format: text

text:
# SPECTRAL EVOLUTION OF THE CONTINUUM AND DISC LINE IN DIPPING IN GRO J1655-40

## INTRODUCTION

GRO J1655-40 (X-ray transient Nova Sco 1994) is a Galactic Jet Source first discovered in hard X-rays with BATSE (Zhang et al. 1994). It underwent several X-ray outbursts between July 1994 until September 1997 when the source switched off in X-rays. High resolution radio observations revealed apparently superluminal, relativistic jets moving in opposite directions with velocity of 0.92 c (Hjellming & Rupen 1995, Tingay et al. 1995). However, radio activity of the source is apparently not correlated with X-ray outbursts. The source was active at radio wavelengths only for approximately 6 months during the early stage of X-ray activity in 1994 (Hjellming & Rupen 1995). Shahbaz et al. (1999) used optical observations to obtain a well-constrained mass range for the compact object of 5.5–7.9 $`M_{}`$, leaving no doubt that this is a black hole. The inclination of the system is in the range of 63.7–70.7(van der Hooft et al. 1998). The black hole is surrounded by a massive accretion disc filling approximately 85% of the Roche lobe radius (Orosz & Bailyn 1997).

The source shows strong X-ray dipping, i.e. reductions of X-ray intensity caused by obscuration of the X-ray source by absorbing material in the line of sight (Fig. 1, left). The dipping provides a diagnostic of the X-ray emission regions and strongly constrains spectral models because of the requirement that emission models fit several dip spectra as well as non-dip. It occurs in this source predominantly in orbital phase 0.68–0.92 (Kuulkers et al. 2000) suggesting that blobs of absorbing material are located most probably on the outer rim of the accretion disc as in LMXB.

Recently, a highly red- and blue-shifted iron disc line has been discovered in the X-ray spectrum of GRO J1655-40 (Bałucińska-Church & Church 2000) from the observation with Rossi-XTE on 26th February, 1997. The observation took place at the beginning of the last outburst seen before the complete switch-off in X-rays. The source has not been detected in radio since 1996 despite regular monitoring (Tingay, priv. comm.). During this observation, strong X-ray dipping occured. In the present paper I will discuss the evolution of the continuum and the iron disc line during dipping using this data, and will also show how the X-ray dipping constrains emission region sizes.

## THE PERSISTENT EMISSION SPECTRUM: DETECTION OF THE DISC LINE

The observation of GRO J1655-40 discussed in this paper was made on 1997, February 26, lasting 14,600 s with an on-source good exposure time of 7,600 s. Data from the Proportional Counter Array (PCA) instruments are presented. Four spectra during persistent emission were carefully selected from regions of the lightcurve where the count rate was particularly stable. The spectra were fitted with a model consisting of a disc blackbody and a power law. The same model was also used by Zhang et al. (1997). The disc blackbody having temperature $`kT`$1.1 keV was the dominant component contributing 90% to the total luminosity (0.1–100 keV) of $`9.6\times 10^{37}`$ erg $`\mathrm{s}^1`$ which is $``$10% of the Eddington luminosity for a 7$`M_{}`$ object. The power law was very steep with the photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }2.4`$. The continuum parameters agree well with the results published by Kuulkers et al. (1998). Although the above model gave the best fit to the continuum, the fits were generally poor ($`\chi ^2/\mathrm{dof}`$133/91) with systematic residuals at $``$5.8 keV and $``$7.3 keV in every spectrum analysed (Fig. 1, right).

By adding two Gaussian lines to the continuum, the fits became very good with $`\chi ^2/\mathrm{dof}`$70/85, and an F-test showed that the fits were improved with significance $`>>`$ 99.9% (Fig. 2, left). The mean line energies of the four spectra are $`\overline{E}_1`$ = $`5.85\pm 0.08`$ and $`\overline{E}_2=7.32\pm 0.13`$ keV. If we assume that the splitting of the two lines is caused by the relativistic Doppler shift, the rest energy of the line is $`E_{\mathrm{rest}}`$ = $`6.88\pm 0.12`$ keV and the velocity $`v/c=\beta `$ is 0.33 for an inclination $`\widehat{ı}`$ = 70. However, the intensity of the “blue” line is always smaller than the intensity of the “red” line. Therefore, the intensities of the two lines observed cannot simply be due to a disc line where Doppler boosting of the blue line is expected. However, in several ASCA spectra of GRO J1655-40 iron absorption-line features were found at energies which will influence the observed strength of the blue line (Ueda et al. 1998).

Consequently, we carried out spectral fitting with the continuum described as before and a Laor disc line + an absorption line added. Good quality fits ($`\chi ^2/\mathrm{dof}76/84`$) were obtained for all spectra with results as follows. The mean value of rest-frame energy of the emission line was $`6.56\pm 0.14`$ keV corresponding to highly ionized Fe (XXII) Kα emission. However, the energy varied from 6.4 keV to 6.8 keV between spectra not constraining very well the ionization state. The inner radius of the emission region $`r_1`$ was found to be $``$10 $`r_\mathrm{S}`$ where $`r_\mathrm{S}`$ is the Schwarzschild radius ($`19.9\pm 3.6`$ km for the possible range of black hole mass in this source); the outer radius $`r_2`$ was poorly constrained to $``$ 50 $`r_\mathrm{S}`$. The inner radius value being larger than the radius of the last stable orbit suggests that the inner part of the disc up to 10 $`r_\mathrm{S}`$ is totally ionized and does not contribute to the emission line. The mean energy of the absorption line from the 4 spectra is well constrained at $`7.09\pm 0.13`$ keV corresponding to the Fe Kα or Fe Kβ line and occurs at the same energy as the blue wing of the disc line. Thus it is quite possible to fit the observed features by a combination of a Laor disc line with absorption (known to take place in the source), and the emission line has the expected profile with a boosted blue wing (Fig. 2, right). Iron disc lines have since been detected in 4U 1630-47 (Cui et al. 2000) and XTE J1748-288 (Miller et al. 2000).

## SPECTRAL EVOLUTION IN DIPPING: THE LINE AND CONTINUUM

During the Rossi-XTE observation, strong X-ray dipping took place (see also Kuulkers et al. 1998) which can be used to strongly constrain spectral models. Normally, spectra in several intensity bands would be selected and then fitted simultaneously. In this case it is difficult to do this because the spectra were selected from data with 16 s binning (PCA data in Standard 2 mode) and the ingress to dipping was very rapid, on a timescale of seconds (Fig. 3, left). To avoid unnecessary mixing of data of different intensities due to this, which can make spectral fitting difficult and results erroneous, only two high quality spectra were selected: one during deep dipping, and another during persistent emission.

In fitting the dip spectrum, firstly the disc blackbody plus power law model was used without line terms. All of the emission parameters were held constant at the values determined for the non-dip spectrum, since dipping must be fitted by absorption only. In order to fit the dip spectrum, it was found necessary for the disc blackbody to have a covering fraction term implying either partial covering by a blobby absorber, or steadily increasing, progressive covering by a non-blobby absorber having angular size somewhat less than the angular size of the disc blackbody. In contrast, the power law appeared to be totally covered by a simple absorber implying smaller emission region size. This is the same model as used by Kuulkers et al. (1998) to fit the same data. However, even the best fit for the continuum-only model was poor, with a reduced $`\chi ^2`$2 and so the disc line was added to the model, for simplicity in the form of two Gaussian lines to represent the red and blue wings. The model becomes

$`\mathrm{exp}(\sigma _{\mathrm{pe}}N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{gal}})\times `${\[exp(-$`\sigma _{\mathrm{pe}}N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{DBB}})\times f_{\mathrm{cov}}+(1f_{\mathrm{cov}})]\times `$ (discbb+2 Gaussian)+exp(-$`\sigma _{\mathrm{pe}}N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{PL}})\times `$powerlaw}

where $`\sigma _{\mathrm{pe}}`$ is the photoelectric cross-section with cosmic abundances (Morrison & McCammon 1983), $`N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{gal}}`$ is the galactic column density, $`N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{DBB}}`$ is the disc blackbody column density, $`f_{\mathrm{cov}}`$ is the covering fraction and $`N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{PL}}`$ is the column density for the Comptonized component. The best fit model is shown in Fig. 3 (right). During dipping $`N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{DBB}}`$ increased to $`1.4\times 10^{24}`$ cm-2, the covering fraction $`f_{\mathrm{cov}}`$ reached 94% consistent with the residual intensity seen in dipping (Fig. 3), and $`N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{PL}}`$ was much larger that $`N_\mathrm{H}^{\mathrm{DBB}}`$ effectively removing all the contribution of the power law component up to at least 15 keV. This implies that the size of the Comptonizing region is smaller that the X-ray emitting accretion disc. The intensity of the disc line described for simplicity by two Gaussian lines decreased during dipping and could be modelled with the same covering fraction as the disc blackbody component suggesting that the line originates in the same part of the disc as the disc blackbody. The decrease of the line is highly significant: an F-test showed a significance $`>>`$ 99.99%. This provides further evidence that the disc line is real.

Although X-ray dipping in GRO J1655-40 is very deep, it is not 100% deep. The depth of dipping in the energy band 2.5–25.0 keV is $``$91% and is independent of energy if measured in several energy bands. This rules out the possibility that the residual emission comes entirely from the dust scattered halo. The halo will contribute to the residual emission as expected for a bright source with high galactic column, but only at energies below $``$5 keV. The galactic column density towards GRO J1655-40 is $`7.0\pm 0.5\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 based on $`E(BV)=1.3\pm 0.1`$ (van der Hooft et al. 1998) and radio measurements (Dickey and Lockman 1990). From this $`N_\mathrm{H}`$, a dust-scattered halo contribution of only $``$3% to the count rate in energies 2.5–25.0 keV can be calculated. Therefore, the majority of the residual emission during deep dipping must come from uncovered disc blackbody emission. It cannot be Comptonized emission as the total contribution of the power law component is 10% only and spectral fitting shows that this is totally removed up to at least 15 keV in deep dipping. Kuulkers et al. (1998) obtain a covering fraction of 99% which appears inconsistent with the $``$9% of intensity remaining in deep dipping (Fig. 3). It is not surprising that this model produces a low energy excess in dipping; however, we have shown that this is due to some emission being not covered simply, and not related to ionized absorber as they suggest.

## SIZE OF THE EMISSION AND ABSORPTION REGIONS

The sizes of the emission and absorption regions can be obtained by using dip ingress and egress times, plus the duration of dipping. The technique differs according to whether the emitter or absorber has larger angular size, and in the present case that dipping is not 100% deep we cannot tell which is larger. If the absorber has larger angular size than the most extended emission, i.e. the disc blackbody, then the ingress time $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ will be determined by the diameter of the emission region and the velocity of the absorber. The residual emission must be due to the absorber being blobby. If the absorber has smaller angular size, $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ is determined by the absorber diameter, and the residual due to incomplete overlap of emitter and absorber. In either case, the total duration of dipping including ingress and egress is proportional to the sum of emitter and absorber diameters. Both possibilities will be discussed in the following. It is assumed that the absorber is located on the outer rim of the disc and co-rotates with the binary frame. It should also be noted that changes during dipping take place on two time-scales: firstly, there is an intensity decrease of $``$10–15% from the non-dip level of $``$2300 Counts s-1 taking $``$45 s which can be described as a shoulder of the dipping; this is followed by a rapid transition to deep dipping lasting 6–10 s.

Firstly, if the X-ray emitting disc is smaller than the absorber the total dip ingress time gives the disc blackbody diameter $`d_{\mathrm{DBB}}`$ via the equation $`2\pi r_{\mathrm{AD}}/\mathrm{P}`$ = $`d_{\mathrm{DBB}}/\mathrm{\Delta }t`$, where $`r_{\mathrm{AD}}`$ is the accretion disc radius and $`P`$ the orbital period. This gives $`d_{\mathrm{DBB}}`$ = $`7\times 10^8`$ cm. The total duration of dipping of $``$170 s combined with this value gives an absorber diameter of $`1.5\times 10^9`$ cm.

If the emitter is larger, the shoulder and rapid transition to deep dipping would be interpreted in terms of a core of hot disc blackbody emitter completely covered in deep dipping, leaving an outer disc blackbody region uncovered. Thus, the rapid ingress/egress time of 6–10 s provides the diameter of the core $`d_{\mathrm{core}}`$ = $`1.1\times 10^8`$ cm. The shoulder ingress time of 45 s gives the absorber diameter of $`7\times 10^8`$ cm, and this with the total duration gives a total disc blackbody diameter of $`1.5\times 10^9`$ cm. A simple calculation of the surface brightness of an accretion disc with temperature of 1 keV confirms that a hot inner core would have a size of $`10^8`$ cm.

The linear scales of the absorber and emitter in the above cases are presented in Fig. 4. For comparison, the radius of the region emitting the iron emission line is also shown. It should be noted that the diameter of the X-ray source obtained here is substantially larger than that provided by Kuulkers et al. (1998) of 23 $`r_\mathrm{S}`$. Firstly, they assume that the angular size of absorber is much greater than that of the source which we show above may not be the case, only one possibility. Secondly, they ignored the shoulders of dipping lasting $``$45 s. Additionally, they assumed an unrealistically short ingress/egress time of 3.5 s in comparison with the 6–10 s adopted here. Consequently, they obtained a size of the X-ray source $``$15 times smaller than the value presented here. Similarly, the duration of dipping at 55 s was underestimated compared with the 170 s used here, leading to radius of $``$95 $`r_\mathrm{S}`$ compared with our 370 $`r_\mathrm{S}`$.

## CONCLUSIONS

In the Rossi-XTE spectra of GRO J1655-40, a highly shifted iron emission line was detected. The line originates in the inner part of the disc which rotates with relativistic velocities $``$0.3 c producing the characteristic shape of a disc line with strong Doppler broadening and boosting. The region where the line is generated is most probably highly ionized (Fe XXII) although the ionization state is not well constrained. The intensity of the emission line decreases during dipping by the same factor as the emission from the accretion disc providing further evidence that the line originates in the disc.

During deep saturated dipping, the Comptonized component is totally absorbed but 10% of the emission is still seen which must originate in the disc. It can be shown that either the outer and cooler parts of the disc are still visible during deep dipping or the absorber is blobby. In both cases, the radius of the disc core which makes the major contribution to the disc luminosity is in rough agreement with the radius of the line emitting region $``$30 Schwarzschild radii. The radius of the X-ray emitting region is between 170–370 $`r_\mathrm{S}`$ depending on the assumptions made about the absorber. The disc emission region is much larger than that previously reported by Kuulkers et al. (1998), who probably underestimated the dip ingress/egress times.


text:
# Enhanced absorption Hanle effect on the 𝐹_g=𝐹→𝐹ₑ=𝐹+1 closed transitions

## I Introduction

Low frequency coherences, between Zeeman or hyperfine split levels, play an important role in laser spectroscopy and quantum optics. Phenomena as coherent population trapping , electromagnetic-induced transparency, laser without inversion, nonlinear susceptibility and refractive index enhancement , steep dispersion , ultra-low group velocity propagation  allow us to realize a coherent control of the absorptive and dispersive properties of an atomic vapor. Zeeman coherences are also a basic ingredient of sub-Doppler  and sub-recoil  laser cooling mechanisms. Very recently an experimental and theoretical investigation of a multilevel atomic system with two optical fields have revealed a new coherent feature of electromagnetic enhanced absorption . The combined action of the two coherent optical fields produce a low frequency Zeeman coherence that increases the atomic absorption. The subnatural linewidth of the resonance observed scanning the frequency difference between the two optical fields is determined by the coherence relaxation rate. In this work we investigate a closely related enhanced absorption associated to the low frequency Zeeman coherence in a degenerate two level system and detected in a Hanle effect configuration.

In the original Hanle effect , the resonance fluorescence of an atomic sample is depolarized by an applied magnetic field as result of the destruction of the excited-state Zeeman coherences. In that case the Hanle resonance width is the natural linewidth of the excited state. In the case of the Hanle effect in the ground state , the width of the Hanle signal is limited only by the relaxation rate of the ground state and subnatural resonances can be realized. The low-frequency coherences result also in the modification of the total fluorescence intensity, and Hanle resonances of both negative and positive sign have been observed.

The case of a $`F_gF_e=F_g,F_g1`$ transition has been extensively studied  and more recent work  has pointed out the strict connection between Hanle effect on these transitions and coherent population trapping. For zero magnetic field the atoms are optically pumped into a nonabsorbing (or dark) state. An applied magnetic field destroys the nonabsorbing state and produces an absorption with a linewidth determined by the relaxation rate of the created Zeeman coherence. Thus the Hanle effect in the ground state of an atomic system appears as a decrease in the atomic absorption, with a minimum centered at zero magnetic field and a linewidth determined by the relaxation rate of the ground state coherences. However anomalous Hanle effect lineshapes may be observed under different experimental conditions. For instance, for the transition $`21`$ in neon the circulation of Zeeman coherence between excited and ground states produced an inversion in the sign of the Hanle effect, with an increased absorption at zero magnetic field .

The study of the Hanle effect on a $`F_gF_e=F_g+1`$ transition leads to different results depending whether the considered transition is open or closed. For the open $`F_g=1F_e=2`$ transition of the sodium D1 line under resonant laser excitation, the fluorescence profile is given by a nearly Lorentzian curve . On the other hand, in the case of the closed $`F_g=2F_e=3`$ transition of the sodium D2 line line, narrow resonances of positive sign have been observed superposed to the homogeneous broadening Lorentzian profile . Similar observation have been reported also by Fischer and Hertel , who explained the effect as a disturbance of the optical pumping process by the Larmor atomic precession. Those authors connected the linewidth of the fluorescence increase to the pumping time, but they did not perform a lineshape investigation. Very recently experimental results of an enhanced absorption in rubidium atoms excited by diode lasers on $`F_\mathrm{g}F_\mathrm{e}=F_\mathrm{g}+1`$ transitions have been obtained by two different groups .

Narrow enhanced-absorption Hanle effect lineshapes have been observed also for in molecules, but the mechanism of their production has not been completely defined.

In the present work we analyse the ground-state Hanle effect on a closed $`F_\mathrm{g}F_\mathrm{e}=F_\mathrm{g}+1`$ transition, with the standard configuration of an applied linear-polarized laser radiation and magnetic field collinear to the laser light wavevector. We describe the peculiarities of the Hanle signal for a closed atomic transition, and identify the mechanism responsible for narrow bright resonances at low laser intensities. We provide a connection with the laser cooling processes where ground state coherences play an important role. We derive the lineshape for enhanced absorption Hanle effect with linewidth determined by the ground state optical pumping time. We investigate the bright resonance in the Hanle effect either detected in the fluorescence emission from the absorbing atoms, as in the experiment of Ref. , or detected in the light transmitted through the absorbing medium. Similar constrasts for the bright resonance are obtained in the two detection schemes.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section II the theoretical basis of the Optical Bloch Equations (OBE) is introduced. Section III presents an analytical solution of the OBE valid in the limit of weak applied laser electric field. The analytical approach allow us to derive an expression for the enhanced absorption lineshape. Section IV presents numerical solutions valid for different atomic transitions. Finally, in Section V conclusions are drawn.

## II Optical Bloch Equations

We consider atoms illuminated by a linearly polarized laser light, resonant with the $`F_gF_e`$ transition of the D2 line. As in the standard Hanle effect configuration, a static magnetic field $`B`$ can be applied collinear to the laser light propagation, the $`Oz`$ direction. The laser electric field propagating is given by

$`\stackrel{}{E}(z,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{2}}\stackrel{}{ϵ}_xe^{i(kz\omega t)}+c.c.`$ (1)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{4}}\left(\stackrel{}{ϵ}_{\sigma ^+}+\stackrel{}{ϵ}_\sigma ^{}\right)e^{i(kz\omega t)}+c.c.`$ (2)
with $`\stackrel{}{ϵ}_j`$ the unit vector of the $`j`$ polarization. For comparison, also the case of circularly polarized laser light (say $`\sigma ^+`$):

$$\stackrel{}{E}(z,t)=\frac{}{2}\stackrel{}{ϵ}_{\sigma ^+}e^{i(kz\omega t)}+c.c.$$
(3)
will be examined. In writing the optical Bloch equations

$$\dot{\rho }=\frac{1}{i\mathrm{}}[H,\rho ]+\widehat{}\rho $$
(4)
we consider only the contribution to the relaxation operator $`\widehat{}`$ due to the spontaneous emission (index SE). By choosing the quantization axis parallel to the magnetic field, the OBEs have the following form ($`|e_j=|J_e,I,F_,j,|g_j=|J_g,I,F_g,j`$):

$`\dot{\rho }_{e_ie_j}`$ $`=`$ $`[i\omega _{e_ie_j}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_eF_g}(1+\alpha _{F_eF_g;F_g^{^{}}})]\rho _{e_ie_j}`$ (7)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{g_k}{}}\left(\rho _{e_ig_k}V_{g_ke_j}V_{e_ig_k}\rho _{g_ke_j}\right)`$
$`\dot{\rho }_{e_ig_j}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[i\omega _{e_ig_j}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_eF_g}(1+\alpha _{F_eF_g;F_g^{^{}}})\right]\rho _{e_ig_j}`$ (9)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{e_k}{}}\rho _{e_ie_k}V_{e_kg_j}{\displaystyle \underset{g_k}{}}V_{e_ig_k}\rho _{g_kg_j}\right)`$
$`\dot{\rho }_{g_ig_j}`$ $`=`$ $`i\omega _{g_ig_j}\rho _{g_ig_j}+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{e_k}{}}\left(\rho _{g_ie_k}V_{e_kg_j}V_{g_ie_k}\rho _{e_kg_j}\right)`$ (11)
$`+\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\rho _{g_ig_j}\right)_{SE}.`$
The quantities $`\omega _{\alpha _i,\beta _j}`$, with $`\alpha ,\beta =(e,g)`$, represent the frequency separation between the energies of levels $`\alpha _i`$ and $`\beta _j`$,

$$\omega _{\alpha _i,\beta _j}=\frac{E_{\alpha _i}E_{\beta _j}}{\mathrm{}},$$
(12)
where the energy for the Zeeman level of the ground or excited state with quantum number $`m_i`$, including the Zeeman splitting due to the applied magnetic field, is given by

$$E_{\alpha _i}=\delta _{\alpha ,e}\mathrm{}\omega _o+g_\alpha \mu _Bm_iB.$$
(13)
Here $`g_\alpha `$ represents the gyromagnetic factor of the ground or excited state, and $`\mu _B`$ the Bohr magneton. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the total spontaneous emission rate for any excited level, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_eF_g}`$ denotes the spontaneous decay rate on the $`F_eF_g`$ transition and $`\alpha _{F_eF_g;F_g^{^{}}}`$ the ratio between the spontaneous decays on the $`F_eF_g^{^{}}`$ and $`F_eF_g`$ transitions. This ratio is given by

$$\alpha _{F_eF_g;F_g^{^{}}}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_eF_g^{^{}}}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_eF_g}}=\frac{2F_g^{^{}}+1}{2F_g+1}\frac{\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}J_g& F_g^{^{}}& I\\ F_e& J_e& 1\end{array}\right\}^2}{\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}J_g& F_g& I\\ F_e& J_e& 1\end{array}\right\}^2}.$$
(14)
$`V_{e_k,g_j}`$, the matrix element of the atom-laser interaction Hamiltonian for linearly polarized laser radiation, in the dipole and rotating wave approximation is given by

$$V_{e_k,g_j}=\frac{}{2}ek|\stackrel{}{d}\stackrel{}{ϵ}_x|gje^{i\omega t}=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{4}ek|d_{+1}+d_1|gje^{i\omega t}.$$
(15)
The matrix elements of the spherical components $`d_q`$ ($`q=0,\pm 1`$) of the electric dipole moment can be written as:

$`<J_e,I,F_e,M_e|d_q|J_g,I,F_g,M_g>=𝒟(1)^{J_e+I+F_e+F_gM_e+1}`$ (16)
$``$ $`\sqrt{(2F_g+1)(2F_e+1)}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}F_g& 1& F_e\\ M_g& q& M_e\end{array}\right)\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}F_e& 1& F_g\\ J_g& I& J_e\end{array}\right\}`$ (17)
where $`𝒟=(J_gdJ_e)`$ is the reduced dipole moment, having indicated with round and curly brackets the $`3j`$ and $`6j`$ symbols respectively. The Rabi frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{R}`$ associated to the strongest electric dipole moment for the $`F_gF_e=F_g+1`$ transition is given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{R}=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}\frac{J_e,I,F_e,M_e=F_e|d_1|J_g,I,F_g,M_g=F_g}{\mathrm{}}.$$
(18)
The spontaneous emission repopulation terms for the density matrix evolution are

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\rho _{g_kg_k^{}}\right)_{SE}=(2F_e+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{F_eF_g}{\displaystyle \underset{(q,q^{}=F_e,+F_e),(p=1,1)}{}}`$ (19)
$`(1)^{pkq^{}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}F_g& 1& F_e\\ k& p& q\end{array}\right)\rho _{e_qe_q^{}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}F_e& 1& F_g\\ q^{}& p& k^{}\end{array}\right).`$ (20)
To eliminate the fast oscillation with the laser frequency $`\omega `$ we introduce the quantities $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ defined as:

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{e_ie_j}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _{e_ie_j}`$ (22)
$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{g_ig_j}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _{g_ig_j}`$ (23)
$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{e_ig_j}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _{e_ig_j}e^{i\omega t}`$ (24)
$`\stackrel{~}{V}_{e_ig_j}`$ $`=`$ $`V_{e_ig_j}e^{i\omega t}.`$ (25)
Thus the matrix elements $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{e_ig_j}`$ are time-independent and the density-matrix equations in terms of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ can be easily solved numerically.

## III Lineshape Qualitative discussion

As a case study to investigate the linewidth of the bright resonance, we consider an hypothetically closed $`F_g=1F_e=2`$ transition, with Clebsch-Gordon coefficients as in Fig. 1. Moreover we will examine the bright resonance by choosing for the atomic basis two different quantization axis, i.e. parallel and perpendicular to the magnetic field direction.

A quick look to the OBE shows that the decay rate for the optical coherences in Eq. (4b), and of the excited state populations and Zeeman coherences in Eq. (4a) is on the order of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the natural width. Thus, in order to modify significantly the excited state populations or coherences related to the excited state, the magnetic field should be strong enough, i.e. the Larmor frequency should be on the order of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. On the other hand, the natural width does not appear explicitely in Eq. (4c) for the populations and the coherences in the ground state multiplicity. As immediate consequence, the narrow features can be originated from what occurs in the ground state. In the case of a closed transition a steady state can be reached and a particularly simple situation is the limit of weak saturation, where the laser field can be treated as a perturbation. It is well known that in this case the excited state can be adiabatically eliminated, leading to an effective master equation for the density matrix of the ground state . These approximations result in optical coherences proportional to the amplitude of the laser field and excited state populations proportional to the light intensity. The characteristic evolution rate for the ground state populations and coherences is then given by the parameter $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ known as the optical pumping rate and defined by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{R}^2}{\delta ^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/4}.$$
(26)
The choice of the quantization axis is also a crucial point. Clearly, when one introduces a magnetic field, the quantization axis is usually taken along this field. However, because the narrow structures are expected for very weak magnetic fields, a better physical insight can be obtained in the natural basis given, when B=0, by the light polarization. In this basis, the steady state populations for the ground sublevels are $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\pm 1}=4/17`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_0=9/17`$. The atoms accumulate mostly in the level more interacting with the light field (bright state), leading to a maximum in the fluorescence. When a magnetic field orthogonal to the quantization axis is applied, the populations of the ground states will be partially redistributed, because the Zeeman states are no more eigenstate of the energy for $`B0`$. Thus the population of levels weakly coupled to the excited state will increase at the expenses of the population of the bright states. This redistribution, leading to a decrease of the fluorescence rate, explains the bright resonance. To couple efficiently the Zeeman sublevels the Larmor frequency has to be of the order of the relaxation rate of the coherences or, in the case of a non-zero laser detuning, of the order of the energy separation due to the light-shift. Because the relaxation rate of the coherences is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, a narrow feature is expected, even if a more careful examination is needed to give the proportionality coefficient. Notice also the strong analogy with the Raman spectroscopy of $`\sigma ^+\sigma ^{}`$ optical molasses, where a two-photon process couples the Zeeman sublevels .

If the magnetic field is used as quantization axis, a different description of the process originates with a creation of Zeeman ground state coherence at zero magnetic field and its destruction at non zero values of magnetic fields characterizing the bright resonance. In fact the density matrix investigation required to analyse the Hanle effect with quantization axis along the magnetic field direction is formally equivalent to that of the polarization gradient mechanism denominated as $`\sigma ^+\sigma ^{}`$ configuration. In  it was shown that the equivalence is realized by replacing the atomic Larmor frequency in the applied magnetic field with the Doppler shift of the atoms moving within the cooling laser field. Thus the equations derived for the ground-state populations and coherences in those references eliminating adiabatically the optical coherences and the excited-state populations and coherences may be used to analyze the coherence creations in the bright line Hanle effect. Let $`C_\mathrm{r}`$ and $`C_\mathrm{i}`$ be the real and imaginary parts of the ground state coherence $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{g_1g_1}`$

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{g_1g_1}=C_r+iC_i$$
(27)
and let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ be the ground state populations

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_i=\rho _{g_ig_i}$$
(28)
For a weak laser intensity, such that the adiabatic eliminations can be applied, the equivalence with the analysis of ref. allows us to write a closed set of five equations for the ground state populations and coherences

$`\dot{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{72}}\mathrm{\Pi }_1+{\displaystyle \frac{9\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{72}}\mathrm{\Pi }_0+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{72}}\mathrm{\Pi }_1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{18}}C_r{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{}}{6}}C_i`$ (30)
$`\dot{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{72}}\mathrm{\Pi }_1+{\displaystyle \frac{9\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{72}}\mathrm{\Pi }_0{\displaystyle \frac{5\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{72}}\mathrm{\Pi }_1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{18}}C_r+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{}}{6}}C_i`$ (31)
$`\dot{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0`$ $`=`$ $`\dot{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1\dot{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1`$ (32)
$`\dot{C}_r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{24}}\mathrm{\Pi }_1+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{8}}\mathrm{\Pi }_0+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{24}}\mathrm{\Pi }_1{\displaystyle \frac{5\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{12}}C_r+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mu _gB}{\mathrm{}}}C_i,`$ (33)
$`\dot{C}_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{}}{12}}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_1\mathrm{\Pi }_1\right){\displaystyle \frac{2\mu _gB}{\mathrm{}}}C_r{\displaystyle \frac{5\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{12}}C_i.`$ (34)
where we have introduced the light shift $`\delta ^{}`$

$$\delta ^{}=\frac{\omega \omega _o}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_R^2}{\delta ^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/4}$$
(35)
and $`\mu _g=g_g\mu _B`$. Introducing the population difference $`d=\mathrm{\Pi }_1\mathrm{\Pi }_1`$ and using the relation $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1+\mathrm{\Pi }_1=1\mathrm{\Pi }_0`$, Eqs. (III) may be rewritten as

$`\dot{d}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{12}}d{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{}}{3}}C_i,`$ (37)
$`\dot{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{18}}{\displaystyle \frac{11\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{36}}\mathrm{\Pi }_0+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{9}}C_r,`$ (38)
$`\dot{C}_r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{24}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{12}}\mathrm{\Pi }_0{\displaystyle \frac{5\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{12}}C_r+{\displaystyle \frac{2\mu _gB}{\mathrm{}}}C_i,`$ (39)
$`\dot{C}_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{}}{12}}d{\displaystyle \frac{2\mu _g}{\mathrm{}}}BC_r{\displaystyle \frac{5\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{12}}C_i.`$ (40)
whose steady state solution is

$`C_r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5}{34}}\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{132}{17}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\frac{4\mu _gB}{\mathrm{}}\right)^2}{4\left(\delta ^{}\right)^2+5\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\right)^2}}\right]^1,`$ (42)
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{11}}(1+2C_r),`$ (43)
$`C_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{24\mu _gB}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{4\left(\delta ^{}\right)^2+5\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\right)^2}}C_r,`$ (44)
$`d`$ $`=`$ $`4{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^{}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}}C_i.`$ (45)
The fluorescence signal is proportional to the total excited state population. In the low saturation limit, the population of each excited state may be expressed as a function of the ground state quantities

$`\rho _{e_{\pm 2}e_{\pm 2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_R^2}{\delta ^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/4}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\pm 1},`$ (47)
$`\rho _{e_{\pm 1}e_{\pm 1}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_R^2}{\delta ^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/4}}\mathrm{\Pi }_0,`$ (48)
$`\rho _{e0e0}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_R^2}{\delta ^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/4}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_1+\mathrm{\Pi }_1\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}C_r\right].`$ (49)
The total excited state population at the steady state $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{st}^e`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{st}^e=\underset{i=2,2}{}\rho _{e_ie_i}=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_R^2}{\delta ^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/4}\left(\frac{25}{88}+\frac{3}{44}C_r\right).$$
(50)
Thus the variation in the fluorescence with the magnetic field is associated to the modification of the ground state coherence with the magnetic field. The laser interaction produces a large coherence, 5/34, between the $`m_F=1`$ and $`m_F=1`$ Zeeman sublevels. Increasing the magnetic field the coherence $`C_r`$ is reduced from its maximum value at $`B=0`$ to zero. The equation for $`C_r`$ represents a narrow bright resonance whose HWHM $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }B=\frac{\mathrm{}}{8\mu _g}\sqrt{\frac{17}{33}\left[4\left(\delta ^{}\right)^2+5\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\right)^2\right]}.$$
(51)
The contrast C, defined as the amplitude of the narrow resonance divided by the amplitude of the homogenous broadened line, is 3/85, independent of the Rabi frequency and laser detuning in the limit of low-saturation. Note however that the Rabi frequency and laser detuning determine the time scale to reach the steady state, as from the Eq. (26) for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$.

On the other hand, when the polarization of the light is circular, the population accumulates in the m=+1 sublevel and a magnetic field along the quantization axis does not redistribute the populations. As a consequence, one expects no narrow structures in the case of a circularly polarized beam with a magnetic field along the propagation axis.

## IV Numerical solution of the OBE

To point out out the basic features of the effect of narrow bright resonances, we have solved the OBE for a cold atomic sample, where the laser light excites only one atomic hyperfine transition, with only the natural broadening. Moreover for a cold sample the interaction time between laser and atoms may be assumed long enough to consider only the steady state solution of the density matrix equations.

The bright line has been detected either on the fluorescent light emitted by the atomic sample as in experiment of Ref. , or on the light transmitted by the atomic sample, as in the experimental results reported in Ref. . For the fluorescence measurements the bright line appear as an increase of the emitted light. For the transmission measurements the bright line appears as an additional loss, i.e. as a reduced transmission, and an increase in absorption. For a laser excited closed transition, the atoms reach a steady state, and the fluorescence intensity $`I(B)`$ emitted from the cold atomic sample interacting with the laser beam is proportional to the steady state total population of the excited state $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{st}^e`$. Thus the dependence of this quantity on the amplitude of the applied magnetic field produces the Hanle effect lineshapes observed on the fluorescence emission. For the transmission measurements, we characterize the transmission signal $`T`$ by considering the imaginary part $`\chi ^{^{\prime \prime }}`$ of the susceptibility, i.e. the loss per unit wavelength.

### A Closed Rb D2 line transitions

We have examined the bright line Hanle signals for both the $`F_g=2F_e=3`$ D2 transition of the the 87Rb isotope and for the $`F_g=3F_e=4`$ D2 transition of the 85Rb isotope, with similar results in the two cases. Results of the numerical calculation for the total stationary excited-state population $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{st}^e(B)`$ for 87Rb are reported in Fig. 2 at different laser intensities. Results of the numerical calculation for the susceptibility $`\chi ^{\prime \prime }`$ in the case of the $`F_g=3F_e=4`$ D2 transition of the the 85Rb isotope are reported in Fig. 3 also for different laser intensities. In both cases for comparison also the results for circularly polarized laser light have been reported as dashed lines. In the case of linearly polarized laser light, for small laser intensities a narrow bright resonance appears around $`B=0`$, in both fluorescence emission and transmission, superposed to a broader line. That narrow feature is more clearly shown in the insets, and is absent in the case of circularly polarized laser field. The contrast $`C`$ of the bright resonance is around ten percent for both detection schemes and is nearly independent of the laser intensity up to intensities of 0.1 mW/cm2. At larger laser intensities the contrast decreases. Furthermore the bright resonance disappears at laser intensities around few mW/cm2.

At high laser intensities, the distribution of the population in the ground state is irrelevant. It is important instead the number of excited-state levels which can be effectively populated. For zero magnetic field, the two Zeeman levels edges of the excited state, with $`M_e=\pm 3`$, are not populated and all the allowed transitions $`|g,i|e,i`$ are saturated, producing $`\rho _{g_ig_i}\rho _{e_ie_i}`$. Therefore the total fluorescence intensity $`I(0)`$ becomes

$`I(0)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }{\displaystyle \underset{i=2,2}{}}\rho _{e_ie_i}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{i=2,2}{}}\rho _{e_ie_i}+{\displaystyle \underset{i=2,2}{}}\rho _{g_ig_i}\right)`$ (52)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2}}`$ (53)
independent of the distribution of the atomic population. For non-zero magnetic field also the two Zeeman edge states can be occupied as a result of the magnetic-field mixing between excited state sublevels, so the total excited-state population can increase. This explain the high-intensity reversed lineshape appearing in Fig. 2.

### B Open $`F_g=1F_e=2`$ transition of the 87Rb D2-line

We consider now the open $`F_g=1F_e=2`$ transition of the 87Rb D2-line. For a laser excited open transition, the stationary excited-state population is zero , and the fluorescence intensity $`I_{\mathrm{int}}(B)`$ emitted from the atomic sample within the interaction time $`t_{\mathrm{int}}`$ depends on the time integrated total population $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mathrm{int}}^e(B)`$ of the excited state defined by

$$I_{\mathrm{int}}(B)=\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mathrm{int}}^e(B)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_0^{t_{\mathrm{int}}}\mathrm{\Pi }^e(B,t)𝑑t.$$
(54)
By numerically solving the optical Bloch equation, we calculated the integrated excited-state population $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mathrm{int}}^e`$, Eq. (54), as reported in Fig. 4. The plots indicate that in this case there is no bright resonance. Such a result is in agreement with that of Akulshin et al derived for a bichromatic configuration: subnatural resonances do not occurr in open transitions. In fact, as discussed previously, the phenomenon of bright resonances corresponds to the redistribution, via optical pumping, of the population in the ground state with an accumulation into the levels maximally coupled to the excited state. The presence of a channel of decay out of the levels excited by the laser contrasts this accumulation: the strong transitions are depleted at a higher rate than the weak ones. For a loss rate large enough, the depletion dominates and no bright resonance occurs. Finally, for sufficiently large interaction times and laser intensities, the atomic states are completely depleted by the laser.

The analysis of Ref.  has shown that the time-integrated excited-state population depends only on the loss parameter $`\alpha _{F_e=2F_g=1;F_g^{}}`$, and is independent of the magnetic field, for a range within the homogeneous linewidth. The flat spectra of Fig. 4 at large laser intensities are produced by those dependencies.

### C Closed $`F_g=4F_e=5`$ transition of the Cs D2-line

In the work of Théobald et al  the Hanle effect on the different hyperfine transitions of the Cs D2-line was investigated for applied linearly-polarized broadband laser radiation. Their result for the closed $`F_g=4F_e=5`$ transition is, at first sight, in disagreement with our general conclusion for a $`F_g=FF_e=F+1`$ transition.

In fact in that experiment the measured intensity of the fluorescence from the atomic sample was almost constant around zero magnetic field, for a laser intensity of 2 mW/cm2 and an interaction time of 12 $`\mu `$s. In order to clarify this point, we solved the optical Bloch equations also for the $`F_g=4F_e=5`$ closed transition of the cesium D2 line. Results for $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mathrm{st}}^e`$ are shown in Fig. 5.

The dependence of the excited-state population on the magnetic field at different laser intensities and polarizations is completely analogous to the behaviour observed for the closed $`F_g=FF_e=F+1`$ transition of the 85Rb and 87Rb, therefore confirming the general validity of this behaviour. However the results of Fig. 5 clarify why in the experiment of Théobald et al the fluorescence intensity was almost constant around zero magnetic field: in the experimental investigation the laser intensity was beyond the low-saturation regime, in which sharp bright resonances occur.

## V Conclusions

We studied theoretically the Hanle effect on closed $`F_g=FF_e=F+1`$ transitions. Both cases of linear- and circular-polarized laser excitation have been considered. An analytic solution of the optical Bloch equations has been given for a closed $`F_g=1F_e=2`$ transition. Numerical solutions have been obtained for the transitions corresponding to available experimental data.

For the examined closed transitions resonant with a linear polarization laser field, bright resonances, i.e. sharp increases of the absorption have been reproduced around zero magnetic field at low laser intensities. The enhanced absorption corresponds to the accumulation, via optical pumping, of the atomic population in the ground states maximally coupled to the excited state. The application of a magnetic field perpendicular to the light polarization redistributes the population among the ground state sublevels, and results in a decrease of the fluorescence intensity. At increasing intensities of the linear-polarized laser field, the strength of the bright resonance is progressively reduced, and in the saturation regime of the optical transition a decrease of the absorption around zero magnetic field is produced.

Our calculations for open transitions have confirmed that the bright resonance does not generally occurs for this kind of transitions. In effect for open transitions the laser field will empty the ground state with a rate similar to that needed to redistribute the ground state population. Furthermore it should be pointed out that the bright-line production requires an optical pumping process. Thus, depending on the applied laser intensity, the interaction time should be long enough to let the atoms reach their steady state. For instance, the steady state was not reached in Ref.  where it was demonstrate that for sufficiently weak light intensities the bright resonance disappears, because the redistribution of the population in the ground state was not achieved.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank S.S. Cartaleva and G. Alzetta for showing us their results prior to publication. F.R. thanks A. Hemmerich for many useful discussions and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft for financial support under project Li 417/4-1. The Laboratoire de Physique des Lasers, Atomes et Molécules is a Unité Mixte de Recherche de l’Université de Lille 1 et du CNRS.


text:
# 1 The 𝑛 frequency bands of the spectrum for a background with 𝑛 transition frequencies, arranged in growing order.

## Abstract

We compute the spectral distribution of the quantum fluctuations of the vacuum, amplified by inflation, after an arbitrary number of background transitions. Using a graphic representation of the process we find that the final spectrum can be completely determined trough a synthetic set of working rules, and a list of simple algebraic computations.

BA-TH/00-398

gr-qc/0101118

A diagrammatic approach to the spectrum
of cosmological perturbations

G. De Risi and M. Gasperini

Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Bari,
Via G. Amendola 173, 70126 Bari, Italy
and
Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy

———————————————

To appear in Phys. Lett. B

The standard cosmological model , in spite of the large number of successful predictions, cannot be extrapolated too far back in time. It is by now a consolitated opinion that our Universe, in its earlier epochs, should include a phase of inflationary (i.e. accelerated) evolution . Many different realizations of inflation are possible, however, and we have to face the problem of how to distinguish them through their possible phenomenological consequences.

To this aim, we may note that the instability of the small fluctuations (of the metric and of the matter fields) is one of the main physical properties of a phase of accelerated evolution. As a consequence of this instability, small perturbations are amplified in a way which depends on the intensity and on the duration of inflation . Different inflationary models amplify perturbations with different spectral distribution, and the computation of the spectrum thus becomes an important tool to predict observable effects, and to discriminate eventually between various possible models of primordial evolution.

The computation of the spectrum, performed accorting to the standard cosmological perturbation theory , may become long and cumbersome even in the linear approximation, however, if the model of cosmological background is complicated. The aim of this paper is to present a set of working rules, based on a diagrammatic representation of the evolution of perturbations, allowing a quick estimate of the final amplitude and of the spectral distribution. The idea of a diagrammatic approach is not new , but it was never implemented up to now in a complete and systematic way, so as to be generally valid for all classes of inflationary backgrounds.

To be more precise, the diagrammatic method of computation that we shall propose here can be applied to all cosmological fluctuations $`\psi `$ described by the quadratic effective action

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\eta z^2(\eta )\left(\psi ^2+\psi ^2\psi \right),$$
(1)
where $`z`$ is the external “pump field”, responsible for the amplification, and the prime denotes differentiation with respect to the conformal time $`\eta `$. It is convenient, in this context, to introduce the canonical variable $`u=z\psi `$ which diagonalizes the effective action, and which satisfies the canonical evolution equation

$$u_k^{^{\prime \prime }}+\left(k^2\frac{z^{\prime \prime }}{z}\right)u_k=0$$
(2)
(for each mode $`k`$ of the Fourier expansion, $`^2u_k=k^2u_k`$). We shall also assume that the background evolution can be separated into $`n+1`$ different cosmological phases, with $`n`$ transitions at $`\eta =\eta _i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, and that in each phase the evolution of the pump fields (sufficiently far from the transition) can be parametrized in conformal time by an appropriate power $`\alpha _i`$, namely $`z_i|\eta |^{\alpha _i}`$. It follows that, in each phase, the general solution of eq. (2) can be written in terms of the first and second kind Hankel functions  as:

$$u_k^i(\eta )=|\eta |^{\frac{1}{2}}\left[A_+^i(k)H_{\mu _i}^{(1)}(x)+A_{}^i(k)H_{\mu _i}^{(2)}(x)\right],\mu _i=|\alpha _i1/2|,x=k|\eta |.$$
(3)
In order to fix our conventions, we shall label the $`n`$ transitions in decreasing order for $`\eta `$ ranging from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`+\mathrm{}`$, and we shall put the power $`\alpha _i`$ to the right (and $`\alpha _{i+1}`$ to the left) of $`\eta _i`$, namely

$$z_{i+1}|\eta |^{\alpha _{i+1}},\eta <\eta _i,z_i|\eta |^{\alpha _i},\eta >\eta _i$$
(4)
It follows that the first (in order of time) cosmological phase is labelled by $`n+1`$, the last one by $`1`$. The normalization to an initial vacuum fluctuation spectrum  thus imposes $`A_+^{n+1}=1`$, $`A_{}^{n+1}=0`$, while the coefficients of the last phase $`A_\pm ^1(k)`$, fixed by the continuity of $`\psi _k`$ and $`\psi _k^{}`$ at the transitions $`\eta _i`$ (not of $`u_k`$ and $`u_k^{}`$, see the discussion in ), will determine the final spectral distribution of the amplified perturbations. The spectral energy density, in particular, is given by  $`d\rho /d\mathrm{log}k=(k/a)^4|A_{}^1(k)|^2/\pi ^2`$ or, in critical units and in terms of the proper frequency $`\omega =k/a`$,

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(\omega ,t)=\frac{8}{3\pi }\frac{\omega ^4}{M_p^2H^2}|A_{}^1(\omega )|^2.$$
(5)
The computation of the spectrum thus reduces, in general, to the problem of solving a linear non-omogeneous system of $`2n`$ equations,

$$\psi _k^{i+1}(x_i)=\psi _k^i(x_i),\psi _k^{i+1}(x_i)=\psi _k^i(x_i),$$
(6)
for the $`2n`$ unknown quantities $`A_\pm ^i(k)`$. The solution is straightforward, in principle; in practice, however, it is in general arduous to extract the relevant physical information from the exact solution, for any background with $`n2`$. In this paper we shall derive a set of prescriptions enabling an immediate estimate of the spectral coefficient $`A_{}^1(k)`$, through an approximate procedure which captures the essential features (amplitude and frequency dependence) of the spectrum, without solving explicitly the full system of equations. Such an estimate is based on the asymptotic expansion of the Hankel functions, and on the possible separation of the spectrum into $`n`$ frequency bands, depending on the number of transitions which are truly effective for a given frequency mode.

In order to introduce the basic ideas of our procedure, we shall start considering the simplest case of only one transition at $`\eta =\eta _1`$. The normalized solution of eq. (2) is then

$`u_k^1=|\eta |^{\frac{1}{2}}H_{\mu _1}^{(1)}(x),`$ (7)
$`u_k^2=|\eta |^{\frac{1}{2}}\left[A_+^1H_{\mu _2}^{(1)}(x)+A_{}^1H_{\mu _2}^{(2)}(x)\right]`$ (8)
(with $`\mu _1\mu _2`$), and the continuity of $`\psi _k`$ at $`\eta _1`$ provides for the spectral coefficients the following exact solution :

$`A_{}^1={\displaystyle \frac{i\pi }{4}}\left[x_1\left(H_{\mu _2}^{{}_{}{}^{}(1)}H_{\mu _1}^{(1)}H_{\mu _2}^{(1)}H_{\mu _1}^{{}_{}{}^{}(1)}\right)+\left(\alpha _1\alpha _2\right)H_{\mu _2}^{(1)}H_{\mu _1}^{(1)}\right],`$ (9)
$`A_+^1={\displaystyle \frac{i\pi }{4}}\left[x_1\left(H_{\mu _2}^{(1)}H_{\mu _1}^{{}_{}{}^{}(2)}H_{\mu _2}^{{}_{}{}^{}(1)}H_{\mu _1}^{(2)}\right)+\left(\alpha _2\alpha _1\right)H_{\mu _2}^{(1)}H_{\mu _1}^{(2)}\right],`$ (10)
where the Hankel functions are evaluated ay $`x_1=k|\eta _1|`$. These coefficients satisfy the canonical normalization $`|A_+|^2|A_{}|^2=1`$.

The time scale $`\eta _1`$ defines the typical transition frequency, $`k_1=|\eta _1|^1`$. For modes with $`kk_1`$ we can use the large argument limit of the Hankel functions, and we obtain $`A_{}^10`$, $`A_+^11`$: such modes are thus unaffected by the transition, modulo higher order corrections that are esponentially damped like $`e^{k/k_1}`$ (see , for instance), and that we shall neglect in our approximation. For low frequency modes, $`kk_1`$, we can use instead the small argument limit ,

$`H_\mu ^{(1)}(x)p_\mu x^\mu +iq_\mu x^\mu ir_\mu x^{2\mu }+s_\mu x^{2+\mu }+\mathrm{},x0`$ (11)
$`H_\mu ^{(2)}(x)p_\mu ^{}x^\mu iq_\mu x^\mu +ir_\mu x^{2\mu }+s_\mu ^{}x^{2+\mu }+\mathrm{},x0`$ (12)
where the coefficients $`p,q,\mathrm{}`$ are complex numbers with modulo of order one (for later use, we have also included higher order corrections). The exact solution (10) provides, in this limit,

$$A_{}^1C_1^1x_1^{\mu _2\mu _1}+C_2^1x_1^{\mu _2+\mu _1}+C_3^1x_1^{\mu _2\mu _1}+C_4^1x_1^{2\mu _2\mu _1}+\mathrm{}$$
(13)
where

$`C_1^1={\displaystyle \frac{i\pi }{4}}q_{\mu _1}q_{\mu _2}\left(\mu _2\mu _1+\alpha _2\alpha _1\right),`$ (14)
$`C_2^1={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}p_{\mu _1}q_{\mu _2}\left(\mu _2\mu _1\alpha _2+\alpha _1\right),`$ (15)
$`C_3^1={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}q_{\mu _1}p_{\mu _2}\left(\mu _2+\mu _1\alpha _2+\alpha _1\right),`$ (16)
$`C_4^1={\displaystyle \frac{i\pi }{4}}\left[q_{\mu _1}r_{\mu _2}\left(2\mu _2+\mu _1\alpha _2+\alpha _1\right)+r_{\mu _1}q_{\mu _2}\left(2\mu _2+\mu _1\alpha _2+\alpha _1\right)\right]`$ (17)
(and a similar expression for $`A_{}^1`$).

By recalling that $`\mu _i=|\alpha _i1/2|`$, it follows that the first term of the expansion (13) is the leading one, for $`x_10`$. When $`C_1^1=0`$, however, we have to include the next-to-leading corrections. Taking into account all possible values of $`\alpha _1`$, $`\alpha _2`$, and truncating the expansion (13) to the lowest order term with non-vanishing coefficients, we find that for $`\alpha _1\alpha _2`$ there are four different possibilities, corresponding to four different spectral amplitudes:

$`\alpha _2>1/2\mathrm{or}\alpha _1>1/2,`$ $`A_{}^1C_1^1x_1^{\mu _2}x_1^{\mu _1},`$ (18)
$`\alpha _1>1/2,\alpha _1>\alpha _2,`$ $`A_{}^1C_2^1x_1^{\mu _2}x_1^{\mu _1},`$ (19)
$`\alpha _2>1/2,\alpha _2>\alpha _1,`$ $`A_{}^1C_3^1x_1^{\mu _2}x_1^{\mu _1},`$ (20)
$`\alpha _21/2,\alpha _11/2,`$ $`A_{}^1C_4^1x_1^{\mu _2+1}x_1^{\mu _1+1},`$ (21)
in agreement with the results first obtained in .

If one of the two powers $`\alpha _1`$, $`\alpha _2`$ equals $`1/2`$, the corresponding Bessel index is $`\mu =0`$, and the small argument expansion (12) is to be replaced by

$`H_0^{(1)}(x)p_0+iq_0\mathrm{log}xir_0x^2\mathrm{log}x+s_0x^2+\mathrm{},x0,`$ (22)
$`H_0^{(2)}(x)p_0^{}iq_0\mathrm{log}x+ir_0x^2\mathrm{log}x+s_0^{}x^2+\mathrm{},x0.`$ (23)
Suppose, for instance, that $`\alpha _1=1/2`$. The exact solution (10) is now approximated by

$$A_{}^1C_1^1x_1^{\mu _2}\mathrm{log}x_1+\overline{C}_2^1x_1^{\mu _2}+\mathrm{},$$
(24)
where

$$\overline{C}_2^1=\frac{\pi }{4}\left[q_{\mu _2}p_0\left(\mu _2\alpha _2+\frac{1}{2}\right)iq_{\mu _2}q_0\right].$$
(25)
As $`\overline{C}_1^1`$ is always nonzero, the leading term in eq. (24) is the firs one for $`\alpha _2>1/2`$, and the second one for $`\alpha _2<1/2`$. We may thus include also the value $`\alpha =1/2`$ in the general rules (21), provided we take into account the prescription

$$x^\mu |_{\mu =0}\mathrm{log}x,x^\mu |_{\mu =0}1.$$
(26)
The above computation for a single background transition can be easily iterated for a cosmological model containing two or more transitions. We have solved the general case with $`n`$ transitions, and we have found the remarkable result that the vanishing of the leading term of the asymptotic expansion - and then the particular spectral behaviour of the solution - depends only on the kinematic powers $`\alpha _i`$ of two phases: the one preceding the first transition, and the one following the last transition. Such a result is in agreement with the well known phenomenon of “freezing” of perturbations , and with the general duality properties  of the action (1).

Using the above result, it becomes possible to write down a recurrent expansion for the spectrum after $`n`$ transition. To this aim, it is convenient to represent the whole amplification process with a simple diagram, in which we insert a vertical line in correspondence of each transition. The height of the i-th line is proportional to the associated transition frequency, $`k_i=|\eta _i|^1`$. It become possible, in this way, to identify at a glance the various frequency bands ($`k`$) of the spectrum, according to the number of transitions (with $`k_i>k`$) from which a given band is significatively affected. Note that, for $`\eta `$ growing from minus infinity, the height of the vertical lines may grow monothonically up to a maximum transition frequency (corresponding to a minimum time scale), and is then monothonically decreasing for $`\eta `$ running towards plus infinity.

Let us start with the case in which the transition frequencies $`k_i=|\eta _i|^1`$ are arranged in growing order from the left to the right (see Fig. 1). The frequency band with $`k>k_1`$ is not amplified and we shall disregard it. The band number $`1`$ of the diagram ($`k_2<k<k_1`$) will be affected by one transition, the band number $`2`$ ($`k_3<k<k_2`$) by two transitions, and so on. The iteration of the matching procedure used for a single transition leads to a recurrent expression for the coefficient $`A_{}`$, where the $`k`$-dependence is fixed by the first and last phase, and the amplitude is fixed by the continuity at the transitions. We can write, in particular,

$`|A_{}^1(k)|`$ $``$ $`x_1^{\gamma _{21}}x_1^{\gamma _{12}},k_2<k<k_1`$ (27)
$``$ $`x_2^{\gamma _{31}}x_1^{\gamma _{13}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_2}}\right)^{\gamma _{21}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_2}}\right)^{\gamma _{12}\gamma _{13}},k_3<k<k_2`$ (28)
$`\mathrm{}`$ (29)
$``$ $`x_n^{\gamma _{n+1,1}}x_1^{\gamma _{1,n+1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_{n1}}{x_n}}\right)^{\gamma _{n1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_n}}\right)^{\gamma _{1n}\gamma _{1,n+1}}\mathrm{}`$ (31)
$`\mathrm{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_{i1}}{x_i}}\right)^{\gamma _{i1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_i}}\right)^{\gamma _{1i}\gamma _{1,i+1}}\mathrm{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_2}}\right)^{\gamma _{21}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_2}}\right)^{\gamma _{12}\gamma _{13}},k<k_n`$
(modulo a numerical factor of order one, that can be computed from the exact solution, but that we shall neglect for our purpose of a quick approximate estimate).

The powers $`\gamma _{ik}`$ of eq. (31) depend (in ordered way) on $`\alpha _i,\alpha _k`$ according to the same rules of eq. (21), with the only difference that when $`\alpha _i`$ and $`\alpha _k`$ are not contiguous (i.e., $`\alpha _i\alpha _{k+1}`$), they can also have the same value. In that case $`\mu _i=\mu _k`$, and the lowest order non-vanishing term of the expansion leads to $`x_{i1}^{\mu _i}x_k^{\mu _i}`$ if $`x_{i1}<x_k`$, or to $`x_{i1}^{\mu _i}x_k^{\mu _i}`$ if $`x_{i1}>x_k`$ (see eq. (17), where $`C_2^1=C_3^10`$ for $`\mu _1=\mu _2`$). By summarizing the working rules for computing the powers $`\gamma _{ik}`$ we must then distinguish two cases. In the case $`\alpha _i=\alpha _k`$ we have:

$`\alpha _i=\alpha _k,`$ $`\gamma _{ik}=ϵ_{ik}\mu _i,\gamma _{ki}=ϵ_{ik}\mu _i,`$ (33)
$`ϵ_{ik}=\mathrm{sign}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_{i1}}{x_k}}\right)=\mathrm{sign}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k_k}{k_{i1}}}\right).`$
Otherwise ($`\alpha _i\alpha _k`$) we have, according to eq. (21):

$`\alpha _i>1/2\mathrm{or}\alpha _k>1/2,`$ $`\gamma _{ik}=\mu _i,\gamma _{ki}=\mu _k,`$ (34)
$`\alpha _i>1/2,\alpha _i>\alpha _k,`$ $`\gamma _{ik}=\mu _i,\gamma _{ki}=\mu _k,`$ (35)
$`\alpha _k>1/2,\alpha _k>\alpha _i,`$ $`\gamma _{ik}=\mu _i,\gamma _{ki}=\mu _k,`$ (36)
$`\alpha _i1/2,\alpha _k1/2,`$ $`\gamma _{ik}=\mu _i+1,\gamma _{ki}=\mu _k+1,`$ (37)
Note that $`\gamma _{ik}\gamma _{ki}`$, but that $`\gamma _{ik}(\alpha _i,\alpha _k)=\gamma _{ik}(\alpha _k,\alpha _i)`$. Note also that, in the limiting case in which $`\mu _i=0`$ or $`\mu _k=0`$, we can take into account the logarithmic corrections according to the prescription (26). However, as they are usually negligible in realistic models, we shall neglect the log corrections in our first estimate of the spectrum, using the simple rule:

$$\gamma _{ik}(\frac{1}{2},\alpha _k)=0,\gamma _{ki}(\frac{1}{2},\alpha _k)=\mu _k=\left|\alpha _k\frac{1}{2}\right|,$$
(39)
for any $`k`$.

At this point, one remark is in order. The spectral distribution determined through the above procedure applies – by construction – only sufficiently far from the transition frequencies, $`kk_i`$. Near the transition the spectral slope may change with respect to the asymptotic regime, but always in such a way as to guarantee the continuity of the spectrum at $`k=k_i`$. In eq. (31), however, the asymptotic expression has been extrapolated up to $`k_i`$ and, as a consequence, its amplitude is normalized by continuity. This is certainly allowed – within our approximations – when the leading term of the expansion (13) is nonzero. When $`\alpha _i`$ and $`\alpha _1`$ are both smaller than $`1/2`$, and the leading term is vanishing, this extrapolation may introduce an error in the asymptotic amplitude of the spectrum, which is however of order one – and thus compatible with the degree of accuracy required for our present estimate – provided the amplification of the corresponding band is not too large, i.e. provided $`F(k_i)(k_i/k_{i1})^{\gamma _{i1}}(k_i/k_1)^{\gamma _{1i}}<1`$. If $`F1`$, on the contrary, the correct asymptotic amplitude of the branches with $`k<k_i`$ is obtained by renormalizing the results of eq. (31) by the factor $`F^2(k_i)`$.

A recurrent expression, similar to eq. (31), is also obtained for the complementary situation in which the $`n`$ transition frequencies $`k_i`$ are arranged in decreasing order, for $`\eta `$ ranging from minus to plus infinity (see Fig. 2). There are still $`n`$ frequency bands, defined by $`k_{i1}<k<k_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, and the spectral coefficients can be approximated as follows:

$`|A_{}^1(k)|`$ $``$ $`x_n^{\gamma _{n+1,n}}x_n^{\gamma _{n,n+1}},k_{n1}<k<k_n`$ (40)
$``$ $`x_n^{\gamma _{n+1,n1}}x_{n1}^{\gamma _{n1,n+1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_n}{x_{n1}}}\right)^{\gamma _{n,n+1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_n}{x_{n1}}}\right)^{\gamma _{n+1,n}\gamma _{n+1,n1}},k_{n2}<k<k_{n1}`$ (41)
$`\mathrm{}`$ (42)
$``$ $`x_n^{\gamma _{n+1,1}}x_1^{\gamma _{1,n+1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_n}{x_{n1}}}\right)^{\gamma _{n,n+1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_n}{x_{n1}}}\right)^{\gamma _{n+1,n}\gamma _{n+1,n1}}`$ (45)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_{n1}}{x_{n2}}}\right)^{\gamma _{n1,n+1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_n}{x_{n2}}}\right)^{\gamma _{n+1,n1}\gamma _{n+1,n2}}\mathrm{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_2}{x_1}}\right)^{\gamma _{2,n+1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_n}{x_1}}\right)^{\gamma _{n+1,2}\gamma _{n+1,1}},`$
$`k<k_1`$
where $`\gamma _{ik}`$ are given again by eqs. (33), (LABEL:17). Again, when the leading term is vanishing, the asymptotic amplitudes are correct provided $`\overline{F}(k_i)(k_i/k_{i+1})^{\gamma _{i+1,n+1}}(k_i/k_n)^{\gamma _{n+1,i+1}}<1`$, otherwise they are to be renormalized by the factor $`\overline{F}^2(k_i)`$.

The above results can be summarized by a set of prescriptions, allowing an automatic computation of the spectrum, once the relevant diagram is plotted. For a synthetic formulation of such prescriptions it is convenient to define, for each “leg” of the diagram representing a transition, the so-called phase of exit and phase of re-enter. More precisely, for any leg $`\eta _i`$ placed to the left of the highest one, we shall define phase of re-enter the one directly to the right of the last leg crossed by the transition frequency $`k_i=|\eta _ı|^1`$. For any leg $`\eta _j`$ placed to the right of the highest one, we shall define phase of exit the one directly to the left of the first leg crossed by the transition frequency $`k_j=|\eta _j|^1`$ (see Fig. 3).

With the above definitions, the diagrammatic rules for the computation of the spectrum can now be synthetized as follows.

* We plot the diagram for the given model of background
* We choose the frequency band we want to compute, and we single out the relevant transitions.
* For any relevant leg $`\eta _i`$ placed to the left of the highest one we insert the amplitude factor:

$$\left(\frac{x_{i1}}{x_i}\right)^{\gamma _{ir}}\left(\frac{x_r}{x_i}\right)^{\gamma _{ri}\gamma _{r,i+1}}.$$
(46)
For any relevant leg $`\eta _i`$ placed to the right of the highest one we insert the factor:

$$\left(\frac{x_{i+1}}{x_i}\right)^{\gamma _{i+1,e}}\left(\frac{x_{e1}}{x_i}\right)^{\gamma _{e,i+1}\gamma _{ei}},$$
(47)
where the labels $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}e\mathrm{"}`$ and $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}r\mathrm{"}`$ denote, respectively, the exit and re-enter phase (note that, according to these rules, the highest leg does not contribute to the amplitude).
* We add the overal factor determing the frequency dependence of the spectrum:

$$x_f^{\gamma _{f+1,\mathrm{}}}x_{\mathrm{}}^{\gamma _{\mathrm{},f+1}},$$
(48)
where the labels $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}f\mathrm{"}`$ and $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\mathrm{}\mathrm{"}`$ denote, respectively, the first and last (from the left) relevant legs for the band we are considering.
* We compute, finally, the powers $`\gamma _{ik}`$ according to eqs. (33), (LABEL:17) and, if needed, we renormalize the amplitudes through the factors $`F^2`$ or $`\overline{F}^2`$, as discussed before.

As a simple application of such a method, we shall compute here the spectrum for the amplification process represented by the diagram of Fig. 4, by assuming for the various phases the following particular values:

$$\alpha _1=1,\alpha _2=1/2,\alpha _3=2,\alpha _4=1/2.$$
(49)
With such a choice of the kinematical powers, the diagram of Fig. 4 may represent (in the Einstein frame) the amplification of tensor metric fluctuations in a non-minimal model of string cosmology , which includes an initial dilaton-driven phase ($`\eta <\eta _3`$), a first intermediate, high-curvature string phase ($`\eta _3<\eta <\eta _2`$), a second intermediate dilaton phase with decreasing curvature ($`\eta _2<\eta <\eta _1`$), and a final radiation-dominated phase, with constant dilaton ($`\eta >\eta _1`$). In the limit $`\eta _2\eta _1`$ the model reduces to the minimal one, in the limit $`\eta _3\eta _2`$ one recovers instead the non-minimal model discussed in .

Let us consider, for instance, the (lowest frequency) band number $`3`$ of Fig. 4, corresponding to a “three-leg” transition (for this band, obviously, $`\eta _3`$ is the first leg and $`\eta _1`$ is the last one). For the leg $`\eta _3`$ the re-enter phase is $`\alpha _2`$, for the leg $`\eta _1`$ the exit phase is $`\alpha _4`$. Following the rules listed above we obtain the spectral coefficient

$$|A_{}^1(k)|x_3^{\gamma _{41}}x_1^{\gamma _{14}}\left(\frac{x_2}{x_3}\right)^{\gamma _{32}}\left(\frac{x_2}{x_3}\right)^{\gamma _{23}\gamma _{24}}\left(\frac{x_2}{x_1}\right)^{\gamma _{24}}\left(\frac{x_3}{x_1}\right)^{\gamma _{42}\gamma _{41}},k<k_3.$$
(50)
The computation of the powers $`\gamma _{ik}`$, according to eqs. (33), (LABEL:17), (39), gives:

$`\gamma _{32}(2,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}},\gamma _{23}(2,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})=0,`$ (51)
$`\gamma _{24}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})`$ $`=0,\gamma _{42}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})=0,`$ (52)
$`\gamma _{41}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},1)`$ $`=0,\gamma _{14}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},1)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},`$ (53)
where the ordered labels of $`\gamma `$ refers to the various phases, and the numbers enclosed in round brackets refer to the particular numerical values of the corresponding kinematical powers. The spectral coefficient (50) thus becomes

$$|A_{}^1(k)|\left(\frac{k_3}{k_2}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{k}{k_1}\right)^{1/2},$$
(54)
and the associated energy distribution (5),

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(\omega ,t)\frac{8}{3\pi }\frac{\omega _1^4}{M_p^2H^2}\left(\frac{\omega _2}{\omega _3}\right)^3\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _1}\right)^3,$$
(55)
reproduces (modulo logarithmic corrections) the well known cubic slope associated to the dilaton-radiation transiton, and is in agreement with the results of  and . With the same procedure we can easily estimate the spectrum for the other bands of Fig. 4.

In summary, we have shown in this paper how to obtain a quick estimate of the cosmological spectra using a simple method, based on a set of effective prescriptions, and on a diagrammatic representation of the amplification of perturbations. We believe that such a method does not represent only a mathematical “curiosity”, but may have useful applications to the study of various inflationary scenarios, that will be discussed in future papers.

###### Acknowledgements.

It is a pleasure to thank Alessandra Buonanno, Massimo Giovannini, Carlo Ungarelli and Gabriele Veneziano for helpful comments.


text:
# Potential Models for Radiative Rare 𝐵 Decays

## I Introduction

The flavour changing weak decays of mesons have always been a rich source of information about basic interactions in particle physics. In particular, radiative $`B`$ decays $`BK^{}\gamma `$ $`(K^{}K^{}(892),`$ $`K^{}(1430)`$ etc.) received intensive theoretical studies. The presence of heavy $`b`$ quark permits the use of Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQET) in evaluating the relevant hadronic matrix elements where the relevance of the use of a potential model comes in. One purpose of our paper is to test the sensitivity of the branching ratios for $`BK^{}\gamma `$ decays relative to the inclusive $`bs\gamma `$ decay rate to potential models. Among the radiative processes $`BX_s\gamma ,BK^{}(892)\gamma `$ and $`BK_2^{}(1430)\gamma `$ exclusive branching ratios have been measured experimentally:

$$(BK^{}(892)\gamma )=(4.55\pm 0.34)\times 10^5$$
(1)
$$(BK_2^{}(1430)\gamma )=(1.66\pm 0.13)\times 10^5$$
(2)
and so has been the inclusive rate

$$(BX_s\gamma )=(2.32\pm 0.57\pm 0.35)\times 10^5$$
(3)
Several methods have been employed to predict $`BK^{}\gamma `$ decay rate: HQET, QCD sum rules-, quark models-, bound state resonances and Lattice QCD -. In this paper we follow the approach of  in which both $`b`$ and $`s`$ quarks are considered heavy. Although the $`s`$-quark is not particularly heavy and very substantial corrections to the Isgur-Wise functions are to be anticipated, particularly at the symmetry point, yet it has been found that the use of heavy quark symmetry for $`s`$-quark has not been too bad , particularly in connection with prediction of decay rates for $`DK^{()}\mathrm{}\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$,$`DK\mathrm{}\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ from $`BD^{()}\mathrm{}\nu `$ . It is, therefore, not an unreasonable hope that the static limit may provide results of a comparable accuracy also for the radiative rare $`B`$-decays. In fact the agreement obtained for $`BK^{}\gamma `$ seems to support this hope. In any case the rates of $`K^{}`$ states relative to $`BK^{}\gamma ,`$ should not too much depend on $`\frac{1}{m_s}`$ corrections. In the heavy quark limit, the long distance effects are contained within unknown form factors whose precise definition consistent with the covariant trace formulasim \-  has now been clarified.We use the same non relativistic quark model for the wave functions of the light degree of freedom (LDF) as was used in  but employ the numeical approach of .We use three different potentials, linear potential $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}V=\frac{4\alpha _s}{3r}+br+c\mathrm{"}`$, screening confiningpotential $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}V=\left(\frac{4\alpha _s}{3r}+br\right)\frac{1e^{\mu r}}{\mu r}\mathrm{"}\text{[19]}`$ and heavy quark pothential $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}V=br\frac{8C_F}{r}u(r)\mathrm{"}`$. Our results for linear potential are $`(16.07\pm 5.2)\%`$ for $`BK^{}(892)\gamma `$and $`(7.25\pm 3.2)\%`$ for $`BK_2^{}(1430)\gamma `$ while those for screening confining potential are $`(19.75\pm 5.2)\%`$and $`(4.74\pm 1.2)\%`$ and for heavy quark potential they are $`(11.18\pm 4.6)\%`$and $`(5.09\pm 2.7)\%`$ respectively. They are in good agreement with the recent experimental measurements made by CLEO  and at the present precision of both theoretical and experimental values, one cannot distinguish between the above potentials. However, when the data for other decays of $`B`$ into some of the other $`K`$-meson states become available, it should be possible to make such a distinction-\[see Table 1\].

In section II we present the theoretical framework for $`BK^{}\gamma `$ decays. ISGW Model is described in section III which also contains the procedure for finding wave function of LDF using different potential models. The obtained results are summarized in the Conclusion.

## II Theoretical Framework

For $`BK^{}\gamma `$ decays the effective hamiltonian is well known  -:

$$H_{eff}=\frac{4G_F}{\sqrt{2}}V_{tb}V_{ts}^{}C_7(m_b)𝒪_7(m_b)$$
(4)
where

$$𝒪_7=\frac{e}{32\pi ^2}F_{\mu \nu }\left[m_b\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{s}\sigma ^{\mu \nu }(1+\gamma _5)b+m_s\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{s}\sigma ^{\mu \nu }(1\gamma _5)b\right]$$
(5)
Matrix elements of bilinear currents of two heavy quarks $`(J(q)=\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{Q}TQ)`$ are most conveniently evaluated within the framework of covarient trace formulasim. Denoting $`\omega =v^{}.v,`$ where $`v`$ and $`v^{}`$ are the four velocities of the two mesons, we have

$`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(v^{})\left|J(q)\right|\mathrm{\Psi }(v)=Tr[\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{M}(v^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }M(v)](\omega )`$

where $`M^{}`$ and $`M`$ denote matrices describing states $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(v^{})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }(v)`$, $`\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{M}`$=$`\gamma ^0M^{}\gamma ^0,`$ and $`(\omega )`$ represents the LDF. $`M`$, $`M^{}`$ and $`(\omega )`$ can be found in  and using Eq.(5) we can write:

$$K^{}\gamma \left|𝒪_7(m_b)\right|B=\frac{e}{16\pi ^2}\eta _\mu q_\nu Tr[\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{M^{}}(v^{})\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mu \nu }M(v)](\omega )$$
(6)
where the factor $`q_\nu =m_Bv_\nu m_K^{}v_\nu ^{}`$ comes from the derivative in the field strength Fμν of Eq.(4), $`\eta _\mu `$ is the photon polarization vector and

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mu \nu }=m_B\sigma ^{\mu \nu }(1+\gamma _5)+m_K^{}\sigma ^{\mu \nu }(1\gamma _5)$$
(7)
Using the mass shell condition of the photon $`(q^2=0)`$ and polarization sums for spin-1 and spin-2 particles, the decay rates are calculated in :

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK^{}(892)\gamma )=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\xi _C(\omega )\right|^2\frac{1}{y}[(1y)^3(1+y)^5(1+y^2)]$$
(8)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK_1(1270)\gamma )=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\xi _E(\omega )\right|^2\frac{1}{y}[(1y)^5(1+y)^3(1+y^2)]$$
(9)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK_1(1400)\gamma )=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\xi _F(\omega )\right|^2\frac{1}{24y^3}[(1y)^5(1+y)^7(1+y^2)]$$
(10)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK_2^{}(1430)\gamma )=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\xi _F(\omega )\right|^2\frac{1}{8y^3}[(1y)^5(1+y)^7(1+y^2)]$$
(11)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK^{}(1680)\gamma )=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\xi _G(\omega )\right|^2\frac{1}{24y}[(1y)^7(1+y)^5(1+y^2)]$$
(12)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK_2(1580)\gamma )=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\xi _G(\omega )\right|^2\frac{1}{8y^3}[(1y)^7(1+y)^5(1+y^2)]$$
(13)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK^{}(1410)\gamma )=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\xi _{C_2}(\omega )\right|^2\frac{1}{y}[(1y)^3(1+y)^5(1+y^2)]$$
(14)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK_1(1650)\gamma )=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\xi _{E_2}(\omega )\right|^2\frac{1}{y}[(1y)^5(1+y)^3(1+y^2)]$$
(15)
where

$$y=\frac{m_K^{}}{m_B}$$
(16)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\frac{\alpha }{128\pi ^4}G_F^2m_B^5\left|V_{tb}\right|^2\left|V_{ts}\right|^2\left|C_7(m_B)\right|^2$$
(17)
and the argument of the Isgur-Wise (IW) function is fixed by the mass shell condition of the photon $`(q^2=0),`$

$$\omega =\frac{1+y^2}{2y}$$
(18)
## III Potential Models for the Isgur-Wise Functions

Following  for the evaluation of IW form factors needed for the decay rates we assume that we can describe heavy-light mesons using some non-relativistic potential models; the rest frame LDF wave function can then be written as

$$\varphi _{j\lambda j}^{(\alpha L)}(x)=\underset{m_L,m_s}{}R_{\alpha L}(r)Y_{Lm_L}(\mathrm{\Omega })\chi _{m_s}L,m_L;\frac{1}{2},m_sj,\lambda _j;L,\frac{1}{2}$$
(19)
where $`\chi _s`$ represent the rest frame spinors normalized to one, $`\chi _{m_s^{^{}}}^{}\chi _{m_s}=\delta _{m_s^{^{}},m_s}`$ and $`\alpha `$ represents all other quantum numbers. In  following expressions for the form factors are obtained:

$$\xi _C(\omega )=\frac{2}{\omega +1}j_0(ar)_{00},0_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}(0_{\frac{1}{2}}^{},1_{\frac{1}{2}}^{})$$
(20)
$$\xi _F(\omega )=\frac{2}{\sqrt{\omega ^21}}j_1(ar)_{10},0_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}(0_{\frac{1}{2}}^+,1_{\frac{1}{2}}^+)$$
(21)
$$\xi _F(\omega )=\sqrt{\frac{3}{\omega ^21}}\frac{2}{\omega +1}j_1(ar)_{10},0_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}(1_{\frac{3}{2}}^+,2_{\frac{3}{2}}^+)$$
(22)
$$\xi _G(\omega )=\frac{2\sqrt{3}}{\omega ^21}j_2(ar)_{20},0_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}(1_{\frac{3}{2}}^{},2_{\frac{3}{2}}^{})$$
(23)
where denoting the energy of LDF as $`E_q:`$

$$a=(E_q+E_{\stackrel{^{}}{\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{q}}})\sqrt{\frac{\omega 1}{\omega +1}}$$
(24)
and

$$F(ar)_{L^{^{}}L}^{\alpha ^{^{}}\alpha }=r^2𝑑rR_{\alpha ^{^{}}L^{^{}}}^{}(r)R_{\alpha L}(r)F(ar)$$
(25)
To find the form factors we use the method of  i.e. solve the Schrodinger Equation numerically.We use three different potentials

Linear potential:

$$V=\frac{4\alpha _s}{3r}+br+c,$$
(26)
Screening confining potential :

$$V=\left(\frac{4\alpha _s}{3r}+br\right)\frac{1e^{\mu r}}{\mu r},$$
(27)
and Heavy quark potential :

$$V=br\frac{8C_F}{r}u(r)$$
(28)
Following , we fix $`b=0.18`$ $`GeV^2`$ and vary $`\alpha _s`$ and $`c`$ for a given value of $`m_{u,d}`$(in the range $`0.300.35GeV`$) and $`m_s`$(in the range $`0.50.6GeV`$), untill a good description of the spin averaged spectra of $`K`$-meson states is obtained. Following this procedure, our $`\alpha _s`$ ranges from $`0.37`$ to $`0.48`$, while $`c`$ takes values from $`0.83GeV`$ to $`0.90GeV`$. These parameters are in good agreement with the original ISGW values ($`\alpha _s=0.5`$ and $`c=0.84GeV`$ for $`m_{u,d}=0.33`$ $`GeV`$ and $`m_s=0.55GeV`$). For the screening confining potential: $`\sigma =0.18\pm 0.02`$ $`GeV^2`$ and $`\mu ^1=0.8\pm 0.2`$ $`fm`$, while for the heavy quark potential  $`C_F=\frac{N_c^21}{2N_c}`$ and \[$`a(q^2)`$ is defined in \]

$$u(r)=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dq}{q}(a(q^2)\frac{k}{q^2})\mathrm{sin}(q.r)$$
(29)
which is calculated numerically at $`r0.01`$ fm and represented in the MATHEMATICA file in the format of note book at the site http://www.ihep.su/~kiselev/Potential.nb. The short distance behaviour of the potential is purely peturbative, so that at $`r0.01`$ fm we can put

$$V(r)=C_F\frac{\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{\alpha _v}(1/r^2)}{r}$$
(30)
where the value of the running coupling constant $`\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{\alpha _v}(1/r^2)`$ at $`r_s=0.01fm`$ is $`\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{\alpha _v}(1/r_s^2)=0.22213.`$
As in  the definition of the LDF energy for a $`K^{}`$ meson, proposed to account for the fact that $`s`$ mesons are not particulaly heavy, is

$$E_{\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{q}}=\frac{m_K^{}\times m_{u,d}}{m_s+m_{u,d}}$$
(31)
Another definition which is consistent with heavy quark symmetry is

$$E_{\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{q}}=m_K^{}m_s$$
(32)
These two definitions are not equivalent in the heavy quark limit, so we have done all calculations employing both of these two definitions and at the end we have quoted the broadest possible range of the results obtained. Finally, $`E_{\stackrel{\mathrm{\_}}{q}}`$ for the $`B`$ meson has been taken to be the same as for the $`K^{}`$ meson, consistent with heavy quark symmetry. It turns out that this is actually a very reasonable assumption. To find the size of a meson, which we need for the evaluation of the integral in Eq.(25), we investigate for the asymptotic behavior of Schrodinger Equation for a particular potential model. As an example we display the asymptotic behavior of LDF wave function for linear potential model(for $`\mathrm{}=1`$) in Fig 1.

## IV Conclusion

In table $`1`$ we present our results for the ratio $`R=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK^{}\gamma )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(BX_s\gamma )}`$ for various $`K`$ meson states; the inclusive branching ratio is usually taken to be QCD improved quark decay rate for $`B`$ which can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BX_s\gamma )=4\mathrm{\Omega }(1\frac{m_s^2}{m_b^2})^3(1+\frac{m_s^2}{m_b^2})$$
(33)
giving the prediction for $`BR(bs\gamma )`$ to be $`(2.8\pm 0.8)\times 10^4`$ , where the uncertainity is due to the choice of the QCD scale.

We find that the radiative decays of $`B`$ into $`K`$ meson states saturate $`30\%`$ to $`50\%`$ the inclusive decay rate . We cannot reach more quantative conclusions due to errors involved in theoretical estimates, due to which also we cannot at present distinguish between the potential models used. However, even with the present accuracy it should be possible to make such a distinction when data for the other $`K`$-states listed in Table $`1`$ become available.