text:
# Rayleigh-Taylor Instabilities in Thin Films of Tapped Powder

## Abstract

We observe powder ”droplets” forming when tapping repeatidly an horizontal flat plate initially covered with a monolayer of fine powder particles. Starting from a simple model involving both the air flow through the porous cake and avalanche properties, we setup an analytical model which satisfactorily fits the experimental results. We observe a close analogy between the governing equations of the phenomenon and the basic physics of wetting liquids, including the equivalent of the Laplace law and the surface tension parameter leading to the well known Rayleigh Taylor instability.

PACS numbers: 45.70.-n, 45.70.Qj, 74.80.Bj, 81.05.Rm

In the recent years, there has been a great deal of interest in the response of granular materials to various kinds of external perturbations. Up to now, the vast majority of the experimental, theoretical and simulated works have dealt with model granular solids in the sense that the particles were supposed to be large enough (i.e. typically larger than $`100\mu m)`$ to avoid significant interaction with the surrounding fluids. In reverse and rather paradoxically, the understanding of the behavior of fine powders has received much less attention although it is universally recognized as the keystone of an increasing number of high-tech industrial processes. In this spirit, a few recent attempts were made towards the analysis of the behavior of fine (typically in the range from $`1`$ to less than $`30\mu m)`$ cohesive or non-cohesive powders in air (e.g. ) or of larger particles submitted to excessive windy conditions, such as in desert dunes.

In a recent paper we reported a series of experiments and an analytical model dealing with a thick (about 10mm) slice of fine powder in a container tapped from below. We reported that, under these circumstances, a quasi periodic corrugated pattern spreads out. The characteristic wavelength of this pattern was found to be proportional to the amplitude of the taps. Our theoretical model involved two basic features of the fine granular material : First, the Darcy’s law for modelling the air flux trapped under the layer and pushed through the porous cake of granulate when the pile falls down immediately after the shock. Secondly, it involved the maximum stability angle of a granulate before generating avalanches. It was shown that a corrugated surface stands as a more stable state than a horizontal flat surface with respect to air blow from below, because it is easier to eject a particle from a flat surface than from an inclined surface sitting at the avalanche angle. We explained that the apices of the hills created by air blow from below are unstable as compared to both sides of the hills. A couple of further experiments showing direct ”crater like” formation resulting from this ”volcano effect”, provided us a clear view of this last feature.

Thus, our model explicitly accounts for the earlier Faraday’s observation of the ”chimney or volcano effect”. Faraday stated that ” It forms a partial vacuum into which the air round the heap enters with more readiness than the heap itself. The particles of the heap rise up at the center, overflow, fall down upon all slides and disappear at the bottom, apparently proceeding inwards” as sketched in Fig.1 which, additionally shows the resulting inner convections rolls.

Keeping along the same line, we make a step further considering now a thin slice of a fine powder (typical particle size $`30\mu \mathrm{m})`$ spread out over a flat plate. When gently tapping repeatedly and at constant intensity onto the plate, we observe the formation of a collection of separate rounded conical heaps looking like droplets of powder evenly spread over the plate. The resulting pattern strikingly reminds one of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability illustrated by the droplets structure obtained when turning up a glass plate initially covered with a thin film of a wetting liquid. As we will show in the following, this analogy is not fortuitous. It results from an underlying similarity between the equations governing the wetting properties of liquids and the behavior of powder piles interacting with a surrounding gas.

Several basic characteristic features of the instability of a tapped thin film of powder can be readily observed starting from a simple table-top experiment : Using a small leucite rule equipped with thin spacers, we spread a monolayer slice of powder (silica beads, diameter about 30$`\mu m`$) over a flat glass plate (size 6x9 $`cm^2)`$. This glass plate is kept horizontal and secured on its periphery using a latex band which allows a certain degree of freedom for up and down motions. Using a small metallic or plastic rod, we knock gently and repeatedly at a very low pace and at a constant intensity over one corner of the glass plate, applying vertically as brief taps as possible. After a few taps (about ten to twenty), the surface, initially flat, smooth and horizontal, separates into a collection of tiny rounded conical heaps looking like droplets similar to those reported in Fig.2. Starting from the same initial conditions but tapping more energetically while keeping the intensity as constant as possible from one tap to the next, induces a pattern with bigger droplets separated by a larger distance. Note that excessive wetness prevents the observation of these surface patterns.

Definitely more reliable information has been obtained in the course of our experiments, using a more sophisticated device. We set a CCD (charge coupled device) camera above the plate in order to record and process the successive patterns obtained during the experiments. Secondly, we used a magnetically driven tapping device and a commercial Bruer and Kjaer accelerometer stuck on the plate in the vicinity of the sample in order to monitor the acceleration of the taps. Thus we get the wavelength dependence on the tap acceleration. Typical experimental results are reported in Fig.3

First we look for a relationship between the height of the approximately identical conical piles and the mean distance separating them. Consider the initial situation when a thin slice of powder of thickness $`e`$ made of small spherical beads (diameter $`D)`$ is evenly spread over a horizontal flat surface whose area is $`S.`$ Suppose now that the powder has been gathered in a number of $`N`$ disjointed identical conical piles having an angle $`\theta `$ to horizontal and culminating at altitude $`h.`$ These piles are evenly distributed over the area $`S`$. Due to volume conservation, the number $`N`$ of these piles is approximately given by

$$N=3\frac{Se\mathrm{tan}^2\theta }{\pi }\frac{1}{h^3}h^3$$
(1)
The wavelength $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of this pattern is the square root of the mean area occupied by each pile

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{3e\mathrm{tan}^2\theta }}h^{\frac{3}{2}}h^{\frac{3}{2}}$$
(2)
In agrement with Faraday’s and more recent authors’ observation of the volcano effect and the associated convection, we have shown that when a conical powder pile undergoes a ballistic flight, we can distinguish between two regions, delimitated by a circle at altitude $`h_C`$ (Fig.1). The lowest region is stable against the upcoming air flux because it is stabilized by the lateral avalanches ($`0h<h_C)`$. Around the apex we found an unstable part ($`h_Chh_T)`$ (T for top) where grains are expelled by the upcoming air flux. The adimensional parameter $`C`$ measures the proportion of the unstable part of the heap, so that $`C=\left(h_Th_C\right)/h_T.`$ In our preceding paper dealing with thick powder layers, we observed that the stability of the corrugated patterns and the linear dependence of the wavelength on the shocks amplitude are consistent with the fact that $`C`$ is independent of the shocks acceleration. Stated differently, the steady state of a pattern as sketched in Fig. 1 results from the balance between the number of expelled particles near the apices and the number of particles which are reinjected into the bulk of the heaps at every tap.

In order to eject a single free particle of diameter $`D`$ and density $`\rho ,`$ sitting on an horizontal surface, we need an air velocity which exceeds the free flight velocity of this particle $`v_f=D^2\rho g/18\eta `$ where $`\eta `$ is the air viscosity and $`g`$ the gravitational acceleration. Now, we consider a particle sitting at altitude $`h_C`$ on the inclined surface of the heaps. We built a simplified equation for the screening effect due to the avalanche process, considering that the mass of the particles lying at an altitude $`h`$ is increased by a factor $`Np\mathrm{sin}\theta ,`$ $`N`$ being the number of the above lying particles pertaining to a single sheet of the inclined granulate and $`p`$ being the number (typically 5) of sheets possibly involved in the avalanche. Thus the required air velocity needed to eject the considered particle is given by $`v_{h_C}=v_f\left(h_Th_C\right)p\mathrm{sin}\theta /D.`$

The velocity of the upcoming air flux at altitude $`h_C`$ is given by the Darcy’s law, so that :

$$v_{h_C}=\frac{K\mathrm{\Delta }P}{\eta h_C}=v_f\frac{C}{1C}\frac{h_Cp\mathrm{sin}\theta }{D}$$
(3)
where $`K`$ is the permeability of the powder and $`\mathrm{\Delta }P`$ the pressure difference acting over the granular porous cake, due to the air compression when the pile falls down. Thus we find the basic equation governing the problem :

$$\frac{K\mathrm{\Delta }P}{Dh_C}=\rho \left(\frac{1}{18}\frac{C}{1C}p\mathrm{sin}\theta \right)gh_C$$
(4)
Written in this form, Eq. (4) can be seen as describing the balance between two antagonistic pressures :

* An ”hydrostatic” pressure $`P_g`$ which accounts for the screening effect of the avalanche properties of the powder

$$P_g=\rho ^{}gh_C$$
(5)
where $`\rho ^{}=\rho \left(\frac{1}{18}\frac{C}{1C}p\mathrm{sin}\theta \right)`$ is the normalized density of the particles sitting near the apices and participating to the avalanches.
* The equivalent of a Laplace-Young pressure, $`P_l`$ (describing the pressure difference at the interface of two liquids) which can be written

$$P_l=\frac{K\mathrm{\Delta }P}{Dh_C}=\gamma ^{}\left(\frac{2}{h_C}\right)$$
(6)
where $`\gamma ^{}`$ plays the role of a surface tension and is defined by

$$\gamma ^{}=\frac{K\mathrm{\Delta }P}{2D}$$
(7)

In brief, Eq. (4) describes the equilibrium of the analogue of a wetting liquid droplet on an horizontal plate. Thus, we assimilate a conical powder pile with a half spherical wetting material of height $`h_C`$ and curvature $`2/h_C.`$ This ersatz displays a surface tension (or capillary forces) given by equation 7. This analogue to a surface tension can be seen as resulting from the convective forces (Fig.1) which drag powder particles from the surrounding surface and subsequently inject them into the powder pile. Therefore, the equivalent surface tension of the powder pile has a purely dynamical origin since it results from the convective forces related to the volcano effect. From Eq. 4, we get $`h_C`$ from the following relationship

$$h_C\left(\frac{K\mathrm{\Delta }P}{D}\frac{1}{\rho ^{}g}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}=\left(\frac{2\gamma ^{}}{\rho ^{}g}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}$$
(8)
Going on with the analogy to wetting liquids, we can also define the usual capillary length $`\lambda `$ equating the hydrostatic pressure and the Laplace-Young pressure so that $`\lambda =\left(\gamma ^{}/\rho ^{}g\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}=h_C/\sqrt{2}`$ and a related Bond number $`Bo=\left(\rho ^{}gh_C^2/\gamma ^{}\right)`$

Now, using Eq. (2), we find

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{3e\mathrm{tan}^2\theta }}\left(\frac{K\mathrm{\Delta }P}{D}\frac{1}{\rho ^{}g}\right)^{\frac{3}{4}}=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{3e\mathrm{tan}^2\theta }}\left(\frac{2\gamma ^{}}{\rho ^{}g}\right)^{\frac{3}{4}}$$
(9)
Here a numerical estimation of the involved parameters is imperative. We calculate an approximate value for the surface tension $`\gamma ^{}`$starting from Eq. (9) using typical values for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(5mm),`$ e$`(20\mu m)`$ and $`\rho ^{}`$ obtained for $`C=5\%.`$ We get $`\gamma ^{}\mathrm{2.\hspace{0.17em}3}10^5Nm^1`$ which means that this constant is about $`3000`$ times smaller than the surface tension of pure water. As expected, $`\lambda `$ and $`h_C`$ are in the order of 1mm. Moreover, starting from Eq. (6) we can get an estimated value for the pressure difference between the altitude $`h_C`$ and the base. First, we consider that the permeability of the granular material is a fraction of the cross sectional area of a single particle. Thus, we get $`\mathrm{\Delta }P`$ in the order of $`3`$ Pascal. This quantity should be a fraction of the maximum possible air pressure due to the total weight of the powder pile leaning on the basis surface $`S`$. This maximum air pressure is found to be about $`10`$Pascal which therefore stands as a correct order of magnitude.

Table 1 summarizes the analogy between the basic equations governing the powder heap equilibrium and the equations governing the equilibrium of liquid droplets.

Now, starting from this analogy and using e.g. Eq. (4), we can transcribe the classical demonstration of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability for wetting liquids. The standard analysis consists in examining the evolution of an infinitesimal sinusoidal distortion of the initially flat surface. Note that the basic calculation for liquids (found in text-books) leads to a wavelength dependence $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(\gamma /\rho g\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ Here, the distortion is by no means infinitesimal. We rather introduced the volume conservation condition (Eq. (1)) which leads to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(\gamma ^{}/\rho ^{}g\right)^{\frac{3}{4}}.`$ But except for this difference, the underlying phenomenology of the blown powder mimics the standard Rayleigh-Taylor instability.

Still proceeding with the analogy of the inner pressure within a powder heap given by Eq. (6) which mimics the Laplace-Young law, we predict that if two powder heaps of unequal sizes are sitting next to each other, the smaller one would be sucked into the larger one just as this occurs between two communicating bubbles. The experimental result fulfills this assertion as can be seen in Fig.4.

Furthermore, it is well known that a thin film of a wetting liquid spread over a cylindrical rod is intrinsically unstable. Due the so-called Rayleigh instability, such a cylindrical film splits into a collection of approximately equally spaced droplets because of the curvature of the supporting surface. Here, we find a seemingly identical behavior starting from a single line of powder spread over a horizontal plate (Fig.5).

However, the analogy is misleading here because the curvature of the support does not play any role in this experiment. We should rather consider this result as a 1D version of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability in fine powders.

At this point, it is meaningful that the ambient fluid viscosity $`\eta `$ cancels out in Eq. (4) just as in the classical analysis of the steady state of the Rayleigh Taylor instability. It is also certainly not fortuitous that the similarity between the leading equation for wetting fluids and blown fine powders comes from the formal analogy between the Darcy’s and Laplace-Young law. In connection with that, we note that the equivalent surface tension $`\gamma ^{}`$ is in the order of $`D\mathrm{\Delta }P.`$ The corresponding energy due to a small surface change $`dS`$ reads $`\delta W`$ $`\gamma ^{}dSD^3\mathrm{\Delta }PV_p\mathrm{\Delta }P`$ where $`V_p`$ is the volume of a single pore of the granular cake. This merely illustrates the fact that the Darcy’s law expresses the Poiseuille law across a single pore of the porous cake.

Even if it has the merit to establish a connection between the (yet unknown) description of blown powder properties and the (already known) wetting liquids behavior, our simple theoretical explanation certainly lays itself open to several criticisms. In particular, it does not convey any information regarding the development of the surface instability. Such an analysis would involve the introduction of a sort of powder viscosity which is not considered in the present model dealing with the steady state of the process. A time resolved scrutiny of the pattern growth would probably convey information about this question. We postpone the description of this study to a forthcoming paper.

I am grateful to R. Jacobs, E. Raphael, I. Aronson and the granular group in Jussieu for stimulating discussions.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

1982 Les Houches Lecture Notes

INTERACTION OF GRAVITATIONAL WAVES

WITH AN ELASTIC SOLID MEDIUM

B. Carter

Groupe d’Astrophysique Relativiste

Observatoire de Paris

92 Meudon, France

$`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Contents}}`$

1. Introduction.

2. Kinematics of a Material Medium: Material Representation.

3. Kinematics of a Material Medium: Convected Differentials.

4. Kinematics of a Perfect Elastic Medium.

5. Small Gravitational Perturbations of an Elastic Medium.

1 INTRODUCTION

Although the presently most promising approach to the direct detection of gravitational radiation would seem to be provided by the use of appropriate electromagnetic field configurations (e.g. that of and optical interferometer) the original, and until now most highly developed method has been based on the use of an elastic solid configuration, traditionally a cylindrical bar of the kind originally introduced by Weber. A highly simplified but essentially adequate description of the interaction of gravitational radiation with such an apparatus was given by Weber himself in his seminal 1960 paper . For a more detailed analysis, and for the treatment of more general configurations such as that of the earth as a whole, a system of wave equations governing the interaction of weak gravitational radiation with an elastic solid was derived soon after by Dyson , Papapetrou , and others, subject to the limitation that non-linearities due to self gravitation of the solid medium are neglected, as is entirely justifiable in a terrestrial context.

While the final outcome of the present article will be a rederivation of the weak field wave equations to which we have just referred, we shall nevertheless use a quite different approach to that of Dyson and Papapetrou. Instead of working throughout in an only approximately self consistent linearised scheme, as they did, we shall first set up the exactly self consistent fully non-linear theory of the interaction of a gravitational field with an elastic solid in accordance with Einsein’s theory. The general, non- linear theory is in any case needed for application to the more exotic context of neutron star deformations, as was discussed e.g. by Carter and Quintana . Starting from this mathematically sound basis, we shall then proceed to the derivation of the weak field limit in two successive stages of approximation: we shall first impose the restriction that the gravitational radiation be weak, even though the unperturbed background field may still be strong (as in the case of a neutron star); finally we shall impose the condition that the background field also be weak (as in the case of the earth) so as to obtain the Dyson Papapetrou equations.

Unlike the treatments used by other authors such as those of the schools of Eringen (see e.g. Maughin ) or of Souriau (who was the first to set up the fully non-linear elasticity theory used here ) our present treatment will be based on the use of convected differentials, a powerful technique for the analysis of material media (elastic or otherwise) that generalises the more restricted convected differentiation procedure first introduced by Oldroyd . In providing a self-contained introduction to the general concept of convected differentals and differentiation, and to their application to the theory of an elastic solid and its interaction with gravitation, the present article condenses several previous publications describing work carried out in collaboration with H. Quintana , , , , . This article thus serves to update an earlier introductory survey by Ehlers  .

2 KINEMATICS OF A MATERIAL MEDIUM: MATERIAL REPRESENTATION

In Newtonian theory a $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{material}}`$ $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{medium}}`$ is usually visualised as a three dimensional manifold whose configuration at a given instant is specified by a non-singular mapping into three dimensional Euclidean space, the motion of the medium being given by the time variation of the maping. However in General Relativity theory, where there is in general no canonically preferred set of three-dimensional sections (Euclidean or otherwise) of the fundamental four-dimensional spacetime manifold $``$ say, it is more convenient and natural to proceed the other way about. The medium itself is still to be conceived in the abstract as a three-dimensional manifold, $`𝒳`$ say, (whose points represent idealised particles of the material) but its motion can be specified by a necessarily degenerate (four to three dimensional) mapping, $`𝒫`$ say, of the world-tube traversed by the matter in $``$ onto the manifold $`𝒳`$, the world line of each idealised particle of the medium being projected under $`𝒫`$ onto the corresponding point in $`𝒳`$.

We shall use Greek indices $`\mu ,\nu ,\mathrm{}`$ to specify ordinary spacetime tensors on $``$, and capital Roman indices A, B, … to specify tensors on the manifold $`𝒳`$ representing the medium. The spacetime indices $`\mu ,\nu ,\mathrm{}`$ may be thought of in the traditional manner as specifying tensor components defined in terms of a local system of coordinates $`x^\mu `$ ($`\mu =0,1,2,3`$) on $``$ while similarly the material indices A, B, … may be thought of as defined in terms of local coordinates $`X^\text{A}`$ (A=1,2,3) on $`𝒳`$. However, following Penrose , it wil also be comvenient to interpret the index symbols in the abstract manner as merely an indication of the tensorial (or more general) character of the quantities concerned (rank, co/contravariant quality, and in the present case association with $``$ or $`𝒳`$) rather than as integers specifying concrete components. Thus with the indices interpreted in this loose sense, the statement that a point with coordinates $`X^\text{A}`$ in $`𝒳`$ is the image under $`𝒫`$ of a point with coordinates $`x^\mu `$ in $``$ may legitimately be expressed in a simple and natural manner by

$$X^\text{A}=𝒫\{x^\mu \}$$
$`(2.1)`$
whereas with a strict traditional interpretation of A and $`\mu `$ such an equation would be nonsense.

The operation $`𝒫`$ of projection from $``$ onto $`𝒳`$ evidently induces a corresponding projection, which we shall also denote by $`𝒫`$, from tangent vectors at any given point $`x^\mu `$ in $``$ onto tangent vectors at the corresponding point $`𝒫\{x^\mu \}`$ in $`𝒳`$. In an obviously natural notation we shall denote the projected image of a tangent vector by the same basic symbol, distinguishing the image from the original vector only by the appropriate change from Roman to Greek of the index symbol, i.e. for any spacetime tangent vector $`\xi ^\mu `$ we shall set

$$\xi ^\text{A}=𝒫\{\xi ^\mu \}.$$
$`(2.2)`$
Due to the degeneracy of $`𝒫`$ there is in general no corresponding induced projection operation for covectors except in the particular case of a covector $`\alpha _\mu `$ that is orthogonal to the congruence of worldlines in the sense that

$$u^\mu \alpha _\mu =0,$$
$`(2.3)`$
where the vector $`u^\mu `$ is tangent to the worldline at the spacetime point in question. In this particular case the projection will induce a corresponding covector on $`𝒳`$, for which as before we shall use the same basic symbol, i.e. we shall write

$$\alpha _\text{A}=𝒫\{\alpha _\mu \},$$
$`(2.4)`$
and in this case the operation is reversible, i.e. we shall have a bijection

$$\alpha _\mu \alpha _\text{A}$$
$`(2.5)`$
between orthogonal covectors at $`x^\mu `$ in $``$ and covectors at $`𝒫\{x^\mu \}`$ in $`𝒳`$. We can use the (pseudo-) metric tensor $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ on the spacetime manifold $``$ (with signature $`+++`$ and units such that $`c=1`$) to define a corresponding bijection for tangent vectors by restricting our attention to tangent vectors on $``$ that are orthogonal to the world lines in the metric sense, i.e.

$$u_\mu \xi ^\mu =0,u_\mu =g_{\mu \nu }u^\nu .$$
$`(2.6)`$
Subject to this restriction the projection (2.1) will have the same reversibility property as (2.4), i.e.

$$\xi ^\mu \xi ^\text{A}$$
$`(2.7)`$
in the same sense as (2.5).

The natural 1 - 1 correspondence that has just been defined between vectors or covectors orthogonal to the worldlines in spacetime and vectors or covectors in the material medium can evidently be extended directly to general orthogonal tensors as defined in terms of tensor products of orthogonal vectors and covectors. This correspondence is of vital importance for setting up any physical theory of the mechanical behaviour of the medium, since its spacetime evolution must be described in terms of geometrical quantities (tensors etc.) defined in spacetime, whereas its intrinsic properties can only be described in terms of quantities described directly in terms of the manifold $`𝒳`$ representing the material medium (a requirement commonly dignified as the “principle of material objectivity”).

Since there is no guarantee that all physically relevant spacetime tensors will turn out to be automatically orthogonal to the worldlines, it is important to remark that they can always be canonically decomposed into a set of orthogonal tensors of equal or lower order by using the orthogonal projection tensor $`\gamma _\nu ^\mu `$. In terms of the normalised unit tangent vector $`u^\mu `$ and the corresponding covector $`u_\mu `$ defined by

$$u^\mu u_\mu =1$$
$`(2.8)`$
this orthogonal projection operator is defined in terms of the unit tensor $`g_\nu ^\mu `$ by

$$\gamma _\nu ^\mu =g_\nu ^\mu +u^\mu u_\nu .$$
$`(2.9)`$
In the particular case of an ordinary tangent vector $`v^\mu `$ the natural decomposition into a set consisting of an orthogonal part $`{}_{}{}^{}v_{}^{\mu }`$ and a scalar $`v^{}`$ is given by

$$v^\mu =_{}v^\mu +v^{}u^\mu ,$$
$`(2.10)`$
where

$${}_{}{}^{}v_{}^{\mu }=\gamma _\nu ^\mu v^\nu ,v^{}=u_\mu v^\mu ,$$
$`(2.11)`$
while for a general covector $`\omega _\mu `$ we similarly have

$$\omega _\mu =_{}\omega _\mu +\omega _{}u_\mu ,$$
$`(2.12)`$
where

$${}_{}{}^{}\omega _{\mu }^{}=\gamma _\mu ^\nu \omega _\nu ,\omega _{}=u^\mu \omega _\mu .$$
$`(2.13)`$
This allows us to represent them in terms of sets of corresponding geometrical quantities defined at the corresponding point in the material medium in the form

$$v^\mu \{_{}v^\text{A},v^{}\}$$
$`(2.14),`$
and

$$\omega _\mu \{_{}\omega _\text{A},\omega _\mu \},$$
$`(2.15)`$
the extension to general tensors of higher order being straightforeward albeit cumbersome.

3 KINEMATICS OF A MATERIAL MEDIUM: CONVECTED DIFFERENTIALS

The concept of a material representation of spacetime tensors in terms of sets of tensors defined on the medium space (as defined by (2.14) and (2.15) ) gives rise naturally to the concept of $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{material}}`$ $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{variation}}`$ defined as the difference between the material representations in any Lagrangian (i.e. worldline preserving) variation between different configurations, which may either arise from a mapping between different physically conceivable evolutions of the medium or else merely from a time displacement in a single evolution. The spacetime tensor corresponding to the infinitesimal material variation between nearby states of evolution of the medium will be referred to as the convected differential . We shall use the symbol $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to denote an ordinary Lagrangian differential and we shall use the notation $`d[]`$ for a corresponding convected differential. Thus in the case of a vector and a covector respectively, (2.14) and (2.15) give rise to the correspondences

$$d[v^\mu ]\{\mathrm{\Delta }_{}v^\text{A},\mathrm{\Delta }v^{}\},$$
$`(3.1)`$
and

$$d[\omega ]\{\mathrm{\Delta }_{}\omega _\text{A},\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _{}\}.$$
$`(3.2)`$
To evaluate these expressions we use the facrthat the world line preserving variation can only change the magnitude but not the direction of the unit tangent vector $`u^\mu `$: explicitly

$$\mathrm{\Delta }u^\mu =\frac{_1}{^2}u^\mu u^\nu u^\rho \mathrm{\Delta }_{\rho \sigma }$$
$`(3.3)`$
where we use the abbreviation

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{\rho \sigma }=\mathrm{\Delta }g_{\rho \sigma }$$
$`(3.4)`$
for the Lagrangian variation of the metric. In the case of a vector we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }v^{}=u_\nu \mathrm{\Delta }v^\nu v^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }u_\nu $$
$`(3.5)`$
$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{}v^\mu =\gamma _\nu ^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }v^\nu +v^\nu \left(u^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }u_\nu +u_\nu \mathrm{\Delta }u^\mu \right).$$
$`(3.6)`$
Since the bracketed quantity in the last expresion is automatically parallel to $`u^\mu `$ it does not contribute to the material projection, so we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{}v^\text{A}=𝒫\{\mathrm{\Delta }_{}v^\mu \}=𝒫\{\gamma _\nu ^\mu v^\nu \}$$
$`(3.7)`$
and hence

$$d[v^\mu ]=\gamma _\nu ^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }v^\nu +u^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }v^{}$$

$$=\mathrm{\Delta }v^\mu u^\mu v^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }u_\nu .$$
$`(3.8)`$
In the case of a covector we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _{}=u^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }\omega _\nu \omega _\nu \mathrm{\Delta }u^\nu $$
$`(3.9)`$
$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{}\omega _\mu =\gamma _\mu ^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }\omega _\nu +\omega _\nu \left(u^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }u_\mu +u_\mu \mathrm{\Delta }u^\nu \right),$$
$`(3.10)`$
both terms in the last expression being automatically orthogonal to $`u^\mu `$. Thus using

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{}\omega _\text{A}=𝒫\{\mathrm{\Delta }_{}\omega _\mu \}$$
$`(3.11)`$
we immediately obtain

$$d[\omega _\mu ]=\mathrm{\Delta }_{}\omega _\mu +u_\mu \mathrm{\Delta }\omega _{}$$

$$=\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _\mu +\omega _\nu u^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }u_\mu .$$
$`(3.12)`$
The extension to a general tensor is now automatic: it suffices to add an appropriately analogous term for each extra index. Thus for a general mixed tensor $`T_\nu \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}`$ one obtains the relation  between convected and Lagrangian differentials in the form

$$d[T_\nu \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}]=\mathrm{\Delta }T_\nu \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}+T_\rho \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}u^\rho \mathrm{\Delta }u_\nu +\mathrm{}$$

$$T_\nu \mathrm{}^\rho \mathrm{}u^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }u_\rho \mathrm{}$$
$`(3.13)`$
where the Lagrangian differential of the covector $`u_\mu `$ is obtainable by substituting the formula (3.3) in the expression

$$\mathrm{\Delta }u_\mu =g_{\mu \nu }\mathrm{\Delta }u^\nu +u^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }.$$
$`(3.14)`$
An important particular case  covered by the general formula (3.13) is that in which instead of making a comparison between nearby but different states of material motion (as one needs to do in perturbation theory) one wishes to study $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{time}}`$ variations in a single given state of motion. This corresponds to the case in which the Lagrangian variation is simply given by $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Lie}}`$ $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{differentiation}}`$ with respect to a time displacement vector field, $`\zeta ^\mu `$ say, which we shall denote by $`\zeta \text{}`$, i.e. we set

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\zeta \text{},$$
$`(3.15)`$
where the vector $`\zeta ^\mu `$ is an arbitrarily normalised tangent to the flow, which can therefore be expressed in the form

$$\zeta ^\mu =u^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }\tau ,$$
$`(3.16)`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$ is an arbitrary scalar field interpretable as representing the local value of the corresponding infinitesimal proper time displacement along the world lines. Although the various terms in (3.13) will involve derivatives of $`\zeta ^\mu `$, the intrinsic nature of the material variation will ensure that the convected differential will only depend on the scalar value of the displacement $`d\tau `$ at the point under consideration, so that it will take the form

$$d[T_\nu \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}]=[T_\nu \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}]\dot{}d\tau $$
$`(3.17)`$
where the tensor $`[T_\nu \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}]\dot{}`$ so defined is what we refer to as the $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{convected}}`$ $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{derivative}}`$. By direct substitution of (3.15) and (3.16) in (3.13) one can check that the terms involving gradients of $`d\tau `$ do indeed cancel out, so that one recovers the original formula  for the convected derivative, namely

$$[T_\nu \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}]\dot{}=T_\nu \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}+T_\rho \mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}(\dot{u}_\nu +_\nu )u^\rho +\mathrm{}$$

$$T_\nu \mathrm{}^\rho \mathrm{}(\dot{u}^\rho +_\rho )u^\mu \mathrm{}$$
$`(3.18)`$
where $`_\mu `$ is the usual metric covariant differentiation operator and where we use a simple dot withoutsquare brackets to denote covariant differentiation with respect to the propert time, i.e. $`\dot{}=u^\rho _\rho `$. In the particular case of the unit tangent vector itself, the dot operation gives the acceleration vector, whose covariant form is also expressible as the Lie derivative:

$$\dot{u}_\mu =u\text{}u_\mu .$$
$`(3.19)`$
Just as (3.13) is a generalisation of the earlier formula (3.18), so also (3.18) is itself a generalisation of a previuos formula given by Oldroyd  for the particular case of tensors entirely orthogonal to the world lines, for which, as pointed out by Ehlers , the convected derivative reduces to the orthogonal projection of the Lie derivative. An important example is the divergence tensor $`\theta _{\mu \nu }`$ of the material flow, as defined by the decomposition

$$_\mu u_\nu =\theta _{\mu \nu }+\omega _{\mu \nu }\dot{u}_\mu u_\nu ,$$
$`(3.20)`$
where the vorticity tensor $`\omega _{\mu \nu }`$ is antisymmetric and $`\theta _{\mu \nu }`$ is symmetric. It is related to the strain tensor $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ (i.e. the covariant version of the orthogonal projection tensor (2.19) ) by

$$\theta _{\mu \nu }=\frac{_1}{^2}[\gamma _{\mu \nu }]\dot{}.$$
$`(3.21)`$
4 MECHANICS OF A PERFECT ELASTIC MEDIUM

The convected differential and derivative that were described in the previous section are potentially useful for the kinetic analysis of any kind of material medium. One of the simplest applications is to the theory of a medium whos behaviour satisfies the following (by now standard) criterion of perfect elasticity. A perfect $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{elastic}}`$ $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{medium}}`$ can be characterised succinctly by the condition that its energy - momentum tensor is a material function of the metric tensor with respect to the flow field specified by its timelike eigenvector. This means that the energy momentum tensor takes the form

$$T^{\mu \nu }=\rho u^\mu u^\nu +P^{\mu \nu }$$
$`(4.1)`$
where the pressure tensor satisfies the orthogonality condition

$$P^{\mu \nu }u_\nu =0,$$
$`(4.2)`$
so that the material representation of $`T^{\mu \nu }`$ is expressible as

$$T^{\mu \nu }\{P^{\text{AB}},0,\rho \},$$
$`(4.3)`$
and this representation must be a function of the corresponding representation

$$g_{\mu \nu }\{\gamma _{\text{AB}},0,1\}.$$
$`(4.4)`$
Thus at each point in the three dimensional manifold $`𝒳`$ representing the medium there are well defined functions determining the pressure components $`P^{\text{AB}}`$ and also the density $`\rho `$ in terms of the components $`\gamma _{\text{AB}}`$. There is however a restriction that prevents these functions from all being chosen arbitrarily, namely the local energy - momentum conservation law

$$_\mu T^{\mu \nu }=0,$$
$`(4.5)`$
which has four independent components, whereas the acceleration of the flow has only three independent degrees of freedom. In order to avoid having an overdetermined system of equations of motion, one must require thqt the component of (4.5) along the flow (i.e. the conservation of rest frame energy as distinct from momentum) should be satisfied as an identity. The remaining independent equations are given by

$$\gamma _\nu ^\mu _\rho T^{\rho \nu }=0,$$
$`(4.6)`$
which is equivalent to the equations of motion

$$\rho \dot{u}^\mu =\gamma _\nu ^\mu _\rho P^{\rho \nu }.$$
$`(4.7)`$
The equation that must be satisfied identically is

$$u_\nu _\mu T^{\mu \nu }=0,$$
$`(4.8)`$
which is equivalent to

$$\dot{\rho }=\left(\rho \gamma ^{\mu \nu }+P^{\mu \nu }\right)\theta _{\mu \nu }.$$
$`(4.9)`$
Now it follows from (3.21) that this last can be expresssed in terms of convected derivatives as

$$[\rho ]\dot{}=\frac{_1}{^2}\left(\rho \gamma ^{\mu \nu }+P^{\mu \nu }\right)[\gamma _{\mu \nu }]\dot{},$$
$`(4.10)`$
which means that the convected variations allong the world lines must satisfy

$$d[\rho ]=\frac{_1}{^2}\left(\rho \gamma ^{\mu \nu }+P^{\mu \nu }\right)d[\gamma _{\mu \nu }],$$
$`(4.11)`$
and hence that the corresponding variation of the material projections in $`𝒳`$ must satisfy

$$d\rho =\frac{_1}{^2}\left(\rho \gamma ^{\text{AB}}+p^{\text{AB}}\right)d\gamma _{\text{AB}}.$$
$`(4.12)`$
This will be satisfied automatically for an arbitrary equation of state $`\rho =\rho \{\gamma _{\text{AB}}\}`$ if and only if the corresponding equations for the six algebraically independant pressure components are specified by

$$P^{\text{AB}}=2\frac{\rho }{\gamma _{\text{AB}}}\rho \gamma ^{\text{AB}}.$$
$`(4.13)`$
By carrying out a second partial differentiation of the single equation of state function for $`\rho `$ with respect to the strain $`\gamma _{\text{AB}}`$ we deduce that the material variation of the pressure tensor will be given by

$$dP^{\text{AB}}=\frac{_1}{^2}\left(E^{\text{ABCD}}+P^{\text{AB}}\gamma ^{\text{CD}}\right)d\gamma _{\text{CD}},$$
$`(4.14)`$
where the $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{elasticity}\mathrm{tensor}}`$, whose material projection is defined by

$$E^{\text{ABCD}}=2\frac{p^{\text{AB}}}{\gamma _{\text{CD}}}p^{\text{AB}}\gamma ^{\text{CD}}$$
$`(4.15)`$
will obey the symmetry conditions

$$E^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }=E^{(\mu \nu )(\rho \sigma )}=E^{\rho \sigma \mu \nu }$$
$`(4.16)`$
as well as the orthogonality requirement

$$E^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }u_\sigma =0.$$
$`(4.17)`$
A familiar special case of a perfectly elastic medium is that of an ordinary perfect fluid, which can be defined in the present context by the condition that its density be a function only of the determinant $`|\gamma |`$ of the material projection of the strain tensor, i.e.

$$\rho =\rho \{|\gamma |\}.$$
$`(4.18)`$
It follows from (4.13) that the pressure tensor will then take the purely isotropic form

$$P^{\mu \nu }=P\gamma ^{\mu \nu },$$
$`(4.19)`$
with the pressure scalar given by

$$P=2|\gamma |\frac{d\rho }{d|\gamma |},$$
$`(4.20)`$
while the elasticity tensor will be given in terms of the bulk modulus

$$\beta =2|\gamma |\frac{dP}{d|\gamma |},$$
$`(4.21)`$
by the formula

$$E^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }=(\beta P)\gamma ^{\mu \nu }\gamma ^{\rho \sigma }+2P\gamma ^{\mu (\rho }\gamma ^{\sigma )\nu }.$$
$`(4.22)`$
5 SMALL GRAVITATIONAL PERTURBATIONS OF AN ELASTIC MEDIUM

Having seen how to set up a system of exactly self - consistent but non - linear equations governing a perfect elastic medium in the framework of General Relativity, we are now ready to derive the linearised wave equation governing small perturbations relative to a known background, such as might be induced by weak incoming gravitational radiation.

It is usually convenient to think of the perturbations as being determined in terms of a vector field $`\xi ^\mu `$ that specifies the infinitesimal displacement of the worldlines relative to their positions in the known background space. Of course such a displacement is entirely gauge dependent and can always be reduced to zero by the use of an appropriate Lagrangian (worldline dragging) mapping of the perturbed space onto the background, butit is often convenient to fix the gauge by a more purely geometric requirement such as the preservation of a harmonic coordinate system, which is the generalisation of the usual newtonian procedure of defining the displacements relative to the fixed Euclidean structure of space. We shall use the symbol $`\delta `$ to denote the Eulerian variation of any quantity as specified by any such geometric prescription for the mapping of the perturbed spacetime onto the unperturbed background. The difference between the Lagrangian variations denoted by $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the Eulerian variations denoted by $`\delta `$ is given by Lie differentiation with respect to the corresponding infinitesimal displacement field $`\xi ^\mu `$, i.e.

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\delta +\xi \text{}.$$
$`(5.1)`$
Thus in particular the Lagrangian variation of the metric tensor is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }=h_{\mu \nu }+2_{(\mu }\xi _{\nu )},$$
$`(5.2)`$
where we use the usual notation

$$h_{\mu \nu }=\delta g_{\mu \nu }$$
$`(5.3)`$
for the Eulerian variation of the metric arising from the gravitational waves under consideration.

As far as quantities characterising the material medium are concerned, it is easier to work with Lagrangian than Eulerian variations, since the former are related directly (via (3.13)) to convected variations and hence to the material variations that are governed directly by the equations of state. In the case of orthogonal covariant tensors, including the special case of scalars, we see from (3.13) that the Lagrangian variation is given directly by the convected variation, and hence from (4.12) we find that the Lagrangian variation of the density is given in terms of that of the metric by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\rho =\frac{_1}{^2}\rho y^{\rho \sigma }\mathrm{\Delta }_{\rho \sigma },$$
$`(5.4)`$
where for future convenience we introduce the abbreviation

$$y^{\rho \sigma }=\gamma ^{\rho \sigma }+\rho ^1P^{\rho \sigma }.$$
$`(5.5)`$
For a contravariant tensor however, (3.13) introduces extra terms, so that for the dependence of the Eulerian variation of the pressure tensor in terms of the metric (4.14) gives rise to the formula

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P^{\mu \nu }=\frac{_1}{^2}\left(E^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }+P^{\mu \nu }\gamma ^{\rho \sigma }4P^{\rho (\mu }u^{\nu )}u^\sigma \right)\mathrm{\Delta }_{\rho \sigma }.$$
$`(5.6)`$
Using these results together with the expression (3.3) for the lagrangian variation of the flow field $`u^\mu `$ itself, we are now in a position to work out the perturbed equations of motion by taking the variation of the exact equations of motion (4.7). It is evidently most convenient to start from the Lagrangian variation, i.e.

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\rho \dot{u}^\mu +\gamma _\nu ^\mu _\rho P^{\nu \rho }\right)=0,$$
$`(5.7)`$
which works out explicitly as

$$\left(A_\rho ^{\mu (\nu \sigma )}\rho y_\rho ^\mu u^\nu u^\sigma \right)\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \sigma }^\rho +\gamma _\rho ^\mu ϵ_{\nu \sigma }\mathrm{\Delta }_\tau E^{\rho \tau \nu \sigma }$$

$$=\left(P^{\mu \nu }\dot{u}^\sigma \frac{_1}{^2}\dot{u}^\mu P^{\nu \sigma }2A_\rho ^{\mu (\nu \tau )}(\theta _\tau ^\rho +\omega _\tau ^\rho )u^\sigma +\rho y_\rho ^\mu \dot{u}^\rho u^\nu u^\sigma \right)\mathrm{\Delta }_{\nu \sigma }$$
$`(5.8)`$
using the abbreviation

$$ϵ_{\mu \nu }=\frac{_1}{^2}\delta \gamma _{\mu \nu }=\frac{_1}{^2}\gamma _\mu ^\rho \gamma _\nu ^\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }_{\rho \sigma }$$
$`(5.9)`$
for the relative strain tensor, and

$$A_\rho ^{\mu \nu \sigma }=E_\rho ^{\mu \nu \sigma }\gamma _\rho ^\mu P^{\nu \sigma }$$
$`(5.10)`$
for the modified elasticity tensor first introduced in a classical context by Hadamard. When the Lagrangian metric perturbation $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }`$ is evaluated by use of (5.2), and the corresponding perturbation of the affine connection components $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \sigma }^\mu `$ is evaluated using the corresponding substitution

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \sigma }^\mu =_{(\sigma }\mathrm{\Delta }^\mu {}_{\nu )}{}^{}\frac{_1}{^2}^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }_{\nu \sigma }$$

$$=_{(\nu }_{\sigma )}\xi ^\mu +_{(\nu }h^\mu {}_{\sigma )}{}^{}\frac{_1}{^2}^\mu h_{\nu \sigma }\xi ^\rho R_{(\nu \sigma )\rho }^\mu $$
$`(5.11)`$
where the Riemann tensor is defined by

$$\left(_\mu _\nu _\nu _\mu \right)\xi _\rho =R_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }\xi ^\sigma ,$$
$`(5.12)`$
then we see that the basic perturbation equation (5.8) takes the form of a hyperboliv wave equation for the displacement vector $`\xi ^\mu `$ when $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ is given. The characteristic cones and the corresponding sound speeds can be worked out directly from (4.7) by considering discontinuities  without any need of the full set of perturbation equations given here.

In order to have a complete system of equations governing the interaction of weak gravitational radiation with an elastic medium we need an additional wave equation governing the gravitational perturbation $`h_{\mu \nu }`$. This is obtainable by taking the appropriate perturbations of the Einstein gravitational equations, which are expressible (in units with G=1) by

$$\widehat{R}^{\mu \nu }=8\pi T^{\mu \nu }$$
$`(5.13)`$
where the Ricci tensor is defined by

$$R_{\mu \nu }=R_{\mu \rho \nu }^\rho $$
$`(5.14)`$
and where we use the notation $`\widehat{}`$ for the partial trace subtraction operation defined by

$$\widehat{R}^{\mu \nu }=R^{\mu \nu }\frac{_1}{^2}g^{\mu \nu }R_\rho ^\rho .$$
$`(5.15)`$
In our work up to this stage we have been concentrating on material aspects, so that Lagrangian variations have given the simplest formulae. However the advantages of being able to use more general Eulerian variations become apparent now that we come to the properly gravitational aspect, since it is well known that the perturbed Einstein equations in the Eulerian form

$$\delta \left(\widehat{R}^{\mu \nu }8\pi T^{\mu \nu }\right)=0$$
$`(5.16)`$
can be greatly simplified by the imposition of the harmonic gauge condition

$$_\mu \widehat{h}^{\mu \nu }=0.$$
$`(5.17)`$
Under these conditions most of the terms drop out and one is left with an equation of the form

$$\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\widehat{h}^{\mu \nu }=16\pi \delta T^{\mu \nu }$$
$`(5.18)`$
where the relevant wave operator is defined by

$$\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\widehat{h}^{\mu \nu }=_\rho ^\rho \widehat{h}^{\mu \nu }\widehat{R}^{\mu \nu }\widehat{h}_\rho ^\rho +2C_{\rho \sigma }^{\mu \nu }\widehat{h}^{\rho \sigma }$$

$$\frac{_2}{^3}R_\rho ^\rho \left(\widehat{h}^{\mu \nu }\frac{_1}{^4}g^{\mu \nu }\widehat{h}_\rho ^\rho \right)$$
$`(5.19)`$
using the standard notation

$$C_{\rho \sigma }^{\mu \nu }=R_{\rho \sigma }^{\mu \nu }2g_{[\rho }^{[\mu }\left(R_{\sigma ]}^{\nu ]}\frac{_1}{^6}g_{\sigma ]}^{\nu ]}R_\tau ^\tau \right)$$
$`(5.20)`$
(with square brackets denoting antisymmetrisation) for Weyl’s trace free conformal tensor. The Eulerian variation of the energy-momentum tensor is obtainable using (5.1) in terms of a Lie derivative and a more easily evaluable Lagrangian variation. Thus starting from (4.1) and using (3.1), (5.4), and (5.6) we obtain finally

$$\delta T^{\mu \nu }=\frac{_1}{^2}(^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }+T^{\mu \nu }g^{\rho \sigma })\mathrm{\Delta }_{\rho \sigma }$$

$$+2T^{\rho (\mu }_\rho \xi ^{\nu )}\xi ^\nu _\rho T^{\mu \nu }$$
$`(5.21)`$
where, following Friedman and Schutz  we have constructed a generalised (non-orthogonal) elasticity tensor with the same symmetry properties as those of the ordinary elasticity tensor (4.16) according to the prescription

$$^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }=E^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }+6u^{(\mu }u^\nu P^{\rho \sigma )}8u^{(\mu }P^{\nu )(\rho }u^{\sigma )}\rho u^\mu u^\nu u^\rho u^\sigma .$$
$`(5.22)`$
The coupled system of equations (5.8) and (5.9) simplifies considerably when not only the perturbations but also the background gravitational field is weak, as is the case in terrestrial (as opposed to neutron star) applications. In such cases we may suppose that there is a small dimensionless parameter, $`ϵ`$, loosely interpretable as an upper bound not only on the order of magnitude of the gravitatinal wave perturbations $`h_{\mu \nu }`$, $`ϵ_{\mu \nu }`$ etc., but also of the deviations of the metric from the flat Minkowski form. It then follows from the Einstein equation that the density $`\rho `$ must also be of linear order in $`ϵ`$ as the latter tends to zero, while (by the virial theorem) the pressure in a self gravitating system is of even higher order, tending to zero even when divided by $`ϵ`$, i.e. in standard notation

$$P^{\mu \nu }=o\{ϵ\}.$$
$`(5.23)`$
(In our original version  a printer’s error substituted 0 in place of o throughout.) Since the unperturbed energy-momentum tensor will be at most of linear order in $`ϵ`$ its perturbation will be of higher order, i.e.

$$\delta T^{\mu \nu }=o\{ϵ\}$$
$`(5.24)`$
so that the gravitational wave equation (5.18) will to lowest order be of simple Dalembertian form , i.e.

$$_\rho ^\rho h^{\mu \nu }=o\{ϵ\}.$$
$`(5.25)`$
It follows that in addition to the harmonic gauge condition we can to this order make the further simplifications

$$h_{\mu \nu }u^\nu =o\{\epsilon \},h_\nu ^\nu =o\{ϵ\}$$
$`(5.26)`$
and to the same order the wave equation for the displacement reduces to the form

$$u^\nu u^\sigma _\nu _\sigma \xi ^\mu \rho ^1_\nu \left(E^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }(_\rho \xi _\sigma +\frac{_1}{^2}h_{\rho \sigma })\right)=o\{ϵ\}$$
$`(5.27)`$
in agreement with calculations of Dyson  and Papapetrou  .

As a simple practical application Dyson considered the case of an elastic medium that is $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{isotropic}}`$, as it will be in the case of a typical metal when considered on scales large compared with the microscopic crystalline domains. In such a case (in consequence of (5.23)) the elasticity tensor will be of the form

$$E^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }=\beta \gamma ^{\mu \nu }\gamma ^{\rho \sigma }+2\mu \left(\gamma ^{\mu (\rho }\gamma ^{\sigma )\nu }\frac{_1}{^3}\gamma ^{\mu \nu }\gamma ^{\rho \sigma }\right)$$
$`(5.28)`$
where $`\beta `$ is the bulk modulus and $`\mu `$ is the rigidity modulus. Now under these conditions it follows from (5.26) that the only gravitational term in (5.28) reduces to the form

$$_\nu \left(E^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }h_{\rho \sigma }\right)=2h^{\mu \nu }_\nu \mu ,$$
$`(5.29)`$
which shows, as pointed out by Dyson, that the gravitational waves couple with the elastic displacement only via non-uniformities of the rigidity. (In the case of a traditional Weber bar detector the relevant non-uniformity is provided by the discontinuity at the surface of the cylinder.)

REFERENCES

 Weber, J., Phys. Rev. 117 (1960) 306.

 Dyson, F.J., Astroph. J. 156 (1969) 529.

 Papapetrou, A. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré A16 (1972) 63.

 Carter B., and Quintana, H., Astroph. J. 202 (1975) 54.

 Maugin, G.A., J. Math. Phys. 19 (1978) 1198.

 Souriau, J.M., Géométrie et Relativité (Herman, Paris, 1965).

 Oldroyd, J.G., Proc. Roy. Soc. A270 (1970) 103.

 Carter, B., and Quintana, H., Proc. Roy. Soc. A331, (1972) 57.

 Carter, B., Commun. Math. Phys. 30 (1973) 261.

 Carter, B., Phys. Rev. D7 (1973) 1590.

 Carter, B., and Quintana, H., Phys. Rev. D16 (1977) 2928.

 Carter, B., Proc. Roy. Soc. A372 (1980) 169.

 Ehlers, J., in Israel, W., (ed) Relativity, Astrophysics and Cosmology (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1970) 89.

 Penrose, R., in DeWitt, C., and Wheeler, J.A. (eds) Battelle Rencontre (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1968)

 Friedman, J.L., and Schutz, B.L., Astrophys. J. 200 (1975) 204.


text:
# Bäcklund transformation and special solutions for Drinfeld–Sokolov–Satsuma–Hirota system of coupled equations

## Abstract

Using the Weiss method of truncated singular expansions, we construct an explicit Bäcklund transformation of the Drinfeld–Sokolov–Satsuma–Hirota system into itself. Then we find all the special solutions generated by this transformation from the trivial zero solution of this system.

Short title: Bäcklund transformation and special solutions

PACS numbers: 02.30.Ik, 02.30.Jr

The system of two coupled nonlinear evolution equations

$$u_t+u_{xxx}6uu_x6v_x=0v_t2v_{xxx}+6uv_x=0$$
(1)
was introduced, independently, by Drinfeld and Sokolov , and by Satsuma and Hirota . In , the system (1) was given as one of numerous examples of nonlinear equations possessing Lax pairs of a special form. In , the system (1) was found as a special case of the four-reduction of the KP hierarchy, and its explicit one-soliton solution was constructed. Recently, Gürses and Karasu  found a recursion operator and a bi-Hamiltonian structure for (1), which provide the system (1) with an infinite algebra of generalized symmetries and an infinite set of conservation laws.

In this paper, we construct, using the Weiss method of truncated singular expansions , an explicit Bäcklund transformation of the Drinfeld–Sokolov–Satsuma–Hirota (DSSH) system (1) into itself, and then find all the special solutions generated by this transformation from the trivial zero solution of this system. In relation with our results, we should mention the recent paper of Tian and Gao , who did not find a Bäcklund transformation of (1) into itself, contrary to their claim, and produced a rational special solution of the DSSH system with erroneously many arbitrary parameters.

First of all, we find it useful to rewrite the DSSH system (1) in the form of the single sixth-order equation

$$w_{tt}w_{xxxt}2w_{xxxxxx}+18w_xw_{xxxx}+36w_{xx}w_{xxx}36w_x^2w_{xx}=0$$
(2)
which is related to (1) by the Miura-type transformation

$$u=w_xv=\frac{1}{6}\left(w_t+w_{xxx}3w_x^2\right).$$
(3)
This representation (2) of the original system (1) is very convenient, because the Bäcklund transformation of (1) would contain complicated radicals, whereas the Bäcklund transformation of (2) turns out to involve rational expressions only.

It is easy to verify that the equation (2) possesses the Painlevé property in the formulation for partial differential equations . Substituting the singular expansion $`w=w_0\varphi ^\alpha +\mathrm{}+w_n\varphi ^{n+\alpha }+\mathrm{}`$ into (2), we find the following two branches, i.e. admissible choices of $`\alpha `$ and $`w_0`$ with corresponding positions $`n`$ of resonances: (i) $`\alpha =1`$, $`w_0=2\varphi _x`$, $`n=1,1,3,4,6,8`$, and (ii) $`\alpha =1`$, $`w_0=10\varphi _x`$, $`n=5,1,1,6,8,12`$. Then, checking the consistency of the recursion relations for $`w_n`$ at the resonances of both branches, we find that no logarithmic terms should be introduced into the singular expansions of solutions.

According to the positions of resonances, the branch (i) is generic, but the branch (ii) is not. Since the Bäcklund transformation sought should be applicable to a generic solution of the equation (2), we have to consider the truncated singular expansion in the branch (i). The use of the new expansion function $`\chi `$, $`\chi =\left(\varphi ^1\varphi _x\frac{1}{2}\varphi _x^1\varphi _{xx}\right)^1`$, proposed by Conte , simplifies the computations very considerably. Following , we substitute the truncated expansion $`w=2\chi ^1+a(x,t)`$ into the equation (2), use the identities $`\chi _x=1+\frac{1}{2}S\chi ^2`$, $`\chi _t=C+C_x\chi \frac{1}{2}\left(C_{xx}+CS\right)\chi ^2`$ and $`S_t+C_{xxx}+2SC_x+CS_x=0`$, where $`S=\varphi _x^1\varphi _{xxx}\frac{3}{2}\varphi _x^2\varphi _{xx}^2`$ and $`C=\varphi _x^1\varphi _t`$, collect terms with equal degrees of $`\chi `$, and thus obtain a complicated system of equations, which turns out to be compatible and equivalent to the following normal system of two equations for $`\varphi `$ and $`a`$ of total order six:

$$a_x+\frac{1}{6}C+\frac{1}{3}S=0a_t+a_{xxx}\frac{3}{2}a_x^2+\frac{3}{2}a_xC+\frac{3}{8}C^2=k$$
(4)
where the parameter $`k`$ appeared as a constant of integration.

The truncated singular expansion

$$w=2\frac{\varphi _x}{\varphi }+\frac{\varphi _{xx}}{\varphi _x}+a$$
(5)
represents a Miura-type transformation between the system (4) and the equation (2). According to the Weiss method , the function $`z(x,t)`$ determined by

$$z=\frac{\varphi _{xx}}{\varphi _x}+a$$
(6)
is also a solution of (2). Therefore (6) represents one more Miura-type transformation between (4) and (2). These two Miura-type transformations, (5) and (6), together with the auxiliary system (4), determine an implicit Bäcklund transformation between the ‘new’ solution $`w`$ and the ‘old’ solution $`z`$ of the DSSH system written in the form (2) (certainly, these terms ‘new’ and ‘old’ can be used in the opposite order).

Now, eliminating $`\varphi `$ and $`a`$ from the equations (4), (5) and (6), we obtain the following explicit Bäcklund transformation of the equation (2) into itself:

$$p_t+\left(4p_{xx}3\frac{p_x^2}{p}3pq_x+\frac{1}{4}p^3\right)_x=0$$
(7)
$$q_t\frac{3}{2}\frac{p_{xt}}{p}+\frac{3}{4}\frac{p_xp_t}{p^2}\frac{1}{2}q_{xxx}\frac{3}{2}\frac{q_xp_{xx}}{p}+\frac{3}{4}\frac{p_xq_{xx}}{p}+\frac{9}{8}pp_{xx}$$

$$+\frac{3}{4}\frac{p_x^2q_x}{p^2}\frac{9}{16}p_x^2+\frac{3}{2}q_x^2\frac{3}{4}p^2q_x+\frac{3}{64}p^4=2k$$
(8)
where $`p=wz`$ and $`q=w+z`$. The equations (7) and (8) constitute a Bäcklund transformation in the sense of the definition given in : if we eliminate $`z`$ from (7) and (8), we obtain exactly the equation (2) for $`w`$; and if we eliminate $`w`$ from (7) and (8), we obtain (2) for $`z`$. We think, however, that it is impossible to prove this by hand-made computations: we did it by means of the Mathematica system . As far as we know, the equations (7) and (8) are the most complicated explicit Bäcklund transformation in the literature.

Let us find all the ‘new’ solutions $`w`$ of the equation (2) generated by the obtained Bäcklund transformation from the trivial ‘old’ solution $`z=0`$. Setting $`z=0`$ in (7) and (8), we get an over-determined system of two equations for $`w`$, which can be solved exactly, using the new dependent variable $`\psi `$: $`w=2\varphi ^1\varphi _x`$, $`\varphi _x=\psi ^2`$. This gives us the following five types of explicit special solutions of the DSSH system written in the form (2):

$$w=\frac{2}{x}$$
(9)
$$w=\frac{6x^2}{x^3+12t}$$
(10)
$$w=\frac{30\left(x^2+\sigma \right)^2}{3x^5+10\sigma x^3+15\sigma ^2x240\sigma t+\tau }$$
(11)
$$w=210(x^3+\sigma x24t)^2(15x^7+42\sigma x^51260x^4t$$

$$+35\sigma ^2x^32520\sigma x^2t+60480xt^2+420\sigma ^2t+\tau )^1$$
(12)
$$w=4\kappa \left(c_1\mathrm{e}^a+c_2\mathrm{e}^a+c_3\mathrm{e}^b+c_4\mathrm{e}^b\right)^2$$

$$\times [c_1^2\mathrm{e}^{2a}c_2^2\mathrm{e}^{2a}\mathrm{i}c_3^2\mathrm{e}^{2b}+\mathrm{i}c_4^2\mathrm{e}^{2b}$$

$$+2\left(1\mathrm{i}\right)c_1c_3\mathrm{e}^{a+b}+2\left(1+\mathrm{i}\right)c_1c_4\mathrm{e}^{ab}$$

$$2\left(1+\mathrm{i}\right)c_2c_3\mathrm{e}^{a+b}2\left(1\mathrm{i}\right)c_2c_4\mathrm{e}^{ab}$$

$$+4(c_1c_2+c_3c_4)\kappa x48(c_1c_2c_3c_4)\kappa ^3t+c_5]^1$$
(13)
where some inessential parameters were eliminated using arbitrary shifts $`xx+x_0`$ and $`tt+t_0`$; $`\sigma ,\tau ,c_1,c_2,c_3,c_4,c_5`$ and $`\kappa `$ are arbitrary constants; $`a=\kappa x4\kappa ^3t`$ and $`b=\mathrm{i}\kappa x+4\mathrm{i}\kappa ^3t`$; $`\kappa `$ is related to $`k`$ as $`k=6\kappa ^4`$; and the solutions (9)–(12) correspond to the case $`k=0`$.

With respect to the DSSH system (1), the solutions (9) and (10) are trivial in the sense that, according to (3), $`v=0`$ for them; actually, they are rational solutions of the potential KdV equation $`w_t+w_{xxx}3w_x^2=0`$. But the rational solutions (11) and (12) are not trivial in this sense: $`v0`$ for them. As for the solution (13), $`v=0`$ only if $`c_1=c_2=0`$ or $`c_3=c_4=0`$. Consequently, the obtained Bäcklund transformation can produce nontrivial solutions for the coupled equations (1).

We should notice, however, that there are no solitary wave solutions among the solutions (9)–(13). Indeed, the only solution of the form $`w=f\left(xct\right)`$ ($`c=\mathrm{constant}`$), generated by (7)–(8) from $`z=0`$, is the solution (9), for which $`c=0`$. For this reason, we suspect (7)–(8) of being not the simplest (elementary) Bäcklund transformation of the equation (2) into itself: it might be a product of two elementary Bäcklund transformations; such a phenomenon was observed in , where two different Bäcklund transformations of the Calogero equation were found and studied. This point requires further investigation.

The authors are grateful to the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) for support.


text:
# Quantum teleportation of entangled coherent states

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author thanks the helpful discussions with Klaus Mølmer, Anders Sørensen, Barry C Sanders, Paolo Zanardi, Serge Massar, and Nicolas J Cerf. This work is supported by the Information Society Technologies Programme IST-1999-11053, EQUIP, action line 6-2-1.