text:
# On the topology and area of higher dimensional black holes

## 1 Introduction

Among the most fundamental macroscopic features of a black hole are its topology and area. The first general theorem on the topology of black holes was due to Hawking  in the early 70’s who proved that the boundary surface of a black hole (obtained by intersecting the event horizon with a suitable spacelike hypersurface) in a $`3+1`$ dimensional asymptotically flat stationary black hole spacetime obeying the dominant energy condition is spherical. Much later, during the mid-nineties, it was realized that results on topological censorship could be used to improve various aspects of Hawking’s black hole topology theorem, cf.,  and references cited therein. At the same time, during the 90’s, it was recognized that under appropriate circumstances, one could have as black hole boundaries surfaces of higher genus. As is now well known, such examples can occur in $`3+1`$ dimensional black hole spacetimes which are asymptotically locally anti-de Sitter, and which, in particular, have nontrivial topology at infinity, see e.g., , and references cited therein. Such examples, of course, do not violate Hawking’s theorem; because of the presence of a negative cosmological constant, the dominant energy condition is not satisified. These examples, however, do satisfy the mild energy conditions of topological censorship, and, in fact, as shown in , are consistent with topological censorship. In the general setting of asymptotically locally anti-de Sitter spacetimes, topological censorship implies that the genus of the black hole boundary (or, if there is more than one black hole, the sum of the genera of the black hole boundaries) is bounded above by the genus of the surface at infinity; in particular, if the latter is spherical, so is the black hole boundary. Hence, in $`3+1`$ dimensions, the topology of black holes is controlled by the topology at infinity.

Although Hawking’s theorem does not hold in the asymptotically locally anti-de Sitter setting, his basic argument still applies and leads to an interesting conclusion, as pointed out by Gibbons  in the time-symmetric case. In this case, under circumstances closely related to those considered by Hawking, and assuming nonnegative local energy density $`T_{00}0`$, Gibbons obtains the following lower bound for the area of a black hole boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$,

$`\mathrm{Area}(\mathrm{\Sigma }){\displaystyle \frac{4\pi (g1)}{|\mathrm{\Lambda }|}},`$ (1)
where $`g`$ is the genus of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ is the cosmological constant. Hence, in this situation the black hole entropy has a lower bound depending on a global topological invariant. Shortly thereafter, Woolgar  obtained independently a similar inequality in the general (nontime-symmetric) case.

During the past decade there has been a significant increase in interest in black holes in higher (and lower) dimensions, due largely to the recognition of their relevance to string theory; see for example the review articles of Horowitz  and Peet . There is now an extensive literature of solutions in string theory (and supergravity) with horizons, which represent black holes, and related objects, such as black strings and black $`p`$-branes, in various dimensions. The physical properties of these solutions have been widely studied. Interest in black holes in various dimensions has intensified in recent years, due, for example, to the role they have played in the conjectured correspondence between string theory (and supergravity) on asymptotically locally anti-de Sitter backgrounds and the large $`N`$ limit of certain conformal field theories defined on the boundary-at-infinity of these backgrounds, cf. .

The aim of the present paper is to establish some general properties of black holes which hold in arbitrary dimension. To be more specific, our goal is to obtain extensions of Hawking’s black hole topology theorem (relevant when $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$) and Gibbon’s entropy bound (relevant when $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$) to higher dimensions. The general setting for these results is presented in the next section. We restrict attention primarily to the time-symmetric case. Some comments regarding the general case are given in Section 4.

In Section 2 we obtain restrictions on the topology of a black hole boundary surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ sitting in a spacelike hypersurface $`V^n`$ in a spacetime $`M^{n+1}`$, $`n3`$. We show under suitable circumstances, (in particular, under appropriate energy conditions) that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ must admit a metric of positive scalar curvature (which needn’t be the induced metric). In the $`3+1`$ ($`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }=2`$) case, this implies, by Gauss-Bonnet that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a $`2`$-sphere, and we recover Hawking’s theorem. The point, however, is that there are many known topological obstructions to metrics of positive scalar curvature in higher dimensions, as well, as we recall in Section 2. In particular, in the $`4+1`$ ($`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }=3`$) case, the topology of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is restricted to the $`3`$-sphere (modulo the Poincaré conjecture) perhaps with identifications, $`S^2\times S^1`$, and finite connected sums of such manifolds.

The proofs of the results in Section 2 are based on a variation of Hawking’s original argument. However, his argument does not directly extend to higher dimensions, since, in higher dimensions, the Gauss-Bonnet theorem cannot be used, as it was by Hawking, to control the total scalar curvature of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Instead, we combine Hawking’s argument together with arguments similar to those of Schoen and Yau  in their study of higher dimensional manifolds of positive scalar curvature. We mention also, that, although topological censorship holds in arbitrary dimension, the techniques used in  to study the topology of black holes in $`3+1`$ dimensions via topological censorship do not directly extend to higher dimensions, see  for further discussion of this point.

In Section 3 we obtain a higher dimensional analogue of the entropy bound (1). Given the role that scalar curvature plays in Hawking’s argument, and in the higher dimensional arguments of Section 2, one is led to consider the so-called *$`\sigma `$-constant* (or Yamabe invariant)  as the relevant topological invariant in higher dimensions. With regard to this choice we were also influenced by suggestive comments of Gibbons . The $`\sigma `$-constant is a fundamental topological invariant of smooth compact manifolds, which we now briefly describe; see  for further details.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, $`n3`$, be a smooth compact (without boundary) $`(n1)`$-dimensional manifold. If $`g`$ is a Riemannian metric on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, let $`[g]`$ denote the conformal class of $`g`$. The Yamabe constant with respect to $`[g]`$, which we denote by $`\lambda [g]`$, is the number,

$`\lambda [g]=\underset{\stackrel{~}{g}[g]}{inf}{\displaystyle \frac{_\mathrm{\Sigma }S_{\stackrel{~}{g}}𝑑\mu _{\stackrel{~}{g}}}{(_\mathrm{\Sigma }𝑑\mu _{\stackrel{~}{g}})^{\frac{n3}{n1}}}},`$ (2)
where $`S_{\stackrel{~}{g}}`$ and $`d\mu _{\stackrel{~}{g}}`$ are respectively the scalar curvature and volume measure of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ in the metric $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$. The expression involving integrals is just the volume-normalized total scalar curvature of $`(\mathrm{\Sigma },\stackrel{~}{g})`$. The solution to the famous Yamabe problem, due to Yamabe, Trudinger, Aubin and Schoen, guarantees that the infimum in (2) is achieved by a metric of constant scalar curvature.

The $`\sigma `$-constant of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is defined by taking the supremum of the Yamabe constants over all conformal classes,

$`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })=\underset{[g]}{sup}\lambda [g].`$ (3)
As observed by Aubin, the supremum is finite, and in fact bounded above in terms of the volume of the standard unit $`(n1)`$-sphere $`S^{n1}^n`$. The $`\sigma `$-constant divides the family of compact manifolds into three classes according to: (1) $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })>0`$, (2) $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })=0`$, and (3) $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })<0`$. It follows from the solution of the Yamabe problem that $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })>0`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ admits a metric of positive scalar curvature.

In the case $`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }=2`$, the Gauss-Bonnet theorem implies $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })=4\pi \chi (\mathrm{\Sigma })=8\pi (1g)`$. In a certain sense, then, one may view the $`\sigma `$-constant as a generalization of the Euler characteristic to higher dimensions. This has been especially emphasized in three dimensions by Anderson, who in  describes some fundamental connections between the $`\sigma `$-constant and Thurston’s geometrization conjecture for $`3`$-manifolds. In this context there are some well known results and conjectures concerning the sign of the $`\sigma `$-constant. As noted above, $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })0`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ does not carry a metric of positive scalar curvature; some large classes of examples for which this holds are discussed in Section 2. It is believed that all compact hyperbolic $`3`$-manifolds (which, in fact, accounts for most compact $`3`$-manifolds) have strictly negative $`\sigma `$-constant, but this has yet to be proven. There has been progress in determining the sign of the $`\sigma `$-constant in $`4`$-dimensions; see for example the paper of Lebrun , in which Seiberg-Witten theory is used to determine the sign of the $`\sigma `$-constant within the class of compact complex algebraic surfaces (of, hence, four real dimensions) in terms of the Kodaira dimension. Finally, we mention that the $`\sigma `$-constant has also arisen in the cosmological context, see for example, ; related notions have appeared in some earlier papers, as well, cf., .

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ be a smooth black hole boundary contained in a spacelike hypersurface $`V^n`$ in a spacetime $`M^{n+1}`$, as described in Section 2, and suppose $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })0`$ (which, in higher dimensions, is roughly analogous to the assumption $`g1`$ in the $`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }=2`$ case). Then the results in Section 3 imply, under appropriate circumstances (e.g., $`T_{00}0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$), that the area of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ satisfies,

$`\mathrm{vol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1})\left|{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\right|^{\frac{n1}{2}},`$ (4)
in analogy with the entropy bound (1).

We proceed to a detailed presentation of our results. Some concluding remarks are made in Section 4.

## 2 Topological restrictions

We now describe the basic setting for our results. Let $`\stackrel{~}{V}^n`$ be a smooth spacelike hypersurface in a spacetime $`M^{n+1}`$, and let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ be a smooth compact hypersurface in $`\stackrel{~}{V}^n`$. To simplify certain statements and arguments, we assume $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ is connected. However, all of the results presented here apply to each component of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, in cases that it is not connected. Physically one is to think of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ as the intersection of $`\stackrel{~}{V}^n`$ with the black hole event horizon in a stationary or static black hole spacetime. Alternatively, for dynamic black holes, one may think of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ as an apparent horizon contained within the black hole region. In either case, we assume that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ is marginally outer trapped, i.e., that the null expansion $`\theta `$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, with respect to the outward null normals, vanishes. Implicit in this assumption is that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ separates $`\stackrel{~}{V}^n`$ into an “inside” and an “outside”. Let $`V^n`$ denote the outside of $`\stackrel{~}{V}^n`$ together with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$; hence, $`V^n`$, in the induced metric, is a smooth Riemannian manifold-with-boundary, with compact boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$. Although some of our results will hold in more generality, for simplicity we are going to restrict attention to the time-symmetric case. In particular, our results apply in a natural way to the hypersurfaces of orthogonality in static black hole spacetimes. Some comments concerning the nontime-symmetric case are presented in Section 4.

Thus, we assume that $`V^n`$ is a hypersurface of time symmetry, i.e., is totally geodesic. Then, as is standard in this case, conditions concerning the null expansion scalar along a hypersurface $`W^{n1}`$ in $`V^n`$ can be expressed in terms of the mean curvature of $`W^{n1}`$ as a submanifold of $`V^n`$. In particular, the assumption that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ is marginally outer trapped, reduces to the assumption that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ is a minimal surface (i.e., has vanishing mean curvature, $`H=0`$) in $`V^n`$. Similarly, an outer trapped surface in $`V^n`$ is a compact hypersurface $`W^{n1}`$ in $`V^n`$ homologous to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ which has negative mean curvature, $`H<0`$, with respect to its outward unit normal in $`V^n`$. (By “outward normal”, we mean the normal to $`W^{n1}`$ which points out from the region bounded by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ and $`W^{n1}`$. By our sign conventions, $`H=\mathrm{div}_WN`$, where $`N`$ is the outward pointing unit normal to $`W^{n1}`$ in $`V^n`$.)

We say that $`V^n`$ is *regular* if, in addition to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ being minimal, there are no outer trapped surfaces in the interior of $`V^n`$. The nonexistence of outer trapped surfaces in the domain of outer communications of a black hole spacetime, which we have incorporated into our model, is a standard result of black hole theory as developed in. The arguments involved in establishing this do not depend on the dimension in an essential way. In all of our results it is assumed that $`V^n`$ is regular (or else satisifies a slightly stronger condition which we describe later).

Since $`V^n`$ is totally geodesic, the scalar curvature $`S`$ of $`V^n`$ is geometrically constrained by the Gauss equations to satisfy

$`S=2R_{00}+R,`$ (5)
where $`R_{00}`$ is the Ricci curvature of spacetime in the direction orthogonal to $`V^n`$ and $`R`$ is the scalar curvature of spacetime. In this paper we are primarily concerned with physical theories on spacetime whose field equations include equations of the form,

$`R_{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Rg_{\mu \nu }+\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }=T_{\mu \nu },`$ (6)
where $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ includes various matter field terms, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is constant. This includes general relativity, of course, but also various string field theories at sufficiently low energies, cf.,  and references cited therein. In particular, our results apply to various black string and black $`p`$-brane solutions, as well as to conventional higher dimensional black holes. Taking into account the field equations, $`S`$ is constrained to satisfy,

$`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }.`$ (7)
Our first result establishes restrictions on the topology of the horizon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ under the assumption that $`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is nonnegative. (We have in mind, in particular, the asymptotically flat case, in which $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ and the energy condition, $`T_{00}0`$, holds.) Under this assumption it is shown that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ carries (generically) a metric of positive scalar curvature. One may then appeal to the vast literature of results establishing restrictions on the topology of compact manifolds that admit metrics of positive scalar curvature, cf.,  for an overview. Particularly strong results hold in the $`4+1`$ ($`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }=3)`$ case. We will recall some of these results after the proof of the following theorem.

###### Theorem 1

Let $`V^n`$, $`n3`$, be a regular time symmetric spacelike hypersurface, with compact boundary horizon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, in a spacetime $`M^{n+1}`$, as described above. Suppose the scalar curvature of $`V^n`$ satisfies, $`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$. Then either

1. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ admits a metric of positive scalar curvature, or
2. $`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ is totally geodesic and Ricci flat.

In the $`3+1`$ ($`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }=2`$) case, the theorem implies, using Gauss-Bonnet, that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^2`$ is either a flat torus or a topological sphere, in agreement with standard results . (We recall that the torus arises as a borderline case in Hawking’s original arguments, as well. The torus case is not easily eliminated without further assumptions, cf., the discussion in .)

*Proof:* The proof is similar in spirit to the proof of Hawking’s black hole topology theorem in $`3+1`$ dimensions , and its extension to apparent horizons , attributed to Gibbons. However, these proofs use the Gauss-Bonnet theorem to control the total scalar curvature of the horizon. This does not work in higher dimensions. Instead, we use a variation of the approach taken by Schoen and Yau  in their study of manifolds of positive scalar curvature in higher dimensions.

Let $`t\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ be a variation of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0=\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in $`V^n`$, with variation vector field $`X=\varphi N`$, where $`N`$ is the unit normal along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ pointing into $`V^n`$ and $`\varphi `$ is a smooth positive function on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. For $`t0`$ sufficiently small, $`\{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t\}`$ foliates a neighborhood of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Extend $`N`$ to be the unit normal field to these $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$’s. For each $`t`$, let $`H=H_t`$ be the mean curvature of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$; by our conventions, $`H=\mathrm{div}(N)`$. Then by Raychaudhuri’s equation for a (possibly) nongeodesic unit vector field, which is valid for Riemannian, as well as Lorentzian, manifolds of arbitrary dimension, we have,

$`N(H)=\mathrm{Ric}(N,N)|B|^2+\mathrm{div}(_NN),`$ (8)
where $``$ and $`\mathrm{Ric}`$ are respectively the Levi-Civita connection and Ricci tensor of $`V^n`$, and $`B=B_t`$ is the second fundamental form of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$: For $`X,YT_p\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$, $`B(X,Y)=_XN,Y`$.

The Gauss equations may be used to obtain the following “rearrangement”  of the first two terms on the right hand side of (8),

$`\mathrm{Ric}(N,N)+|B|^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\widehat{S}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}S+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|B|^2\text{along }\mathrm{\Sigma },`$ (9)
where $`\widehat{S}`$ is the scalar curvature of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in the induced metric, and we have used the fact that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is minimal ($`H=0`$).

The divergence term in (8) may be written as,

$`\mathrm{div}(_NN)=\mathrm{div}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}(_NN)|_NN|^2.`$ (10)
A further computation shows,

$`_NN={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\varphi }}\varphi \text{along }\mathrm{\Sigma },`$ (11)
where $`\varphi =\mathrm{grad}_\mathrm{\Sigma }\varphi `$. Substitution of (11) into (10) gives,

$`\mathrm{div}(_NN)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\varphi }}\mathrm{}\varphi \text{along }\mathrm{\Sigma },`$ (12)
where $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the Laplacian on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

By substituting (9) and (12) into (8), and noting that along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\frac{H}{t}=X(H)=\varphi N(H)`$, we obtain,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{S}S|B|^2)\varphi `$ (13)
$`=`$ $`L(\varphi )\text{along }\mathrm{\Sigma },`$
where $`L=\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{2}(\widehat{S}S|B|^2)`$ is the so called *stability operator*, rearranged according to (9).

Let $`\lambda _1`$ denote the first eigenvalue of $`L`$, and let $`\varphi `$ be an associated eigenfunction,

$`L(\varphi )=\lambda _1\varphi .`$ (14)
It is well known that for operators of the form of $`L`$, $`\varphi `$ can be chosen to be strictly positive, $`\varphi >0`$.

We observe that $`\lambda _1`$ cannot be negative; otherwise (13) and (14) would imply that $`\frac{H}{t}<0`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Since $`H=0`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, this would mean that for $`t`$ sufficiently small, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ would be outer trapped, contrary to our assumptions.

Hence, $`\lambda _10`$. This implies  that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a *stable* minimal hypersurface, by which we mean that $`A^{\prime \prime }(0)0`$ with respect to every variation $`t\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0=\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, where $`A(t)=`$ the area of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$. The conclusion of Theorem 1 then follows from arguments in . Here we give a more direct argument, which is also relevant to the nontime-symmetric case. Let $`g`$ denote the induced metric on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and consider the conformally related metric $`\stackrel{~}{g}=\varphi ^{\frac{2}{n2}}g`$. The scalar curvature $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in the metric $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ is given by,

$`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi ^{\frac{n}{n2}}(2\mathrm{}\varphi +\widehat{S}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n2}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\varphi |^2}{\varphi }})`$ (15)
$`=`$ $`\varphi ^{\frac{2}{n2}}(2\lambda _1+S+|B|^2+{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{n2}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\varphi |^2}{\varphi ^2}})`$
where, for the second equation, we have used (14).

Equation (15) and the assumption $`S0`$ imply that $`\stackrel{~}{S}0`$. If $`\stackrel{~}{S}>0`$ at some point, then by well known results of Kazdan and Warner , one can conformally change $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ (and, hence $`g`$) to a metric of strictly positive scalar curvature. Case (a) of Theorem 1 then holds. If $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ vanishes identically, then, by equation (15), $`\lambda _1=0`$, $`S0`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`B=0`$, and $`\varphi `$ is constant. Equation (14) then implies that $`\widehat{S}0`$. By a result of Bourguinon (see ), it follows that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ carries a metric of positive scalar curvature, unless it is Ricci flat. Theorem 1 now follows. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark: As shown in the proof, the absence of outer trapped surfaces in $`V`$ implies that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is stable. We make use of this observation, which is valid in the time-symmetric case only, in Section 3. In Section 4 we consider the extension of Theorem 1 to the nontime-symmetric case.

Theorem 1 asserts that, apart from exceptional cases, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ carries a metric of positive scalar curvature. (In fact, later we will show, under slightly stronger conditions, that case (b) cannot occur.) Although the scalar curvature is a rather weak geometric invariant, there are many known topological obstructions to the existence of metrics of positive scalar curvature. In the celebrated paper of Lichnerowicz , spinorial methods and the Atiyah-Singer index theorem were used to prove that compact $`4k`$-dimensional spin manifolds of positive scalar curvature have vanishing $`\widehat{A}`$-genus. This was followed later by work of Hitchin , who also used the spinorial method to obtain further vanishing theorems. However these results left open the question as to whether, for example, the $`k`$-torus admits a metric of positive scalar curvature. Then in , Schoen and Yau proved that the fundamental group of a compact orientable $`3`$-manifold that admits a metric of positive scalar curvature cannot contain a subgroup isomorphic to a nontrivial surface group. This implies, in particular, that the $`3`$-torus does not admit a metric of positive scalar curvature. In , Schoen and Yau generalized their techniques to higher dimensions, thereby establishing the existence of a large class of compact manifolds, including tori, of dimension up to $`7`$, that do not admit metrics of positive scalar curvature. These results were put in a somewhat broader context, in the case of spin manifolds, by Gromov and Lawson  via the development of the notion of *enlargability*. We mention just two results obtained in . It is proved there, for example, that any compact manifold (of arbitrary dimension) that admits a metric of positive scalar curvature, cannot carry a metric of nonpositive sectional curvature $`K0`$. This result rules out many obvious topologies, such as products of tori and higher genus surfaces, etc.

Now restrict attention to the case $`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }=3`$, and assume, by passing to a double cover if necessary, that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is orientable. According to the prime decomposition theorem of Milnor, any such manifold $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ can be expressed as a finite connected sum of three types of manifolds: (i) manifolds covered by homotopy $`3`$-spheres (or $`3`$-spheres, if the Poincaré conjecture holds), (ii) manifolds diffeomorphic to $`S^2\times S^1`$, and (iii) $`K(\pi ,1)`$ manifolds. Recall, a $`K(\pi ,1)`$ manifold is a manifold whose universal cover is contractible (such as the torus). In  it is shown that if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ admits a metric of positive scalar curvature then it cannot have any $`K(\pi ,1)`$’s in its prime decomposition.

We are led to the following corollary.

###### Corollary 2

Let $`V^4`$ be a regular time symmetric spacelike hypersurface, with compact boundary horizon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^3`$, in a spacetime $`M^{4+1}`$. Suppose the scalar curvature of $`V^4`$ satisfies, $`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^3`$. Then, unless it is flat, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^3`$ (or a double cover, if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^3`$ is nonorientable) is diffeomorphic to a finite connected sum of homotopy $`3`$-spheres, perhaps with identifications, and $`k0`$ copies of $`S^2\times S^1`$.

Thus, the basic black hole topologies for the $`4+1`$ dimensional black hole spacetimes modeled in Corollary 2 are $`S^3`$ (perhaps with identifications) and $`S^2\times S^1`$. If $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is flat then it must be a $`3`$-torus, or be covered by a $`3`$-torus. The corollary follows immediately from Theorem 1, the result of Gromov and Lawson described above, and the fact that in three dimensions, Ricci flat implies flat.

As mentioned earlier, case (b) of Theorem 1 can be eliminated under slightly stronger conditions. Let $`V^n`$ be an orientable time-symmetric spacelike hypersurface with compact minimal ($`H=0`$) boundary horizon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$. A marginally outer trapped surface in $`V^n`$ is a compact minimal hypersurface in $`V^n`$ homologous to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$. We say that $`V^n`$ is *strongly regular* provided (1) there are no marginally outer trapped surfaces in the interior of $`V^n`$, and (2) there exists a compact hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0^{n1}`$ in $`V^n`$ homologous to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ which is mean convex, i.e., which satisifies $`H>0`$ with respect to the outward normal. Condition (2) is a mild asymptotic condition generally satisfied by asymptotically flat and asymptotically locally anti-de Sitter spacetimes. The nonexistence of marginally outer trapped surfaces in the domain of outer communications is a standard result of black hole theory as developed in .

###### Theorem 3

Let $`V^n`$, $`3n7`$, be a strongly regular time symmetric spacelike hypersurface, with compact boundary horizon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, in a spacetime $`M^{n+1}`$, as described above. Suppose the scalar curvature of $`V^n`$ satisfies, $`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ admits a metric of positive scalar curvature.

*Proof:* Let $`V_0`$ be the region in $`V`$ bounded by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$. $`V_0`$ is a compact Riemannian manifold-with-boundary, with (weakly) mean convex boundary $`V_0=\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ determines a nontrivial homology class in $`H_{n1}(V_0,)`$. We claim that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is of least area in its homology class. To see this, we minimize area in the homology class of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. By standard results in geometric measure theory, there exists a smooth minimizer contained in $`V_0\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$; for the regularity of the minimizer we are using the assumption $`n7`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ denote a component of this minimizer; $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ is necessarily minimal, i.e., has mean curvature $`H=0`$. To avoid having a marginally outer trapped surface contained in the interior of $`V`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ must meet $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. But then, since $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is also minimal, it follows from the maximum principle that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1=\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, which implies our claim.

In particular, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is locally of least area, i.e., the area of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is less than or equal to the area of any nearby surface isotopic to it. If the scalar curvature $`S`$ of $`V`$ were strictly positive, then arguments in  would imply that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, being locally of least area, would carry a metric of positive scalar curvature. If, as is our situation, the scalar curvature $`S`$ is merely assumed to be nonnegative, it is shown in  (which generalizes to higher dimension results in ) that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ can fail to carry a metric of positive scalar curvature only under special circumstances: $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ must be totally geodesic, and a neighborhood $`U`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ must be isometric to $`[0,ϵ)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Thus, to avoid the occurence of marginally outer trapped surfaces in the interior of $`V`$, we conclude that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ carries a metric of positive scalar curvature. $`\mathrm{}`$

*Remark:* The dimension restriction $`n7`$ is most likely an artifact of the proof. It only comes up in showing that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is locally of least area; if this is known to be the case, the dimension restriction is unnecessary. It is possible that the absence of outer trapped and marginally outer trapped surfaces alone is sufficient to imply that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is locally of least area, but this does not follow immediately.

In the $`4+1`$ ($`dim\mathrm{\Sigma }=3`$) case, we obtain the following corollary to Theorem 3, similar to Corollary 2.

###### Corollary 4

Let $`V^4`$ be a strongly regular time symmetric spacelike hypersurface, with compact boundary horizon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^3`$, in a spacetime $`M^{4+1}`$. Suppose the scalar curvature of $`V^4`$ satisfies, $`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$. Then, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^3`$ (or a double cover, if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^3`$ is nonorientable) is diffeomorphic to a finite connected sum of homotopy $`3`$-spheres, perhaps with identifications, and $`k0`$ copies of $`S^2\times S^1`$.

## 3 Lower area bounds and the $`\sigma `$-constant

With the setting as in the previous section, we obtain lower bounds for the area of the horizon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ in terms of its $`\sigma `$-constant, which is assumed to be nonpositive, $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })0`$, under the assumption that $`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ satisfies, $`S\kappa `$, where $`\kappa `$ is a positive constant. We have in mind, in particular, the asymptotically locally anti-de Sitter case, in which $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ and the energy condition $`T_{00}0`$ holds.

###### Theorem 5

Let $`V^n`$, $`n4`$, be a regular time symmetric spacelike hypersurface, with compact boundary horizon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, in a spacetime $`M^{n+1}`$, as in Theorem 1, such that $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })0`$. Suppose that the scalar curvature of $`V^n`$ satisfies, $`S=2T_{00}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }\kappa `$, where $`\kappa `$ is a positive constant. Then the area of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, $`\mathrm{vol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1})`$, satisfies,

$`\mathrm{vol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1})\left({\displaystyle \frac{|\lambda [g]|}{\kappa }}\right)^{\frac{n1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })|}{\kappa }}\right)^{\frac{n1}{2}},`$ (16)
where $`g`$ is the induced metric on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$.

In particular, if $`T_{00}0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, the area of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ satisfies the inequality (4).

*Proof:* By the remark following the proof of Theorem 1, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a stable minimal hypersurface, i.e., $`A^{\prime \prime }(0)0`$ with respect to every variation $`t\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0=\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, where $`A(t)=`$ the area of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$. We recall the formula for the second variation of area with respect to variations $`t\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ having variation vector field $`X=\varphi N`$, where $`N`$ is the unit normal to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ pointing into $`V`$ and $`\varphi C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$,

$`A^{\prime \prime }(0)={\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}(|\varphi |^2(\mathrm{Ric}(N,N)+|B|^2)\varphi ^2)𝑑\mu .`$ (17)
Theorem 5 is now a consequence of the following purely Riemannian result, which may be of some independent interest.

###### Theorem 6

Let $`V^n`$, $`n4`$, be a Riemannian manifold with scalar curvature $`S`$ satisfying, $`S\kappa `$, where $`\kappa `$ is a positive constant. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ be a two-sided compact stable minimal hypersurface in $`V^n`$ with $`\sigma `$-constant $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Sigma })0`$. Then the area of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$, $`\mathrm{vol}(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1})`$, satisfies the inequalities in (16).

*Proof:* The second inequality in (16) is immediate from the definition of the $`\sigma `$-constant. To prove the first inequality we use the following reformulation of the Yamabe constant ,

$`\lambda [g]=\underset{\varphi C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Sigma }),\varphi >0}{inf}{\displaystyle \frac{_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\frac{4(n2)}{n3}|\varphi |^2+\widehat{S}\varphi ^2)𝑑\mu }{(_\mathrm{\Sigma }\varphi ^{\frac{2(n1)}{n3}}𝑑\mu )^{\frac{n3}{n1}}}}.`$ (18)
In view of equations (9) and (17) the stability of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ implies that the following inequality holds for all $`\varphi C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ (we may assume $`\varphi >0`$),

$`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}(|\varphi |^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{S}S|B|^2)\varphi ^2)𝑑\mu 0,`$ (19)
and hence,

$`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}(2|\varphi |^2+\widehat{S}\varphi ^2)𝑑\mu {\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}S\varphi ^2𝑑\mu .`$ (20)
Then, noting that $`2<\frac{4(n2)}{n3}`$, we obtain,

$`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}({\displaystyle \frac{4(n2)}{n3}}|\varphi |^2+\widehat{S}\varphi ^2)𝑑\mu `$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}S\varphi ^2𝑑\mu `$ (21)
$``$ $`\kappa {\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}\varphi ^2𝑑\mu .`$
By Hölder’s inequality,

$`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}\varphi ^2𝑑\mu \left({\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}\varphi ^{\frac{2(n1)}{n3}}𝑑\mu \right)^{\frac{n3}{n1}}\left({\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Sigma }}1𝑑\mu \right)^{\frac{2}{n1}},`$ (22)
which, when combined with (21), gives,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\frac{4(n2)}{n3}|\varphi |^2+\widehat{S}\varphi ^2)𝑑\mu }{(_\mathrm{\Sigma }\varphi ^{\frac{2(n1)}{n3}}𝑑\mu )^{\frac{n3}{n1}}}}\kappa (\text{vol(}\mathrm{\Sigma }\text{)})^{\frac{2}{n1}}.`$ (23)
Making use of this inequality in (18) yields,

$$\lambda [g]\kappa (\text{vol(}\mathrm{\Sigma }\text{)})^{\frac{2}{n1}},$$

from which the first inequality in Theorem 6 follows. $`\mathrm{}`$

Theorem 6 is a higher dimensional analogue of Theorem 3 in , as well as the result of Gibbons discussed in the introduction (in which the stability of the horizon was assumed).

## 4 Final remarks

Consider the setting of Theorem 1, in the general, nontime-symmetric case. Let $`t\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$ be the variation of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in the proof of the theorem. Let $`U`$ be the timelike future pointing unit normal along $`V`$. Then $`K=U+N`$ is a null vector field along $`V`$ such that $`\theta =\theta _t=\mathrm{div}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_t}K`$ is the null expansion scalar along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_t`$. By a similar computation to that given in the proof of Theorem 1, one obtains the following generalization of Equation 13,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{t}}=\mathrm{}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{S}2T_{ab}U^aK^b2\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Theta }^2)\varphi +\varphi \mathrm{div}_\mathrm{\Sigma }(_NU)^P`$
$`+\varphi |_NN|^2\varphi |_NN+(_NU)^P|^2,`$ (24)
along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, where we have used the assumption that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is marginally outer trapped, $`\theta =0`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Here, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the null second fundamental form of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with respect to $`K`$, and $`X^P`$ denotes projection of the vector $`X`$ onto $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. In the $`3+1`$ dimensional case, Hawking’s arguments can cope with the “bad terms” in the above, e.g., the divergence term gets integrated away; our method in higher dimensions cannot deal so easily with these terms. However, if the term $`(_NU)^P`$ vanishes along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, Equation (4) reduces to a form that permits the arguments in the proof of Theorem 1 to go through. Thus, whenever this term vanishes, e.g., if the second fundamental form of $`V`$ vanishes along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, or, more generally, if $`_NUN`$ along $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, then Theorem 1 generalizes to the nontime-symmetric case.

Finally, we remark that the arguments presented in this paper, as in the case of the standard $`3+1`$ results, as well, require the black hole boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{n1}`$ to be sufficiently smooth, $`C^2`$, say. Horizons, however, need not have this degree of regularity, in general. For issues regarding the regularity of horizons, see for example , and references cited therein.

We wish to thank Bill Minicozzi for some helpful comments.


format: text

text:
# Parametric Resonance of Neutrino Oscillations in Electromagnetic Wave

## References


text:
# Resonant 𝑑𝑑𝜇 Formation in Condensed Deuterium

## I Introduction

Theoretical study of resonant formation of the muonic molecule $`dd\mu `$ in condensed deuterium targets is the main subject of this paper. The resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation, first observed by Dzhelepov and co-workers dzhe66 , is a key process of muon catalyzed fusion ($`\mu `$CF) in deuterium (see e.g. reviews breu89 ; pono90 ). A muonic deuterium atom $`d\mu `$ is created when a negative muon $`\mu ^{}`$ is captured into an atomic orbital in a deuterium target. After $`d\mu `$ deexcitation to the $`1S`$ state and slowing down, the $`dd\mu `$ molecule can be formed in $`d\mu `$ atom collision with one of the D2 target molecules. The resonant formation is possible due to presence of a loosely bound state of $`dd\mu `$, characterized by the rotational number $`J=1`$ and vibrational number $`v=1`$, with binding energy $`|\epsilon _{Jv=11}|`$ 1.97 eV. This energy, according to the Vesman mechanism vesm67 , is completely transferred to excited rovibrational states of the molecular complex $`[(dd\mu )dee]`$. The scheme of calculation of $`dd\mu `$ formation rate in gaseous deuterium has been developed for many years pono76 ; mens86 ; mens87 ; faif89 , and has lead to a good agreement with the experiments performed in gaseous targets scri93 ; peti99 . On the other hand, this theory, when directly applied to solid deuterium targets, leads to strong disagreement with the experimental results know96 ; demi96 ; know97 . Therefore, it is necessary to calculate the $`dd\mu `$ formation rate with solid state effects taken into account, which is the main purpose of this paper.

Our calculations are based on the theoretical results (transition matrix elements, resonance energies) obtained in the case of $`dd\mu `$ formation in a single D2 molecule. In Sec. II the main formulas used for this case are briefly reported. A general formula for the energy-dependent $`dd\mu `$ formation rate in a D2 condensed target is derived in Sec. III, using the Van Hove formalism of the single-particle response function vanh54 . This formula is then applied (Sec. IV) for harmonic solid targets, in particular for a cubic Bravais lattice. A phonon expansion of the response function is used to study phonon contributions to the resonant formation. Numerical results for 3 K zero pressure frozen deuterium targets (TRIUMF experimental conditions know96 ; know97 ), with the fcc polycrystalline structure, are shown in Sec. V. The formation rates have been calculated assuming the isotropic Debye model of the solid and the values of Debye temperature and lattice constant observed in neutron scattering experiments.

The calculated rates of resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation and back decay have been used for Monte Carlo simulations of $`dd`$ fusion neutron and proton time spectra. Since the initial distributions of $`1S`$ muonic atom energy contain contributions from hot $`d\mu `$’s ($``$ 1 eV) mark94 ; abbo97 , influence of slow deceleration of $`d\mu `$ atoms below 10 meV adam96  on these time spectra is investigated in Sec. VI. The simulations take into account the processes of incoherent and coherent $`d\mu `$ atom scattering in solid deuterium. In particular, the Bragg scattering, phonon scattering, and rovibrational transitions in D2 molecules are included. We consider a dependence of the resonant formation rate and time spectra on broadening of the rovibrational D2 energy levels, due to the binding of the molecules in the lattice vank83 .

Since it has been predicted in Refs. filc96 ; mens96 ; guri99  that strong $`dd\mu `$ formation takes place only in solid para-D2, study of this process in pure ortho-D2 and para-D2 targets is another aim of this work. The neutron spectra calculated for these two solids are discussed in Sec. VI.

## II Resonant formation in a free molecule

First we consider resonant formation of the $`dd\mu `$ molecule in the following reaction

$$(d\mu )_F+(\text{D}_2)_{\nu _iK_i}^I\left[(dd\mu )_S^{Jv}dee\right]_{\nu _fK_f},$$
(1)
where D2 is a free deuterium molecule in the initial rovibrational state $`(\nu _iK_i)`$ and the total nuclear spin $`𝐈`$. The muonic atom $`d\mu `$ has total spin $`𝐅`$ and CMS kinetic energy $`\epsilon `$. The complex $`[(dd\mu )dee]`$ is created in the rovibrational state $`(\nu _fK_f)`$ and the molecular ion $`dd\mu `$, which plays the role of a heavy nucleus of the complex, has total spin $`𝐒`$. The rate $`\lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}`$ of the process above depends on the elastic width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF}`$ of $`[(dd\mu )dee]`$ complex decay ostr80 ; lane83 ; gula85 ; padi88  in reactions

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF}}{}(d\mu )_F+(\text{D}_2)_{\nu _iK_i}^I\hfill \\ \hfill \left[(dd\mu )_S^{Jv}dee\right]_{\nu _fK_f}& \\ & \underset{\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_f}{\overset{}{}}\text{stabilization processes,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_f`$ is the total rate of the stabilization processes, i.e. deexcitation and nuclear fusion in $`dd\mu `$

$$dd\mu \{\begin{array}{cc}\mu +t+p+4.0\text{ MeV}\hfill & \\ \mu +^3\text{He}+n+3.3\text{ MeV}\hfill & \\ \mu ^3\text{He}+n+3.3\text{ MeV}.\hfill & \end{array}$$
(3)
When fusion takes place, the muon is generally released and can again begin the $`\mu `$CF cycle. However, sometimes the muon is captured into an atomic orbital of helium (sticking), which stops further reactions.

The value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF}`$ is given in atomic units ($`e=\mathrm{}=m_e=`$ 1) by the formula

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF}=2\pi A_{if}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}|V_{if}(\epsilon )|^2\delta (\epsilon _{if}\epsilon ),$$
(4)
where $`V_{if}(\epsilon )`$ is a transition matrix element and $`\epsilon _{if}`$ is a resonance energy defined in Ref. faif89 . The factor $`A_{if}`$ is due to averaging over initial and summing over final projections of spins and angular momenta of the system. Vector $`𝐤`$ is the momentum of relative $`d\mu `$ and D2 motion

$$\epsilon =k^2/2,$$
(5)
and $``$ is the reduced mass of the system. Integration of Eq. (4) over $`𝐤`$ leads to

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF}=\frac{k_{if}}{\pi }A_{if}|V_{if}(\epsilon _{if})|^2,k_{if}=k(\epsilon _{if}).$$
(6)
Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_f`$ are much lower ($`10^3`$ meV) than $`\epsilon `$, Vesman’s model can be applied and the energy-dependent resonant formation rate has the Dirac delta function profile

$$\lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )=2\pi NB_{if}\left|V_{if}(\epsilon )\right|^2\delta (\epsilon \epsilon _{if}).$$
(7)
where $`N`$ is the density of deuterium nuclei in the target. According to Ref. faif89  the coefficients $`A_{if}`$ and $`B_{if}`$ in the above equations are equal to

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill A_{if}& =4W_{SF}\xi (K_i)\frac{2K_i+1}{2K_f+1},\hfill \\ \hfill B_{if}& =2W_{SF}\frac{2S+1}{2F+1},\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
where

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill W_{SF}& =(2F+1)\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{2}& 1& F\\ 1& S& 1\end{array}\right\}^2,\hfill \\ \hfill \xi (K_i)& =\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{2}{3}\hfill & \text{ for }K_i=0,\hfill \\ \frac{1}{3}\hfill & \text{ for }K_i=1,\hfill \end{array}\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
and the curly brackets stand for the Wigner $`6j`$ symbol. In formula (8) the usual Boltzmann factor describing the population of rotational states in a gas target is omitted because we calculate the formation rate separately for each initial rotational state. If the muonic atoms in a gas have a steady kinetic energy distribution $`f(\epsilon ,T)`$ at target temperature $`T`$, Eq. (7) can be averaged over the atom motion leading to a mean resonant rate $`\lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(T)`$.

## III Resonant formation in a condensed target

Since a muonic deuterium atom can be approximately treated as a small neutron-like particle, methods used for description of neutron scattering and absorption in condensed matter are applicable in the case $`dd\mu `$ formation in dense deuterium targets. Below we adapt the method developed by Lamb lamb39 , and then generalized by Singwi and Sjölander sing60  using the Van Hove formalism of the single-particle response function $`𝒮_i`$ vanh54 , for calculation of the resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation rates.

A Hamiltonian $`H_{\text{tot}}`$ of a system, consisting of a $`d\mu `$ atom in the 1$`S`$ state and a heavy condensed D2 target, can be written down as follows

$$H_{\text{tot}}=\frac{1}{2M_{d\mu }}_{R_{d\mu }}^2+H_{d\mu }(𝐫_1)+H_{\text{D}_2}(\mathit{\varrho }_1)+V(𝐫_1,\mathit{\varrho }_1,\mathit{\varrho }_2)+H,$$
(10)
where $`M_{d\mu }`$ is the $`d\mu `$ mass and $`𝐑_{d\mu }`$ denotes the position of $`d\mu `$ center of mass in the coordinate frame connected with the target (see Fig. 1). Operator $`H_{d\mu }`$ is the Hamiltonian of a free $`d\mu `$ atom, $`𝐫_1`$ is $`d\mu `$ internal vector; $`H_{\text{D}_2}`$ denotes the internal Hamiltonian of a free D2 molecule. It is assumed that $`dd\mu `$ formation takes place in collision with the l-th D2 target molecule. The position of its mass center in the target frame is denoted by $`𝐑_l`$; $`\mathit{\varrho }_1`$ is a vector connecting deuterons inside this molecule. Function $`V`$ stands for the potential of the $`d\mu `$–D2 interaction faif89 , leading to $`dd\mu `$ resonant formation. Vector $`\mathit{\varrho }_2`$ connects the $`d\mu `$ and D2 centers of mass. We neglect contributions to the potential $`V`$ from the molecules other than the l-th molecule because we assume here that distances between different molecules in the target are much greater than the D2 size. The kinetic energy $`\epsilon `$ of the $`d\mu `$ atom and its momentum $`𝐤`$ in the target frame are connected by the relation

$$\epsilon =k^2/2M_{d\mu }.$$
(11)
The Hamiltonian $`H`$ of a pure D2 target, corresponding to the initial target energy $`E_0`$, has the form

$$H=\underset{j}{}\frac{1}{2M_{\text{mol}}}_{R_j}^2+\underset{j}{}\underset{j^{}j}{}U_{jj^{}},$$
(12)
where $`𝐑_j`$ is the position of $`j`$-th molecule center of mass in the target frame (Fig. 2), $`U_{jj^{}}`$ denotes interaction between the $`j`$-th and $`j^{}`$-th molecule, and $`M_{\text{mol}}`$ is the mass of a single target molecule.

The coordinate part $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\text{tot}}`$ of the initial wave function of the system can be written as a product

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\text{tot}}=\psi _{d\mu }^{1S}(𝐫_1)\psi _{\text{D}_2}^{\nu _iK_i}(\mathit{\varrho }_\mathrm{𝟏})\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_{d\mu })|0,$$
(13)
where $`|0`$ stands for the initial wave function of the condensed D2 target, corresponding the total energy $`E_0`$. Eigenfunctions of the operators $`H_{d\mu }`$ and $`H_{\text{D}_2}`$ are denoted by $`\psi _{d\mu }^{1S}`$ and $`\psi _{\text{D}_2}^{\nu _iK_i}`$, respectively. Using the relation $`𝐑_{d\mu }=𝐑_l+\mathit{\varrho }_2`$, the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\text{tot}}`$ takes the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\text{tot}}=\psi _{d\mu }^{1S}(𝐫_1)\psi _{\text{D}_2}^{\nu _iK_i}(\mathit{\varrho }_\mathrm{𝟏})\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤\mathit{\varrho }_2)\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l)|0,$$
(14)
which is similar to that used in the case of $`dd\mu `$ formation on a single D2, except the factor $`\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l)|0`$. This factor depends only on positions of mass centers of the target molecules.

After formation of $`[(dd\mu )dee]`$ complex, the total Hamiltonian of the system is well approximated by the operator $`H_{\text{tot}}^{}`$

$$H_{\text{tot}}H_{\text{tot}}^{}=H_{dd\mu }(𝐫,𝐑)+H__C(\mathit{\varrho })+V(\mathit{\varrho },𝐫,𝐑)+\stackrel{~}{H},$$
(15)
where $`H_{dd\mu }`$ is an internal Hamiltonian of $`dd\mu `$ molecular ion, vectors $`𝐫`$ and $`𝐑`$ are its Jacobi coordinates. Relative motion of $`dd\mu `$ and $`d`$ in the complex is described by a Hamiltonian $`H__C`$ which depends on the respective internal vector $`\mathit{\varrho }`$. The final Hamiltonian $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ of the target, with the eigenfunction $`|\stackrel{~}{n}`$ and energy eigenvalue $`\stackrel{~}{E}_n`$, is expressed by the formula

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \stackrel{~}{H}=& \frac{1}{2M_C}_{R_l}^2+\underset{jl}{}\frac{1}{2M_{\text{mol}}}_{R_j}^2+\underset{j}{}\underset{j^{}j}{}U_{jj^{}}\hfill \\ \hfill =& \left(1\frac{M_{\text{mol}}}{M_C}\right)\frac{1}{2M_{\text{mol}}}_{R_l}^2+H=\mathrm{\Delta }H+H,\hfill \end{array}$$
(16)
where $`M_C`$ is the mass of the complex. The respective coordinate part $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\text{tot}}^{}`$ of the total final wave function of the system is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\text{tot}}^{}=\psi _{dd\mu }^{Jv}(𝐫,𝐑)\psi __C^{\nu _fK_f}(\mathit{\varrho })|\stackrel{~}{n}.$$
(17)
where $`\psi _{dd\mu }^{Jv}`$ and $`\psi __C^{\nu _fK_f}`$ denote eigenfunctions of the Hamiltonians $`H_{dd\mu }`$ and $`H__C`$, respectively.

The energy-dependent resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation rate $`\lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )`$ in the condensed target, for the initial $`|0`$ and final $`|\stackrel{~}{n}`$ target states and a fixed $`d\mu `$ total spin $`F`$, is calculated using the formula

$$\lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )=2\pi NB_{if}|𝒜_{i0,fn}|^2\delta (\epsilon \epsilon _{if}+E_0\stackrel{~}{E}_n),$$
(18)
with the resonance condition

$$\epsilon +E_0=\epsilon _{if}+\stackrel{~}{E}_n,$$
(19)
taking into account the initial and final energy of the target. The resonant energy for a free D2 is denoted by $`\epsilon _{if}`$ and the transition matrix element is given by

$$𝒜_{i0,fn}=\mathrm{\Psi }_{\text{tot}}^{}|V|\mathrm{\Psi }_{\text{tot}}.$$
(20)
Using Eqs. (14) and (17) the matrix element (20) can be written as a product

$$𝒜_{i0,fn}=\stackrel{~}{n}|\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l)|0V_{if}(\epsilon )$$
(21)
where $`V_{if}(\epsilon )`$ is the transition matrix element calculated for a single D2 molecule faif89 . The rate (18) can be additionally averaged over a distribution $`\rho _{n_0}`$ of the initial target states at a given temperature $`T`$ and summed over the final target states, which leads to

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )=2\pi NB_{if}|V_{if}(\epsilon )|^2\underset{n,n_0}{}& \rho _{n_0}|\stackrel{~}{n}|\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l|0|^2\hfill \\ & \times \delta (\epsilon \epsilon _{if}+E_0\stackrel{~}{E}_n).\hfill \end{array}$$
(22)
Factor $`B_{if}`$, defined by Eqs. (8), is due to the averaging over the initial projections and summation over the final projections of spin and rovibrational quantum numbers. This factor takes also into account a symmetrization of the total wave function of $`d\mu `$+D2 system over three deuterium nuclei.

Now we introduce a time variable $`t`$ to eliminate the $`\delta `$ function in the equation above and then we involve time-dependent operators, which is familiar in scattering theory (see, e.g., Refs akhi47 ; wick54 ). Using the Fourier expansion of the $`\delta `$ function

$$\delta (\epsilon \epsilon _{if}+E_0\stackrel{~}{E}_n)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}it(\epsilon \epsilon _{if}+E_0\stackrel{~}{E}_n)\mathbf{\right)}$$
(23)
one has

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )=NB_{if}|V_{if}|^2& _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}it\left(\epsilon \epsilon _{if}\right)\mathbf{\right)}\underset{n,n_0}{}\rho _{n_0}\hfill \\ & \times 0|\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l)|\stackrel{~}{n}\stackrel{~}{n}|\mathrm{exp}(it\stackrel{~}{E}_n)\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l)\mathrm{exp}(itE_0)|0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(24)
Assuming that the perturbation operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ is well-approximated by its mean value

$$\mathrm{\Delta }H0|\mathrm{\Delta }H|0\mathrm{\Delta }\epsilon _{if}=\left(1M_{\text{mol}}/M_C\right)_T<0,$$
(25)
which is valid when the target relaxation time is much smaller than the $`dd\mu `$ lifetime of the order of 10-9 s, the matrix element in Eq. (24) can be expressed as

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \stackrel{~}{n}|\mathrm{exp}(it\stackrel{~}{E}_n)\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l)\mathrm{exp}(itE_0)|0\hfill \\ & =\stackrel{~}{n}|\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}it(H+\mathrm{\Delta }H)\mathbf{\right)}\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l)\mathrm{exp}(itH)|0\hfill \\ & \stackrel{~}{n}|\mathrm{exp}(it\mathrm{\Delta }\epsilon _{if})\mathrm{exp}(itH)\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐑_l)\mathrm{exp}(itH)|0\hfill \\ & =\stackrel{~}{n}|\mathrm{exp}(it\mathrm{\Delta }\epsilon _{if})\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}i𝐤𝐑_l(t)\mathbf{\right)}|0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(26)
where $`𝐑_l(t)`$ denotes the Heisenberg operator and $`_T`$ in formula (25) is the mean kinetic energy of the target molecule at temperature $`T`$.

Using the identity $`_n|\stackrel{~}{n}\stackrel{~}{n}|=1`$ in Eq. (24) we obtain

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )=NB_{if}|V_{if}(\epsilon )|^2_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}& dt\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}it(\epsilon \epsilon _{if}^{})\mathbf{\right)}\hfill \\ & \times \mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}i𝐤𝐑_l(0)\mathbf{\right)}\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}i𝐤𝐑_l(t)\mathbf{\right)}_T,\hfill \end{array}$$
(27)
where $`\mathrm{}_T`$ denotes both the quantum mechanical and the statistical averaging at temperature $`T`$, and $`\epsilon _{if}^{}`$ being the resonance energy

$$\epsilon _{if}^{}=\epsilon _{if}+\mathrm{\Delta }\epsilon _{if},$$
(28)
shifted by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\epsilon _{if}<0`$. Note that such a resonant energy shift was neglected in papers lamb39 ; sing60 , where absorption of neutrons and $`\gamma `$-rays by heavy nuclei were considered. An estimation of the shift in the case of $`\gamma `$ emission from a nucleus bound in a solid, similar to Eq. (25) was given in Ref. jose60 .

A self pair correlation function $`G_s(𝐫,t)`$ is defined by the following equation vanh54

$$\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}i𝐤𝐑_l(0)\mathbf{\right)}\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}i𝐤𝐑_l(t)\mathbf{\right)}_T=d^3rG_s(𝐫,t)\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐫),$$
(29)
and the single-particle response function $`𝒮_i(𝜿,\omega )`$ is given by the formula

$$𝒮_i(𝜿,\omega )=\frac{1}{2\pi }d^3r𝑑tG_s(𝐫,t)\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}i(𝜿𝐫\omega t)\mathbf{\right)}.$$
(30)
Thus, by virtue of Eqs. (27) and (30), the resonant formation rate in a condensed target can by expressed in terms of the response function

$$\lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )=2\pi NB_{if}|V_{if}(\epsilon )|^2𝒮_i(𝜿,\omega ),$$
(31)
where the momentum transfer $`𝜿`$ and energy transfer $`\omega `$ to the target are defined as follows

$$𝜿=𝐤,\omega =\epsilon \epsilon _{if}^{}.$$
(32)
The advantage of the Van Hove method is that all properties of the target, for given momentum and energy transfers, are contained in the factor $`𝒮_i(𝐤,\omega )`$. It is possible to rigorously calculate $`𝒮_i`$ in the case of a perfect gas and in the case of a harmonic solid. However, a liquid target or a dense gas target is a difficult problem to solve.

Proceeding as above one can obtain a similar formula for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF^{}}`$ in a condensed target (in general, $`d\mu `$ spin $`F^{}`$ after back decay can be different from $`d\mu `$ spin $`F`$ before the formation)

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF^{}}& =2\pi A_{if}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}|V_{if}(\epsilon )|^2\stackrel{~}{𝒮}_i(𝜿,\omega ^{}),\hfill \\ \hfill \omega ^{}& =\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{if}^{}\epsilon ,\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{if}^{}=\epsilon _{if}+\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{if},\hfill \end{array}$$
(33)
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒮}_i`$ is the response function calculated for the state $`|\stackrel{~}{n}`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{if}\stackrel{~}{n}|\mathrm{\Delta }H|\stackrel{~}{n}=\left(M_C/M_{\text{mol}}1\right)\stackrel{~}{}_T,$$
(34)
where $`\stackrel{~}{}_T`$ denotes the mean kinetic energy of the complex bound in the target.

## IV Resonant formation in a harmonic solid

It has been shown by Van Hove vanh54  that the self correlation function in the case of a gas or a solid with cubic symmetry takes the general form

$$G_s(𝐫,t)=\mathbf{\left(}\frac{M_{\text{mol}}}{2\pi \gamma (t)}\mathbf{\right)}^{3/2}\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}\frac{M_{\text{mol}}}{2\gamma (t)}r^2\mathbf{\right)}.$$
(35)
For a cubic Bravais lattice, in which each atom is at a center of inversion symmetry, $`\gamma (t)`$ is given by the formula

$$\gamma (t)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑w\frac{Z(w)}{w}n__\text{B}(w)\mathrm{exp}(iwt),$$
(36)
where $`Z(w)`$ is the normalized vibrational density of states such that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill _0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑wZ(w)=1,& Z(w)=0\text{ for }w>w_{\text{max}},\hfill \\ & Z(w)Z(w),\hfill \end{array}$$
(37)
$`n__\text{B}(w)`$ is the Bose factor

$$n__\text{B}(w)=\left[\mathrm{exp}(\beta w)1\right]^1,\beta =(k_\text{B}T)^1.$$
(38)
and the Boltzmann constant is denoted by $`k_\text{B}`$.

The response function (30), after substitution of Eqs. (35), (36) and integration over $`𝐫`$, can be written as follows

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝒮_i(𝜿,\omega )=& \frac{1}{2\pi }\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}\frac{\kappa ^2}{2M_{\text{mol}}}\gamma (\mathrm{})\mathbf{\right)}\hfill \\ & \times _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}dt\mathrm{exp}(i\omega t)\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}\frac{\kappa ^2}{2M_{\text{mol}}}[\gamma (\mathrm{})\gamma (t)]\mathbf{\right)},\hfill \end{array}$$
(39)
$`\gamma (\mathrm{})`$ denotes the limit of $`\gamma (t)`$ at $`t\mathrm{}`$. This formula can be expanded in a power series of the momentum transfer $`\kappa `$, which leads to

$$𝒮_i(𝜿,\omega )=\mathrm{exp}(2W)\left[\delta (\omega )+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g_n(\omega ,T)\frac{(2W)^n}{n!}\right],$$
(40)
where $`2W`$ is the Debye-Waller factor, familiar in the theory of neutron scattering,

$$2W=\frac{\kappa ^2}{2M_{\text{mol}}}\gamma (\mathrm{})=\frac{\kappa ^2}{2M_{\text{mol}}}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑w\frac{Z(w)}{w}\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{1}{2}\beta w\right),$$
(41)
and the functions $`g_n`$ are given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}& g_1(w,T)=\frac{1}{\gamma (\mathrm{})}\frac{Z(w)}{w}\left[n__\text{B}(w)+1\right],\hfill \\ & g_n(w,T)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑w^{}g_1(ww^{},T)g_{n1}(w^{},T),\hfill \\ & _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑wg_n(w)=1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(42)
In the case of a cubic crystal structure $`2W`$ can also be expressed as

$$2W=\frac{1}{3}0|𝐮^2|0\kappa ^2,$$
(43)
where $`𝐮`$ is the displacement of a molecule from its lattice site. Substitution of Eq. (40) to Eq. (31) leads to the following formation rate

$$\lambda _{\nu _iK_i,\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )=2\pi NB_{if}|V_{if}(\epsilon )|^2\mathrm{exp}(2W)\left[\delta (\omega )+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g_n(\omega ,T)\frac{(2W)^n}{n!}\right],$$
(44)
The first term in expansion (44) represents a sharp peak describing the $`\delta `$ profile recoilless formation. The next terms give broad distributions corresponding to subsequent multi-phonon processes. In particular, the term with $`n=1`$ describes formation connected with creation or annihilation of one phonon.

If $`2W1`$ we deal with so-called strong binding lamb39  where only the few lowest terms in the above expansion are important. On the other hand, in the limit $`2W1`$ (weak-binding) many multi-phonon terms give comparable contributions to (44). Therefore, for sufficiently large $`\kappa ^2`$ it is convenient to use the impulse approximation in which $`\gamma (t)`$ is replaced by its value near $`t=0`$

$$\gamma (t)\gamma (0)+it\frac{2}{3}_T.$$
(45)
This leads to the asymptotic formula for $`𝒮_i`$

$$𝒮_i(𝜿,\omega )=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{\pi }}\mathrm{exp}\mathbf{\left(}\left(\frac{\omega }{\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)^2\mathbf{\right)},$$
(46)
where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=2\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}_T},=\frac{\kappa ^2}{2M_{\text{mol}}}.$$
(47)
The mean kinetic energy $`_T`$ of a molecule in the solid, which also determines the resonance energy shift (25), is equal to

$$_T=\frac{3}{2}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑wZ(w)w\left[n__\text{B}(w)+\frac{1}{2}\right].$$
(48)
The energy $`_T`$ contains a contribution from the zero-point vibrations and it approaches $`3k_\text{B}T/2`$ only at high temperatures $`Tw_{\text{max}}/k_\text{B}`$. Function (46) is a Gaussian with response centered at the recoil energy $``$. Therefore in the weak binding region the resonant formation rate takes the Doppler form obtained by Bethe and Placzek 111In fact, formula (46) is the limit of the Bethe formula in the case of a very narrow natural resonance width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }0`$. for resonant absorption of neutrons in gas targets beth37 . However, the resonance width (47) in the solid at temperature $`T`$ is different from the Doppler width in a Maxwellian gas $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{gas}}=2\sqrt{k_\text{B}T}`$ unless the temperature is sufficiently high. This phenomenon was pointed out by Lamb in his paper lamb39  concerning resonant neutron absorption in solid crystals. By virtue of the equations above one can introduce for the solid an effective temperature $`T_{\text{eff}}`$

$$T_{\text{eff}}=\frac{2}{3}_T/k_\text{B}.$$
(49)
## V Resonant formation in frozen deuterium

The following considerations concern the solid deuterium crystals used in the TRIUMF experiments mars93 ; know96b , though the results presented below can be applied to targets obtained in similar conditions demi96 ; stra96 . At TRIUMF thin solid deuterium layers have been formed by rapid freezing of gaseous D2 on gold foils at $`T=3`$ K and zero pressure. According to Ref. silv80  such deuterium layers have the face-centered cubic (fcc) polycrystalline structure. Since the distance between the neighboring molecules is a few times greater than the diameter of a D2 molecule and the Van der Waals force that binds the solid is weak, one can neglect perturbations of the resonant formation potential $`V`$ due to these neighbors.

The deuterium crystals at zero pressure are quantum molecular crystals. The amplitude of zero-point vibration at 3 K equals 15% of the nearest neighbor distance. A single-particle potential in this case is not harmonic and the standard lattice dynamics leads to imaginary phonon frequencies. However, the standard dynamics can be applied after a renormalization of the interaction potential, taking into account the short-range pair correlations between movement of the neighbors silv80 . In result, the theoretical calculations klei70  of the phonon dispersion relations give a good agreement with the neutron scattering experiments niel73  and the Debye model for solid deuterium can be used as a good approximation of the phonon energy distribution

$$Z(w)=\{\begin{array}{cc}3w^2/w__\text{D}^3\hfill & \text{ if }ww__\text{D},\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{ if }w>w__\text{D},\hfill \end{array}$$
(50)
with the Debye energy $`w__\text{D}=k_\text{B}\mathrm{\Theta }_\text{D}`$ and Debye temperature $`\mathrm{\Theta }_\text{D}`$ taken from the neutron experiments. For $`T=3`$ K we use the Debye model of an isotropic solid with $`\mathrm{\Theta }_\text{D}=108`$ K corresponding to the maximal phonon energy $`w__\text{D}=9.3`$ meV. Thus, we are dealing with the limit $`T/\mathrm{\Theta }_\text{D}1`$ where

$$\gamma (\mathrm{})=\frac{3}{2}w__\text{D}^1,_T=\frac{9}{16}w__\text{D}\text{5.2 meV},T_{\text{eff}}=\frac{3}{8}\mathrm{\Theta }_\text{D}\text{40 K},$$
(51)
are very good approximations of Eqs. (41), (48) and (49). The Debye-Waller factor and mean kinetic energy $`_T`$ at lowest temperatures are determined by contributions from the zero-point D2 vibration in the lattice, and therefore these quantities do not tend to zero at $`T0`$. The zero-point energy is not accessible energy, but its effects are always present.

The values of the resonance energies depend on initial and final rovibrational quantum numbers of the system. In solid hydrogens at low pressures these quantum numbers remain good quantum numbers, but excited energy levels broaden into energy bands (rotons and vibrons) due to coupling between neighboring molecules vank83 . The calculations presented in the literature concern pure solid H2, HD and D2 targets and only lowest quantum numbers. The problem of a heavier impurity, such as $`(dd\mu )d`$ complex in D2, has not been considered yet. However, knowing that the width of the rotational bands can reach about 1 meV vank83 , a possible influence of this effect on the calculated formation rates and fusion neutron time spectra is discussed in the next section.

At low temperatures all D2 molecules are in the ground vibrational state $`\nu _i=0`$ and $`dd\mu `$ is formed via the excitation of the complex to the state $`\nu _f=7`$. Unless a catalyst is applied, rapidly frozen deuterium is a mixture of ortho-D2 ($`K_i=0`$) and para-D2 ($`K_i=1`$). In the TRIUMF experiments gaseous deuterium was pumped through a hot palladium filter before freezing. Therefore the solid target was a statistical mixture (2:1) of the ortho- and para-states ($`K_i=stat`$). Since the para-ortho relaxation without a catalyst is very slow (0.06%/h) in solid deuterium soue86 , the population of these states is not changed during experiments of a few days.

The lowest resonance energies $`\epsilon _{if}`$ and $`\epsilon _{if}^{}`$, for fixed $`\nu _i`$, $`\nu _f`$ and different values of $`F`$, $`K_i`$, $`S`$ and $`K_f`$ are shown in Table 1 peti99 . A few of them have negative values, which means that to satisfy the resonance condition $`\epsilon =\epsilon _{if}`$ an energy excess in the $`d\mu `$+D2 system should be transferred to external degrees of freedom. This is possible in dense targets, where energy of neighboring molecules can be increased. Such an effect, due to triple collisions in gas targets, has been firstly discussed in Ref. mens86b . In a solid, the energy excess is lost through incoherent phonon creation. According to (25), (28), and (51), in the considered 3 K solid deuterium all resonant energies $`\epsilon _{if}^{}`$ are shifted by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\epsilon _{if}1.81`$ meV. One can see that all resonances for $`F=\frac{1}{2}`$ are placed at higher energies, which is caused by $`d\mu `$ hyperfine splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }E^{\text{hfs}}=`$ 48.5 meV. All resonance energies $`\epsilon _{if}^{}w__\text{D}`$ 10 meV are connected with formation from the upper spin state $`F=\frac{3}{2}`$ of $`d\mu `$. However, only resonances corresponding to the dipole transitions $`K_i=0K_f=1`$ and $`K_i=1K_f=0,2`$ can give a significant contribution to the formation rate at lowest energies. Other transition matrix elements described in Ref. faif96  tend to zero when $`\epsilon 0`$ (see Figs. 3 and 4 obtained for $`K_i=0`$ and $`K_i=1`$ ).

The low energy rates ($`\epsilon w_D`$) are calculated using formula (44) with a few most significant terms of the response function expansion (40) taken into account. Fig. 5 shows the function $`𝒮_i(𝜿,\epsilon \epsilon _{if}^{})`$ corresponding to the two dipole transitions in para-D2. The subthreshold resonance, with $`\epsilon _{if}^{}9.0`$ meV, gives contributions to the formation rate only through the phonon creation processes. For $`\epsilon _{if}^{}1.6`$ meV, the non-phonon process is possible and it is represented by a vertical line. Different peaks in this figure describe processes connected with different numbers of created phonons. In particular, one-phonon processes, which are proportional to $`Z(w)`$ with the characteristic Debye cutoff, can be clearly distinguished. Since the $`n`$-phonon term in (40) is proportional to $`\kappa ^{2n}`$, the $`dd\mu `$ formation rate tends to zero at $`\epsilon 0`$. Note that the phonon annihilation gives negligible contribution to the rate at very low target temperatures $`T\mathrm{\Theta }_\text{D}`$.

In order to compare the calculated formation rates with experiments the summed rates $`\lambda _{K_i}^F(\epsilon )`$ are introduced

$$\lambda _{K_i}^F(\epsilon )=\underset{K_f,S}{}\lambda _{\nu _iK_i\nu _fK_f}^{SF},\nu _i=0,\nu _f=7.$$
(52)
In Fig. 6 the formation rates $`\lambda _{K_i}^F(\epsilon )`$ in the solid ortho-D2 and para-D2 are shown for $`F=\frac{3}{2}`$. In the case of resonances satisfying the condition $`\epsilon _{if}^{}w__\text{D}`$ we have $`2W<1`$ and the expansion (44) is used. The two strong peaks represent the recoilless formation process, without phonon excitations. The delta function profile of every peak is shown as a rectangle with a height equal to the formation rate strength divided by the total decay width ($`0.8\times 10^3`$ meV). The strength defined as the value of the factor standing before $`\delta (\omega )`$ in the expansion (44), is equal to 0.1061 eV$`\mu `$s-1 for the resonance $`K_i=0K_f=1`$ in solid ortho-D2. The transition $`K_i=1K_f=2`$ in para-D2 gives 0.07544 eV$`\mu `$s-1 as the resonance strength. Higher resonance energies involve many multi-phonon terms and therefore we use the asymptotic form (46) of $`S_i`$ for $`\epsilon _{if}^{}>w__\text{D}`$. All formation rates presented in the figures are normalized to the liquid hydrogen density $`N_0=4.25\times 10^{22}`$ atoms/cm3.

Though in Monte Carlo simulations, involving energy-dependent rates of different processes, the “absolute” formation rates $`\lambda _{K_i}^F(\epsilon )`$ should be used, it is convenient to introduce an effective formation rate $`\overline{\lambda }_{K_i}^F(\epsilon )`$ which leads to the nuclear $`dd`$ fusion in $`[(dd\mu )dee]`$ complex. Back decay of the complex to the $`d\mu +`$D2 system, characterized by the quantum numbers $`K_i^{}`$ and $`F^{}`$, strongly influences the fusion process because the back-decay rates are comparable with the effective fusion rate $`\overline{\lambda }_f`$ 374 $`\mu `$s-1 mens87 . Since in a solid target rotational deexcitation of the asymmetric complex is much faster than back decay and fusion, it is assumed that back decay takes place only from the state $`K_f=0`$. The effective formation rate is then defined by the following formula

$$\overline{\lambda }_{K_i}^F(\epsilon )=\underset{K_f,S}{}\lambda _{\nu _iK_i\nu _fK_f}^{SF}(\epsilon )𝒫_S^{\text{fus}},\nu _i=0,\nu _f=7,$$
(53)
where the fusion fraction $`𝒫_S^{\text{fus}}`$ is given by

$$𝒫_S^{\text{fus}}=\frac{\overline{\lambda }_f}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^S},\mathrm{\Gamma }^S=\overline{\lambda }_f+\underset{F^{}}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{SF^{}},\mathrm{\Gamma }^{SF^{}}=\underset{K_i^{},K_f=0}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i^{}}^{SF^{}}.$$
(54)
Since the frequency of lattice vibrations ($`w__\text{D}/\mathrm{}10^7`$ $`\mu `$s-1) is many orders of magnitude greater than the back-decay and fusion rates, energetic phonons created during the $`dd\mu `$ formation process are dissipated. At 3 K the number of phonons with energies $`wk_\text{B}T`$ 0.26 meV is strongly suppressed by the Bose factor $`n__\text{B}(w)`$. Therefore back decay with phonon annihilation at $`T\mathrm{\Theta }_\text{D}`$ is negligible. In particular, the phonon channel of decay of $`dd\mu `$, formed from $`d\mu `$ state $`F=\frac{3}{2}`$ due to the subthreshold resonances, is closed because this would require an annihilation of a phonon with energy of a few meV. In this case back decay is connected with the spin-flip transition to $`F^{}=\frac{1}{2}`$. Since the corresponding energy release of a few tens of meV is much greater than the Debye energy ($`\mathrm{\Delta }E^{\text{hfs}}w_D`$), the $`dd\mu `$ decay rate is dominated by contributions from simultaneous phonon creation processes.

After integration of formula (33) over direction of vector $`𝐤`$ one obtains

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF^{}}=\frac{A_{if}}{\pi }_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑kk^2|V_{if}(\epsilon )|^2\stackrel{~}{𝒮}_i(k^2,\omega ^{}),$$
(55)
and then substitution of expansion (40) and integration of the recoilless term lead to

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu _fK_f,\nu _iK_i}^{SF^{}}=\frac{A_{if}}{\pi }[M& \stackrel{~}{k}_{if}|V_{if}(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{if}^{})|^2\mathrm{exp}(2\stackrel{~}{W}_{if})\hfill \\ \hfill +& \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}dkk^2|V_{if}(\epsilon )|^2\mathrm{exp}(2\stackrel{~}{W})g_n(\omega ^{},T)\frac{(2\stackrel{~}{W})^n}{n!}],\hfill \end{array}$$
(56)
where

$$2\stackrel{~}{W}=\frac{k^2}{2M_C}\gamma (\mathrm{}),2\stackrel{~}{W}_{if}=2\stackrel{~}{W}(\stackrel{~}{k}_{if}),\stackrel{~}{k}_{if}=\sqrt{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}M\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{if}^{}}.$$
(57)
It is assumed in the formula above that the phonon energy spectrum of solid deuterium containing $`[(dd\mu )dee]`$ is similar to that of a pure deuterium lattice. The problem of lattice dynamics of a quantum solid deuterium crystal containing a small admixture of a heavier isotope has not been considered yet in literature, at least to the knowledge of the authors. However, this approximation is reasonable since the Debye temperatures of solid hydrogen and deuterium at 3 K are very similar silv80 , independently of the mass difference of these isotopes. Therefore it is assumed that during the $`dd\mu `$ lifetime the mean kinetic energy $`\stackrel{~}{}_T`$ of the complex reaches the energy $`_T`$ characterizing a pure deuterium solid. Thus the resonance energy shift (34) is approximated by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{if}\left(M_C/M_{\text{mol}}1\right)_T2.77\text{ meV},$$
(58)
which gives $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{if}^{}=\epsilon _{if}2.77`$ meV.

The effective formation rates in 3 K solid deuterium for $`F=\frac{3}{2}`$ are shown in Fig. 7. The phonon part of the rates below a few meV is about two orders of magnitude lower than the average rate of 2.7 $`\mu `$s-1 derived from the experiment know96 ; know97 . This means that at $`\epsilon w_D`$ the phonon contribution to the total resonant formation rate is even smaller than the non resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation rate $`\lambda _{\text{nr}}`$ 0.44 $`\mu `$s-1 scri93 , and that the estimation of the phonon contribution given in Ref. mens96  is strongly overestimated. Therefore, the experimental results can only be explained by resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation at energies $`\epsilon 1`$ meV, where the rate exceeds significantly the value of 1 $`\mu `$s-1. A cusp at 0.3 meV in para-D2 is due to the formation with simultaneous one-phonon creation, connected with the subthreshold resonance $`K_i=1K_f=0`$. This implies a significant difference between the resonant formation in ortho-D2 and para-D2 below 1 meV. However, this difference is difficult to measure because of a broad distribution of $`d\mu `$ energy. Note that a similar subthreshold phonon effect in the case of resonant $`dt\mu `$ formation in solid deuterium has been discussed in Ref fuku93 .

In the solid target the fusion fraction $`𝒫_S^{\text{fus}}`$ 0.3 and the total resonance width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^S0.8\times 10^3`$ meV for both $`S=\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`S=\frac{3}{2}`$. The back-decay rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{SF^{}}`$ from $`S=\frac{1}{2}`$ to $`F^{}=\frac{1}{2}`$ equals about 843 $`\mu `$s-1. Decay $`S=\frac{1}{2}F^{}=\frac{1}{2}`$ is impossible. In the case of $`S=\frac{3}{2}`$ we have obtained $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{SF^{}}`$ 281 $`\mu `$s-1 for $`F^{}=\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{SF^{}}`$ 610 $`\mu `$s-1 for $`F^{}=\frac{3}{2}`$. Phonon creation processes give dominant contributions to the back-decay rates, e.g., the non-phonon part of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{SF^{}}`$, given by the first term of expansion (56), equals 169 $`\mu `$s-1. Therefore the $`d\mu `$ energy spectrum, after back decay in the solid, is not discrete.

In Fig. 8 the effective rates in solid deuterium for $`F=\frac{1}{2}`$ are presented. For the sake of comparison the formation rate for 3 K ortho-D2 gas is also plotted. The “gas” curve has been calculated using the asymptotic formula (46) for $`𝒮_i`$ with $`T_{\text{eff}}=3`$ K.This figure shows that in a real solid deuterium target the rates are smeared much more than in a gas target with the same temperature, because of the zero-point vibrations. Therefore even at relatively high $`d\mu `$ energies of some 0.1 eV one should not neglect the solid effects and use the formation rates calculated for a 3 K Maxwellian gas.

## VI Monte Carlo calculations

The calculated energy-dependent $`dd\mu `$ formation rates have been applied in our Monte Carlo simulations of $`\mu `$CF in 3 K solid deuterium targets. The final $`d\mu `$ energy distribution after back decay, including simultaneous phonon creation processes, has been determined through a numerical integration of Eq. (56). The calculated distribution is shown in Fig. 9 for $`S=\frac{1}{2}`$, $`K_f=0`$ and $`F^{}=\frac{1}{2}`$. The rotational transitions to $`K_i^{}=0,1,2`$ with no phonon creation are seen as the delta peaks. The continuous energy spectrum describes phonon creation contribution to $`d\mu `$ energy. Note that, opposite to $`dd\mu `$ formation rates, this phonon contribution (for a given rotational transition peak) extends towards lower energies. The average $`d\mu `$ energy after $`dd\mu `$ back decay equals about 30 meV, for the presented spectrum.

The $`dd`$ fusion neutron and proton spectra depend on the time evolution of $`d\mu `$ energy. This energy is determined by differential cross sections of different scattering processes of $`d\mu `$ atoms in a given solid target, including elastic scattering, rovibrational transitions, spin-flip reactions and phonon processes. The scattering cross sections in a solid are calculated using the Van Hove method. Some results of such calculations for $`d\mu `$ atoms in fcc solid deuterium have been presented and discussed in Ref. adam99 . The incoherent processes, such as spin-flip or rovibrational transitions, are described by the self pair correlation function $`G_s(𝐫,t)`$ defined by Eq. (29). The Bragg scattering and coherent phonon scattering are connected with a pair correlation function $`G(𝐫,t)`$ vanh54 .

In Fig. 10 is shown the total cross section for $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ scattering in the statistical mixture of 3 K solid ortho-D2 and para-D2. Bragg scattering, with the Bragg cutoff at $`\epsilon __\text{B}=`$ 1.1 meV, and incoherent elastic scattering do not change $`d\mu `$ energy because of the very large mass of the considered solid target. Below 1.7 meV the $`d\mu `$ atom is effectively accelerated, mainly due to the rotational deexcitation of para-D2 molecules guri99 ; adam99 . This transition is enabled by muon exchange between deuterons in $`d\mu +`$D2 scattering. The curve “$`01`$” in Fig. 10, describing the rotational deexcitation, includes contributions from simultaneous incoherent phonon processes. This cross section at $`\epsilon =`$ 2.5 meV equals 0.22$`\times 10^{20}`$ cm2, which is about three times less (taking into account the statistical factor of 1/3 for $`K=1`$ states) than the estimation given in paper guri99 . Phonon annihilation is a much weaker $`d\mu `$ acceleration mechanism than the rotational deexcitation.

Since the coherent amplitude for $`d\mu `$ elastic scattering on a single D2 molecule is greater by two orders of magnitude than the incoherent amplitude, the coherent processes involving conservation of momentum dominate low energy $`d\mu `$ scattering in solid deuterium. It is especially important below a few meV, where the shapes of coherent and incoherent cross sections differ strongly. The small phonon creation cross section below 1.1 meV, leading to $`d\mu `$ energy loss, is due to the incoherent amplitude. Coherent phonon creation is impossible below $`\epsilon __\text{B}`$. This limit is obtained in the case of coherent one-phonon creation process, for the total momentum conservation involving the smallest (non-zero) inverse lattice vector $`𝝉`$, which also fixes the position of the first peak of the Bragg scattering at $`\epsilon __\text{B}=`$ 1.1 meV. For $`𝝉=\mathrm{𝟎}`$ one-phonon creation is possible only if the $`d\mu `$ velocity is not lower than the sound velocity in the crystal, which is well-known in neutron physics. According to Ref. soue86  the mean sound velocity in solid deuterium equals about 1.2$`\times 10^5`$ cm/s and this corresponds to $`d\mu `$ energy of 15 meV. Therefore, neglecting the inverse lattice contribution to the one-phonon creation cross section in Ref. guri99  leads to the severe underestimation of $`d\mu `$ slowing down at lowest energies and subsequent overestimation of $`d\mu `$ kinetic energy.

Above 1.7 meV phonon creation already prevails over all acceleration processes. However, the effective deceleration rate below $`w__\text{D}`$ is strongly suppressed by the dominating Bragg elastic scattering. At energies above some 10 meV subsequent rotational and then vibrational excitations of D2 molecules become important and they provide a very fast mechanism of $`d\mu `$ deceleration at higher energies.

The total cross section for $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ scattering in a pure 3 K ortho-D2 target (see Fig. 11) is quite similar to that shown in Fig. 10. A significant difference is the lack of rotational deexcitation. Therefore phonon annihilation is the only, and weak, acceleration mechanism. It dominates the inelastic cross section below 1.4 meV.

Fig. 12 presents the time evolution of average $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ atom energy $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$, obtained from our Monte Carlo calculations. It is assumed that the target is infinite and that $`d\mu `$ atoms have initially a Maxwellian energy distribution with a mean energy of 1 eV. A statistical initial population of $`d\mu `$ total spin is used and the theoretical non-resonant part of the total spin-flip rate $`\lambda _{\frac{3}{2},\frac{1}{2}}`$ is multiplied by a single scaling factor of 0.4, in order to keep agreement with the experimental values peti99 ; voro99  of the spin-flip rate. The calculations have been performed for ortho-D2, para-D2 and their statistical mixture (stat). One can see that $`d\mu `$ mean energy of 10 meV is reached already after 5 ns. Then, below the Debye energy, deceleration become very slow. The lowest value of $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$ is determined by the intersection point of the cross sections of the acceleration processes and phonon creation process. In the case of a statistical mixture $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$ 1.7 meV, for $`K=0`$ we have $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$ 1.4 meV. Finally, for pure para-D2, with a contribution to the total cross section from the rotational transition $`K=10`$ three times greater than that shown in Fig. 10, $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$ 2.2 meV. Thus, $`d\mu `$ atoms are never thermalized and their energy is significantly greater than 1 meV. For para-D2 the mean energy is always greater than the energy of the lowest resonance peak $`\epsilon _{if}^{}=`$ 1.6 meV. However, even if $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$ is smaller than $`\epsilon _{if}^{}`$, a significant part of $`d\mu `$ atoms has energy $`\epsilon \epsilon _{if}^{}`$ because of a large admixture of hot $`d\mu `$ atoms at $`t=0`$ mark94 ; abbo97  and slow deceleration below 10 meV.

Since at energies of a few meV the lowest delta peaks are dominant in the resonant formation, their contributions to the mean effective formation rate are shown in Fig. 13 for gas and solid deuterium (stat) targets, assuming steady Maxwell distributions of $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ energy, with different $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$. The maximum average rate of about 6 $`\mu `$s-1 in the solid is due to the resonance energy shift of $``$1.8 meV. The experimental result of 3 $`\mu `$s-1 can be explained because $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$ is greater than 1 meV. However, in order to obtain large fusion neutron and proton yields through resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation, the width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^S`$ of the resonance peaks in solid can not be too narrow. The peak resonant rates of a few 10$`{}_{}{}^{4}\mu `$s-1 have been obtained assuming the discrete values of the rovibrational D2 energies in solid deuterium and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^S10^3`$ meV. These resonant rates are many orders of magnitude greater than the inelastic scattering rate $``$ 10 $`\mu `$s-1. In such a case $`d\mu `$ atoms are very quickly (compared to $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ lifetime) removed from the regions of resonance peaks and the contribution of the recoilless resonances to the neutron yield is negligible. The Monte Carlo simulations have shown that the neutron yield from the phonon part of the resonant rates gives only some 10% of the yield observed in the experiments. In result, the calculated time spectra, obtained for the small $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^S`$, are dominated by weak non-resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation, which disagrees with the experimental data. Therefore, we have investigated influence of a broadening of the non-phonon resonant peaks, due to the presence of molecular rovibrational bands in solid, discussed in Ref. vank83 . Since in the literature there is no information concerning the profile of such bands, we have assumed a rectangular shape of the resonance peaks. The resonance strengths have been fixed and their widths have been changed in the limits 0.001–1 meV. It turns out that good Monte Carlo results are obtained for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^S`$ 0.5 meV, which is consistent with the rotational bandwidths of about 1 meV reported in Ref. vank83 . This gives the resonant formation rate of 294 $`\mu `$s-1 for the recoilless peak in ortho-D2, and respectively 214 $`\mu `$s-1 in para-D2. In Fig. 14 one sees the resonant formation rate at lowest energies for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^S=`$ 0.5 meV and for the statistical mixture of ortho- and para-states. Also shown is the Monte Carlo distribution of $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ energy, calculated for times $`t=`$ 10 ns and $`t=`$ 30 ns. The Maxwell distribution of initial $`d\mu `$ energy, with $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}=`$ 1 eV, has been assumed. Two minima in the $`d\mu `$ energy distribution appear quickly at the positions of the resonance peaks since the respective $`dd\mu `$ formation rates are comparable with the total inelastic scattering rate of about 30 $`\mu `$s-1.

The $`dd`$ fusion neutron spectrum, calculated assuming the same initial $`d\mu `$ energy and resonance profiles, is shown in Fig. 15. A 3.2$`\times 10^6`$ concentration of nitrogen is included in order to fit the TRIUMF target conditions. The solid line plotted in this figure has been calculated using the steady-state kinetics model with the effective formation rate $`\overline{\lambda }_{stat}^{3/2}=`$ 3 $`\mu `$s-1 and total spin-flip rate $`\lambda _{\frac{3}{2},\frac{1}{2}}=`$ 36 $`\mu `$s-1 taken from the fits to the experimental data know97 . The slope of the spectrum at $`t`$ 80 ns is determined by the rates $`\overline{\lambda }_{stat}^{3/2}`$, $`\lambda _{\frac{3}{2},\frac{1}{2}}`$, and $`d\mu `$ scattering rate which also changes the population of $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ atoms in the vicinity of the resonant peaks. The steady-state kinetics model does not include the process of $`d\mu `$ deceleration. Therefore, fits using this model could entangle the deceleration rate with the formation and spin-flip rates. The mean formation rate, calculated directly in the Monte Carlo runs, is a function of time, and it stays at the level of 1–3 $`\mu `$s-1. The spectrum slope at large times $`t`$ 100 ns, when $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ atoms practically disappear, are due to the nonresonant $`dd\mu `$ formation from $`F=\frac{1}{2}`$ and to the muon transfer to nitrogen contamination.

The shape of the time spectra practically does not change when the mean energy $`\epsilon _{\text{avg}}`$ of the initial single Maxwell distribution varies in the limits 0.01–1 eV. On the other hand, the spectra change strongly if a significant part of $`d\mu `$ atoms at $`t=0`$ has energy smaller than the energy of the lowest resonant peak, which can be observed using a more complicated (e.g. two-Maxwell distribution). Assuming that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^S`$ is greater than 0.5 meV we obtain results which begin to differ significantly from the analytical curve calculated with the experimental parameters. In particular, the ratios of neutron yields from the short and large times begin to disagree. Fits of the calculated spectra to the experimental data would enable a better determining of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^S`$ and a shape of the initial $`d\mu `$ energy. However, this is not the purpose of this work. A qualitative comparison of Monte Carlo spectra with the experimental data has already been performed in article know97 . In this case good fits were not obtained since at that time the resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation rates in solid D2 and $`d\mu `$ scattering rates including coherent effects in the solid were not yet available.

Our calculations show that strong resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation takes place both in ortho-D2 and para-D2. There are certain differences between the neutron time spectra from these targets (see Fig. 16), caused by the different positions and strengths of the lowest resonance peaks. Also $`d\mu `$ slowing down process differs slightly in the two cases. The neutron yield at larger times is smaller for ortho-D2 since in this case the resonance peak is placed at higher energy of 2.3 meV. Therefore, $`d\mu `$ atoms are removed faster from the peak compared to the situation in para-D2, where the resonance is observed at 1.6 meV. A greater mean $`d\mu `$ energy in para-D2 (cf. Fig. 12) leads also to a stronger overlap of the resonance peak and $`d\mu `$ energy distribution at $`t20`$ ns. However, the differences between the spectra can be clearly seen only in high-statistics experiments.

## VII Conclusions

The methods used for description of resonant neutron and $`\gamma `$-ray absorption in condensed matter have been directly applied for calculation of resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation and back-decay rates in condensed deuterium targets. These rates are expressed in terms of the Van Hove single-particle function, which depends on properties of a given target. In particular, we have derived the analytical formulas for the rate in the case of resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation in a harmonic solid deuterium. The calculations show great differences between resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation in 3 K solid deuterium and in 3 K D2 gas. In solid, the formation at a few meV, which determines the experimental results, is dominated by presence of the strong recoilless resonant peaks. On the other hand, the formation with simultaneous phonon creation is important above the Debye energy. The resonance profiles in the solid at higher energies are similar to that in D2 gas, but with the effective temperature equal to 40 K. This temperature is determined by the energy of zero-point vibration of D2 molecule in the lattice. Phonon creation is always important in the case of $`dd\mu `$ back decay because it is connected with energy release of a few tens meV, which is much greater than the Debye energy.

A condition $`T/\mathrm{\Theta }__D1`$ is fulfilled for any solid deuterium target at low pressure. Therefore, the parameters determining solid state effects (Debye-Waller factor, mean energy of D2 vibration in solid) weakly depend on target temperature $`T`$. They are expressed in terms of the Debye energy $`w__\text{D}`$ which does not significantly change with the varying solid temperature $`T`$. In result, the resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation rates in solid deuterium for different $`T`$ are very similar and one may expect that the average formation rates, derived from measurements performed at different temperatures, will also be very close. This is confirmed by the results of experiments carried out at TRIUMF and at JINR.

The structure of a solid deuterium target depends on its temperature and history. Targets maintained at $`T`$ 4 K have the hcp structure silv80 . Though our calculations have been performed for fcc crystals, the obtained results are also good approximations of the resonant rates in hcp polycrystals since the Debye temperature and nearest neighbor distance are similar for these two lattices. In general, the formulas derived in this paper can be used in a wide range of target temperature and density, with appropriate experimental values of the Debye temperature and lattice constant taken into account.

The Monte Carlo calculations show that $`d\mu `$ deceleration below the Debye energy is very slow and that mean energy of $`d\mu (F=\frac{3}{2})`$ atom is always significantly greater than 1 meV. The energy distribution of $`d\mu `$’s during their lifetime is very broad (at least a few meV), therefore a strong overlap of this distribution and lowest resonance peaks takes place, leading to a large mean $`dd\mu `$ formation rate in solid deuterium. However, explanation of the experiments is possible only if the broadening of rovibrational molecular levels in solid is taken into account. We obtained reasonable results assuming that the strengths of the recoilless resonant peaks are constant and that the rotational bands increase the resonance peak width to 0.5 meV. Note that, according to Ref. vank83 , high pressures lead to a greater broadening and even to a mixing of rotational states. This could complicate a comparison of theory and high-pressure experiments. The phonon part of the resonant rate give only about 10% contribution to the calculated neutron time spectra.

The $`dd`$ fusion neutron spectra calculated for ortho-D2 and para-D2 solid targets are quite similar. Small differences between the spectra are due to the different energies and strengths of the lowest resonant peaks, and to a slightly higher mean $`d\mu `$ energy in para-D2. These differences can be clearly seen only in high-statistics experiments. Our calculations do not confirm a lack of strong resonant $`dd\mu `$ formation in solid ortho-D2, predicted in the papers mens96 ; guri99 . In order to verify the theory it is necessary to perform measurements in pure ortho-D2 and para-D2 solid targets under the same conditions.

###### Acknowledgements.

We wish to thank L. I. Ponomarev for stimulationg discussions. We are grateful to G. M. Marshall for a critical reading of the manuscript. This work was supported in part through Grant INTAS 97-11032.