text:
# Untitled Document

Retarded Electromagnetic Interaction and the
Origin of Non-linear Phenomena in Optics
Mei Xiaochun

(Department of Physics, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, 350025, China, E-mail: fzbgk@pub3.fz.fj.cn)

The non-linear relation between electric polarization and electric field strength is achieved through introducing the retarded electromagnetic interactions between classical charge particles. The result agrees with the phenomenological theory in current non-linear optics, means that the non-linear phenomena in optics come from the retarded electromagnetic interaction between charged particles.

The current non-linear optics describes interaction between light and materials by the half-classical method, i.e., use the classical theory of electromagnetic field to describe light’s motion and quantum theory to describe interaction between photons and material particles. The theory can deal with non-linear optics well. The Maxwell equation of electromagnetic interaction in medium is

$$\times \stackrel{}{E}=\frac{\stackrel{}{B}}{t}\times \stackrel{}{H}=\stackrel{}{J}_f+\frac{\stackrel{}{D}}{t}$$
(1)
$$\stackrel{}{D}=\rho _f\stackrel{}{B}=0$$
(2)
The experiments show that for general non-iron electric medium and non-iron magnetic medium, under the condition of weak field, the relations between electric polarization $`\stackrel{}{P}`$ and electric field strength, as well as magnetic polarization $`\stackrel{}{M}`$ and magnetic field strength are linear, connected by the so-called constructive equations

$$\stackrel{}{D}=\epsilon \stackrel{}{E}=\epsilon _0\stackrel{}{E}+\stackrel{}{P}\stackrel{}{B}=\mu \stackrel{}{H}=\mu _0(\stackrel{}{H}+\stackrel{}{M})$$
(3)
$$\stackrel{}{P}=\epsilon _0\chi _e\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{M}=\chi _m\stackrel{}{H}$$
(4)
But the experiments also show that in the strong fields, the relations between $`\stackrel{}{P}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{E}`$, as well as $`\stackrel{}{M}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{H}`$ are non-linear and vary complex. This kind of relations can’t be deduced from theory at present. We now get them by phenomenological hypothesis. For example, in the non-linear optics, the relation between electric polarization $`\stackrel{}{P}`$ and electric field strength is supposed to be (1)

$$\stackrel{}{P}=\epsilon _0(\chi _e^1\stackrel{}{E}+\stackrel{}{\chi }_e^2\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{E}+\stackrel{}{\stackrel{}{\chi }}_e^3:\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{E}\mathrm{})$$
(5)
Here $`\chi _e^i`$ is polarization tensors. By means of the formula and the Maxwell equation, so much non-linear phenomena in optics can be described well. It is proved blow that after the retarded electromagnetic interaction between charged particles are considered, we can obtain Eq.(5) easy and shows that the non-linear phenomena in optics come from the retarded electromagnetic interaction between charged particles.

Let $`t^{},\stackrel{}{r}^{},\stackrel{}{v}^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{a}^{}`$ represent retarded time, coordinate, velocity and acceleration, $`t,\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{v}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ represent non-retarded time, coordinate, velocity and acceleration. A particle with charge $`q_i`$, velocity $`\stackrel{}{v}_j^{}`$ and acceleration $`\stackrel{}{a}_j^{}`$ at space point $`\stackrel{}{r}_j^{}(t^{})`$ and time $`t^{}`$ would cause retarded potentials as follows at space point $`\stackrel{}{r}_i(t)`$ and time $`t`$

$$\phi _{ij}^{}=\frac{q_j}{4\pi \epsilon _0(1\frac{\stackrel{}{v}_j^{}\stackrel{}{n}_{ij}}{c})r_{ij}^{}}\stackrel{}{A}_{ij}^{}=\frac{q_j\stackrel{}{v}_j^{}}{4\pi \epsilon _0(1\frac{\stackrel{}{\nu }_j^{}\stackrel{}{n}_{ij}}{c})r_{ij}^{}}$$
(6)
In the formula $`\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}^{}(t,t^{})=\stackrel{}{r}_i^{}(t)\stackrel{}{r}_j^{}(t^{})`$, $`r_{ij}^{}=\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}^{}`$, $`\stackrel{}{n}_{ij}=\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}^{}/r_{ij}^{}`$. When the particle’s speed $`v<<c`$, the retarded distance $`r_{ij}^{}(t^{})`$ at retarded time $`t^{}`$ can be replaced approximately by non-retarded distance $`r_{ij}(t)`$, i.e., we can let

$$t^{}=tr_{ij}^{}(t^{})/ctr_{ij}(t)/c$$
(7)
$$r_{ij}^{}(t,t^{})=\stackrel{}{r}_i(t)\stackrel{}{r}_j^{}(t^{})=\stackrel{}{r}_i(t)\stackrel{}{r}_j^{}[tr_{ij}^{}(t^{})/c]\stackrel{}{r}_i(t)\stackrel{}{r}_j^{}[tr_{ij}(t)/c]=r_{ij}^{}(t)$$
(8)
It is noted that $`r_{ij}^{}(t)r_{ij}(t)`$, for $`r_{ij}^{}(t)`$ is the approximate retarded distance, but $`r_{ij}(t)`$ is not the retarded distance. In this case, we can develop retarded quantities into series in light of small quantity $`r_{ij}/c`$. By relation $`\stackrel{}{v}_j=d\stackrel{}{r}_j/dt`$, we get (2)

$$\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}^{}(t,t)\stackrel{}{r}_i(t)\stackrel{}{r}_j^{}(tr_{ij}/c)=\stackrel{}{r}_i(t)\stackrel{}{r}_j(t)+\frac{\stackrel{}{v}_j(t)}{c}r_{ij}(t)\frac{\stackrel{}{a}_j(t)}{2c^2}r_{ij}^2(t)+\frac{\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}_j(t)}{6c^3}r_{ij}^3(t)+\mathrm{}$$

$$=\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}(t)+\frac{\stackrel{}{v}_j(t)}{c}r_{ij}(t)\frac{\stackrel{}{a}_j(t)}{2c^3}r_{ij}^2(t)+\frac{\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}_j(t)}{6c^3}r_{ij}^3(t)+\mathrm{}$$
(9)
$$\stackrel{}{v}_j(t^{})\stackrel{}{v}_j(t)\frac{\stackrel{}{a}_j(t)}{c}r_{ij}(t)+\frac{\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}_j(t)}{2c^3}r_{ij}^2(t)+\mathrm{}\stackrel{}{a}_j^{}(t^{})\stackrel{}{a}_j(t)\frac{\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}_j(t)}{c}r_{ij}(t)+\mathrm{}$$
(10)
Mediums are composed of atoms and molecules, and atoms and molecules can be regarded as electrical dipoles composed of two particles with charges $`\pm q`$. Suppose the distance between two charges is $`r_{ij}(t)`$ at time $`t`$, the electrical dipole moment is $`\stackrel{}{P}_j`$. The direction of $`\stackrel{}{P}_j=q_j\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}`$ is from the point the $`j`$ -particle located pointing to the mass center point $`\stackrel{}{r}_i`$ of electric dipole. By considering the retarded effect of interaction, according to Eq.(9), the retarded electrical dipole moment becomes approximately

$$\stackrel{}{P}_j^{}=q_j\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}^{}=q_j(\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}+\frac{\stackrel{}{\nu }_j}{c}r_{ij}\frac{\stackrel{}{a}_j}{2c^2}r_{ij}^2+\frac{\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}_j}{6c^3}r_{ij}^3)$$
(11)
$`\stackrel{}{v}_j(t)`$ $`\stackrel{}{a}_j(t)`$ and $`\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}_j(t)`$ are the -particle’s velocity, acceleration and acceleration of acceleration individually. If there is only one electrical dipole in space, the directions of $`\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}`$, $`\stackrel{}{v}_j`$, $`\stackrel{}{a}_j`$ and $`\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}_j`$ are on the same straight line. In this case, the subscript can be removed and Eq.(11) can be written as

$$P^{}=q(r+\frac{v}{c}r\frac{a}{2c^2}r^2+\frac{\dot{a}}{6c^3}r^3+\mathrm{})$$
(12)
When there exists the action of external electric field $`E=E_0\mathrm{sin}(\omega t+\theta _0^{})`$, the motion equation of electrical dipole is

$$\frac{d^2r}{dt^2}+2\beta \frac{dr}{dt}+\omega _0^2r=\frac{qE_0}{m}\mathrm{sin}(\omega t\theta _0^{})$$
(13)
The second item on the right side is damping force (radiation damping force and damping force caused by collisions between particles). When $`\omega _2>\beta `$, the solution of Eq.(13) is (3)

$$r=A\mathrm{sin}(\omega t\theta _0)+Be^{\beta t}\mathrm{sin}(\sqrt{\omega _0^2\beta ^2t}\delta )$$
(14)
$$A=\frac{qE_0}{m\sqrt{(\omega _0^2\omega ^2)^2+(2\beta \omega )^2}}\theta _0=\theta _0^{}+tg^1(\frac{\beta \omega }{\omega _0^2\omega ^2})$$
(15)
When $`t`$ is big enough, we have $`e^{\beta t/2}0`$ and the second item on the right side of Eq.(14) can be omitted. In this case, we have

$$v=A\omega \mathrm{cos}(\omega t\theta _0)a=A\omega ^2\mathrm{sin}(\omega t\theta _0)\dot{a}=A\omega ^3\mathrm{cos}(\omega t\theta _0)$$
(16)
Put them into Eq.(12), we get

$$P^{}=qA\{\mathrm{sin}(\omega t\theta _0)+\frac{\omega }{c}\mathrm{sin}(\omega t\theta _0)\mathrm{cos}(\omega t\theta _0)+\frac{\omega ^2}{2c^2}\mathrm{sin}^3(\omega t\theta _0)$$

$$\frac{\omega ^3}{6c^3}\mathrm{sin}^3(\omega t\theta _0)\mathrm{cos}(\omega t\theta _0)+\mathrm{}\}$$

$$=qA\{(1+\frac{3\omega ^2}{8c^2})\mathrm{sin}(\omega t\theta _0)+\frac{\omega }{2c}(1\frac{\omega ^2}{24c^2})\mathrm{sin}(2\omega t2\theta _0)\frac{\omega ^2}{8c^2}\mathrm{sin}(3\omega t3\theta _0)$$

$$+\frac{\omega ^3}{48c^3}\mathrm{sin}(4\omega t4\theta _0)+\mathrm{}\}$$
(17)
It is obvious that after the retarded interaction is considered, the waves of $`2,3,4\mathrm{}`$ multiple frequencies would appear in the vibrations of electrical dipoles. If two electric fields with different frequencies are imported with

$$E=E_1\mathrm{sin}(\omega _1t\theta _1^{})+E_2\mathrm{sin}(\omega _2t\theta _2^{})$$
(18)
similar results can be obtained

$$r=A_1\mathrm{sin}(\omega _1t\theta _1)+A_2\mathrm{sin}(\omega _2t\theta _2)$$
(19)
$$\nu =A_1\omega _1\mathrm{cos}(\omega _1t\theta _1)+A_2\omega _2\mathrm{cos}(\omega _2t\theta _2)$$
(20)
$$a=A_1\omega _1^2\mathrm{sin}(\omega _1t\theta _1)A_2\omega _2^2\mathrm{sin}(\omega _2t\theta _2)$$
(21)
$$\dot{a}=A_1\omega _1^3\mathrm{cos}(\omega _1t\theta _1)A_2\omega _2^2\mathrm{cos}(\omega _2t\theta _2)$$
(22)
In the formula, $`A_i=qE_0/m\sqrt{(\omega _0^2\omega _i^2)^2+(2\beta \omega _i)^2}`$, $`\theta _i=\theta _i^{}+tg^1[2\beta \omega /(\omega _0^2\omega ^2)]`$. Put them into Eq.(12), we get

$$P^{}=q\{[A_1+\frac{A_1^2\omega _1}{2c}+A_1A_2^2(\frac{\omega _1^2}{2}+\omega _2^2)]\mathrm{sin}(\omega _1t\theta _1)+[A_2+\frac{A_2^2\omega _2}{2c}+A_1^2A_2(\omega _1^2+\frac{\omega _1^2}{2})]\mathrm{sin}(\omega _2t\theta _2)$$

$$+\frac{A_1A_2}{2c}[(\omega _1+\omega _2)\mathrm{sin}((\omega _1+\omega _2)t(\theta _1+\theta _2))+(\omega _1\omega _2)\mathrm{sin}((\omega _2\omega _1)t(\theta _2\theta _1))]$$

$$+\frac{A_1^3\omega _1^2}{4c}[\mathrm{sin}(3\omega _1t3\theta _1)3\mathrm{sin}(\omega _1t\theta _1)]+\frac{A_2^3\omega _2^2}{4c}[\mathrm{sin}(3\omega _2t3\theta _2)3\mathrm{sin}(\omega _2t\theta _2)]$$

$$A_1A_2^2(\frac{\omega _1^2}{4}+\omega _2^2)[\mathrm{sin}((\omega _1+2\omega _2)t(\theta _1+2\theta _2))+\mathrm{sin}((\omega _12\omega _2)t(\theta _12\theta _2))]$$

$$A_1^2A_2(\omega _1^2+\frac{\omega _2^2}{4})[\mathrm{sin}((\omega _2+2\omega _1)t(\theta _2+2\theta _1))+\mathrm{sin}((\omega _22\omega _1)t(\theta _22\theta _1))]+\mathrm{}\}$$
(23)
Besides multiple frequencies, sum frequencies and different frequencies would appear.

Because $`v=A\omega \mathrm{cos}(\omega t\theta _0)=A\omega \mathrm{sin}(\omega t\theta _0\pi 2)`$, there is a difference of phase $`\pi /2`$ between $`v/\omega `$ and $`r`$. There is also a difference of phase $`\pi /2`$ between $`\dot{a}/\omega ^3`$ and $`r`$. If these differences are omitted, we can let $`v\omega r`$, $`\dot{a}\omega ^3r`$. Considering $`a=\omega ^2r`$, put the relations into Eq.(12), we get

$$P^{}q(r+\frac{\omega }{c}r^2+\frac{\omega ^2}{2c^2}r^3+\frac{\omega ^3}{6c^3}r^4+\mathrm{})$$
(24)
According to Eq.(14), when $`t`$ is large enough and the differencd of phase is omitted, the displacement of dipole directs radio to electric field’s strength, i.e., $`r=\alpha E`$, $`\alpha =q/m\sqrt{(\omega _0^2\omega ^2)^2+(2\beta \omega )^2}`$. For the vibrations of atoms in crystal lattice, we have $`\omega >>\omega _0`$ and $`\omega >>\beta `$, so $`\alpha q/m\omega ^2`$. Put the relation into the formula above, we get

$$P^{}q\alpha (E+\frac{\omega \alpha }{c}E^2+\frac{\omega ^2\alpha ^2}{2c^2}E^3+\frac{\omega ^3\alpha ^3}{6c^3}E^4+\mathrm{})$$
(25)
This is just the non-linear relation between electrical polarization and electric field strength. Suppose the wavelength of incident wave is $`\lambda =4\times 10^7M`$, the dipole vibrating in lattice is hydrogen with mass $`m`$, we get

$$\frac{\omega \alpha }{c}=\frac{q}{cm\omega }3.14\times 10^{10}M/V$$
(26)
The radio of parameters between the first item and second item is about $`10^{10}`$. This value coincides with experiments (4). Eq.(27) can be written as

$$P^{}\epsilon _0(\chi _e^1E+\chi _e^2\frac{\omega \alpha }{c}E^2+\frac{\omega ^2\alpha ^2}{2c^2}E^3+\frac{\omega ^3\alpha ^3}{6c^3}E^4+\mathrm{})$$
(27)
$$\chi _e^1=\frac{q\alpha }{\epsilon _0}\chi _e^2=\frac{q\omega \alpha ^2}{\epsilon _0c}\chi _e^3=\frac{q\omega ^2\alpha ^3}{2\epsilon _0c^2}\chi _e^4=\frac{q\omega ^3\alpha ^4}{6\epsilon _0c^3}$$
(28)
But it should be noted that the results exists phase differences between on Eq.(29) and (12) and Eq.(12) is fundamental.

In the practical systems, there exist many dipoles and interactions between dipoles. Besides vibrations, dipoles may rotate and shift, so the directions of $`\stackrel{}{r}_{ij}`$, $`\stackrel{}{v}_j`$, $`\stackrel{}{a}_j`$ and $`\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}_j`$ are not on the same straight lines in general. By taking sum and let $`q_j\alpha _j=\epsilon _0\chi _{ej\sigma }^1`$, $`q_j\omega _j\alpha _j^2/c=\epsilon _0\chi _{ej\sigma }^2\mathrm{}`$, the total electrical dipole moment of medium can be written as the form of partial quantities

$$P_\sigma =\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}P_{j\sigma }^{}=\epsilon \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}(\chi _{ej\sigma }^1E+\chi _{ej\sigma }^2E^2+\chi _{ej\sigma }^3E^3+\mathrm{})$$
(29)
Because the model of dipole is only a kind of approximation, by considering interactions between particles as well as by considering other complex factors, in general situation, the non-linear relation between electrical polarization and electric field strength should be written as the form of product form of tensors

$$\stackrel{}{P}=\epsilon _0(\chi _e^1\stackrel{}{E}+\stackrel{}{\chi }_e^2\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{E}+\stackrel{}{\stackrel{}{\chi }}_e^3:\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{E}+\mathrm{})$$
(30)
This is just the foundational relation used in non-linear optics.

In order to explain the origin of non-linear phenomena in optics or Eq.(32), the non-linear oscillator model is discussed at present. The motion equation of oscillator is written as (1)

$$\frac{d^2r}{dt^2}+2\beta \frac{dr}{dt}+\omega _0^2r+Dr^2=\frac{F}{m}$$
(31)
In the formula, $`mDr^2`$ is the non-linear force to cause non-linear effects. However, it should be seen that the origin of this item is still unclear. Where it comes from? Why is takes such form, not $`mDr^{1/2}`$ or $`mDr^3`$ and so on. The current theory can’t provide clear explanation. Meanwhile, the value of parameter $`D`$ can’t be decided by theory. Quantum mechanics provides a method of perturbation approximation to calculate polarizability, but does not yet provide explanation for the origin of non-linear phenomena. So it is proper to consider that the origin of non-linear in optics comes from the retarded electromagnetic interaction.

Because $`\stackrel{}{v}\stackrel{}{v}`$, $`\stackrel{}{a}\stackrel{}{a}`$, $`\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}\dot{\stackrel{}{a}}`$ under time reversal, so $`\stackrel{}{r}^{}`$ shown in Eq.(11) can’t keep unchanged under time reversal. In this way, it can be said that most of non-linear phenomenon in optics violate symmetry of time reversal.
Reference
(1) Zuo Chongpei, Non-linear Physics, Tianjing Science and Technology Publishing House, 267 271 1995 .
(2) Cao Changqi, Electrodynamic, People Education House, 240 1979 .
(3) Zhuo Yanbo, Theoretical Mechanics, Jiangshu Since and Technology Publishing House, 107 1979 .
(4) J A Wan-Vechten Phys. Rev.,183, 709 (1969).


format: text

text:
# Semileptonic 𝐵→𝜂ℓ𝜈 decay in light cone QCD

## 1 Introduction

The paradigm of CP violation related to the structure of CKM matrix in the Standard Model (and its beyond) is fueling an impressive experimental programme for the study of both exclusive and inclusive B-decays. The data from BaBar and Belle open new era of B meson physics, and open a real possibility for detecting semileptonic decay modes of B mesons. The semileptonic decay modes of B mesons are much cleaner samples then the nonleptonic decay modes since in these modes, there does not exist any problems connected with the presence of a third strongly interacting particle. For this reason, the study of semileptonic decays is one of the efficient ways for the determination of the CKM matrix elements. For example $`V_{cb}`$ has been determined from semileptonic meson decays . CLEO collaboration  have measured the branching ratios of $`B^0\pi ^{}\mathrm{}^+\nu `$ and $`B^0\rho ^{}\mathrm{}^+\nu `$ which leads to $`|V_{ub}|=(3.25\pm 0.14_{0.29}^{+0.21}\pm 0.55)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^3`$. It is well known that for accurate determination of CKM matrix elements we need more reliable determination of transition form factors.

In this work we calculate the transition form factors for $`B\eta \mathrm{}\nu `$ decay in light cone QCD sum rules (LCQSR) method. The detailed description of the method and its applications can be found in . It should be noted that interest to the $`B\eta \mathrm{}\nu `$ and $`B\eta ^{}\mathrm{}\nu `$ semileptonic decays is due to the fact that they also give information on the $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ mixing (see for example ).

The work is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, we derive the sum rules for the transition form factors of $`B\eta \mathrm{}\nu `$ decay. Section 3 is devoted to the numerical analysis and contain a summary of the results and our conclusions.

## 2 Light Cone QCD Sum Rules for the $`B\eta `$ transition form factors

The $`B\eta `$ weak transition form factors $`f_+(q^2)`$ and $`f_{}(q^2)`$ are defined as:

$`\eta (p)|\overline{u}\gamma _\mu (1+\gamma _5)b|B(p+q)=2f_+p_\mu +(f_++f_{})q_\mu .`$ (1)
In this section, we calculate these form factors using light cone QCD sum rule method. We adopt the usual strategy of light cone sum rules method by considering the following correlator function:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu (p,q)=i{\displaystyle d^4xe^{iqx}\eta (p)|T\left\{\overline{u}(x)\gamma _\mu (1+\gamma _5)b(x)\overline{b}(0)i(1+\gamma _5)u(0)\right\}|0}`$ (2)
The main reason for choosing the chiral $`\overline{b}i(1+\gamma _5)u`$ current instead of the $`\overline{b}i\gamma _5u`$ current, which have been used in the calculation of the $`B\pi `$ weak form factor , is that in this case, twist-3 wave functions which are the main inputs in LCQSR method and which bring the main uncertainty to the prediction, do not contribute (see below, see also ).

First let us consider the hadronic representation of the correlator. By inserting a complete set of states with the same quantum numbers as the operator $`\overline{b}i(1+\gamma _5)u`$ between the currents and isolating the pole term of the lowest pseudo scalar $`B`$ meson, we get the following hadronic representation of the correlator:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu (p,q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\eta |\overline{u}\gamma _\mu b|BB|\overline{b}i\gamma _5u|0}{m_B^2(p+q)^2}}+{\displaystyle \underset{h}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\eta |\overline{u}\gamma _\mu b|hh|\overline{b}i(1+\gamma _5)u|0}{m_h^2(p+q)^2}}`$ (3)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1(q^2,(p+q)^2)p_\mu +\mathrm{\Pi }_2(q^2,(p+q)^2)q_\mu `$
The sum in Eq. 3 takes into account the contributions of the higher states and continuum. Note that the intermediate states $`h`$ contain not only pseudo scalar resonances of masses greater the $`m_B`$, but also scalar resonances with $`J^P=0^+`$ corresponding to the operator $`\overline{b}u`$.

For the invariant amplitudes $`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$, one can write a general dispersion relation in the $`B`$ meson momentum squared, $`(p+q)^2`$, as:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_i(q^2,(p+q)^2)={\displaystyle 𝑑s\frac{\rho _i(s)}{s(p+q)^2}}+subtractions`$ (4)
where $`subtractions`$ are polynomials in $`(p+q)^2`$ and the spectral densities corresponding to Eq. (3) are given as:

$`\rho _1(s)`$ $`=`$ $`2f_+(q^2){\displaystyle \frac{m_B^2f_B}{m_b}}\delta (sm_B^2)+\rho _1^h(s)`$ (5)
$`\rho _2(s)`$ $`=`$ $`(f_++f_{}){\displaystyle \frac{m_B^2f_B}{m_b}}\delta (sm_B^2)+\rho _2^h(s)`$ (6)
The first terms in Eqs. (5) and (6) represent the ground state B-meson contribution and are easily obtained from Eq. (3) using Eq. (1) and the definition

$`B|\overline{b}i\gamma _5d|0={\displaystyle \frac{m_B^2f_B}{m_b}}`$
whereas $`\rho _i^h`$ represent the spectral densities of the higher resonances and the continuum. The spectral densities $`\rho _i^h`$ can be approximated by invoking the quark-hadron duality ansatz:

$`\rho _i^h(s)=\rho _i^{QCD}\theta (ss_0)`$ (7)
So for the hadronic representation of the invariant amplitudes $`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ we get:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2f_+(q^2)m_B^2f_B}{m_b(m_B^2(p+q)^2)}}+{\displaystyle _{s_0}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑s{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _1^{QCD}(s)}{s(p+q)^2}}+subtractions`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(f_++f_{})m_B^2f_B}{m_b(m_B^2(p+q)^2)}}+{\displaystyle _{s_0}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑s{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _2^{QCD}(s)}{s(p+q)^2}}+subtractions`$ (8)
For obtaining sum rules for the form factors $`f_+`$ and $`f_{}`$ we must calculate the correlator function in QCD. It can be done by using the light cone OPE method; i.e. by expanding the $`T`$ product of currents near the light cone $`x^20`$. After contracting the $`b`$-quark fields we get

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu (p,q)=i{\displaystyle d^4xe^{iqx}\eta (p)|\overline{u}(x)\gamma _\mu (1+\gamma _5)S_b(x)(1+\gamma _5)u(0)|0}`$ (9)
where $`S_b`$ is the full propagator of the $`b`$ quark. Its explicit expression is given by the following expression

$`iS_b(x)`$ $`=`$ $`iS_b^0(x)igs{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}}e^{ikx}{\displaystyle _0^2}dv\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{)}k+m_b}{(m_b^2k^2)^2}}G^{\mu \nu }(vx)\sigma _{\mu \nu }`$ (10)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_b^2k^2}}vx_\mu G^{\mu \nu }(vx)\gamma _\nu \}`$
Here $`S_b^0(x)`$ is the free quark propagator of the massive $`b`$ quark:

$`S_b^0(x)={\displaystyle \frac{m_b^2}{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{K_1(m_b\sqrt{x^2})}{\sqrt{x^2}}}i{\displaystyle \frac{m_b^2}{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{)}x}{x^2}}K_2(m_b\sqrt{x^2})`$ (11)
where $`K_i`$ are the Bessel functions.

From Eqs. (9)-(11) it follows that, in order to calculate the theoretical part of the correlator function, the matrix elements of the nonlocal operators between $`\eta `$ meson and vacuum states are needed.

Here we would like to do following remark: in all the following calculations we neglect the $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ mixing since it is very small , and therefore we choose as the interpolating current for the $`\eta `$ meson, the SU(3) octet axial vector current:

$`J_\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}}(\overline{u}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5u+\overline{d}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5d2\overline{s}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5s)`$ (12)
In order to simplify the notation we use $`\overline{q}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu q`$ to denote $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(\overline{u}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5u+\overline{d}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5d2\overline{s}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5s)`$ and introduce notation $`F_\eta =\frac{f_\eta }{\sqrt{6}}`$, where $`f_\eta `$ determined as $`0|\overline{q}(0)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu q(0)|\eta (q)=if_\eta q_\mu `$.

An important observation is that the terms in $`S_b(x)`$ containing odd number of gamma matrices do not contribute, i.e. leading twist-3 terms do not give any contribution. Up to twist-4, the $`\eta `$ meson wave functions are defined in the following way  :

$`\eta (p)|\overline{q}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5q|0`$ $`=`$ $`if_\eta p_\mu {\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑ue^{iupx}\left[\phi _\eta (u)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}m_\eta ^2x^2A(u)\right]`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}f_\eta m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{x_\mu }{px}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑ue^{iupx}B(u)`$
$`\eta (p)|\overline{q}(x)\gamma _\mu \gamma _5g_sG_{\alpha \beta }(vx)q(0)|0`$ $`=`$ $`f_\eta m_\eta ^2\left[p_\beta \left(g_{\alpha \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{x_\alpha p_\mu }{px}}\right)p_\alpha \left(g_{\beta \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{x_\beta p_\mu }{px}}\right)\right]`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }𝒟\alpha _i\phi _{}(\alpha _i)e^{ipx(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)}`$
$`+f_\eta m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{p_\mu }{px}}(p_\alpha x_\beta p_\beta x_\alpha ){\displaystyle 𝒟\alpha _i\phi _{}(\alpha _i)e^{ipx(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)}}`$
$`\eta (p)|\overline{q}(x)g_s\stackrel{~}{G}_{\alpha \beta }(vx)\gamma _\mu q(0)|0`$ $`=`$ $`if_\eta m_\eta ^2\left[p_\beta \left(g_{\alpha \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{x_\alpha p_\mu }{px}}\right)p_\alpha \left(g_{\beta \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{x_\beta p_\mu }{px}}\right)\right]`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }𝒟\alpha _i\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)e^{ipx(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)}`$
$`+if_\eta m_\eta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{p_\mu }{px}}(p_\alpha x_\beta p_\beta x_\alpha ){\displaystyle 𝒟\alpha _i\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)e^{ipx(\alpha _1+u\alpha _3)}}`$
where $`\stackrel{~}{G}_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{\mu \nu \sigma \lambda }G^{\sigma \lambda }`$, $`𝒟\alpha _i=d\alpha _1d\alpha _2d\alpha _3\delta (1\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3)`$. In Eqs. (13)-(LABEL:eq14), the $`\phi _\eta (u)`$ is the leading twist-2, $`A(u)`$ and part of $`B(u)`$ are two particle twist-4, $`\phi _{}(\alpha _i)`$, $`\phi _{}(\alpha _i)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)`$ are three particle twist-4 wave functions.

Here we should note that that matrix element $`\eta (p)|\overline{u}\gamma _\mu G^{\alpha \beta }(ux)\sigma _{\alpha \beta }u|0=0`$ due to the parity invariance of strong interactions and using the identity

$`\gamma _\mu \sigma _{\alpha \beta }=i(g_{\mu \alpha }\gamma _\beta g_{\mu \beta }\gamma _\alpha )+ϵ_{\mu \alpha \beta \rho }\gamma ^\rho \gamma _5`$
Inserting Eqs. (10) and (11) into Eq. (9) and using definitions of $`\eta `$-meson wave functions (Eqs. (13)-(LABEL:eq14)) for the theoretical part of the correlation function we get:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu ^{th}=`$ $`i\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle }d^4xe^{iqx}[{\displaystyle _0^1}due^{iupx}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{32\pi ^2}}F_\eta m_b^2(16\phi _\eta +Am_\eta ^2x^2){\displaystyle \frac{K_1(m_b\sqrt{x^2})}{\sqrt{x^2}}}p_\mu `$ (16)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi ^2}}F_\eta m_b^2m_\eta ^2B{\displaystyle \frac{K_1(m_b\sqrt{x^2})}{\sqrt{x^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{x_\mu }{px}}\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle }𝒟\alpha {\displaystyle _0^1}due^{i(\alpha _2+u\alpha _3)px}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12\pi ^2}}F_\eta m_\eta ^2m_b(\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{})K_0(m_b\sqrt{x^2}){\displaystyle \frac{x_\mu p^2p_\mu (px)}{px}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12\pi ^2}}F_\eta m_\eta ^2m_b(\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{})K_0(m_b\sqrt{x^2}){\displaystyle \frac{p^2x_\mu +2(px)p_\mu }{px}}\}]`$
The next task is to carry out the fourier transformation and then to take the Borel transform with respect to the variable $`(p+q)^2`$ in order to suppress the contributions of the higher states and the continuum and also in order to eliminate the subtraction terms. Finally we identify the same structures both at the hadronic and quark gluon levels. Subtraction of the continuum contribution is done by employing the quark-hadron duality as mentioned before. This amounts to restricting the spectral integral to $`ss_0`$. (for more details about this procedure see the appendix and also ). For the theoretical part of the correlator (2) function we get:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu ^{th}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}F_\eta {\displaystyle \frac{m_\eta ^2}{3}}I_1^1(\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}2\phi _{}2\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{})p_\mu +\sqrt{2}F_\eta {\displaystyle \frac{m_\eta ^4}{3m_b}}\stackrel{~}{I}_2^2(\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}+\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{})p_\mu `$ (17)
$`+2\sqrt{2}F_\eta m_bJ_1^0(\phi _\eta )p_\mu \sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \frac{F_\eta }{16}}m_bm_\eta ^2J_1^2(A)p_\mu \sqrt{2}F_\eta m_\eta ^2\stackrel{~}{J}_2^1(B)p_\mu `$
$`\sqrt{2}F_\eta m_\eta ^2J_2^1(B)q_\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3m_b}}F_\eta m_\eta ^4I_2^2(\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}+\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{})q_\mu `$
where the functions $`I_n^m(\phi )`$, $`J_n^m(\phi )`$, $`\stackrel{~}{I}_n^m(\phi )`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{J}_n^m(\phi )`$ are defined in the appendix.

Equating the coefficients of the corresponding $`p_\mu `$ and $`q_\mu `$ structures in Eqs. (3-6)) and (17) we get the following sum rules for the form factors $`f_+`$ and $`f_++f_{}`$ respectively:

$`f_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_bF_\eta }{\sqrt{2}m_B^2f_B}}e^{\frac{m_B^2}{M^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{m_\eta ^2}{3}}I_1^1(\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}2\phi _{}2\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{})`$ (18)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{m_\eta ^4}{3m_b}}\stackrel{~}{I}_2^2(\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}+\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{})+2m_bJ_1^0(\phi _\eta ){\displaystyle \frac{m_bm_\eta ^2}{16}}J_1^2(A)m_\eta ^2\stackrel{~}{J}_2^1(B)]`$
$`f_++f_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}F_\eta m_b}{m_B^2f_B}}e^{\frac{m_B^2}{M^2}}\left[m_\eta ^2J_2^1(B)+{\displaystyle \frac{m_\eta ^4}{3m_b}}I_2^2(\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}+\phi _{}+\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{})\right]`$ (19)
Eqs. (18) and (19) are our final results for the $`B\eta `$ transition form factors.

## 3 Numerical Analysis

From Eqs. (18) and (19) it follows that the main input parameters of these sum rules are the $`\eta `$ meson wave functions. The explicit expressions of the wave functions $`\phi _\eta (u)`$, $`A(u)`$, $`B(u)`$ and $`\phi _{}(\alpha _i)`$, $`\phi _{}(\alpha _i)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_{}(\alpha _i)`$ are given in .

The next input parameter of the sum rule is leptonic decay constant $`F_\eta `$. It should be noted that for $`\eta `$ meson case, the situation is more complicated compared to the $`\pi `$ and $`K`$ meson cases, due to the mixing with $`\eta ^{}`$. As we already noted that we neglect mixing between $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$. More recent analysis show that the coupling to the octet current $`\eta `$ is $`f_\eta =159MeV`$ which we use in our numerical calculations.

In our calculations we neglect QCD radiative corrections. Therefore for consistency we neglect QCD corrections to the leptonic decay $`f_B=160MeV`$  (see also ).

Having these input parameters, we can carry out our numerical calculation. According to QCD sum rules philosophy, first of all, a suitable range for the auxiliary Borel parameter $`M^2`$ should be found such that the numerical results are stable. The lower limit of $`M^2`$ is determined by the requirement that the terms $`M^{2n},(n>1)`$ remain sub dominant. The upper bound of $`M^2`$ is determined by requiring that the contributions of the higher resonances and the continuum are less then $`30\%`$ of the total result. Our numerical calculations leads that both requirements are satisfied in the region $`10GeV^2<M^2<16GeV^2`$. It should be noted that the light cone QCD sum rules predictions for the form factors are reliable at the region

$`q^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}m_b^22m_b\chi `$
where $`\chi `$ is a typical hadronic scale of roughly $`0.5GeV`$. Then $`q^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}18GeV^2`$.

In Figs. (1) and (2), the $`M^2`$ dependencies of the form factors $`f_+(q^2)`$ and $`f_{}(q^2)`$ is depicted for three different values of $`q^2=0,5,10GeV^2`$ for two different values of the continuum threshold $`s_0=35,40GeV^2`$. From these figures, we see that $`f_+(q^2)`$ and $`f_{}(q^2)`$ vary weakly as $`M^2`$ varies in the region $`10GeV^2<M^2<16GeV^2`$ up to $`q^2=18GeV^2`$.

Having the working region of $`M^2`$, our next problem is to find the dependence of the form factors $`f_+(f_{})(q^2)`$ on $`q^2`$ at given values of $`M^2`$, namely at $`M^2=12GeV^2`$ and $`M^2=16GeV^2`$, at $`s_0=35GeV^2`$ and $`s_0=40GeV^2`$. We find that $`f_+^\eta (0)=0.15\pm 0.3`$ and $`f_{}^\eta (0)=0.16\pm 0.2`$. As we already noted, in the region $`q^218GeV^2`$, applicability of the light cone QCD sum rules is questionable. In order to extend our results to the full physical region, we look some parameterization of the form factors in such a way that in the region, $`0q^218GeV^2`$, this parameterization coincide with light cone QCD sum rules predictions. A good parameterization of the $`q^2`$ dependence can be given in terms of three parameters as:

$`f_i(q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{f_i(0)}{1a_F\left(\frac{q^2}{m_B^2}\right)+b_F\left(\frac{q^2}{m_B^2}\right)^2}}`$ (20)
The values of these parameters for the $`B\eta `$ transition form factors $`f_+(f_{})`$ are obtained as $`a_F=1.07\pm 0.08`$ ($`a_F=1.1\pm 0.1`$) and $`b_F=0.19\pm 0.16`$ ($`b_F=0.28\pm 0.19`$) where the quoted errors are only due to the variations of the continuum threshold, $`s_0`$, and the Borel mass, $`M^2`$.

It should be noted that the form factors of $`B\eta `$ transition can be related from $`B\pi `$ transition form factors using $`SU(3)_F`$ symmetry. For example, the value of $`f_+(q^2=0)=0.15`$ obtained via $`SU(3)_F`$ symmetry is consistent with our prediction of $`f_+(q^2=0)`$.

Finally, we would like to note that the background for the $`B\eta \mathrm{}\nu `$ decay would be much smaller than that for the $`B\pi \mathrm{}\nu `$ decay, due to the much lower multiplicity, since the background caused by $`B\eta X`$ is one order of magnitude smaller than that of $`B\pi X`$.

In conclusion, we calculate the transition form factors for $`B\eta \mathrm{}\nu `$ decay using the light cone QCD sum rules.

## Appendix A Appendix

In this appendix, the derivations of the explicit forms of the functions, $`I_i`$, and $`J_i`$, appearing in Eq. (17) are presented and the method to calculate the continuum subtractions is demonstrated. For this purpose, consider a general term of the correlation function :

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(p,q)={\displaystyle d^4xe^{iqx}_0^1𝑑u𝒟\alpha _ie^{i(\alpha _2+u\alpha _3)px}\phi (\alpha _i)f(u)\frac{K_\nu (m_b\sqrt{x^2})}{(\sqrt{x^2})^\nu }}`$ (A1)
where $`𝒟\alpha _i=d\alpha _1d\alpha _2d\alpha _3\delta (1\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3)`$ After switching to Euclidean space and carrying out the $`x`$ integration, one obtains:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(p,q)=i{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2}{m_b^2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑u𝒟\alpha _i𝑑tt^{1\nu }\phi (\alpha _i)f(u)e^{\frac{t}{2m_b}(Q^2+m_b^2)}}`$ (A2)
where $`Q^2=(q+kp)^2=q^2\overline{k}p^2k\overline{k}+k(q+p)^2`$ and $`k=\alpha _2+u\alpha _3`$, $`\overline{k}=1k`$, and all the appearing momenta are Euclidean. In order to obtain Eq. (A2), the following representation of the Bessel function $`K_\nu (x)`$ is used:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{K_\nu (m_b\sqrt{x_E^2})}{(\sqrt{x_E^2})^\nu }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{t^{\nu +1}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{m_b}{2}}\left(t+{\displaystyle \frac{x_E^2}{t}}\right)\right]`$ (A3)
where $`x_E`$ is the Euclidean position vector. Carrying out the Borel transformation with respect to $`(p+q)^2`$ using the identity:

$`e^{\alpha (p+q)^2}=\delta \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{M^2}}\alpha \right)`$ (A4)
where $``$ stands for the Borel transformation and $`M^2`$ is the Borel parameter and carrying out the $`t`$ integral, one obtains:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(M^2)={\displaystyle \frac{4i\pi ^2}{m_b}}{\displaystyle 𝑑u𝒟\alpha _i\left(\frac{2m_b}{kM^2}\right)^{1\nu }e^{s(k)}\frac{\phi (\alpha _i)f(u)}{k}}`$ (A5)
where

$`s(k)={\displaystyle \frac{m_b^2q^2\overline{k}+p^2k\overline{k}}{k}}`$ (A6)
where we have switched back to Minkowskian spacetime. Note that one can write the factors $`\frac{2m_b}{kM^2}`$ is the integrand as a differential operator acting on the exponential in the integrand and hence:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(M^2)={\displaystyle \frac{4i\pi ^2}{m_b}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{m_b}}\right)^{1\nu }{\displaystyle 𝑑u𝒟\alpha _ie^{s(k)}\frac{\phi (\alpha _i)f(u)}{k}}`$ (A7)
Note that

$`e^{\frac{s(k)}{M^2}}={\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑se^{\frac{s}{M^2}}\delta (ss(k))`$ (A8)
which is nothing but the spectral representation of the exponential. The contributions of the higher states and the continuum are subtracted by replacing a cutoff, $`s_0`$, instead of the infinity as the upper limit of the spectral integral. Hence the effect of subtraction of the continuum and the higher states is to restrict the integration region in Eq. (A7) to the regions of $`k`$ for which $`0s(k)s_0`$ which implies that $`\delta k1`$ where

$`\delta ={\displaystyle \frac{m_\eta ^2+q^2s_0+\sqrt{(m_\eta ^2+q^2s_0)^24m_\eta ^2(q^2m_b^2)}}{2m_\eta ^2}}`$ (A9)
where $`p^2=m_\eta ^2`$. Hence the contributions of the term given in Eq. (A1) to the sum rules after Borel transformation and the continuum is subtracted is given by:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(M^2)={\displaystyle \frac{4i\pi ^2}{m_b}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{m_b}}\right)^{1\nu }{\displaystyle 𝑑u𝒟\alpha _i\frac{\phi (\alpha _i)f(u)}{k}e^{\frac{s(k)}{M^2}}}`$ (A10)
where the integration region is determined by the conditions:

$`\delta k1`$
$`0u,\alpha _i1`$ (A11)
and the Dirac’s delta function in the definition of $`𝒟\alpha _i`$ fixes $`_i\alpha _i=1`$.

In order to obtain the contributions to the sum rules from terms containing additional powers of $`x_\mu `$ one can use the trick of replacing $`x_\mu `$ by differentiation with respect to $`q_\mu `$. For terms containing a factor of $`px`$ in the denominator, one can use the following trick: in order not to have any singularity at $`px=0`$, the integral of these wave functions in the absence of the exponential should cancel. Hence, for these terms only, one can write:

$`e^{i\alpha px}e^{i\alpha px}1=ipx{\displaystyle _0^\alpha }𝑑ke^{ikpx}`$ (A12)
and the rest of the calculation is similar to the presented one. Note that the subtracted $`1`$ does not contribute.

When the contributions of the continuum is subtracted and the Borel transformation is carried out for the other terms, the following functions which appear in Eq. (17) are encountered:

$`I_1^n(\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{m_b}}\right)^n\left[{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta }}𝑑\alpha _1{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta \alpha _1}}𝑑\alpha _3{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑u+{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta }}𝑑\alpha _1{\displaystyle _{1\delta \alpha _1}^{1\alpha _1}}{\displaystyle _{\frac{\delta 1+\alpha _1+\alpha _3}{\alpha _3}}^1}𝑑u\right]`$ (A13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\phi (\alpha _1,1\alpha _1\alpha _3,\alpha _3)}{1\alpha _1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3}}e^{\frac{s(1\alpha _1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3)}{M^2}}`$
$`I_2^n(\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{}{m_b}})^n[{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta }}d\alpha _1{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta \alpha _1}}d\alpha _3{\displaystyle _0^1}du{\displaystyle _\delta ^{1\alpha 1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3}}dk`$ (A14)
$`+{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta }}d\alpha _1{\displaystyle _{1\delta \alpha _1}^{1\alpha _1}}d\alpha _3{\displaystyle _{\frac{\delta 1+\alpha _1+\alpha _3}{\alpha _3}}^1}du{\displaystyle _\delta ^{1\alpha _1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3}}dk]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\phi (\alpha _1,1\alpha _1\alpha _3,\alpha _3)}{1\alpha _1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3}}e^{\frac{s(1\alpha _1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3)}{M^2}}`$
$`\stackrel{~}{I}_2^n(\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{}{m_b}})^n[{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta }}d\alpha _1{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta \alpha _1}}d\alpha _3{\displaystyle _0^1}du{\displaystyle _\delta ^{1\alpha 1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3}}dk`$ (A15)
$`+{\displaystyle _0^{1\delta }}d\alpha _1{\displaystyle _{1\delta \alpha _1}^{1\alpha _1}}d\alpha _3{\displaystyle _{\frac{\delta 1+\alpha _1+\alpha _3}{\alpha _3}}^1}du{\displaystyle _\delta ^{1\alpha _1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3}}dk]`$
$`\phi (\alpha _1,1\alpha _1\alpha _3,\alpha _3)e^{\frac{s(1\alpha _1\alpha _3+u\alpha _3)}{M^2}}`$
$`J_1^n(\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{m_b}}\right)^n{\displaystyle _\delta ^1}𝑑u{\displaystyle \frac{\phi (u)}{u}}e^{\frac{s(u)}{M^2}}`$ (A16)
$`J_2^n(\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{m_b}}\right)^n{\displaystyle _\delta ^1}𝑑u{\displaystyle _\delta ^u}𝑑k{\displaystyle \frac{\phi (u)}{k}}e^{\frac{s(k)}{M^2}}`$ (A17)
$`\stackrel{~}{J}_2^n(\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{m_b}}\right)^n{\displaystyle _\delta ^1}𝑑u{\displaystyle _\delta ^u}𝑑k\phi (u)e^{\frac{s(k)}{M^2}}`$ (A18)


text:
# The [OII]𝜆3727 Luminosity Function of the Local UniversePartly based on observations collected at the German-Spanish Astronomical Center, Calar Alto, Spain, operated by the Max-Planck-Institute für Astronomie (MPIA), Heidelberg, jointly with the Spanish National Commission for Astronomy. Partly based on observations made with the Isaac Newton Telescope operated on the island of La Palma by the Royal Greenwich Observatory in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de Los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias.

## 1 Introduction

The measurement of the Star Formation Rate (SFR) density of the Universe as a function of look-back time is a fundamental parameter in order to understand the formation and evolution of galaxies. The current picture, outlined in the last years, is that the global SFR density has been declining from a peak at redshift of z$``$1.5 to the present day value (see Hogg, 2002, and references therein). Despite one of the best direct measurements in the optical of current SFR is the nebular H$`\alpha `$ 6563Å luminosity (Kennicutt, 1998; Charlot & Longhetti, 2001), this emission line is only detectable with CCDs out to z$``$0.4. H$`\alpha `$ luminosities have been used to trace the SFR density in this redshift range (Gallego et al., 1995; Tresse & Maddox, 1998; Jones & Bland-Hawthorn, 2001; Pascual et al., 2001).

The alternative indicators used in the optical for estimating the SFR at high$`z`$ have been mainly two: UV continuum luminosities (Lilly et al., 1996; Madau et al., 1996; Madau, 1997; Connolly et al., 1997); and \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosities (Hammer et al., 1997; Hogg et al., 1998). UV fluxes are easy to obtain from broad-band photometry and, when combined with photometric redshifts, are useful to analyze large samples. The \[OII\] flux is easy to measure when in emission and is available in the optical until $`z1.5`$.

In this paper we use \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 fluxes for the Universidad Complutense de Madrid local sample to derive the local \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosity function. In §2 we discuss the sample and the new data. In §3, the local \[OII\] luminosity function is obtained. Finally, in §4 we compare the local luminosity density with estimations already available for higher redshifts. A Friedman cosmology with H$`{}_{0}{}^{}=100`$ km s-1 Mpc-1 and q$`{}_{0}{}^{}=0.5`$ has been used.

## 2 The UCM survey of Local Star-forming Galaxies: \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 data

The Universidad Complutense de Madrid (hereafter UCM) objective-prism survey (List I&II, Zamorano et al., 1994, 1996) provides an ideal tool for studying the population and properties of star-forming galaxies at low redshift. The sample consists of 191 galaxies in 471.4 deg2 with z$``$0.045 and equivalent width EW(H$`\alpha `$+\[NII\])$``$20Å. Objects were selected according to their H$`\alpha `$+\[NII\] + continuum fluxes and therefore they constitute a representative sample of current star-forming galaxies. Accurate spectrophotometry (Gallego et al., 1996, 1997) and broad-band photometry in the optical (Vitores et al., 1996a, b; Pérez-González et al., 2000, 2001) have already been published.

In September 1996 a new spectroscopic run was carried out to obtain high quality data in the \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 region. In this run a total of 108 (56%) UCM galaxies were observed again. The telescope used was the 2.5-m Isaac Newton Telescope (INT) at La Palma (Spain). The wavelength range covered was 3640Å-6180Å with a dispersion of 2.5Å/pixel. The slit width was 2 arcsec (spectral resolution of $``$7Å) except for 13 galaxies that, given their large size, were observed with a 4 arcsec slit. The reduction was made following the standard procedure using both IRAF and the Reduceme software package (Cardiel, 1999).

When joining the new results to the Gallego et al. (1996) data, a final 92% (176 out of 191) of the UCM objects had the \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 region well covered. In 145 of these 191 objects (76%), we have measured \[OII\] in emission with EW$``$5Å. A total fraction of 24% of objects show no line. Most of them are starburst nuclei-like objects, with a contribution to the global SFR (as measured from H$`\alpha `$) that is $``$25% of the total amount. The quality of the new spectra revealed the existence of underlying absorptions in the H$`\beta `$ emission line. However, we could not estimate Balmer decrements because the H$`\alpha `$ region was not covered. Color excesses were re-calculated using the observed H$`\alpha `$/H$`\beta `$ from Gallego et al. (1996) but assuming equivalent widths of the Balmer lines in absorption equal to 3Å (González Delgado et al., 1999). The new values, 0.2 in average smaller than previous ones, were used to correct for reddening. The H$`\gamma `$ line, when observed, provided a consistency check. We were not able to estimate extinction for five galaxies.

Based on the emission line diagnostic diagrams and morphological properties, Gallego et al. (1996) classified spectroscopically each of the UCM galaxies. We decided to remove all UCM galaxies under the Seyfert type. Independently of its spectroscopic class, each nucleated galaxy could harbor a dwarf seyfert nucleus. Ho et al. (1997) estimated that 43% of galaxies had such a nucleus with H$`\alpha `$ luminosity 1/100th of the typical H$`\alpha `$ luminosity of a Seyfert galaxy. This amount turns out to be about one hundredth of the L measured by Gallego et al. (1995) We decided not to include any correction relative to this effect. Once the AGNs and objects with no emission were removed, the final sample consisted of 134 and 129 galaxies with observed and extinction corrected luminosity.

## 3 The Local \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosity function

Direct information on the amount and nature of the present-day SFR in the local Universe can be obtained by constructing the \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosity function for galaxies with current star formation activity. To correct for the signal not covered by the slit, the total \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosity line for each galaxy was computed from the \[OII\] equivalent width and its continuum as obtained from the Johnson B band magnitude. Given that the \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 line is not included into the B band for the UCM galaxies, we analyzed the ratio of the actual continuum adjacent to the \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 line, and the average continuum within the B band, as measured in our spectra. The average $`k=F_B^c/F_{[OII]}^c`$ ratios for each spectroscopic type (0.94, 1.15 and 1.43 for Blue Compact Dwarfs, HII-like and disk-like objects respectively) were applied. The observed total \[OII\] line luminosity $`L_{obs}^{OII}`$ was computed as

$`L_{obs}^{OII}`$ $`=`$ $`EW_{obs}^{OII}L_{obs}^{c,OII}`$ (1)
and the adjacent continuum $`L_{obs}^{c,OII}`$ as the scaled B continuum $`L_{obs}^{c,B}`$ without the line contamination

$`L_{obs}^{c,OII}`$ $`=`$ $`L_{obs}^{c,B}/(k+EW_{obs}^{OII}{\displaystyle \frac{Qe(3727)}{\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda (B)}})`$
$`L_{obs}^{c,B}`$ $`=`$ $`P_0^B\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}^{0.4m_B}D(z)`$ (2)
where $`m_B`$ is the Johnson B apparent magnitude, $`P_0^B`$ the corresponding photometric zero point and $`D(z)`$ is the luminosity distance. It is worth noting that the B band magnitudes were not corrected for galactic extinction in order to compare with those observed \[OII\] luminosities measured from not extinction-corrected spectroscopy. The mean galactic extinction in the B band for the UCM sample is 0.23$`\pm `$0.21 if Schlegel et al. (1998) is considered or 0.12$`\pm `$0.10 if Burstein & Heiles (1982) is considered.

In a sample such as the UCM survey, the completeness is determined by the H$`\alpha `$+\[NII\] line+continuum flux. This is a pseudo apparent magnitude proportional to the current star-forming activity of the source. Gallego et al. (1995) used the V/Vmax test to obtain a complete sample of 176 galaxies within the UCM survey. These objects were selected with line+continuum flux larger than $`1.9\times 10^{14}`$erg cm$`^2`$s-1. They used that sample to determine the H$`\alpha `$ and SFR density luminosity functions for the local Universe. We proceeded here in a similar manner to estimate the \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosity function. Instead of adding artificial galaxies, we chose a final limiting flux slightly fainter than the one provided by the V/Vmax method and then we included all galaxies having non-zero flux in \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727. With the goal of quantifying the goodness of V/Vmax results, we compared with the maximum-likelihood parametric fit (STY, Yahil et al., 1991) and the nonparametric step-wise maximum-likelihood (SWML, Efstathiou et al., 1988) methods.

The resulting Schechter best fitting parameters as provided by the STY method for a limiting \[OII\] flux of $`2.2\times 10^{14}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 are: $`\alpha 1.21\pm 0.21`$, $`\varphi ^{}=10^{2.98\pm 0.19}`$ Mpc-3, and $`L^{}=10^{40.92\pm 0.13}`$ erg s-1.

The number densities for each luminosity interval obtained from the V/Vmax (both observed and extinction corrected) are tabulated in Table 1. Both fit and values, within errors, are almost identical to the ones obtained by both the V/Vmax and SWML methods. The densities were corrected for the 8% of UCM galaxies for which there is no \[OII\] data available. The luminosity function errors are those obtained considering a Gaussian distribution of $`\sigma `$ equal to the square root of the number of galaxies in each $`\mathrm{log}L(\mathrm{OII})`$ bin.

Any comparison with previous \[OII\] luminosity functions has to be done with caution, given that different measurements come from samples built with very different selection criteria. In Figure 1 we have plotted our \[OII\] observed luminosity function for the local Universe, in comparison with the one by Hogg et al. (1998) for the Caltech Faint Galaxy Redshift Survey (CFGRS), a sample of galaxies at intermediate redshift ($`0.35<z<1.5`$). The \[OII\] luminosity density of the Universe was obviously higher in the past.

Given that we have E(B–V) for every object but seven, we corrected each object luminosity as:

$`L_{corr}^{OII}=EW_{obs}^{OII}L_{obs}^{c,OII}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}^{0.4(A_{3727}E_l(BV))}`$ (3)
where $`A_{3727}=\frac{f(3727)}{0.295}=4.81`$ (Osterbrock, 1989).

The resulting Schechter best fitting parameters as provided by the STY method for a limiting flux of $`4.0\times 10^{14}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 are: $`\alpha =1.17\pm 0.08`$, $`\varphi ^{}=10^{3.71\pm 0.16}`$ Mpc-3, and $`L^{}=10^{42.66\pm 0.17}`$ erg s-1. Densities are in Table 1 (again V/Vmax and SWML results are similar).

Sullivan et al. (2000) published the luminosity function for a sample of 273 galaxies in the range $`z=0.010.3`$ selected by their emission in the ultraviolet. Their \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosities were obtained from follow-up spectroscopy and were extinction-corrected. A Schechter fit provides the following parameters: $`\alpha =1.59\pm 0.12`$, $`\varphi ^{}=10^{2.82\pm 0.18}`$ Mpc-3, and $`L^{}=10^{41.96\pm 0.09}`$ erg s-1. The differences have to be understood as coming different galaxy populations, with more abundant but less luminous galaxies in the UV-selected sample.

## 4 The evolution of the \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosity density

One of the major uncertainties when analyzing SFR densities at different redshifts arises when results obtained with several tracers have to be compared. This is why it is so important to obtain the evolution of the luminosity densities for each SFR tracer. Our local \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727 luminosity density, when combined with similar results from deep samples up to $`z1.5`$, allow us to sketch the evolution of the SFR density as traced by the observed \[OII\]luminosity. Given that the luminosity function is well fitted as a Schechter function, and $`\alpha 2`$, $`\varphi (L)`$ can be integrated for the whole range of luminosities:

$`L_{tot}={\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}L\varphi (L)𝑑L=\varphi ^{}L^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(2+\alpha )`$ (4)
For the observed luminosities, the total \[OII\] luminosity density is $`10^{38.01\pm 0.15}`$erg s$`^1`$Mpc-3 in the Local Universe ($`z0.045`$) for star-forming galaxies with $`EW(\mathrm{H}\alpha +[\mathrm{NII}])20`$Å. When the effect of the extinction is considered, the total \[OII\] extinction-corrected luminosity per unit volume corresponds to $`10^{39.00\pm 0.11}`$erg s$`^1`$Mpc-3. The extinction correction amounts for a total of one dex. This luminosity density is similar to the one we could estimate from the B band luminosity function published by citet1997ApJ…475..502G for the UCM sample. It is also comparable to the luminosity density we would obtain if we apply an average \[OII\]$`\lambda `$3727/H$`\alpha `$ factor to the extinction-corrected H$`\alpha `$ luminosity density measured by Gallego et al. (1995).

In Figure 2 we have plotted all the \[OII\] luminosity densities published in the literature. The CFGRS sample already revealed a strong evolution from z=1 to the low redshift universe. This evolution is in agreement with the Canada-France Redshift Survey results (Hammer et al., 1997). Unfortunately, these surveys only provide with observed luminosities. We have also plotted both the observed and the extinction-corrected value for the Sullivan et al. (2000) sample.

The right axis of Figure 2 shows how the $`L([\mathrm{OII}])`$ scale transforms into a SFR density scale using the nominal transformation provided by Kennicutt (1998): $`\frac{SFR}{\mathrm{M}_{}\mathrm{yr}^1}=1.4\times 10^{41}L_{[\mathrm{OII}]}`$ (erg s-1). Our total extinction-corrected \[OII\] luminosity density translates into a SFR density of $`0.014\pm 0.003\mathrm{M}_{}`$yr$`^1`$Mpc-3.

Assuming that the SFRD evolves with redshift as $`(1+z)^n`$, the combination of the UCM local value with the CFGRS data implies a $`n4`$. Such strong evolution is similar to the one obtained using H$`\alpha `$ as SFR tracer for the same redshift range. However, we want to stress that the selection effects and calibrations for each sample were different and some caution is necessary when interpreting these quantitative results.

Valuable discussions with A. Alonso-Herrero, P.G. P rez-Gonz lez and S. Pascual are gratefully acknowledged. We would also like to thank the anonymous referee for his/her useful suggestions that improved this paper. This work was supported in part by the Spanish Plan Nacional de Astronom a y Astrof sica under grant AYA2000-1790.


text:
# Exact phase shifts for atom interferometry

## 1 Introduction

Recently atom interferometers  have been described by the ABCD$`\xi `$ formalism of Gaussian atom optics ,  which yields an exact formulation of phase shifts taking into account the wave packet structure of atom waves.

For the theory of atom interferometers two basic stages are required:

1. a proper description of the propagation of wave packets between the beam splitters

2. an adequate modelization of the beam splitters themselves.

The first stage is achieved through the ABCD$`\xi `$ theorem whose main results are briefly recalled in section 2. The second problem is adressed by the $`ttt`$ theorem which provides a simple model for the phase introduced by the splitting process.

In this paper we give a compact way to express the atom interferometer phase shifts in terms of the coordinates and momenta of the wave packet centers only. For this purpose we derive two new theorems (the four end-points theorem and the phase shift theorem) valid for a Hamiltonian at-most-quadratic in position and momentum operators.

## 2 The ABCD$`\xi `$ theorem

In this framework we consider a Hamiltonian which is the sum of an internal Hamiltonian $`H_0`$ (with eigenvalues written with rest masses $`m_i`$) and an external Hamiltonian $`H_{ext}`$:

$$H_{ext}=\frac{1}{2m}\stackrel{}{p_{op}}.\stackrel{}{g}\left(t\right).\stackrel{}{p_{op}}\frac{m}{2}\stackrel{}{q_{op}}.\stackrel{}{\gamma }\left(t\right).\stackrel{}{q_{op}}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\left(t\right).\left(\stackrel{}{q_{op}}\times \stackrel{}{p_{op}}\right)m\stackrel{}{g}\left(t\right).\stackrel{}{q_{op}}$$
(1)
where one recognizes several usual gravito-inertial effects: rotation through $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\left(t\right)`$, gravity through $`\stackrel{}{g}\left(t\right)`$, gradient of gravity through $`\stackrel{}{\gamma }\left(t\right)`$,… and where $`\stackrel{}{g}\left(t\right)`$ is usually equal to the unity tensor (for simplicity we omit the transposition sign $``$ on vectors).

For a wave packet $`\psi (q,t_1)=wp(q,t_1,q_1,p_1,X_1,Y_1)`$, where $`q_1`$ is the initial mean position of the wave-packet, $`p_1`$ its initial mean momentum, and $`(X_1,Y_1)`$ its initial complex width parameters in phase space, one obtains the ABCD$`\xi `$ theorem :

$`\psi (q,t_2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3q^{}}.K(q,t_2,q^{},t_1).wp(q^{},t_1,q_1,p_1,X_1,Y_1)`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_1,p_1)}.wp(q,t_2,q_2,p_2,X_2,Y_2)`$
where $`K`$ and $`S_{cl}`$ are the quantum propagator and classical action respectively, and where $`q_2,p_2,X_2,Y_2`$ obey the ABCD law ($`G`$ and $`U`$ are the representative matrices of $`\stackrel{}{g}\left(t\right)`$ and the rotation $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\left(t\right)`$, and we write $`A_{21}`$ instead of $`A(t_2,t_1)`$ for simplicity):

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}q_2\\ p_2/m\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}U_{21}.\xi _{21}\\ G_2^1.U_{21}.\dot{\xi }_{21}\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{21}& B_{21}\\ C_{21}& D_{21}\end{array}\right).\left(\begin{array}{c}q_1\\ p_1/m\end{array}\right)$$
(3)
$$\left(\begin{array}{c}X_2\\ Y_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{21}& B_{21}\\ C_{21}& D_{21}\end{array}\right).\left(\begin{array}{c}X_1\\ Y_1\end{array}\right)$$
(4)
For example the phase of a gaussian wave packet is:

$$S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_1,p_1)/\mathrm{}+p_2.(qq_2)/\mathrm{}+\frac{m}{2\mathrm{}}(qq_2).\mathrm{R}e(Y_2.X_2^1).(qq_2)$$
(5)
and in this case the main phase shift recorded between $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ is equal to:

$$S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_1,p_1)/\mathrm{}+p_1.q_1/\mathrm{}p_2.q_2/\mathrm{}$$
(6)
## 3 The ttt theorem

When the dispersive nature of a laser beam splitter is neglected (wave packets structure preserved), its effect may be summarized by the introduction of both a phase and an amplitude factor (see  and  for a detailed proof):

$$M_{ba}.e^{i\left(\omega t^{}k^{}.q^{}+\phi ^{}\right)}$$
(7)
where $`t^{}`$ and $`q^{}`$ depend on $`t_A`$ and $`q_A`$, the mean time and position of the laser wave.

For a temporal beam splitter:

$`t^{}`$ $``$ $`t_A`$
$`q^{}`$ $``$ $`q_{cl}\left(t_A\right)`$
$`k^{}`$ $``$ $`k`$
$`\phi ^{}`$ $``$ $`\phi \text{ (laser phase)}`$ (8)
For a spatial beam splitter:

$`q^{}`$ $``$ $`q_A`$
$`t^{}\text{ such that }q_{cl}\left(t^{}\right)`$ $``$ $`q_A`$
$`k^{}`$ $``$ $`k+\delta k`$
$`\phi ^{}`$ $``$ $`\phi +\delta \phi `$ (9)
where $`\delta k`$ is the additional momentum transferred to the excited atoms out of resonance, and where $`\delta \phi `$ is a laser phase: $`\delta \phi \delta k.q_A`$ (see ).

Let us emphasize that these calculations do not rely on the assumption that the splitter is infinitely thin or that the atom trajectories are classical.

## 4 The four end-points theorem for a Hamiltonian at most quadratic in position and momentum operators

We shall cut any interferometer into as many slices as there are interactions on either arm and thus obtain several path pieces (see section 5). From now on we shall consider systematically pairs of these homologous paths (see Fig. 1) in the case of a Hamiltonian at most quadratic.

Fig. 1: A pair of homologous paths

These two classical trajectories are labelled by their corresponding mass ($`m_\alpha `$ and $`m_\beta `$), their initial position and momentum ($`q_{\alpha 1}`$, $`p_{\alpha 1}`$, $`q_{\beta 1}`$ and $`p_{\beta 1}`$) and their common drift time $`T=t_2t_1`$.

Before establishing the first new theorem let us consider the expression of the classical action for the $`\alpha `$ path (see ):

$`{\displaystyle \frac{S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\alpha 1},p_{\alpha 1})}{m_\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`\dot{\xi }.\stackrel{~}{U}.G^1.(A.q_{\alpha 1}+B.p_{\alpha 1}/m_\alpha )+{\displaystyle _{t_1}^{t_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{L}{m_\alpha }}dt`$ (10)
$`+q_{\alpha 1}.{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{A}C}{2}}.q_{\alpha 1}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{m_\alpha }}.{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{B}D}{2}}.{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{m_\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{m_\alpha }}.\stackrel{~}{B}C.q_{\alpha 1}`$
which can be rewritten as:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\alpha 1},p_{\alpha 1})}{m_\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 2}}{2m_\alpha }}.q_{\alpha 2}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{2m_\alpha }}.q_{\alpha 1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\xi }.\stackrel{~}{U}.G^1.U.\xi +{\displaystyle _{t_1}^{t_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{L}{m_\alpha }}𝑑t`$ (11)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\xi }.\stackrel{~}{U}.G^1.q_{\alpha 2}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\xi .\stackrel{~}{U}.{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 2}}{m_\alpha }}`$
with the help of the definition of $`q_{\alpha 2}`$ and $`\frac{p_{\alpha 2}}{m_\alpha }`$ (see 3). Then we can use the $`\beta `$ path to replace $`\dot{\xi }.\stackrel{~}{U}.G^1`$ with:

$$\dot{\xi }.\stackrel{~}{U}.G^1=\frac{p_{\beta 2}}{m_\beta }C.q_{\beta 1}D.\frac{p_{\beta 1}}{m_\beta }$$
(12)
Consequently we get:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\alpha 1},p_{\alpha 1})}{m_\alpha }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 2}}{m_\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 2}}{m_\beta }}\right).q_{\alpha 2}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{m_\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 1}}{m_\beta }}\right).q_{\alpha 1}`$ (13)
$`+h(t_2,t_1)+f(\alpha ,\beta )`$
where $`h(t_2,t_1)`$ is independent of positions and momenta and where $`f(\alpha ,\beta )=f(\beta ,\alpha )`$. The same goes for the expression of $`S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\beta 1},p_{\beta 1})/m_\beta `$ which is obtained by exchanging $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. Finally we arrive at the first new theorem (a more general demonstration starting with Hamilton principal functions is given in appendix 1):

###### Theorem 1

$`{\displaystyle \frac{S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\alpha 1},p_{\alpha 1})}{m_\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 2}}{m_\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 2}}{m_\beta }}\right).q_{\alpha 2}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{m_\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 1}}{m_\beta }}\right).q_{\alpha 1}`$ (14)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\beta 1},p_{\beta 1})}{m_\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 2}}{m_\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 2}}{m_\beta }}\right).q_{\beta 2}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{m_\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 1}}{m_\beta }}\right).q_{\beta 1}`$
or equivalently:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\alpha 1},p_{\alpha 1})}{m_\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 2}}{m_\alpha }}.q_{\alpha 2}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{m_\alpha }}.q_{\alpha 1}`$ (15)
$`[{\displaystyle \frac{S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\beta 1},p_{\beta 1})}{m_\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 2}}{m_\beta }}.q_{\beta 2}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 1}}{m_\beta }}.q_{\beta 1}]`$
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 2}}{m_\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 2}}{m_\alpha }}\right).\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha 2}+q_{\beta 2}}{2}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta 1}}{m_\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}}{m_\alpha }}\right).\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha 1}+q_{\beta 1}}{2}}\right)`$
which gives the main part of the phase shift expressed with the half sums of the coordinates and the momenta of the four end-points only.

In the case of identical masses ($`m_\alpha =m_\beta `$) this expression simplifies to:

$`S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\alpha 1},p_{\alpha 1})p_{\alpha 2}.q_{\alpha 2}+p_{\alpha 1}.q_{\alpha 1}`$ (16)
$`[S_{cl}(t_2,t_1,q_{\beta 1},p_{\beta 1})p_{\beta 2}.q_{\beta 2}+p_{\beta 1}.q_{\beta 1}]`$
$`=`$ $`\left(p_{\beta 2}p_{\alpha 2}\right).\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha 2}+q_{\beta 2}}{2}}\right)\left(p_{\beta 1}p_{\alpha 1}\right).\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha 1}+q_{\beta 1}}{2}}\right)`$
## 5 The phase shift theorem for a Hamiltonian at most quadratic in position and momentum operators

In this section we draw on the results of previous sections to establish the interferometer phase shift expression for an arbitrary beam splitters configuration.

For a sequence of pairs of homologous paths (an interferometer geometry) (see Fig. 2)

Fig. 2: Interferometer geometry sliced into pairs of homologous paths between interactions on either arm (when an interaction occurs only on one arm the corresponding k on the other arm is set = 0)

one can infer the general sum for the main coordinate dependant part of the global phase shift:

$$\frac{p_{\beta D}p_{\alpha D}}{\mathrm{}}.\left(q\frac{q_{\alpha D}+q_{\beta D}}{2}\right)\frac{p_{\alpha 1}+p_{\beta 1}}{2\mathrm{}}.\left(q_{\beta 1}q_{\alpha 1}\right)+\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\left(k_{\beta i}k_{\alpha i}\right).\frac{q_{\alpha i}+q_{\beta i}}{2}$$
(17)
If now we take into account the other terms of the phase shift we finally obtain the following result (given here for a Gaussian wave packet):

###### Theorem 2

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \left(q,t_{N+1}t_D\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(p_{\beta D}p_{\alpha D}\right).\left(q{\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha D}+q_{\beta D}}{2}}\right)/\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}+p_{\beta 1}}{2\mathrm{}}}.\left(q_{\beta 1}q_{\alpha 1}\right)`$ (18)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}[(k_{\beta i}k_{\alpha i}).{\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha i}+q_{\beta i}}{2}}(\omega _{\beta i}\omega _{\alpha i}).t_i+\phi _{\beta i}\phi _{\alpha i}]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_{\beta i}}{m_{\alpha i}}}1\right).`$
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{S_{\alpha i}}{\mathrm{}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha ,i+1}}{2\mathrm{}}}.\left(q_{\beta ,i+1}q_{\alpha ,i+1}\right){\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha i}+\mathrm{}k_{\alpha i}}{2\mathrm{}}}.\left(q_{\beta i}q_{\alpha i}\right)\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\beta ,N}}{2\mathrm{}}}(qq_{\beta D}).\mathrm{R}e(Y_D.X_D^1).(qq_{\beta D})`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\alpha ,N}}{2\mathrm{}}}(qq_{\alpha D}).\mathrm{R}e(Y_D.X_D^1).(qq_{\alpha D})`$
where $`S_{\alpha i}S_{cl}(t_{i+1},t_i,q_{\alpha i},p_{\alpha i}+\mathrm{}k_{\alpha i},m_{\alpha i})`$.

This fundamental result is valid for a time-dependent Hamiltonian and takes into account all the mass differences which may occur. It allows to calculate exactly the phase shift for all the interferometer geometries which can be sliced as above: symmetrical Ramsey-Bordé (Mach-Zehnder), atomic fountain clocks,… All these particular cases will be detailed in a forthcoming paper (see )

Let us point out that the nature (temporal or spatial) of beam splitters leads to different slicing of the paths. In the spatial case, indeed, the number of different $`t_i^{}`$ may be twice as great as in the temporal case (see the definition of $`t_i^{}`$ in these two different cases in section 3).

## 6 Phase shift after spatial integration

In an actual interferometer one has to integrate spatially the output wave packet over the detection region. With Gaussian wave packets this integration leads to a mid-point theorem  : ”The first term of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi (q,t_D)`$ disappears when the spatial integration is performed”.

Furthermore the terms which depend on the wave packets structure ($`Y`$ and $`X`$) vanish when $`m_{\beta ,N}=m_{\alpha ,N}`$ (which is always the case). One obtains finally:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \left(t_D\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}+p_{\beta 1}}{2\mathrm{}}}.\left(q_{\beta 1}q_{\alpha 1}\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}[(k_{\beta i}k_{\alpha i}).{\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha i}+q_{\beta i}}{2}}(\omega _{\beta i}\omega _{\alpha i}).t_i+\phi _{\beta i}\phi _{\alpha i}]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_{\beta i}m_{\alpha i}}{2\mathrm{}}}\right).`$
$`\{({\displaystyle \frac{S_{\alpha i}}{m_{\alpha i}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha ,i+1}}{2m_{\alpha i}}}.(q_{\beta ,i+1}q_{\alpha ,i+1}){\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha i}+\mathrm{}k_{\alpha i}}{2m_{\alpha i}}}.(q_{\beta i}q_{\alpha i}))`$
$`+({\displaystyle \frac{S_{\beta i}}{m_{\beta i}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta ,i+1}}{2m_{\beta i}}}.(q_{\alpha ,i+1}q_{\beta ,i+1}){\displaystyle \frac{p_{\beta i}+\mathrm{}k_{\beta i}}{2m_{\beta i}}}.(q_{\alpha i}q_{\beta i}))\}`$
## 7 Identical masses and symmetrical case

The case of identical masses is an important approximation which is commonly used for the modelization of many devices like gravimeters and gyrometers , , . If $`m_{\alpha i}=m_{\beta i}=m,`$ $`i`$, this general phase shift becomes :

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \left(t_D\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha 1}+p_{\beta 1}}{2\mathrm{}}}.\left(q_{\beta 1}q_{\alpha 1}\right)+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left(k_{\beta i}k_{\alpha i}\right).{\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha i}+q_{\beta i}}{2}}`$ (20)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}[\phi _{\beta i}\phi _{\alpha i}(\omega _{\beta i}\omega _{\alpha i}).t_i]`$
We can also specify the form of this phase shift when the interferometer geometry is symmetrical (see Fig.3).

Fig. 3: A typical symmetrical interferometer

This symmetry is expressed as : $`k_{\beta i}+k_{\alpha i}=0,`$ $`i[2,N1]`$, i.e. it is a symmetry with respect to the direction of the particular vector : $`p_{initial}+\mathrm{}k_{initial}/2`$.

Consequently :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \left(t_N\right)=k_1.q_1+2\underset{i=2}{\overset{N1}{}}k_i.\frac{q_{\alpha i}+q_{\beta i}}{2}+k_N.\frac{q_{\alpha N}+q_{\beta N}}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\left(\phi _{\beta i}\phi _{\alpha i}\right)$$
(21)
But $`i[2,N1]`$ :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha ,i+1}+q_{\beta ,i+1}}{2}}`$ $`=`$ $`\xi _{i+1,i}+A_{i+1,i}.{\displaystyle \frac{q_{\alpha i}+q_{\beta i}}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B_{i+1,i}}{m}}.{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\alpha i}+p_{\beta i}}{2}}`$ (22)
$`=`$ $`\xi _{i+1,1}+A_{i+1,1}.q_1+{\displaystyle \frac{B_{i+1,1}}{m}}.(p_1+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}k_1}{2}})`$
$``$ $`Q\left(t_{i+1}\right)`$
which can be calculated with the ABCD$`\xi `$ law.

It depends only on $`q_1`$ (initial position) and $`p_1+\frac{\mathrm{}k_1}{2}`$ (“Bragg initial momentum”).

Therefore :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \left(t_N\right)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}(k_{\beta i}k_{\alpha i}).Q\left(t_i\right)\underset{i=1}{\overset{N1}{}}\left(\phi _{\beta i}\phi _{\alpha i}\right)$$
(23)
which has a very simple form when the origin of coordinates is chosen such that $`q_1=0`$, and when the Bragg condition $`p_1+\frac{\mathrm{}k_1}{2}=0`$ is satisfied.

## 8 Conclusion

In this paper we have used the ABCD$`\xi `$ formulation of atom optics and the $`ttt`$ theorem to establish two theorems valid for a time-dependent Hamiltonian at most quadratic in position and momentum operators. The first one gives a compact expression of the action difference between two homologous paths. The second one gives an analytical expression of the global phase shift for atom interferometers in the case of such a Hamiltonian.

Consequently this analytical expression provides a simple way to calculate exactly the phase shift in this case, and then to calculate perturbatively for example the effect of a third-order term in the external Hamiltonian (necessary for space missions like HYPER ). For example, one can calculate exactly the global phase shift due to gravity plus a gradient of gravity plus a rotation, and then calculate perturbatively the effect of a gradient of gradient of gravity. These calculations and the application to specific cases (gravimeters, gyrometers, atomic clocks…) will be detailed in a forthcoming article  where we recover well-known perturbative results (, , , ) from exact expressions.

## 9 Appendix 1

In a case of a Hamiltonian at most quadratic in position and momentum operators, the Hamilton principal functions concerning two pairs of homologous points are also at most quadratic in positions (owing to the Hamilton-Jacobi equation, see ):

$$S_\alpha (q_{\alpha 1},q_{\alpha 2})/m_\alpha =a+b.q_{\alpha 1}+c.q_{\alpha 2}+q_{\alpha 1}.d.q_{\alpha 1}+q_{\alpha 1}.e.q_{\alpha 2}+q_{\alpha 2}.f.q_{\alpha 2}$$
(24)
$$S_\beta (q_{\beta 1},q_{\beta 2})/m_\beta =a+b.q_{\beta 1}+c.q_{\beta 2}+q_{\beta 1}.d.q_{\beta 1}+q_{\beta 1}.e.q_{\beta 2}+q_{\beta 2}.f.q_{\beta 2}$$
(25)
where $`a`$ is a scalar, $`b`$ and $`c`$ are vectors, and $`d`$, $`e`$ and $`f`$ are matrices (see ).

We can define $`p_{\alpha 1}`$, $`p_{\alpha 2}`$, $`p_{\beta 1}`$, $`p_{\beta 2}`$ such that:

$$p_{\alpha 1}_{q_{\alpha 1}}\left(\frac{S_\alpha }{m_\alpha }\right)=b2d.q_{\alpha 1}e.q_{\alpha 2}$$
(26)
$$p_{\alpha 2}_{q_{\alpha 2}}\left(\frac{S_\alpha }{m_\alpha }\right)=c+2f.q_{\alpha 2}+\stackrel{~}{e}.q_{\alpha 1}$$
(27)
$$p_{\beta 1}_{q_{\beta 1}}\left(\frac{S_\beta }{m_\beta }\right)=b2d.q_{\beta 1}e.q_{\beta 2}$$
(28)
$$p_{\beta 2}_{q_{\beta 2}}\left(\frac{S_\beta }{m_\beta }\right)=c+2f.q_{\beta 2}+\stackrel{~}{e}.q_{\beta 1}$$
(29)
and obtain the following expression:

$$\frac{S_\alpha }{m_\alpha }\frac{S_\beta }{m_\beta }=\frac{1}{2}\left(p_{\alpha 2}+p_{\beta 2}\right).\left(q_{\alpha 2}q_{\beta 2}\right)\frac{1}{2}\left(p_{\alpha 1}+p_{\beta 1}\right).\left(q_{\alpha 1}q_{\beta 1}\right)$$
(30)
The same relation holds for the classical action concerning two actual paths with a common drift time (homologous paths). This yields an other demonstration of the first theorem expressed in section 4.