text:
# Coherent Baryogenesis

CERN-TH/2003-070, HD-THEP-03-15

## Abstract

We propose a new baryogenesis scenario based on coherent production and mixing of different fermionic species. The mechanism is operative during phase transitions, at which the fermions acquire masses via Yukawa couplings to scalar fields. Baryon production is efficient when the mass matrix is nonadiabatically varying, nonsymmetric and when it violates $`CP`$ and $`BL`$ directly, or some other charges that are eventually converted to $`BL`$. We first consider a toy model, which involves two mixing fermionic species, and then a hybrid inflationary scenario embedded in a supersymmetric Pati-Salam GUT. We show that, quite generically, a baryon excess in accordance with observation can result.

1. Introduction. Baryogenesis scenarios beyond the standard model often invoke the out-of-equilbrium decay of heavy particles Yoshimura:1978ex ; Fukugita:1986hr . Well known notable exceptions are the mechanisms proposed by Affleck and Dine Affleck:1984fy  and by Cohen and Kaplan Cohen:1987vi , both being operative in the presence of scalar condensates.

In this letter, we present a novel baryogenesis scenario involving nonadiabatic evolution of classical scalar fields during phase transitions, at which the baryon-lepton symmetry of the gauge group of a grand-unified theory (GUT) is broken. Yukawa couplings give rise to time dependent mass terms for matter fields and thereby the resonant production of particles Traschen:1990sw . Furthermore, the mass matrices are temporarily nondiagonal, inducing thus flavor oscillations between species with baryonic and leptonic charge. At the end of the phase transition, when the mass matrix becomes diagonal, the charges get frozen-in. Since this mechanism relies on the interplay of coherent particle production and $`(BL)`$-violating flavor oscillations we call it *coherent baryogenesis*. We emphasise the conceptual simplicity of coherent baryogenesis, since it involves the tree-level dynamics of quantum fields only.

2. Formalism. For our calculations we adapt the kinetic approach (cf. Refs. ZhuangHeinz:1995 ; Kainulainen:2001cn ; GarbrechtProkopecSchmidt:2002 ), which makes use of the dynamics of Wigner functions, which are closely related to classical phase space distributions.

To compute them, we extend the formalism of Ref. Kainulainen:2001cn ; GarbrechtProkopecSchmidt:2002 . We define the Wigner function,

$`iS^<(k,x)_{ab}={\displaystyle d^4r\mathrm{e}^{ikr}0|\overline{\psi }_b(xr/2)\psi _a(x+r/2)|0},`$
where $`a,b=1,\mathrm{},N`$ are species indices and $`(i\gamma ^0S^<)^{}=i\gamma ^0S^<`$ is hermitian. Our derivation will go through for a 2-point function with general density matrix, but in view of our applications in inflation we prefer to write it with respect to the vacuum from the outset. Introducing an $`N\times N`$ matrix $`M`$ and its hermitian and antihermitian parts, respectively,

$`M_H={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(M+M^{}\right),M_A={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2i}}\left(MM^{}\right),`$
we find that $`iS^<`$ obeys the Wigner space Dirac equation

$$(k/+\frac{i}{2}\gamma ^0_t(M_H+i\gamma ^5M_A)e^{\frac{i}{2}\stackrel{}{_t}_{k_0}})_{ac}iS_{cb}^<=0.$$
(1)
The mass matrix $`M`$ emerges generically from Yukawa couplings to scalar field condensates, $`_{\mathrm{Yu}}=y\varphi \overline{\psi }_R\psi _L+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.`$, which can induce $`CP`$-violation in the fermionic equations JoyceProkopecTurok:1994 ; ClineJoyceKainulainen:2000 ; Carena:2000id ; Kainulainen:2001cn . It is noteable, that in coherent baryogenesis the condensate does not have to carry a charge, while this is necessary for the Affleck-Dine mechanism Affleck:1984fy , therefore being conceptually different. This can be seen explicitly from the two examples in this letter, where the scalar condensates $`\varphi `$ are always real, and therefore $`q_\varphi =i\varphi ^{}\stackrel{}{_t}\varphi =0`$.

However, the time dependence of $`M`$ plays here another important rôle. For $`N=1`$, the Dirac equation consists of two first order differential equations due to the two degrees of freedom of the fermionic field. Thus, also $`dM/dt`$ can contribute $`CP`$-violation, and in general, both sources from $`M`$ and $`dM/dt`$ cannot be simultaneously removed by local phase reparametrizations of the fermionic fields, *cf.* Ref. GarbrechtProkopecSchmidt:2002  for an example. When $`N>1`$, even higher derivatives of $`M`$ are involved, allowing, in principle, multiple sources of $`CP`$-violation. We stress that this is a very different situation from the Standard Model quark mixing Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix, or lepton mixing Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata matrix, where at least three generations of quarks or leptons are required for one CP-violating phase.

We now make use of the fact that the helicity operator $`\widehat{h}=\widehat{𝐤}\gamma ^0𝜸\gamma ^5`$, commutes with the Dirac operator in (1) and decompose the Wigner function

$$i\gamma _0S_h^<=\frac{1}{4}\left(\mathrm{𝟙}+h\widehat{𝐤}𝝈\right)\rho ^\mu g_{\mu h},$$
(2)
where we have omitted the species indices, $`\widehat{𝐤}=𝐤/|𝐤|`$ and $`\sigma ^\mu `$, $`\rho ^\mu `$ ($`\mu =0,1,2,3`$) are the Pauli matrices. We multiply (1) by $`\rho ^\mu `$, take the trace and integrate the hermitian part over $`k_0`$. Introducing the 0th momenta of $`g_{\mu h}`$, $`f_{\mu h}=(dk_0/2\pi )g_{\mu h}`$, we obtain the system of equations

$`\dot{f}_{0h}+i[M_H,f_{1h}]+i[M_A,f_{2h}]`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (3)
$`\dot{f}_{1h}+2h|𝐤|f_{2h}+i[M_H,f_{0h}]\{M_A,f_{3h}\}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`\dot{f}_{2h}2h|𝐤|f_{1h}+\{M_H,f_{3h}\}+i[M_A,f_{0h}]`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`\dot{f}_{3h}\{M_H,f_{2h}\}+\{M_A,f_{1h}\}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
The $`f_{\mu h}(x,𝐤)`$ can be interpreted as follows: $`f_{0h}`$ is the charge density, $`f_{3h}`$ is the axial charge density, and $`f_{1h}`$ and $`f_{2h}`$ correspond to the scalar and pseudoscalar density, respectively. Note that the commutators in (3), which mix particle flavors, are essential for the production of the charges $`f_{0h}`$, and thus for our scenario.

For an originally diagonal mass matrix and adiabatic conditions, the initial Wigner functions describing zero particles are (*cf.* Ref. GarbrechtProkopecSchmidt:2002 ):

$`f_{0h}^{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`|L_h^{ab}|^2+|R_h^{ab}|^2,f_{1h}^{ab}=2\mathrm{}(L_h^{ab}R_h^{ab}),`$
$`f_{3h}^{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`|R_h^{ab}|^2|L_h^{ab}|^2,f_{2h}^{ab}=2\mathrm{}(L_h^{ab}R_h^{ab}),`$ (4)
with

$`L_h^{ab}=\delta _{ab}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _a+hk}{2\omega _a}}},R_h^{ab}=\delta _{ab}{\displaystyle \frac{M_{aa}^{}}{\sqrt{2\omega _a(\omega _a+hk)}}},`$
where $`\omega _a=\sqrt{𝐤^2+|M_{aa}|^2}`$. For a nondiagonal, but hermitian, $`M`$, one obtains initial conditions by an appropriate unitary transformation. If additionally $`M_A0`$, a biunitary transformation is necessary for diagonalisation.

Since $`f_{0h}`$ is the zeroth component of the vector current, the charge of the species $`a`$ carried by the mode with momentum $`k`$ and helicity $`h`$ is simply $`q_{ah}(k)=f_{0h}^{aa}`$. From eqs. (3) one can derive that, in order to generate a nonvanishing charge $`q_{ah}(k)`$, i.e. $`\dot{f}_{0h}^{aa}0`$, $`M`$ should not be symmetric. Note also, that the Lagrangean

$`=\overline{\psi }_a/\psi _a\overline{\psi }_b(M_H+i\gamma ^5M_A)_{ba}\psi _a`$
is $`U(1)`$ symmetric, and thus $`_aq_{ah}(k)`$ is conserved.

3. Toy model. We now consider a two species model, where fundamental $`SU(2)`$ fermions couple to an adjoint scalar triplet $`\mathrm{\Phi }^i`$ and to a singlet $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$, such that the mass matrix is given by $`M=\mathrm{\Phi }^0\mathrm{𝟙}+\mathrm{\Phi }^i\sigma ^i`$. While we fix the fields associated with the diagonal generator $`\sigma ^3`$ as $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0=\mu `$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^3=\mu /2`$, with $`\mu `$ being a mass scale, we let $`\mathrm{\Phi }^1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^2`$ move freely in a harmonic potential, starting form arbitrary initial conditions. Conjugating the fermionic sector of (3) under $`CP`$ while leaving the scalar condensate invariant, we find that, in spite of $`M`$ being hermitian, $`CP`$ is broken for the fermions, because $`MM^{}`$. Damping is introduced through a phenomenological decay rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and through the Hubble expansion in a matter dominated universe, *e.g.* the scale factor is $`a=a_m\eta ^2`$, where $`\eta `$ denotes the conformal time, and $`{}_{}{}^{}d/d\eta =ad/dt`$. The equation of motion for a scalar $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }+2\frac{a^{}}{a}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}+a^2\frac{dV}{d\mathrm{\Phi }}+a\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=0.$$
(5)
Writing $`\omega _\mathrm{\Phi }^2=d^2V/d\mathrm{\Phi }^2`$ and setting $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0`$, the solutions are

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )={\displaystyle \frac{c_1}{\eta ^3}}\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}a_m\omega _\mathrm{\Phi }\eta ^3\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{c_2}{\eta ^3}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}a_m\omega _\mathrm{\Phi }\eta ^3\right).`$ (6)
For $`\mathrm{\Phi }^1`$, we employ $`c_1=\mu `$, $`c_2=0`$ and $`\omega _\mathrm{\Phi }=\mu `$, for $`\mathrm{\Phi }^2`$, $`c_1=0`$, $`c_2=\mu `$ and $`\omega _\mathrm{\Phi }=1.5\mu `$, and we set $`a_m=\mu ^2`$.

We approximate the effect of damping by multiplying the solutions (6) by $`A=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{6}a_m\mathrm{\Gamma }\eta ^3\right)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.1\mu \omega _\mathrm{\Phi }`$. The equations of motions for the Wigner functions in conformal space-time are then simply obtained by replacing $`M`$ by $`aM`$ in (3) Giudice:1999fb GarbrechtProkopecSchmidt:2002 . We illustrate the motion of the mixing fermionic mass terms in conformal time in figure 1.

Requiring that there are no particles at $`\eta =2.1\mu ^1`$, we choose initial conditions in accordance with (4) and solve (3) numerically, to find fermion number production as displayed in figure 2 as a function of the conformal momentum $`k`$.

We sum over the helicities, $`q_a=q_{a+}+q_a`$, and note, that in the present case $`q_{a+}=q_a`$, for $`M_A=0`$. Integration over $`k`$, $`q_a=a^3𝑑kk^2q_a(k)/2\pi ^2`$, gives the charge densities $`q_1=q_2=2.4\times 10^5(\mu /a)^3`$. If $`q_1`$ was charged under $`B`$, our toy model would lead to successful baryogenesis.

4. Hybrid inflation in a supersymmetric Pati-Salam model. We shall now discuss the implementation of coherent baryogenesis in a more realistic model. In order to generate a baryon asymmetry which survives the sphaleron washout, we require the presence of ($`BL`$)-violation. This is the case in several GUTs, *e.g.* $`E(6)`$, a subgroup of which is $`SO(10)`$, and in the Pati-Salam group, $`G_{PS}=SU(4)_C\times SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$, which appears as an intermediate stage of breaking of $`SO(10)`$ down to the Standard Model. For simplicity, here we study an extension of the hybrid inflationary scenario embedded in a supersymmetric Pati-Salam model, which is considered in Jeannerot:2000sv  and does not suffer from the monopole problem. The relevant terms of the superpotential are

$`W`$ $``$ $`\kappa S\left(\overline{H}^cH^c\mu ^2\right)\beta S\left({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{H}^cH^c}{M_S}}\right)^2`$ (7)
$`+`$ $`\zeta GH^cH^c+\xi G\overline{H}^c\overline{H}^c.`$
Under $`G_{PS}`$, the fields transform as $`H^c=(\overline{\mathrm{𝟒}},\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟐})`$, $`\overline{H}^c=(\mathrm{𝟒},\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟐})`$, $`S=(\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟏})`$, $`G=(\mathrm{𝟔},\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟏})`$ Antoniadis:1988cm . We adopt the notation

$`H^c=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_{H1}^c& u_{H2}^c& u_{H3}^c& \nu _H^c\\ d_{H1}^c& d_{H2}^c& d_{H3}^c& e_H^c\end{array}\right),`$ (10)
and likewise for $`\overline{H}^c`$. With $`SU(4)_C`$ broken to the Standard Model, $`G=D+\overline{D}`$, with $`D=\mathrm{𝟑}`$ and $`\overline{D}=\overline{\mathrm{𝟑}}`$ of $`SU(3)_C`$. Vanishing of the D-terms requires $`H^c=\overline{H}^c`$, which we assume throughout this discussion. During inflation, the neutrino-like component $`\nu _H^c`$ of $`H^c`$ has the vacuum expectation value

$$|\nu _H^c|=M_S\left[\kappa /(2\beta )\right]^{\frac{1}{2}},$$
(11)
which evolves during the waterfall regime to the supersymmetric vacuum, where $`S=0`$ and

$`|\nu _H^c|=\left({\displaystyle \frac{\kappa M_S^2\left[\kappa M_S^2(\kappa M_S^24\beta \mu ^2)\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}}{2\beta }}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ (12)
All other components of $`H^c`$ as well as the fields $`G`$ vanish at all times. Thus, $`|H^c|^2=\overline{H}^cH^c=|\nu _H^c|^2`$, and eq. (7) implies the following scalar potential:

$`V`$ $`=`$ $`2\left|S\nu _H^c(\kappa 2\beta {\displaystyle \frac{|\nu _H^c|^2}{M_S^2}})\right|^2+\left|\kappa \left(|\nu _H^c|^2\mu ^2\right)\beta {\displaystyle \frac{|\nu _H^c|^4}{M_S^2}}\right|^2.`$
Numerically, we simulate the evolution of the scalar fields from the end of inflation until they settle to the supersymmetric vacuum. The choice of our parameters is listed in table 1, for a discussion of their implications for cosmic observations, see Ref. Senoguz:2003hc .

We let $`\nu _H^c`$ point in the real direction and remark, that not all constants can be made real by field redefinitions, thereby allowing a nontrivial phase between $`\zeta `$ and $`\xi `$. Note, that the substitution $`\zeta \xi ^{}`$ results in the opposite sign of $`BL`$ and $`B`$ and hence, when $`\zeta =\xi ^{}`$, there is no generation of $`BL`$. Furthermore, that $`M_S`$ is rather small is not an essential feature of the model, but was introduced to avoid large initial Higgs field amplitudes, which are unplesant to deal with numerically.

Eventually, $`\nu _H^c`$ condenses to the value given by (12) (cf. figure 3), and the field $`S`$ settles to zero. In this situation, the flavor oscillations between the Dirac fermions

$`\chi _{1j}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\psi _{d_{\overline{H}j}^c}\\ \overline{\psi }_{\overline{D}_j}\end{array}\right)\text{and}\chi _{2j}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\psi _{D_j}\\ \overline{\psi }_{d_{Hj}^c}\end{array}\right),`$ (17)
are scotched, since their mass term,

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\overline{\chi }_{1j}& \overline{\chi }_{2j}\end{array}\right)[`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{}\left[\nu _H^c\xi \right]& \frac{1}{2}m_d\\ \frac{1}{2}m_d& \mathrm{}\left[\nu _H^c\zeta \right]\end{array}\right)`$ (21)
$`+i\gamma ^5`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{}\left[\nu _H^c\xi \right]& \frac{i}{2}m_d\\ \frac{i}{2}m_d& \mathrm{}\left[\nu _H^c\zeta \right]\end{array}\right)`$ $`\left]\right(\begin{array}{c}\chi _{1j}\\ \chi _{2j}\end{array}),`$ (26)
where $`m_d=S\left(\kappa /2\beta |\nu _H^c|^2/M_S^2\right)`$, becomes diagonal.

Starting with initially zero fermions, we compute the charges $`q_{1j}(k)`$ and $`q_{2j}(k)`$ associated with $`\chi _{1j}`$ and $`\chi _{2j}`$, respectively, at the time when the phase transition is completed, by using (3), as shown in figure 4. Integration then yields $`q_1=q_2=1.0\times 10^5(\mu /a)^3`$, where we have already summed over the three colors, and where in our computation $`a120`$ during the phase transition.

In the presence of the $`(BL)`$-violating condensate of $`\overline{\nu }_H^c`$, the right handed neutrino $`\nu ^c`$ acquires a Majorana mass from the additional, nonrenormalizable contribution $`\gamma F^c\overline{H}^cF^c\overline{H}^c/M_S`$ to the superpotential (7), where $`F^c\overline{H}^c`$ form a gauge singlet, and $`F^c=(\overline{\mathrm{𝟒}},\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟐})`$ are the superfields containing the right handed quarks and leptons,

$`F^c=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_1^c& u_2^c& u_3^c& \nu ^c\\ d_1^c& d_2^c& d_3^c& e^c\end{array}\right).`$ (29)
This also gives rise to the Lagrangean terms

$`\gamma (\overline{\nu }_H^c/M_S)[\psi _{\nu ^c}\varphi _{d_j^c}\psi _{d_{\overline{H}j}^c}+\psi _{d_j^c}\varphi _{\nu ^c}\psi _{d_{\overline{H}j}^c}]+c.c.,`$
allowing the decay of the $`d_{\overline{H}j}^c`$-component of $`\chi _{1j}`$ in (17) to $`d^c+\nu ^c`$, where one of the latter particles is fermionic, the other scalar. The Majorana neutrinos $`\nu ^c`$ are their own antiparticles; neglecting the small effects induced by possible mixing angles and a $`CP`$-violating phase in the Majorana mass matrix familiar from leptogenesis scenarios Fukugita:1986hr ; Buchmuller:1996pa ; Giudice:1999fb ; Garcia-Bellido-Morales:2001 , their decay leaves behind no net charge. Note that in turn, our mechanism does not require any lower constraint on these angles and the phase as in leptogenesis.

The coupling $`\gamma _2F^cH^cF^cH^c/M_S`$ allows the decay of the $`H^c`$-fields through the reaction from the $`d_H^c`$-component of $`\chi _{2j}`$ in (17) to $`d^c+u^c`$. The charges hence get transformed to $`\left(BL\right)=\frac{1}{3}q_1\frac{2}{3}q_2`$. This number is promoted by sphaleron processes to $`B=(10/31)(BL)`$ Harvey:1990qw , where we assumed two complex Higgs doublets.

Hence, the final value of $`BL`$ arises here due to the transformation of other charges in decay processes. However, we point out, that models are conceivable where coherent particle production directly leads to standard model particles, the $`\left(BL\right)`$-charge of which is conserved in the subsequent history of the universe.

To obtain a lower bound on the baryon-to-photon ratio, we need an upper bound for the entropy, which can be obtained by assuming a complete and instantaneous conversion of the vacuum energy $`\varrho =[\kappa ^2M_S^2/(4\beta )\kappa \mu ^2]^2`$ into a thermal bath of highly relativistic particles, with the energy density $`\varrho =\pi ^2g^{}T^4/30`$, where $`g^{}=221.5`$ is the number of degrees of freedom in the MSSM. The entropy per unit volume is then $`s=2\pi ^2g^{}T^3/45`$, and we thus estimate the generated baryon-to-photon ratio to be $`B/n_\gamma 9.4\times 10^{10}`$. Also, a contribution from boson production may arise, which we do not consider here. Note that our result was obtained by choosing a small CP-violating phase (cf. table 1), indicating that there is an ample phase space of couplings, which leads to baryon production consistent with the observed $`B/n_\gamma =6.1\pm 0.3\times 10^{10}`$ Bennett:2003bz . In conclusion, we have demonstrated that coherent baryogenesis is a viable, efficient and natural candidate for the creation of the baryon asymmetry of the universe.


format: text

text:
# The BRST quantization and the no-ghost theorem for 𝐴𝑑𝑆₃

## 1 Introduction

Even though strings on curved backgrounds have been widely discussed in the last decade or so, rigorous discussion within string theory is very difficult. This is due to the lack of the string theory on general backgrounds, especially the no-ghost theorem. As is well-known, string theory generally contains negative norm states (ghosts) from timelike oscillators. However, they do not appear as physical states. This is well-established for string theory in flat spacetime. When the background spacetime is curved, things are not clear though. Standard proofs of the no-ghost theorem requires light-cone directions; if the background is written as $`\mathrm{IR}^{1,d1}\times K`$ with a unitary CFT $`K`$, $`d2`$. This is true both in the old covariant quantization (OCQ) and in the BRST quantization.

In our previous papers, we show the no-ghost theorem for $`d1`$ using the BRST quantization . (See Ref.  for the NSR string). Here, we extend our results to more general backgrounds. We point out that

* The vanishing theorem is valid if the matter Hilbert space is written as a direct product of two Verma modules (as in Theorem 4.1), one for a nonunitary $`c=1`$ CFT and another for the rest, which is assumed to be a unitary CFT.
* The no-ghost theorem is also valid for the above Hilbert space (under a certain condition. See Theorem 6.1.)

One particular example is $`AdS_3`$, so we establish the no-ghost theorem in the BRST quantization of $`AdS_3`$. We heavily use the previous results on the old covariant quantization of $`AdS_3`$ -. In particular, we impose the restriction on the $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ spin $`j`$ for the discrete series representations first proposed in Refs. , and we include the spectral flowed sectors first proposed in Ref. .

In the context of the OCQ, the no-ghost theorem for $`AdS_3`$ has been known . However, the foundation of the perturbative string theory lies in the BRST quantization, and the OCQ often needs to be justified from the underlying BRST quantization. We compare our proof with the proof in the OCQ and also establish the BRST-OCQ equivalence for $`AdS_3`$. It turns out that the key in both approaches is the certain structure of the Hilbert space mentioned above.\[Eq. (23) for the BRST quantization and Eq. (68) for the OCQ\]

The organization of the present paper is as follows. First, in the next section, we briefly review string theory on $`AdS_3`$. The full proof of the no-ghost theorem is rather involved, so we give the outline of the proof in Sec. 3. Section 4 and 5 are the discussion of the vanishing theorem and the no-ghost theorem for $`AdS_3`$, respectively. In Sec. 6, we present the no-ghost theorem in the most general form. We also discuss a time-dependent background of Ref.  where the background has ghosts in certain cases and explain how the background violates the assumptions of our theorem in those cases. In Sec. 7, we establish the BRST-OCQ equivalence for the backgrounds our no-ghost theorem applies. We summarize our notations and conventions of the BRST quantization in App. A. The presentation of the proof in our second paper  is slightly different from our first paper  although the proof itself is very similar; we will follow the style of our second paper.

## 2 Strings on $`AdS_3`$

$`AdS_3`$ with NS-NS flux is described by the $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ WZW model. In most applications, one tensors an internal CFT $`K^{}`$ and considers string theory on $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})\times K^{}`$. We follow the notations and the conventions of Ref.  with some minor changes.

The Kac-Moody algebra for $`sl(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ is

$$[J_m^a,J_n^b]=iϵ_c^{ab}J_{m+n}^c+\frac{k}{2}m\eta ^{ab}\delta _{m+n},$$
(1)
where $`k`$ is the level, $`ϵ^{123}=+1`$ and $`\eta ^{ab}=\text{diag}(+1,+1,1)`$. In terms of the modes $`J_n^\pm =J_n^1\pm iJ_n^2`$, the algebra is

$`[J_m^+,J_n^{}]=2J_{m+n}^3+km\delta _{m+n},`$ (2)
$`[J_m^\pm ,J_n^\pm ]=0,`$ (3)
$`[J_m^3,J_n^\pm ]=\pm J_{m+n}^\pm ,`$ (4)
$`[J_m^3,J_n^3]={\displaystyle \frac{k}{2}}m\delta _{m+n}.`$ (5)
The matter Virasoro generator

$`L_m^\mathrm{m}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\eta _{ab}\stackrel{}{}J_{mn}^aJ_n^b\stackrel{}{}`$ (6)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\stackrel{}{}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(J_{mn}^+J_n^{}+J_{mn}^{}J_n^+)J_{mn}^3J_n^3\right\}\stackrel{}{}`$
satisfies the Virasoro algebra with central charge

$$c_{SL(2,\mathrm{IR})}=\frac{3k}{k2}$$
(7)
and

$`[J_m^\pm ,L_n^\mathrm{m}]=mJ_{m+n}^\pm ,`$ (8)
$`[J_m^3,L_n^\mathrm{m}]=mJ_{m+n}^3.`$ (9)
We always assume $`k>2`$ to ensure a positive central charge as well as a single timelike direction. When there is no internal CFT $`K^{}`$, $`c_{SL(2,\mathrm{IR})}=26`$ so that $`k=52/23`$.

### 2.1 Unflowed representations

If the spectrum is bounded below, acting repeatedly with $`J_n^a(n>0)`$ always produces a Kac-Moody primary which is annihilated by $`J_n^a(n>0)`$. For the moment, let us suppose that this is the case and call these representations as “unflowed representations” (for the reason which will soon become clear.) For the WZW model, a Kac-Moody primary is also a Virasoro primary. A Kac-Moody primary forms a representation of the global $`sl(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ generated by the zero modes $`J_0^a`$. Then, the representations of the $`sl(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ current algebra are built over Kac-Moody primaries by applying $`J_n^a(n>0)`$ in all possible ways. There are five classes of the unitary representations of the global $`sl(2,\mathrm{IR})`$. They are characterized by the second Casimir $`c_2=\eta _{ab}J_0^aJ_0^b=j(j1)`$ and $`J_0^3=m`$:

1. Lowest weight discrete series:

$$𝒟_j^+=\{|j,m:m=j,j+1,j+2,\mathrm{}\},$$
(10)
where $`j>0`$ such that $`J_0^{}|j,j=0`$.
2. Highest weight discrete series:

$$𝒟_j^{}=\{|j,m:m=j,j1,j2,\mathrm{}\},$$
(11)
where $`j>0`$ such that $`J_0^+|j,j=0`$.
3. Principal continuous series:

$$𝒞_j^\alpha =\{|j,\alpha ,m:m=\alpha ,\alpha \pm 1,\alpha \pm 2,\mathrm{}\},$$
(12)
where $`0\alpha <1`$ and $`j=1/2+is`$, $`s>0`$.
4. Complementary (Supplementary) series:

$$_j^\alpha =\{|j,\alpha ,m:m=\alpha ,\alpha \pm 1,\alpha \pm 2,\mathrm{}\},$$
(13)
where $`0\alpha <1`$, $`1/2<j<1`$ and $`j1/2<|\alpha 1/2|`$.
5. Identity representation: trivial representation with $`j=0`$.

We always consider the universal cover of $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$; so, the spin $`j`$ is not restricted to be a half-integer or an integer. A complete basis for the square integrable functions on $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ is known from the harmonic analysis; they are given by the matrix elements of the first three representations $`𝒟_j^\pm `$ (with $`j>1/2`$) and $`𝒞_j^\alpha `$. Thus, we consider only those representations. We denote the representations of the full current algebra built over those zero mode representations by $`\widehat{𝒟}_j^\pm `$ and $`\widehat{𝒞}_j^\alpha `$.

Now, the on-shell condition at grade $`N`$ reduces to

$$\frac{j(j1)}{k2}+N+h=1.$$
(14)
Here, $`h0`$ is a conformal weight from the internal CFT $`K^{}`$. For the continuous series, this condition is satisfied only for $`N=0`$. By construction, they satisfy the other physical state conditions and they are unitary. Thus, only the discrete series are usually considered for the no-ghost theorem (for the unflowed representations.)

The no-ghost theorem for the background has been widely discussed using the OCQ -. In particular, Refs.  proved the theorem for $`\widehat{𝒟}_j^\pm `$ with the additional restriction on the spin $`j`$ for $`𝒟_j^\pm `$:

$$0<j<\frac{k}{2}.$$
(15)
We sketch the proof in App. B. The bound in turn implies that the grade is bounded above from the on-shell condition (14):

$$N+h<1+\frac{k}{4}$$
(16)
### 2.2 Flowed representations

It is proposed in Ref.  that these representations appeared in the last subsection are not the only representations appear in the WZW model. This idea was then revived in Ref.  and obtained physical significance. To see this, note that the current algebra is invariant under the following transformation:

$`\stackrel{~}{J}_n^3`$ $`=`$ $`J_n^3{\displaystyle \frac{k}{2}}w\delta _n,`$ (17)
$`\stackrel{~}{J}_n^+`$ $`=`$ $`J_{n+w}^+,`$ (18)
$`\stackrel{~}{J}_n^{}`$ $`=`$ $`J_{nw}^{}.`$ (19)
Then, the Virasoro generators $`L_m^\mathrm{m}`$ are related to $`\stackrel{~}{L}_m^\mathrm{m}`$ by

$$L_m^\mathrm{m}=\stackrel{~}{L}_m^\mathrm{m}w\stackrel{~}{J}_m^3\frac{k}{4}w^2\delta _m.$$
(20)
This transformation is known as the spectral flow. References  proposed to include the representations transformed by the spectral flow. Denote the resulting representations by $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\pm ,w}`$ and $`\widehat{𝒞}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\alpha ,w}`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{j}`$ labels the spin before the flow (Similarly, $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{N}`$). The on-shell condition becomes

$$L_0^\mathrm{m}=\frac{\stackrel{~}{j}(\stackrel{~}{j}1)}{k2}w\stackrel{~}{m}\frac{k}{4}w^2+\stackrel{~}{N}+h=1.$$
(21)
In general, $`L_0^\mathrm{m}`$ is not bounded below for the flowed representations. However, $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\pm ,w=1}=\widehat{𝒟}_{m\stackrel{~}{j}}^{}`$. Thus, in order for the discrete representations with $`j,\stackrel{~}{j}<1/2`$ not to appear, the spin $`j`$ has to satisfy the bound

$$\frac{1}{2}<j<\frac{k1}{2}.$$
(22)
Note that this bound is stronger than the bound (15), which is needed to show the no-ghost theorem. When $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\pm ,w}`$ saturates the lower bound of Eq. (22), $`\widehat{𝒞}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\alpha ,w}`$ appears; likewise when $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\pm ,w}`$ saturates the lower bound of Eq. (22), $`\widehat{𝒞}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\alpha ,w+1}`$ appears . The representations $`\widehat{𝒞}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\alpha ,w}`$ correspond to long strings .

Then, Ref.  shows the no-ghost theorem for the spectral flowed representations with the bound (15).

## 3 The outline of the proof

Now, we turn into the discussion of the no-ghost theorem in the BRST quantization. The full proof of the no-ghost theorem is rather involved and we will use our previous proofs. Thus, we briefly describe general structure of our proof here. The terminology appeared below is explained later. In general, the proof of the no-ghost theorem consists of 2 steps in the BRST quantization (Table 1).

* Step 1: The first is to show the vanishing theorem. The vanishing theorem states that the $`\widehat{Q}`$-cohomology is trivial except at the zero ghost number. This is done by choosing an appropriate filtration for your BRST operator $`\widehat{Q}`$. A filtration allows us to use a simplified BRST operator $`Q_0`$ and we can first study the cohomology of $`Q_0`$. If the $`Q_0`$-cohomology is trivial, so is the $`\widehat{Q}`$-cohomology (Lemma 3.1 of Ref. ); this is the reason why the filtration is so useful. However, the particular filtration used in standard proofs is also part of the reason why $`d2`$ in those proofs.
* Step 2: The second is to compute and compare the index and the signature of the cohomology group explicitly. If the index is equal to the signature, the no-ghost theorem holds provided the vanishing theorem is valid.

Step 1 and 2 themselves consist of several steps, which are explained in Sec. 4 and 5, respectively.

However, in our approach it is useful to have an additional step:

* Step 0: Write the matter Hilbert space in terms of products of two Verma modules, one for a nonunitary $`c=1`$ CFT and the other for a unitary CFT $`K`$.

Using this form of the Hilbert space, we have shown Step 1 or the vanishing theorem in our previous papers. (The $`d=1`$ case is a particular example.) So, the vanishing theorem for $`AdS_3`$ follows immediately if one can show Step 0 for $`AdS_3`$. This will be our main focus in the next section. Then, we will show Step 2 in Sec. 5.

Incidentally, to establish Step 1 in our previous works, we do not use the standard filtration, but use the filtration introduced by Frenkel, Garland, and Zuckerman . In our approach, the proof refers only to the matter Virasoro generators themselves. This is convenient when one discusses general spacetime backgrounds such as $`AdS_3`$.

## 4 The vanishing theorem for string theory

We start with our vanishing theorem . Let $`𝒱(c,h)`$ be a Verma module with highest weight $`h`$ and central charge $`c`$. Then,

###### Theorem 4.1 (The vanishing theorem for string theory).

The $`\widehat{Q}`$-cohomology can be non-zero only at zero ghost number if the matter part of the Hilbert space $``$ can be decomposed as a sum of the following two Verma modules:

$$_{h^0,h^K}=𝒱(c^0=1,h^0<0)𝒱(c^K=25,h^K>0).$$
(23)
(Or more generally, the $`c^0=1`$ part is written as nondegenerate Verma modules.)

Here, the restriction on the weights $`h^0`$ and $`h^K`$ comes in order for the Verma modules to form the basis of the $`c^0=1`$ nonunitary CFT and the $`c^K=25`$ unitary CFT, respectively. Thus, the vanishing theorem follows immediately once one establishes that the theory in question has the Hilbert space in the form of Eq. (23), which is Step 0 of Sec. 3.

The proof of this vanishing theorem consists of three steps (Table 2):

* Step 1.1: Apply our filtration á la Frenkel, Garland, and Zuckerman (Ref.; Eq. (35) of Ref. ). With FGZ’s filtration, the simplified BRST operator $`Q_0`$ can be further decomposed as a sum of two differentials, $`d^{}`$ and $`d^{\prime \prime }`$. This decomposition is crucial for the proof; it reduces the problem to the $`d^{}`$-cohomology, and $`d^{}`$ acts only on the $`c^0=1`$ part and the $`b`$ ghost part. This is the reason why the proof does not require $`d2`$.
* Step 1.2: If the $`d^{}`$-cohomology is trivial, so is the $`Q_0`$-cohomology. This follows from a Künneth formula. Then, the $`\widehat{Q}`$-cohomology is trivial as well from the general property of filtration.
* Step 1.3: Now, the problem is reduced to the $`d^{}`$-cohomology. Show the vanishing theorem for the $`d^{}`$-cohomology.

See Refs.  for the actual proof.

In addition to the vanishing theorem, we have actually established a stronger statement in the paper:

###### Theorem 4.2 (FP-ghost decoupling theorem).

Physical states do not contain Fadeev-Popov ghosts if $``$ is decomposed as in Eq. (23).

Although the theorem itself is not necessary to establish the no-ghost theorem, it is useful to establish, e.g., the BRST-OCQ equivalence (Sec. 7).

We discuss the examples where our vanishing theorem can be applied. Again, one merely has to check that a theory has the Hilbert space in the form of Eq. (23).

### 4.1 $`d=1`$ case

For $`\mathrm{IR}^{1,d1}\times K(d=1)`$, choose the $`c^0=1`$ CFT as a CFT generated by the timelike oscillators $`\alpha _m^0`$. The isomorphism

$$\text{Fock}(\alpha _m^0,;k^0)𝒱(1,h^0)\text{if }h^0=\alpha ^{}k^2<0$$
(24)
can be easily shown using the Kac determinant for $`c^0=1`$ (Eq. (45) in Ref. ). The CFT $`K`$ is a unitary CFT, so $`h^K>0`$.

### 4.2 Flat spacetime or $`d2`$ cases

Again, choose the $`c^0=1`$ CFT as a CFT generated by the timelike oscillators $`\alpha _m^0`$. The $`c^K=25`$ CFT is a product of the CFT generated by $`\alpha _m^i`$ and a unitary CFT $`K^{}`$. When $`(k^i)^2>0`$, the $`c^K=25`$ CFT can be written in terms of Verma modules with $`h^K>0`$ , so reduces to the $`d=1`$ case.

### 4.3 $`AdS_3`$

The Hilbert space of the $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ WZW model can also be decomposed as in Eq. (23) under the restriction on the spin (15). This construction of the Hilbert space has been done in Refs. ; it was discussed in order to prove the no-ghost theorem for $`AdS_3`$ in the context of the old covariant quantization.

Choose the $`c^0=1`$ CFT as a CFT generated by $`J_n^3`$, which corresponds to the timelike $`U(1)`$:

$$L_m^0=\frac{1}{k}\underset{n}{}\stackrel{}{}J_{mn}^3J_n^3\stackrel{}{}.$$
(25)
Also, define

$$L_m^K=L_m^\mathrm{m}L_m^0.$$
(26)
By construction, $`L_m^K`$ commute with $`J_n^3`$ and thus with $`L_n^0`$. Thus, as far as Virasoro generators are concerned, the $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ WZW model can be decomposed as

$$U(1)\times SL(2,\mathrm{IR})/U(1)$$
(27)
with the Hilbert space consisting of all states of the form

$$L_{m_1}^0L_{m_2}^0\mathrm{}L_{m_M}^0L_{n_1}^KL_{n_2}^K\mathrm{}L_{n_N}^K|h^0|h^K,$$
(28)
where $`m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_M`$ and $`n_1n_2\mathrm{}n_N`$. Thus, we regard the coset part as $`K`$. When there is an internal CFT $`K^{}`$, we include it as a part of $`K`$. Note that even though we write $`U(1)\times SL(2,\mathrm{IR})/U(1)`$, it does not mean that the $`U(1)`$ part is completely separated from the coset part as a direct product; the $`J_0^3`$-value for the Virasoro primaries must be common in both.

Since such a construction of the Hilbert space is fairly standard , here we merely check that the weights $`h^0`$ and $`h^K`$ are as in Eq. (23). We discuss the unflowed and flowed representations separately.

(i) Unflowed representations: The $`c^0=1`$ CFT has

$$h^0=\frac{m^2}{k}0.$$
(29)
Thus, the CFT can be written in terms of the Verma modules $`𝒱(c^0=1,h^0<0)`$ except $`m=0`$ states. However, there is no on-shell state with $`m=0`$ except a few states, which have zero ghost number and have positive norm, so they do not affect the vanishing theorem and the no-ghost theorem . The coset can also be written in terms of the Verma modules $`𝒱(c^K=25,h^K>0)`$. For representations $`\widehat{𝒟}_j^+`$, this is possible if the spin $`j`$ satisfies the bound (15) . If the Virasoro primary $`|h^K`$ is at grade $`M`$ of $`\widehat{𝒟}_j^+`$,

$`h^K`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{j(j1)}{k2}}+M+{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{k}}+h`$ (30)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2j(k/2j)}{k(k2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{k}}({\displaystyle \frac{k}{2}}j)+{\displaystyle \frac{2j}{k}}(j+m+M)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}(jm)^2+h>0`$
since $`k>0`$, $`j>0`$, $`k/2j>0`$, $`j+m+M0`$, and $`h0`$. Here, the bound $`j+m+M0`$ comes from the $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ Clebsh-Gordon decomposition: the spin at grade $`M`$ is from $`jM`$ to $`j+M`$. Note that $`m`$ here is the total $`J_0^3`$-value, not the $`J_0^3`$-value for $`𝒟_j^+`$. The weight $`h^K`$ is non-negative because the coset is unitary under the bound .

(ii) Flowed representations: The discussion for the flowed representations $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{+,w}`$ and $`\widehat{𝒞}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\alpha ,w}`$ is similar. For the flowed representations,

$`L_0^0`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{L}_0^0w\stackrel{~}{J}_0^3{\displaystyle \frac{k}{4}}w^2,`$ (31)
$`L_0^K`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{L}_0^\mathrm{m}\stackrel{~}{L}_0^0=\stackrel{~}{L}_0^\mathrm{K}.`$ (32)
The $`c^0=1`$ CFT can be written in terms of the Verma modules since

$$h^0=\frac{m^2}{k}=\frac{(\stackrel{~}{m}+\frac{k}{2}w)^2}{k}0.$$
(33)
Again the $`m=0`$ state may be problematic, but one can check that there is no $`m=0`$ on-shell state except the ground state . The coset can also be written in terms of the Verma modules since

$$h^K=\frac{\stackrel{~}{j}(\stackrel{~}{j}1)}{k2}+\stackrel{~}{M}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{m}^2}{k}+h>0$$
(34)
for $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{+,w}`$ and

$$h^K=\frac{\stackrel{~}{s}^2+\frac{1}{4}}{k2}+\stackrel{~}{M}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{m}^2}{k}+h>0$$
(35)
for $`\widehat{𝒞}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\alpha ,w}`$.

## 5 The no-ghost theorem for $`AdS_3`$

In order to show the no-ghost theorem, the notion of signature is useful. For a vector space $`V`$ with an inner product, we can choose a basis $`e_a`$ such that $`e_a|e_b=\delta _{ab}C_a,`$ where $`C_a\{0,\pm 1\}`$. Then, the signature of $`V`$ is defined as $`\text{sign}(V)=_aC_a`$. If $`\text{sign}(V)=\text{dim}(V)`$, all the $`C_a`$ are 1, so $`V`$ has positive definite norm. Then, the statement of the no-ghost theorem is equivalent to

$$\text{tr}_{\mathrm{obs}}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{mass}}}C=\text{tr}_{\mathrm{obs}}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{mass}}},$$
(36)
where $`q=e^{2\pi i\tau }`$, the trace “$`\text{tr}_{\mathrm{obs}}`$” is taken over the observable Hilbert space, and the operator $`C`$ gives eigenvalues $`C_a`$. Here, $`L_0^{\mathrm{mass}}`$ is the “mass” term in $`L_0`$ ,i.e., the $`L_0`$-eigenvalue for the ground state \[$`\alpha ^{}k^2`$ for the flat spacetime and $`c_2/(k2)`$ for $`AdS_3`$\]. Using the on-shell condition

$$L_0|\varphi =(L_0^{\mathrm{mass}}+L_0^{\mathrm{osc}})|\varphi =0$$
(37)
($`L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}`$ counts the total grades.), Eq. (36) becomes

$$\text{tr}_{\mathrm{obs}}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}C=\text{tr}_{\mathrm{obs}}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}.$$
(38)
Equation (38) can be shown with 3 steps (Table 3). This has been done repeatedly for $`d2`$ in Refs. . Step 2.1 and 2.2 make use of the BRST quartet mechanism and Step 2.1 uses the vanishing theorem as well. Step 2.3 can be done by explicitly calculating the both sides. Once one establishes the vanishing theorem, the only nontrivial step is Step 2.3, i.e., to show

$$\text{tr}_\widehat{}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}C=\text{tr}_\widehat{}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}()^{\widehat{N}^g}.$$
(39)
Note that the trace weighted by $`()^{\widehat{N}^g}`$ is an index.

For the $`AdS_3`$ case, we also make use of closely related quantities:

$$\text{tr}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}C,\text{tr}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}()^{\widehat{N}^g},$$
(40)
where the trace “tr” is taken over the Hilbert space $``$. These are essentially weighted characters of the Virasoro algebra. The difference between $`\widehat{}`$ and $``$ is that the latter does not impose the on-shell condition.

### 5.1 Flat spacetime or $`d2`$ cases

In standard proofs, one explicitly computes the timelike, longitudinal oscillator parts and the $`(b,c)`$ ghosts part. Then, one gets

$$\text{tr}_\widehat{}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}C=\text{tr}_\widehat{}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}()^{\widehat{N}^g}=\text{tr}__Kq^{L_0^K1}.$$
(41)
Here, $`K`$ is the product of a transverse CFT and a unitary CFT $`K^{}`$. This also shows the equivalence with the light-cone spectra.

### 5.2 $`d1`$ cases

In our previous papers, we pointed out that the standard proof is also valid for $`d=1`$ by computing the $`c^0=1`$ part and the $`(b,c)`$ ghosts part if the vanishing theorem is valid for $`d=1`$. Then, one gets

$`\text{tr}_\widehat{}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}C=\text{tr}_\widehat{}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}()^{\widehat{N}^g}`$ $`=`$ $`q^1{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}(1q^m)\text{tr}__Kq^{L_0^K}`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`\eta (\tau )\text{tr}__Kq^{L_0^K\frac{c^K}{24}},`$
where $`\eta (\tau )`$ is the Dedekind eta function.

### 5.3 $`AdS_3`$

In general, the computation of the index and signature may not be easy and one needs to take an orthonormal basis for the signature. However, for the $`AdS_3`$ case, the $`c^0=1`$ part is written in terms of a free CFT and the coset is unitary just like $`K`$. Then, the situation is the same as the $`d=1`$ case and the computation is essentially the same. Thus, we mainly discuss some minor complications specific to $`AdS_3`$.

The Hilbert space consists of a sum of Verma modules of the form (28). We consider the index and the signature for each Verma module with given $`h^0`$ and $`h^K`$. Only positive $`h^K`$ is considered since the no-ghost theorem is expected to hold only for this case. The following basis is taken for Step 2.3:

* $`U(1)`$ part: $`J_n^3`$
* The coset part: the basis (28), which is further diagonalized (although we do not have to compute it explicitly.)

It is important here that we take the basis (28), not $`J_n^a`$ since $`J_n^3`$ do not commute with $`J_n^a`$.

First, let us consider the weighted $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ characters (40). For all the representations we consider,

$$\text{tr}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}()^{\widehat{N}^g}=\eta (\tau )\text{tr}_{_K(h^K>0)}q^{L_0^K\frac{c^K}{24}}.$$
(43)
Here, $`\text{tr}_{_K(h^K>0)}`$ is taken over the Hilbert space $`_K`$ with a given $`h^K>0`$. For flowed representations, one had better use $`\stackrel{~}{L}_0^\mathrm{m}`$ instead of $`L_0^\mathrm{m}`$ for the exponent of $`q`$; otherwise, powers of $`q`$ are not directly related to the mass. However, it is sufficient to use $`L_0^\mathrm{m}`$ for our purpose.

The above weighted character (43) takes the trace over $``$, whereas the index (39) takes the trace over $`\widehat{}`$. Thus, the weighted character does not really represent the dimension of physical space. The on-shell condition needs to be imposed in order to get the dimension from Eq. (43). This gives rise to two issues. First of all, given a series of representations for $`AdS_3`$, the on-shell condition may not be satisfied for all grades. For the flat spacetime, the on-shell condition is always satisfied by choosing momentum $`k^\mu `$ appropriately. However, in general this may not be the case, and this is not the case for $`AdS_3`$. For example, a continuous representation $`\widehat{𝒞}_j^\alpha `$ typically appears only at the ground state $`N=0`$ when $`k>2`$.

Second, for the discrete series $`\widehat{𝒟}_j^+`$ and $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{+,w}`$, one must impose the bound (15). The bound in turn implies that the grade is bounded above (16) from the on-shell condition. Thus, the weighted character can be interpreted as the dimension at a particular grade if the grade is consistent with the on-shell condition and the bound. In other words, even though we sum over all the grades in the character, the full spectrum implied from the character does not appear as physical states. However, these are minor points since weighted characters for $`AdS_3`$ are the same even before we impose the on-shell condition \[See (45)\].

Now, for the character weighted by $`C`$,

$$\text{tr}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}C=\eta (\tau )\text{tr}_{_K(h^K>0)}q^{L_0^K\frac{c^K}{24}},$$
(44)
where we used the unitarity of the $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})/U(1)`$ coset for $`h^K>0`$ . Comparing Eqs. (43) and (44), we get

$$\text{tr}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}C=\text{tr}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}()^{\widehat{N}^g}.$$
(45)
Then, taking the on-shell condition into account, we established

$$\text{tr}_\widehat{}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}C=\text{tr}_\widehat{}q^{L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}}()^{\widehat{N}^g}.$$
(46)
Note that the timelike direction cancels with one of the FP-ghost contribution in Eq. (43), but the character still has a factor of $`\eta (\tau )`$. Consequently, the dimension of the physical Hilbert space is smaller than the Hilbert space of $`K`$ (by the dimension of a nondegenerate $`c=1`$ Verma module). This is because null states arise by tensoring the $`c^0=1`$ CFT and $`K`$. In the OCQ language, this means that the physical spectrum includes neither timelike oscillators nor OCQ-null states and consists only of DDF states (App. B).

One would recognize that the character (43) is in fact part of the full $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ characters (times the FP-ghost contribution); e.g., see Appendix B of Ref. . One way to obtain the modular invariant partition function from the character is as follows <sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1Also, see Refs.  and Refs. -.: First, sum over the $`J_0^3`$-eigenvalue with weight $`z^{J_0^3}`$. The weight is necessary to avoid the divergence which arises due to the infinite degeneracy of zero mode representations. Next, take the “diagonal combination” of character with the anti-holomorphic part. Then, sum over all the representations. Finally, take into account the chiral anomaly. The partition function obtained in this way is identical to the one computed for $`SL(2,C)/SU(2)`$ model , which is expected to be related to the $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})`$ model by some Euclidean rotation.

## 6 The no-ghost theorem for string theory

We saw that the vanishing theorem is valid not only for $`d=1`$, but also valid as long as the matter part of the Hilbert space $``$ is written as a sum of two Verma modules:

$$_{h^0,h^K}=𝒱(c^0=1,h^0<0)𝒱(c^K=25,h^K>0).$$
(47)
Moreover, the no-ghost theorem is valid for such a Hilbert space as well. To see this, note that the isomorphism (24) works in both directions. In one direction, we can use the isomorphism to write the $`c^0=1`$ Fock space in terms of a Verma module, but given a Hilbert space $``$ in terms of Verma modules as in Eq. (47), one can take the basis of a nonunitary free boson $`\alpha _m^0`$ for the $`c^0=1`$ part. Then, the proof of the no-ghost theorem is essentially the same as the $`d=1`$ or $`AdS_3`$ case.

There is one difference however. The computation of the signature assumes that Virasoro primaries $`|h^0`$ have positive-definite norm. This is trivial for the $`d=1`$ case; the Virasoro primaries in this case are just $`|k^0`$. However, this point is nontrivial in general and one has to check this point separately. This is similar to the requirement in the OCQ that DDF states have positive-definite norm. Thus, we arrives at the following theorem:

###### Theorem 6.1 (The no-ghost theorem for string theory).

$`\widehat{}_{\mathrm{obs}}`$ is a positive definite space (i) if the matter part of the Hilbert space $``$ is decomposed as in Eq. (23), and (ii) if the Virasoro primaries $`|h^0`$ used to construct the $`c^0=1`$ Verma module have positive-definite norm.

Let us expand condition (ii) more (in the OCQ language). If there were a Virasoro primary in the $`c^0=1`$ part other than a ground state, it would imply that the primary is the Virasoro primary under the full Virasoro algebra. The only case that this is not a OCQ-physical state is when this is a null state, but we assume that there is no such null state in condition (i). Then, the timelike direction is not decoupled and there is a physical state with the timelike polarization. This does not necessarily mean that the theory is problematic. However, if the norm of such a Virasoro primary is not positive-definite, it would imply the violation of the no-ghost theorem.

It is instructive to see backgrounds with ghosts and see how these backgrounds violate the assumptions of our no-ghost theorem. The Lorentzian orbifold $`\mathrm{IR}^{1,\stackrel{~}{d}}/𝐙_2`$ is an example . In certain cases, this example contains ghosts, so our no-ghost theorem should not apply. This example does not satisfy our no-ghost theorem partly because it violates condition (ii) of Theorem 6.1. They consider the spacetime under the following action (For simplicity, consider the bosonic string.):

$$X^aX^a(a=0,\mathrm{},\stackrel{~}{d}),X^iX^i(i=\stackrel{~}{d}+1,\mathrm{},25)$$
(48)
They found a ghost when $`\stackrel{~}{d}7`$ and we focus on these cases. In the twisted sector, $`X^a`$ are antiperiodic; so there is no momentum $`k^a`$ and the zero-point energy is shifted. Thus,

$`h^0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}+M>0,`$ (49)
$`h^K`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^{}(k^i)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{d}}{16}}+M^{}>0,`$ (50)
where Virasoro primaries $`|h^0,|h^K`$ are assumed to be at grade $`M,M^{}`$, respectively. Thus, the matter Hilbert space is not decomposed as in Eq. (23), but one can still form the $`c^0=1`$ Hilbert space by Verma modules since the resulting Kac determinant has no zeros. In fact, the character for the $`c=1`$ twisted sector is decomposed in terms of a free boson character $`\eta (\tau )^1`$:

$`\chi _{c=1,h=\frac{1}{16}}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`q^{\frac{1}{48}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1q^{m\frac{1}{2}})^1`$ (51)
$`=`$ $`q^{\frac{1}{16}}\eta (\tau )^1{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}q^{\frac{n(n1)}{4}}`$
$`=`$ $`q^{\frac{1}{16}}\eta (\tau )^1(1+q^{\frac{1}{2}}+q^{\frac{3}{2}}+\mathrm{}).`$
However, the $`c^0=1`$ Hilbert space does not satisfy the condition (ii) of Theorem 6.1. For example, the Hilbert space contains a Verma module constructed from a Virasoro primary $`\alpha _{1/2}^0|0`$ and this gives rise to negative-norm states. \[The primary corresponds to the $`q^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ term in Eq. (51).\]

Also, one can write each $`c^0=1`$ Verma module in terms of a free boson basis, but the resulting free boson basis is unitary since the $`c^0=1`$ part has positive $`h^0`$. (The nonunitarity of the model comes from the nonunitarity of the Virasoro primaries.) The weighted characters for this background (40) are not the same due to these two reasons.

Fortunately, for the Lorentzian orbifold, both $`h^0`$ and $`h^K`$ are positive so that there is only finite number of on-shell states; physical spectrum can be computed explicitly and there is no ghost when $`\stackrel{~}{d}>7`$.

## 7 BRST-OCQ equivalence

For string theory on curved backgrounds, one often uses the OCQ. The purpose of this section is to establish the connection between the BRST quantization discussed here and the OCQ. The BRST-OCQ equivalence is well-established for the flat case. When the background is curved, the equivalence may not hold although it is certainly likely. Here, we prove the BRST-OCQ equivalence for the backgrounds where Theorem 6.1 hold. We sketch the standard textbook proof  emphasizing the necessary assumptions and the differences from the standard case. As is clear from below, the proof requires the following assumptions:

1. The BRST version of the no-ghost theorem
2. For each physical state, there is an equivalent class where the FP-ghost sector is in ghost vacuum $`|`$.

What we have to show is that there is a map which maps the OCQ equivalence classes to the BRST equivalence classes, and the map is both one-to-one and onto. Let $`|\psi `$ be a state in the matter Hilbert space of the OCQ. Associate a state

$`|\psi ,`$ (52)
from the Hilbert space in the BRST quantization. Then, the proof consists of 4 steps.

* Step 1: OCQ physical state $``$ BRST closed state
Show that each OCQ physical state maps to a BRST-closed state. This follows from

$$Q|\psi ,=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_n(L_n^\mathrm{m}\delta _n)|\psi ,.$$
(53)
* Step 2: Equivalent OCQ states $``$ Equivalent BRST states
Show that if $`|\psi `$ and $`|\psi ^{}`$ are equivalent OCQ physical states, they map into the same BRST class:

$$|\psi ,|\psi ^{},=Q|\chi .$$
(54)
The state is a BRST-closed state from Step 1 and has a zero norm since $`|\psi |\psi ^{}`$ is OCQ-null. From the no-ghost theorem (BRST), a zero-norm closed state must be exact. So, this step uses the no-ghost theorem.
* Step 3: The map is one-to-one, i.e., Equivalent OCQ states $``$ Equivalent BRST states.
The converse to Step 2. Show that $`|\psi |\psi ^{}`$ is OCQ null if Eq. (54) holds. One expands $`|\chi `$ in terms of excitations over the ghost ground state, substitute it into Eq. (54), and compare the both sides.
* Step 4: The map is onto.
Show that every BRST class contains at least one state of the form (52). In our case, this follows from the FP-ghost decoupling theorem (Theorem 4.2).

We have therefore established the no-ghost theorem in the OCQ, for the backgrounds which satisfy Theorem 6.1, in particular for $`AdS_3`$. In fact, one can actually show the no-ghost theorem in the OCQ directly under the same assumption as the BRST quantization . Specifically, as discussed in App. B, the proof requires that

* The Hilbert space is written as in Eq. (23).

This assumption is the same as ours.

## Note Added

While this paper is in preparation, we received a preprint by Pakman  which has some overlap with the present paper. The no-ghost theorem on a generic spacetime has been also discussed in Ref. .

###### Acknowledgments.

We would like to thank Vijay Balasubramanian, Mirjam Cvetic, Yang-Hui He, Asad Naqvi, Burt Ovrut, and Joe Polchinski. We would especially like to thank Mitsuhiro Kato for continuous help throughout our projects and Yuji Satoh for useful discussions and for various comments on the draft. M.N. would like to thank theoretical high energy physics group at Univ. of Pennsylvania for the kind hospitality where this work was carried out. The research of M.A. was supported in part by the fellowship from Soryushi Shogakukai. The research of M.N. was supported in part by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (13740167) and the Oversea Research Fellowship from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan.

## Appendix A Notations and conventions

We use the notations and conventions of Refs. . We assume that the total $`L_m`$ of the theory is given by

$$L_m=\underset{L_m^\mathrm{m}}{\underset{}{L_m^0+L_m^K}}+L_m^g.$$
(55)
We assume that $`K`$ is a unitary CFT and all states in $`K`$ lie in highest weight representations.

The ghost number operator $`\widehat{N}^g`$ is normalized so that $`\widehat{N}^g|=0`$ since the ghost zero modes will not matter to our discussion.

We will call the total Hilbert space $`_{\mathrm{total}}`$, but it is useful to define the following subspaces:

$``$ $`=`$ $`\{\varphi _{\mathrm{total}}:b_0\varphi =0\},`$ (56)
$`\widehat{}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\varphi _{\mathrm{total}}:b_0\varphi =L_0\varphi =0\}.`$ (57)
The physical state conditions are

$$Q|\text{phys}=0,b_0|\text{phys}=0,L_0|\text{phys}=0.$$
(58)
Thus, we will consider the cohomology on $`\widehat{}`$; $`Q`$ takes $`\widehat{}`$ into itself. The Hilbert space $`\widehat{}`$ is classified according to mass eigenvalues. The on-shell condition is written as

$$L_0|\varphi =(L_0^{\mathrm{mass}}+L_0^{\mathrm{osc}})|\varphi =0,$$
(59)
where $`L_0^{\mathrm{mass}}`$ is the “mass” term in $`L_0`$ ,i.e., the $`L_0`$-eigenvalue for the ground state \[$`\alpha ^{}k^2`$ for the flat spacetime and $`c_2/(k2)`$ for $`AdS_3`$\], and $`L_0^{\mathrm{osc}}`$ counts the total grade.

Decompose the BRST operator $`Q`$ in terms of ghost zero modes:

$$Q=\widehat{Q}+(\text{terms in }Q\text{ with ghost zero modes}).$$
(60)
Then, for a state $`|\varphi \widehat{}`$,

$$Q|\varphi =\widehat{Q}|\varphi .$$
(61)
Therefore, the physical state condition reduces to

$$\widehat{Q}|\varphi =0.$$
(62)
Also, $`\widehat{Q}^2=0`$ on $`\widehat{}`$ from Eq. (61). Thus, $`\widehat{Q}`$ defines a BRST complex, which is called the relative BRST complex. So, we can define $`\widehat{}_\mathrm{c},\widehat{}_\mathrm{e}\widehat{}`$ by

$$\widehat{Q}\widehat{}_\mathrm{c}=0,\widehat{}_\mathrm{e}=\widehat{Q}\widehat{},$$
(63)
and define the relative BRST cohomology of $`Q`$ by

$$\widehat{}_{\mathrm{obs}}=\widehat{}_\mathrm{c}/\widehat{}_\mathrm{e}.$$
(64)
## Appendix B The no-ghost theorem in the OCQ: $`d=1`$ and $`AdS_3`$ cases

Here, we sketch the proof for $`d=1`$ and $`AdS_3`$ in the old covariant quantization. This has been done in Refs. . The original proof of Goddard-Thorn  itself does not hold for these cases, but one can extend to these cases via minor modifications. We first give the general strategy in Sec. B.1 which consists of 3 steps, then discuss the flat spacetime, $`d=1`$ case, $`AdS_3`$, general case separately in Sec. B.2.

### B.1 General strategy

* Step 1: The states of the form

$$L_{m_1}^\mathrm{m}L_{m_2}^\mathrm{m}\mathrm{}K_{n_1}K_{n_2}\mathrm{}|f,$$
(65)
form a complete basis of the Hilbert space $`_{\mathrm{OCQ}}`$, where

$$K_n|f=L_n^\mathrm{m}|f=0(n1).$$
(66)
Here, $`|f`$ is the generalization of DDF states. In the end, DDF states span physical space, so suppose that $``$ is known to be unitary. Also, $`K_n`$ is a generalization of the light-cone operator in Goddard-Thorn’s proof. We thus choose $`K_n`$ which satisfy

$$[K_m,L_n^\mathrm{m}]=mK_{m+n}.$$
(67)
However, we do not impose $`[K_m,K_n]=0`$ unlike Goddard-Thorn’s proof; we assume that $`K_n`$ are nondegenerate.

The outline of the proof: The proof begins with mapping the above states to the states of the form

$$L_{m_1}^KL_{m_2}^K\mathrm{}K_{n_1}K_{n_2}\mathrm{}|f,$$
(68)
where $`L_m^K=L_m^\mathrm{m}L_m^0`$. $`L_m^0`$ contains the timelike part and defines a nonunitary $`c^0=1`$ CFT. $`L_m^K`$ defines a Virasoro algebra with $`c^K=25`$. Then, the proof uses the fact that the Kac determinant for $`c^K=25`$ is nonvanishing for $`h^K>0`$. Note that this basis of the Hilbert space (68) is basically the same as the one in the BRST quantization (28).
* Step 2: From Step 1, a physical state $`|\varphi `$ can be written as

$$|\varphi =|s+|k.$$
(69)
$`|s`$ is a spurious state and $`|k𝒦`$ is a state with no $`L_m^\mathrm{m}`$’s. If $`|\varphi `$ is physical, then $`|s`$ and $`|k`$ are physical as well. A consequence is that $`|s`$ is a null state and $`|\varphi ^2=|k^2`$.

The outline of the proof: The proof directly follows from Goddard-Thorn’s proof.
* Step 3: If $`|k`$ is physical, then $`|k=|f`$. Thus,

$$|\varphi ^2=|k^2=|f^2.$$
(70)
So, the space of physical states is unitary if $``$ is unitary.

The outline of the proof: The proof uses the isomorphism of $`𝒦`$ with a $`c^0=1`$ Verma modules and that the Kac determinant for $`c^0=1`$ is nonvanishing for $`h^0<0`$. Since the Kac determinant is nonvanishing, there is no Virasoro primaries in the Verma modules other than $`|f`$.

### B.2 Examples

* Flat spacetime or $`d2`$ case: Originally, Goddard and Thorn  choose

$$K_n=k_0\alpha _n,$$
(71)
where $`k_0`$ is a specific light-cone vector. (The above proof for Step 1 does not apply to this case, but this step can be shown using the technique of Goddard and Thorn  or of Thorn .) Then, one can immediately conclude that $`|\varphi ^2=|f^2`$ after Step 2 from $`[K_m,K_n]=0`$ and $`K_n|f=0`$. However, one needs $`d2`$ to define $`k_0`$.
* $`d1`$ case: As pointed out in Refs. , one can alternatively choose

$$K_n=\alpha _n^0.$$
(72)
Then, $`K_n`$ do not commute, but Step 3 assures $`|\varphi ^2=|f^2`$.
* $`AdS_3`$: One can choose

$$K_n=J_n^3.$$
(73)
For the discrete representation $`\widehat{𝒟}_j^\pm `$ and their flowed representations $`\widehat{𝒟}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\pm ,w}`$, Step 1 to 3 follow with the bound on the spin $`j`$ (15) since $`h^K>0`$ only within the bound . On the other hand, for the continuous representations $`\widehat{𝒞}_{\stackrel{~}{j}}^{\alpha ,w}`$, this condition on the weight is always valid. Note that $`J_n^3|f=0`$ by construction, so $``$ is a subspace of the coset $`SL(2,\mathrm{IR})/U(1)`$. The coset has been shown to be unitary within the bound of $`j`$ in Ref. .
* General cases: As one can see, the proof is equally valid as long as one can isolate the timelike part as a $`c^0=1`$ CFT, and if the basis of the Hilbert space $`_{\mathrm{OCQ}}`$ is written as in Eq. (68) or a sum of two Verma modules:

$$_{h^0,h^K}=𝒱(c^0=1,h^0<0)𝒱(c^K=25,h^K>0).$$
(74)
Note that this is the same as the requirement in the BRST quantization (23). In general, the operator $`K_n`$ can be constructed by choosing a free boson basis due to the isomorphism (24).


text:
# Schemes for loading a Bose–Einstein condensate into a two-dimensional dipole trap

## I Introduction

Bose–Einstein condensates (BEC) of alkali atoms BEC  as sources of coherent matter waves are of considerable interest in atom optics and interferometry. The first atom interferometry experiment using a BEC was performed in 1997 Ketterle97 . Since then, interferometry has been used to probe the condensate coherence length Esslinger00 , to give a signature for the Mott insulator transition in an optical lattice Esslinger02  and to test restricted geometry effects Ertmer01 . This last example is a witness to the increasing interest in BEC in reduced dimensions Ketterle01 .

The 2DEG (two-dimensional electron gas) is a very rich system in condensed matter physics, giving rise for example to the fractional quantum Hall effect FQHE  and to anyonic quasi-particles anyons . It is also a convenient medium for electronic interferometry Buks98 . By analogy, a 2DAG (two-dimensional atomic gas) would give access to a new regime of quantum degeneracy Bagnato91 . Most of the theoretical work investigating this field predicts specific phenomena not encountered in the 3D geometry, such as a progressive coherence below a critical temperature and a modification of the mean field interaction Petrov01 . The realization of a 2D condensate is also a preliminary step for the production and the manipulation of anyonic quasi-particles Cirac01 . Finally integrated atom optics, where the matter waves can be guided in an arbitrary way, represents an important technological challenge.

The most convenient ways to realize a 2D confinement of alkali atoms use either Zeeman interaction Hinds98  or ac Stark optical potentials Grimm00 . The Zeeman method is based on the current-carrying micro wires technique which has been used with success to produce BEC in quasi-1D geometries ReichelNature01 ; Zimmermann01 . This technique may be adapted to produce an exponentially decaying B field Hinds98 . The advantage is the use of a simple device yielding a large energy spacing of the lowest-lying vibrational levels. The main drawback is the heating produced by proximity magnetic fields above the metallic surface, due to thermal fluctuations. Atoms sitting at distances below 1 micrometre will eventually suffer a high rate of scattering Henkel01 . To our knowledge, no experimental demonstration of this suggested mechanism has yet been realized.

On the other hand 2D trapping with dipole forces has been performed in standing waves Bouchoule02  or with atoms stopped by an evanescent wave and transferred to the nodes or anti-nodes of a far off-resonant standing wave close to a metallic or dielectric surface Pfau98 ; Spreeuw02 . An inhomogeneous trap in one direction is also naturally produced with two evanescent light waves and the resulting Morse-like potential is conservative for sufficiently large frequency detunings. This idea was proposed more than ten years ago by Ovchinnikov et al. Ovchinnikov91 . A good trap geometry is not the only issue for the realization of a 2D gas. An efficient loading of this trap is also essential. A loading scheme of a double evanescent wave trap (DEWT) based on a dissipative transfer of cold atoms has been previously proposed by Dalibard and Desbiolles Desbiolles96  and extended for larger frequency detunings Perrin00 . Recently, a group in Innsbruck succeeded for the first time in loading a DEWT from a dense dipole trap with 20 000 Cs atoms at a temperature as low as 100 nK Grimm02 . All those mechanisms deal with non-condensed atoms. Our paper focuses on the loading of a DEWT from a BEC cloud. We address here two types of loading process and compare their advantages. Our approach is based on adiabatic transformations of combined magnetic plus dipole traps up to the final stage of a DEWT.

The paper is organized as follows: section II describes the principle of the DEWT and gives our proposed parameters; section III explains the method of loading starting from two different kinds of trap: (i) the usual magnetic Ioffe–Pritchard trap or (ii) the anti-nodes of a moving red-detuned standing wave as a conveyor belt from the magnetic trap to the DEWT. Details are given in this section about the numerical solutions of the time-dependent Gross–Pitaevskii equation. In section IV, we present the experimental apparatus and give our preliminary results: production of a 87Rb BEC near a dielectric surface and transportation of a thermal cloud to this surface.

## II Principle of the double evanescent wave trap (DEWT)

Let us first recall briefly the criterion for reaching the 2D regime for atoms confined in a 3D harmonic trap, with trapping frequencies $`\omega _x,\omega _y\omega _z`$. In the case of a degenerate Bose gas, the chemical potential $`\mu _{\text{3D}}`$ calculated for the 3D geometry should fulfil the inequality $`\mu _{\text{3D}}\mathrm{}\omega _z`$. This leads to a constraint on the atom number $`NN_{\text{BEC}}^{2D}`$ where $`N_{\text{BEC}}^{2D}=\gamma \omega _z^{3/2}/(\omega _x\omega _y)`$ Ketterle01 . With the parameters of 87Rb one gets $`\gamma =800\sqrt{2\pi \text{rad/s}}`$ . By contrast, a 2D classical gas is obtained if $`k_\text{B}T\mathrm{}\omega _z`$. This makes sense if the transition temperature $`k_\text{B}T_c\mathrm{}(\omega _x\omega _y\omega _zN)^{1/3}`$ also fulfils this inequality. The requirement on the atom number for a classical 2D gas is thus $`NN_{\text{cl}}^{2D}`$ where $`N_{\text{cl}}^{2D}=\omega _z^2/(\omega _x\omega _y)`$ whatever the atom. $`N_{\text{cl}}^{2D}`$ is less than $`N_{\text{BEC}}^{2D}`$ as soon as $`\omega _z`$ is less than $`2\pi \times 640`$ kHz for 87Rb, which is the case in most experiments including ours. We will discuss the validity of the 2D regime in our case later in this section.

The quasi-2D trap we describe in this paper was first proposed by Ovchinnikov et al. Ovchinnikov91 . It consists in two evanescent light waves produced by total internal reflection at the surface of a dielectric material (see figure 1). One of the light fields is red-detuned by $`\delta _r`$ with respect to the atomic transition whereas the other one is blue-detuned by $`\delta _b`$. The angles of incidence of both beams at the dielectric–vacuum interface are chosen such that the decay length of the red field $`1/\kappa _r`$ is larger than the decay length of the blue field $`1/\kappa _b`$. The light shift produced by the two fields results in a Morse-like potential along $`z`$, with a long-range attractive potential and a short-range repulsive wall near the surface. A radial confinement ($`x`$ and $`y`$ directions) is achieved with appropriate waists for the red and the blue beams, typically choosing a smaller waist for the red beam. The overall potential seen by the atoms also includes the van der Waals attractive potential towards the dielectric surface.

As our goal is to load such a trap with a degenerate Bose gas, we paid particular attention to keep the spontaneous emission rate as low as possible. The light shift of a field of intensity $`I`$ 111In the following, we will employ the commonly used term ”intensity” instead of the more accurate ”irradiance” to refer to power divided by area. detuned by $`\delta `$ scales as $`I/\delta `$ whereas the spontaneous scattering rate scales as $`I/\delta ^2`$. At constant light shift, the use of larger detunings and therefore larger intensities is thus preferable. The practical constraints on the availability of laser sources led us to the choice of a YAG laser of a few watts at 1064 nm for the red field and a laser source of a few hundred milliwatts detuned by a few nanometres for the blue field, typically a titanium–sapphire laser. Note that the Innsbruck group came to the same conclusions Grimm02 .

We now give the expression of the 2D trapping potential for 87Rb atoms in the $`5S_{1/2}F=2`$ state. The two trapping beams of wavelength $`\lambda _r`$ and $`\lambda _b`$ enter a dielectric prism of refraction index $`n`$ in the $`xz`$ plane where $`z`$ is the direction orthogonal to the surface. The angles of incidence at the dielectric–vacuum interface are $`\theta _r`$ and $`\theta _b`$, both above the critical angle for total internal reflection $`\theta _c=\mathrm{arcsin}(1/n)`$. The decay length of the red evanescent wave is then $`\kappa _r^1=\sqrt{n^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _r1}\lambda _r/2\pi `$. A similar expression holds for $`\kappa _b^1`$.

As the detuning of the YAG laser is large as compared to the fine structure of the excited state $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{FS}}`$, we can consider the transition as a $`J=0J^{}=1`$ transition. The light shift of the ground state due to the red field is always scalar, regardless of the polarization of the evanescent light. Therefore, we choose a TM polarization for this beam, which gives rise to a higher transmission coefficient at the dielectric–vacuum interface. We will note $`\delta _r`$ the detuning of the YAG beam with respect to the D2 line at 780 nm. In the following, we do not differentiate between $`\delta _r`$ and $`\delta _r+\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{FS}}`$.

On the other hand, as the detuning between the blue field and the D2 line is smaller than $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{FS}}`$ we have to take into account the contributions of both D1 (at 795 nm) and D2 lines to the light shift. The detuning with respect to the D2 line will be denoted as $`\delta _b`$, whereas the detuning with respect to the D1 line is $`\delta _b+\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{FS}}`$. As $`\delta _b`$ is different from $`\delta _b+\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{FS}}`$, the light shift potential will be scalar only if the polarization of the blue evanescent field is linear. In order to ensure a uniform trapping potential for all Zeeman sub-states, we choose a TE polarization for the incoming blue wave, which ensures a linear polarization along $`y`$ for the evanescent field.

We denote by $`P_r`$ and $`P_b`$ the powers of the red and blue beams respectively inside the dielectric medium, while $`w_r`$ and $`w_b`$ are the beam waists. The corresponding intensities inside the dielectric at the surface are $`I_{r,b}=2P_{r,b}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{r,b}/\pi w_{r,b}^2`$. The intensity of each beam at $`z=0`$ in the vacuum depends on its polarization (TE for the blue beam, TM for the red one).

The light shift produced by both beams reads

$`H_{\text{LS}}(𝐫)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }[A_re^{2\kappa _rz}\mathrm{exp}(2x^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _r/w_r^22y^2/w_r^2)`$ (1)
$`+`$ $`A_be^{2\kappa _bz}\mathrm{exp}(2x^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _b/w_b^22y^2/w_b^2)]`$
where

$`A_r`$ $`=`$ $`t_{\text{TM}}^2{\displaystyle \frac{I_r}{2I_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{4\delta _r}}`$ (2)
$`A_b`$ $`=`$ $`t_{\text{TE}}^2{\displaystyle \frac{I_b}{2I_s}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{4\delta _b}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{4(\delta _b+\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{FS}})}}\right)`$ (3)
Note that $`A_r<0`$. The transmission coefficients for the intensity are

$`t_{\text{TM}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4n^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _r}{n^21}}{\displaystyle \frac{2n^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _r1}{(n^2+1)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _r1}}`$ (4)
$`t_{\text{TE}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4n^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _b}{n^21}}`$ (5)
Here, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the natural linewidth of the excited state and $`I_s=1.6`$ mW/cm2 is the saturation intensity. The terms in $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _{r,b}`$ in the exponential appear because of the projection of the beam profile onto the dielectric surface.

The total potential includes the van der Waals interaction with the surface. One has to go beyond Lennard-Jones potential in $`1/z^3`$ because the distance to the surface is comparable to $`\mathrm{\lambda ̄}=\lambda /2\pi `$. Therefore retardation effects cannot be ignored. Landragin Landragin97  gives an analytical correction to the Lennard-Jones potential which approximates the exact result with a $`0.6\%`$ accuracy between 0 and $`10\mathrm{\lambda ̄}`$:

$$H_{\text{vdW}}(z)f(z/\mathrm{\lambda ̄})H_{\text{LJ}}(z)$$
(6)
with

$`f(u)`$ $`=`$ $`0.987({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+1.098u}}`$ (7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{0.00493u}{1+0.00987u^30.00064u^4}})`$
$$H_{\text{LJ}}(z)=\frac{n^21}{n^2+1}\frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon _0}\frac{d^2}{12}\frac{1}{\mathrm{\lambda ̄}}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\lambda ̄}}{z}\right)^3$$
(8)
For rubidium in the ground state, the mean value of electric dipole squared is $`d^2=28.2e^2a_0^2`$ where $`a_0`$ is the Bohr radius and $`e`$ the electron charge.

In the following we give the trap characteristics for a reasonable choice of parameters for the evanescent light, taking into account the available power of laser sources near 780 nm. The proposed values of the parameters are indicated in table 1. The dielectric medium is chosen to be BK7 glass which has a relatively low index of refraction $`n=1.51`$ to minimize the van der Waals attraction towards the surface. Using this material, the critical angle for total internal reflection is $`\theta _c=41.5^{}`$.

These values of the trap parameters lead to a very anisotropic potential above the dielectric surface. A cut of the potential along $`z`$ for $`x=y=0`$ is depicted in figure 2, top. The atoms are trapped at a distance $`z_0=360`$ nm from the surface. The trap depth is 180 kHz (or equivalently $`9\mu `$K) and is given by the energy difference between the bottom of the trap and the saddle points at $`x=0`$, $`y=\pm 195\mu `$m, $`z=300`$ nm (see the contour plot in figure 2, bottom). We have checked with a 1D numerical calculation that the tunnelling from the ground state to the dielectric surface is negligible. The potential is essentially harmonic around the minimum in the $`x`$ and $`y`$ directions where the trapping force results from the transverse profile of both beams. The oscillation frequency is smaller along $`x`$ due to the angle between the beam axis and the surface. In the $`z`$ direction the trap deviates rapidly from the harmonic approximation. However, the computed oscillation frequency along $`z`$ at the bottom of the trap gives a good indication of the anisotropy of the potential: $`\omega _x=2\pi \times 41`$ Hz, $`\omega _y=2\pi \times 67`$ Hz and $`\omega _z=2\pi \times 28`$ kHz. The aspect ratio is thus 690 along $`x`$ and 420 along $`y`$. With these parameters, the value of $`N_{\text{BEC}}^{2D}`$ is $`1.4\times 10^6`$ and we get either $`\mu _{\text{3D}}/h=10`$ kHz for $`10^5`$ atoms or 4 kHz for $`10^4`$ atoms, to be compared to 28 kHz. The system is thus already in the 2D regime for a reasonably high number of atoms. However, $`N_{\text{cl}}^{2D}=3\times 10^5`$ is lower than $`N_{\text{BEC}}^{2D}`$ and the transition temperature corresponds to about 20 kHz for $`10^5`$ atoms and 9 kHz for $`10^4`$ atoms, which means that only thermal clouds close to the transition temperature could be considered as 2D gases.

As this trap is intended to be loaded with a degenerate Bose gas, the spontaneous scattering rate at the bottom of the trap is an important parameter. It is given by the formula

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\text{scatt}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }[t_{\text{TM}}^2{\displaystyle \frac{I_r}{2I_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}{4\delta _r^2}}e^{2\kappa _rz_0}`$ (9)
$`+`$ $`t_{\text{TE}}^2{\displaystyle \frac{I_b}{2I_s}}({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}{4\delta _b^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}{4(\delta _b+\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{FS}})^2}})e^{2\kappa _bz_0}]`$
With our choice of parameters we get $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\text{scatt}}=5`$ s-1. This gives a reasonable lifetime for a degenerate gas inside the trap.

## III Loading the 2D trap

The loading of the 2D trap with a degenerate Bose gas is one of the major points to be addressed in this type of experiment. Methods for loading similar traps with classical gases have been demonstrated before. They rely on optical pumping by evanescent waves in the vicinity of the surface Pfau98 ; Grimm02 . This kind of method is prohibited when dealing with a degenerate gas. In fact, any interaction of the atoms with resonant light should be avoided in order to preserve coherence and reduce heating. In this paper, we propose two different methods for loading the atoms from a magnetic trap, centred a few millimetres above the dielectric surface, into the DEWT. The magnetic trap we start with is a standard cigar-shaped QUIC trap Esslinger98  with frequencies $`\omega _{}=2\pi \times 300`$ Hz and $`\omega _x=2\pi \times 21`$ Hz (see section IV.1). Both schemes rely on the adiabatic transfer from the magnetic trap into the surface trap. We give a brief description of the methods and present results of numerical simulations of the two transfer processes.

### III.1 Scheme 1: magnetic to 2D trap transfer

The first method consists in deforming a translated magnetic trap adiabatically by switching on the evanescent light trap slowly. The atoms are first translated inside a moving magnetic trap to the vicinity of the surface. This is done by adding to the QUIC trap a pair of Helmholtz coils with a vertical axis (see section IV.2). At the same time, the blue-detuned evanescent light field is switched on in order to prevent the atoms from sticking to the surface as they come very close to it. Second, the condensate is transferred into the 2D dipole trap by switching on the red-detuned evanescent wave slowly, thus compressing the cloud strongly in the $`z`$ direction. Finally, the magnetic field has to be switched off and the atoms remain trapped in the DEWT. The transfer is adiabatic if the variation of the trap frequency $`\omega (t)`$ verifies along each direction the following inequality:

$$\frac{\omega }{t}\omega ^2$$
(10)
This implies that the ramping time of the evanescent wave must be very large as compared to the oscillating period of the atoms in the trap.

We present here a 3D numerical calculation of part of this process using the time-dependent Gross–Pitaevskii Equation (GPE) for the macroscopic wavefunction for a condensate comprising $`10^6`$ atoms. The starting point of the calculation is the ground state of a hybrid trap consisting of the blue-detuned evanescent light plus a magnetic harmonic trap centred at the surface ($`z=0`$), see figure 3($`a`$). We then let the wavefunction evolve due to the GPE, while switching on the red evanescent field and the van der Waals potential with an exponential time profile. The total ramping time is $`T_{\text{ramp}}`$. The calculation ends at time $`t_{\text{end}}>T_{\text{ramp}}`$ and does not include the magnetic field extinction.

We use the splitting method to evaluate the effect of the total Hamiltonian for a time interval $`dt`$: if $`dt`$ is small enough, one can let $`H_rdt`$ and $`H_pdt`$ commute, where $`H_r`$ is the part of the Hamiltonian diagonal in the position basis (potential energy plus interactions) and $`H_p`$ is diagonal in momentum (kinetic energy). The evolution during $`dt`$ leads to

$$\psi (t+dt)=T^{}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{iH_pdt}{\mathrm{}}\right)T\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{iH_rdt}{\mathrm{}}\right)\psi (t)$$
(11)
where $`T`$ represents a fast Fourier transform and $`T^{}`$ its inverse. We calculate the chemical potential $`\mu `$ and the initial wavefunction by solving the time-dependent GPE with the method of imaginary time; we propagate and renormalize $`\psi (\tau )`$ at each step using the equation

$$\frac{\psi }{\tau }=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}H\psi $$
(12)
to get a positive chemical potential as small as possible. The corresponding wavefunction represents the ground state of the GPE and is taken as initial state $`\psi (t=0)`$ before deformation. The subsequent evolution is calculated using equation (11) (where $`H_r`$ is a function of time).

The magnetic trap is chosen to be isotropic with an oscillation frequency $`\omega _0=2\pi \times 300`$ Hz (oscillation period $`T_{\text{osc}}=3.3`$ ms) to reduce the calculation time. The 2D trap results from evanescent waves with decay lengths $`\kappa _r^1=510`$ nm and $`\kappa _b^1=220`$ nm. The light shift at the surface is 5.4 MHz for the blue beam and $`1.4`$ MHz for the red one. The oscillation frequencies in the DEWT alone are $`\omega _z=2\pi \times 30`$ kHz along the vertical axis, $`\omega _x=2\pi \times 30`$ Hz and $`\omega _y=2\pi \times 64`$ Hz in the horizontal plane. The position of the minimum of the potential well along the vertical direction is about 350 nm above the surface of the prism. As $`\omega _x`$ and $`\omega _y`$ are much smaller than $`\omega _0`$, the frequency in the horizontal plane changes only slightly from $`\omega _0`$ to e.g. $`\sqrt{\omega _0^2+\omega _x^2}`$ and the criterion for adiabaticity is easily fulfilled horizontally.

The numerical results are shown in figure 3. Figures 3 ($`a`$:$`z`$) to 3 ($`c`$:$`z`$) represent the spatial atomic density integrated along $`x`$ and $`y`$ as a function of $`z`$ together with the trapping potential along $`z`$. Figures 3 ($`d`$:$`y`$) to 3 ($`c`$:$`y`$) show the density integrated along $`x`$ and $`z`$ and plotted as a function of $`y`$. Figure 3 ($`a`$) represents the initial atomic distribution ($`t=0`$) of the $`10^6`$ atoms, corresponding to the ground state of the hybrid magnetic plus blue evanescent wave trap. The atomic density along $`z`$ is not symmetrical due to the steep wall produced by the blue beam. The spatial density for two different ramping times $`T_{\text{ramp}}`$ of the red beam is given in figures 3 ($`b`$) and 3 ($`c`$).

We observe that almost all the condensate is transferred into the dipole trap for a ramping time $`T_{\text{ramp}}=32`$ ms much greater than the initial oscillation period $`T_{\text{osc}}`$, figure 3 ($`c`$). We also note that, in this case, the width of the spatial density along the horizontal direction is enlarged when adding the red beam, compare figure 3 ($`c`$:$`y`$) with figure 3 ($`a`$:$`y`$). Indeed when ramping up the red beam intensity slowly, the atomic cloud is compressed along the vertical axis, figure 3 ($`c`$:$`z`$), and expands in the horizontal directions where the potential energy increases more slowly with distance from the centre.

On the other hand, for a very short ramping time (0.3 ms), only a few atoms are transferred into the 2D dipole trap (figure 3 ($`b`$)). The integrated atomic density along $`z`$ presents three features: we observe two density peaks with a large difference between their amplitude, plus a broad background. The centre of the smaller peak corresponds to the minimum of the dipole trap and represents the atoms which were transferred successfully. The larger peak sits at the extreme border of the dipole trap well. One can understand this with a simple picture. When we ramp up the red beam quickly, the atoms which were localized at the bottom of the initial potential with almost zero velocity suddenly acquire an energy equal to the depth of the dipole potential. They populate a very narrow band of excited states of the new well and are essentially located at the turning points of the potential. Towards the surface, the potential is very stiff and the atomic velocity changes almost instantaneously. As a result, a single density peak is visible at the right turning point where the potential is much shallower. Note that the respective weight of the two peaks changes as the loading time $`T_{\text{ramp}}`$ is increased: more atoms are transferred in the DEWT, see figure 4, and the second peak is reduced. The background of the distribution represents the atoms which are not much affected by the switching on of the red beam. These atoms were out of the well in the right-hand side of the potential when the red beam was ramped up. The width of the spatial density along the horizontal direction (figure 3 ($`b`$:$`y`$)) does not change as compared to figure 3 ($`a`$:$`y`$) due to the poor compression reached in the $`z`$ direction.

The analysis of the transfer efficiency is presented in figure 4. To estimate the number of transferred atoms, we fit the peak in the $`z`$ density profile corresponding to the atoms trapped in the DEWT with a Gaussian profile and compare its area to the total number of atoms. The transfer efficiency increases non linearly with the ramping time. For a ramping time $`T_{\text{ramp}}=32`$ ms, very large as compared to $`T_{\text{osc}}`$, the difference between the final density profiles and the ground state of the total trap (DEWT + magnetic trap) is imperceptible and the transfer is actually adiabatic. From figure 4 we infer that a 20 ms ramping time is quite enough to realize an adiabatic transfer. Note that in the adiabatic case, as we ramp the magnetic trap off very slowly, the spatial density along the $`z`$ axis becomes narrower while the horizontal width becomes larger (not shown here). Indeed, the horizontal frequencies of the dipole trap ($`\omega _x=2\pi \times 30`$ Hz, $`\omega _y=2\pi \times 64`$ Hz) are smaller than those in the initial trap ($`\omega _x=\omega _y=2\pi \times 300`$ Hz), and the anisotropy is more pronounced due to the strong confinement along $`z`$ and the interactions between atoms.

### III.2 Scheme 2: the atomic lift

The second method makes use of a moving standing wave to transport the atoms from the magnetic trap into the DEWT. The idea is close to the principle of the conveyor belt recently realized on a micro chip Reichel01 . At the beginning of the loading process, the atoms are confined in the magnetic trap and the laser fields producing the DEWT are on. The process may be decomposed into three steps: (i) The atoms are loaded at the anti-nodes of a stationary wave into a series of horizontal planes obtained by two red-detuned counter-propagating beams along $`z`$. (ii) The magnetic field is switched off and the atoms are lifted down towards the surface by changing the phase of one of the beams with respect to the other. The atoms accumulate in the 2D trap by continuous deformation of the potential (figure 5). (iii) Finally, when all the atoms are in the last well near the surface, the stationary wave is switched off and the atoms remain trapped in the DEWT.

At each step, the different transfers have to remain adiabatic to avoid any heating of the atomic cloud. Step (i) should not pose particular problems as transfer of condensates into optical lattices has already been demonstrated Inguscio01 . Note that the atoms remain trapped horizontally even after the magnetic field has been switched off due to the Gaussian profile of the counter-propagating beams, with corresponding horizontal oscillation frequency $`\omega _h`$. One simply has to switch off the magnetic field adiabatically, that is in a time larger than $`\omega _h^1`$.

To realize this first step, one can typically use a $`\lambda _{\text{lift}}=830`$ nm laser diode with a power of 15 mW in each beam and a waist of $`90\mu `$m. This gives $`\omega _h=2\pi \times 60`$ Hz. Provided the populated anti-nodes are far from the evanescent waves, the phase change may be very fast, and this gives the atoms a large translational velocity, $`v_1`$. When the atoms approach the surface, the velocity must be lowered, to $`v_2`$ say, because the horizontal shape of the trap changes. In fact the horizontal frequency seen by an atom changes, in the $`x`$ direction for example, from $`\omega _h`$ to $`\omega _{\text{max}}=(\omega _h^2+\omega _x^2)^{1/2}`$ when it is first loaded in the DEWT, and then changes periodically between $`\omega _{\text{max}}`$ and $`\omega _x`$ as the phase evolves further to load the remaining atoms. This gives the typical time constant for adiabaticity.

We tested this loading scheme qualitatively with a 3D numerical simulation analogous to the one described in the last section. We were interested mostly in the last stage where the atomic cloud distributed in several planes approaches the surface. The initial state of the calculation ($`t=0`$) is the ground state of the GPE in the potential formed by the stationary wave with $`\lambda _{\text{lift}}=800`$ nm plus a 1D harmonic potential along $`z`$. This potential mimics the situation immediately after the transfer from the magnetic trap into the stationary wave. The 1D potential is centred $`3.4\mu `$m above the surface and is switched off at the beginning of the evolution through the time-dependent GPE, while the 2D trap is switched on. At this point ($`t=1.1`$ ms), the atoms are spread over a few planes. For an initial vertical oscillation frequency of 300 Hz and $`10^5`$ atoms, typically 15 planes are populated. However, to reduce the calculation time, we start from a condensate in a harmonic trap with a vertical oscillation frequency of 1.6 kHz. In this case, the atoms are spread symmetrically over three planes (see figure 6). The relative phase between the two beams of the standing wave is then allowed to evolve, resulting in the two successive velocities $`v_1=1.1`$ mm/s and $`v_2=76\mu `$m/s, as mentioned above.

The results of the numerical calculation are shown in figure 6. The column density integrated over $`x`$ and $`y`$ is plotted as a function of $`z`$ at three stages of the loading process. At $`t=5.8`$ ms ($`a`$) the first populated plane reaches the rim of the last well, which coincides with the 2D trap. At $`t=13.3`$ ms ($`b`$) two populated planes have melted into the last well. At $`t=22.3`$ ms ($`c`$) the atoms accumulate in the last well. However, it was not possible to fulfil the condition for adiabatic transfer. As a result, the final atomic density does not coincide with the ground state of the GPE in the DEWT. We shall discuss this point further in the conclusion. Moreover, when the atoms are in the last well of the standing wave before melting, they tunnel through the small barrier separating them from the trap, as can be seen already in ($`a`$), thus populating excited states of the DEWT. To limit this phenomenon, both the depth and the typical size of the wells of the standing wave must be adjusted to those of the DEWT. This condition may be a difficult point to address experimentally.

## IV Preliminary experimental results

In this section, we present some preliminary experimental results towards loading of a degenerate Bose gas into a DEWT.

### IV.1 Experimental set-up

The experimental set-up, figure 7, consists of two ultra-high vacuum chambers separated vertically by 75 cm. In the upper chamber (pressure $`10^9`$ Torr) the 87Rb atoms are collected from a vapour in a standard magneto-optical trap (MOT) by three retro-reflected beams ($`1/e^2`$-diameter 25 mm each, total power 45 mW). This MOT acts as a reservoir for the second MOT in the lower cell where the pressure is below $`10^{11}`$ Torr. The difference in vacuum pressure is ensured by a tube of length 120 mm with an internal diameter of only 6 mm. The lower MOT is set up with six independent laser beams with a $`1/e^2`$-diameter of 10 mm each for a total power of 45 mW.

The atoms are continuously transferred into the second cell by an original method combining pushing and guiding the atoms. The pushing beam has a power of 30 mW and is detuned by 2.5 GHz on the red side of the MOT $`5S_{1/2},F=25P_{3/2},F^{}=3`$ transition. It is focused 8 cm above the upper MOT to a waist of $`220\mu `$m such that its radius is $`250\mu `$m at the upper MOT and $`940\mu `$m at the lower MOT. This beam induces sufficiently large light shifts (30 MHz) so that atoms inside the beam no longer feel the MOT beams; the atoms are extracted from the upper MOT with a radiation pressure about 25 times smaller than that of a typical MOT. The advantage of this method is that the velocity of atoms remains in the capture range of the lower MOT (about 15 m/s). Furthermore, the pushing beam acts as a dipole trap which guides the atoms vertically near its axis inside the small diameter tube. The depth of this guide is about 1.4 mK at the upper MOT for the $`F=2`$ state. A collinear repumping beam, tuned to the $`F=1F^{}=2`$ transition, ensures that the atoms remain in $`F=2`$. Due to the divergence of the guiding beam the radiation pressure at the position of the lower trap is negligible. The fact that the atoms are guided while pushed towards the lower cell renders the loading process very robust against small changes in the parameters of the two MOTs.

After 30 s of loading time, the atoms are cooled by molasses cooling, compressed and pumped into the $`F=2,m_F=2`$ state. They are then transferred into a Ioffe–Pritchard, cigar-shaped magnetic trap. The coils producing the magnetic field are placed following the quadrupole and Ioffe configuration (QUIC) Esslinger98  and dissipate a total electric power of 200 W. They are cooled by thermal contact with water-cooled copper radiators. Two independent current sources are used, one for the Ioffe coil (43 A) and one for the quadrupole coils (30 A). The resulting magnetic field has a minimum $`B_0`$ of about 1 G with a field gradient $`b^{}=225`$ G/cm and a curvature $`b^{\prime \prime }=270`$ G/cm2. The resulting oscillation frequencies are 21 Hz along the axis of the cigar ($`x`$ direction) and 300 Hz in the transverse $`yz`$ plane for the $`F=2,m_F=2`$ state. We achieve Bose–Einstein condensation after 30 s of RF evaporative cooling.

### IV.2 Results

The condensate contains typically $`2\times 10^5`$ atoms and is produced at the centre of the QUIC trap, just above the prism which is the support for the 2D evanescent light trap (see the bottom of figure 7). The vertical position of the prism with respect to the condensate may be adjusted mechanically. However, it is limited to at least 3 mm to maintain a correct loading efficiency of the MOT. By adding to the QUIC trap a uniform vertical magnetic field varying from 0 to 64 G the minimum of the trapping potential is moved down to the surface of the prism, as required by the first 2D-transfer scheme. This field is produced by ramping up a current from 0 to 20 A in two additional horizontal coils separated by 4 cm, having each 30 windings of mean diameter 16 cm. During the ramp, the current in the quadrupole coils of the QUIC trap is lowered by about 5%; otherwise the trap would cross a zero of the magnetic field and the atoms would separate into two clouds. The resulting potential near the centre of the trap remains essentially unaltered apart from an increase of a factor of 1.6 in the oscillation frequency along the slow axis (from 21 Hz to 33 Hz). This axis is also slightly tilted, in agreement with the magnetic field calculations. To illustrate the translation process, we filled the initial QUIC trap with a sample of thermal atoms at $`T=9\mu `$K centered 3.7 mm above the prism and imaged the atomic cloud at several steps of its journey towards the surface, figure 8. When the current in the additional coils reaches 20 A, the atoms are lost by contact with the surface in the absence of a blue-detuned evanescent wave.

As the experiment was performed with a non-condensed cloud, the next step will be to extend it to a BEC. The blue and red beams have then to be added to the experimental set-up. Preliminary experiments with a blue beam alone were realized: a bounce of thermal atoms released from the QUIC trap 3.7 mm above the prism was observed. However, the detuning $`\delta _b=2\pi \times 500`$ MHz was too small for the beam to be used in a loading experiment and it will be replaced by an appropriate laser source. This should allow us to test experimentally the first transfer scheme.

## V Conclusion

In this paper, we studied two possible methods for loading a degenerate Bose gas into a strongly anisotropic trap. The first method is also the simpler one. We have demonstrated experimentally with a thermal cloud the first stage corresponding to the vertical translation of the atomic cloud. We simulated the transfer from the translated QUIC trap into the DEWT. When the criterion for adiabaticity is fulfilled the transfer efficiency is close to 100%. The simulation assumed an isotropic magnetic trap with oscillation frequency $`\omega _0=2\pi \times 300`$ Hz. In the experimental situation, one of the horizontal frequencies is $`\omega _{0x}=2\pi \times 33`$ Hz only and the loading time may have to be increased by a small factor. The last stage corresponds to the extinction of the magnetic field and should not pose particular problems providing that the switching time is much longer than the horizontal frequencies in the DEWT. We believe that this loading method could be implemented experimentally. The difficulty is to adjust the horizontal position of the magnetic trap to the center of the DEWT. This can be done by changing slightly the balance between the currents in the QUIC coils.

The second method has the great advantage of compressing the atomic cloud already in the QUIC trap before the atoms are loaded into the DEWT. The translation stage towards the surface (velocity $`v_1`$) may be faster than in the last method, as the vertical oscillation frequency in the series of planes is on the order of a few tens of kHz instead of 300 Hz. The accumulation stage into the DEWT by a phase sweep seems to be an elegant idea. However, the phase velocity $`v_2`$ is strongly limited if one tries to fulfil the adiabaticity condition. In fact, for horizontal frequencies $`\omega _h=2\pi \times 60`$ Hz in the standing wave and $`\omega _x=2\pi \times 30`$ Hz in the DEWT, the frequency change between $`\omega _x`$ and $`\sqrt{\omega _h^2+\omega _x^2}`$ has to be slower than $`\omega _x`$. Therefore the velocity $`v_2`$ has to be much smaller than $`\lambda _{\text{lift}}/4\times \omega _x/2\pi =6\mu `$m/s to avoid 2D breathing mode excitation. The typical time to load 15 planes is then a few seconds. This is still an order of magnitude too large to be of interest for practical applications. To reduce this time, one may either increase the horizontal frequency during the loading process, or compress the cloud initially to populate fewer horizontal planes. Another problem that will occur with this loading method is the phase noise in the standing wave. The study of its influence on the loading mechanism is out of the scope of this paper. However, a recent work in Bonn showed that it produces heating and reduces the lifetime in a standing wave trap Alt03 .

Finally, let us note that the second method may be used in a reversed way to extract the 2DAG and study it far from the surface: once the atoms are confined in the DEWT, one can slowly switch on a standing wave and change the relative phase to lift the atoms away from the surface. It is then easier to produce a single 2D trap with a very high aspect ratio with less laser power.

###### Acknowledgements.

We are indebted to Y. Castin and D. Lemoine for fruitful discussions, and to R. J. Butcher for a critical reading of the manuscript. We acknowledge support from the Région Ile-de-France (contract number E1213). Laboratoire de physique des lasers is UMR 7538 of CNRS and Paris 13 University.