text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In 1970 Bocaletti et al opened up the discussion about the interaction of weak gravitational wave (GW) fields and static electromagnetic fields in vacuum . In the seventies this problem has been studied in detail in the application to GW detection (see, e.g., ). The idea of these investigations was based on two suggestions (i) that the GW field is weak and (ii) the electromagnetic field is in vacuum. Item (ii) was motivated by the supposition that either the presence of matter or vacuum fluctuations make the velocities of both gravitational and electromagnetic waves different, therefore destroying the coherence between both types of waves  (see, also, ).

This problem has been taken up in  where items (i) and (ii) were dropped down and solutions in the presence of matter were considered for non-linear GW background. Specifically, an exact solvable model of evolution of an electromagnetic field in a GW background in the presence of a spatially isotropic dielectric medium was studied along with the critical character of the GW effect on the amplification of the electrodynamical response, (here we are using the word “critical” in analogy to phase transitions terminology). It was also shown that one can consider this sort of models in the framework of nonlinear GW fields .

One can now go a step further and study the critical behaviour of an electrodynamical system in a GW background for a wider class of models other than those considered in . We discuss in a covariant formalism a generalized problem of the singular behaviour of electrodynamical systems evolving in a GW background. The paper is composed as follows. In section 2 the phenomenological representation of the master equations for electrodynamics of continuous media is given for arbitrary gravitational background fields and then considered for four particular models, namely, pure vacuum, curvature induced corrections in vacuum, spatially isotropic medium, and curvature induced corrections in spatially isotropic medium. In section 3 exact solutions of Maxwell equations in a GW background (specifically, a pp-wave background) are obtained and discussed for the four mentioned examples. Attention is given to the singular behaviour problem. In section 4 we present our conclusions.

## 2 Master equations and constitutive relationships

### 2.1 Covariant decription of dielectric and magnetic properties of continuous media and vacuum

The master equations of covariant electrodynamics of continuous media are the following :

$$_kH^{ik}=\frac{4\pi }{c}I^i,$$
(1)
$$_kF^{ik}=0,$$
(2)
where $`H^{ik}`$ is the electric and magnetic induction tensor, $`_k`$ is the covariant derivative, $`I^i`$ is the current four-vector for free charges, $`F^{ik}`$ is the tensor dual to the Maxwell tensor $`F_{mn}`$. The definition of duality for a generic tensor $`T^{ik}`$ is

$$T^{ik}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{g}}ϵ^{ikls}T_{ls},$$
(3)
where $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}ϵ^{ikls}`$ is the Levi-Civita tensor and $`ϵ^{ikls}`$ is the completely anti-symmetric symbol with $`ϵ^{0123}=ϵ_{0123}=1`$. As usually, we have

$$F_{ik}=_iA_k_kA_i,$$
(4)
where $`A_i`$ is the four-vector potential. With this definition equation (2) is trivially satisfied.

The set of equations (1) and (2) of covariant electrodynamics of continuous media should be completed by formulating consistently the constitutive equations , linking the electric and magnetic induction tensor with the Maxwell tensor. The simplest relation between these tensors is linear and has the following form:

$$H^{ik}=C^{ikmn}F_{mn},$$
(5)
where $`C^{ikmn}`$ is called the material tensor, describing the properties of the linear response and containing the information about dielectric and magnetic permeabilities, as well as about the magneto-electric coefficients  (see, also,  for other details). This tensor has the well-known index-transposition properties:

$$C^{ikmn}=C^{mnik}=C^{kimn}=C^{iknm}.$$
(6)
Due to these symmetries the $`C^{ikmn}`$ tensor has 21 independent components.

The physical interpretation of the components of the material tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$ is simplest in the frame of reference in which the medium is at rest. Thus, the time-like four-vector $`U^i`$ of the medium is a necessary element of the theory. When the medium is present one has to include the $`U^i`$ vector into the constitutive equations. Note, however, that in vacuum there is no medium velocity $`U^i`$ by definition, but one may still use the four-velocity of an arbitrary observer.

The constitutive equations in the form (5) are phenomenological. This phenomenological approach is appropriate to describe several types of media, including the vacuum, which is usually considered as a sort of medium in the framework of covariant electrodynamics of continuos media.

### 2.2 Decomposition of the material tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$: the general case

An interpretation of the 21 independent components of the material tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$ can be given through relationships between the four-vectors electric induction $`D^i`$ and magnetic field $`H^i`$, on one hand, and the four-vectors electric field $`E^i`$ and the magnetic induction $`B^i`$ on the other hand. In order to do this one defines the vectors $`D^i`$, $`H^i`$, $`E^i`$ and $`B^i`$ by the following formulae :

$$D^i=H^{ik}U_k,H^i=H^{ik}U_k,E^i=F^{ik}U_k,B^i=F^{ik}U_k.$$
(7)
These vectors are spacelike lying in a hypersurface orthogonal to the velocity four-vector $`U^i`$,

$$D^iU_i=0=E^iU_i,H^iU_i=0=B^iU_i.$$
(8)
For $`U^i`$ timelike and normalized to unity, one can through formulae (7) and (8) represent the Maxwell tensor in the form

$$F_{mn}=\delta _{mn}^{pq}E_pU_qϵ_{mnls}\sqrt{g}B^lU^s=E_mU_nE_nU_m\eta _{mnl}B^l.$$
(9)
where $`\delta _{mn}^{ik}`$ is the generalized 4-indices $`\delta `$Kronecker tensor and $`\eta _{mnl}`$ is an anti-symmetric tensor orthogonal to $`U^i`$ defined as

$$\eta _{mnl}\sqrt{g}ϵ_{mnls}U^s,\eta ^{ikl}\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}ϵ^{ikls}U_s.$$
(10)
The generalized 6-indices $`\delta `$Kronecker tensor and the spacelike tensor $`\eta ^{ikl}`$, both constructed from the Levi-Civita tensor, are the standard tools for the decomposition of the material tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$. They are connected by the useful identity

$$\eta ^{ikp}\eta _{mnp}=\delta _{mns}^{ikl}U_lU^s=\mathrm{\Delta }_m^i\mathrm{\Delta }_n^k\mathrm{\Delta }_n^i\mathrm{\Delta }_m^k,$$
(11)
where the symmetrical projection tensor $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{ik}`$ is defined as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{ik}=g^{ik}U^iU^k.$$
(12)
It allows to project a generic tensor to a hypersurface orthogonal to the four-velocity vector $`U^i`$. Upon contraction, equation (11) yields another identity

$$\frac{1}{2}\eta ^{ikl}\eta _{klm}=\delta _{ms}^{il}U_lU^s=\mathrm{\Delta }_m^i.$$
(13)
We can now decompose $`C^{ikmn}`$ uniquely as

$`C^{ikmn}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\epsilon ^{im}U^kU^n\epsilon ^{in}U^kU^m+\epsilon ^{kn}U^iU^m\epsilon ^{km}U^iU^n\right)+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\eta ^{ikl}(\mu ^1)_{ls}\eta ^{mns}+\eta ^{ikl}(U^m\nu _l^nU^n\nu _l^m)+\eta ^{lmn}(U^i\nu _l^kU^k\nu _l^i)\right].`$ (14)
Here $`\epsilon ^{im}`$, $`(\mu ^1)_{pq}`$ and $`\nu _p^m`$ are defined as

$$\epsilon ^{im}=2C^{ikmn}U_kU_n,(\mu ^1)_{pq}=\frac{1}{2}\eta _{pik}C^{ikmn}\eta _{mnq},$$
(15)
$$\nu _p^m=\eta _{pik}C^{ikmn}U_n=U_kC^{mkln}\eta _{lnp}.$$
(16)
The tensors $`\epsilon _{ik}`$ and $`(\mu ^1)_{ik}`$ are symmetric, but $`\nu _l^k`$ is in general non-symmetric. The dot denotes the position of the second index when lowered. These three tensors are spacelike, i.e., they are orthogonal to $`U^i`$,

$$\epsilon _{ik}U^k=0,(\mu ^1)_{ik}U^k=0,\nu _l^kU^l=0=\nu _l^kU_k.$$
(17)
Calculating $`D^i`$ and $`H_i`$ given in (7), and using the decomposition (5) and (14), we obtain the standard linear relationships

$$D^i=\epsilon ^{im}E_mB^l\nu _l^i,H_i=\nu _i^mE_m+(\mu ^1)_{im}B^m.$$
(18)
Thus, the tensors $`\epsilon ^{im}`$, $`\mu _{pq}`$ and $`\nu _p^m`$ are the four-dimensional analogues of the dielectric permeability tensor, the magnetic permeability tensor and the magneto-electric coefficient tensor, respectively. One sees, that the 21 components of $`C^{ikmn}`$ can be divided into the 6 components of $`\epsilon ^{im}`$, the 6 components of $`(\mu ^1)_{pq}`$ and the 9 components of $`\nu _p^m`$. If the magneto-electric coefficient tensor $`\nu _i^m`$ is equal to zero, we have a special case of a so-called permeable medium and the $`C^{iklm}`$ tensor is characterized by 12 components only .

We now study four models where this decomposition takes place.

### 2.3 Decomposition of the material tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$ in vacuum; its dielectric properties in the presence of a gravitational field

#### 2.3.1 The first model: pure vacuum

As a first model we consider the vacuum case in a generic curved background. One can ask what are the coefficients $`C^{ikmn}`$ for this case. For vacuum electrodynamics one has

$$H^{ik}=F^{ik}=g^{im}g^{kn}F_{mn}.$$
(19)
Thus, from (5), the material tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$ in vacuum must be the following

$$C_{(\mathrm{vac})}^{ikmn}=\frac{1}{2}\left(g^{im}g^{kn}g^{in}g^{km}\right).$$
(20)
We can see explicitly, that in vacuum the $`U^i`$ vector does not appear in $`C^{ikmn}`$. From equations (15)-(16) we get

$$\epsilon ^{ik}=(\mu ^1)^{ik}=\mathrm{\Delta }^{ik},\nu _i^k=0.$$
(21)
From (21) we see that the tensors $`\epsilon ^{ik}`$ and $`(\mu ^1)^{ik}`$ depend on the four-velocity, in contrast to the $`C_{(\mathrm{vac})}^{ikmn}`$ tensor (20). Thus, the vacuum in a gravitational field should be seen as a specific sort of medium by specifying a four-velocity to it .

#### 2.3.2 The second model: curvature induced corrections in vacuum

As a second model we consider the one-loop corrections to quantum electrodynamics in a curved vacuum background . The relationship between induction tensor and Maxwell tensor has the form

$$H^{ik}=F^{ik}(1+q_1R)+q_2(R_m^iF^{mk}R_m^kF^{mi})+q_3R^{ikmn}F_{mn},$$
(22)
where $`R^{ikmn}`$ is the Riemann tensor, $`R^{ik}`$ is the Ricci tensor, $`R`$ is the scalar curvature of the spacetime, and the coefficients

$$q_1=\frac{\alpha \lambda _e^2}{180\pi },q_2=\frac{13\alpha \lambda _e^2}{180\pi },q_1=\frac{\alpha \lambda _e^2}{90\pi }$$
(23)
contain the fine structure constant $`\alpha `$ and Compton wavelength of the electron $`\lambda _e`$. From (22) one sees that the interaction between the electromagnetic field and curvature produces an electric and magnetic polarization of the vacuum. Using (5), we can conclude that the material tensor is now given by

$$C^{ikmn}=C_{(\mathrm{vac})}^{ikmn}+C_{(\mathrm{corr})}^{ikmn},$$
(24)
where,

$`C_{(\mathrm{corr})}^{ikmn}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}q_1R\left(g^{im}g^{kn}g^{in}g^{km}\right)+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}q_2\left(R^{im}g^{kn}R^{in}g^{km}+R^{kn}g^{im}R^{km}g^{in}\right)+q_3R^{ikmn}.`$ (25)
Note, that $`C_{(\mathrm{corr})}^{ikmn}`$ is linear in the Riemann, Ricci and scalar curvatures and does not contain the four-velocity vector $`U^i`$.

### 2.4 Decomposition of $`C^{ikmn}`$ in a spatially isotropic medium

#### 2.4.1 The third model: pure spatially isotropic medium in a gravitational field

As a third model we consider a transparent spatially isotropic medium. From the phenomenological point of view a spatially isotropic medium may be decribed by two scalars only: $`\epsilon `$ \- the dielectric permeability and $`\mu `$ \- the magnetic permeability.

Note the similarity of a spatially isotropic medium with its two scalars $`\epsilon `$ and $`\mu `$, with the theory of elasticity also characterized by two scalars, the Lamé coefficients $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$. Thus, keeping this analogy, and recalling that the symmetric tensor of elastic modulus $`E^{iklm}`$ can be decomposed as $`E^{iklm}=\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }^{ik}\mathrm{\Delta }^{lm}+\mu (\mathrm{\Delta }^{il}\mathrm{\Delta }^{km}+\mathrm{\Delta }^{im}\mathrm{\Delta }^{kl})`$, one can also decompose the anti-symmetric tensor $`C^{iklm}`$ using two tensorial quantities, $`G^{ikmn}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{ikmn}`$, defined by

$$G^{ikmn}\frac{1}{2}\left(g^{im}g^{kn}g^{in}g^{km}\right)$$
(26)
and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{ikmn}`$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{ikmn}\frac{1}{2}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }^{im}\mathrm{\Delta }^{kn}\mathrm{\Delta }^{in}\mathrm{\Delta }^{km}\right).$$
(27)
These tensors form the basis for the decomposition of the anti-symmetric material tensor in a spatially isotropic medium. We can then write the following linear combination

$$C_{(\mathrm{iso})}^{ikmn}\frac{1}{\mu }\mathrm{\Delta }^{ikmn}+\epsilon \left(G^{ikmn}\mathrm{\Delta }^{ikmn}\right),$$
(28)
or in detailed form,

$`C_{(\mathrm{iso})}^{ikmn}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mu }}\left(g^{im}g^{kn}g^{in}g^{km}\right)+`$
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon \mu 1}{2\mu }}\right)\left(g^{im}U^kU^ng^{in}U^kU^m+g^{kn}U^iU^mg^{km}U^iU^n\right),`$ (29)
where the coefficients in this linear combination were choosen to recover the standard definitions in three dimensions, i.e.,

$$D^i=\epsilon E^i,H_i=\frac{1}{\mu }B_i,\epsilon ^{ik}=\epsilon \mathrm{\Delta }^{ik},(\mu ^1)^{ik}=\frac{1}{\mu }\mathrm{\Delta }^{ik},\nu _i^k=0.$$
(30)
If we put $`\epsilon `$ and $`\mu `$ equal to unity, equation (29) yields, the material tensor in vacuum (20), as it should.

#### 2.4.2 The fourth model: curvature induced anisotropic corrections in a spatially isotropic medium

As before, through a phenomenological decomposition, we find the anisotropic contributions to $`C^{ikmn}`$ from the Riemann tensor, the Ricci tensor and the scalar curvature. These contributions give

$$C_{(\mathrm{aniso})}^{ikmn}=C_{(\mathrm{iso})}^{ikmn}+C_{(\mathrm{corr})}^{ikmn},$$
(31)
where now,

$`C_{(\mathrm{corr})}^{ikmn}=\left(H_1R+Q_1R_{pq}U^pU^q\right)\left(g^{im}g^{kn}g^{in}g^{km}\right)+`$
$`+\left(\overline{H}_1R+\overline{Q}_1R_{pq}U^pU^q\right)\left(g^{im}U^kU^ng^{in}U^kU^m+g^{kn}U^iU^mg^{km}U^iU^n\right)+`$
$`+Q_2\left(R^{im}g^{kn}R^{in}g^{km}+R^{kn}g^{im}R^{km}g^{in}\right)+`$
$`+\overline{Q}_2\left(R^{im}U^kU^nR^{in}U^kU^m+R^{kn}U^iU^mR^{km}U^iU^n\right)+`$
$`+\widehat{Q}_2U^l\left(R_l^{(i}U^{m)}U^kU^nR_l^{(i}U^{n)}U^kU^m+R_l^{(k}U^{n)}U^iU^mR_l^{(k}U^{m)}U^iU^n\right)+`$
$`+Q_3R^{ikmn}+`$
$`+\overline{Q}_3U_pU_q\left(R^{ipmq}g^{kn}R^{ipnq}g^{km}+R^{kpnq}g^{im}R^{kpmq}g^{in}\right)+`$
$`+\widehat{Q}_3U_pU_q\left(R^{ipmq}U^kU^nR^{ipnq}U^kU^m+R^{kpnq}U^iU^mR^{kpmq}U^iU^n\right),`$ (32)
where, $`(im)`$ denotes symmetrization in those indices, and the $`H_1`$ and $`\overline{H}_1`$, $`Q_1,Q_2,Q_3`$, $`\overline{Q}_1,\overline{Q}_2,\overline{Q}_3`$ and $`\widehat{Q}_2,\widehat{Q}_3`$ coefficients are phenomenological parameters for the medium, which appear in this formalism in much the same way as $`q_1,q_2,q_3`$ have appeared in the vacuum case. However, we stress that contrary to the vacuum case where $`q_1`$, $`q_2`$, and $`q_3`$ can be found from within vacuum quantum electrodynamics , the coefficients $`H_1`$, etc, cannot be directly extracted, since there is no developed self-consistent quantum electrodynamics in continuous media in curved spacetimes.

The full material tensor (31), $`C_{(\mathrm{aniso})}^{ikmn}=C_{(\mathrm{iso})}^{ikmn}+C_{(\mathrm{corr})}^{ikmn}`$, containing contributions from (29) and (32), covers all three previous examples (20), (25), and (29), on choosing the coefficients in the decompositions (29) and (32) in an appropriate way. In this sense it is the general construction to the four mentioned examples given above. For instance, for $`\epsilon =\mu =1`$ we may, if we wish, restrict to the case where the coefficients $`\overline{H}_1,Q_1,\overline{Q}_1,\overline{Q}_2,\overline{Q}_3,\widehat{Q}_2,\widehat{Q}_3`$ in (32) disappear. This could be achieved by puting these coefficients proportional to $`(\epsilon \mu 1)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }>0`$). Note, however, that from the phenomenological point of view this requirement is not compulsory.

In order to be complete, we mention that the material tensor $`C^{iklm}`$ we have been using can be enlarged to contain other admissible non-minimal coupling terms . Indeed, the most general material tensor $`\chi ^{iklm}`$, without curvature corrections, has the generic form $`\chi =f(x)\chi ^0+\alpha (x)[ϵ]`$, where we have suppressed the indices, $`[ϵ]`$ here means tensors constructed from an odd number of the Levi-Civita tensor, and $`x`$ stands for spacetime coordinates. The scalar function $`\alpha (x)`$ is an Abelian axion field which appears in some particle theories with CP-violation . Adding curvature corrections leads to a non-minimal coupling contribution of duals of the curvature tensors, $`R^{iklm}`$ for instance, to the tensor $`\chi ^{iklm}`$ . This approach would lead to an interaction term between the axions and the curvature, but we do not investigate these models here.

## 3 Exact solutions of Maxwell equations

### 3.1 Decomposition of the material tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$ for a pp-wave gravitational background and its dielectric properties

The previous sections contain the decomposition of the material tensor for an arbitrary spacetime metric. It is of interest to study the tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$ in a particular background. Here we will consider as the spacetime background the exact pp-wave solution of Einstein’s equations in vacuum described by the metric

$$ds^2=2dudvL^2\left[e^{2\beta }(dx^2)^2+e^{2\beta }(dx^3)^2\right],$$
(33)
where

$$u=\frac{ctx^1}{\sqrt{2}},v=\frac{ct+x^1}{\sqrt{2}}$$
(34)
are the retarded and the advanced time, respectively. The functions $`L`$ and $`\beta `$ depend on $`u`$ only.

The pp-wave metric (33) possesses $`G_5`$ as the symmetry group  and admits the following set of Killing vector fields:

$`\xi _{(v)}^i=\delta _v^i,\xi _{(2)}^i=\delta _2^i,\xi _{(3)}^i=\delta _3^i,`$
$`\xi _{(4)}^i=x^2\delta _v^i\delta _2^i{\displaystyle g^{22}(u)𝑑u},\xi _{(5)}^i=x^3\delta _v^i\delta _3^i{\displaystyle g^{33}(u)𝑑u},`$ (35)
of which the first three, $`\xi _{(v)}^i`$, $`\xi _{(2)}^i`$, and $`\xi _{(3)}^i`$, form a $`G_3`$ Abelian subgroup of $`G_5`$. Here $`g^{\alpha \beta }(u)`$ ($`\alpha ,\beta =2,3`$) are the contravariant components of the metric tensor. The vector $`\xi _{(v)}^i`$ is isotropic, covariantly constant and orthogonal to the other four ones, i.e.,

$$_k\xi _{(v)}^i=0,g_{ik}\xi _{(v)}^i\xi _{(j)}^k=0.$$
(36)
The two functions $`L(u)`$ and $`\beta (u)`$ are coupled by the equation:

$$L^{^{\prime \prime }}+L(\beta ^{^{}})^2=0.$$
(37)
One can assume $`\beta (u)`$ as an arbitrary function of $`u`$ and then solve for $`L`$. The curvature tensor has two non-zero components:

$$R_{u2u}^2=R_{u3u}^3=L^2\left[L^2\beta ^{^{}}\right]^{^{}}.$$
(38)
The Ricci tensor $`R_{ik}`$ and the curvature scalar $`R`$ are equal to zero.

For a medium (or an observer) at rest in the chosen frame of reference one has

$$U^i=(\delta _u^i+\delta _v^i)\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}.$$
(39)
Then one can show that for the pp-wave background, described by equations (33)-(38), one obtains for a spatially isotropic medium with curvature induced corrections (see (31)-(32)), the following dielectric permeability, magnetic permeability and magneto-electric coefficients, respectively:

$`\epsilon ^{im}=\epsilon \mathrm{\Delta }^{im}+2(Q_3+\overline{Q}_3+\widehat{Q}_3)R^{ikmn}U_kU_n,`$
$`(\mu ^1)_{pq}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mu }}\mathrm{\Delta }_{pq}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Q_3\eta _{pik}R^{ikmn}\eta _{mnq}2\overline{Q}_3R_{plqs}U^lU^s,`$
$`\nu _p^m=Q_3\eta _{pik}R^{ikmn}U_n.`$ (40)
Explicitly we find,

$`\epsilon ^{uu}=\epsilon ^{vv}=\epsilon ^{uv}={\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon }{2}},(\mu ^1)_{uu}=(\mu ^1)_{vv}=(\mu ^1)_{uv}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mu }},`$
$`\epsilon ^{u\alpha }=(\mu ^1)_{u\alpha }=\epsilon ^{v\alpha }=(\mu ^1)_{v\alpha }=0,\epsilon ^{23}=(\mu ^1)_{23}=0,`$
$`\epsilon ^{22}=g^{22}\left[\epsilon +(Q_3+\overline{Q}_3+\widehat{Q}_3)R_{u2u}^2\right],\epsilon ^{33}=g^{33}\left[\epsilon (Q_3+\overline{Q}_3+\widehat{Q}_3)R_{u2u}^2\right],`$
$`(\mu ^1)^{22}=g^{22}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mu }}+(Q_3\overline{Q}_3)R_{u2u}^2\right],(\mu ^1)^{33}=g^{33}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mu }}(Q_3\overline{Q}_3)R_{u2u}^2\right],`$
$`\nu _{uu}=\nu _{uv}=\nu _{vu}=\nu _{vv}=\nu _{u\alpha }=\nu _{\alpha u}=\nu _{v\alpha }=\nu _{\alpha v}=\nu _{22}=\nu _{33}=0,`$
$`\nu _{23}=\nu _{32}=Q_3L^2R_{u2u}^2.`$ (41)
One sees, that the pp-wave field induces an anisotropy in the dielectric properties of the initially spatially isotropic medium. These anisotropies appear in the plane $`x^2Ox^3`$ only, parallel to the gravitational wave front.

One important question arises: do these modifications in the dielectric properties of the media produce changes in the electromagnetic field structure and in its properties? In order to answer this question we consider now some exact solutions of Maxwell equations.

### 3.2 States inheriting the symmetry of the GW background and the reduction of Maxwell equations

Searching for exact solutions of Maxwell equations (1)-(2), it is advisable to fully use the inherited spacetime symmetries. Thus, we suggest first, that, for negative retarded time ($`u0`$) before the appearance of the gravitational wave (at $`u=0`$) the dielectric medium is infinite, homogeneous and static. In other words, the tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$ can be put equal to a constant at $`u0`$.

For $`u>0`$, i.e., the GW already permeates the medium, the tensor $`C^{ikmn}`$ contains the metric $`g_{ik}(u)`$ and the Riemann tensor $`R^{ikmn}(u)`$ (see, e.g., (32)). Therefore, $`C^{ikmn}`$ depends on the retarded time only. This idea can be formulated in a covariant way.

Call $`𝚿`$ an arbitrary macroscopic function of the state of the electrodynamical system (material tensor, Maxwell tensor, induction tensor, etc.), and, as before, let $`\xi _{(a)}^i`$ be the Killing vectors belonging to the Abelian subgroup $`G_3`$ of the total $`G_5`$ group of symmetry of the GW space-time. Now, if the electrodynamical quantities are to inherit the spacetime symmetries one must impose, $`\mathrm{\pounds }_{\xi _{(a)}}𝚿=0`$, where $`\mathrm{\pounds }_{\xi _{(a)}}`$ stands for the Lie derivative along the $`\xi _{(a)}^i`$ vector. This zero Lie-derivative condition on the Maxwell and induction tensors, i.e., $`\mathrm{\pounds }_{\xi _{(a)}}F_{mn}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\pounds }_{\xi _{(a)}}H_{mn}=0`$, implies that they depend on the variable $`u`$ only, $`F_{mn}=F_{mn}(u)`$ and $`H_{mn}=H_{mn}(u)`$.

Thus, the second subsystem of Maxwell equations (2) can be put in the form

$$\frac{1}{2L^2}\frac{d}{du}\left(ϵ^{iuls}F_{ls}\right)=0.$$
(42)
On integrating equation (42) we obtain,

$$F_{v\alpha }(u)=F_{v\alpha }(0)=\mathrm{const},F_{\alpha \beta }(u)=F_{\alpha \beta }(0)=\mathrm{const}.$$
(43)
Analogously, the first subsystem of Maxwell equations (1) yields

$$L^2C^{iumn}(u)F_{mn}(u)=C^{iumn}(0)F_{mn}(0)=\mathrm{const}.$$
(44)
Only three equations of (44) are non-trivial (the equations for $`i=v,2,3`$). The three functions $`F_{u\alpha }`$ and $`F_{uv}`$ are unknown, since $`F_{v\alpha }`$ and $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ are constant (see (43)) and can be expressed in terms of initial data on the GW front. Thus, we obtain the following reduced algebraic system, containing three equations for the three unknown functions

$`C^{vuvu}(u)F_{uv}(u)+C^{vu\alpha u}(u)F_{u\alpha }(u)=Z^v(u),`$ (45)
$`C^{\gamma uvu}(u)F_{uv}(u)+C^{\gamma u\alpha u}(u)F_{u\alpha }(u)=Z^\gamma (u),`$ (46)
where

$`Z^v(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}C^{vuvu}(0)F_{uv}(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}C^{vu\alpha u}(0)F_{u\alpha }(0)+`$
$`+F_{v\alpha }(0)\left(C^{vuv\alpha }(u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}C^{vuv\alpha }(0)\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F_{\alpha \beta }(0)\left(C^{vu\alpha \beta }(u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}C^{vu\alpha \beta }(0)\right),`$ (47)
and,

$`Z^\gamma (u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}C^{\gamma uvu}(0)F_{uv}(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}C^{\gamma u\alpha u}(0)F_{u\alpha }(0)+`$
$`+F_{v\alpha }(0)\left(C^{\gamma uv\alpha }(u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}C^{\gamma uv\alpha }(0)\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F_{\alpha \beta }(0)\left(C^{\gamma u\alpha \beta }(u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}C^{\gamma u\alpha \beta }(0)\right),`$ (48)
are known functions of the retarded time $`u`$.

This system of three equations (45)-(46) can be solved for generic material tensor (14) by the standard procedure involving Cramer’s determinant, as in a linear algebra system of equations.

This system has an unique solution if the determinant $`𝒟`$ of the $`3\times 3`$ matrix $`C^{iuku}(u)`$ ($`i,k=v,2,3`$) is not identically equal to zero. For such a unique solution, the components $`F_{uk}`$ of the Maxwell tensor contain the determinant $`𝒟`$ in their denominators.

We introduce the term “singular behaviour” in the description of the behaviour of the electromagnetic field, when the determinant $`𝒟`$ is not equal to zero identically, but close to zero. In principle, using equation (45)-(46) one can formulate explicitly this requirement in a general case for a generic anisotropic medium. Nevertheless, to clarify the physical meaning of the singularities, we consider the four particular previous examples of the $`C^{iklm}`$ tensor decomposition.

### 3.3 Exact solutions in vacuum

#### 3.3.1 The first model: pure vacuum

The refractive index is defined by $`n^2\epsilon \mu `$. For pure vacuum $`n^2=1`$. When $`n^2=1`$, Cramer’s determinant for the system (45)-(46) is equal to zero. Then, equation (45) gives

$$F_{uv}(u)=\frac{1}{L^2}F_{uv}(0),$$
(49)
and equation (46) yields

$$F_{v\alpha }(0)=0.$$
(50)
Due to the condition (50), the solution of the system of equations (46) exists if and only if $`F_{v\alpha }(u)=0`$. On also has that $`F_{23}`$ and $`F_{u\alpha }`$ are arbitrary functions of $`u`$, $`F_{23}(u)`$ and $`F_{u\alpha }(u)`$, since they do not appear in the set of equations. This solution describes a static longitudinal electric and magnetic field (longitudinal with respect to the the direction of the GW propagation). However, the transversal components of the field represent a travelling wave. Thus, generally, when $`n^2=1`$, the required solution of Maxwell equations, depending on the retarded time $`u`$ only, does not exist. In other words, the problem of the response of the electrodynamic system in vacuum (i.e., without dielectric material) is a subject of special consideration, which we do now.

Let us focus on the evolution of a magnetic field (we do not treat here an electric field, since it yields some conceptual problems). In the absence of GWs the magnetic field is static and homogeneous, i.e., it means is constant throughout space. Let us call the three components of this constant field as $`H^1`$, $`H^2`$, and $`H^3`$. In the GW background metric (33) we have now to find a solution of the Maxwell equations depending on the four coordinates $`(u,v,x^2,x^3)`$, since there is no solution depending on the retarded time $`u`$ alone. In order to satisfy the initial conditions, i.e., in the absence of a GW the magnetic field is equal to an arbitrary constant vector, one can choose, for $`u0`$, the components of the electromagnetic potential four-vector $`A_i`$ depending linearly on the coordinates $`(u,v,x^2,x^3)`$:

$$A_u=A_v=0,A_2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}H^3(uv)+\frac{1}{2}H^1x^3,A_3=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}H^2(vu)\frac{1}{2}H^1x^2.$$
(51)
The Maxwell equations admit the solution in which $`A_u`$ and $`A_v`$ are not changed by the GW, and the transversal components of the four-vector of potential satisfy the equations

$$\widehat{D}A_2=2\beta ^{^{}}_vA_2,\widehat{D}A_3=2\beta ^{^{}}_vA_3,$$
(52)
where $`\widehat{D}2_u_v+g^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha _\beta `$. It is easy to check that the formulae

$`F_{uv}F_{01}=0,F_{32}=H^1,`$
$`F_{v2}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}H^3e^\beta ,F_{v3}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}H^2e^\beta ,`$
$`F_{u2}=F_{v2}+\beta ^{^{}}e^\beta M_2,F_{u3}=F_{v3}\beta ^{^{}}e^\beta M_3,`$ (53)
where $`M_2`$ and $`M_3`$ are defined by

$`M_2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}H^3(uv)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H^1x^3e^\beta ,`$
$`M_3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}H^2(vu){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H^1x^2e^\beta ,`$ (54)
represent the solution of equations (1)-(2) in vacuum with initial conditions (51).

Formulae (53)-(54) recover the known results of , when we reduce the nonlinear GW background to the case of a weak GW. It is important to emphasize that the gravitationally induced electric field, whose components are,

$$E_2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\beta ^{^{}}e^\beta M_2,E_3=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\beta ^{^{}}e^\beta M_3,$$
(55)
grows linearly as a function of the coordinates $`(v,x^2,x^3)`$.

#### 3.3.2 The second model: curvature induced corrections in vacuum

From equations (45) one obtains equation (49), as in the previous case. Then equation (46) also coincides with equation (50) for pure vacuum because the curvature induced corrections for the material tensor (see equation (25)) do not give any contribution to $`C^{iuku}`$ tensor in equations (45)-(46). As in the previous case there is no solution depending on $`u`$ only. For a different solution see .

### 3.4 Exact solutions in a spatially isotropic medium

#### 3.4.1 The third model: pure spatially isotropic medium in a gravitational wave field

Consider now a spatially isotropic medium with $`n^21`$. Using formula (29) for the $`C^{ikmn}`$ coefficients and equation (39) for the four-velocity of the medium, one can extract that equation (45) also gives equation (49). The remaining pair of equations (46) takes the form

$$(n^21)g^{\gamma \alpha }F_{u\alpha }(u)=(n^21)\frac{\eta ^{\gamma \alpha }}{L^2}F_{u\alpha }(0)+(n^2+1)F_{v\alpha }(0)\left(g^{\gamma \alpha }\frac{1}{L^2}\eta ^{\gamma \alpha }\right),$$
(56)
where $`\eta _{ik}`$ is the Minkowski metric.

For $`n^21`$, the solution of the system (56) is unique and equal to

$`F_{u2}(u)=F_{u2}(0)+F_{u2}(0)\left(e^{2\beta }1\right)+\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2+1}{n^21}}\right)F_{v2}(0)\left(e^{2\beta }1\right),`$
$`F_{u3}(u)=F_{u3}(0)+F_{u3}(0)\left(e^{2\beta }1\right)+\left({\displaystyle \frac{n^2+1}{n^21}}\right)F_{v3}(0)\left(e^{2\beta }1\right).`$ (57)
The physical analysis of the solution (49) and (57) is more transparent in terms of the electric and magnetic four-vectors (7):

$`E_1(u)F_{10}F_{uv}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}E_1(0),`$
$`B^1(u)F_{32}=B^1(0),`$
$`E_2(u)F_{20}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(F_{2u}+F_{2v})=E_2(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n^21)}}\mathrm{\Pi }_2(u),`$
$`B^2(u)F_{13}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(F_{v3}F_{u3})=B^2(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n^21)}}\mathrm{\Pi }_3(u),`$
$`E_3(u)F_{30}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(F_{3u}+F_{3v})=E_3(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n^21)}}\mathrm{\Pi }_3(u),`$
$`B^3(u)F_{21}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(F_{u2}F_{v2})=B^3(0){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n^21)}}\mathrm{\Pi }_2(u),`$ (58)
where

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_2(u)=\left(e^{2\beta }1\right)\left[n^2E_2(0)+B^3(0)\right],`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_3(u)=\left(e^{2\beta }1\right)\left[n^2E_3(0)B^2(0)\right].`$ (59)
We see that when $`n^21`$, then the gravitationally induced part of the electric and magnetic fields, i.e., the terms involving $`\frac{1}{(n^21)}\mathrm{\Pi }_\alpha (u)`$, go to infinity (we are not taking $`n^2E_2(0)=B^3(0)`$, and $`n^2E_3(0)=B^2(0)`$ simultaneously, which is a rather special case, of no interest here). Thus, we have two distinct situations (i) if we take first the limit of $`\beta 0`$ and then $`n^21`$ we obtain that the gravitational induced part of the Maxwell tensor $`F_{ik}`$ is zero, i.e., the double limit: $`lim_{n^21}lim_{\beta 0}\{F_{ik}\}=0`$, where $`\{F_{ik}\}`$ denotes the gravitational induced part of the Maxwell tensor $`F_{ik}`$; (ii) if we take first the limit of $`n^21`$ and then $`\beta 0`$ we obtain that the gravitational induced part of the Maxwell tensor $`F_{ik}`$ is infinite, i.e., the double limit $`lim_{\beta 0}lim_{n^21}\{F_{ik}\}=\mathrm{}`$. Since these limits do not coincide, we can speak of a critical behaviour of the electromagnetic field near the singular point $`n^2=1`$. In the absence of the GW such a problem does not arise.

#### 3.4.2 The fourth model: curvature induced anisotropic corrections in a spatially isotropic medium

When the tensor of linear response $`C^{ikmn}`$ is given by the formulae (31)-(32), then the longitudinal component of the electric field coincides with (49), but the remaining two-component subsystem of equations (46) takes the form

$`\left[(n^21)g^{\gamma \alpha }+\mu \widehat{Q}_3R^{\gamma v\alpha v}\right]F_{u\alpha }(u)=(n^2+1)F_{v\alpha }(0)\left(g^{\gamma \alpha }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{L^2}}\eta ^{\gamma \alpha }\right)+`$
$`+(n^21){\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{\gamma \alpha }}{L^2}}F_{u\alpha }(0)\mu F_{v\alpha }(0)R^{\gamma v\alpha v}(\widehat{Q}_3+2\overline{Q}_3).`$ (60)
In this case Cramer’s determinant $`𝒟`$ of the system (60) is equal to

$$𝒟=\frac{1}{L^4}\left[(n^21)+\mu \widehat{Q}_3R_{u2u}^2\right]\left[(n^21)+\mu \widehat{Q}_3R_{u3u}^3\right].$$
(61)
Recalling that $`R_{u2u}^2=R_{u3u}^3`$, we find

$$𝒟=\frac{1}{L^4}\left[(n^21)^2\mu ^2\widehat{Q}_3^2(R_{u2u}^2)^2\right],$$
(62)
and

$`F_{u2}(u)=[1+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu \widehat{Q}_3}{(n^21)}}R_{u2u}^2]^1\{F_{v2}(0){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n^21)}}[(n^2+1)(1e^{2\beta })`$
$`\mu R_{u2u}^2(\widehat{Q}_3+2\overline{Q}_3)]+F_{u2}(0)e^{2\beta }\},`$
$`F_{u3}(u)=[1+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu \widehat{Q}_3}{(n^21)}}R_{u3u}^3]^1\{F_{v3}(0){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n^21)}}[(n^2+1)(1e^{2\beta })`$
$`\mu R_{u3u}^3(\widehat{Q}_3+2\overline{Q}_2)]+F_{u3}(0)e^{2\beta }\}.`$ (63)
There is a singularity when $`𝒟0`$. For instance, this can happen, when $`n^2`$ is near one and the quantity $`\mu ^2\widehat{Q}_3^2(R_{u2u}^2)^2`$ is equal to the small difference $`(n^21)^2`$. Since the Riemann tensor can periodically change its value, due to the periodic oscillations of the GW, one could observe a periodic increasing of one of the two component of the electric and magnetic fields. This type of singularities is very similar to the behaviour of the previous third model. The novelty here, is that periodic variations of the curvature tensor produce a natural approach to the critical point at $`𝒟=0`$, which repeats itself periodically. In principle, from the phenomenological point of view, we can consider a new sort of medium with $`n^2=1`$, $`\mu =1`$, and $`\widehat{Q}_30`$. Then $`𝒟=\widehat{Q}_3^2(R_{u2u}^2)^2/L^4`$. From equation (32), we see that for $`\widehat{Q}_30`$ the material tensor depends on the velocity $`U^i`$, which is a characteristic of media in general. Therefore, we can call this medium a “quasi-vacuum”.

## 4 Conclusions

We have shown that there exists a new class of solutions of evolutionary equations for initially static electric and magnetic fields inside a media in a GW background. The solutions on this class have two important properties: the first property is that they inherit the symmetry of the GW field and depend on the retarded time only. In vacuum there are no such solutions, as we have shown. The second property is connected with the singularities which appear in the electro-magnetic response to the GW. These singularities have a general status and appear not only in a material media with arbitrary spatial symmetry, but also in a “quasi-media”, such as vacuum interacting with curvature. This second property of the solutions gives a clear motivation to search for experimental confirmation of this theoretical predictions, namely the amplification of electric and magnetic fields due to the passage of a GW.

## 5 Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Richard Kerner for fruitful discussions. AB thanks the hospitality CENTRA/IST in Lisbon, and a special grant from ESO/FCT to invited scientists. This work was partially funded by FCT through project ESO/PRO/1250/98.


format: text

text:
# Top Quark Yukawa Couplings and New Physics

## Introduction

The present and next generation of colliders will help elucidate the nature of the electroweak symmetry breaking and to determine if the symmetry breaking is due to the presence of a Higgs boson. Precision fits of the Standard Model seem to indirectly point at the existence of a light Higgs boson ($`M_h<170210`$ GeV)osaka , while the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) requires the existence of a scalar Higgs lighter than about 130 GeV. Thus, a Higgs discovery by the Tevatron or the LHC in the mass range around $`120130`$ GeV seems a likely possibility. The role of the next generation of $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders will therefore not be to make a Higgs discovery, but rather to obtain precision measurements of the Higgs properties and to use them to understand the underlying mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking.

The production of a Higgs boson in association with a pair of $`t\overline{t}`$ quarks is of particular interest for two reasons. First, the $`t\overline{t}h`$ production mode can be an important discovery mode for a Higgs boson around $`120130`$ GeV at the LHCatlasreport  or the Tevatrondavidetal . Second, this channel offers a direct handle on the Yukawa coupling of the top quark to the Higgs boson.

## I Associated top-Higgs production at a high energy $`e^+e^{}`$ collider

The process $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}h`$ has been studied extensively and has been calculated both in the SM and in the MSSM at $`O(\alpha _s)`$us ; zerwasetal . For a SM Higgs, the factor $`K=\sigma _{NLO}/\sigma _{LO}`$ at $`\sqrt{s}=500`$ GeV is in the range $`(1.42.4)`$, depending on $`M_h`$. However the cross section is drastically suppressed by phase space and for $`M_h120130`$ GeV is of the order of $`0.1fb`$. On the other hand, at $`\sqrt{s}=1`$ TeV the cross section for $`M_h=120130`$ GeV is about $`2fb`$ and is only slightly reduced by QCD corrections ($`K=0.80.9`$). The energy dependence of the rate is shown in Fig. 1 and it is clear that the optimal energy is somewhere around $`\sqrt{s}700800GeV`$.

Although the cross section is small, the signature for $`t\overline{t}h`$ production is spectacular. The possibility of fully reconstructing the two top quarks in the final state allows efficient discrimination of the signal over the background, and together with a good b-tagging efficiency is crucial for increasing the precision with which the top Yukawa coupling can be measured. A detailed simulationjuste  of $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}h`$ for a $`120GeV`$ Higgs, at $`\sqrt{s}=800`$ GeV, found that the top Yukawa coupling could potentially be measured with a precision of 5.5% when optimal b-tagging efficiency is assumed. At lower energies, and for heavier Higgs masses, the precision deteriorates rapidly.us\_analysis

## II MSSM

Associated production of a Higgs boson and a $`t\overline{t}`$ pair in the MSSM can be very different from the Standard Model since the $`t\overline{t}h`$ coupling can be significantly suppressed for small $`M_A`$, (where $`h`$ is now the lightest neutral Higgs boson of the MSSM). In addition, the presence of additional Higgs bosons leads to the possibility of new processes and of resonance effects. An example is $`e^+e^{}AHt\overline{t}H`$, which is illustrated in the right hand plot of Fig. 1. ($`H`$ is the heavier of the neutral Higgs bosons of the MSSM). The resonance at $`2M_t`$ is apparent. The main channels in the MSSM are the scalar ones, i.e. $`t\overline{t}h`$ and $`t\overline{t}H`$, since the pseudoscalar mode $`t\overline{t}A`$ is very suppressed over most of the MSSM parameter space. Over most of the $`tan\beta M_A`$ plane, it is possible to observe either $`t\overline{t}h`$ or $`t\overline{t}H`$ with a rate greater than $`1fb`$ at $`\sqrt{s}=500GeV`$.us

## III Models with extra dimensions at the TEV scale

Scenarios such as that proposed by Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, and Dvali,add  (ADD) in which gravity propagates in $`d+4`$ dimensions can have a dramatic effect on Higgs physics. In such models the gravitational interactions occur at a scale $`M_S`$, which can be as small as a $`TeV`$. The extra $`d`$ dimensions are then compactified on a torus of radius $`R`$. This leads to a relationship between Newton’s Constant, $`G_N`$, and the other scales,

$$\frac{1}{G_N}R^dM_S^{d+2}.$$
(1)
These models have a tower of very light Kaluza Klein excitations which couple weakly to ordinary matter ($`1/M_{pl}`$). However, the density of the light Kaluza Klein modes is high (for large $`R`$) and so the collective interactions build up to electroweak strength. At tree level, the contributions of the spin-$`0`$ Kaluza Klein modes to $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}H`$ are suppressed by $`m_e`$, so only the spin $`2`$ states are relevant here.

It is straightforward to find the effective $`4`$fermion and $`f\overline{f}hh`$ interactions due to the graviton exchanges which contribute to $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}h`$.han  For $`f(p)+\overline{f}(q)f^{}(p^{})+\overline{f}^{}(q^{})`$, we have

$`𝒜_{ffff}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{C(s)}{16}}\{\overline{v}(q)(p^{}/q^{}/)u(p)\overline{v}(p^{})(p/q/)v(q^{})`$ (2)
$`+(pq)(p^{}q^{})\overline{u}(q)\gamma ^\mu u(p)\overline{u}(p^{})\gamma _\mu v(q^{})\},`$
while for $`f(p)+\overline{f}(q)h(p_{h1})+h(p_{h2})`$, the effective interaction is,

$$𝒜_{ffhh}=\frac{C(s)}{2}(pq)p_{h_1}\overline{v}(q)p_{h_1}/u(p).$$
(3)
The constant $`C(s)`$ represents the effect of the sum over all the Kaluza Klein modes (with masses $`M_i`$) and is given byhan

$$C(s)=16\pi G_N\underset{i}{}\frac{1}{sM_i^2}_{(\sqrt{s}<<M_S,d>2)}\frac{16\pi }{d2}\left(\frac{1}{M_S}\right)^4.$$
(4)
Calculating the complete rate for $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}h`$, including the Standard Model interactions, the new interactions of Eqs. (2) and (3), and the relevant interference terms, gives the rates in the ADD scenario shown in Fig. 2 for $`d=3`$ extra dimensions. At $`\sqrt{s}=1TeV`$, the rate can be enhanced by several orders of magnitude if the gravitational interactions are at the $`12TeV`$ scale. The energy distribution of the Higgs boson, $`x_h=2E_h/\sqrt{s}`$, is slightly shifted to lower values of $`x_h`$ by the presence of the gravitational interactions.

## IV Conclusion

The process $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}h`$ provides a sensitive probe of new physics effects. It is best measured at $`\sqrt{s}=700800GeV`$ and requires the highest possible luminosity.


text:
# REFERENCES

Comment on “Gravity Waves, Chaos, and Spinning Compact Binaries”

In , Levin shows that the equations of motion for two comparable mass objects in the second-post-Newtonian approximation to general relativity predict chaotic orbits — orbits whose future evolution is extremely sensitive to initial conditions. The phase evolution of the gravitational waveforms emitted by these systems also will be extremely sensitive to initial conditions. This renders it essentially impossible to detect such waves using the technique of matched filtering. The purpose of this Comment is to point out that it has been understood for some time that alternative detection methods will be needed in the relevant regime, so that matched filtering is highly unlikely to be used for the detection of these waves.

The post-Newtonian expansion of general relativity is a slowly convergent, asymptotic expansion. It is not very useful as the members of the binary approach the innermost stable circular orbit. The “standard lore” of the community studying sources of gravitational waves (see, e.g., Ref. ) is that post-Newtonian approximations cease to be useful for constructing accurate phase evolutions when the separation of the members of the binary is $`r15M`$. Post-Newtonian phase evolution models can describe the gravitational waveform when the separations are larger than this; other methods adapted to the strong field (see, e.g., Ref. ) must be used for evolution inside this radius. This regime, beyond the realm of applicability of post-Newtonian techniques, but prior to the point at which one would like to use templates from numerical relativity, has been named the “IBBH” regime (see Ref.  for further discussion).

It has been understood for some time that the waves emitted as compact binary systems spiral through this regime are likely to be of great importance for ground-based gravitational-wave observatories such as LIGO, VIRGO, GEO600, and TAMA. In particular, as binary black hole (BBH) systems with total system masses of $`10M_{}M50M_{}`$ spiral through the IBBH regime, they emit waves which lie roughly in the frequency band at which the first detectors are maximally sensitive (see Ref. , particularly Fig. 4). Less massive systems (containing one or two neutron stars) emit waves at higher frequencies, so that detectors are more sensitive to earlier epochs of their coalescence, when post-Newtonian approximations are probably reliable.

Because of the strong possibility that BBH coalescences will be common events in the detectors’ datastreams , and because it is well-understood that theory is currently unable to reliably model the phase evolution of their waves, much effort has been directed to build data analysis techniques that do not rely on detailed phasing information. An example is the “power-monitoring statistic” introduced in Ref. , and discussed in greater detail in Ref. . Such techniques rely on the fact that the number of cycles emitted as the system evolves through the very strong-field regime is relatively small. Matched filtering boosts the signal-to-noise ratio by roughly the square root of the number of wave cycles measured. If the number of cycles is small, matched filtering does not buy very much and — at least for detection purposes — cruder techniques can do very well.

In Fig. 3 of , Levin shows the fractal basin boundaries of a binary system for many initial conditions, neglecting dissipation due to gravitational wave emission. This figure rather clearly demonstrates the existence of chaos. However, in this strong field regime and with dissipation included, very few orbits remain before the bodies merge, as is indicated by Fig. 5 of . Methods such as the power-monitoring statistic would probably do very well at detecting these waves.

Thus, I believe it is likely that the chaotic orbits of compact bodies will not strongly impact the detection of gravitational waves by ground-based observatories. The number of cycles emitted during the chaotic evolution Levin has demonstrated is probably small enough that non-matched-filtering-based techniques are likely to work quite well, particularly for early detectors whose noise characteristics render them insensitive to all but the last few inspiral orbits (depending rather strongly on the system’s total mass). Because post-Newtonian templates are not accurate in this regime, it would have been very surprising if matched filters were used to search for these waves even in the absence of chaos. It is worth noting, however, that chaotic effects may dramatically impact our ability to extract astrophysical information from the detected waves. In addition, chaos may have a big impact on detection of gravitational waves by LISA from the inspiral of small ($`110M_{}`$) bodies into massive ($`10^510^7M_{}`$) black holes, where the number of cycles will be very large ($`10^5`$).

Scott A. Hughes
130-33 Caltech
Pasadena, CA 91125
e-mail: hughes@tapir.caltech.edu
PACS numbers: 04.30.Db, 04.25.-g, 04.80.Nn


text:
# New approaches to the determination of the total cross section

## 1 Introduction

In reality, in experiment one measure $`dN/dt`$, as a result of which ”experimental” data such as $`\sigma _{tot}`$, slope-$`B`$, $`\rho `$ are extracted from $`dN/dt`$ with some model asumptions. Some approaches are needed to extrapolate the measured quantities to $`t=0`$. The elastic scattering data were constrained by several conditions: the imaginary part of the nuclear amplitude has an exponential form in the small $`t`$ region; the real and imaginary parts of the nuclear amplitude have the same $`t`$ dependence; spin contributions are neglected. Note that the value of $`\rho `$ heavily correlats with the normalization of $`d\sigma /dt`$. Its magnitude weakly impacts the determination of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ only in the case when the normalization is known exactly.

There is no any experiment on measurement of the values separately. But in some experiments, to reduce experimental errors, the magnitude of some quantities is taken from another experiment. Sometimes, it leads to contradiction between the basic parameters for one energy (for example, if we calculate the imaginary part of scattering amplitude, we can obtain a non-exponential behavior). It can lead to some errors in the analysis based on the dispersion relations.

The procedure of extrapolation of the imaginary part of the scattering amplitude is significant for determining $`\sigma _{tot}`$. The importance of the extrapolated contribution is seen from  where the contribution to $`\sigma _{tot}`$ of $`\sigma _{obs}`$, the directly measured value, and of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _{el}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _{inel}`$, the extrapolated contributions of the elastic and inelastic cross sections, are shown at energies $`\sqrt{s}=30.6,52.8`$ and $`62.7GeV`$. One can see that the growth of the total cross sections is due to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _{el}`$ by $`50\%`$ for $`pp`$ and nearly by $`100\%`$ for $`p\overline{p}`$ scattering.

The analysis of experimental data also shows a possible manifestation of spin-flip amplitudes at high energies . The research into spin effects will be a crucial stone for different models and will help us to understand the interaction and structure of particles, especially at large distances. All this raises the question about the measure of spin effects in the elastic hadron scattering at small angles at future accelerators. Especially, we would like to note the programs at RHIC where the polarization of both the collider beams will be constructed.

To obtain the magnitude of $`\rho `$, we fit the differential cross sections either taking into account the value of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ from another experiment, as made by the UA4/2 Collaboration, or taking $`\sigma _{tot}`$ as a free parameter. If one does not take the normalization coefficient as a free parameter in the fitting procedure, his determination requires the knowledge of the behavior of the imaginary and real parts of the scattering amplitude in the range of small transfer momenta and the magnitudes of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ and $`\rho `$.

## 2 The method of changing the sign

The differential cross sections measured in the experiment are described by the squared scattering amplitude. From the equation for the differential cross section one can obtain the equation for $`\rho `$ for every experimental point - $`t_i`$

$`\rho (s,t_i)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{ImF_N(s,t_i)}}\{ReF_c(s,t_i)+`$
$`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma _i}{dt}}n(ImF_c(s,t_i)+ImF_N(s,t_i))^2]^{1/2}\}.`$ (1)
As the imaginary part of scattering amplitude is defined by $`ImF_N(s,t)=Hexp(B/2t)`$ where $`H=\sigma _{tot}/(4\pi 0.389)`$ it is evident from (1) that the real part depends on $`n,\sigma _{tot},B`$.

For the proton-proton scattering this equation has a remarkable property. If we expand the expression under the radical sign, we obtain

$$(n1)(ImF_c+ImF_N)^2+n(ReF_c+ReF_N)^2.$$
(2)
As the real part of the Coulomb scattering amplitude is negative and the real part of the nucleon scattering amplitude is positive, it is clear that this expression will have a minimum situated on the scale of $`t`$ independent of $`n`$ and $`\sigma _{tot}`$. As we know the Coulomb amplitude, we estimate the real part of the proton-proton scattering amplitude at this point. Note that all other methods give us the real part only in a sufficiently wide interval of the transfer momenta.

This method works only in the case of the positive real part of the nucleon amplitude and it is especially good in the case of large $`\rho `$. So, it is interesting for the future experiment at RHIC.

## 3 The differential method (”tail of ghost”)

Let us examine the simplest gedanken case of $`pp`$-scattering and try to determine the sign of $`d\rho (t)/dt`$ depending on the difference of normalization $`n`$ and $`n+\delta n`$ and $`\delta \sigma =\sigma _{true}\sigma _{totprob}`$. There, $`\sigma _{true}`$ is the magnitude of the true total cross section and $`\sigma _{totprob}`$ is the magnitude of the total cross section which we take as our first approximation.

In first, let us suppose that in experiment we find true normalization of data $`dN/dt`$ (so $`n=1`$) and try to find the derivate of the calculated $`\rho `$ on $`t`$ ($`d\rho /dt`$) with a small deviation of $`n`$ ($`\delta n`$) . Write for that case our equation for $`\rho `$ for two points: $`t_1`$, where $`F_c=2ImF_h`$, and for $`t_2`$, where $`F_c=ImF_h`$; and calculate $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho =\rho (t_2)\rho (t_1)`$ for normalization $`n+\delta n`$ with $`\delta n<<1`$. So, for example, for $`t_2`$ we can input in (1)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{dt}}(n+\delta n)=2ImF_h^2(1\rho +\rho ^2)(1+\delta n)`$ (3)
and obtain, if we take $`\sigma _{tprob}=\sigma _{tr}`$, that the difference between the calculated $`\rho _i`$ will be

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho (t_2,t_1)\delta n/4`$ (4)
and is a function of $`t`$. It is clear that if we find the true magnitude of the total cross section and $`\delta n=0`$, then $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho (t_2,t_1)`$ will be equal to zero. The same calculations are carried out for $`\delta \sigma _{tr}`$ with $`\delta n=0`$ and show that the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho (t_2,t_1)`$ depends on the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _{tot}`$. Then, if we will calculate $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho (t_2,t_1)`$ with differences $`\delta n`$ and $`\sigma _{tot}`$ we can determine the true magnitude of $`\sigma _{tot}`$.

## 4  Connection between $`A_N`$ and $`\sigma _{tot}`$

Let us examine the future $`pp2pp`$ Experiment at $`\sqrt{s}=500GeV`$, as an example. Elastic differential cross section will be regarded as having $`2\%`$ statistical errors, according to the Proposal of the $`PP2PP`$ Collaboration. Now, in fitting procedure we take into account the standard assumption for high energy elastic hadron scattering at small angles: the simple exponential behavior with slope $`B`$ of the imaginary and real parts of the scattering amplitude; hadron spin-flip amplitude does not exceed $`10\%`$ of the hadron spin-non-flip amplitude. The differential cross section was calculated using $`\sigma _{tot}=63.5mb;\rho =0.15;B=15.5GeV^2`$ ( in variant $`I`$ with $`150`$ points and in variant $`II`$ with $`75`$ points) from $`t_0=0.00075`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=0.00025GeV^2`$) and then put through a special random process using $`2\%`$ errors. After that, the obtained ”experimental” data were fitted. The systematic errors were taken into account as the free parameter $`n`$. The result is presented in Table 1 for three ($`n=1.`$\- fixed) or four parameters ($`n`$ \- free).

| Table 1. Fit of $`d\sigma /dt`$ measurements | | | | |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`N`$ | $`\sigma _{tot}mb`$ | $`\delta B`$ | $`\delta \rho `$ | $`\delta n`$ |  |
| $`I`$ | $`63.54\pm 0.12`$ | $`\pm 0.2`$ | $`\pm 0.008`$ | fix |  |
| $`I`$ | $`63.6\pm 1.25`$ | $`\pm 0.3`$ | $`\pm 0.02`$ | $`\pm 0.04`$ |  |
| $`II`$ | $`63.5\pm 0.25`$ | $`\pm 0.7`$ | $`\pm 0.01`$ | fix |  |
| $`II`$ | $`64.05\pm 1.4`$ | $`\pm 1.0`$ | $`\pm 0.03`$ | $`\pm 0.05`$ |  |

It is clear that the most important value is the coefficient normalization of the differential cros section. Its small errors lead to significant errors in the $`\sigma _{tot}`$. So, we see that the normalization of experimental data is the most important problem for the determination of $`\sigma _{tot}`$.

Lacking better knowledge, we assume that the hadron spin-flip amplitude is a slowly varying function of $`t`$ apart the kinetic factor, and we parametrize it as

$`\varphi _5^h={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{|t|}}{m}}(\rho k_2+ik_1)Im\varphi _1^h,`$ (5)
where $`\rho `$, $`k_1`$, $`k_2`$ are slowly changing functions of s. The coefficients $`k_1`$ and $`k_2`$ are the ratios of the real and imaginary parts of the spin-flip to spin-non-flip amplitudes without the kinematic factor $`\sqrt{|t|}`$. As a result, the $`A_N`$ can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A_N}{8\pi P_B}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{dt}}=Im\varphi _1^h{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{m\sqrt{|t|}}}({\displaystyle \frac{\mu 1}{2}}k_1)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{|t|}}{m}}\rho [Im\varphi _1^h]^2\mathrm{\Delta }k,`$ (6)
with $`\mathrm{\Delta }k=k_2k_1`$. We examined also a few variants with different assumptions about the magnitudes of the imaginary and real parts of the hadron spin-flip amplitude at $`\sqrt{s}=500GeV`$. Variant $`A_i`$: $`\varphi _5^h=0.`$, so $`k_1=k_2=0`$ . Variant $`B_i`$: $`k_1=0.1`$, $`k_2=0.15`$. Variant $`C_i`$: $`k_1=0.1`$, $`k_2=0.15`$. Variant $`C_3`$ was made by a random procedure with errors twice smaller, so the errors equal $`5\%÷10\%`$ (see, Table 2).

The ”experiment” with $`10\%÷20\%`$ errors determine the magnitudes of real and imaginary parts of the hadron spin flip almost with $`100\%`$ errors. The variant $`C_3`$, which reflects the experiment with $`5\%÷10\%`$ errors, twice decreases the errors of the magnitude of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ and hadron spin-flip.

Let us make the fit of both data on the differential cross section and the analyzing power. The results are shown in Table 3. The added polarization data decrease the error in $`\sigma _{tot}`$ only by $`10\%`$ (from $`1.25mb`$ to $`1.1mb`$). But the determination of the magnitude of the real and imaginary parts of the hadron spin-flip amplitude become three time better. It is to be noted that the variant $`C_3`$ leads to decrease of in the error of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ from $`\pm 1.25mb`$ to $`\pm 0.9mb`$.

Table 2. Fit of $`A_N`$

| $`N`$ | $`\sigma _{tot}mb`$ | $`\delta \rho `$ | $`\delta k_1`$ | $`\delta k_2`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`A_1`$ | $`63.5\pm 3.4`$ | $`\pm 0.08`$ | $`\pm 0.07`$ | $`\pm 0.05`$ |
| $`A_2`$ | $`63.46\pm 3.8`$ | $`\pm 0.15`$ | $`\pm 0.06`$ | $`\pm 0.1`$ |
| $`B_1`$ | $`63.5\pm 3.8`$ | $`\pm 0.09`$ | $`\pm 0.07`$ | $`\pm 0.11`$ |
| $`B_2`$ | $`62.7\pm 4.`$ | $`\pm 0.3`$ | $`\pm 6.3`$ | $`\pm 5.6`$ |
| $`C_1`$ | $`63.4\pm 3.6`$ | $`\pm 0.09`$ | $`\pm 0.07`$ | $`\pm 0.11`$ |
| $`C_2`$ | $`63.5`$ -fix | fix | $`\pm 0.015`$ | $`\pm 0.011`$ |
| $`C_3`$ | $`63.9\pm 1.83`$ | $`\pm 0.05`$ | $`\pm 0.037`$ | $`\pm 0.035`$ |

Table 3. Fit of $`d\sigma /dt`$ and $`A_N`$ (300 points)

| $`N`$ | $`\sigma _{tot}mb`$ | $`\delta \rho `$ | $`\delta k_1`$ | $`\delta k_2`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`A`$ | $`63.4\pm 1.1`$ | $`\pm 0.02`$ | $`\pm 0.02`$ | $`\pm 0.02`$ |
| $`C`$ | $`63.4\pm 1.1`$ | $`\pm 0.02`$ | $`\pm 0.02`$ | $`\pm 0.03`$ |
| $`C_3`$ | $`63.2\pm 0.9`$ | $`\pm 0.015`$ | $`\pm 0.014`$ | $`\pm 0.02`$ |

## 5  Connection between $`t_{max}`$ of $`A_N`$ and $`\sigma _{tot}`$

As noted above, most uncertainty in the determination of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ using the measurement of $`A_N`$ came from the error in the beam polarization which plays the role of a normalization factor of the differential cross section. The point of maximum of $`A_N`$ is independent of the magnitude of the beam polarization. So, it allows us to use this value for the extraction of the magnitude of $`\sigma _{tot}`$. Here is the formula  (the case $`B1`$)

$`\sigma _{tot}={\displaystyle \frac{9.776\alpha }{t_{max}}}[\sqrt{3}{\displaystyle \frac{8}{\mu 1}}(\rho IR)](\rho \alpha \phi )],`$
where $`I=k_1`$ and $`R=\rho k_2`$, and these coefficients are unknown. Its determination will depend on the magnitude of beam polarization. To reduce the impact of the hadron spin-flip amplitude, it was proposed to used the new value - $`t_{max2}`$, the place of the maximum of $`d\sigma /dtA_N^2`$  . The derivation of this value gives (the case $`A1`$ )

$$\sigma _{tot}=8\pi 0.39(mb/GeV^2)\alpha /t_{max2}.$$

In the case of the exponential behavior of the scattering amplitude, one obtains (the case $`A2`$ )

$$\sigma _{tot}=9.776\alpha [1/t_{max2}B/2],$$

where $`B`$ is the slope of the differential cross section. In our previous work we showed that it could be obtained from the measurement of $`A_N`$ of some ratio of the real and imaginary part of the hadron spin-flip amplitude which is independent of the magnitude of the beam polarization $`\rho (k_2k_1)/(1k_1)`$. Using this ratio, we can obtain the relation between $`\sigma _{tot}`$ and the point of maximum $`A_N`$ in the form (the case $`C2`$)

$`\sigma _{tot}=9.776\alpha ({\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_{max}}}+B)[{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3+4\rho ^2}}{1+\rho ^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{8\rho \mathrm{\Delta }k}{(\mu 1)(1+2\rho )(1k_1)}}(\rho \alpha \phi )].`$ (7)
The calculation of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ by using these formulae is shown in Table 4 for $`\sqrt{s}=52GeV`$ and in Table 5 for $`\sqrt{s}=540GeV`$ for different variants of the magnitude of the hadron spin-flip amplitude. For comparison, the variant $`C1`$ is show without taking into account of the contribution of the hadron spin-flip amplitude (the case $`C1`$)

$`\sigma _{tot}=`$
$`9.776\alpha ({\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_{max}}}+B)[{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3+4\rho ^2}}{1+\rho ^2}}(\rho \alpha \phi )].`$ (8)
## 6  Conclusions

The magnitudes of $`\sigma _{tot}`$, $`\rho `$ and slope - $`B`$ have to be determined in one experiment and their magnitudes depend on each other. The normalizations of $`dN/dt`$ and $`A_N`$ are most important for the determination of these values. The new methods of extracting magnitudes of these quantities are required. Some of such ideas were shown in this talk. Additional information on $`A_N`$ slightly reduces the errors in the size of $`\sigma _{tot}`$. The presented new formulae for the determination of the magnitude of $`\sigma _{tot}`$ using the place of $`t_{max}`$ of the CNI give sufficiently good results in a wide energy region and can be used as an additional method for the determination of $`\sigma _{tot}`$.

Table 4. $`\sigma _{tot}`$ as function of $`t_{max}`$

| Input $`\rho =0.1`$,$`B=13.`$, $`\sigma _{tot}`$ =43.0 mb | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`k_1,k_2`$ | B1 | A1$`t_{m2}`$ | C1$`t_m`$ | C2$`t_m`$ |
| 0., 0. | 42.0 | 43.2 | 43.3 | 43.3 |
| 0.1, 0.2 | 41.9 | 42.1 | 42.2 | 43.3 |
| 0.2, 0.2 | 42.0 | 43.2 | 43.3 | 43.3 |
| 0.0, 0.2 | 42.0 | 41.0 | 42.1 | 43.4 |
| $`\rho =0.075`$ |  |  |  |  |
| 0.0, 0.2 | 41.9 | 41.4 | 41.7 | 43.5 |

Table 5. $`\sigma _{tot}`$ as function of $`t_{max}`$

| Input $`\rho =0.15`$,$`B=15.5`$, $`\sigma _{tot}`$ =63.5 mb | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`k_1,k_2`$ | B1 | A1$`t_{m2}`$ | C1$`t_m`$ | C2$`t_m`$ |
| 0., 0. | 62.1 | 63.5 | 63.3 | 63.5 |
| 0.2, 0.2 | 62.3 | 63.5 | 61.9 | 63.5 |
| 0.0, 0.1 | 62.8 | 61.8 | 61.5 | 63.7 |
| 0.1, 0.2 | 62.0 | 61.3 | 60.7 | 63.3 |
| 0.0, 0.2 | 62.2 | 59.3 | 58.5 | 63.7 |
| -0.1, -0.2 | 61.0 | 64.9 | 64.9 | 63.1 |
| $`\rho =0.1`$ |  |  |  |  |
| 0.2, 0.2 | 62.0 | 63.5 | 63.6 | 63.6 |
| $`\rho =0.0`$ |  |  |  |  |
| 0.2, 0.2 | 61.9 | 63.2 | 63.8 | 63.7 |

Acknowledgments. I would like to express my sincerely thanks to the Organizing Committee and especially to R. Fiore and A. Papa for the kind invitation and the financial support at such remarkable Conference, and W. Gurin, B. Nicolescu and E. Predazzi for fruitful discussions.


text:
# Prospects for a Quantum Dynamic Random Access Memory (Q-DRAM)

## 1 Introduction

Quantum memory is an important constituent of quantum information science. It has many applications: (i) increasing the efficiency of quantum key distribution (QKD) protocols (the receiver Bob stores the received qubits in a quantum memory and measures them after the sender Alice tells him the bases), (ii) improving the EPR-based QKD schemes , (iii) teleporting a state using singlet pairs prepared in advance, (iv) new schemes for QKD that rely on the existence of short-term memory , (v) attacking oblivious transfer and quantum bit commitment schemes , etc.

The requirements for quantum memory are thought to be very different from those of quantum gates. In a quantum gate, the qubits are accessed and rotated numerous times, but the coherence time need not be very long; it simply has to be much longer than the switching time. In contrast, the qubits in a quantum memory are seldom accessed, but they must live much longer (ideally “forever”) without decohering. One must also be able to access them with high fidelity.

## 2 Spintronic quantum memory

The most popular scalable solid state quantum gates are based on manipulating the spins of single electrons or holes in quantum dots  or in single dopant atoms . For the sake of compatibility, we must implement quantum memory in the same systems111The coherence times of electron or hole spins are much less than that of nuclear spins. However, nuclear spins are not easy to “read” as data; consequently, one must couple the nuclear spin to an electron spin and then detect the electron spin  to read the original nuclear spin. This transduction of a nuclear spin to an electron spin is a delicate process and difficult to implement with high enough fidelity..

Because of the relatively short coherence time of electron or hole spins, non-volatile quantum static memories (Q-SRAMs) are not appropriate; rather, quantum dynamic memories (Q-DRAMs) may be possible if the qubit can be refreshed periodically through refresh cycles. Below, we explore possible routes to refreshing the quantum state of a quanton.

### 2.1 Refreshing a qubit

It is very possible that refreshing can be accomplished through the quantum Zeno effect which postulates that repeated observations of a qubit will inhibit its decay . Repeated observations automatically serve as refresh cycles. However, this repeated observation has to be carried out by a non-invasive detector. A ballistic point contact has been used in the past as a non-invasive charge detector for electrons in quantum dots , and its role in the context of the quantum Zeno effect has been examined . It may be possible to use a spin-polarized scanning tunneling microscope tip as a non-invasive probe for spin, but that is yet to be realized in practice.

A more straightforward approach would be to read the qubit periodically and then re-create some (but not all) attributes of it. Since, we are not going to use the memory for computation (such as implementing Shor’s or Kitaev’s algorithms, or Grover’s sorter), we may not need to draw upon the full power of quantum parallelism. The expectations from “memory” are different from those that we expect from “logic gates”. We may not need the full phase information in many cases.

Consider the qubit encoded by the coherent superposition of two spin states of a quanton:

$`|\psi >=a_{}|>+a_{}|>`$
$`|a_{}|^2+|a_{}|^2=1`$ (1)
If we make several measurements of this qubit we will measure the upspin state with a probability $`|a_{}|^2`$. Thus, by making several measurements over identical qubits, we can find the magnitudes of $`a_{}`$ and $`a_{}`$, but not the relative phase between them. In many applications involving measurements of stored qubits on given bases, it may be sufficient to know just the magnitudes of $`a_{}`$ and $`a_{}`$, and the relative phase is unimportant. For such niche applications, we can develop a Q-DRAM with present technology as explained below.

One can periodically read the qubits (with a period much smaller than the decoherence time) in several nominally identical hosts (e.g. single-electron quantum dots) to extract the magnitudes of $`a_{}`$ and $`a_{}`$. After each reading, we will re-inject quantons into these dots from a spin polarized contact, followed by immediate single qubit rotations in every dot to re-create the magnitudes of $`a_{}`$ and $`a_{}`$ (but not the relative phase, which will be arbitrary). In this fashion, we can store the magnitudes of $`a_{}`$ and $`a_{}`$ for an indefinite time. This is a crude, but often effective, quantum dynamic random access memory (Q-DRAM).

### 2.2 Why quantum dots?

Single quantons confined in quantum dots are ideal storage media from the vantage point of technology. Large, well-ordered arrays of quantum dots can be self-assembled with a density exceeding 1011/cm2. This can lead to unprecedented density of qubits – in excess of 1011/cm2. Thus, even if we introduce a 100-fold redundancy (the same qubit is stored in 100 dots), we can still obtain a qubit storage density in excess of 1 giga-qubit in 1 cm2 (smaller than a postage stamp) whose storage capacity of 2$`^{10^9}`$ exceeds by far that of all the hard disks that could have been made with all the material in the universe over the life of the universe.

Fig. 1 shows a self assembled porous alumina film produced in our laboratory by anodization of aluminum . The pores can be filled sequentially with different materials to create multi-layered quantum dots surrounded by alumina. Alternately, the pores can be used as etch masks to mesa-isolate quantum dots in a multilayered film grown by molecular beam epitaxy . Using these techniques , one can grow semiconductor quantum dots capped by ferromagnetic contacts that act as spin polarizers for injecting spin, and spin analyzers for detecting spin.

## 3 Quantum erasure

Before concluding this paper, we point out that there is theoretically an intriguing possibility of actually re-creating the entire qubit (including the phase) after it has been “read”. i.e. after the spin analyzer has detected the spin orientation. This involves quantum erasure  as explained below.

Consider a quanton in a coherent superposition of two spin states, described by a wavefunction

$$\psi =a_{}|>+a_{}|>$$
(2)
A fundamental result of quantum measurement theory is that if the spin analyzer tries to detect the spin of the incoming quanton, the wavefunction of the detector becomes entangled with that of the quanton. The entangled (non-factorizable) wavefunction is

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=a_{}|>|1>+a_{}|>|2>$$
(3)
where the wavefunctions $`|1>`$ and $`|2>`$ span the Hilbert space of the detector. Thus, $`|1>`$ corresponds to the detector (spin-analyzer) passing an up-spin quanton, and $`|2>`$ corresponds to the detector reflecting a downspin quanton.

If we make a measurement of whether the detector passed the quanton (corresponding to the determination that the quanton’s spin was “up”), the probability amplitude of that is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=<1|\mathrm{\Phi }>=a_{}|><1|1>+a_{}|><1|2>$$
(4)
Since the detector makes an “unambiguous” determination, meaning that it always passes an upspin quanton and never passes a downspin quanton, the wavefunctions $`|1>`$ and $`|2>`$ are orthogonal, meaning that upspin detection and downspin detection are mutually exclusive (a quanton cannot be simultaneously both upspin and downspin, and the detector will unambiguously determine what the spin is). Hence, from Equation (4),

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{detected}=a_{}|>;|\mathrm{\Psi }|^2=|a_{}|^2$$
(5)
and we get no information about $`a_{}`$, or the phase. This is interpreted as wavefunction collapse. However, this collapse is not irreversible since if we design an experiment whose result is the probability of a particular outcome of the spin measurement and finding the detector in the symmetric state ($`|1>+|2>`$), then the corresponding probability amplitude is

$`[<1|+<2|]|\mathrm{\Phi }>`$ $`=`$ $`a_{}|><1|1>+a_{}|><1|2>+a_{}|><2|2>+a_{}|><2|1>`$ (6)
$`=`$ $`a_{}|>+a_{}|>`$
$`=`$ $`\psi ,`$
which is the original wavefunction. Hence, we have restored the original wavefunction.

Note that if we can find the detector in the symmetric state, we would not have known whether the quanton that passed through it was “up” or “down”, and hence we would not have collapsed the wavefunction. Thus, by finding the detector in the symmetric state, we have erased the information about the spin and hence restored the original coherent superposition state. The quantum erasure is possible because the entangled wavefunction $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is still a pure state and not a mixed state.

What do we need to implement quantum erasure? We need only one difficult technological feat. When the quanton passes through the spin analyzer, it should be able to rotate the magnetization of the analyzer and change it. If the polarizer and analyzer were originally magnetized in the +z-direction, the passage of the quanton through the analyzer must turn on some interaction that results in the analyzer getting magnetized in the +x-direction. Fig. 2 depicts this situation. We assume that $`|1>`$ corresponds to the state of the detector whereby the analyzer is magnetized (spin polarized) in the +z-direction and $`|2>`$ corresponds to the state of the detector whereby the analyzer is magnetized in the -z-direction. Thus,

$$|1>\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right]$$
(7)
$$|2>\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right]$$
(8)
Clearly $`|1>`$ and $`|2>`$ are orthogonal and the state $`|1>+|2>`$ corresponds to the state

$$|1>+|2>\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\end{array}\right],$$
(9)
which corresponds to spin-polarization in the +x-direction.

Thus, we must find the analyzer polarized in the +x-direction after the quanton passes through it. In other words, the magnetization of the analyzer must be sensitive to the passage of a quanton and respond to it. At present, this is not possible; but the recent discovery of control of magnetization via an electric current in InMnAs  is beginning to hold out some hope in this direction.

## 4 Conclusion

In this brief report, we have pointed out the possibilities of quantum-dot based quantum dynamic random access memory (Q-DRAM), and outlined three possible schemes to implement qubit refreshing. The advantage of quantum dot based memory is the exceedingly large storage density that is possible.