text:
# LEPTON ACCELERATION BY RELATIVISTIC COLLISIONLESS MAGNETIC RECONNECTION

## 1 INTRODUCTION

The observed radiation of most large scale extragalactic jets is due to incoherent synchroton radiation. In a number of sources, M87 and 3C 273 for instance, the radiation lifetime of the electrons (and possibly positrons) is much less than the transit time from the central source (Felten 1968). Thus, there must be mechanisms for the electron “reacceleration.”

Several mechanisms have been proposed to account for the reacceleration of the electrons. These include Fermi mechanism of particle acceleration (Christiansen, Pacholczyk, & Scott 1976), Fermi acceleration in shock waves (Krimsky 1977; Axford, Leer, & Skadron 1978; Bell 1977, 1978; Blandford & Ostriker 1978), stochastic electric field acceleration (Eilek & Hughes 1990) and whistler wave acceleration (Melrose 1974). The effectiveness of the Fermi mechanism and stochastic fields in accelerating electrons is unknown (Blandford & Eichler 1987; Eilek & Hughes 1990; Jones & Ellison 1991). Resistive tearing has been discussed as a means of producing neutral layers which can accelerate electrons (Königl & Choudhuri 1985; Choudhuri & Königl 1986). Reconnection as a mechanism for accelerating electrons has been discussed by a number of authors (Blandford 1983; Begelman, Blandford, & Rees 1984; Browne 1985; Ferrari 1984, 1985; Norman 1985; Kirchner 1988; Lesch 1991; Romanova & Lovelace 1992). The acceleration of electrons by long wavelength electromagnetic waves trapped in the boundary layer of a jet was discussed by Bisnovatyi-Kogan and Lovelace (1995).

The reconnection of magnetic fields at a neutral point as described by magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) has been studied extensively. It has been shown that the neutral lines can evolve into current sheets (Syrovatskii 1971). Resistive MHD simulations of reconnection by Biskamp (1986) show a strong tendency to form a current sheets.

Collisionless reconnection has been studied by following particle orbits, assuming nonrelativistic particles and prescribed fields (Galeev 1984; Zelenyi et al. 1984; Burkhart, Drake, & Chen 1990; Deeg 1991). The particles were launched away from the $`X`$point and given an initial velocity that is appropriate for a given thermal velocity distribution. Acceleration of the particles near the $`X`$point was observed. This work was extended to include the self-consistent fields of the particle flows (Burkhart, Drake, & Chen 1991). For sufficiently high inflow rates they found an outflow shock where the flow velocity exceeded the Alfvén velocity. In addition they found that sufficiently large inflow rates caused the width of the current layer to “collapsed to zero,” and concluded that there was a maximum infow rate into the reconnection region. Nonrelativistic particle trajectories have been studied in reconnection regions as part of an investigation of the Earth’s magnetosphere (Speiser 1965). This work has been extended in an effort to define an effective conductivity in the absence of particle collisions (Speiser 1970).

Direct acceleration of particles in reconnection layers was proposed by Alfvén (1968). Direct relativistic acceleration of leptons near the $`X`$line of a magnetic field configuration was studied by Romanova and Lovelace (1992). The static electric field parallel to this $`X`$line can cause the acceleration of leptons to the very high Lorentz factors observed. Romanova and Lovelace (1992) analyzed the particle orbits in the current layer structure proposed by Syrovatskii (1971). For the case of an electron-positron plasma they obtained an energy distribution function $`dn/d\gamma \gamma ^{1.5}`$. Recently, Zenitani and Hoshino (2001) have done relativistic particle-in-cell simulations of a reconnection layer in an electron-positron plasma and have found a spectrum $`\gamma ^1`$ out to $`\gamma 20`$.

In this work we solve the relativistic equations of motions for an electron-positron plasma moving in the electric and magnetic fields of a reconnection layer indicated in Figure 1. In turn, the particle motion is used to calculate the current-density and the associated self magnetic field. The particle orbits and field calculations are done iteratively to give a self-consistent equilibrium for the reconnection layer. Once we have this equilibrium we can determine the distribution function of the accelerated leptons. Section 2 of this paper develops the theory, and Section 3 discusses the methods and results. Section 4 gives the conclusions of this work.

## 2 THEORY

### 2.1 Physical Picture

The geometry of the stationary ($`/t=0`$) reconnection region is shown in Figure 1. The magnetic field $`𝐁=B_x(x,y)\widehat{𝐱}+B_y(x,y)\widehat{𝐲}`$ has an $`X`$point in the $`(x,y)`$ plane at $`x=0,y=0`$. A uniform electric field exists in the $`z`$direction, $`𝐄=E_0\widehat{𝐳}`$ with $`\times 𝐄=0`$ and $`E_0<0`$. Therefore, the lepton gas drifts with velocity $`v_{dy}=cE_zB_x/𝐁^2`$ in the $`y`$direction towards the magnetic $`X`$point from above and below. Because the gas is electrically neutral there is no net current due to this drift (both electrons and positrons drift with the same velocity in the same direction).

The $`𝐁`$ field vanishes at the $`X`$point, and consequently in the vicinity of this point the particle motion is dominated by the electric field. The electric field accelerates electrons in say the $`+z`$ direction and positrons in the $`z`$ direction. This gives a current-density in the $`z`$ direction. As the leptons are accelerated in the $`\pm z`$ directions their motion is “bent” into the $`\pm x`$ directions by the $`(𝐯\times 𝐁/c)_x`$ force. At a large enough distance $`|x|`$ from the $`X`$point the magnetic field becomes dominant and the particles exhibit the usual drifts (Northrop 1963).

The electrons and positrons are confined near $`y=0`$ by the $`B_x`$ magnetic field. If a particle drifts into the $`X`$ point from above, and then overshoots the $`y=0`$ plane, the $`𝐄\times 𝐁`$ drift will then deaccelerate the particle and return it toward the $`y=0`$ plane. The particles also drift in the $`x`$direction with velocity $`v_{dx}=cE_zB_y/𝐁^2`$. Both electrons and positrons drift away from the $`X`$point. This is due to the component of the $`𝐁`$ field in the $`y`$direction. Since the $`x`$drifts for electrons and positrons are in the same direction there is no net current in the $`x`$direction. Since both positrons and electrons enter the $`X`$point from both sides ($`y>0`$ and $`y<0`$) the net contribution of the $`y`$motions cancels, and there is no $`y`$direction current.

We make the simplifying approximation of neglecting the $`y`$thickness of the current layer. In this case, the particles move in the $`y=0`$ plane. We therefore treat equilibria where the particles drift from above and below into the $`y=0`$ plane where they are accelerated in the $`\pm z`$ directions and then expelled in the $`\pm x`$ directions. Thus we calculate the particle orbits $`[x(t),0,z(t)]`$. Knowing the particle motion allows us to calculate the surface current-density $`𝒥_z(x)`$. From this we calculate the self-magnetic field. We then use the self field to recalculate the particle orbits. We iterate on this process so that we get a self-consistent solution of the self magnetic field and the particle orbits. The self-consistent orbits of the leptons can then be used to derive the energy spectrum of the accelerated leptons.

### 2.2 Single Particle Motion

The magnetic field can be written as $`𝐁=\times [A_z(x,y)\widehat{𝐳}],`$ where $`A_z`$ is the total vector potential. For specificity we consider an $`X`$type null point of the $`𝐁`$ so that $`A_z(x,y)`$ is an even function of both arguments. The magnetic field consists of a “external” component due to distant currents and the “self field” due to local currents. The external component $`A_z^{ext}`$ is divergence and curl free. We take the leading terms of a Tayor expansion of this field,

$$A_z^{ext}=\frac{B_0}{2L}(x^2y^2),$$

so that

$$B_x^{ext}=B_0\frac{y}{L},B_y^{ext}=B_0\frac{x}{L},$$
$`(1)`$
where $`B_0>0`$ without loss of generality. The total field is given by

$$A^{tot}(x,y)=A^{ext}+A^{self}.$$
$`(2)`$
$`A^{tot}`$ is an even function of both arguments but its dependence on $`(x,y)`$ is changed by the self-field.

We consider quasi-stationary conditions so that $`\times 𝐄=0`$ and thus $`𝐄=\mathrm{\Phi },`$ which is the “external” electric field. The relevant solution is $`𝐄=E_0\widehat{𝐳}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }=E_0z`$, where $`E_0=\mathrm{const}<0`$. This corresponds to plasma flowing into the $`X`$ point from above and below the $`y=0`$ plane. Because we consider an electron-positron plasma the “self electric field” is zero, and the total electric field is $`E_0\widehat{𝐳}`$.

The single particle motion is described by the Lagrangian

$$=mc^2\sqrt{1\beta ^2}+\frac{q}{c}A_zv_zq\mathrm{\Phi },$$
$`(3)`$
where $`\beta |𝐯|/c`$ and the electrostatic potential $`\mathrm{\Phi }=E_0z`$. The corresponding Hamiltonian is

$$=\left[(𝐏\frac{q}{c}𝐀)^2+m^2c^4\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}+q\mathrm{\Phi },$$

where $`𝐏`$ is the canonical momentum. Because $`/t=0`$, the $`=`$ const which is the single particle energy.

A further constant of the motion is the canonical momentum in the $`z`$direction, $`P_0`$. Because $`A_z`$ is independent of $`z`$,

$$\frac{dP_z}{dt}=\frac{}{z}=qE_0,\mathrm{or}\frac{d}{dt}(P_zqE_0t)=0,$$

so that

$$P_0P_zqE_0t=m\gamma \frac{dz}{dt}+\frac{q}{c}A_zqE_0t=\mathrm{const}.$$
$`(4)`$
The $`z`$equation of motion is simply $`dP_0/dt=0`$ which gives

$$\frac{d}{dt}\left(m\gamma \frac{dz}{dt}\right)+\frac{q}{c}B_y\frac{dx}{dt}\frac{q}{c}B_x\frac{dy}{dt}qE_0=0,$$
$`(5)`$
where $`\gamma =(1\beta ^2)^{1/2}`$. For the limit where the $`z`$acceleration is small, equation (5) gives

$$\frac{q}{c}B_y\frac{dx}{dt}\frac{q}{c}B_x\frac{dy}{dt}qE_0=0,$$

or

$$𝐯=c𝐄\times 𝐁/𝐁^2$$
$`(6)`$
which is the well-known $`𝐄\times 𝐁`$ drift velocity (Northrop 1963).

We assume that away from the $`X`$point the leptons are relatively ‘cold’ in the sense that their thermal velocity spread is less than their $`𝐄\times 𝐁`$ drift velocity which is less than $`c`$. Thus, leptons which are initially above (below) the $`(x,z)`$ plane drift down (up) towards this plane as sketched in Figure 1. A restricted class of solutions has the form $`𝐱(t)=[x(t),0,z(t)]`$. A particle “launched” from a position $`(x_0,0,0)`$ in the $`y=0`$ plane with $`v_y=0`$ stays in this plane. Of course, a particle launched away from this plane (or one that has $`v_y0`$), oscillates about the $`y=0`$ plane.

In this work we neglect the thickness of the current layer in the $`y`$ direction. Therefore, we use the particle orbits in the $`y=0`$ plane. We consider a set of particles entering the $`y=0`$ plane from above and below with initial locations given by $`(x_0,0,0)`$.

Dimensionless variables are introduced as

$$\widehat{x}x/L,\widehat{t}\omega _0t,\mathrm{where}\omega _0|q|B_0/mc,$$
$`(7)`$
is the non-relativistic cyclotron frequency in the reference field $`B_0`$. Dimensionless electric and magnetic fields are naturally measured in units of $`B_0`$. In particular, we let

$$|E_0|/B_0.$$
$`(8)`$
A characteristic Lorentz factor can be defined as

$$\gamma _0\frac{|q|B_0L}{mc^2}=\frac{\omega _0L}{c}.$$
$`(9)`$
We can rewrite this as

$$\gamma _05.9\times 10^3\left(\frac{B_0}{10^6\mathrm{G}}\right)\left(\frac{L}{10^{13}\mathrm{cm}}\right).$$

Note that $`v_x/c=\gamma _0(d\widehat{x}/d\widehat{t})`$, for example. We let $`n_{\mathrm{}}`$ be the number density of leptons (electrons $`+`$ positrons) at a large distance from the $`X`$point. An important dimensionless quantity is

$$\zeta \frac{4\pi n_{\mathrm{}}\gamma _0mc^2}{B_0^2}.$$
$`(10)`$
The role of this parameter is described in §3.

### 2.3 High Energy Approximation

A particle launched at $`x_0`$ in the $`y=0`$ plane is accelerated in the $`z`$direction by the $`E_0\widehat{𝐳}`$ field and it drifts in the $`x`$direction because of the $`𝐯\times 𝐁`$ force. The closer to the $`X`$point a particle starts (the smaller $`x_0`$ is) the higher the energy it is accelerated to. An approximate solution for the particle motion in the external magnetic field $`𝐁^{ext}`$ is possible for sufficiently small $`x_0`$ where there is a large acceleration in the $`z`$direction.

Assuming that the particle is already highly relativistic we let $`p_x(t)=m\gamma c\mathrm{sin}(\theta )`$ and $`p_z(t)=m\gamma c\mathrm{cos}(\theta )`$. For specificity we consider the acceleration of electrons. The equations of motion become

$$\frac{dp_x}{dt}=qB_y^{ext}(x)\mathrm{cos}(\theta ),\frac{dp_z}{dt}=qB_y^{ext}(x)\mathrm{sin}(\theta )+qE_0.$$

We assume $`\theta ^21`$ and discuss the conditions for this later. The energy equation gives $`m\gamma c^2=qE_0z+\mathrm{const}`$ and the small angle approximate gives $`tz/c`$.

The $`x`$equation of motion in dimensionless variables becomes

$$\frac{d}{d\widehat{z}}\left(\widehat{z}\frac{d\widehat{x}}{d\widehat{z}}\right)=\frac{\widehat{x}}{}.$$
$`(11)`$
The relevant solution to equation (11) is

$$\widehat{x}=\widehat{x}_0I_0\left(2\sqrt{\widehat{z}/}\right),$$
$`(12)`$
where $`I_0`$ is the usual modified Bessel function. This dependence is valid for small angles, that is, for $`(d\widehat{x}/d\widehat{z})^21,`$ or $`[\widehat{x}_0I_1(2\sqrt{\widehat{z}/})/\sqrt{\widehat{z}}]^21`$. A necessary condition for this is that $`\widehat{x}_0`$. The geometry of the orbits for highly relativistic motion depends only on $`\widehat{x}_0`$ and $``$ (in fact, on just $`/\widehat{x}_0`$) and not for example on $`\gamma _0`$.

Figure 2 shows orbits in the external magnetic field calculated without approximation. The approximation of equation (12) is also shown.

### 2.4 Current-Density from Single Particle Motion

Far from the $`X`$point, ideal magnetohydrodynamics applies, and the fluid particles are confined to flux surfaces where $`A_z=`$const. Even though this is a time independent situation, the flux surfaces drift inward towards the neutral layer with a velocity equal to $`𝐯_d=c𝐄\times 𝐁/B^2`$. Since the $`𝐁`$ field is tangent to surfaces of constant $`A_z`$ and the electric field is in the $`\widehat{𝐳}`$ direction, the field lines drift inward towards the $`X`$point at the same speed the particles do. Near the $`X`$ point, where $`|𝐄|>|𝐁|`$, ideal magnetohydrodynamics breaks down.

We assume that after a particle inflows (from above or below) to the $`y=0`$ plane it gets launched on an orbit in this plane, $`[x(t),0,z(t)]`$. The initial position of the particle in the $`y=0`$ plane is $`x_0`$ and some value of $`z`$. We denote the number flux density of particles (electrons $`+`$ positrons) inflowing from above and below the $`y=0`$ plane as $`(x_0)`$ (number per $`\mathrm{cm}^2`$ per second). The simplest case is that of a uniform density of inflowing plasma where

$$=2n_{\mathrm{}}c,$$
$`(13)`$
where $`n_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the number density ($`1/`$cm3) of electron plus positron density at large distances and where the factor of two comes from the two sides of the current layer. The motion of a single particle starting from position $`x_0`$ is described by its position $`[x(t|x_0),0,z(t|x_0)]`$ and its velocity $`[v_x(t|x_0),0,v_z(t|x_0)]`$.

The surface current-density (charge per cm per second) for each initial $`x_0`$ is then given by

$$𝒥_z(x|x_0)dx_0=q𝒩(x|x_0)v_z(x|x_0)dx_0,$$
$`(14)`$
where $`𝒩(x|x_0)`$ (with units $`1/`$cm3) is the surface number density (of electrons and positrons) at $`x`$ launched between $`x_0`$ and $`x_0+dx_0`$. In equation (14), $`v_z`$ is the electron velocity, $`q`$ is the electron charge, and the angular brackets indicate a time average. In the considered stationary state which is uniform in $`z`$, all averages are independent of $`t`$ and $`z`$.

Consider particles moving in the $`+x`$ direction (the $`x`$ direction case follows by symmetry), then conservation of particles implies that

$$𝒩(x|x_0)v_x(x|x_0)=\mathrm{const}=(x_0),$$
$`(15)`$
where $`v_x(x|x_0)`$ is the velocity of an electron or a positron. Thus,

$$𝒥_z(x)=_0^{x_0^m}𝑑x_0𝒥_z(x|x_0),$$

$$=q_0^{x_0^m}𝑑x_0(x_0)\frac{v_z(x|x_0)}{v_x(x|x_0)},$$
$`(16)`$
where $`x_0^m`$ is the maximum of $`x_0`$ assumed to be $`𝒪(L)`$. The total current between $`x`$ and $`x+\delta x`$ can be written as

$$\delta x𝒥_z(x)=q_0^{x_0^m}𝑑x_0(x_0)_x^{x+\delta x}𝑑x\frac{v_z}{v_x}.$$

For a particular value of $`x_0`$ a particle orbit passes between $`x`$ and $`x+\delta x`$ for time between $`t_1=t(x|x_0)`$ and $`t_2=t(x+\delta x|x_0)`$ (and possibly for time between $`t_3`$ and $`t_4`$ and $`t_5`$ and $`t_6`$, or an odd number of intervals). This allows us to replace the spatial integration by a temporal integration over the particle orbit. Notice that $`v_x=\delta t_jv_{xj}/\delta t_j`$, where $`j=1`$ or $`j=1,2,3`$, etc. represents the different traversals of the interval $`\delta x`$ at the distance $`x`$, and where $`\delta t_j=\delta x/|v_{xj}|`$. We have for example $`𝑑tv_x=\delta t_jv_{xj}=\delta x`$. Therefore, we find

$$\delta x𝒥_z(x)=q_0^{x_0^m}𝑑x_0(x_0)_{t_1}^{t_2}𝑑tv_z[x(t),z(t)|x_0].$$
$`(16a)`$
The time integral needs to be done for all values of $`t`$ for which the particle is between $`x`$ and $`x+\delta x`$. We can put equation (16a) into dimensionless form using equations (7) - (10) and $`\widehat{𝒥}_z𝒥_z/(cB_0)`$. For the case where equation (13) applies this gives

$$\delta \widehat{x}\widehat{𝒥}_z=\overline{\zeta }𝑑\widehat{x}_0𝑑\widehat{t}\frac{d\widehat{z}}{d\widehat{t}}.$$
$`(16b)`$
Here,

$$\overline{\zeta }\frac{\zeta }{2\pi },$$
$`(17)`$
with $`\zeta `$ defined by equation (10), is a dimensionless measure of the rate of inflow of plasma to the neutral layer.

### 2.5 Self-Magnetic Field

For the considered thin current layer with surface current-density $`𝒥(x)`$, we can express the self-magnetic field of this current as

$$B_y^{self}(x)=\frac{2}{c}𝒫𝑑x^{}\frac{𝒥_z(x^{})}{xx^{}},$$
$`(18)`$
where $`𝒫`$ is the principle value. In dimensionless variables this becomes

$$\widehat{B}_y^{self}(x)=2𝒫𝑑\widehat{x}^{}\frac{\widehat{𝒥}_z(\widehat{x}^{})}{\widehat{x}\widehat{x}^{}},$$

The total magnetic field is

$$B_y^{tot}(x)=B_y^{ext}(x)+B_y^{self}(x).$$
$`(19)`$
The dimensionless form of this equation is the same but with hats over the magnetic fields.

In the following we simplify the notation by dropping the hats and dropping the $`y`$ and $`z`$ subscripts on $`B_y`$ and $`𝒥_z`$.

## 3 METHODS AND RESULTS

The self-consistent magnetic field of the current layer is calculated iteratively. For a relatively weak self field - sufficiently small $`\overline{\zeta }`$ compared with unity - a direct iteration scheme has been found to converge. This scheme may be described as

$$B_n^{tot}\underset{\mathrm{orbits}}{\underset{}{}}𝒥_{n+1}\underset{\mathrm{HT}}{\underset{}{}}B_{n+1}^{tot}\underset{\mathrm{orbits}}{\underset{}{}}𝒥_{n+2}\mathrm{},$$
$`(20)`$
where

$$B_n^{tot}=x+B_n^{self},B_n^{self}2𝒫𝑑x^{}\frac{𝒥_n(x^{})}{xx^{}}.$$
$`(21a)`$
Here, “HT” stands for the Hilbert transform, and “orbits” indicates the evaluation of equation (16b) using an $`x`$grid of $`100200`$ points and the calculation of $`100200`$ electron orbits. A stretched $`x`$grid is used with higher resolution at small $`x`$. The distribution of inflowing plasma $`(x_0)`$ is assumed uniform in $`x_0`$ as given by equation (13). All cases considered here have $`\gamma _01`$ so that the initial, non-relativistic or modestly relativistic conditions ($`\gamma <2`$) of particles at their starting points $`x_0`$ do not affect the reported results. In the iteration sequence we have found it advantageous to make analytical fits to the self fields $`B_n^{self}`$ which are used in the subsequent orbit calculations.

For larger self-fields we use the iteration (20) with equation (21a) replaced by

$$B_n^{tot}=x+\alpha B_n^{self}+(1\alpha )B_{n1}^{self},$$
$`(21b)`$
where $`0<\alpha <1`$ is a numerical factor, and $`B_n^{self}`$ is still given by equation (21a). This iteration scheme is known to allow the calculation of self-consistent particle ring equilibria with large self-fields (see for example Larrabee et al. 1979, 1982).

The key dimensionless parameters which determine the self-consistent current layers are

$$,\overline{\zeta },\mathrm{and}\gamma _0.$$
$`(22)`$
For the considered limit $`\gamma _01`$ and fixed $``$, we find that the current density and self-field are almost independent of $`\gamma _0`$. However, the distribution function of accelerated leptons does depend on $`\gamma _0`$ and $``$ as discussed below.

### 3.1 Weak Self-Field

Figure 3 shows the current density profiles $`𝒥(x)`$ for a weak field case $`\overline{\zeta }=0.05`$ where the convergence of the direct iteration, equations (20) and (21a), is quite rapid. The main peak of the current density is due to the direct acceleration of electrons and positrons in the region where $`|𝐄|/|𝐁|>1.`$ The “shoulder” of the current density profile is due to the gradient $`B`$ drift in the $`z`$direction. Figure 4 shows the final profiles of the total and self-magnetic fields. The self-field acts to reduce the slope of the total field $`B^{tot}`$ near the origin. For vanishing self-field the slope is unity. For the case of Figure 4, the slope is $`dB^{tot}/dx|_00.680`$.

The energy distribution or spectrum of the leptons accelerated in the current layer $`dn/d\gamma `$ is obtained from the calculation of the particle orbits. The particles inflowing to the current layer are uniformly distributed in $`x_0`$ and initially they are assumed to have $`\gamma <2`$. The Lorentz factor of a particle as it exits the current layer (say, $`x>x_{max}`$) is therefore a function of $`x_0`$, $`\gamma _m=\gamma _m(x_0)`$. As part of our orbit calculations we determine $`\gamma _m(x_0)`$. We find that $`\gamma _m(x_0)`$ is a monotonically decreasing function of $`x_0`$. With $`dn/dx_0=`$ const the number of particles launched between $`x_0`$ and $`x_0+dx_0`$, we have

$$\frac{dn}{d\gamma }=\frac{dn/dx_0}{\left|d\gamma /dx_0\right|},$$
$`(23)`$
for $`\gamma >2`$, where we have dropped the $`m`$subscript on $`\gamma `$.

Figure 5 shows lepton distribution for the same case as Figures 3 and 4. As mentioned earlier the magnetic field of the current layer is almost independent of $`\gamma _0`$. For these values of $`\overline{\zeta }`$ and $``$, we have run a range of values of $`\gamma _0=10^210^4`$, and find that the distributions are roughly fitted by

$$\frac{dn}{d\gamma }\frac{K}{\gamma }\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\gamma }{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0}\right),$$
$`(24)`$
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0=\kappa ^2\gamma _0`$ and $`\kappa 12`$. With $`K1/\mathrm{ln}(0.56\mathrm{\Gamma }_0)`$ the distribution is normalized to unity. The distribution (24) is not expected to be the same as that observed because of the influence of the distribution of $`\gamma _0`$ values and/or the affect of radiative losses. These affects on the spectrum are discussed in §3.4.

### 3.2 Strong Self-Field

For larger self-field strengths $`\overline{\zeta }`$, we use the iteration indicated by equations (20) and (21b) usually with $`\alpha =0.5`$. For $`\overline{\zeta }=0.1`$ we have not succeeded in getting the iterations to converge. We find that the iterations lead to negative values of $`B^{tot}(x)`$ for $`x>0`$ which would cause trapping of particles in the $`x`$direction. Such a configuration is inconsistent with our assumption that the accelerated particles are expelled in the $`x`$direction. The existence of a maximum of $`\overline{\zeta }`$, which measures the rate of plasma inflow to the neutral layer, is consistent with the finding of a maximum plasma inflow rate by Burkhart et al. (1991). For $`\overline{\zeta }=0.075`$, equations (20) and (21b) converge after five iterations. We find that the maximum of the current-density $`𝒥(0)`$ and the half-width at half-maximum of the current-density $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ increases as $`\overline{\zeta }`$ increases. For this case we find $`dB^{tot}/dx0.412`$. The energy spectrum of the accelerated leptons is similar to equation (24).

### 3.3 Scalings

In more detail, we find the scaling relations

$$𝒥(0)1.53\overline{\zeta }/B^{},$$
$`(25a)`$
and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }x1.48/\sqrt{B^{}},$$
$`(25b)`$
where $`B^{}dB^{tot}/dx|_{x=0}`$. The first relation can be derived from the analytic orbits of §2.3. For the external magnetic field $`B^{tot}=x`$, we have from §2.4,

$$\underset{x0}{lim}𝒥(x)=lim\overline{\zeta }_0^x\frac{dx_0}{dx/dz}=lim\overline{\zeta }_0^x\frac{dx_0\sqrt{z}}{x_0I_1(2\sqrt{z/})}$$

$$=\overline{\zeta }_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dz^{}}{I_0(2\sqrt{z^{}})}1.53\overline{\zeta },$$
$`(26)`$
where the relation between $`x,x_0`$, and $`z`$ is given by equation (12). In the magnetic field $`B^{tot}=B^{}x`$, equation (26) is modified by the replacement $`/B^{}`$. Equation (25b) is empirical.

We can use equations (25a) and (25b) to obtain an approximate constitutive equation for the current layer. Note that $`dB^{tot}/dx|_0=1+dB^{self}/dx|_0`$, and that $`dB^{self}/dx|_0=2𝑑x[𝒥(0)𝒥(x)]/x^2`$. Notice in turn that this integral is proportional to $`𝒥(0)/\mathrm{\Delta }x`$. From this we obtain the relation

$$\overline{\zeta }0.205\left[(B^{})^{1/2}(B^{})^{3/2}\right].$$
$`(27)`$
This dependence is shown in Figure 6 along with the calculated equilibria. The left-hand part of the curve is dashed because we have not found the corresponding self-consistent equilibria. The maximum of $`\overline{\zeta }`$ is thus $`\overline{\zeta }_{max}0.08`$. This maximum represents a maximum inflow rate to the reconnection region analogous to that found by Burkhart et al. (1991).

### 3.4 Apparent Spectra

The observed lepton distribution $`f(\gamma )`$ deduced from the synchrotron spectrum of a radio source will in general be different from the distribution of accelerated particles at a given reconnection site ($`dn/d\gamma `$). For a typical radio source $`f\gamma ^{2.5}`$. One effect is due to the distribution of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ values owing mainly to the distribution of $`L`$ for different reconnection sites. Note that $`k=2\pi /L`$ is the wavenumber of the spatial power spectrum of the $`𝐁`$ field. With the distribution $`W(\mathrm{\Gamma }_0)`$, the average lepton distribution function $`f(\gamma )`$ for many reconnection sites is

$$f(\gamma )=𝑑\mathrm{\Gamma }_0W(\mathrm{\Gamma }_0)\frac{dn(\gamma |\mathrm{\Gamma }_0)}{d\gamma }.$$
$`(28)`$
For $`W(\mathrm{\Gamma }_0)\mathrm{\Gamma }_0^q`$, equation (28) gives $`f\gamma ^{1q}`$ for $`q>1`$, where the logarithmic dependence of the normalization factor $`K`$ of $`dn/d\gamma `$ is neglected.

The observed $`f(\gamma )`$ may also be steeper than $`dn/d\gamma `$ owing to synchrotron and/or inverse Compton radiation (see, e.g., Pacholczyk 1970). In a steady state the radiative loss term in the Boltzmann equation for the leptons, $`[\dot{\gamma }f(\gamma )]/\gamma `$ balances the source term $`dn/d\gamma `$ on the right hand side, where $`\dot{\gamma }\gamma ^2`$ describes the radiative losses. Thus

$$f(\gamma )=\frac{\mathrm{const}}{\gamma ^2}_\gamma ^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\gamma ^{}\frac{dn}{d\gamma ^{}}.$$
$`(29)`$
This integral is easily done for the case where $`dn/d\gamma `$ is given by equation (24). One finds that the $`f(\gamma )`$ is somewhat steeper than $`\gamma ^2`$ for $`\gamma <\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ and rapidly decreasing for $`\gamma >\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$.

## 4 CONCLUSIONS

We have calculated the self-consistent current-density distribution in the region of collisionless reconnection at an $`X`$type magnetic neutral point in a relativistic electron-positron plasma. The energy distribution function of the accelerated leptons has also been calculated.

We find that there are three important dimensionless parameters: (1) The characteristic Lorentz factor $`\gamma _0eB_0L/m_ec^21`$, where $`B_0`$ is a reference magnetic field strength and $`L`$ is the length scale of the magnetic field; (2) The ratio of the static electric field $`E_0`$ to the reference magnetic field, $`|E_0|/B_0`$; and (3) the strength parameter $`\overline{\zeta }(/2\pi )4\pi n_{\mathrm{}}mc^2/B_0^2`$, which is a measure of the rate of inflow of the plasma towards the reconnection region. We find that the current-density distribution depends on $``$ and $`\overline{\zeta }`$ but only weakly on $`\gamma _0`$. The distribution function of the accelerated leptons is found to be approximately $`dn/d\gamma \gamma ^1`$ for $`\gamma <\mathrm{\Gamma }_0=\kappa ^2\gamma _0`$ where $`\kappa 12`$. The simulations of Zenitani and Hoshino (2001) give a distribution $`\gamma ^1`$ for $`\gamma <20`$. The apparent distribution function may be steeper due to the distribution of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ values and/or the radiative losses. Self-consistent equilibria are found only for plasma inflow rates $`\overline{\zeta }`$ to the $`X`$point less than a critical value which depends on $``$.

This work was supported in part by NASA grants NAG5-9047 and NAG5-9735 and by NSF grant AST-9986936.


format: text

text:
# Compositeness Effects in the Bose-Einstein Condensation

## I Introduction

In many physical problems one has to deal with a large number of identical particles that are not of a fundamental character but which are known to be composed by a bound system of several fermions. Examples include systems of identical atoms, molecules or nuclei. If the number of “fundamental” fermions contained in the composite particle is odd, it is a fermion, otherwise it is a boson. In many situations the internal structure of the composite particle can be ignored and the system as a whole treated as a collection of interacting or noninteracting point-like particles. This is the case for instance, in the theories of Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) of trapped bosonic gases Bec . Another example is provided by electron-hole bosonic states in semiconductors, called excitons Comb-epl . In such systems, the bosons have internal structure and finite size, i.e., they are composite bosonic particles. The rational for neglecting the internal structure of the atoms in atomic BEC is that one is dealing with a very dilute system in the trap. The low density regime makes it very improbable that the internal structures of the atoms overlap in the trap, since the average distance between atoms in typical condensates is several times the size of an atom. For excitons, the situation is not as favorable as in atomic BEC and effects of the internal structure of the bosons might play an important role Comb-epl .

A departure from the purely bosonic behavior of the atoms in a trap might occur in situations that the central density of the condensate grows beyond a critical value. This happens, for example, when interatomic attractive forces tend to push the atoms to the center of the trap and the zero-point kinetic energy is no longer able to stabilize the system. The collapse is expected to occur when the number $`N`$ of atoms exceeds a critical value, $`N_{\mathrm{cr}}`$, leading to an interaction energy larger than the kinetic energy.

The aim of the present paper is to set up a framework to evaluate the departure from the purely bosonic behavior of a BEC of composite particles. A complete theory aimed at such a task should include all the possible degrees of freedom for the constituent particles, which is in general highly prohibitive from the computational point of view. In the present paper, we use a phenomenological approach, making use of the concept of quons GreenPRD . Quons are particles that are neither bosons, nor fermions, and the quon creation and annihilation operators obey a particular algebra that interpolates between Fermi e Bose algebras. The quon algebra is in fact a deformation of the Fermi and Bose algebras, and is such that when a parameter ($`q`$) runs from $`1`$ and $`+1`$, it interpolates between the Fermi and Bose algebras.

Recently, a systematic way to build a many-body quon state has been discussed GreenPRD ; SidRic  and a general formula for a normalized many-quon symmetric state SidRic  has been found. The developed formalism allows to apply the quon algebra to describe physical systems presenting deviations from an idealized situation, in the same fashion of the more usual Quantum Algebras Kibler . An example is SidRic  the three dimensional quonic harmonic oscillator which describes in a effective way anharmonic effects. The quonic deformation is also effective for incorporating correlations in many-body systems. Applications involving the antisymmetric subspace (fermion-like particles) can be also considered and are now under way.

The use of the symmetric subspace, and $`q`$ close enough to $`+1`$, allows to describe in a very natural way the departure from a purely bosonic behavior of systems of composite bosons. In order to apply such ideas to the BEC in trapped gases, we derive in Section III a quonic version of the Gross-Pitaeviskii (GP) equation, which we denote qGP. In the limit of $`q=1`$, the qGP equation reduces to the usual GP equation, widely used in the literature Bec . Initially, in Section II, we present a brief discussion on the description of a composite boson built from two non-identical fermions and provide a connection with the quon algebra. This will allow a first estimate of the deformation parameter $`q`$ in terms of parameters of the system Comb-epl ; us . In Section IV we present numerical results, and compare with observables related to trapped bosonic atoms. Conclusions and future perspectives are presented in Section V.

## II Relation between composite particles and quons

### II.1 Composite particles

Let us consider a composite boson state with quantum number $`\alpha `$ as a bound state of two distinct fermions

$$A_\alpha ^{}|0=\underset{\mu \nu }{}\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^{\mu \nu }a_\mu ^{}b_\nu ^{}|0,$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^{\mu \nu }`$ is the Fock-space bound-state amplitude, $`a_\mu ^{}`$ and $`b_\mu ^{}`$ are the fermion creation operators, and $`|0`$ is the no-particle state (vacuum). The quantum number $`\alpha `$ stands for the center of mass momentum, the internal energy, the spin, and other internal degrees of freedom of the composite boson. For instance, the composite boson could be the hydrogen atom, where $`a_\mu ^{}`$ and $`b_\mu ^{}`$ create an electron and a proton respectively. The $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ stand for the space and internal quantum numbers of the constituent fermions. The sum over $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ is to be understood as a sum over discrete quantum numbers and an integral over continuous variables.

The fermion creation and annihilation operators satisfy canonical anti-commutation relations:

$`\{a_\mu ,a_\nu \}=\{a_\mu ^{},a_\nu ^{}\}=0\{b_\mu ,b_\nu \}=\{b_\mu ^{},b_\nu ^{}\}=0,`$
$`\{a_\mu ,a_\nu ^{}\}=\delta _{\mu ,\nu }\{b_\mu ,b_\nu ^{}\}=\delta _{\mu ,\nu }.`$ (2)
It is convenient to work with normalized amplitudes $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^{\mu \nu }`$, such that

$$\alpha |\beta =\delta _{\alpha ,\beta },$$
(3)
and therefore

$$\underset{\mu \nu }{}\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{\Phi }_\beta ^{\mu \nu }=\delta _{\alpha ,\beta }.$$
(4)
Using the fermion anticommutation relations of Eq. (2) and the Fock-space amplitude normalization Eq. (4), one can easily show that the composite boson operators satisfy the following commutation relations:

$`[A_\alpha ,A_\beta ]=[A_\alpha ^{},A_\beta ^{}]=0,`$ (5)
$`[A_\alpha ,A_\beta ^{}]=\delta _{\alpha ,\beta }\mathrm{\Delta }_{\alpha \beta },`$ (6)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\alpha \beta }`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{\alpha \beta }=\underset{\mu \nu }{}\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^{\mu \nu }\left(\underset{\mu ^{}}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_\beta ^{\mu ^{}\nu }a_\mu ^{}^{}a_\mu +\underset{\nu ^{}}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_\beta ^{\mu \nu ^{}}b_\nu ^{}^{}b_\nu \right).$$
(7)
One can also easily show the following commutation relations:

$$[a_\mu ,A_\alpha ^{}]=\underset{\mu ^{}\nu ^{}}{}\delta _{\mu ,\mu ^{}}\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^{\mu ^{}\nu ^{}}b_\nu ^{}^{}[b_\nu ,A_\alpha ^{}]=\underset{\mu ^{}\nu ^{}}{}\delta _{\nu ,\nu ^{}}\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^{\mu ^{}\nu ^{}}a_\mu ^{}^{}.$$
(8)
The composite nature of the bosons is evident from the presence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\alpha \beta }`$, which is a sort of “deformation” of the canonical boson algebra. The effect of this term becomes unimportant in the infinite tight binding limit, i.e. in the limit of point-like bosons. Eq. (8) shows the lack of kinematical independence of the microscopic operators $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\nu `$ from the macroscopic ones $`A_\alpha ^{}`$s.

### II.2 The quon algebra

The quon algebra is defined by the deformed commutation relation

$`A_\alpha A_\beta ^{}qA_\beta ^{}A_\alpha =\delta _{\alpha ,\beta },`$ (9)
where $`q`$ is the deformation parameter of the algebra; $`A_\alpha `$ annihilates the vacuum

$$A_\alpha |0=0.$$
(10)
The quon algebra interpolates between the Fermi and Bose algebras as the parameter $`q`$ varies from $`1`$ to $`+1`$. Polynomials in the creation operators acting on the vacuum form a Fock-like space of vectors, i.e., the quonic Fock space. In Ref. Zagier  it was shown that the squared norm of all vectors in the quonic Fock space remains positive definite, provided that $`q`$ ranges from $`1`$ to $`+1`$. Note that no commutation relation can be imposed on $`A_\alpha ^{}`$,$`A_\beta ^{}`$ and $`A_\alpha `$,$`A_\beta `$. However, as remarked by GreenbergGreenPRD , similarly to the case of normal Bose commutation relations, no such rule is needed for practical evaluation of expectation values of polynomials in $`A_\alpha `$ and $`A_\alpha ^{}`$ when Eq. (10) holds. Such matrix elements can be evaluated with the repeated use of Eq. (9) solely; annihilation operators are moved to the right using Eq. (9) until they annihilate the vacuum or creation operators are moved to the left using the adjoint of Eq. (9) until they annihilate the vacuum.

Since there is no commutation relations between $`A_\alpha ^{}`$,$`A_\beta ^{}`$ and $`A_\alpha `$,$`A_\beta `$ all $`n!`$ states given by the order permutations of the creation operators acting on the vacuum (and carrying different quantum numbers) are linearly independent. This is in sharp contrast to the usual bosonic or fermionic algebras and important differences between the quonic and usual Fock space appears due to this property. As an example, we consider a two quons system occupying the arbitrary states $`1`$ and $`2`$

$`|1=A_1^{}A_2^{}|0|2=A_2^{}A_1^{}|0,`$ (11)
which are not independent states and the overlap matrix is

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}1|1& 1|2\\ 2|1& 2|2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& q\\ q& 1\end{array}\right).`$ (12)
One can show that the basis that diagonalizes the overlap matrix is

$`|S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\sqrt{1q}}}(A_1^{}A_2^{}+A_2^{}A_1^{})0,`$ (13)
$`|A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\sqrt{1+q}}}(A_1^{}A_2^{}A_2^{}A_1^{})0,`$ (14)
where $`|S`$ is a symmetric state and $`|A`$ is an antisymmetric state. Analogously for a three quons system occupying three distinct states $`1,2,3`$, the non-orthogonal basis will contain the six independent states $`A_i^{}A_j^{}A_k^{}|0`$, where the indexes $`i,j,k`$ are determined by the 3! permutations of $`1,2,3`$. The orthonormal basis may be obtained classifying these states according to the irreducible representations of the permutation group of three elements, $`S_3`$.

Besides the well known symmetric and antisymmetric states, there are four more exotic mixed symmetric states. To shorten the corresponding expressions we adopt the convention $`A_i^{}A_j^{}A_k^,|0|ijk`$ and can write: states:

$`|S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+2q^2+2q+q^3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}}\left[|ijk+|jik+|ikj+|jki+|kij+|kji\right],`$ (15)
$`|A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+2q^22qq^3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}}\left[|ijk|jik|ikj+|jki+|kij|kji\right],`$ (16)
$`|MS1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1q^2+qq^3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12}}}[|ijk|jik+2|ikj+|jki2|kij|kji],`$ (17)
$`|MS2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1q^2+qq^3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[|ijk|jik+|jki+|kji\right],`$ (18)
$`|MS3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1q^2q+q^3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[|ijk|jik|jki+|kji\right],`$ (19)
$`|MS4`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1q^2q+q^3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12}}}\left[|ijk+|jik2|ikj+|jki2|kij+|kji\right],`$ (20)
where $`i,j,k=1,2,3`$ . Also, the cases $`i=j`$, $`i=k`$, $`j=k`$ and $`i=j=k`$ are automatically included in the expressions of Eqs. (15) to (20) up to a normalization factor which is $`q`$-independent. Evidently, the above basis states can be built from the well known procedure based on the Young tableaux method Greiner , or through the diagonalization of the overlap matrix obtained from all possible order permutations from the state $`A_i^{}A_j^{}A_k^{}|0`$ . In fact, the $`q`$-polynomials which appear in the square roots in Eqs. (15) to (20), correspond to the eigenvalues of the overlap matrix and measure the degree of violation of statistics in the system.

Finally, we remark that for the quon algebra one may also define the transition operator $`N_{ij}`$, obeying the commutation relationsGreenPRD ; Melja

$$[N_{ij},A_k^{}]=\delta _{jk}A_i^{},[N_{ji},A_k]=\delta _{jk}A_i.$$
(21)
The $`N_{ij}`$ operator is given by an infinite series expansion in terms of the quonic annihilation and creation operators, and its first few terms are given by

$`N_{ij}=A_i^{}A_j+(1q^2)^1{\displaystyle \underset{\gamma }{}}(A_\gamma ^{}A_i^{}qA_i^{}A_\gamma ^{})(A_jA_\gamma qA_\gamma A_i)+\mathrm{}.`$ (22)
The number operator $`N_i`$ is obtained when $`i=j`$.

### II.3 The quon algebra and composite particles

If one writes $`q=1x`$, the deformed commutator, Eq. (9), can be written as

$$[A_\alpha ,A_\beta ^{}]=\delta _{\alpha \beta }xA_\alpha ^{}A_\beta .$$
(23)
The similarity of this relation with Eq. (6) is evident. In some sense, the product of fermion operators $`a_\mu ^{}^{}a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu ^{}b_\nu ^{}`$ weighted by the $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$’s in Eq. (6) is effectively modelled by the term $`xA_\alpha ^{}A_\beta `$ in Eq. (23).

We note that the commutation relations of Eq. (5) between $`A_\alpha `$,$`A_\beta `$ and $`A_\alpha ^{}`$,$`A_\beta ^{}`$ are not algebraic relations valid for quons. Since we wish to describe a system of “identical” composite bosons, we impose that the state vectors of a many-body composite particles system are invariant by the permutation of the particle indexes. So we assume that the physical subspace which is adequate for the description of a bosonic composite system is composed only of totally symmetric states. To build the physical subspace we have to project out from the basis of states only totally symmetric states.

It is possible to show that the most general symmetric state for a system of $`N`$ quons can be written as SidRic :

$$|n_\alpha n_\beta n_\gamma \mathrm{};S=\sqrt{\frac{n_\alpha !n_\beta !n_\gamma !\mathrm{}}{N![N]!}}\widehat{S}_N(A_\alpha ^{})^{n_\alpha }(A_\beta ^{})^{n_\beta }(A_\gamma ^{})^{n_\gamma }\mathrm{}|0,$$
(24)
where $`\widehat{S}_N`$ is an operator that generates all possible combinations that are symmetric under the permutation of any of the creation operators, $`n_\alpha +n_\beta +n_\gamma +\mathrm{}=N`$ and Kibler ; chai

$$[N]=\frac{1q^N}{1q},$$
(25)
with $`[N]!=[N][N1]\mathrm{}.[2][1]`$ and !=1. Another important result that we are going to use next is the following SidRic :

$$A_\alpha |n_\alpha n_\beta n_\gamma \mathrm{};S=\sqrt{\frac{[N]}{N}}\sqrt{n_\alpha }|n_\alpha 1,n_\beta n_\gamma \mathrm{}.;S.$$
(26)
This last expression allows one to calculate matrix elements between symmetric quonic states with any number of quons. Using Eq. (26) one can easily show that, within the physical subspace, i.e., the one built only from totally symmetric states, $`|\psi ,S`$, the commutation relations of Eq. (5) are now valid also for the quons

$`\psi ,S|\left(A_\alpha ^{}A_\beta ^{}A_\beta ^{}A_\alpha ^{}\right)|\psi ,S=0,`$ (27)
$`\psi ,S|\left(A_\alpha A_\beta A_\beta A_\alpha \right)|\psi ,S=0.`$ (28)
In this way, the analogy between a composite particle and a quon is complete.

### II.4 Free composite gas

Now let us consider a system of $`N`$ composite bosons in a large box of volume $`V`$ at zero temperature. If the bosons were ideal point-like particles, the ground state of the system would be the one where all bosons condense in the zero momentum state. In the case of composite bosons, the closest analog of the ideal gas ground state is

$$|N=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N!}}(A_0^{})^N|0,$$
(29)
where $`A_0^{}`$ is the creation operator of a composite boson in its ground state (ground state $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$) and with zero center of mass momentum. Due to the composite nature of the bosons, this state incorporates kinematical correlations implied by the Pauli exclusion principle which operates on the constituent fermions. Among other effects, the Pauli principle forbids the macroscopic occupation of the zero momentum state. The closest analog to the boson occupation number in the state of Eq. (29) is

$$N_0=\frac{N|A_0^{}A_0|N}{N|N}.$$
(30)
In order to evaluate Eq. (30), we consider a spin zero boson and use for the spatial part of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ a simple Gaussian form such that the r.m.s radius of the boson is $`r_0`$. To lowest order in the density of the system $`n=N/V`$, $`N_0`$ is given by us

$$N_0=N\left(1\gamma nr_0^3\right),$$
(31)
where $`\gamma `$ is a geometrical factor. The exact value of the geometrical factor $`\gamma `$ depends on the form of the internal wave-function of the composite boson. Depending on the exact form used for the internal boson wave-function this factor runs from 50 to 250 Comb-epl . Note that Eq. (31) is valid only for $`\gamma nr_0^31`$, i.e. for extremely low-density systems. For higher-density systems, a nonlinear $`N`$ dependence of $`N_0/N`$ is obtained Comb-epl .

It is apparent from Eq. (31) that in the limit of infinite tight binding, $`r_00`$, one has the familiar Bose-Einstein condensation. For finite values of the size of the bosons, the effects of the Pauli principle become important and one has a depletion on the amount of condensed bosons. Moreover, from Eq. (31) one has that if the size of the bound state is of the order of the mean separation of the bosons in the medium, $`dn^{1/3}`$, the depletion is almost total. The depletion of the condensation is a direct consequence of the deformation of the boson algebra by the term $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\alpha \beta }`$.

In the same spirit as in the previous case, we take as the closest analog of the ideal boson gas ground state the $`N`$ quon state

$$|N=\frac{1}{\sqrt{[N]!}}(A_0^{})^N|0.$$
(32)
Note that we are using the same symbols for both the composite and quon algebra annihilation/creation operators.

As before, the operator $`A_0^{}A_0`$ is the number operator in the zero deformation limit only. The effect of the deformation can be evaluated taking the expectation value of $`A_0^{}A_0`$ in the state $`|N`$, Eq. (32). To evaluate the expectation value, we make use of the result given by equation Eq. (25)

$$N_0=N|A_0^{}A_0|N=[N]=\frac{1q^N}{1q}.$$
(33)
Using the above result one obtains to lowest order in $`x`$,

$$N_0=\frac{1}{x}[1(1x)^N]N\left(1\frac{1}{2}Nx\right).$$
(34)
Comparing this result with the one of Eq. (31) it is clear that the effect of the deformation, for sufficiently low densities, is such that

$$Nx2\gamma \frac{Nr_0^3}{V}.$$
(35)
That is, the effect of the deformation parameter is proportional to the ratio of the volume occupied by the bosons to the volume of the system. Note that for densities not extremely low, a nonlinear $`N`$ dependence is expected for the deformation parameter, as remarked above.

## III The Gross-Pitaeviskii Equation for Composite Bosons

We now use the quon algebra formalism in the BEC. We consider a system of $`N`$ composite bosons interacting in a spherical harmonic oscillator trap. We assume that the effective Hamiltonian describing such system is given by

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`T+V+V_{trap}`$ (36)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ,\beta }{}}\alpha |T|\beta A_\alpha ^{}A_\beta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\delta }{}}\alpha \beta |V|\gamma \delta A_\alpha ^{}A_\beta ^{}A_\gamma A_\delta +{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ,\beta }{}}\alpha |V_{trap}|\beta N_{\alpha \beta },`$
where $`T`$, $`V_{trap}`$ and $`V`$ correspond to the kinetic energy, trap harmonic oscillator potential and the interaction among the composite bosons respectively. We take as usual

$`T(\stackrel{}{x})={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\mathrm{}_\stackrel{}{x},`$ (37)
and

$`V(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})=g\delta (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y}).`$ (38)
To obtain the equation describing the condensate of composite bosons we assume that the lowest energy state is given by

$`|\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{(A_0^{})^N}{\sqrt{[N]!}}}|0.`$ (39)
So we impose the variational principle

$`\psi ,S|H|\delta \psi ,S=0,`$ (40)
where the arbitrary variational symmetrized state has the form

$$|\delta \psi ,S=\widehat{S}A_\mu ^{}A_0|\psi ,S,(\mu 0)$$
(41)
and the symbol $`\widehat{S}`$ is a symmetrizer operator. Eq. (40) is equivalent to the expression

$`\psi ,S|{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha \beta }{}}\left(\alpha |T|\beta A_\alpha ^{}A_\beta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\gamma \delta }{}}\alpha \beta |V|\gamma \delta A_\alpha ^{}A_\beta ^{}A_\gamma A_\delta +\alpha |V^{trap}|\beta N_{\alpha \beta }\right)|\delta \psi ,S=0.`$ (42)
From Eq. (26) one obtains the matrix elements

$`\psi ,S|A_\alpha ^{}A_\beta |\delta \psi ,S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[N]}{N}}\sqrt{N}\delta _{\alpha 0}\delta _{\beta \mu },`$ (43)
$`\psi ,S|N_{\alpha \beta }|\delta \psi ,S`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{N}\delta _{\alpha 0}\delta _{\beta \mu }\psi ,S|A_\alpha ^{}A_\beta ^{}A_\gamma A_\delta |\delta \psi ,S`$ (44)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[N]}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{[N1]}{N1}}\sqrt{N}(N1)(\delta _{\alpha 0}\delta _{\beta 0}\delta _{\gamma \mu }\delta _{\delta 0}+\delta _{\alpha 0}\delta _{\beta 0}\delta _{\gamma 0}\delta _{\delta \mu }).`$
Using these in Eq. (42), one obtains

$`{\displaystyle \frac{[N]}{N}}T_{0\mu }+V_{0\mu }^{trap}+{\displaystyle \frac{[N][N1]}{N}}V_{000\mu }=0.`$ (45)
Therefore, the variational principle leads in coordinate space to the equation

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\mathrm{}_\stackrel{}{x}+{\displaystyle \frac{N}{[N]}}V^{trap}(\stackrel{}{x})+g[N1]|\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})|^2\right]\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})=ϵ\varphi (\stackrel{}{x}).`$ (46)
This equation may be interpreted as a generalization of the Gross-Pitaeviskii equation to quons and, as mentioned previously will be denoted as qGP.

## IV The Solution of the Quon Gross-Pitaeviskii Equation and Applications

Many authors have recently presented different methods to solve the usual GP equation. Here, we follow a variational approach, in which we expand the ground state wave-function in a three-dimensional harmonic oscillator basis with angular momentum $`l=0`$. Good convergence has been achieved within the method and we were able to reproduce to very good accuracy results obtained in the literature with other methods when we go to the limit $`q=1`$.

Initially we consider the case of an attractive interaction, represented by a negative value of the scattering length Bec . Of particular interest is the study of the well known collapse, which occurs when the number of atoms in the trap reaches a critical number for which the system becomes unstable. In that case, the behavior of the GP solution is characterized by the dimensionless constant

$$k=\frac{N_0|a|}{b_t},$$
(47)
where $`b_t`$ is the trap oscillator length and $`a`$ the $`s`$-wave scattering length. Several authors (see for instance Ref. Roberts  and references therein) have calculated the critical value ($`k_c`$) for this constant using different methods. The value, for an isotropic trap, was always very close to $`k_c=0.575`$. Recent measurements Roberts  indicate a value for $`k_c`$ that is between $`10\%`$ and $`25\%`$ smaller than the theoretical predictions.

Let us now consider now the qGP equation. According to our discussion in Section (II), one may interpret the number of condensed atoms as $`N_0=[N]`$. Eq (46) can be rewritten in terms of dimensionless variables in the same fashion as done in the normal GP equation Bec :

$`\left[\mathrm{}_{\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}}+\stackrel{~}{r}^28\pi k(q)|\varphi (\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}})|^2\right]\varphi (\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}})=2\stackrel{~}{ϵ}\varphi (\stackrel{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}).`$ (48)
Here we have used explicitly the oscillator form for the potential and have written the interaction constant in terms of the scattering length $`a`$ as $`g=4\pi \mathrm{}^2a/m`$. The tilde means energy in units of the oscillator energy, $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}=ϵ/\mathrm{}\omega _t`$, and length is expressed in units of the modified oscillator constant , $`\stackrel{~}{x}=x/b_t(q)`$, with

$$b_t(q)=b_t\left(\frac{[N]}{N}\right)^{1/4}.$$
(49)
In addition,

$`k(q)={\displaystyle \frac{|a|[N]}{b_t}}{\displaystyle \frac{[N1]}{[N]}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{N}{[N]}}\right)^{1/4}k\left({\displaystyle \frac{N}{[N]}}\right)^{1/4}.`$ (50)
Obviously the qGP equation of Eq. (48) leads to a critical value $`k_c(q)=0.575`$. However, in the present case the critical constant to be compared with the experimental value is given by

$$k_c=0.575\left(\frac{[N]}{N}\right)^{1/4}.$$
(51)
For $`N_0=[N]=2000`$ and using $`x`$ independent of $`N`$ and as small as $`x=3\times 10^4`$ (or $`q=1x=0.9999`$), one finds that it is possible to fit the experimental result $`k_c=0.522`$ Roberts . This value of $`x`$ should be compared to the expression coming from our estimate of the deformation parameter in Eq. (35). Using for $`r_0`$ the scattering length $`|a|15\AA `$, and using the linear dimension of the trap as given by $`b_t100\AA `$ Cornish  one obtains precisely

$$x=2\gamma \frac{|a|^3}{b_t^3}10^4,$$
(52)
where for the geometrical factor $`\gamma `$ we used the value $`\gamma =100`$, as estimated in Ref. Comb-epl . This result is of the correct order of magnitude to bring the theoretical value for the critical constant within the range of experimental values.

As a second application, we consider the case of a repulsive interaction. In this case the number of atoms in the trap can reach large numbers (N up to $`10^7`$), which can raise the question of validity for the use of the GP equation for such high densities. In a recent calculation fabrocini , effects that go beyond the usual GP (or mean-field) solution were also considered and shown to lead to a systematic, small increase in the chemical potential of the condensate. In our formalism we may obtain the same behavior by preserving the original GP dynamics but relaxing the condition that the particles are true bosons. To see how this happens , we now rewrite Eq. (46) in a slightly different form:

$`\left[H_{osc}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{N}{[N]}}1\right)V^{trap}(\stackrel{}{x})+g[N1]|\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})|^2\right]\varphi (\stackrel{}{x})=ϵ\varphi (\stackrel{}{x}),`$ (53)
where $`H_{osc}`$ is the usual three-dimensional harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian. Following our previous interpretation that the number of condensed atoms is $`[N]`$, we conclude that only the term proportional to $`N/[N]1`$ differs from the usual GP equation. However, for $`q`$ close enough to $`1`$, this term is small ($`1`$) even for large values of $`N`$, and therefore one may treat this term as a perturbation to the non-deformed solution. At this point it is worthwhile to note that this term will always increase the energy of the condensate by a small amount. Of course, the increase will depends on the value of $`q`$ (or $`x`$) used. In order to make a phenomenological estimation of the effect of this perturbation we relate again our results of section II.4 for the depletion of the condensate to the one presented in Section III of Ref. Bec . There, an estimation for the depletion is given by:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{NN_0}{N_0}}={\displaystyle \frac{5\sqrt{\pi }}{8}}\sqrt{a^3n(0)},`$ (54)
where $`n(0)`$ is the central ($`r=0`$) density of the condensate. Equating our result, Eq. (34), with the above and taking in to account that $`x1`$, we obtain:

$`x{\displaystyle \frac{10\sqrt{\pi }}{8N}}\sqrt{a^3n(0)}.`$ (55)
Note that a dependence of the deformation parameter on the number of atoms (or on the density) appears very naturally here. As we have discussed in Section II.4, an $`N`$-independent deformation parameter $`x`$ is physically reasonable only for low density systems. In the present situation of a repulsive interaction, the number of atoms in the trap can be many orders of magnitude larger than in the attractive case and it is gratifying to see the internal consistency of our formalism, in that it is capable of describing both extremes in a very natural way.

In order to perform numerical calculations, one needs $`n(0)`$, which can be taken from the $`x=0`$ solution of the GP equation and the value for $`N`$, which in turns depends on $`x`$. However, for our purposes here we may evaluate the order of magnitude of $`x`$ making $`N=N_0`$ in Eq. (55). We also use $`a/b_t=5\times 10^2`$. This last value might seem quite big when compared to the one used for example in Refs. Bec  and Roberts . However, recent experimental developments Cornish  allow to change the scattering length by orders of magnitude thanks to a technique known as Feshbach resonance. The value chosen here is consistent with, for example, the experiment reported in Ref. Cornish . In Table I we present our numerical results for the chemical potential $`ϵ`$, for different $`N_0`$ values. Note that, although our initial conditions are different from the ones chosen for the calculations in Ref. fabrocini , the results are qualitatively equivalent, in the sense that we get always a bigger value for the chemical potential, as compared to the usual GP solution.

## V Conclusions

We have considered in this work the quon algebra to describe in an effective and phenomenological way the departure from a purely bosonic behavior of a system of composite bosons. The formalism was developed previously and relies on the projection of the whole quonic space onto the symmetric subspace. The main idea is to preserve the bosonic behavior and leave to the deformation parameter the description of possible deviations. As a specific application we have considered the derivation of the Gross-Pitaeviskii equation within the quon algebra, which can be done in a straightforward way using our formalism. The interpretation of the modified Gross-Pitaeviskii equation obtained is consistent with our initial qualitative considerations.

As for numerical calculations we have in first place solved our deformed GP equation for the collapse in the case of an attractive force in a trapped bosonic gas. Reinterpreting the value of the critical constant for the collapse, we obtained that the deformation of the bosonic algebra changes the value of this constant, and the change is in the right direction to explain experimental results. Of course, the modification depends on the chosen value for the deformation parameter $`q`$, which is not easy to estimate at the conditions of the experiment. We have found that a decrease of order $`10^4`$ compared to the bosonic limit $`q=1`$, and independent of the number of atoms in the trap, brings the critical value within the recent experimental measurements. Secondly, we have calculated the chemical potential for the case of a repulsive force between the trapped atoms. This is a more favorable situation to test our model, since recently it became experimentally feasible to create condensates with a much larger number of atoms as compared to the attractive case. Using a phenomenological estimation for the deformation parameter, for which a density dependence arises very naturally, we are able to calculate the correction in the chemical potential.

Natural extensions of the present work would include the investigation of the effect of the $`q`$-deformation on other observables of the BE condensates. Also, there are many other interesting systems for which the quon algebra could be useful to describe deviations from a purely bosonic behavior of many-body systems of composite bosons. One example, which seems particularly interesting in the present context, is the case of excitons Comb-epl , which are boson-like particles formed by a electron-hole pair in a semiconductor. Work in these directions is underway.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was partially supported by CNPq.


text:
# An Electron Paramagnetic Resonance Study of Electron-Hole Asymmetry in Charge Ordered Pr1-xCaxMnO3 (x=0.64,0.36)

## I Introduction

The phenomenon of charge ordering observed in Re1-xAxMnO3 where Re is a trivalent rare earth ion and A is a divalent alkaline earth ion has been intensively studied for the past few years. This has been one of the most puzzling of the various properties exhibited by the rare earth manganites such as Colossal Magneto Resistance (CMR), orbital ordering, phase separation and a large number of magnetic and structural transitions as a function of temperature and composition . The parent compound ReMnO3 contains Mn3+ ions which have one outermost eg electron. Doping with a divalent alkaline earth ion introduces Mn4+ with one less electron (a hole) and hence manganites with x $`<`$ 0.5 are called ‘hole-doped’. Coming from the opposite end of the phase diagram the AMnO3 compound consists of all Mn4+ ions and doping it with a trivalent rare earth ion introduces Mn3+ ions and hence eg electrons into the system. Therefore, manganites with x $`>`$ 0.5 are termed ‘electron-doped’. Interestingly, the phase diagram is not symmetric across x = 0.5 concentration though the number of charge carriers on both sides of x = 0.5 vary in a symmetric manner. Broadly speaking, the x $`<`$ 0.5 region in the phase diagrams of the manganites is dominated by ferromagnetic interaction whereas x $`>`$ 0.5 region is characterised by charge ordering. The phase diagram of Pr1-xCaxMnO3 (PCMO) shows charge ordering in the 0.3 $`<`$ x $`<`$ 0.8 composition regime. However, the asymmetry of the phase diagram persists even in the charge ordered (CO) state of x $`<`$ 0.5 e.g. x=0.36(PCMO-h) and x $`>`$ 0.5 compound e.g. x=0.64 (PCMO-e). The properties of the CO state are quite different in the two compounds. The charge ordering transition temperature Tco for PCMO-h is 210 K whereas that for PCMO-e is 268 K. Charge ordering in the former can be melted into a ferromagnetic metallic state by doping with ions such as Cr3+ and Ru4+by the application of magnetic fields whereas no such signs of melting of charge order are observed in PCMO-e. The cause of these differences has been attributed to the intrinsic differences in the electronic structure of the two types of systems.

Electron Paramagnetic Resonance (EPR) has proved to be a valuable tool in the study of the manganites. Through a study of the temperature and composition dependence of various EPR parameters such as the linewidth and the intensity across the various transitions valuable information has been obtained regarding the interplay of different interactions in the systems  . However most of these studies relate to CMR manganites and there are comparatively very few published reports of EPR studies of CO manganites .To the best of our knowledge, there has been no report of a comparative study of electron and hole-doped manganites. Since the asymmetry in the phase diagram across x=0.5 is an interesting aspect of the physics of manganites, we compare the EPR results on the electron-doped manganite Pr0.36Ca0.64MnO3 (PCMO-e) with those reported by us earlier  on the hole-doped Pr0.6Ca0.4MnO3 (PCMO-h) with a view to understanding this asymmetry as reflected in the EPR parameters and their temperature dependence.

## II Experimental

Single crystals of PCMO-e were prepared by the float zone technique. Resistivity measurements show an increase in the resistivity at TCO = 268 K. Magnetization measurements show a peak in the susceptibility also at 268 K. However no peak in the susceptibility was observed at TN unlike in PCMO-h.

The EPR experiments were carried out on both single crystal and powder samples of PCMO-e using a Bruker X - band spectrometer (model 200D) equipped with an Oxford Instruments continuous flow cryostat (model ESR 900). The spectrometer was modified by connecting the X and Y inputs of the chart recorder to a 12 bit A/D converter which in turn is connected to a PC enabling digital data acquisition. With this accessory, for the scanwidth typically used for our experiments i.e 6000 Gauss, one could determine the magnetic field to a precision of 3 Gauss. For single crystal study the static magnetic field was kept parallel to the c-axis of the crystal. Experiments were also performed with another orientation (H $``$ a) to check for any anisotropy in the ESR response. For measurements on powder, the finely ground sample was dispersed in paraffin wax.The temperature was varied from 4.2 K to room temperature (accuracy: $`\pm 1K`$) and the EPR spectra were recorded while warming the sample. Signals could be recorded only for temperatures T $`>`$ 200 K below which signals had very poor signal to noise ratio. While doing experiments on both the single crystal and the powder, a speck of DPPH was used as a g-marker. To carry out the lineshape fitting (to be described below) the signal due to DPPH was subtracted digitally.

## III Results and Discussion

Figure 1a shows some representative EPR spectra recorded on the single crystal of PCMO-e. The signals are Dysonian in shape and are fitted to the equation

$$\frac{dP}{dH}=\frac{d}{dH}(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }H+\alpha (HH_0)}{4(HH_0)^2+\mathrm{\Delta }H^2}+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }H+\alpha (H+H_0)}{4(H+H_0)^2+\mathrm{\Delta }H^2)})$$
$`(1)`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$H is the full width at half intensity, H0 is the resonance field and $`\alpha `$ is the asymmetry parameter which is the fraction of the dispersion component of Lorentzian added to the absorption component resulting in the Dysonian lineshape. In equation 1 the first term represents the signal response due to the component of microwaves that is polarised clockwise and the second term represents the response to the component polarised anticlockwise.

Figure 1b shows the EPR spectra from the powder sample of PCMO-e at a few temperatures. These are Lorentzian in shape and are fitted to equation

$$\frac{dP}{dH}=\frac{d}{dH}(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }H}{4(HH_0)^2+\mathrm{\Delta }H^2}+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }H}{4(H+H_0)^2+\mathrm{\Delta }H^2)})$$
$`(2)`$
where the symbols have the same meanings as in equation 1. The two terms are incorporated for the same reason as mentioned above. The lineshape parameters obtained by fitting are plotted in figures 2, 3 and 4 along with the data of PCMO-h

The single crystal parameters g, peak to peak linewidth $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp(= $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$H / $`\sqrt{3}`$) and the asymmetry parameter $`\alpha `$ obtained from the fits to equation 1 are plotted in figure 2 against temperature. The single crystal data of PCMO-h are also plotted in the same figure for the purpose of comparison.

As can be seen from figure 2a, the value of ‘g’ (2.002) in PCMO-h at room temperature is higher than that in PCMO-e (1.999) which is less than the free electron value. The ‘g’ value in PCMO-e (Fig. 2a, solid squares) increases only slightly as the temperature is lowered from room temperature to Tco below which it decreases sharply. It reaches a value of 1.94 at 200 K. This temperature dependence is quite different from that observed in the case of PCMO-h (Fig. 2a) where it remains nearly temperature independent in the paramagnetic phase, i.e, from room temperature to Tco, below which it decreases sharply to a value less than the free electron ‘g’ value, ‘ge’. With further reduction in temperature, the ‘g’ value increases monotonically.

The linewidth (Fig. 2b) also behaves differently in the two manganites. In PCMO-e it shows a slight monotonic decrease down to 245 K below which it shows a smooth, sharper increase. In PCMO-h on the other hand, there is a sharp discontinuous increase at Tco and a monotonic increase at lower temperatures.

The asymmetry parameter $`\alpha `$ plotted in figure 2c exhibits marked differences between the two samples. While it increases abruptly at Tco in PCMO-h, in PCMO-e it remains temperature independent till well below Tco, i.e, down to 245 K and then decreases monotonically below that temperature. In PCMO-h on the other hand throughout the temperature below Tco, $`\alpha `$ decreases monotonically.

In figure 3, we show the results from the powder spectra of PCMO-h and PCMO-e. The ‘g’ values plotted in figure 3a show a monotonic increase as the temperature is reduced from room temperature in both the compounds. The magnitude of ‘g’ in the former is however greater than ‘ge’ throughout the temperature range whereas in the latter it shows a crossover from less than ‘ge’ to a value larger than ‘ge’ near Tco. Also, the temperature dependence of ‘g’ in the two samples is qualitatively different. The variation of ‘g’ from room temperature down to TN is much larger in PCMO-e than in PCMO-h. Another noteworthy point is that the temperature dependences of ‘g’ in the powder and single crystal of PCMO-e are opposite to each other. Moreno et al.,  observed an anisotropy in the temperature dependence of ‘g’ in single crystals of layered manganite La2(1-x)Sr1+2xMn2O7. They observed that on decreasing the temperature ‘g’ increases with T for H$``$a but decreases with T for H$``$c. In order to examine the possibility of such an anisotropy in the single crystal of PCMO-e, we repeated the experiment for H$``$a and found that there was no anisotropy in the variation of ‘g’ with temperature. So the reasons for the difference between behaviour of ‘g’ in the single crystal and the powder of PCMO-e are not clear at present.

The dependence of the peak to peak linewidth $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp on temperature shown in figure 3b for PCMO-h and PCMO-e also shows a difference below Tco in that the curvatures of the two are opposite to each other. The variation in linewidth is again larger in PCMO-e than in PCMO-h.

The EPR intensities for the two samples are plotted in figures 3c against temperature. In both the samples, the intensity goes through a peak at Tco, decreasing monotonically below this temperature. However, the sharp drop in intensity found at $``$ Tco (240 K) in the case of PCMO-h is not seen in PCMO-e.

Now we attempt to understand these results in the light of the microscopic phenomena occurring in these systems. We focus on the temperature variation of ‘g’ in the powder sample and that of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$H and $`\alpha `$ in single crystals. It was earlier observed by us that the hole-doped charge ordering systems exhibit certain tell-tale EPR signatures:

1. It was noted that ‘g’ ($`g=g_e(1\pm k\frac{\lambda }{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ where $`\lambda `$ is the spin-orbit coupling constant, $`k`$ is a positive numerical factor and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the crystal field splitting), even in the charge disordered paramagnetic state, is larger than ‘ge’ and on cooling stays independent of temperature till Tco. Below Tco it becomes very sensitive to temperature and goes on increasing with decreasing temperature. The anomalous ‘g’ shift (since for both Mn3+ and Mn4+ ‘g’ is expected to be lower than ‘ge’) can be attributed to the ‘hole’ nature of the charge carriers since for holes in a less than half filled shell the spin-orbit coupling constant $`\lambda `$ is negative . This conclusion is consistent with the present observation that in the system with electrons as charge carriers, ‘g’ is less than ‘ge’ in the charge disordered state. The increase in ‘g’ below Tco found in PCMO-h and NdCaMnO3 (NCMO) was attributed to the strengthening of the spin-orbit interaction due to orbital ordering developing between Tco and TN. However, the fact that ‘g’ crosses over to a value greater than ‘ge’ in the electron-doped system and continues to increase as the temperature is lowered below Tco indicates that an essentially different mechanism is operative in the electron-doped system. This is consistent with the suggestion by Khomskiithat in these systems the concept of orbital ordering cannot be strictly applied.
2. In the hole-doped PCMO and NCMO the dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$H on T in the single crystals in the region TN $``$ Tco could be explained in terms of a model involving motional narrowing. Hopping of the Jan-Teller polarons was understood to be the underlying mechanism of charge transport. However, we notice in Figs. 2b, 3b and 4 that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$H vs T of PCMO-e and PCMO-h have different functional dependences on temperature. Interestingly we observe that the temperature dependence of $`\rho `$ is the same as the temperature dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp of single crystal as shown in the inset of Fig. 4. We find that both the resistivity and the single crystal EPR linewidth fit the model of variable range hopping (VRH)(solid line in Fig 4) given by equation

$$\mathrm{\Delta }H=K.exp(\frac{T_0}{T})^{\frac{1}{4}}$$
$`(3)`$
VRH has been used to explain the resistivity of manganites in the paramagnetic state by Viret et al.,  using the concept of magnetic localisation. They found that the density of states gets modified consequent to the localisation of charge carriers due to Hund’s coupling between the itinerant eg electrons and the stationary, core t2g spins. This lead to the realisation of a random potential in the paramagnetic state. In case of CO manganites, in the charge ordered state a long ranged AFM order is not established. So the concept of random magnetic potential can be applied. From the VRH fit we obtained the parameter T0. The localisation length is given by $`\frac{1}{\alpha }=\sqrt[3]{\frac{k.T_0}{171.U_m.v}}`$ where k is the Boltzmann factor, $`U_m`$ is the random magnetic potential which is of the order of 2 eV (Hund’s coupling) and $`v`$ is the volume of the unit cell per manganese ion which is $`5.7X10^{29}m^3`$. The numerical factor 171 comes from the geometrical corrections due to the symmetry of $`d_{z^2}`$ orbital of eg electron and the probability that an unoccupied manganese orbital can accept an electron. The localisation length for PCMO-e thus obtained is 0.3 nm which is larger than the Mn ionic radius ($``$ 0.8 Ao) as expected in VRH model. While the VRH fit to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp vs T in PCMO-e is seen to be excellent, the model did not fit the linewidth data of PCMO-h well (dotted line in figure 4), the regression coefficient indicative of the goodness of fit being 0.91 in the latter compared to 0.99 for the fit to the data of PCMO-e.
3. The same conclusion i.e. the applicability of the model of motional narrowing in the case of PCMO-e is borne out by the behaviour of $`\alpha `$ as well. In case of PCMO-h an anomalous peak is observed in $`\alpha `$ vs T at Tco. No such peak is observed in PCMO-e where $`\alpha `$ decreases smoothly as $`\rho `$ increases below Tco as expected. In PCMO-h, the peak in $`\alpha `$ was found to be correlated with the motion of the Jahn-Teller polarons. The absence of such a peak in PCMO-e again points towards the negligible contribution of Jahn-Teller polaron-mediated charge transport in this system.

In summary, the comparative EPR study of hole-doped and electron-doped PCMO brings out certain essential differences in the nature of the order and the transport mechanisms in the two cases.

Acknowledgments

AKS and SVB thank Department of Science and Technology for financial support. JJ thanks CSIR, India for a fellowship. CNRR thanks the BRNS (DAE) for support.

Figure Captions
FIGURE 1

(a) EPR spectra of a single crystal sample of Pr0.36Ca0.64MnO3 for a few representative temperatures. The solid circles are experimental data and the solid line shows the fit to equation 1 described in the text. (b) EPR spectra of a powder sample of Pr0.36Ca0.64MnO3 for a few representative temperatures. The solid circles are experimental data and the solid line shows the fit to equation 2 described in the text.
FIGURE 2

Temperature dependence of single crystal lineshape parameters obtained from the fits to equation 1.(a) g; the vertical lines are error bars (b) peak to peak linewidths $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp and (c) $`\alpha `$; the error bars for $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp and $`\alpha `$ are very small and hence are not shown . The open circles represent the data for PCMO-h and the solid squares for PCMO-e.
FIGURE 3

Temperature dependence of powder lineshape parameters obtained from the fits to equation 2. (a) g; The vertical lines show error bars on the ‘g’ value (b) the peak to peak linewidths $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp and (c) Intensity times T. The error bars for the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp and intensity are very small and hence are not shown . The open circles represent the data for PCMO-h and the solid squares for PCMO-e.
FIGURE 4

Temperature dependence of single crystal linewidths $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp obtained from the fits to equation 1. The solid squares are the data for PCMO-e and the open circles for PCMO-h. The solid and the dotted lines are the least square fits to the variable range hopping model (Eqn. 3) to the respective data sets in the temperature range of TN to Tco. The inset shows the essentially similar temperature dependence of the resistivity (obtained from reference 3, scaled by an appropriate constant, open triangles), and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Hpp (solid triangles) data for PCMO-e.