text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In this paper, we study the wave propagation in a cylindrical optical fiber.aaaWe will use the terms optical waveguide and optical fiber interchangeably. As model equation, we use the *Helmholtz equation*

$$\mathrm{\Delta }u+k^2n(x,y,z)^2u=f(x,y,z),(x,y,z)^3,$$
(0.1)
also called the *time-harmonic wave equation*. The number $`k`$ is called the *wavenumber*, and the function $`f`$ represents a source of energy. We require that the index of refraction $`n(x,y,z)`$ have the form:

$$n(x,y,z)=\{\begin{array}{cc}n_{co}(x^2+y^2),\hfill & \text{if }x^2+y^2<R^2,\hfill \\ n_{cl},\hfill & \text{if }x^2+y^2R^2,\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`R`$ is the radius of the waveguide.

The main result of this paper is the construction of a representation formula for a solution $`u`$ of (0.1) satisfying suitable radiation conditions. Our results generalize a similar formula obtained by Magnanini and Santosa? in the two dimensional case.

In ? it is shown that the energy of the electromagnetic field is divided into two parts: a part propagates inside the waveguide as a finite number of distinct guided modes, while the other part either decays exponentially along the fiber or is radiated outside. Our case reveals a new feature: for special choices of the parameters, new kinds of guided modes appear which, rather than decaying exponentially outside the fiber, vanish as a power of the distance from the fiber’s axis.

As in,? we use the technique of separation of variables. But there are a number of important differences. We separate variables in the three cylindrical coordinates $`r,`$ $`\vartheta ,`$ and $`z.`$ The component in $`\vartheta `$ is simple to solve for, and will only introduce a sum over $`m`$. The separation in $`z`$ can be solved as in.? More complicated is the study of the $`r`$-coordinate: we will obtain a differential equation in $`r`$ which is Bessel’s equation, save for a non-constant coefficient. This equation will have a singularity at $`r=0.`$ Also, instead of working as in 2-D with sine and cosine functions whose zeros are uniformly distributed, we will work with Bessel’s functions whose distribution of zeros is more complicated. These differences make the method used in ? inapplicable.

Instead, we use the theory of singular self-adjoint eigenvalue problems for second order differential equations as presented in ? and. ? Applying this theory to our problem and doing the explicit calculations took some effort, chiefly for the reason that our self-adjoint eigenvalue problem has (just like in the 2-D case) a coefficient which is, with some restrictions, a general function, so we cannot obtain solutions for our equation in terms of concrete functions.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we derive the second order self-adjoint eigenvalue problem associated with the Helmholtz equation (0.1). In section 3 we will prove a set of technical lemmas aimed at studying the behavior of the solutions of this eigenvalue problem. In section 4 we will classify the solutions of the eigenvalue problem which are “well-behaved” (in a sense to be specified there) as $`r0`$ and $`r\mathrm{}.`$ The motivation is that the electromagnetic field in the fiber will have a representation in terms of the “well-behaved” solutions of this eigenvalue problem. In section 5 we summarize the theory of self-adjoint eigenvalue problems as exposed in ? and.?

The functions defined in section 5 are calculated in section 6. In section 7 the transform defined in section 5 is computed. The obtained transform is used in section 8 to find Green’s function for the Helmholtz equation (0.1), and in turn, to find the desired electromagnetic field in the fiber given the source.

## 2 The Eigenvalue Problem

A typical optical fiber is a cylindrical dielectric waveguide, made of silica glass or plastic. Its central region is called *core*, surrounded by *cladding*, which has a slightly lower index of refraction. The cladding is surrounded by a protective *jacket*. Most of the electromagnetic radiation propagates along the core. The electromagnetic field intensity in the cladding decays exponentially along the radial direction. This is why, the radius of the cladding, which is typically several times larger than the radius of the core, can be considered infinite.

A typical optical fiber is *weakly guided*, which means that the difference in the indices of refraction of its the core and cladding is very small. In these conditions the electromagnetic field in the fiber is essentially *transverse* with each of the transverse components approximately satisfying the Helmholtz equation (0.1). This is the so-called *weakly guided approximation*. For a derivation of (0.1) from Maxwell’s equations for a weakly guided fiber see,? chapters 30 and 32.

Because of the cylindrical geometry it will be convenient to use the cylindrical coordinate system $`(r,\vartheta ,z),`$ with $`z`$ being the axial direction. Then, the index of refraction will depend on the $`r`$ variable only, $`n=n(r).`$ In the new coordinates (0.1) becomes

$$\frac{^2u}{z^2}+\frac{1}{r}\frac{}{r}\left(r\frac{u}{r}\right)+\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{^2u}{\vartheta ^2}+k^2n(r)^2u=f(r,\vartheta ,z).$$
(0.2)
This is a linear partial differential equation. The solution of this equation will be determined as soon as we find its *Green’s function.* In order to obtain the latter, consider the homogeneous version of (0.2),

$$\frac{^2u}{z^2}+\frac{1}{r}\frac{}{r}\left(r\frac{u}{r}\right)+\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{^2u}{\vartheta ^2}+k^2n(r)^2u=0.$$

Look for a solution in separated variables, $`u(r,\vartheta ,z)=Z(z)\mathrm{\Theta }(\vartheta )v(r).`$ It is quickly found that we must have

$$u(r,\vartheta ,z)=e^{i\beta kz}e^{im\vartheta }v(r),$$
(0.3)
with $`\beta ,`$ $`m,`$ and $`v(r)`$ satisfying the differential equation

$$v^{\prime \prime }+\frac{1}{r}v^{}+\left\{k^2n(r)^2\beta ^2\frac{m^2}{r^2}\right\}v=0$$

(the derivative here, and in the rest of this paper will always be in respect to the variable $`r`$).

Let $`R>0`$ be the radius of the fiber core. Then $`n(r)=n_{cl}`$ for $`rR.`$ Denote

$$d^2=n_0^2n_{cl}^2,l=k^2(n_0^2\beta ^2),q(r)=k^2[n_0^2n(r)^2].$$
(0.4)
Then this equation becomes

$$v^{\prime \prime }+\frac{1}{r}v^{}+\left\{lq(r)\frac{m^2}{r^2}\right\}v=0.$$
(0.5)
We will view (0.5) as an eigenvalue problem in $`l.`$ The variable $`r`$ is in $`(0,\mathrm{}),`$ the number $`m`$ is an integer, the function $`q`$ is bounded, measurable, real-valued and non-negative, with $`q(r)=d^2>0`$ for $`rR>0`$. It will be convenient to make a variable change. Denote $`w(r)=\sqrt{r}v(r).`$ Get the equation

$$w^{\prime \prime }+\left\{lq(r)\frac{m^21/4}{r^2}\right\}w=0,r(0,\mathrm{}).$$
(0.6)
This will be our self-adjoint eigenvalue problem.

## 3 A Study of the Solutions of the Eigenvalue Problem

Before going further we will need some information about the behavior of the solutions of the differential equation (0.6) as functions of $`r`$ and $`l`$ and $`m.`$ This will be the subject of the next four lemmas.

###### Lemma 0.1.

There exists a solution $`j_m(r,l)`$ $`(r>0,l,m)`$ of (0.6) such that

$$\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{j_m(r,l)}{r^{|m|+1/2}}=1,\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{j_m^{}(r,l)}{(|m|+1/2)r^{|m|1/2}}=1.$$
(0.7)
The functions $`j_m(r,l)`$ and $`j_m^{}(r,l)`$ are analytic in $`l`$ as $`r`$ is fixed. There exists another solution $`y_m(r,l)`$ of (0.6) such that

$$\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{y_m(r,l)}{r^{|m|+1/2}}=1,\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{y_m^{}(r,l)}{(|m|+1/2)r^{|m|1/2}}=1,\text{ if }|m|1,$$
(0.8a)
and
$$\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{y_m(r,l)}{\sqrt{r}\mathrm{ln}r}=1,\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{y_m^{}(r,l)}{\mathrm{ln}r/(2\sqrt{r})}=1,\text{ if }m=0.$$
(0.8b)
###### Proof.

We will assume $`m0,`$ and then set $`j_m=j_m`$ and $`y_m=y_m.`$ Make the variable change $`w=r^{m+1/2}\sigma `$ in (0.6). Obtain

$$\sigma ^{\prime \prime }+\frac{2m+1}{r}\sigma ^{}+\{lq(r)\}\sigma =0.$$

Denote $`k=2m+1,`$ $`k1.`$ Multiply this equation by $`r^k.`$ Get

$$(r^k\sigma ^{})^{}=r^k(q(r)l)\sigma .$$
(0.9)
To prove this lemma we need to find two solutions $`\sigma (r,l)`$ and $`\tau (r,l)`$ of (0.9) such that

$$\underset{r0}{lim}\sigma (r,l)=1,\underset{r0}{lim}\sigma ^{}(r,l)=0,$$
(0.10)
$$\underset{r0}{lim}r^{2m}\tau (r,l)=1,\underset{r0}{lim}r^{2m+1}\tau ^{}(r,l)=2m,\text{ if }m1,$$
(0.11a)
and
$$\underset{r0}{lim}\frac{\tau (r,l)}{\mathrm{ln}r}=1,\underset{r0}{lim}r\tau ^{}(r,l)=1,\text{ if }m=0.$$
(0.11b)
Also, $`\sigma (r,l)`$ must be analytic in $`l`$ for $`r`$ fixed. The idea to finding $`\sigma `$ and $`\tau `$ is to rewrite (0.9) as an integral equation.

Let $`q_{\mathrm{}}=sup_{r[0,\mathrm{})}q(r).`$ If $`\omega :[0,\mathrm{})`$ is a function, bounded and integrable on every compact subset of $`[0,\mathrm{}),`$ and $`p0`$ is an integer, then one has

$$\left|\underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}s^p\omega (s)𝑑s\right|\underset{t[0,r]}{sup}|\omega (t)|\underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}s^p𝑑s=\underset{t[0,r]}{sup}|\omega (t)|\frac{r^{p+1}}{p+1}.$$
(0.12)
Consider the operator

$$T\omega (r)=\underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}t^k\underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}s^k(q(s)l)\omega (s)𝑑s𝑑t,$$
(0.13)
defined for complex-valued functions $`\omega `$ which are bounded and integrable on every compact subset of $`[0,\mathrm{}).`$ By applying (0.12) to the inner-most integral in (0.13) we deduce

$$\underset{t[0,r]}{sup}|T\omega (t)|(q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|)\underset{t[0,r]}{sup}|\omega (t)|\frac{r^2}{2(k+1)}.$$

In particular, for any $`r>0,`$ $`T`$ is a bounded linear operator from the space $`𝒞([0,r])`$ of continuous, complex-valued functions defined on $`[0,r]`$ onto itself. By using the same reasoning as above, one can show by induction that for any integer $`n0`$

$$|T^n\omega (r)|(q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|)^n\underset{t[0,r]}{sup}|\omega (t)|\frac{r^{2n}}{\{24\mathrm{}2n\}\{(k+1)(k+3)\mathrm{}(k+2n1)\}}.$$
(0.14)
Using (0.12) it is easy to check that if function $`\sigma `$ satisfies (0.10), then (0.9) is equivalent to

$$\sigma ^{}(r,\lambda )=\frac{1}{r^k}\underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}s^k(q(s)\lambda )\sigma (s,\lambda )𝑑s,$$
(0.15)
which in turn is the same as

$$\sigma =1+T\sigma .$$
(0.16)
We will find $`\sigma `$ by applying the method of successive approximations. Let $`\sigma _01,`$ and $`\sigma _{n+1}=\sigma _0+T\sigma _n,n0.`$ Then,

$$\sigma _n=\sigma _0+T\sigma _0+\mathrm{}+T^n\sigma _0,n0.$$

By using (0.14) we obtain that the series

$$\sigma =\sigma _0+T\sigma _0+\mathrm{}+T^n\sigma _0+\mathrm{},\sigma _01,$$
(0.17)
is uniformly convergent for $`r`$ and $`l`$ in compact sets. Since $`\sigma _n`$ is continuous in $`r`$ and analytic in $`l,`$ the same property will hold for $`\sigma .`$ Using the fact that the operator $`T`$ is continuous on $`𝒞([0,r])`$ for any $`r>0`$, it follows from the above series that (0.16) holds, and therefore (0.9) holds.

Now prove the existence of $`\tau `$ satisfying (0.9) with the boundary conditions (0.11a) or (0.11b). That will be done in several steps to be described below. For the rest of the lemma, $`\sigma =\sigma (r,l)`$ will be the solution to (0.9) found above. We are not looking for any properties of $`\tau `$ in respect with $`l.`$ Therefore, we will fix $`l,`$ and will consider $`\tau `$ to be a function of $`r`$ only. At step 1 we will prove that if $`\tau `$ is a solution to (0.9) which is linearly independent of $`\sigma ,`$ then $`\tau `$ is unbounded as $`r0.`$ At step 2, we will show that any solution $`\tau `$ to (0.9) has the property

$$|\tau (r)|A+Br^k,0<rr_0,$$
(0.18)
for some $`A>0,B>0,r_0>0.`$ At step 3 we will prove that any solution $`\tau `$ of (0.9) linearly independent of $`\sigma `$ satisfies

$$\tau ^{}(r)=O(r^k)\text{ as }r0.$$
(0.19)
That will imply (0.11a) or (0.11b) depending on whether $`m1`$ or $`m=0,`$ that is, $`k3`$ or $`k=1.`$

Step 1. Show that any solution $`\tau `$ to (0.9) which is linearly independent of $`\sigma `$ is unbounded as $`r0.`$ Assume that $`\tau `$ is such a solution and that it is bounded as $`r0.`$ From (0.9) we get

$$r^k\tau ^{}(r)=c_1+\underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}s^k(q(s)l)\tau (r)𝑑s$$

for some constant $`c_1.`$ We cannot have $`c_10,`$ because then $`\tau ^{}(r)=O(r^k)`$ with $`k1,`$ so $`\tau `$ cannot be bounded as $`r0.`$ Then, if $`c_1=0`$ we can divide by $`r^k`$ and integrate again, to obtain

$$\tau =c_2+T\tau ,$$

with $`T`$ the operator defined by (0.13) and $`c_2`$ another constant. Since the solution $`\sigma `$ satisfies $`\sigma =1+T\sigma ,`$ we deduce that $`\phi =\tau c_2\sigma `$ will satisfy

$$\phi =T\phi .$$

Then $`\phi =T^n\phi `$ for any $`n0.`$ By using (0.14) we get

$$|\phi (r)|(q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|)^n\underset{t[0,r]}{sup}|\phi (t)|\frac{r^{2n}}{\{24\mathrm{}2n\}\{(k+1)(k+3)\mathrm{}(k+2n1)\}},$$

for any $`r>0`$ and $`n0,`$ which implies $`\phi =0,`$ that is, $`\tau =c_2\sigma .`$ This is a contradiction with the assumption that $`\tau `$ is linearly independent of $`\sigma .`$

Step 2. Show that for any $`\tau `$ solution of (0.9) inequality (0.18) holds. Let us again write (0.9) as an integral equation. This time we cannot integrate from $`r=0,`$ since we expect an unbounded solution as $`r0`$. Let $`r_0>0`$ be a fixed number. It is easy to show that $`\tau `$ will satisfy (0.9) if and only if

$$\tau =\tau _0+S\tau ,$$
(0.20)
where

$$\tau _0(r)=c_0+d_0\underset{r_0}{\overset{r}{}}t^k𝑑t,$$

with $`c_0=\tau (r_0),`$ $`d_0=r_0^k\tau ^{}(r_0)`$, and the operator $`S`$ is defined on functions $`\theta `$ integrable on compact subsets of $`(0,\mathrm{})`$ and is given by the formula

$$S\theta (r)=\underset{r_0}{\overset{r}{}}t^k\underset{r_0}{\overset{t}{}}s^k(q(s)l)\theta (s)𝑑s𝑑t.$$

Use once again the method of successive approximations to express $`\tau `$ as the sum of an infinite series. Let $`c_0,d_0,`$ and define $`\tau _0(r)=c_0+d_0_{r_0}^rt^k𝑑t,`$ $`\tau _{n+1}=\tau _0+S\tau _n,n0.`$ We have

$$\tau _n=\tau _0+S\tau _0+\mathrm{}+S^n\tau _0,n0.$$

Notice that if $`\omega `$ is an integrable function on $`(0,r_0),`$ then for $`0<rr_0`$

$$\left|\underset{r_0}{\overset{r}{}}s^k\omega (s)𝑑s\right|\underset{r}{\overset{r_0}{}}s^k|\omega (s)|𝑑sr^k\underset{r}{\overset{r_0}{}}|\omega (s)|𝑑s.$$
(0.21)
By applying (0.21) we get the estimate $`|\tau _0(r)||c_0|+|d_0|r_0r^k`$ for $`0<rr_0.`$ Then,

$$\left|\underset{r_0}{\overset{t}{}}s^k(q(s)l)\tau _0(s)𝑑s\right|\underset{t}{\overset{r_0}{}}(q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|)(r_0^k|c_0|+|d_0|r_0)𝑑s=C(q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|)(r_0t),$$

where $`C=r_0^k|c_0|+|d_0|r_0.`$ Apply (0.21) to estimate $`S\tau _0.`$

$$|S\tau _0(r)|r^k\underset{r}{\overset{r_0}{}}C(q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|)(r_0t)𝑑t=C(q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|)r^k\frac{(r_0r)^2}{2!}.$$

By repeating the above reasoning, one obtains by induction

$$|S^n\tau _0(r)|C(q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|)^nr^k\frac{(r_0r)^{2n}}{(2n)!},0<rr_0,n1.$$

As it was done for $`\sigma ,`$ one can prove that the series

$$\tau =\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}S^n\tau _0$$

is uniformly convergent for $`r`$ in compact subsets of $`(0,r_0]`$ and that $`\tau `$ satisfies (0.20). One can then estimate $`\tau .`$

$$|\tau (r)|\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|S^n\tau _0(r)||c_0|+Cr^ke^{\sqrt{q_{\mathrm{}}+|l|}(r_0r)},0<rr_0,$$

which implies (0.18).

Step 3. Show that any solution $`\tau `$ to (0.9) which is linearly independent of $`\sigma `$ satisfies (0.19). From (0.18) we deduce that $`r^k(q(r)l)\tau (r)`$ is bounded as $`r0.`$ Integrate (0.9) from $`0`$ to $`r.`$ Get

$$r^k\tau ^{}(r)=c_3+\underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}s^k(q(s)l)\tau (s)𝑑s,$$
(0.22)
with $`c_3`$ a constant.

Suppose that $`c_3=0.`$ Then, from (0.18) and (0.22) it follows that $`|r^k\tau ^{}(r)|Mr`$ for $`0<rr_0`$ and some $`M>0.`$ But then, $`|\tau ^{}(r)|M/r^{k1}`$ for $`0<rr_0.`$ Note that $`k`$ is an odd number, since $`k=2m+1`$ with $`m0`$ an integer. In particular $`k2,`$ or $`k11.`$ Since $`\tau (r)=\tau (r_0)+_{r_0}^r\tau ^{}(s)𝑑s,`$ we obtain

$$|\tau (r)|A_1+\frac{B_1}{r^{k2}},$$

for some $`A_1>0,B_1>0.`$ This is the same as (0.18) but with $`k2`$ instead of $`k`$. By repeating several times the same reasoning starting with (0.22) and the assumption $`c_3=0`$ we will be able to reduce the exponent of $`r`$ in this inequality by $`2`$ every time, until we get that $`\tau `$ must be bounded as $`r0.`$ As shown at step 1, then $`\tau `$ is linearly dependent of $`\sigma ,`$ which is a contradiction. Thus $`c_30.`$ Then, (0.18) and (0.22) give us $`\tau ^{}(r)=O(r^k)`$ as $`r0,`$ or (0.19).

From (0.19) and the equality $`\tau (r)=\tau (r_0)+_{r_0}^r\tau ^{}(s)𝑑s`$ it follows that as $`r0,`$ $`\tau (r)=O(\mathrm{ln}r)`$ if $`k=1,`$ and $`\tau (r)=O(r^{k+1})`$ if $`k>1.`$ One can then get either (0.11a) or (0.11b) by conveniently multiplying $`\tau `$ by a non-zero constant. This proves the lemma.

The following lemma will study the properties of $`j_m(r,l)`$ for $`l`$ real.

###### Lemma 0.2.

Let $`l=\lambda `$. Then $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ and $`j_m^{}(r,\lambda )`$ are real. If $`\lambda 0,`$ then $`j_m(r,\lambda )r^{|m|+1/2}`$ and $`j_m^{}(r,\lambda )>0.`$

###### Proof.

We will consider only the case $`m0,`$ since $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ is an even function of $`m.`$ If $`\lambda `$ is real, then $`q(r)\lambda `$ is real. With the notation from the proof of lemma 0.1, $`j_m(r,\lambda )=r^{m+1/2}\sigma (r,\lambda ),`$ with $`\sigma (r,\lambda )`$ given by the series (0.17). By using this series, and definition (0.13) of the operator $`T`$ we deduce that $`\sigma (r,\lambda )`$ is real, and consequently, $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ is real.

If $`\lambda 0,`$ then $`q(r)\lambda 0.`$ In this case, the operator $`T`$ will map non-negative functions into non-negative functions. We conclude from the construction (0.17) of $`\sigma `$ that $`\sigma (r,\lambda )1,`$ and so, $`j_m(r,\lambda )r^{m+1/2}.`$

To show $`j_m^{}(r,\lambda )>0`$ it suffices to prove $`\sigma ^{}(r,\lambda )0,`$ which is an immediate consequence of (0.15).

The next lemma will study the properties of $`j_m(r,l)`$ for large absolute value of $`m`$ and $`l=\lambda `$ a real number.

###### Lemma 0.3.

Let $`r>0`$ be a fixed number and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }[0,\mathrm{})`$ be a bounded set. If $`|m|`$ is sufficiently large, then for all $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$

$$j_m(r,\lambda )>0,j_m^{}(r,\lambda )>0.$$

###### Proof.

We can assume $`m0.`$ Denote $`k=2m+11.`$ We have that $`j_m(r,\lambda )=r^{m+1/2}\sigma (r,\lambda ),`$ with $`\sigma (r,\lambda )`$ defined by the series (0.17). Here we will prefer to use the notation $`\sigma _m(r,\lambda )`$ to emphasize its dependence on $`m.`$ By using this series and estimate (0.14) it follows that

$$|1\sigma _m(r,\lambda )|\frac{C}{k+1},\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda },$$

with $`C=C(\mathrm{\Lambda },q_{\mathrm{}})`$ a constant, where $`q_{\mathrm{}}=sup_{r[0,\mathrm{})}q(r).`$

From (0.15) we deduce

$$|\sigma _m^{}(r,\lambda )|\frac{D}{k+1},\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda },$$

with $`D=D(\mathrm{\Lambda },q_{\mathrm{}})`$ another constant.

These observations imply that for $`m`$ large enough and $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\sigma _m(r,\lambda )`$ is close to 1, while $`\sigma _m^{}(r,\lambda )`$ is close to zero. Then, since

$$j_m(r,\lambda )=r^{m+1/2}\sigma _m(r,\lambda ),$$

and

$$j_m^{}(r,\lambda )=r^{m1/2}\{(m+1/2)\sigma _m(r,\lambda )+r\sigma _m^{}(r,\lambda )\},$$

it follows quickly that for $`m`$ large enough both of these quantities are strictly positive.

###### Lemma 0.4.

For $`l\{\pi /2<\mathrm{arg}(ld^2)<3\pi /2\},`$ there exist two solutions $`w_m(r,l)`$ and $`x_m(r,l),`$ $`rR,m,`$ of (0.6) which are analytic in $`l.`$ If $`l_+=\{l:𝔪l>0\},`$ then as $`r\mathrm{}`$, $`w_m(r,l)`$ together with its derivative will decay exponentially, while $`x_m(r,l)`$ and its derivative will increase exponentially.

###### Proof.

Recall that $`q(r)=d^2`$ for $`rR,`$ therefore on $`[R,\mathrm{})`$ (0.6) becomes

$$w^{\prime \prime }+\left\{ld^2\frac{m^21/4}{r^2}\right\}w=0.$$

Set

$$w_m(r,l)=\sqrt{r}H_m^{(1)}(\sqrt{ld^2}r),x_m(r,l)=\sqrt{r}H_m^{(2)}(\sqrt{ld^2}r),$$
(0.23)
where $`H_m^{(1)}(\zeta )`$ and $`H_m^{(2)}(\zeta )`$ are the Hankel functions of $`m\text{-th}`$ order. They are analytic functions with the domain $`\{\pi <\mathrm{arg}\zeta <\pi \}.`$ Consider the function $`\sqrt{z}`$ defined on $`\{\pi /2<\mathrm{arg}z<3\pi /2\}`$ with values in $`\{\pi /4<\mathrm{arg}\zeta <3\pi /4\}.`$ We obtain that $`w_m(r,l)`$ and $`x_m(r,l)`$ are analytic functions of $`l\{\pi /2<\mathrm{arg}(ld^2)<3\pi /2\},`$ which is the whole complex plane except those $`l`$ for which $`ld^2`$ has a zero real part and a non-positive imaginary part.

According to formulas (9.2.3) and (9.2.4) from,? we have the asymptotic expansions

$$H_m^{(1)}(\zeta )\sqrt{2/(\pi \zeta )}e^{i(\zeta m\pi /2\pi /4)}$$

and

$$H_m^{(2)}(\zeta )\sqrt{2/(\pi \zeta )}e^{i(\zeta m\pi /2\pi /4)}$$

as $`|\zeta |\mathrm{}`$ and $`|\mathrm{arg}\zeta |<\pi .`$ Then,

$$w_m(r,l)=O\left(e^{i\sqrt{ld^2}r}\right),x_m(r,l)=O\left(e^{i\sqrt{ld^2}r}\right)\text{ as }r\mathrm{}.$$

If $`l_+,`$ then $`𝔪\sqrt{ld^2}>0`$ and thus, $`i\sqrt{ld^2}`$ has a strictly negative real part. Therefore, as $`r\mathrm{},`$ $`w_m(r,l)`$ will decay exponentially, while $`x_m(r,l)`$ will increase exponentially. By formally differentiating the above equalities (for a rigorous justification one needs to use equalities (9.2.13) and (9.2.14) from ?) we deduce that $`w_m^{}(r,l)`$ will decay exponentially, while $`x_m^{}(r,l)`$ will increase exponentially as $`r\mathrm{}.`$

## 4 Classification of the Solutions

The main purpose of this paper is to prove that under certain conditions, the solution to the Helmholtz equation (0.2) is a superposition of functions of the form (0.3). For each of the functions in the superposition, $`v(r)`$ will satisfy (0.5) with the notations of (0.4), and $`l`$ will be a real variable, which we will denote by $`\lambda `$ (thus we will reserve the notation $`l`$ for the complex variable, and the notation $`\lambda `$ for its restriction to the real axis). In addition the following properties will hold:

$$v(r)\text{ is bounded as }r0,$$
(0.24a)
and
$$r\sqrt{r}v(r)\{\begin{array}{cc}\text{ is in }L^2(R,\mathrm{}),\hfill & \text{ if }\lambda d^2,\hfill \\ \text{ is bounded as }r\mathrm{},\hfill & \text{ if }\lambda >d^2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(0.24b)
In this section we will study and classify the functions $`v(r)`$ with the properties (0.24a) and (0.24b).

A solution $`v(r)`$ of (0.5) has the form $`v(r)=w(r)/\sqrt{r},`$ with $`w(r)`$ satisfying (0.6). Lemma 0.1 shows how the solutions of (0.6) look like. It is clear that in order that $`v(r)`$ satisfy (0.24a), we need $`w(r)=j_m(r,\lambda ),`$ or

$$v(r)=\frac{j_m(r,\lambda )}{\sqrt{r}}.$$
(0.25)
Condition (0.24b) is then satisfied if and only if

$$rj_m(r,\lambda )\{\begin{array}{cc}\text{ is in }L^2(R,\mathrm{}),\hfill & \text{ if }\lambda d^2,\hfill \\ \text{ is bounded as }r\mathrm{},\hfill & \text{ if }\lambda >d^2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(0.26)
Next we will investigate for which $`\lambda `$ condition (0.26) holds.

We will need to consider four cases: $`\lambda 0`$, $`0<\lambda <d^2,`$ $`\lambda =d^2`$ and $`\lambda >d^2.`$ In each of these intervals $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ and consequently $`v(r),`$ will have a different behavior.

Case 1. If $`\lambda 0,`$ then according to lemma 0.2, $`j_m(r,\lambda )r^{|m|+1/2},`$ therefore $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ will be not square integrable on $`(R,\mathrm{}).`$

Case 2. Assume $`0<\lambda <d^2.`$ For $`rR`$ the function $`q(r)`$ defined in (0.4) is constant and equal to $`d^2.`$ Then (0.6) becomes

$$w^{\prime \prime }+\left\{\lambda d^2\frac{m^21/4}{r^2}\right\}w=0,r[R,\mathrm{}).$$
(0.27)
The solutions to this equation are

$$k_m(r,\lambda )=\sqrt{r}K_m(\sqrt{d^2\lambda }r),\lambda <d^2,rR,$$
(0.28)
and

$$\sqrt{r}I_m(\sqrt{d^2\lambda }r),\lambda <d^2,rR,$$

where $`K_m`$ and $`I_m`$ are the modified Bessel functions. Formulas (9.7.1) and (9.7.2) from ? give us the expansions

$$\sqrt{s}K_m(s)\sqrt{\pi /2}e^s\text{ as }s\mathrm{},$$

and

$$\sqrt{s}I_m(s)\sqrt{\pi /2}e^s\text{ as }s\mathrm{}.$$

Thus, we have one solution decaying exponentially while another increasing exponentially. In order that $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ be in $`L^2(R,\mathrm{})`$ we need

$$j_m(r,\lambda )=Ck_m(r,\lambda )\text{ for }rR,$$

for some constant $`C.`$ Since both $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ and $`Ck_m(r,\lambda )`$ satisfy the same second order differential equation, namely (0.27), to ask for the equality of these functions is the same as to ask for them to satisfy the same boundary conditions at $`r=R,`$ which translates into

$$j_m(R,\lambda )Ck_m(R,\lambda )=0,$$

and

$$j_m^{}(R,\lambda )Ck_m^{}(R,\lambda )=0.$$

Thus, $`C`$ must satisfy simultaneously two different conditions. This is possible if and only if

$$\frac{j_m^{}(R,l)}{j_m(R,l)}=\frac{k_m^{}(R,l)}{k_m(R,l)},\lambda <d^2.$$
(0.29)
Then we will have

$$j_m(r,\lambda )=\frac{j_m(R,\lambda )}{k_m(R,\lambda )}k_m(r,\lambda ),rR.$$
(0.30)
It will be shown later that for each $`m,`$ the set of $`\lambda `$ such that (0.29) holds is finite. Notice that in this case $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ will decay exponentially as $`r\mathrm{}.`$ Its derivative has the same property, this follows from the asymptotic expansion

$$[\sqrt{s}K_m(s)]^{}\sqrt{\pi /2}e^s\text{ as }s\mathrm{}$$
(0.31)
(according to the formulas (9.7.2) and (9.7.4) from.?) In conclusion, the only $`\lambda (0,d^2)`$ for which (0.26) holds, are those satisfying (0.29).

Case 3. Let now $`\lambda =d^2.`$ Two linear independent solutions of (0.27) are in this case

$$rr^{1/2|m|},m,$$

and

$$r\{\begin{array}{cc}\sqrt{r}\mathrm{ln}r\hfill & \text{ for }m=0,\hfill \\ r^{1/2+|m|}\hfill & \text{ for }m0.\hfill \end{array}$$

The second solution is not bounded for any $`m.`$ By matching the boundary conditions at $`r=R`$ as in the previous case, it is easy to show that $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ will be proportional to the first of these two solutions if and only if

$$\frac{j_m^{}(R,l)}{j_m(R,l)}=\frac{|m|1/2}{R},\lambda =d^2,$$
(0.32)
and then,

$$j_m(r,\lambda )=\frac{j_m(R,\lambda )}{R^{1/2|m|}}r^{1/2|m|},rR.$$
(0.33)
The function $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ will be in $`L^2(R,\mathrm{})`$ if and only if $`|m|2.`$

A function of the form (0.3), with $`v(r)`$ given by (0.25), for which $`0<\lambda d^2`$ and either (0.29), or (0.32) (with $`|m|2`$) holds, is called a *guided mode*. Note that a guided mode decays in $`r`$ either exponentially, or as $`r^{|m|}`$ $`(|m|2).`$

Case 4. Let $`\lambda >d^2.`$ Two solutions of (0.27) are then

$$a_m(r,\lambda )=\sqrt{r}J_m\left(\sqrt{\lambda d^2}r\right),b_m(r,\lambda )=\sqrt{r}Y_m\left(\sqrt{\lambda d^2}r\right),\lambda >d^2,$$
(0.34)
where $`J_m`$ and $`Y_m`$ are the Bessel functions of the first and second kind. Note the formulas

$$\sqrt{s}J_m(s)=\sqrt{\pi /2}\mathrm{cos}(sm\pi /2\pi /4)+O(s^{1/2}),$$

$$\sqrt{s}Y_m(s)=\sqrt{\pi /2}\mathrm{sin}(sm\pi /2\pi /4)+O(s^{1/2}),$$

as $`s\mathrm{}`$ (they are a particular case of formulas (9.2.1) and (9.2.2) from.?) We infer that $`a_m(r,\lambda )`$ and $`b_m(r,\lambda )`$ will be bounded as $`r\mathrm{}.`$ By formally differentiating the above formulas it follows that $`a_m^{}(r,\lambda )`$ and $`b_m^{}(r,\lambda )`$ will also be bounded as $`r\mathrm{}.`$

The functions $`a_m(r,\lambda )`$ and $`b_m(r,\lambda )`$ are linearly independent, since $`J_m`$ and $`Y_m`$ are linearly independent. Then, for $`rR,`$ $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ will be a linear combination of them. To find the coefficients of the linear combination, set

$$j_m(r,\lambda )=c_m(\lambda )a_m(r,\lambda )+d_m(\lambda )b_m(r,\lambda ),rR.$$

By matching the boundary conditions at $`r=R`$, we obtain a linear system which enables us to solve for $`c_m`$ and $`d_m.`$ Apply the equality

$$Y_m^{}(z)J_m(z)J_m^{}(z)Y_m(z)=2/(\pi z),$$

((9.1.16) from ?) to find a value for the determinant of the this linear system. Obtain

$$b_m^{}(R,\lambda )a_m(R,\lambda )a_m^{}(R,\lambda )b_m(R,\lambda )=2/\pi ,$$
(0.35)
and therefore,

$$c_m(\lambda )=\frac{\pi }{2}\{b_m^{}(R,\lambda )j_m(R,\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )b_m(R,\lambda )\},$$
(0.36a)
$$d_m(\lambda )=\frac{\pi }{2}\{a_m^{}(R,\lambda )j_m(R,\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )a_m(R,\lambda )\}.$$
(0.36b)
It is easy to see that $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ and its derivative will be bounded as $`r\mathrm{},`$ and so, condition (0.26) will be satisfied for all $`\lambda >d^2.`$

Let us look at the expression of (0.3) for $`\lambda >d^2`$ and with $`v(r)`$ given by (0.25). Notice that if $`d^2<\lambda <k^2n_0^2,`$ then (0.3) will be oscillatory in $`z`$ (recall that $`k^2\beta ^2=k^2n_0^2\lambda `$). In this case we will say that (0.3) is a *radiation mode*. On the other hand, if $`\lambda >k^2n_0^2,`$ then $`\beta `$ becomes imaginary. Depending on the sign of $`𝔪\beta `$ we will have exponential decay in one of the directions $`z\mathrm{},`$ $`z\mathrm{},`$ and exponential growth in the other one. For $`\lambda >k^2n_0^2,`$ (0.3) will be called an *evanescent mode*.

## 5 The Theory of Eigenvalue Problems

Consider the eigenvalue problem

$$w^{\prime \prime }+\{lQ(r)\}w=0,r(0,\mathrm{}),$$
(0.37)
where $`l.`$ Assume that $`Q`$ is integrable over any compact subset of $`(0,\mathrm{})`$ (in ? and ? the theory is developed only for continuous functions $`Q,`$ but it is mentioned in a footnote on page 224 of ? that it suffices for $`Q`$ to be as we assume above). Let $`0<R<\mathrm{}`$ be an arbitrary but fixed number. Let $`\phi (r,l)`$ and $`\theta (r,l)`$ be the solutions of (0.37) with the boundary conditions

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}\phi (R,l)=0,\phi ^{}(R,l)=1,\hfill & \\ \theta (R,l)=1,\theta ^{}(R,l)=0.\hfill & \end{array}$$
(0.38)
Since (0.37) has an analytic dependence on the parameter $`l,`$ the solutions $`\theta (r,l)`$ and $`\phi (r,l)`$ will be analytic functions of $`l`$ for $`r`$ fixed.

Any solution to (0.37) linearly independent of $`\phi `$ can be represented, up to a constant multiple, in the form

$$\psi =\theta +M\phi ,$$
(0.39)
with $`M.`$ Let $`\tau `$ and $`0<t<\mathrm{}.`$ Look for a solution of (0.37) of the form (0.39) to satisfy the boundary condition

$$\mathrm{cos}\tau \psi (t,l)+\mathrm{sin}\tau \psi ^{}(t,l)=0.$$

It is a direct calculation to check that we need

$$M=M(l)=\frac{\theta (t,l)\mathrm{cos}\tau +\theta ^{}(t,l)\mathrm{sin}\tau }{\phi (t,l)\mathrm{cos}\tau +\phi ^{}(t,l)\mathrm{sin}\tau }.$$
(0.40)
Let $`_+`$ be the open upper complex-half-plane, $`_+=\{l:𝔪l>0\}.`$ As shown in chapter 2 of ? the following results hold: as $`t0,`$ $`M(l)`$ converges uniformly on compact subsets of $`_+`$ to a function $`M_0(l)`$ analytic on $`_+.`$ Moreover, the function

$$\psi _0(r,l)=\theta (r,l)+M_0(l)\phi (r,l),l_+,$$
(0.41)
is in $`L^2(0,R),`$ and one has

$$\underset{0}{\overset{R}{}}|\psi _0(r,l)|^2𝑑r=\frac{𝔪M_0(l)}{𝔪l}.$$
(0.42)
As $`t\mathrm{},`$ $`M(l)`$ converges uniformly on compact subsets of $`_+`$ to an analytic function $`M_{\mathrm{}}(l)`$ on $`_+,`$ and if

$$\psi _{\mathrm{}}(r,l)=\theta (r,l)+M_{\mathrm{}}(l)\phi (r,l),l_+,$$
(0.43)
then $`\psi _{\mathrm{}}(r,l)L^2(R,\mathrm{})`$ and

$$\underset{R}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|\psi _{\mathrm{}}(r,l)|^2𝑑r=\frac{𝔪M_{\mathrm{}}(l)}{𝔪l}.$$
(0.44)
Note that the obtained $`M_0,M_{\mathrm{}},\psi _0,\psi _{\mathrm{}}`$ depend on the parameter $`\tau .`$ Thus, possibly these quantities, and therefore the representation given below, in Theorem 0.1, will not be unique. This might be true in general, but in our concrete case, given by (0.6), these quantities will turn out to be unique, as we will see from lemma 0.5. So then the transform we are looking for (which is calculated in Theorems 0.3 and 0.4) will be unique.

In section 9.5 of ? and chapter 3 of ? it is proved that for any $`\lambda `$ the following limits exist

$$\xi (\lambda )=\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{0}{\overset{\lambda }{}}𝔪\frac{1}{M_0(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}(s+i\delta )}ds,$$
(0.45a)
$$\eta (\lambda )=\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{0}{\overset{\lambda }{}}𝔪\frac{M_0(s+i\delta )}{M_0(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}(s+i\delta )}ds,$$
(0.45b)
$$\zeta (\lambda )=\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{0}{\overset{\lambda }{}}𝔪\frac{M_0(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}(s+i\delta )}{M_0(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}(s+i\delta )}ds.$$
(0.45c)
It is shown there that the functions $`\xi `$ and $`\zeta `$ are non-decreasing, and that $`\eta `$ is with bounded variation. In addition, for any $`\lambda _0<\lambda _1`$ real numbers,

$$\{\eta (\lambda _1)\eta (\lambda _0)\}^2\{\xi (\lambda _1)\xi (\lambda _0)\}\{\zeta (\lambda _1)\zeta (\lambda _0)\},$$
(0.46)
as stated on page 252 of ? (with a different notation). Then, equalities (3.1.8), (3.1.9), (3.1.10) from ? give us an expansion formula for a function $`gL^2(0,\mathrm{})`$ in terms of $`\theta (r,l),\phi (r,l)`$ and the functions $`\xi ,\eta `$ and $`\zeta .`$ The same result is proved in ? at Theorem 5.2. In this reference the representation result is stated more rigorously, so we will prefer it over.? To state the result we need some notations.

Denote $`\rho =(\xi ,\eta ,\zeta ).`$ For any vector $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2),`$ where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2:,`$ let

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^2=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )|^2𝑑\xi +2𝔢\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2(\lambda )\}d\eta +|\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda )|^2d\zeta .$$
(0.47)
The fact that $`\xi `$ and $`\eta `$ are non-decreasing, together with (0.46), gives us that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^20.`$ It is easy to check that $`||||`$ is a semi-norm. Denote by $`L^2(\rho )`$ the space of all $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{}.`$ This is then the statement of Theorem 5.2 from.?

###### Theorem 0.1.

If $`gL^2(0,\mathrm{}),`$ the vector $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)`$, where

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\theta (r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda )=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\phi (r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r,$$

converges in $`L^2(\rho ),`$ that is, there exists $`\mathrm{\Gamma }L^2(\rho )`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{cd}0\text{ as }c0,d\mathrm{},$$

where for $`0<c<d<\mathrm{}`$

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^{cd}(\lambda )=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}\theta (r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^{cd}(\lambda )=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}\phi (r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r.$$
(0.48)
The expansion

$$\begin{array}{c}g(r)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\{\theta (r,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )d\xi (\lambda )+\theta (r,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda )d\eta (\lambda )\hfill \\ \hfill +\phi (r,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )d\eta (\lambda )+\phi (r,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda )d\zeta (\lambda )\}\end{array}$$

holds, with the latter integral convergent in $`L^2(0,\mathrm{}),`$ that is, $`g^{\sigma \tau }g`$ in $`L^2(0,\mathrm{})`$ as $`\sigma \mathrm{},\tau \mathrm{},`$ where for $`\mathrm{}<\tau <\sigma <\mathrm{}`$

$$\begin{array}{c}g^{\sigma \tau }(r)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\sigma }{\overset{\tau }{}}\{\theta (r,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )d\xi (\lambda )+\theta (r,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda )d\eta (\lambda )\hfill \\ \hfill +\phi (r,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )d\eta (\lambda )+\phi (r,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda )d\zeta (\lambda )\}.\end{array}$$
(0.49)
We have the Parseval identity

$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|g(r)|^2𝑑r=\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{\Gamma }^2.$$
(0.50)
## 6 Computing the Measures

In the sections to follow we will apply the results of section 5 to our particular eigenvalue equation, given by (0.6). Thus, for the function $`Q(r)`$ in (0.37) we will have the expression

$$Q(r)=q(r)\frac{m^21/4}{r^2},r(0,\mathrm{}).$$

In this section we will calculate the measures given in (0.45a), (0.45b) and (0.45c).

###### Lemma 0.5.

Let $`M_0^m(l),M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l),\psi _0^m(r,l),\psi _{\mathrm{}}^m(r,l)`$ $`(l_+=\{l:𝔪l>0\})`$ be the quantities defined in section 5 for equation (0.6) (we use the superscript $`m`$ to emphasize their dependence on $`m`$). Let $`j_m(r,l)`$ $`w_m(r,l)`$ be the solutions of (0.6) defined respectively in lemma 0.1 and by (0.23). Then,

$$M_0^m(l)=\frac{j_m^{}(R,l)}{j_m(R,l)},M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)=\frac{w_m^{}(R,l)}{w_m(R,l)},$$
(0.51)
and

$$\psi _0^m(r,l)=\frac{j_m(r,l)}{j_m(R,l)},\psi _{\mathrm{}}^m(r,l)=\frac{w_m(r,l)}{w_m(R,l)}.$$
(0.52)
###### Proof.

It is easy to note that $`j_m(r,l)`$ and $`y_m(r,l)`$ defined in lemma 0.1 are linearly independent solutions of (0.6), thus any other solution will be a linear combination of these two. Then $`\theta (r,l)`$ and $`\varphi (r,l)`$ defined in section 5 can be represented as

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}\theta (r,l)=\alpha (l)j_m(r,l)+\beta (l)y_m(r,l),\hfill & \\ \phi (r,l)=\gamma (l)j_m(r,l)+\delta (l)y_m(r,l),\hfill & \end{array}$$
(0.53)
for some coefficients $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\delta .`$ Let

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(l)=j_m^{}(R,l)y_m(R,l)j_m(R,l)y_m^{}(R,l).$$
(0.54)
Being the Wronskian of two linearly independent solutions $`\mathrm{\Delta }(l)`$ is non-zero. Using the boundary conditions (0.38) it is easy to find that

$$\alpha =\frac{y_m^{}(R,l)}{\mathrm{\Delta }(l)},\beta =\frac{j_m^{}(R,l)}{\mathrm{\Delta }(l)},\gamma =\frac{y_m(R,l)}{\mathrm{\Delta }(l)},\delta =\frac{j_m(R,l)}{\mathrm{\Delta }(l)}.$$
(0.55)
From (0.53) and (0.40) it follows that

$$M(l)=\frac{\{\alpha j_m(t,l)+\beta y_m(t,l)\}\mathrm{cos}\tau +\{\alpha j_m^{}(t,l)+\beta y_m^{}(t,l)\}\mathrm{sin}\tau }{\{\gamma j_m(t,l)+\delta y_m(t,l)\}\mathrm{cos}\tau +\{\gamma j_m^{}(t,l)+\delta y_m^{}(t,l)\}\mathrm{sin}\tau }.$$

For $`t0`$ the formulas (0.7), (0.8a) and (0.8b) tell us that the term $`y_m(t,l)`$ will dominate $`j_m(t,l)`$ and $`j_m^{}(t,l)`$, while $`y_m^{}(t,l)`$ will dominate $`y_m(t,l).`$ Then,

$$M_0^m(l)=\underset{t0}{lim}M(l)=\frac{\beta }{\delta }.$$

By applying (0.55) we obtain the first equality in (0.51). To get the first equality in (0.52) use definition (0.41) of $`\psi _0^m(r,l)`$ and equalities (0.53) to (0.55).

The quantities $`M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)`$ and $`\psi _{\mathrm{}}^m(r,l)`$ are calculated in exactly the same way. One needs to express $`\phi (r,l)`$ and $`\theta (r,l)`$ in terms of $`w_m(r,l)`$ and $`x_m(r,l),`$ then put $`t\mathrm{}`$ in (0.40) and use the properties of $`w_m(r,l)`$ $`x_m(r,l),`$ and their derivatives shown in lemma 0.4. The lemma is proved.

The next lemma will study the properties of the functions $`M_0^m(l),`$ $`M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l),`$ and $`M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l).`$ Here we will set some notation and write some formulas which will be used in the lemma. By $`\lambda `$ we will denote a real variable. Let $`w_m(r,\lambda ),`$ $`k_m(r,\lambda ),`$ $`a_m(r,\lambda ),`$ and $`b_m(r,\lambda )`$ be the functions defined by (0.23), (0.28) and (0.34). The following equalities hold,

$$H_m^{(1)}(iz)=\frac{2}{i\pi }e^{im/2}K_m(z),\pi <\mathrm{arg}z\pi /2$$

and

$$H_m^{(1)}(z)=J_m(z)+iY_m(z),\pi <\mathrm{arg}z<\pi ,$$
(0.56)
(formulas (9.6.4) and (9.1.3) from.?) We deduce

$$w_m(r,\lambda )=\frac{2}{i\pi }e^{im/2}k_m(r,\lambda ),\lambda <d^2,$$
(0.57a)
and
$$w_m(r,\lambda )=a_m(r,\lambda )+ib_m(r,\lambda )\lambda >d^2.$$
(0.57b)
###### Lemma 0.6.

$`M_0^m(l)`$ is meromorphic across all the complex plane, while $`M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)`$ $`(l_+)`$ extends continuously to the real axis. $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ is real or infinite for $`\lambda <d^2,`$ and it has a finite number of zeros on the real axis, all in the interval $`(0,d^2].`$

###### Proof.

As stated in lemma 0.1, $`j_m(R,l)`$ and $`j_m^{}(R,l)`$ will be analytic functions of $`l.`$ Then $`M_0^m(l),`$ being obtained as their ratio, will be a meromorphic function.

The function $`w_m(r,l)`$ was defined in lemma 0.4. It was proved there that $`w_m(r,l)`$ is defined and analytic for all $`l\{\pi /2<\mathrm{arg}(ld^2)<3\pi /2\}.`$ In particular $`w_m(r,\lambda )`$ is defined for all real $`\lambda d^2.`$ To prove that $`M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)`$ extends continuously to the real axis, it suffices to show that its denominator, $`w_m(r,\lambda ),`$ is not zero for $`\lambda \backslash \{d^2\}`$ and that $`lim_{ld^2}M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)`$ exists.

If $`\lambda <d^2,`$ then $`w_m(r,\lambda )0`$ because of (0.28) and (0.57a), since the Bessel function $`K_m(s)`$ takes real strictly positive values for $`s>0`$ (as it follows from section (9.6.1) of.?) If $`\lambda >d^2,`$ then $`w_m(r,\lambda )0`$ because of (0.34) and (0.57b), since for $`s>0`$ the Bessel functions $`J_m(s)`$ and $`Y_m(s)`$ take real values and cannot be zero at the same time.

Show that $`lim_{ld^2}M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)`$ exists. If $`m0,`$ then according to (9.1.8) and (9.1.9) from, ? we have that for $`z`$, $`z0`$

$$H_m^{(1)}(z)(1/\pi )(m1)!(z/2)^m,\text{ for }m1,$$

and

$$H_m^{(1)}(z)(2i/\pi )\mathrm{ln}z,\text{ for }m=0.$$

We can extend these to $`m<0,`$ by using (0.56) together with

$$J_m(z)=(1)^mJ_m(z),Y_m(z)=(1)^mY_m(z),m$$

(formula (9.1.5) from.?) One can obtain the behavior of the derivative of $`H_m^{(1)}(z)`$ as $`z0`$ by formally differentiating the above. Set $`z=R\sqrt{ld^2}.`$ Deduce that for all $`m`$

$$\underset{ld^2}{lim}M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)=\frac{|m|1/2}{R}.$$
(0.58)
Note that $`M_0^m(\lambda )`$ is real or infinite for $`\lambda <d^2,`$ being the quotient of $`j_m^{}(R,\lambda )`$ and $`j_m(R,\lambda )`$ both of which are real according to lemma 0.1. We have that $`M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ is real for $`\lambda <d^2,`$ that follows from (0.57a) and by using again the properties of the function $`K_m(s).`$ Then, $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ is real or infinite for $`\lambda <d^2.`$

Let us show the last part of this lemma, the fact that $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ finite number of zeros on the real axis, all in the interval $`(0,d^2].`$ Let first prove that this function can have no zeros for $`\lambda 0.`$ From (0.57a) we have

$$M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )=\frac{j_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{j_m(R,\lambda )}+\frac{k_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{k_m(R,\lambda )}=\frac{D_m(R,\lambda )}{j_m(R,\lambda )k_m(R,\lambda )},$$

where

$$D_m(r,\lambda )=j_m^{}(r,\lambda )k_m(r,\lambda )j_m(r,\lambda )k_m^{}(r,\lambda ).$$

Assume for some $`\lambda ,`$ $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )=0.`$ Then $`D_m(R,\lambda )=0`$. We will prove that is false. First note that $`D_m(r,\lambda )=D_m(R,\lambda )`$ for $`rR.`$ Indeed, $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ and $`k_m(r,\lambda )`$ will satisfy (0.6) (for $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ this follows by its definition, for $`k_m(r,\lambda )`$ it follows from the observation that according to (0.57a), $`k_m(r,\lambda )`$ is a constant times $`w_m(r,\lambda )`$ which, as defined by (0.23), is a solution of (0.6) for $`rR`$). Then it is easy to check that

$$D_m^{}(r,\lambda )=j_m^{\prime \prime }(r,\lambda )k_m(r,\lambda )j_m(r,\lambda )k_m^{\prime \prime }(r,\lambda )=0,$$

so $`D_m(r,\lambda )`$ is constant in $`r.`$ Second, note that for $`r`$ large enough $`D_m(r,\lambda )<0.`$ Indeed, for $`r>0,`$ $`j_m(r,\lambda )>0,j_m^{}(r,\lambda )>0`$ by lemma 0.2, and $`k_m(r,\lambda )>0`$ by the properties of Bessel functions. Also, for $`r`$ sufficiently large we have $`k_m^{}(r,\lambda )<0,`$ this is a consequence of (0.31). We infer that for $`r`$ large enough $`D_m(r,\lambda )<0.`$ These two observations imply $`D_m(R,\lambda )<0,`$ therefore $`D_m(R,\lambda )`$ is non-zero, and $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )0.`$

Now let $`0<\lambda d^2.`$ We showed that $`M_0^m(l)`$ is meromorphic on the whole complex plane. The function $`w_m(r,l),`$ as defined by (0.23), is analytic on $`\{\pi /2<\mathrm{arg}(ld^2)<3\pi /2\},`$ in particular it is analytic on the set of $`l`$ such that $`𝔢l<d^2.`$ Then $`M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)=w_m^{}(R,l)/w_m(R,l)`$ is meromorphic on the same region, and so is $`M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l).`$ Therefore, it can have only a discrete number of zeros on the interval $`(0,d^2).`$

Assuming that the number of zeros is infinite, their only possible accumulation point is $`\lambda =d^2.`$ So, there will exist a sequence $`\lambda _n<d^2,n1,`$ with $`lim\lambda _n=d^2`$ and $`M_0^m(\lambda _n)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda _n)=0`$ for all $`n1.`$ According to formulas (9.1.3), (9.1.10) and (9.1.11) from, ? the Hankel function $`H^{(1)}(z)`$ will have the representation

$$H_m^{(1)}(z)=f_1(z)+f_2(z)\mathrm{ln}z,$$

with $`f_1(z)`$ and $`f_2(z)`$ meromorphic functions of $`z.`$ Then, if we recall definition (0.23) of $`w_m(r,l),`$ one can calculate that we will have the representation

$$M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)=\frac{g_1(t)+g_2(t)\mathrm{ln}t}{g_3(t)+g_4(t)\mathrm{ln}t},$$

with $`g_1,g_2,g_3`$ and $`g_4`$ meromorphic functions on the whole complex plane, and $`t=\sqrt{ld^2}.`$ We infer

$$g_1(t_n)+g_2(t_n)\mathrm{ln}t_n=0,$$

for all $`n1,`$ where $`t_n=\sqrt{\lambda _nd^2}.`$ Two cases are possible. If $`g_2(t_n)`$ is zero for infinitely many $`n,`$ this implies $`g_1(t_n)=0`$ at the same points. Then the meromorphic functions $`g_1(t)`$ and $`g_2(t)`$ are identically zero, and so is $`M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l),`$ obtaining a contradiction. Otherwise, if $`g_2(t_n)`$ is zero only for finitely many $`n,`$ we can write

$$\mathrm{ln}t_n=\frac{g_1(t_n)}{g_2(t_n)},nn_0.$$

On the right-hand side we have a meromorphic function. As $`n\mathrm{}`$ we have $`t_n0,`$ thus, for some integer $`p`$, there follows

$$\mathrm{ln}|t_n|=O(|t_n|^p).$$

That is clearly impossible. The contradiction shows that $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ can have only finitely many zeros on $`[0,d^2).`$ Another possible zero could be at $`\lambda =d^2.`$

Lastly, show that $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ is never zero on $`(d^2,\mathrm{}).`$ According to (0.51) and (0.57b),

$$M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )=\frac{a_m^{}(R,\lambda )+ib_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{a_m(R,\lambda )+ib_m(R,\lambda )},$$

and so,

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )& =\frac{j_m^{}}{j_m}+\frac{a_m^{}+ib_m^{}}{a_m+ib_m}\hfill \\ & =\frac{(j_m^{}a_ma_m^{}j_m)+i(j_m^{}b_mb_m^{}j_m)}{j_m(a_m+ib_m)}\hfill \end{array}$$
(0.59)
(the arguments $`(R,\lambda )`$ were omitted for simplicity). If we assume that for some $`\lambda >d^2,`$ $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )=0,`$ this implies

$`j_m^{}(R,\lambda )a_m(R,\lambda )a_m^{}(R,\lambda )j_m(R,\lambda )=0,`$
$`j_m^{}(R,\lambda )b_m(R,\lambda )b_m^{}(R,\lambda )j_m(R,\lambda )=0`$
(since these quantities are real, as it follows from lemma 0.2 and (0.34)). The numbers $`j_m(R,\lambda )`$ and $`j_m^{}(R,\lambda )`$ cannot be both zero, since $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ is a non-zero solution of the second order differential equation (0.6). In this case the vectors $`(a_m(R,\lambda ),a_m^{}(R,\lambda ))`$ and $`(b_m(R,\lambda ),b_m^{}(R,\lambda ))`$ must be linearly dependent. That cannot be since the functions $`a_m(r,\lambda )`$ and $`b_m(r,\lambda )`$ $`(rR)`$ are also solutions of (0.6), and they are linearly independent. Thus $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )0.`$ This finishes the lemma.

###### Theorem 0.2.

Let $`\xi _m,`$ $`\eta _m`$ and $`\zeta _m`$ be the functions defined by (0.45a), (0.45b) and (0.45c). There exists a non-decreasing function $`\chi _m:`$ such that the following measures are equal

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill d\xi _m(\lambda )& =j_m(R,\lambda )^2d\chi _m(\lambda ),\hfill \\ \hfill d\eta _m(\lambda )& =j_m^{}(R,\lambda )j_m(R,\lambda )d\chi _m(\lambda ),\hfill \\ \hfill d\zeta _m(\lambda )& =j_m^{}(R,\lambda )^2d\chi _m(\lambda ).\hfill \end{array}$$
(0.60)
The function $`\chi _m`$ is identically zero for $`\lambda (\mathrm{},0],`$ is piecewise constant for $`\lambda (0,d^2)`$ where it has a finite number of discontinuities, and is continuous for $`\lambda (d^2,\mathrm{}).`$

###### Proof.

Denote

$$M(l)=\frac{1}{M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)},l_+.$$

According to (0.45a), for any $`\lambda _0<\lambda _1`$ real numbers

$$\xi _m(\lambda _1)\xi _m(\lambda _0)=\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{\lambda _0}{\overset{\lambda _1}{}}𝔪M(s+i\delta )𝑑s.$$

In particular, if $`M(l)`$ extends continuously to the interval $`[\lambda _0,\lambda _1],`$ then by using Lebesgue’s theorem of dominant convergence it is easy to show that

$$\xi _m(\lambda _1)\xi _m(\lambda _0)=\underset{\lambda _0}{\overset{\lambda _1}{}}𝔪M(s)𝑑s.$$
(0.61)
The same kind of reasoning clearly holds for $`\eta _m`$ and $`\zeta _m.`$

As it follows from lemma 0.6, if $`\lambda 0`$ then $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ is real or infinite, and non-zero. By applying (0.61) we find that for any $`\lambda _1<\lambda _2<0,`$ $`\xi _m(\lambda _1)\xi _m(\lambda _0)=0.`$ From (0.45a) we have that $`\xi _m(0)=0,`$ and thus $`\xi _m(\lambda )=0`$ for all $`\lambda 0.`$ In the same fashion one obtains that for $`\lambda 0,`$ $`\eta _m(\lambda )=0`$ and $`\zeta _m(\lambda )=0.`$ Set $`\chi _m(\lambda )=0`$ for $`\lambda 0,`$ and (0.60) will hold.

Let $`\lambda _1^m<\lambda _2^m<\mathrm{}<\lambda _{P_m}^m`$ be the points in the interval $`(0,d^2]`$ where, according to lemma 0.6, $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )=0.`$ We can use lemma 0.6 and (0.61) to deduce that $`\xi _m,`$ $`\eta _m`$ and $`\zeta _m`$ are constant on each of the intervals making up $`(0,d^2]\backslash \{\lambda _1^m,\lambda _2^m,\mathrm{},\lambda _{P_m}^m\}.`$ Set $`\chi _m`$ to be constant on each of these intervals. At each of the points $`\lambda _1^m,\lambda _2^m,\mathrm{},\lambda _{P_m}^m`$ the functions $`\xi _m,`$ $`\eta _m`$ and $`\zeta _m`$ could have a jump. To show (0.60) on $`(0,d^2]`$ we need to find a relationship between the jumps of these functions. We will return to this shortly.

The remaining case, $`\lambda >d^2,`$ is treated similarly. Equation (0.59) in the proof of lemma 0.6 gives an expression for $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ on this interval (with the notation from (0.34)). By using the fact that the quantities $`a_m,b_m`$ and $`j_m`$ together with their derivatives are real, we can calculate

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔪M(\lambda )& =𝔪\left\{\frac{j_m(a_m+ib_m)}{(j_m^{}a_ma_m^{}j_m)+i(j_m^{}b_mb_m^{}j_m)}\right\}\hfill \\ & =\frac{j_m^2(b_m^{}a_ma_m^{}b_m)}{(j_m^{}a_ma_m^{}j_m)^2+(j_m^{}b_mb_m^{}j_m)^2}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Use (0.35) to simplify the numerator of this fraction. Apply (0.61). We get that for any $`d^2<\lambda _0<\lambda _1,`$

$$\xi _m(\lambda _1)\xi _m(\lambda _0)=\frac{\pi }{2}\underset{\lambda _0}{\overset{\lambda _1}{}}\frac{j_m(R,\lambda )^2}{c_m(\lambda )^2+d_m(\lambda )^2}𝑑\lambda ,$$

where $`c_m(\lambda )`$ and $`d_m(\lambda )`$ are defined by (0.36a) and (0.36b). So we have

$$d\xi _m(\lambda )=\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{j_m(R,\lambda )^2d\lambda }{c_m(\lambda )^2+d_m(\lambda )^2}.$$

We want (0.60) to hold. Define $`\chi _m(\lambda )`$ for $`\lambda >d^2`$ such that

$$d\chi _m(\lambda )=\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{d\lambda }{c_m(\lambda )^2+d_m(\lambda )^2},$$

then the first of the three identities (0.60) is valid. It is easy to repeat the same calculation for $`\eta _m`$ and $`\zeta _m`$ and show that for $`\lambda >d^2`$ the other two identities in (0.60) hold.

Now we will return to what is the longest part of the proof, the study of what happens at the points $`\lambda (0,d^2]`$ where $`M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )=0.`$ Let $`\lambda _0`$ be such a point. An immediate observation is that $`M_0^m(\lambda _0)`$ is finite and $`j_m(R,\lambda _0)0.`$ Indeed, it was proved in lemma 0.6 that $`M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )`$ is finite for $`\lambda `$ real. So, $`M_0^m(\lambda _0)`$ which equals $`M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda _0)`$ is finite. Then, since $`M_0^m(\lambda _0)=j_m^{}(R,\lambda _0)/j_m(R,\lambda _0)`$ and because $`j_m^{}(R,\lambda _0)`$ cannot become zero simultaneously with $`j_m(R,\lambda _0)`$ ($`j_m(r,l)`$ is a solution of (0.6)), we deduce $`j_m(R,\lambda _0)0.`$

With this observation in hand, in order to prove that (0.60) holds at $`\lambda _0`$ one needs to show that

$$d\eta _m(\lambda _0)=M_0^m(\lambda _0)d\xi _m(\lambda _0),d\zeta _m(\lambda _0)=M_0^m(\lambda _0)^2d\xi _m(\lambda _0),$$
(0.62)
and then define $`d\chi _m(\lambda _0)=d\eta _m(\lambda _0)/j_m(R,\lambda _0)^2.`$

Let $`r_0`$ be the jump of $`\xi _m`$ at $`\lambda _0.`$ Recall, $`\xi _m`$ was defined by (0.45a), so,

$$r_0=\underset{\epsilon 0^+}{lim}\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{1}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}ds.$$

By using (0.45b), the first equality in (0.62) can be written as

$$\underset{\epsilon 0^+}{lim}\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{M_0^m(s+i\delta )}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}ds=M_0^m(\lambda _0)r_0.$$

$`M_0^m(l)`$ is analytic around $`\lambda _0.`$ Therefore, in a neighborhood of $`\lambda _0`$

$$M_0^m(s+i\delta )=M_0^m(\lambda _0)+\{M_0^m(s)M_0^m(\lambda _0)\}+i\delta H(s+i\delta ),$$

with $`H`$ a continuous function around $`\lambda _0.`$ Substitute this above. By using the fact that $`M_0^m(\lambda _0)`$ is real and the definition of $`r_0,`$ we get the equivalent equality

$$\begin{array}{c}M_0^m(\lambda _0)r_0\hfill \\ \hfill +\underset{\epsilon 0^+}{lim}\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{\{M_0^m(s)M_0^m(\lambda _0)\}+i\delta H(s+i\delta )}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}ds\\ \hfill =M_0^m(\lambda _0)r_0,\end{array}$$
(0.63)
so we have to prove that the limit of the integral on the left-hand side of (0.63) is zero. To do this, we will need additional information about $`M_0^mM_{\mathrm{}}^m.`$

Let $`l=s+i\delta `$ $`(\delta >0).`$ Recall that formulas (0.42) and (0.44) hold, where $`\psi _0^m`$ and $`\psi _{\mathrm{}}^m`$ are defined in (0.41) and (0.43) and an expression for them is given by (0.52). Add equalities (0.42) and (0.44). Obtain

$$\frac{1}{\delta }𝔪\{M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)\}=\underset{0}{\overset{R}{}}\left|\frac{j_m(r,l)}{j_m(R,l)}\right|^2𝑑r+\underset{R}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left|\frac{w_m(r,l)}{w_m(R,l)}\right|^2𝑑r.$$

This equality gives us two things. First, that $`𝔪\{M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)\}>0,`$ therefore,

$$𝔪\frac{1}{M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)}>0.$$
(0.64)
Second, for $`l`$ close to $`\lambda _0,`$ the quantity $`\delta ^1𝔪\{M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)\}`$ is bounded from below by a strictly positive number, say $`\omega _{\mathrm{}}^1.`$ Then $`\delta ^1|M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)|`$ is bounded below by the same number and therefore,

$$\frac{\delta }{|M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)|}\omega _{\mathrm{}}.$$
(0.65)
The integral in (0.63) can be written as

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{M_0^m(s)M_0^m(\lambda _0)}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}ds\hfill \\ \hfill +\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{i\delta H(s+i\delta )}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}ds.\end{array}$$
(0.66)
Denote $`c_\epsilon =sup_{|s\lambda _0|\epsilon }|M_0^m(s)M_0^m(\lambda _0)|`$. Since $`M_0^m`$ is continuous in a neighborhood of $`\lambda _0,`$ we will have $`c_\epsilon 0`$ as $`\epsilon 0.`$ Let us estimate the first integral from (0.66).

$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill \left|\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{M_0^m(s)M_0^m(\lambda _0)}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}\right|ds\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}\left|𝔪\frac{M_0^m(s)M_0^m(\lambda _0)}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}\right|𝑑s\\ \hfill =\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}|M_0^m(s)M_0^m(\lambda _0)|\left|𝔪\frac{1}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}\right|𝑑s\\ \hfill c_\epsilon \underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}\left|𝔪\frac{1}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}\right|𝑑s\\ \hfill =c_\epsilon \underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{1}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}ds\\ \hfill =c_\epsilon [\xi _m(\lambda _0+\epsilon )\xi _m(\lambda _0\epsilon )].\end{array}$$

In deriving this we used the fact that $`M_0^m(s)M_0^m(\lambda _0)`$ is real, together with (0.64) and (0.45a). Clearly as $`\epsilon 0,`$ the integral goes to zero.

Now estimate the second integral in the sum (0.66). Let $`H_{\mathrm{}}`$ be an upper bound of $`|H(s+i\delta )|`$ for $`l=s+i\delta `$ in a neighborhood of $`\lambda _0.`$ Inequality (0.65) implies that as $`\epsilon 0,`$

$$\left|\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{i\delta H(s+i\delta )}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}ds\right|\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}H_{\mathrm{}}\omega _{\mathrm{}}𝑑s=2\epsilon H_{\mathrm{}}\omega _{\mathrm{}}0$$

This proves the first equality in (0.62).

Let us prove the second equality in (0.62). Recall that $`\zeta _m`$ is given by (0.45c). The above approach does not apply immediately, since unlike $`M_0^m(l)`$ (the numerator in (0.45b)), the function $`M_0^m(l)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(l)`$ (the numerator in (0.45c)) will not be analytic around $`\lambda _0`$ if $`\lambda _0=d^2`$ (since as seen from lemma 0.4, $`w_m(r,l)`$ is not defined in a neighborhood of $`l=d^2`$). The idea is then to use the equality

$$\frac{xy}{xy}=\frac{x^2}{xy}x,$$

to write the jump of $`\zeta _m`$ at $`\lambda _0`$ as

$$\underset{\epsilon 0^+}{lim}\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪\frac{M_0^m(s+i\delta )^2}{M_0^m(s+i\delta )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(s+i\delta )}ds+\underset{\epsilon 0^+}{lim}\underset{\delta 0^+}{lim}\underset{\lambda _0\epsilon }{\overset{\lambda _0+\epsilon }{}}𝔪M_0^m(s+i\delta )𝑑s.$$

The limit of the second integral in the sum will be zero, since as argued above, $`M_0^m`$ will be finite at $`\lambda _0`$ (and therefore, around $`\lambda _0`$) and thus the quantity inside the integral is bounded. For the first integral in the sum we can proceed in the same way we calculated the jump of $`\eta _m.`$ This finishes the proof of (0.60).

Finally, we need to justify the claim that $`\chi _m`$ is a non-decreasing function. From (0.60) we have

$$d\xi _m(\lambda )+d\zeta _m(\lambda )=\{j_m(R,\lambda )^2+j_m^{}(R,\lambda )^2\}d\chi _m(\lambda ).$$

The left-hand side of this is non-negative measure, since by theory $`\xi _m`$ and $`\zeta _m`$ are non-decreasing. The number $`j_m(R,\lambda )^2+j_m^{}(R,\lambda )^2`$ is strictly positive, as $`j_m(R,\lambda )`$ and $`j_m^{}(R,\lambda )`$ cannot be both zero, $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ being a non-zero solution to the second order differential equation (0.6). Then we get that $`d\chi _m(\lambda )`$ is a non-negative measure, which shows that $`\chi _m`$ is non-decreasing.

###### Corollary 0.1.

Let $`\lambda (0,d^2]`$ be a discontinuity point for $`\chi _m.`$ Then, if $`\lambda <d^2,`$ the following hold:

$$\frac{j_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{j_m(R,\lambda )}=\frac{k_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{k_m(R,\lambda )},$$
(0.67a)
and
$$j_m(r,\lambda )=\frac{j_m(R,\lambda )}{k_m(R,\lambda )}k_m(r,\lambda ),rR.$$
(0.67b)
While for $`\lambda =d^2,`$

$$\frac{j_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{j_m(R,\lambda )}=\frac{|m|1/2}{R},$$
(0.68a)
and
$$j_m(r,\lambda )=\frac{j_m(R,\lambda )}{R^{1/2|m|}}r^{1/2|m|},rR.$$
(0.68b)
In particular, for $`\lambda (0,d^2]`$ a discontinuity point of $`\chi _m,`$ $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ decays exponentially as $`r\mathrm{}`$ if $`\lambda <d^2,`$ and $`j_m(r,\lambda )r^{1/2|m|}`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$ if $`\lambda =d^2.`$

###### Proof.

As it follows from the proof of Theorem 0.2, for such a $`\lambda `$ we will have $`M_0^m(\lambda _0)M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda _0)=0.`$ With the help (0.51), (0.57a) and (0.58), we deduce (0.67a) and (0.68a). Notice that these equalities are exactly the conditions (0.29) and (0.32). Then (0.67b) and (0.68b) follow from (0.30) and (0.33).

## 7 Computing the Transform

Denote by $`L^2(\chi _m)`$ the space of all functions $`G:`$ such that

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}|G(\lambda )|^2𝑑\chi _m(\lambda )<\mathrm{},$$

where $`\chi _m`$ is the non-decreasing function defined in Theorem 0.2.

###### Theorem 0.3.

Let $`gL^2(0,\mathrm{}).`$ The integral

$$G_m(\lambda )=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}j_m(r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r$$
(0.69)
is convergent in $`L^2(\chi _m)`$, in the sense that there exists $`G_mL^2(\chi _m)`$ such that $`G_m^{cd}G_m`$ in $`L^2(\chi _m)`$ as $`c0`$ and $`d\mathrm{},`$ where

$$G_m^{cd}(\lambda )=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}j_m(r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r,0<c<d<\mathrm{}.$$
(0.70)
The equality

$$g(r)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}j_m(r,\lambda )G_m(\lambda )𝑑\chi _m(\lambda )$$
(0.71)
holds, in the sense that $`g^{\sigma \tau }g`$ in $`L^2(0,\mathrm{})`$ as $`\tau \mathrm{},\sigma \mathrm{},`$ where

$$g^{\tau \sigma }(r)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\tau }{\overset{\sigma }{}}j_m(r,\lambda )G_m(\lambda )𝑑\chi _m(\lambda ),\mathrm{}<\sigma <\tau <\mathrm{}.$$
(0.72)
We have the Parseval identity

$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|g(r)|^2𝑑r=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|G_m(\lambda )|^2𝑑\chi _m(\lambda ).$$
(0.73)
###### Proof.

We will apply Theorem 0.1. First note that if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)`$ with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2:,`$ then because of (0.60), the norm $`||||`$ as defined in (0.47) can be written in the form

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^2=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|j_m(R,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda )|^2𝑑\chi _m(\lambda ).$$
(0.74)
Recall the identities (0.53) to (0.55) for expressing $`\theta (r,\lambda )`$ and $`\phi (r,\lambda )`$ in terms of $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ and $`y_m(r,\lambda )`$. Note that from (0.54) and (0.55) we get the following equalities involving the coefficients $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,`$ and $`\delta `$

$$\alpha (\lambda )j_m(R,\lambda )\gamma (\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )=1,$$
(0.75)
and

$$\beta (\lambda )j_m(R,\lambda )\delta (\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )=0.$$
(0.76)
Then, for $`0<c<d<\mathrm{},`$ the functions $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^{cd}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^{cd}`$ defined by (0.48) become

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^{cd}(\lambda )=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}\left\{\alpha (\lambda )j_m(r,\lambda )+\beta (\lambda )y_m(r,\lambda )\right\}g(r)𝑑r,$$

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^{cd}(\lambda )=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}\left\{\gamma (\lambda )j_m(r,\lambda )+\delta (\lambda )y_m(r,\lambda )\right\}g(r)𝑑r.$$

We denoted $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{cd}=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^{cd},\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^{cd}).`$ Let

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1^{cd}(\lambda )=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}\alpha (\lambda )j_m(r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2^{cd}(\lambda )=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}\gamma (\lambda )j_m(r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r.$$
(0.77)
and set $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}^{cd}=(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1^{cd},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2^{cd}).`$ We have

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^{cd}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}^{cd}=0.$$
(0.78)
That follows from (0.74) and (0.76). Theorem 0.1 guarantees the existence of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)L^2(\rho )`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{cd}0\text{ as }c0,d\mathrm{}.$$

Then, equality (0.78) says that we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}^{cd}0\text{ as }c0,d\mathrm{}.`$ But, according to (0.74),

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}^{cd}^2=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|\{j_m(R,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda )\}\hfill \\ \hfill \{j_m(R,\lambda )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1^{cd}(\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2^{cd}(\lambda )\}|^2d\chi _m.\end{array}$$
(0.79)
Note that

$$j_m(R,\lambda )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1^{cd}(\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2^{cd}(\lambda )=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}j_m(r,\lambda )g(r)𝑑r.$$

That follows from (0.75) and (0.77). Thus, if we denote

$$G_m(\lambda )=j_m(R,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\lambda )j_m^{}(R,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\lambda ),\lambda ,$$
(0.80)
we obtain from (0.79) that

$$\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|G_m(\lambda )G_m^{cd}(\lambda )|^2𝑑\chi _m0\text{ as }c0,d\mathrm{}$$

($`G_m^{cd}`$ was defined by (0.70)). This shows the first part of Theorem 0.3.

Next we need to show that representation (0.71) holds. It suffices to prove that $`g^{\tau \sigma }`$ as defined by (0.49) in Theorem 0.1 is the same as $`g^{\tau \sigma }`$ defined in (0.72). And they are. To check this one needs to start with $`g^{\tau \sigma }`$ as given in (0.49), substitute $`\theta (r,\lambda )`$ and $`\phi (r,\lambda )`$ from (0.53), use (0.60) to express $`\xi _m,\eta _m`$ and $`\zeta _m`$ in terms of $`\chi _m,`$ use the equalities (0.75) and (0.76), and finally use definition (0.80) for $`G_m(\lambda ).`$

Lastly, the Parseval identity (0.73) follows from (0.50), (0.74) and (0.80). The theorem is proved.

###### Theorem 0.4.

Let $`gL^2(0,\mathrm{}).`$ Let $`\chi _m`$ be the non-decreasing function defined in theorem 0.2. Let $`0<\lambda _1^m<\mathrm{}<\lambda _{P_m}^md^2`$ $`(P_m0)`$ be the points where $`\chi _m`$ is discontinuous. Let $`r_1^m,\mathrm{},r_{P_m}^m`$ be the corresponding jumps. Let $`a_m(r,\lambda )`$ and $`b_m(r,\lambda )`$ be the functions defined by (0.34), and $`c_m(\lambda )`$ and $`d_m(\lambda )`$ be defined by (0.36a) and (0.36b). Then,

$$r_k^m=\pi \left\{\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}j_m(r,\lambda _k^m)^2𝑑r\right\}^1,k=1,\mathrm{},P_m,$$
(0.81)
$$d\chi _m(\lambda )=\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{d\lambda }{c_m(\lambda )^2+d_m(\lambda )^2},\lambda (d^2,\mathrm{}).$$
(0.82)
We have the representation

$$g(r)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{k=1}{\overset{P_m}{}}r_k^mj_m(r,\lambda _k^m)G_m(\lambda _k^m)+\frac{1}{2}\underset{d^2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{j_m(r,\lambda )G_m(\lambda )}{c_m(\lambda )^2+d_m(\lambda )^2}𝑑\lambda .$$
(0.83)
###### Proof.

In theorem 0.2 we proved the existence of the function $`\chi _m`$ and along the way we found its continuous part, that is, equality (0.82). We need to find its discrete part, that is, the value of all the jumps of $`\chi _m.`$ Then (0.83) will follow by applying (0.71).

Let us notice the following observation. If $`\lambda _1\lambda _2,`$ and $`w_1(r)`$ and $`w_2(r)`$ satisfy (0.6) with $`\lambda =\lambda _1,`$ and $`\lambda =\lambda _2`$ respectively, then for any $`0<c<d<\mathrm{}`$

$$\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}w_1(r)w_2(r)𝑑r=(\lambda _1\lambda _2)^1[w_1^{}(r)w_2(r)w_1(r)w_2^{}(r)]|_d^c.$$
(0.84)
Indeed, we can write

$$\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}w_1^{\prime \prime }(r)w_2(r)𝑑r=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}\left\{\lambda _1q(r)\frac{m^21/4}{r^2}\right\}w_1(r)w_2(r)𝑑r,$$

and

$$\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}w_1(r)w_2^{\prime \prime }(r)𝑑r=\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}w_1(r)\left\{\lambda _2q(r)\frac{m^21/4}{r^2}\right\}w_2(r)𝑑r.$$

If we integrate by parts the left-hand sides of these two equalities, and then subtract from first the second, we get exactly (0.84).

Before we prove (0.81), recall the behavior of $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ as $`r\mathrm{}.`$ For $`\lambda d^2`$ a discontinuity point of $`\chi _m`$ it is described in corollary 0.1, while for $`\lambda >d^2`$ see the discussion in section 4.

Let $`\lambda _0d^2`$ be one of the discontinuity points of $`\chi _m.`$ Let $`r_0`$ be the corresponding jump. We will consider two cases: when $`j_m(r,\lambda _0)`$ is square integrable, and when it is not. The first case splits into two subcases: we can have either $`\lambda _0<d^2,`$ or $`\lambda _0=d^2`$ with $`|m|2.`$ The second case happens for $`\lambda _0=d^2`$ and $`|m|\{0,1\}.`$ Let us start with the first case.

Denote $`g(r)=j_m(r,\lambda _0).`$ Since $`g(r)`$ is square integrable, we can apply theorem 0.3 for this particular function. We will show that the corresponding $`G_m(\lambda )`$ as defined by (0.69) is such that

$$G_m(\lambda )=\{\begin{array}{cc}_0^{\mathrm{}}j_m(r,\lambda _0)^2𝑑r,& \text{ if }\lambda =\lambda _0,\hfill \\ 0,& \text{ if }\lambda \lambda _0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(0.85)
for all $`\lambda `$ such that $`d\chi _m(\lambda )0.`$ Then (0.81) will follow promptly; one needs to apply the Parseval identity (0.73) and notice that since $`r_0`$ is the jump of $`\chi _m`$ at $`\lambda _0,`$ then $`d\chi _m(\lambda _0)=r_0\delta (\lambda \lambda _0)`$ with $`\delta `$ being Dirac’s function.

Consider first the subcase $`\lambda _0<d^2.`$ That (0.85) is true for $`\lambda =\lambda _0`$ follows immediately from (0.69). Assume now $`\lambda \lambda _0.`$ Let us compute $`G_m^{cd}(\lambda )`$ for $`0<c<d<\mathrm{}`$ as defined in (0.70). Use (0.84) with $`w_1(r)=j_m(r,\lambda _0),`$ $`w_2(r)=j_m(r,\lambda ).`$ Put $`c0`$ and $`d\mathrm{}.`$ From (0.7) we deduce that

$$j_m^{}(c,\lambda _0)j_m(c,\lambda )j_m(c,\lambda _0)j_m^{}(c,\lambda )0\text{ as }c0.$$

Also, both $`j_m^{}(d,\lambda _0)j_m(d,\lambda )`$ and $`j_m(d,\lambda _0)j_m^{}(d,\lambda )`$ go to zero as $`d\mathrm{}`$ if $`d\chi _m(\lambda )0,`$ since on one hand, $`j_m(r,\lambda _0)`$ and its derivative decrease exponentially, and on the other hand, $`j_m^{}(r,\lambda )`$ and its derivative either decrease exponentially for $`\lambda <d^2`$, or behave like a power of $`r`$ for $`\lambda =d^2,`$ or are bounded for $`\lambda >d^2.`$ In any case we get that $`G_m^{cd}(\lambda )0`$ as $`c0`$ and $`d\mathrm{},`$ so $`G_m(\lambda )=0.`$

The subcase $`\lambda _0=d^2`$ with $`|m|2`$ follows in the same way. The statement that for $`\lambda \lambda _0`$ and $`d\chi _m(\lambda )0`$ both $`j_m^{}(d,\lambda _0)j_m(d,\lambda )`$ and $`j_m(d,\lambda _0)j_m^{}(d,\lambda )`$ go to zero as $`d\mathrm{}`$ is argued in a little different way. We have that $`j_m(r,\lambda _0)`$ and its derivative decay as a negative power of $`r`$ for $`r\mathrm{},`$ while $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ and its derivative either decay exponentially for $`\lambda <\lambda _0,`$ or stay bounded for $`\lambda >\lambda _0.`$ But the conclusion is the same, $`G_m^{cd}(\lambda )0`$ as $`c0`$ and $`d\mathrm{},`$ and thus (0.85) holds in this case too.

Now consider the second case, $`\lambda _0=d^2`$ and $`|m|\{0,1\},`$ when, as we remarked above, $`j_m(r,\lambda _0)`$ is not square integrable. For $`0<c<d<\mathrm{}`$ define

$$g(r)=\{\begin{array}{cc}j_m(r,\lambda _0),& \text{ if }c<r<d,\hfill \\ 0,& \text{ otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

This function *will be* square integrable. Let $`G_m(\lambda )`$ be the corresponding transform of $`g(r)`$ as defined by (0.69). Apply the Parseval identity (0.73). Get

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}|j_m(r,\lambda _0)|^2𝑑r=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|G_m(\lambda )|^2𝑑\chi _m(\lambda )\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\{\lambda _0\}}{}|G_m(\lambda )|^2𝑑\chi _m(\lambda )=\frac{1}{\pi }G_m(\lambda _0)^2r_0.\end{array}$$

From (0.69) we obtain that

$$G_m(\lambda _0)=_c^d|j_m(r,\lambda _0)|^2𝑑r.$$

Then we can write

$$\pi \left\{\underset{c}{\overset{d}{}}|j_m(r,\lambda _0)|^2𝑑r\right\}^1r_0.$$

By putting $`c0,`$ $`d\mathrm{}`$ and noticing that $`r_00,`$ being a jump of the non-decreasing function $`\chi _m,`$ we deduce $`r_0=0.`$

With this theorem, corollary 0.1 and the classification obtained in section 4, we can characterize completely the points of discontinuity of $`\chi _m.`$

###### Corollary 0.2.

Let $`\lambda .`$ Then $`\lambda `$ is a discontinuity point of $`\chi _m`$ if and only if $`j_m(,\lambda )L^2(0,\mathrm{}),`$ and if and only if $`0<\lambda <d^2`$ and (0.67a) holds, or $`\lambda =d^2`$ and (0.68a) holds.

## 8 Finding Green’s Function

In this section we will show that under certain conditions, the solution of the Helmholtz equation (0.1), which in the cylindrical coordinate system $`(r,\vartheta ,z)`$ is written as (0.2), is unique. We will find a representation for it in terms of the source $`f(r,\vartheta ,z),`$ the eigenfunctions $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ of equation (0.6) satisfying lemma 0.1 and the measure $`d\chi _m(\lambda )`$ defined in theorem 0.2. Before proving this result we will need one lemma.

###### Lemma 0.7.

Let $`uC^1(^3).`$ Then $`u`$ can be written as

$$u(r,\vartheta ,z)=\underset{m}{}e^{im\vartheta }u_m(r,z).$$
(0.86)
For each $`z,`$ the function $`ru_m(r,z)`$ is in $`C^1[0,\mathrm{})`$ and

$$\underset{r0}{lim}\left[j_m(r,\lambda )\frac{\{\sqrt{r}u_m(r,z)\}}{r}\frac{j_m(r,\lambda )}{r}\{\sqrt{r}u_m(r,z)\}\right]=0.$$
(0.87)
###### Proof.

Equality (0.86) is nothing but the Fourier series of the function $`\vartheta u(r,\vartheta ,z).`$ The smoothness of the obtained $`u_m`$ follows from the formula for the Fourier coefficients,

$$u_m(r,z)=\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}u(r,t,z)e^{imt}𝑑t.$$

Let us prove (0.87). Write it as

$$\underset{r0}{lim}\left[\sqrt{r}j_m(r,\lambda )\frac{u_m(r,z)}{r}+u_m(r,z)\left(\frac{j_m(r,\lambda )}{2\sqrt{r}}\sqrt{r}\frac{j_m(r,\lambda )}{r}\right)\right]=0.$$

The first term in the sum clearly goes to zero as $`r0.`$ For the second term, by applying lemma 0.1 to the expression in parentheses we get

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{r0}{lim}\left(\frac{j_m(r,\lambda )}{2\sqrt{r}}\sqrt{r}\frac{j_m(r,\lambda )}{r}\right)\hfill \\ \hfill =\underset{r0}{lim}\left(\frac{1}{2}r^{|m|}\left\{|m|+\frac{1}{2}\right\}r^{|m|}\right)=\underset{r0}{lim}|m|r^{|m|}=0,\end{array}$$

for all $`m.`$

These will be the conditions on the solution $`u`$ for (0.2) which will guarantee its uniqueness. First, we will assume that the source $`f`$ is continuous and with compact support. Second, we will impose the condition that $`uC^1(^3).`$ Third, suppose that for all $`m,`$ $`z`$ the following equality holds

$$\underset{r\mathrm{}}{lim}\left[j_m(r,\lambda )\frac{\{\sqrt{r}u_m(r,z)\}}{r}\frac{j_m(r,\lambda )}{r}\{\sqrt{r}u_m(r,z)\}\right]=0,$$
(0.88)
with the functions $`u_m(r,z)`$ defined by (0.86).

Denote by $`U_m(\lambda ,z)`$ the transform of the function $`r\sqrt{r}u_m(r,z)`$ given by (0.69),

$$U_m(\lambda ,z)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}j_m(\rho ,\lambda )\sqrt{r}u_m(r,z)𝑑\rho ,$$
(0.89)
The fourth requirement is the *radiation condition*

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}\underset{|z|\mathrm{}}{lim}\left[\frac{U_m(\lambda ,z)}{|z|}i\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }U_m(\lambda ,z)\right]=0,\hfill & \text{for }\lambda k^2n_0^2\text{ with }d\chi _m(\lambda )0,\hfill \\ & \\ \underset{|z|\mathrm{}}{lim}U_m(\lambda ,z)=0,\hfill & \text{for }\lambda >k^2n_0^2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(0.90)
These conditions are physically motivated. First condition says that the source must be finite. Equation (0.88) signifies a fast decay of the electromagnetic field intensity as $`r\mathrm{}`$. And the radiation condition (0.90) means that the energy going to $`z=\mathrm{}`$ can be separated in two parts. First part is oscillatory, and it goes to infinity, and *cannot not* come from infinity, while the second part is rapidly decaying.

###### Theorem 0.5.

With the above assumptions, the solution of (0.2) can be represented as

$$u(r,\vartheta ,z)=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}G(r,\rho ;\vartheta ,t;z,\zeta )f(\rho ,t,\zeta )\rho 𝑑t𝑑\rho 𝑑\zeta ,$$
(0.91)
where

$$\begin{array}{c}G(r,\rho ;\vartheta ,t;z,\zeta )=\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{2\pi ^2}\frac{1}{\sqrt{r\rho }}\underset{m}{}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{e^{i|z\zeta |\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }}}{2i\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }}e^{im(\vartheta t)}j_m(\rho ,\lambda )j_m(r,\lambda )𝑑\chi _m(\lambda ),\\ \hfill 0<r,\rho ;\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}\vartheta ,t2\pi ;z,\zeta ,\end{array}$$
(0.92)
and $`\chi _m`$ is the non-decreasing function defined in Theorem 0.2.

###### Proof.

The function $`f(\rho ,\vartheta ,z)`$ can be decomposed as

$$f(\rho ,\vartheta ,z)=\underset{m}{}e^{im\vartheta }f_m(\rho ,z),$$
(0.93)
with

$$f_m(\rho ,z)=\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}f(\rho ,t,z)e^{imt}𝑑t.$$
(0.94)
Look for $`u(\rho ,\vartheta ,z)`$ in the form (0.86). By plugging (0.86) and (0.93) into (0.2) we deduce that for each $`m,`$ $`u_m(\rho ,z)`$ needs to satisfy the equation

$$\frac{^2u_m}{z^2}+\frac{1}{\rho }\frac{}{\rho }\left(\rho \frac{u_m}{\rho }\right)+\left(k^2n(\rho )^2\frac{m^2}{\rho ^2}\right)u_m=f_m,$$
(0.95)
for all $`m.`$ Let $`\lambda `$ be such that $`d\chi _m(\lambda )0.`$ Let $`U_m(\lambda ,z)`$ be the transform of $`u_m(\rho ,z)`$ given by (0.89), and let

$$F_m(\lambda ,z)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}j_m(\rho ,\lambda )\sqrt{\rho }f_m(\rho ,z)𝑑\rho $$
(0.96)
be the transform of $`f_m.`$ Multiply (0.95) on both sides by $`\sqrt{\rho }j_m(\rho ,\lambda )`$ and integrate from $`0`$ to $`\mathrm{}.`$ Obtain

$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{^2U_m}{z^2}+\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}j_m(\rho ,\lambda )\frac{1}{\sqrt{\rho }}\frac{}{\rho }\left(\rho \frac{u_m(\rho ,z)}{\rho }\right)𝑑\rho +\hfill \\ \hfill \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}j_m(\rho ,\lambda )\left(k^2n(\rho )^2\frac{m^2}{\rho ^2}\right)\sqrt{\rho }u_m(\rho ,z)𝑑\rho =F_m.\end{array}$$

Use integration by parts twice for the first integral in the above equation. By applying lemma 0.7, and equality (0.88) we get

$$\frac{^2U_m}{z^2}+\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left\{\frac{^2j_m(\rho ,\lambda )}{\rho }+\left(k^2n(\rho )^2\frac{m^21/4}{\rho ^2}\right)j_m(\rho ,\lambda )\right\}\sqrt{\rho }u_m(\rho ,\lambda )𝑑\rho =F_m.$$

Recall that $`j_m(\rho ,\lambda )`$ satisfies (0.6) with $`q(r)`$ given by (0.4). Then,

$$\frac{^2U_m}{z^2}+(k^2n_0^2\lambda )U_m=F_m.$$
(0.97)
The solution to (0.97) which satisfies (0.90) is easily found,

$$U_m(\lambda ,z)=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{e^{i|z\zeta |\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }}}{2i\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }}F_m(\lambda ,\zeta )𝑑\zeta ,$$

or if we use (0.96),

$$U_m(\lambda ,z)=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{e^{i|z\zeta |\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }}}{2i\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }}j_m(\rho ,\lambda )\sqrt{\rho }f_m(\rho ,\zeta )𝑑\rho 𝑑\zeta .$$

$`U_m(\lambda ,z)`$ was defined by (0.89). Using the inversion formula (0.71) given in theorem 0.3 we can recover $`u_m(r,z),`$

$$\sqrt{r}u_m(r,z)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}j_m(r,\lambda )U_m(\lambda ,z)𝑑\chi _m(\lambda ),$$

or

$$u_m(r,z)=\frac{1}{\pi \sqrt{r\rho }}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{e^{i|z\zeta |\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }}}{2i\sqrt{k^2n_0^2\lambda }}j_m(\rho ,\lambda )j_m(r,\lambda )\rho f_m(\rho ,\zeta )𝑑\rho 𝑑\zeta 𝑑\chi _m(\lambda ).$$

Now, to get (0.91) with $`G(r,\rho ;\vartheta ,t;z,\zeta )`$ given by (0.92) we need to substitute $`f_m(\rho ,z)`$ from (0.94), find $`u(r,\vartheta ,z)`$ from (0.86) and interchange the order of integration so that the inner-most integral is the one in respect to $`\lambda .`$

The theorem we just proved shows that the electromagnetic field generated by the source $`f`$ can be decomposed in two parts: the guided part, which is a sum of guided modes decaying in $`r`$ either exponentially or as a power of $`r,`$ and a radiation part, which is obtained by summing in $`m`$ and integrating in $`\lambda .`$ For each $`m`$ the set of guided modes is finite, as it was shown in lemma 0.6. The next theorem will prove a stronger result.

###### Theorem 0.6.

The total number of guided modes (in all $`m`$) is finite.

###### Proof.

We just need to show that for $`|m|`$ large enough there are no more guided modes. A mode $`j_m(r,\lambda )`$ is guided, if

$$M_0^m(\lambda )M_{\mathrm{}}^m(\lambda )=0.$$

All $`\lambda `$ for which this equality happens are in $`(0,d^2],`$ as proved in lemma 0.6. By using (0.51), (0.57a) and (0.58) we can write the this equality as

$$\frac{j_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{j_m(R,\lambda )}=\frac{k_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{k_m(R,\lambda )},\text{ if }\lambda <d^2,$$

or

$$\frac{j_m^{}(R,\lambda )}{j_m(R,\lambda )}=\frac{|m|1/2}{R},\text{ if }\lambda =d^2,$$

where $`k(r,\lambda )`$ is given by (0.28).

The left-hand side of these equalities is strictly positive for $`|m|`$ large, as it follows from lemma 0.3. Thus, the second of these equalities is not possible. To show that the first one cannot happen, it suffices to prove that $`k_m^{}(R,\lambda )<0`$ for $`|m|1,`$ since we know that $`k_m(r,\lambda )>0,`$ for all $`r>0.`$

The function $`rk_m(r,\lambda )`$ will satisfy the equation

$$k_m^{\prime \prime }(r,\lambda )=\left\{d^2\lambda +\frac{m^21/4}{r^2}\right\}k_m(r,\lambda ),$$

which implies that $`k_m^{\prime \prime }(r,\lambda )>0`$ for $`r>0,`$ and so, $`k_m^{}(r,\lambda )`$ is an increasing function of $`r.`$ From this and (0.31) it follows that $`k_m^{}(r,\lambda )<0`$ for all $`r>0.`$ This finishes the proof of the theorem.

## 9 Conclusion

In this paper we have constructed a framework for analyzing waveguide problems which is based on a transform theory. The construction of the transform was more difficult, but the final form relatively similar, to the 2-D case.? The primary tool in obtaining the transform was the theory of self-adjoint singular eigenvalue problems.

This paper completes the study of the wave propagation in a infinite cylindrical waveguide. We obtained a Green’s function valid for every choice of the index of refraction of the core with cylindrical symmetry. In particular, it is enough to solve (0.67a) for $`\lambda (0,d^2]`$ and the differential equation (0.6) in the core region in order to obtain the corresponding Green’s function.

The obtained formula for Green’s functions is very amenable to computation. In a future article we will calculate explicitly Green’s function in the cases of a *step-index fiber* and a *coaxial waveguide* and will display numerical results.

Acknowledgments

We wish to express our gratitude to our advisers, Fadil Santosa and Rolando MagnaninibbbFadil Santosa is the adviser of O. A. and Rolando Magnanini is the adviser of G. C., for proposing this topic to us and for the many discussions and countless suggestions while writing this paper.

References


format: text

text:
# Equal energy sharing double photo ionization of the Helium atom at 20eV and 40eV above threshold

## 1 Introduction

Double photo ionization (DPI) of the helium is one of those fundamental atomic processes which has received wide attention from both theorists and experimentalists. Helium is one of the most abundant elements in stellar atmospheres and hence analysis of Helium spectra is of considerable importance in astrophysics. From the theoretical aspect, the absorption of a photon and subsequent ejection of both electrons from the Helium atom into the continuum, leads to a pure Coulomb three body problem which, at low incident energies, involve complex short range interactions and strong electron correlations that are difficult to treat theoretically and hence present a challenge to theorists.

Detailed discussion about existing theories of helium double photo ionization is presented in our earlier work . It would still be worthwhile to mention the convergent close coupling (CCC) theory of Bray *et al* , 2SC theory of Pont and Shakeshaft  and the 3C theory of Maulbetsch and Briggs  since all of them have been very widely used to study the double photo ionization process. It would also be very appropriate to single out and mention the hyperspherical $``$-matrix with semi classical outgoing waves (H$``$M-SOW) theory of Malegat *et al*  for two reasons. First, the method has been quite successful in describing the total ionization cross section (TICS), single and triple differential cross sections (SDCS and TDCS). Secondly the method bears similarity to our calculation in the use of hyperspherical coordinates, though the techniques used in extracting scattering information is very different from ours. The H$``$M-SOW method uses $``$-matrix  method to obtain solution of the radial wave equation in the inner region bounded by a hypersphere at $`R_0`$ ($`R`$ being the hyperradius). Beyond $`R_0`$ the solution of the radial equations are propagated semiclasically (see section IV of ). In contrast our method is fully quantum mechanical and free from any approximations, though perhaps it is more demanding on the computational resources.

The helium double photo ionization is similar to the electron impact ionization of atomic hydrogen. However, due to the 1Se symmetry of the initial state, the final state can be only of 1Po symmetry. This leads to considerable simplification in computations in contrast to e-H ionization, in which there are many more contributing states in the final channel. Also there are selection rules that are valid only for double photo ionization  (for a recent review see ).

As is well known, the DPI triple differential cross-section can be calculated in three gauges, namely length, velocity and acceleration gauges. In principle the TDCS must be independent of the choice of gauge. However, it has been shown by Lucy et al  that the TDCS results are notoriously gauge dependent unless one uses very accurate wave functions for both initial and final channels. In our previous work  we had been able to show that our results are largely gauge independent and length and velocity gauge results obtained were nearly identical. We now have the TDCS results in the acceleration gauge also, and we will make a brief comparison between the TDCS in the three gauges below before we study other cases. Also in our work  we obtained TDCS at 20eV incident photon energy and our results were for incident photon source linearly polarized with Stokes parameter $`S_1=1`$. Having obtained an essentially gauge independent formalism, in this work we present double photo ionization TDCS at 20eV and 40eV above the helium double ionization threshold 79eV. Also we choose situations in which the incident photon beam is partially (linear) polarized, the degree of polarization being given by the Stokes parameter S1 (for a definition of Stokes parameters see . Our $`S_1`$ corresponds to $`S_{lin}`$ given in section 3.2 of Ref.  in which the $`x`$ and $`y`$ axes are respectively along the major and minor axes of the polarization ellipse).

The double ionization TDCS is obtained from the transition matrix elements given by

$$T_{fi}=\mathrm{\Psi }_f^{()}|V_i|\mathrm{\Phi }_i,$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i(\stackrel{}{r}_1,\stackrel{}{r}_2)`$ is the helium ground state, $`\stackrel{}{r}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{}{r}_2`$ being the coordinates of the two electrons with respect to the helium nucleus (assumed to be at rest). $`\mathrm{\Psi }_f^{()}`$ is the final channel continuum state and $`V_i`$ is the interaction term given by

$$V_i=\stackrel{}{ϵ}\stackrel{}{D}.$$
(2)
In (2) $`\stackrel{}{D}`$ is the dipole operator given by $`\stackrel{}{D}=\stackrel{}{}_1+\stackrel{}{}_2`$ (velocity form), $`\stackrel{}{D}=\omega _i(\stackrel{}{r}_1+\stackrel{}{r}_2)`$ (length form) or $`\stackrel{}{D}=\frac{1}{\omega _i}(\stackrel{}{}_1+\stackrel{}{}_2)V`$ (acceleration form), where

$$V=\frac{1}{r_1}\frac{1}{r_2}+\frac{1}{|\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2|}$$

is the full three body interaction potential and $`\stackrel{}{ϵ}`$ is the photon polarization vector. For an arbitrary degree of (linear) polarization of the incident photon beam characterized by the Stokes parameter S1, the TDCS is given by (see  for example and references therein)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_1d\mathrm{\Omega }_2dE_1}}=(\sigma _x+\sigma _y)+{\displaystyle \frac{S_1}{2}}(\sigma _x\sigma _y),`$ (3)
where $`\sigma _x`$ and $`\sigma _y`$ refer to TDCS calculated with polarization vectors along the x-axis and y-axis respectively.

A schematic diagram of the scattering geometry is shown in figure 1. The photon emerges from the bottom of the scattering plane along the z-axis. The two photo-electrons are ejected after collision in the direction $`\theta _1`$ and $`\theta _2`$ in the scattering plane.

## 2 Theory

The hyperspherical partial wave theory is discussed in considerable detail in our earlier work . Therefore we give here only the essentials.

For the Helium ground state we take a highly correlated 20 term Hylleraas type wave function given by Hart and Herzberg . To calculate the final channel continuum state $`\mathrm{\Psi }_f^{()}`$ we use hyperspherical coordinates $`R=\sqrt{r_1^2+r_2^2}`$, $`\alpha =\mathrm{arctan}(r_2/r_1)`$, $`\widehat{r}_1=(\theta _1,\varphi _1)`$, $`\widehat{r}_2=(\theta _2,\varphi _2)`$ and $`\omega =(\alpha ,\widehat{r}_1,\widehat{r}_2)`$. Also we set $`P=\sqrt{p_1^2+p_2^2}`$, $`\alpha _0=\mathrm{arctan}(p_2/p_1)`$, $`\widehat{p}_1=(\theta _{p_1},\varphi _{p_1})`$, $`\widehat{p}_2=(\theta _{p_2},\varphi _{p_2})`$ and $`\omega _0=(\alpha _0,\widehat{p}_1,\widehat{p}_2)`$ where $`\stackrel{}{r}_i`$ and $`\stackrel{}{p}_i`$ (i = 1, 2) are the coordinates and momenta of the $`i^{th}`$ particle. $`\mathrm{\Psi }_f^{()}`$ is then expanded in hyperspherical harmonics  that are functions of the five angular variables and $`\mathrm{}_1`$, $`\mathrm{}_2`$, $`n`$, $`L`$, $`M`$, which are respectively the angular momenta of the two electrons, the order of the Jacobi polynomial in the hyperspherical harmonics, the total angular momentum and its projection. For a given symmetry $`s`$ we decompose the final state as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{fs}^{()}(R,\omega )=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi }}\underset{\lambda }{}\frac{F_\lambda ^s(\rho )}{\rho ^{\frac{5}{2}}}\varphi _\lambda ^s(\omega )$$
(4)
where $`\lambda `$ is the composite index ($`\mathrm{}_1`$, $`\mathrm{}_2`$, $`n`$, L, M) or $`2n+\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2`$ depending on the context and $`\rho =PR`$ and $`\varphi _\lambda ^s(\omega )`$ are are orthogonal functions that are a product of a Jacobi polynomial $`P_n^{l_1l2}(\alpha )`$ and a coupled angular momentum eigenfunction $`𝒴_{l_1l_2}^{LM}(\mathrm{\Omega }_1,\mathrm{\Omega }_2)`$.

$`F_\lambda ^s`$ then satisfy the infinite set of coupled differential equations

$$\left[\frac{d^2}{d\rho ^2}+1\frac{\nu _\lambda (\nu _\lambda +1)}{\rho ^2}\right]F_\lambda ^s(\rho )+\underset{\lambda ^{}}{}\frac{2\alpha _{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^s}{P\rho }F_\lambda ^{}^s(\rho )=0.$$
(5)
Here $`\alpha _{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^s`$ are the matrix elements of the full three-body interaction potential and $`\nu _\lambda =\lambda +\frac{3}{2}`$. Since the final channel state must have the 1Po symmetry $`s`$ is fixed. The contributing radial waves then correspond to $`L=1`$ and (odd) parity $`\pi =1`$ so that writing $`N=(\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2,n)`$ and $`F_\lambda ^s=f_N`$ the equations for the relevant set of radial waves become

$$\left[\frac{d^2}{d\rho ^2}+1\frac{\nu _N(\nu _N+1)}{\rho ^2}\right]f_N+\underset{N^{}}{}\frac{2\alpha _{NN^{}}}{P\rho }f_N^{}=0.$$
(6)
For actual computations we truncate the set of equations to some maximum value $`N_{mx}`$ of $`N`$. These $`N_{mx}`$ equations in $`N_{mx}`$ variables are solved from origin to infinity. Construction of the radial wave solution is presented in our earlier works  with considerable rigor. So we omit the details in this work. Knowing the radial wave solution, the final channel state can be found from (4) and the transition matrix elements from (1). The photoionization TDCS can then be obtained using

$$\frac{d^3\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_1d\mathrm{\Omega }_2dE_1}=\frac{2\pi ^2\alpha p_1p_2}{\omega _i}|T_{fi}|^2.$$
(7)
## 3 Results and discussion

Convergence in our cross sections depend on two parameters, namely the number of coupled channels included in the computations and the asymptotic range parameter $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ where the asymptotic and the interior solutions are matched (see  and  for details). Numerical investigations show that convergence in TDCS is obtained at $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ = 30000 a.u. with 90 coupled channels. On the contrary oscillations in the SDCS persist even on increasing the asymptotic range parameter $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ substantially beyond 30000 a.u. This is in contrast to the H$``$M-SOW method where oscillations in the SDCS die out on extending the asymptotic range. However, our computed SDCS at $`E/2`$ ($`E`$ being the excess energy) remains more or less constant with the increase of convergence parameters. This strongly suggests that we employ a scaling technique similar to that used in the CCC theory (see ). Whenever the true SDCS at $`E/2`$ is known (from experiment or from some other theory, for example ) we normalize our computed SDCS at $`E/2`$ to the true SDCS by multiplying with a factor. Subsequently, we use this factor to scale our TDCS. Thus the TDCS at 20 eV incident energy have been scaled with a factor 0.8 and at 40 eV by a factor 0.6. In this way we are able to obtain absolute TDCS.

### 3.1 Gauge independence

As remarked earlier, in our previous work  we had been able to show that our work is largely gauge independent. There, independence of the TDCS results with respect to the length and velocity gauges had been presented. We now present the TDCS results in the acceleration gauge also. These are displayed in figure 2. Except near the peaks, the length and velocity gauge results are identical. The maximal departure of the length gauge results occur near the peaks, and are respectively 20% at $`\theta _1=0^o`$, 14% at $`\theta _1=30^o`$, 14% at $`\theta _1=60^o`$ and 7% at $`\theta _1=90^o`$ from the velocity gauge. The acceleration gauge results are indistinguishable from that of the velocity gauge. The gauge independence in our results is a strong signature that our final channel wave function has the correct asymptotic and short range behaviour. Since the velocity and acceleration gauge results are identical, in subsequent calculations we compute TDCS in the acceleration gauge only, as this makes our computations much simpler for values of the Stokes parameter $`S_1<1`$.

### 3.2 Results for 20eV excess energy

In this section we display our results for 99eV incident photon energy and include polarization states by selecting cases with Stokes parameter $`S_1<1`$.

In figure 3 we compare our results with experimental data from Briggs and Schmidt  and the results of the CCC theory  which are on an absolute scale. Since the experimental data are not absolute we have normalized the data in each set to our computed results. Also the CCC results in figure 3 (b) and (c) have been scaled with a factor 0.52. The agreement of the present results with the experiment and the CCC results appears to be good everywhere in shape, except for secondary peaks near $`\theta _2=\pm 150^o`$ at $`\theta _1=180^o`$ (figure 3 (a)). To see whether this additional structure in figure 3 (a) remains, we may need to perform a much larger calculation, that involves the inclusion of many more partial waves in our final state wave function.

In figure 4 we compare our results with the experimental data of Weightman *et al* . The experimental data is not absolute and have been normalized to the present results by multiplying all data with a single factor. The agreement is excellent everywhere.

There is the slight hint of a peak in figure 4 (a) near $`\theta _2=180^o`$ and its magnitude appears to increase in figures 4 (b) and (c). Again, confirmation of this or otherwise have to be deferred due to present limitations in our computational resources. The CCC results for this set of data are not available and hence comparisons are not made.

### 3.3 Results for 40eV excess energy

Figure 5 shows our results for excess energy photon energy $`E=40`$ eV and Stokes parameter $`S_1=0.8`$. Shown also are the experimental results from Cvejanović et al  and the CCC results presented in Ref. . The experimental points have been scaled to our theory by multiplying with 0.05 in all cases. The absolute CCC results have also been scaled by the same factor 0.4. Agreement in shape with the experimental results appear to be excellent everywhere, except in figures 5 (d) and (e) where there are slight departures around $`\theta _2=150^0`$. The CCC results are also almost identical with respect to the shapes.

## 4 Conclusions

In this work, we have presented results for equal energy sharing double photo ionization of the helium atom at 20 eV and 40 eV excess energy. Gauge independence of our TDCS results are shown. Cases in which the incident photon beam is partially polarized are considered. Comparisons are made with the experiments and the CCC theory wherever available and the results are seen to be consistent in shape. In the absence of absolute TDCS measurements for the chosen kinematics, it is difficult to say anything about the correctness of the magnitude of the various results. We also mention that our results presented in this work have converged approximately. For getting fully converged results, more computational facilities may be necessary. All the computations reported here were done on desktop computers with Pentium IV class CPU and 512M core memory.

In a future work, we propose to deal with unequal energy sharing kinematics. However, due to computational limitations we cannot reproduce results for extremely asymmetric energy sharing at this moment. As noted in our work  high Rydberg states tend to interfere with our continuum state giving undesirable results in such cases. To cope with these situations, considerably more computational resources may be necessary.

## 5 Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to V. Schmidt and T. J. Reddish for providing the experimental results and to Igor Bray and Anatoli Kheifets for providing the CCC results electronically. KC acknowledges support from the University Grants Commission in the form of a Minor Research Project F.PSW-035/02(ERO). SP is grateful to CSIR for providing a research fellowship.