format: text

text:
# UTEXAS-HEP-00-2 MSUHEP-00310 Photons, neutrinos and large compact space dimensions

## 1. Introduction

The $`22`$ processes $`\gamma \nu \gamma \nu `$, $`\gamma \gamma \nu \overline{\nu }`$ and $`\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma `$ are of potential interest in astrophysics. However, because of the vector-axial-vector nature of the weak coupling, the leading term in these cross sections for these processes with massless neutrinos, nominally of order $`G_F^2\alpha ^2\omega ^2`$, vanishes due to Yang’s theorem . In the limit that the photon energy $`\omega <m_e`$, where $`m_e`$ is the electron mass, these cross sections can be shown to be of order $`G_F^2\alpha ^2\omega ^2\left(\omega /m_W\right)^4`$ , and, in the annihilation channels at least, this $`\omega ^6`$ behavior persists to center of mass energies $`\sqrt{s}2m_W`$, where $`m_W`$ is the mass of the $`W`$-boson .

The $`\omega ^6`$ behavior of the photon-neutrino cross sections can be understood in terms of an effective Lagrangian of the form

$$_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{SM}}=\frac{1}{32\pi }\frac{g^2\alpha }{m_W^4}A\left[\overline{\psi }\gamma _\nu (1+\gamma _5)(_\mu \psi )(_\mu \overline{\psi })\gamma _\nu (1+\gamma _5)\psi \right]F_{\mu \lambda }F_{\nu \lambda },$$
(1)
where $`g`$ is the electroweak gauge coupling, $`\psi `$ is the neutrino field and $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ is the electromagnetic field tensor. In Eq. (1), $`A`$ is

$$A=\left[\frac{4}{3}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{m_W^2}{m_e^2}\right)+1\right]$$
(2)
in the low energy limit $`\omega <m_e`$, and $`A`$ is obtained by fitting the numerical calculation of the cross section for $`\omega >m_e`$ . Since $`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{SM}}`$ is a dimension 8 operator, it follows that the center of mass cross sections will behave as $`\omega ^6`$. Another property of Eq. (1) is that the scattered photons in the channel $`\gamma \nu \gamma \nu `$ are circularly polarized in leading order  due to the parity violating terms in $`_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. There is no linear polarization in this channel.

Because the scale of $`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{SM}}`$ is $`m_W`$, a typical photon-neutrino cross section is quite small, so small that a high energy neutrino beam is not attenuated by interactions with the present density of relic neutrinos via the process $`\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma `$ . In the early universe, the photons and neutrinos decouple at a temperature $`T`$ 1.6 GeV, or about one microsecond after the Big Bang. If this temperature were a factor of 10 lower, i.e. $`T\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$, one might be justified in speculating that some remnant of the circular polarization mentioned above could be retained in the cosmic microwave background radiation and at this would provide evidence for the relic neutrino background.

Lowering the decoupling temperature necessitates increasing the cross section, $`\sigma (\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma )`$, or changing the dependence of the age of the universe, $`t`$, on the temperature $`T`$. The latter seems unlikely, since the $`tT^2`$ radiation dominated behavior of the early universe is insensitive changes such as including a non-vanishing cosmological constant. On the other hand, new interactions could increase $`\sigma (\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma )`$, provided they involve the exchange of particles with spin $``$ 1. A new interaction of this type is provided by the recent proposal that the compact dimensions of string theory are sufficiently large to make the effective gravitational scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of order a TeV rather than the usual $`M_P=1.2\times 10^{19}`$ GeV Planck scale . That this new gravitational interaction will make a significant correction to the standard model photon-neutrino cross sections can be seen by rewriting Eq. (1) in the form

$$_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{SM}}=\frac{1}{8\pi }\frac{g^2\alpha }{m_W^4}AT_{\alpha \beta }^\nu T_{\alpha \beta }^\gamma ,$$
(3)
where $`T_{\alpha \beta }^\nu `$ and $`T_{\alpha \beta }^\gamma `$ are the symmetrical energy-momentum tensors of the neutrinos and the photons. Explicitly, we have

$`T_{\alpha \beta }^\nu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}[\overline{\psi }\gamma _\alpha (1+\gamma _5)(_\beta \psi )+\overline{\psi }\gamma _\beta (1+\gamma _5)(_\alpha \psi )`$ (4)
$`(_\beta \overline{\psi })\gamma _\alpha (1+\gamma _5)\psi (_\alpha \overline{\psi })\gamma _\beta (1+\gamma _5)\psi ],`$
$`T_{\alpha \beta }^\gamma `$ $`=`$ $`F_{\alpha \lambda }F_{\beta \lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\delta _{\alpha \beta }F_{\lambda \rho }F_{\lambda \rho }.`$ (5)
In the next section, we show that an effective interaction which is the product of energy-momentum tensors also arises when the spin 2 graviton is exchanged between photons and neutrinos. This is followed by the calculation of $`\sigma (\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma )`$ and a discussion of the resulting astrophysical implications.

## 2. Graviton exchange between photons and neutrinos

According to models in which only the graviton ($`𝒢`$) propagates in the additional $`n`$ compact dimensions of a $`D=4+n`$ dimensional manifold, the compact spatial dimension $`R`$ is related to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`M_P`$ as

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^{n+2}R^nM_p^2/4\pi .$$
(6)
The graviton’s propagation in all $`D`$ dimensions implies the existence of a tower of spin 2 particles in ordinary space-time, whose masses are given by $`m_\stackrel{}{n}^2=\stackrel{}{n}^2/R^2`$, where $`\stackrel{}{n}=(n_1,n_2,\mathrm{},n_n)`$ and the $`n_i`$ are integers. Furthermore, in these models the interaction between the spin 2 graviton, $`𝒢_{\mu \nu }`$, and any standard model field has the universal form

$$_{\mathrm{eff}}^𝒢=\frac{\kappa }{2}T_{\mu \nu }𝒢_{\mu \nu },$$
(7)
where $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ is the energy-momentum tensor of the standard model field.

Given the effective coupling, Eq. (7), it is a simple matter to calculate the $`22`$ amplitudes . In the annihilation channels ($`\gamma \gamma \nu \overline{\nu }`$ and $`\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma )`$, the amplitude for a particular $`m_\stackrel{}{n}`$ has the form

$$𝒜_\stackrel{}{n}=\frac{\kappa ^2}{4}T_{\alpha \beta }^\nu (p_1,p_2)\frac{𝒫_{\alpha \beta \lambda \rho }(k_1+k_2)}{m_\stackrel{}{n}^2si\epsilon }T_{\lambda \rho }^\gamma (k_1,k_2),$$
(8)
with $`s=(k_1+k_2)^2`$. Here $`𝒫_{\alpha \beta \lambda \rho }`$ is the spin 2 projection operator

$$𝒫_{\alpha \beta \lambda \rho }(k)=\frac{1}{2}\left(d_{\alpha \lambda }(k)d_{\beta \rho }(k)+d_{\alpha \rho }(k)d_{\beta \lambda }(k)\frac{2}{3}d_{\alpha \beta }(k)d_{\lambda \rho }(k)\right),$$
(9)
with

$$d_{\alpha \beta }(k)=\delta _{\alpha \beta }+\frac{1}{m_\stackrel{}{n}^2}k_\alpha k_\beta .$$
(10)
Since the energy-momentum tensors are conserved, symmetrical and, in this case, traceless, Eq. (8) reduces to

$$𝒜_\stackrel{}{n}=\frac{\kappa ^2}{4}T_{\alpha \beta }^\nu (p_1,p_2)\frac{1}{m_\stackrel{}{n}^2si\epsilon }T_{\alpha \beta }^\gamma (k_1,k_2).$$
(11)
To complete the calculation of the amplitude, it is necessary to sum $`𝒜_\stackrel{}{n}`$ over the values of $`m_\stackrel{}{n}^2`$. This is done by replacing the sum with an integral over the number density $`d𝒩`$ given by

$$d𝒩=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_nR^n(m^2)^{(n2)/2}dm^2,$$
(12)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ is the surface area of an $`n`$-dimensional sphere. If the integral over $`dm^2`$ is cut off at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$, we find as leading terms

$$_0^{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\frac{d𝒩}{m^2si\epsilon }=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_nR^n\mathrm{\Lambda }^{n2}\{\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{s}\right)& \mathrm{if}& n=2\\ \frac{2}{\text{}\left(n2\right)}& \mathrm{if}& n>2\end{array}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_nR^n\mathrm{\Lambda }^{n2}I_n(\mathrm{\Lambda },s).$$
(13)
Apart from a $`\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/s)`$ term when $`n=2`$, all values of $`n`$ have the same $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{n2}`$ dependence. If we then take the specific realization of Eq. (6) for the scale parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to be

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Lambda }^{n+2}R^n=M_P^2,$$
(14)
the summed version of Eq. (11) is

$$𝒜_𝒢=\frac{4\pi }{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}I_n(\mathrm{\Lambda },s)T_{\alpha \beta }^\nu (p_1,p_2)T_{\alpha \beta }^\gamma (k_1,k_2),$$
(15)
where we have used $`\kappa ^2=32\pi /M_P^2`$ .

## 3. $`𝝂\overline{𝝂}\mathbf{}𝜸𝜸`$ cross section including graviton exchange

Using Eq. (3), the Standard Model amplitude for the annihilation processes is

$$𝒜^{\mathrm{SM}}=\frac{1}{8\pi }\frac{g^2\alpha }{m_W^4}AT_{\alpha \beta }^\nu (p_1,p_2)T_{\alpha \beta }^\gamma (k_1,k_2),$$
(16)
which, in view of Eq. (15), leads to the total amplitude

$$𝒜=\left(\frac{1}{8\pi }\frac{g^2\alpha }{m_W^4}A+\frac{4\pi }{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}I_n(\mathrm{\Lambda },s)\right)T_{\alpha \beta }^\nu (p_1,p_2)T_{\alpha \beta }^\gamma (k_1,k_2).$$
(17)
If the photon helicities are denoted by $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$, the product of energy-momentum tensors in Eq. (17) is given by

$`T_{\alpha \beta }^\nu (p_1,p_2)T_{\alpha \beta }^\gamma (k_1,k_2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \left[st(1\lambda _1\lambda _2)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}s^2(1\lambda _1)(1+\lambda _2)\right],`$ (18)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}_{\lambda _1\lambda _2},`$ (19)
where $`t=(p_1k_1)^2`$, and $`\theta `$ is the scattering angle in the center of mass. The differential cross section for $`\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma `$ can then be calculated using

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dz}=\frac{1}{32\pi s}\underset{\lambda _1\lambda _2}{}|𝒜_{\lambda _1\lambda _2}|^2,$$
(20)
with $`z=\mathrm{cos}\theta `$, and

$$𝒜_{\lambda _1\lambda _2}=\left(\frac{1}{32\pi }\frac{g^2\alpha }{m_W^4}A+\frac{\pi }{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}I_n(\mathrm{\Lambda },s)\right)_{\lambda _1\lambda _2}.$$
(21)
Summing over the helicities gives

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dz}=\frac{1}{16\pi }\left(\frac{1}{32\pi }\frac{g^2\alpha }{m_W^4}A+\frac{\pi }{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}I_n(\mathrm{\Lambda },s)\right)^2s^3(1z^4),$$
(22)
which leads to the total cross section

$`\sigma (\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2!}}{\displaystyle _1^1}𝑑z{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{dz}}`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{s^3}{20\pi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{32\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{g^2\alpha }{m_W^4}}A+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}}I_n(\mathrm{\Lambda },s)\right)^2.`$ (24)
Using the value $`A=14.4`$  and expressing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in TeV, we find

$$\sigma (\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma )=\frac{1}{8}\frac{s^3}{m_e^6}\left(1+.3\frac{I_n(\mathrm{\Lambda },s)}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\right)^2\times 10^{31}\mathrm{fb}.$$
(25)
The cross section is shown in Fig. 1 for the cases $`n=2`$ and $`n=4`$ with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=.5,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{and}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}`$ TeV. Although the logarithmic variation in the $`n=2`$ case is scarcely detectable in the range $`.2\mathrm{GeV}\sqrt{s}2\mathrm{GeV}`$, its presence in the coefficient of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^4`$ makes the effect of the extra dimensions largest for this case.

## 4. Discussion and conclusions

The possibility of a high energy neutrino scattering from the current relic neutrino background is not materially enhanced by the inclusion of the effects of gravitons propagating in compact dimensions. Neglecting the electroweak contribution to the $`\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma `$ cross section, which is known to be too small  to produce any scattering, the condition $`\sigma _{\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma }n_\nu ct_0=1`$ for at least one scattering, gives

$$\frac{\pi }{20}\frac{s^3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^8}\mathrm{ln}^2\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{s}\right)n_\nu ct_0=1$$
(26)
or, using the relic neutrino density $`n_\nu =56\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}^3`$, and the age of the universe $`t_0=15\times 10^9`$ years, the condition can be written

$$x^6\mathrm{ln}^2(x^2)=0.0207\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2,$$
(27)
with $`x=\sqrt{s}/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ in GeV. For a 1 TeV scale, the solution to Eq. (27) is $`x=3.78`$, giving $`\sqrt{s}=3.78`$ TeV, which is beyond the range of validity of the effective theory.

The additional contribution to the cross section from gravition exchange will affect the decoupling temperature. The temperature at which the reaction $`\nu \overline{\nu }\gamma \gamma `$ ceases to occur can be determined from the reaction rate per unit volume

$$\rho =\frac{1}{(2\pi )^6}\frac{d^3p_1}{e^{E_1/T}+1}\frac{d^3p_2}{e^{E_2/T}+1}\sigma |\stackrel{}{v}|,$$
(28)
where $`\stackrel{}{p}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{}{p}_2`$ are the neutrino and antineutrino momenta, $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ their energies, $`|\stackrel{}{v}|`$ is the flux and $`T`$ the temperature. Using the invariance of $`\sigma E_1E_2|\stackrel{}{v}|`$, the relationship between $`\sigma |\stackrel{}{v}|`$ in the center of mass frame and any other frame is

$$\sigma |\stackrel{}{v}|=\sigma _{CM}\frac{2E_{\mathrm{CM}}^2}{E_1E_2},$$
(29)
which gives

$$\sigma |\stackrel{}{v}|=\frac{s^4}{16E_1E_2m_e^6}\left(1+\frac{.3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{s}\right)\right)^2\times 10^{70}\mathrm{cm}^2,$$
(30)
for $`n=2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in TeV. Taking $`s=4E_1E_2\mathrm{sin}^2(\theta _{12}/2)`$ , where $`\theta _{12}`$ is the angle between the incoming neutrinos, the angular integrations in Eq. (28) result in the integrand

$$𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_1𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_{12}=\frac{(4\pi )^2}{5}\left[\left(1+\frac{.3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{4E_1E_2}\right)\right)^2+\frac{.12}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\left(1+\frac{.3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{4E_1E_2}\right)\right)+.08\left(\frac{.3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\right)^2\right].$$
(31)
To estimate the decoupling temperature, the last two terms on the right in Eq. (31), which are suppressed relative to the first by small numerical factors, can be neglected. The reaction rate per unit volume is then given by

$$\rho =\frac{6.4\times 10^{69}\mathrm{cm}^2}{5(2\pi )^4}\frac{T^{12}}{m_e^6}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\frac{x^5}{e^x+1}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑y\frac{y^5}{e^y+1}\left[1+\frac{.3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\left(\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{4T^2}\right)\mathrm{ln}x\mathrm{ln}y\right)\right]^2.$$
(32)
The $`\mathrm{ln}x`$ and $`\mathrm{ln}y`$ terms in Eq. (32) result in contributions which are small relative to the remaining terms. Omitting these terms gives

$$\rho =\frac{6.4\times 10^{69}\mathrm{cm}^2}{5(2\pi )^4}\frac{T^{12}}{m_e^6}\left[1+\frac{.3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{4T^2}\right)\right]^2\left[\frac{31}{32}\mathrm{\Gamma }(6)\zeta (6)\right]^2,$$
(33)
where $`\zeta (z)`$ is the Riemann Zeta function. The interaction rate $`R`$ is obtained by dividing Eq. (33) by the neutrino density $`n_\nu =3\zeta (3)T^3/4\pi ^2`$, giving

$$R=7.3\times 10^{24}T_{10}^9\left[1+\frac{.3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{10^{12}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{3T_{10}^2}\right)\right]^2\mathrm{sec}^1,$$
(34)
with $`T_{10}=T/10^{10}K`$. Multiplying $`R`$ by the age of the universe, $`t=2T_{10}^2`$ sec, the condition for a single interaction to occur is

$$\frac{T_{10}}{1828}\left[1+\frac{.3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{10^{12}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{3T_{10}^2}\right)\right]^{2/7}=1.$$
(35)
The solution to this equation is shown in Fig. 2. While there is a substantial correction to the Standard Model decoupling temperature, a decoupling temperature of a few hundred MeV is only possible for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }250300`$GeV, which is unrealistically low. The decoupling temperature for a 1 TeV scale is 1 GeV, down from the Standard Model result of 1.6 GeV. Thus, a mechanism for lowering the photon-neutrino decouping temperature below $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$ remains elusive.

## Acknowledgement

One of us (K.K.) wishes to thank her fellow participants in the Michigan State University High School Honors Science Program for numerous helpful conversations. This research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant PHY-9802439 and by the Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-FG13-93ER40757.

## References


text:
# SINGLE PARTICLE SLOW DYNAMICS OF CONFINED WATER

## I INTRODUCTION

Water plays a most fundamental role on earth and its anomalous properties as a function of pressure and temperature are the subject of a longstanding scientific debate. Nevertheless there are still many crucial questions that remain to be answered. Some of the most important are described throughout all the present issue that is dedicated to metastable water . In particular, the supercooled region has attracted a wide attention in the last few years. Thermodynamic as well as transport, dynamic, properties are not completely understood in this region. The main reason is that experimentally water can be supercooled only down to $`T_H236K`$. Then, because of homogeneous nucleation due to impurities, the liquid is driven toward the crystal phase . Therefore studies of the liquid both through classic computer Molecular Dynamics, MD, and through theoretical models offer us ways to penetrate deep inside that region in the attempt to release the information that is not directly accessible to experiments.

In particular the normal limit of supercooling and the possibility of vitrification of water is a fundamental point that necessitates to be clarified. A recent experiment sustains the hypothesis that the amorphous phase can be connected to the normal liquid phase through a reversible thermodynamic path . MD simulations of bulk supercooled SPC/E  water showed a kinetic glass transition as predicted by mode coupling theory (MCT)  at a critical temperature $`T_CT_S`$ , where $`T_S`$ is the singular temperature of water , which is $`T_S=228K`$ or, for SPC/E, $`49`$ degrees below the temperature of maximum density.

Within this framework a comparison of the behavior of the bulk liquid with the same liquid in a confined environment is highly interesting since both the phase diagram and the dynamic behaviour of confined water could present an analogy with the same liquid in the bulk phase. The outcomings of this kind of researches can have therefore important experimental implication for the bulk. In particular experimentally forbidden regions of the phase diagram of bulk water could become accessible through the study of confined water. On the other hand a study of the modification of confined water with respect to the bulk is highly interesting for the development of both biological and industrial applications.

It has been inferred from experiments, although not conclusively proved, that confining water could be equivalent to the supercooling of the bulk . In this paper I will inquire on how far this analogy can be pushed for SPC/E water confined in a silica pore and its bulk phase.

Among the different systems studied experimentally water confined in porous Vycor glass is one of the most interesting with relevance to catalytic processes and enzymatic activity. Vycor offers in fact to water a well characterized network of cilidrical pores, is composed of simple molecules $`SiO_2`$, has a quite well characterized structure with a sharp distribution of pore sizes with an average diameter of $`40\pm 5\AA `$, i.e. the same order of magnitude of many biological confining environments, and a strongly hydrophilic inner surface. For these reasons several experiments on water-in-Vycor have been performed .

I shall show in the following the results concerning the single particle dynamics obtained from a series of MD simulations of SPC/E water confined in a cylindrical silica cavity . The pore has been modeled to represent the average properties of Vycor pores. The simulated system from one side represents therefore a rather general confining environment and from the other offers the possibility of a direct comparison with experiments. The results shown in the following are focused on the role of hydration level on slow dynamics of confined water in comparison with the bulk properties upon supercooling.

In the next section the details of the model of the pore are described together with the simulation details. In the third section the single particle dynamics of confined water is discussed in comparison with that of bulk SPC/E water. The last section concludes the paper with a discussion on the results.

## II MODEL AND SIMULATION DETAILS

A single pore has been constructed for the simulations since in the range of timescales involved in this kind of dynamics water does not leak out of the pore. A cubic cell of vitreous $`SiO_2`$ was built by melting a $`\beta `$-cristobalite single crystal and then by quenching the system down to ambient temperature . The side of the cube is $`d70`$ $`\AA `$. Inside the cell a cylindrical cavity, the pore, with diameter of $`40`$ $`\AA `$ was created by removing all the atoms lying within a distance of $`R=20`$ $`\AA `$ from the z-axis passing through the center of the cube. The inner surface of the pore was then “corrugated” by removing from it all the $`Si`$ atoms which were bonded to less than four $`O`$. At the surface oxygen atoms can be classified as bridging oxygens (bO) if they are bonded to at least two silicon atoms, non-bridging oxygens (nbO) otherwise. Then the dangling bonds of the nbO were saturated by attaching an hydrogen to each nbO. This procedure mimics the experimental preparation of the sample of water-in-Vycor in which internal surfaces of dessicated Vycor are hydrogenated before hydration. At the end of this process the cell contains $`6400`$ silica atoms, $`12500`$ bO and $`230`$ nbO. This last number yields a surface density of acidic hydrogen of $`2.5`$ $`nm^2`$ in good agreement with the $`2.3`$ $`nm^2`$ obtained in the experiments . The simulations have been performed in the NVE ensemble introducing water molecules into the pore. Water molecules interact among themselves via a SPC/E potential, and with Vycor atoms via an effective pair potential . Both potentials have a Coulombic part plus a Lennard Jones term between oxygens. The parameters of the simulation are reported elsewhere . The interactions cutoff is $`9`$ $`\AA `$ and the shifted force method has been used. For the Coulomb interaction it was checked that with respect to the correct use of the Ewald summation this technique was not producing qualitatively different results . The timestep of the simulations was 2.5 fs. Equilibration, reached through a Berendsen thermostat , was monitored via the time dependence of the potential energy and the total energy. Along the pore axis (z-direction) periodic boundary conditions are applied to the water molecules. Along the remaining directions (xy) water is confined. The glass is rigid.

The molecular dynamics calculations have been performed for different numbers of water molecules, corresponding to different levels of hydration of the pore. The definition of hydration level of the pore deserves some consideration. Experimentally Vycor glass absorbs water up to $`25\%`$ of its dry weight, this is defined as equilibrium or full hydration ($`h_f0.25`$ g of water/ g of Vycor). The experimental density of water when confined in such a pore at full hydration is estimated to be $`11\%`$ less than its bulk value at ambient conditions i.e. $`\rho _W=0.0297`$ molecules/$`\AA ^3=0.8877g/cm^3`$ . A partially hydrated sample is then experimentally obtained by absorption of water in the vapor phase until the desired level of hydration is reached. For the designed pore of this simulation the density of the full hydration is obtained for $`N_W=2661`$, where $`N_W`$ is the number of water molecules introduced in the pore. The five hydration levels investigated in the present work are reported in Table I. I will discuss here the results obtained for two temperatures: $`T=298`$ $`K`$ and $`T=240`$ $`K`$.

The snapshots, see Fig.1, of the system at ambient temperature show that the simulated surface is strongly hydrophilic. At all the degree of hydration water adsorbs on the Vycor surface. A wide variety of water cluster is visible for the lowest global density investigated $`\rho _W=0.1687`$ $`g/cm^3`$, which is lower than the estimated monolayer coverage ($`\rho _W0.2219`$ $`g/cm^3`$).

The density profiles of the oxygen atoms of confined water are shown in Fig.2. It is observed already at lower hydrations the presence of a layer of water molecules wetting the substrate surface. At nearly full hydration two layers of water with higher than bulk density are evident. Few molecules are trapped inside small pockets close to the surface, which are a byproduct of the “sample preparation process”. There is a strong tendency of water molecules close to the surface to form hydrogen bonds (HB) with the atoms of the substrate, in particular the hydrogens of water molecules with bO. As a consequence the HB network of water results to be strongly distorted close to the Vycor surface . This is compatible with the findings of recent experiments on water-in-Vycor .

## III SINGLE PARTICLE DYNAMICS OF CONFINED WATER

Bulk SPC/E water, like many glass forming liquid, when supercooled, or when the pressure is increased, develops a diversification of relaxation times scales, one fast and one slow, well described by MCT . In the MCT  scenario a liquid approaches the glass transition point with a dynamic behaviour mastered by the so called “cage effect”. The molecule or atom is trapped by the transient cage formed by its nearest neighbour, $`nn`$. After an initial ballistic regime it starts feeling the potential barrier of its $`nn`$. In this intermediate time region the particle is rattling in the cage formed by this potential barrier. When the cage relaxes the particle is free to move and enters the normal diffusive regime. But as the liquid gets closer to $`T_C`$ the cage relaxation time becomes longer and eventually approaches infinity in the idealized MCT. Below $`T_C`$ cages are frozen and only hopping processes can restore ergodicity allowing the particle to move (extended MCT) . It is important here to stress that the cage effect is usually due in liquids to the increase of density, i.e. of $`nn`$, and in this respect water plays a peculiar role since there is no substantial increase in the number of $`nn`$ on supercooling. It is the increased stiffness of the HB network at low temperature that allows for a “cage” to be formed also in bulk supercooled water.

Signatures of a behaviour à la Mode Coupling can be found in all the correlators that have an overlap with the density. In the following I will analyze for confined water in particular the mean square displacement, MSD, and the single particle density-density correlation function in the Q,t space also called the intermediate scattering function, ISF, or $`F_S(Q,t)`$. The signatures of this diversification of relaxation times and therefore the shouldering of the relaxation laws are more evident for the $`Q`$ values close to the peak of the structure factor that for oxygen at ambient temperature is $`Q=2.25\AA ^1`$. In particular the long time tail of the ISF is predicted to have a stretched exponential behaviour when the system approaches the glass transition.

In Fig.3 the mean square displacement of oxygens is displayed in the non-confined z-direction at ambient temperature as a function of hydration level. After the initial ballistic diffusion, before entering the diffusive regime, a flattening of the curve at intermediate times is observed as the hydration level is decreased. In the inset the bulk diffusion coefficient and the confined ones are displayed. There is a substantial decrease of average mobility as the hydration level in the pore is lowered. Correspondingly the oxygens ISF at the oxygen-oxygen peak of the structure factor, Fig.4, displays a shouldering of the relaxation laws upon decreasing hydration level. All the tails of the correlators of Fig.4 are highly non-exponential. None-the-less these ISF could not be fitted to the same formula used for bulk supercooled water ,

$$F_S(Q,t)=\left[1A(Q)\right]e^{\left(t/\tau _s\right)^2}+A(Q)e^{\left(t/\tau _l\right)^\beta }$$
(1)
except for the lowest hydration. In eq.1 $`A(Q)=e^{a^2Q^2/3}`$ is the Lamb-Mössbauer factor (the analogous of the Debye Waller Factor for the single particle) arising from the cage effect, and $`\tau _s`$ and $`\tau _l`$ are, respectively, the short and the long relaxation times. For the fit of the ISF of $`\rho _W=0.1687`$ $`g/cm^3`$ shown in Fig.4 a cage radius $`a0.44`$ $`\AA `$ is obtained, which is similar to the radius obtained for bulk supercooled water where $`a0.5`$ Å. The lower radius obtained for confined water may be due to the slightly higher density of water close to the surface, see Fig.2. The short relaxation time $`\tau _s0.14`$ ps is again comparable to the bulk value which is $`\tau _s0.2`$ ps. $`\tau _l356`$ ps and $`\beta =0.35`$. The $`\beta `$ associated with $`\tau _l`$ is very low compared to the typical values obtained for the supercooled bulk. Moreover the lowest hydration correspond to less than the monolayer coverage so that the dynamics of this system is that of clusters of water molecules attached to the pore surface. For the lowest hydration it is also observed a bump around $`0.7ps`$ that could be possibly related to the existence of the Boson Peak feature in the $`S(q,\omega )`$ . This point will be discussed at the end of the paragraph. For the remaining correlators of Fig.4 no analytic function was found that could fit the strongly non-exponential tails. Due to the strong hydrophilicity of the pore a diversification of dynamic behaviour is to be expected as we proceed from the pore surface to the center of the pore. In Fig.5 the $`F_S(Q,t)`$ for the highest global density at ambient temperature is split into the contribution coming from the two layers of water molecules closer to the pore surface, outer shells, and into the contribution coming from all the remaining ones, inner shells. The first two layers are defined according to the density profile, Fig.2. The inner shell contribution could be perfectly fit to eq.1 as shown in the figure, while the outer shells one decays to zero over a much longer timescale so that water molecules there behave already as a glass. From the fit it is extracted $`\beta =0.74`$, $`\tau _l=0.75`$ $`ps`$ $`\tau _s=0.21`$ $`ps`$. The fit shows a remarkable agreement and both the $`\tau `$ values are similar to those of bulk water, while for bulk water at ambient temperature $`\beta =1`$. This kind of analysis has been extended for a different hydration and a different temperature.

In Fig.6 the ISF shell analysis is shown at the peak of the structure factor for T=240 K and $`\rho _W=0.4971`$ $`g/cm^3`$. Also in this case the fit to the stretched exponential of the tail of the inner shells contribution is remarkable. From the fit $`\beta =0.62`$, $`\tau _l=11`$ $`ps`$ $`\tau _s=0.16`$ $`ps`$ are extracted. Again the $`\tau _l`$ is similar to that of bulk water at the same temperature while the $`\beta `$ here is much lower. In Fig.7 the $`\tau _l`$ and the $`\beta `$ values extracted from the fits to eq.1 done as a function of $`Q`$ for T=240 K and $`\rho _W=0.4971`$ $`g/cm^3`$ are shown. The $`\beta `$ value reaches a plateau value and the $`\tau _l`$ values show a $`Q^2`$ dependence. Both these behaviours are typical of a glass former undergoing a kinetic glass transition and in particular the $`Q^2`$ behaviour has been observed for example in glycerol close to the glass transition .

Let us now come back to Fig.4 where for the lowest hydration a bump around 0.7 ps is clearly visible. Deeply supercooled bulk water displayed the same peak around 0.35 ps . This overshoot has been observed in simulations of supercooled strong glass formers like $`SiO_2`$ . It has been attributed in literature to the existence of a Boson Peak (BP) in the frequency domain. The BP is an excess of vibrational modes present in many glasses. When this glassy anomaly appears in the liquid state it is considered as precursor of the glass transition. This peak in the ISF has been also alternatively related to a disturbance propagating in a finite box. If there are periodic boundary conditions imposed (z direction for the present system) the disturbance would reenter the box after $`t=L/v_s`$ where $`v_s`$ is the sound velocity . In spite of the possible existence of this finite size effect it has been recently proven that the BP can be detected by MD .

Note that in this system the same bump is present also in the supercooled confined simulation, see Fig.6, and it is more evident for the inner shells. So that the presence of a disordered surface from one side seems to enhance the temperature at which the BP shows up and also its intensity with respect to the bulk. From the other side since the silica glass is rigid in our simulation the water molecules in contact with the glass cannot vibrate much so that practically only the inner shells can sustain vibrations. In Fig.8 same correlators of Fig.6 in the xy and z direction are shown. It is important to stress here that for this system the finite size effect in the xy directions is a feature also of the real pore.

This bump is therefore likely to be observed for water-in-Vycor. Both for the t corresponding to the minima and the maxima of the bump appearing in the lowest curves of Fig.8 the ratio of the $`t_z/t_{xy}`$ is 1.44 against the 1.75 of the ratio between the lengths of the pore $`L_z=70\AA `$ and $`L_{xy}=40\AA `$. Moreover, although less evident, a BP can be observed also for the outer shells in Fig.8 and the location is completely different with respect to that of the inner shells. So that in our ISFs there is no direct quantitative connection with a finite size effect that can be detected from the shape and the location of these bumps. It can be inferred from these data that both the size and the geometry, and the presence of surface strongly influence the nature of this peak. Size and geometry signatures can be seen in the change of location of the peak in the ISF in xy and z directions, see Fig.8. Signatures of a presence of a hydrophilic rigid surface can be related to the fact that the bump is more evident for the inner shells and is present already at room temperature. The changes of location and shape with respect to the bulk are therefore also probably influenced by all these causes. None-the-less, no quantitative statements can be made at this stage. Therefore both a frequency domain analysis and a instantaneous normal mode analysis can help to shed light on this issue and they are currently in progress on this system.

## IV DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The results discussed in this paper show that for SPC/E water model an analogy between the supercooled bulk and the confined as a function of hydration level of the pore is possible only to the extent that in confined water upon decreasing the hydration level a glassy behaviour appears already at ambient temperature while for bulk water supercooling is required. None-the-less the manner the confined liquid approaches the kinetic glass transition temperature appears completely different. In the pore at higher hydration levels, due to the hydrophilic surface, two quite distinct subsets of water molecules are detectable. Experiments in favour of two phases for confined hydrogen bonded liquids are present in literature . The subset that is in contact with the surface is at higher density with respect to the bulk and is already a glass with low mobility even at ambient temperature. The inner subset displays, like a supercooled liquid, a two step relaxation behaviour à la MCT. It behaves none-the-less differently from the supercooled bulk. In fact it turns out that confined and bulk relaxation times are comparable at the same temperatures but the $`\beta `$ values of the confined water are much lower than those of the bulk always at the same temperature. About the so called Kolhraush exponent $`\beta `$ can be said that in general it is different for different systems but apparently no special significance can be attributed to its numerical value . It is also important to mention here that SPC/E potential is considered one of the best potential for water upon supercooling, but these features are not produced by all potentials. For example the ST2 shows a “jump diffusion” behaviour upon supercooling . These two potential in particular are known to sandwich the behaviour of experimental water so that ST2 water is less and SPC/E water is more structured than real water. On the other hand experimental signatures of MCT behaviour have been found both in the bulk  and in water-in-Vycor  and also experimental signatures of a possible existence of a BP  in water-in-Vycor have been detected. These results are encouraging and more simulations on this pore as a function of temperature and hydration are in progress for a full MCT test and a complete comparison with the bulk.

## V Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Mauro Rovere, Maria Antonietta Ricci and Eckhard Spohr for their contributions to this work, C. Austen Angell, Burkhard Geil, Alberto Robledo and Francesco Sciortino for stimulating discussions on topics related to this paper.


text:
# Cavity implementation of quantum interference in a Λ-type atom

## Abstract

A scheme for engineering quantum interference in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-type atom coupled to a frequency-tunable, single-mode cavity field with a pre-selected polarization at finite temperature is proposed. Interference-assisted population trapping, population inversions and probe gain at one sideband of the Autler-Townes spectrum are predicted for certain cavity resonant frequencies.

Within recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest in the phenomenon of quantum interference between different transition paths of atoms . The principal reason is that it lies at the heart of many new effects and applications of quantum optics, such as lasing without population inversion , electromagnetically-induced transparency , enhancement of the index of refraction without absorption , fluorescence quenching , spectral line narrowing .

The basic system consists of a singlet state connected to a closely-spaced doublet by a single electromagnetic vacuum interaction , so that the two transition pathways from the doublet states to the singlet are not independent and may interfere. It is important for these effects that the dipole moments of the transitions involved are parallel, so that the cross-transition terms are maximal. From the experimental point view, however, it is difficult to find isolated atomic systems which have parallel moments .

Various alternative proposals  have been made for generating quantum interference effects. For example, for three-level atomic systems (in $`V`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ configurations) excited by two laser fields: one being a strong pump field to drive two levels (say $`|1`$ and $`|2`$) and the other being a weak probe field at different frequency to probe the levels $`|0`$ and $`|1`$ or $`|2`$, the strong coherent field can drive the levels $`|1`$ and $`|2`$ into superpositions of these states, so that different atomic transitions are correlated. For such systems, the cross-transition terms are evident in the atomic dressed picture . A four-level atom with two closely-spaced intermediate states coupled to a two-mode cavity can also show the effect of quantum interference . In fact, the experimental observation of the interference-induced suppression of spontaneous emission was carried out in sodium dimers where the excited sublevels are superpositions of singlet and triplet states that are mixed by a spin-orbit interaction .

The major purpose of this Letter is to propose a scheme whereby quantum interference can be readily engendered in realistic, practical situations. We study a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-type atom coupled to a frequency-tunable, single-mode cavity field with a pre-selected polarization which is damped by a thermal reservoir, and show that maximal quantum interference (equivalently, two parallel dipole transition moments) can be achieved in such a system. Interference-assisted population trapping, population inversions and probe gain at one component of the Autler-Townes spectrum are predicted for certain cavity resonant frequencies.

The model consists of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-type three-level atom with the ground sublevels $`|0`$ and $`|1`$, with a level splitting $`\omega _{10}=E_1E_0`$, coupled by the single-mode cavity field to the excited level $`|2`$. Direct transitions between the ground doublet $`|0`$ and $`|1`$ are dipole forbidden. The master equation for the total density matrix operator $`\rho _T`$ in the frame rotating with the average atomic transition frequency $`\omega _0=(\omega _{20}+\omega _{21})/2`$ takes the form

$$\dot{\rho }_T=i[H_A+H_C+H_I,\rho _T]+\rho _T,$$
(1)
with

$`H_A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _{10}}{2}}\left(A_{11}A_{00}\right),`$ (2)
$`H_C`$ $`=`$ $`\delta a^{}a,`$ (3)
$`H_I`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(g_1A_{12}+g_0A_{02}\right)a^{}h.c.,`$ (4)
$`\rho _T`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa (N+1)\left(2a\rho _Ta^{}a^{}a\rho _T\rho _Ta^{}a\right)`$ (6)
$`+\kappa N\left(2a^{}\rho _Taaa^{}\rho _T\rho _Taa^{}\right),`$
where $`H_C`$, $`H_A`$ and $`H_I`$ are the unperturbed cavity, the unperturbed atom and the cavity-atom interaction Hamiltonians respectively, while $`\rho _T`$ describes damping of the cavity field by the continuum electromagnetic modes at finite temperature, characterized by the decay constant $`\kappa `$ and the mean number of thermal photons $`N`$; $`a`$ and $`a^{}`$ are the photon annihilation and creation operators of the cavity mode, and $`A_{ij}=|ij|`$ is the atomic population (the dipole transition) operator for $`i=j`$ $`(ij)`$; $`\delta =\omega _C\omega _0`$ is the cavity detuning from the average atomic transition frequency, and $`g_i=𝐞_\lambda 𝐝_{i2}\sqrt{\mathrm{}\omega _C/2ϵ_0V}(i=0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1})`$ is the atom-cavity coupling constant with $`𝐝_{i2}`$, the dipole moment of the atomic transition from $`|2`$ to $`|i`$ , $`𝐞_\lambda `$, the polarization of the cavity mode, and $`V`$, the volume of the system. In the remainder of this work we assume that the polarization of the cavity field is pre-selected, i.e., the polarization index $`\lambda `$ is fixed to one of two possible directions.

In this paper we are interested in the bad cavity limit: $`\kappa g_i`$, that is the atom-cavity coupling is weak, and the cavity has a low $`Q`$ so that the cavity field decay dominates. The cavity field response to the continuum modes is much faster than that produced by its interaction with the atom, so that the atom always experiences the cavity mode in the state induced by the thermal reservoir. Thus one can adiabatically eliminate the cavity-mode variables, giving rise to a master equation for the atomic variables only , which takes the form,

$`\dot{\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`i[H_A,\rho ]`$ (12)
$`+\{F(\omega _{10})(N+1)[|g_0|^2(A_{02}\rho A_{20}A_{22}\rho )+g_0g_1^{}A_{02}\rho A_{21}]`$
$`+F(\omega _{10})(N+1)\left[|g_1|^2\left(A_{12}\rho A_{21}A_{22}\rho \right)+g_0^{}g_1A_{12}\rho A_{20}\right]`$
$`+F(\omega _{10})N\left[|g_0|^2\left(A_{20}\rho A_{02}\rho A_{00}\right)+g_0g_1^{}\left(A_{21}\rho A_{02}\rho A_{01}\right)\right]`$
$`+F(\omega _{10})N\left[|g_1|^2\left(A_{21}\rho A_{12}\rho A_{11}\right)+g_0^{}g_1\left(A_{20}\rho A_{12}\rho A_{10}\right)\right]`$
$`+h.c.\},`$
where $`F(\pm \omega _{10})=\left[\kappa +i(\delta \pm \omega _{10}/2)\right]^1`$.

Obviously, the equation (12) describes the cavity-induced atomic decay into the cavity mode. The real part of $`F(\pm \omega _{10})|g_i|^2`$ represents the cavity-induced decay rate of the atomic excited level $`|2`$ to the ground level $`|i`$, $`(i=0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1})`$, while the imaginary part is associated with the frequency shift of the atomic level resulting from the interaction with the thermal field in the detuned cavity. The other terms, $`F(\pm \omega _{10})g_ig_j^{},(ij)`$, however, represent the cavity-induced correlated transitions of the atom, i.e., as the atom emits a photon from the excited level $`|2`$ to one of the ground sublevels, say $`|0`$ for example, it drives an absorption of the same photon on a different transition, $`|1|2`$ , and vice versa, which give rise to the effect of quantum interference.

The effect of quantum interference is very sensitive to the orientations of the atomic dipoles and the polarization of the cavity mode. For instance, if the cavity-field polarization is not pre-selected, as in free space, one must replace $`g_ig_j^{}`$ by the sum over the two possible polarization directions, giving $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\lambda g_ig_j^{}𝐝_{i2}𝐝_{j2}^{}`$ . Therefore, only non-orthogonal dipole transitions lead to nonzero contributions, and the maximal interference effect occurs with the two dipoles parallel. As pointed out in Refs.  however, it is questionable whether there is a isolated atomic system with parallel dipoles. Otherwise, if the polarization of the cavity mode is fixed, say $`𝐞_\lambda =𝐞_x`$, the polarization direction along the $`x`$-quantization axis, then $`g_ig_j^{}\left(𝐝_{i2}\right)_x\left(𝐝_{j2}^{}\right)_x`$, which is nonvanishing, regardless of the orientation of the atomic dipole matrix elements. Actually, by selecting the cavity polarization, we can in some cases even engineer a system with two parallel or anti-parallel dipole moments. For example, for an atom with a $`|j,m=0|j1,m=\pm 1`$ transition, if we pre-selected the cavity polarization to the $`x`$-quantization axis, we will achieve a scheme with two parallel dipole moments, whereas if the cavity polarization is pre-selected to the $`y`$-quantization axis, we will have a system with two anti-parallel dipole moments.

It is apparent that if $`\kappa \delta ,\omega _{10}`$, the frequency shifts are negligibly small. Moreover, if we define the cavity-induced decay rates of the excited level to the ground sublevels as $`\gamma _0=\kappa |g_0|^2/[\kappa ^2+(\delta \omega _{10})^2]|g_0|^2/\kappa `$ and $`\gamma _1=\kappa |g_1|^2/[\kappa ^2+(\delta +\omega _{10})^2]|g_1|^2/\kappa `$, the master equation (12) then reduces to the approximate form

$`\dot{\rho }`$ $``$ $`i[H_A,\rho ]`$ (17)
$`+\gamma _0(N+1)(2A_{02}\rho A_{20}A_{22}\rho \rho A_{22})+\gamma _0N(2A_{20}\rho A_{02}A_{00}\rho \rho A_{00})`$
$`+\gamma _1(N+1)(2A_{12}\rho A_{21}A_{22}\rho \rho A_{22})+\gamma _1N(2A_{21}\rho A_{12}A_{11}\rho \rho A_{11})`$
$`+2\sqrt{\gamma _0\gamma _1}(N+1)A_{12}\rho A_{20}+\sqrt{\gamma _0\gamma _1}N(2A_{21}\rho A_{02}A_{01}\rho \rho A_{01})`$
$`+2\sqrt{\gamma _0\gamma _1}(N+1)A_{02}\rho A_{21}+\sqrt{\gamma _0\gamma _1}N(2A_{20}\rho A_{12}A_{10}\rho \rho A_{10}).`$
This equation is same as that of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-type three-level atom with two parallel transition matrix elements in free space . In other words, the maximal effect of quantum interference in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-type atom can be achieved in a cavity with a pre-selected polarization. Furthermore, transforming eq. (17) into the basis: $`\left\{|2,|S=\left(\sqrt{\gamma _0}|0+\sqrt{\gamma _1}|1\right)/\sqrt{\gamma _0+\gamma _1},|A=\left(\sqrt{\gamma _0}|1\sqrt{\gamma _1}|0\right)/\sqrt{\gamma _0+\gamma _1}\right\}`$, shows that the cavity mode only couples to the states $`|S`$ and $`|2`$ with a cavity-induced decay rate of $`\left(\gamma _0+\gamma _1\right)`$, and the asymmetric state $`|A`$ is decoupled from the excited state $`|2`$. Interestingly, in the case of degenerate ground states ($`\omega _{10}=0`$), the steady-state solution is highly dependent upon initial conditions of the atom. For example, if the atom is initially in the asymmetric state $`|A`$, it will stay in the state forever, i.e., $`|A`$ is a complete trapped state, whereas the steady-state populations are respectively, $`\rho _{22}=N/(2N+1)`$, $`\rho _{SS}=(N+1)/(2N+1)`$ and $`\rho _{AA}=0`$, if the atom is initially in either the symmetric state $`|S`$ or the excited state $`|2`$. Otherwise, for the atom initially in one of the ground doublet, $`\rho _{22}=N/(4N+2)`$, $`\rho _{SS}=(N+1)/(4N+2)`$ and $`\rho _{AA}=1/2`$, where an half population is trapped in the state $`|A`$. It is evident that the existence of the population trapped state and the dependence of the steady-state population on the initial atomic states originate from the cavity induced quantum interference..

Our numerical calculations show no trapped state at all in the nondegenerate case ($`\omega _{10}0`$). Nevertheless, the cavity-induced quantum interference between the two transition paths, $`|0|2`$ and $`|1|2`$ gives rise to the steady-state population inversions and coherence, as shown in Fig. 1, where $`\omega _{10}=2\kappa =200`$, $`N=20`$ and $`g_0=g_1=10`$ are taken. The steady-state populations and coherence are highly dependent on the cavity frequency. The coherence is symmetric with the cavity detuning and reaches the maximum value at $`\delta =0`$, while the population differences are asymmetric. Furthermore, the population inversions may be achieved for certain cavity frequency. For example, if the cavity frequency is tuned to $`139.2<\delta <82.3`$, the population is inverted between the excited level $`|2`$ and the ground sublevel $`|0`$, (i.e., $`\rho _{22}>\rho _{00}`$), whereas $`\rho _{22}>\rho _{11}`$ in the region of $`82.3<\delta <139.2`$. It is clear that $`\rho _{22}>\rho _{11}>\rho _{00}`$ is achieved in the region of $`139.2<\delta <0`$. The steady-state population inversions and nonzero coherence manifests the cavity-induced quantum interference .

Now we investigate the effects of quantum interference on the Autler-Townes spectrum $`A(\omega )`$, by illuminating a weak, frequency-tunable probe field on such a system. One may predict that, in the absence of the cavity-induced interference (i.e., no cross transition, associated with $`g_ig_j^{}`$, is taken into account ), two transition paths, $`|0|2`$ and $`|1|2`$, are independent, which respectively lead to the higher- and lower-frequency sidebands of the absorption doublet with respective linewidths $`\gamma _0\left(2N+1\right)+\gamma _1\left(N+1\right)`$ and $`\gamma _0\left(N+1\right)+\gamma _1\left(2N+1\right)`$. Whereas, the spectral features may be dramatically modified in the presence of the cavity-induced interference. Here we only concentrate on the case $`\omega _{10}2\kappa \gamma _0,\gamma _1,N`$, so that the doublet is well resolved. See for example, in Fig. 2 where $`\omega _{10}=2\kappa =200`$, $`N=20`$, $`g_0=g_1=10`$ and different cavity detunings are taken, in which the solid (dashed) lines represent the spectrum in the presence (absence) of the cavity induced interference. It is clearly shown that, when the cavity is resonant with the average frequency of the atomic transitions, $`\delta =0`$ , the interference widens and strengthens the absorption doublet, which is symmetric, (Fig. 2(a)). Otherwise, it is asymmetric. Rather surprisingly, probe gain may occur at either the lower- or the higher-frequency sideband, e.g., the probe field is amplified at the lower-frequency sideband for $`\delta =50`$ and $`100`$, while at the other sideband for $`\delta =200`$, see in Figs. 2(b)-2(d) for instance. When the cavity detuning is much larger than the ground sublevel splitting and the cavity linewidth, $`\delta \omega _{10},2\kappa `$, the effect of the cavity induced interference is negligible small so that the absorption spectrum is virtually same as that without interference (we show no figure here).

It is well known that the probe absorption of multi-level atoms is attributed to population difference between two dipole transition levels and coherence between two dipole forbidden levels, and either the inverted populations or the coherence can lead to probe gain. As demonstrated in Fig. 1, the population between the two transition levels $`|2`$ and $`|1`$ is inverted in the region of $`82.3<\delta <139.2`$. Therefore, the gain at the lower-frequency sideband stems from the cavity-induced steady-state population inversion between $`|2`$ and $`|1`$ for $`\delta =50`$ and $`100`$, whereas the cavity-induced coherence between the two dipole-forbidden excited sublevels $`|0`$ and $`|1`$ must be the origin of the gain at the higher-frequency one in the case $`\delta =200`$.

In summary, we have shown that maximal quantum interference can be achieved in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-type atom coupled to a single-mode, frequency-tunable cavity field at finite temperature, with a pre-selected polarization in the bad cavity limit. The cavity-induced interference may give rise to the population trapping and inversions, and the probe gain at either sideband of the Autler-Townes doublet, depending upon the cavity resonant frequency, the ground level splitting and the mean number of thermal photons. The gain occurring at different sidebands has the various origin: in the case of $`\delta >0`$, the higher-frequency gain is due to the nonzero coherence, while the lower-frequency one is attributed to the population inversion. As shown in Refs:  that an apply laser coupling to multilevel atoms may result in the steady-state coherence and population inversions. We here present an another scheme whereby they can be generated by the cavity-induced interference.

We should emphasize that there are no special restrictions on the atomic dipole moments in our system, as long as the polarization of the cavity field is pre-selected, and that the effects of the cavity-induced interference occur over ranges of the parameters, and are profound when the ground level splitting is the same order of the cavity linewidth and the mean number of thermal photons $`N1`$, which may make its experimental observation feasible.

###### Acknowledgements.

I greatly acknowledge conversations with Z. Ficek and S. Swain.


text:
# Higher dimensional flat embeddings of (2+1) dimensional black holes

## I Introduction

After Unruh’s work , it has been known that a thermal Hawking effect on a curved manifold  can be looked at as an Unruh effect in a higher flat dimensional space time. According to the global embedding Minkowski space (GEMS) approach , several authors  recently have shown that this approach could yield a unified derivation of temperature for various curved manifolds such as rotating Banados-Teitelboim-Zanelli (BTZ) , Schwarzschild  together with its anti-de Sitter (AdS) extension, Reissner-Nordström (RN)  and RN-AdS .

On the other hand, since its pioneering work in 1992, the (2+1) dimensional BTZ black hole  has become one of useful models for realistic black hole physics . Moreover, significant interests in this model have recently increased with the novel discovery that the thermodynamics of higher dimensional black holes can often be interpreted in terms of the BTZ solution . It is therefore interesting to study the geometry of (2+1) dimensional black holes and their thermodynamics through further investigation.

In this paper we will analyze Hawking and Unruh effects of the (2+1) dimensional black holes in terms of the GEMS approach. In section 2 after we briefly recapitulate the known global (2+2) dimensional embedding of the static and rotating (2+1) BTZ black holes, we will newly consider the charged static BTZ black hole. In section 3, we will also treat the novel global higher dimensional flat embeddings of the (2+1) static, rotating, and charged de Sitter(dS) black holes, which are the counterpart of usual BTZ black holes. In particular, we will show that the charged dS black hole is embedded in (3+2) GEMS, contrast to the charged BTZ one with (3+3) GEMS structure.

## II BTZ Anti-de Sitter Geometry

### A Static BTZ Space

In this subsection we begin with a brief recapitulation of the GEMS approach to temperature given in Ref. , for the well known (2+1) dimensional uncharged static BTZ black hole which is described by the 3-metric

$$ds^2=N^2dt^2N^2dr^2r^2d\varphi ^2$$
(1)
with the lapse function

$$N^2=M+\frac{r^2}{l^2}.$$
(2)
Here one notes that this BTZ space originates from AdS one via the geodesic identification $`\varphi =\varphi +2\pi `$. The (2+2) AdS GEMS $`ds^2=(dz^0)^2(dz^1)^2(dz^2)^2+(dz^3)^2`$ is then given by the coordinate transformations for $`rr_H`$ (the extension to $`r<r_H`$ is given in Ref. .) with the event horizon $`r_H=M^{1/2}l`$ as follows

$`z^0`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2r_H^2}{l^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l^2}}t,`$ (3)
$`z^1`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2r_H^2}{l^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l^2}}t,`$ (4)
$`z^2`$ $`=`$ $`l{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l}}\varphi ,`$ (5)
$`z^3`$ $`=`$ $`l{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l}}\varphi ,`$ (6)
where $`k_H=r_H/l^2`$ is the Hawking-Bekenstein horizon surface gravity. These flat embeddings of the curved spacetime are easily obtained by comparing the 3-metric (1) with $`ds^2=\eta _{ab}dz^adz^b`$, where $`a,b=0,\mathrm{},3`$ and $`\eta _{ab}=(+,,,+)`$.

In static detectors ($`\varphi `$, $`r=`$ const) described by a fixed point in the ($`z^2`$, $`z^3`$) plane (for example $`\varphi =0`$ gives $`z^2=0`$, $`z^3=`$const), one can have constant 3-acceleration

$$a=\frac{r}{l(r^2r_H^2)^{1/2}}$$
(7)
and constantly accelerated motion in ($`z^0`$,$`z^1`$) with the Hawking temperature

$$T=\frac{a_4}{2\pi }=\frac{r_H}{2\pi l(r^2r_H^2)^{1/2}}$$
(8)
which yields the relation $`a_4=(a^2l^2)^{1/2}`$. Here one notes that the above Hawking temperature is also given by the relation

$$T=\frac{1}{2\pi }\frac{k_H}{g_{00}^{1/2}}.$$
(9)
Note that in the asymptotic limit the BTZ space approaches to AdS one whose acceleration at infinity is given by $`a=l^1`$ to yield zero temperature (no Hawking particle at infinity). The Rindler horizon condition $`(z^1)^2(z^0)^2=0`$ implies $`r=r_H`$ and the remaining embedding constraint yields $`(z^3)^2(z^2)^2=l^2`$ so that the BTZ solution yields a finite Unruh area $`2\pi r_H`$ due to the periodic identification of $`\varphi `$ mod $`2\pi `$ . The well-known entropy $`2\pi r_H`$ of the static BTZ space is then given by the transverse Rindler area .

### B Rotating BTZ Space

In this subsection we also briefly summarize the results of the GEMS approach given in Ref. , for the well known (2+1) dimensional uncharged rotating BTZ black hole which is described by the 3-metric

$$ds^2=N^2dt^2N^2dr^2r^2(d\varphi +N^\varphi dt)^2,$$
(10)
where the lapse and shift functions are

$$N^2=M+\frac{r^2}{l^2}+\frac{J^2}{4r^2},N^\varphi =\frac{J}{2r^2},$$
(11)
respectively. Note that for the nonextremal case there exist two horizons $`r_\pm (J)`$ satisfying the following equations,

$$0=M+\frac{r_\pm ^2}{l^2}+\frac{J^2}{4r_\pm ^2},$$
(12)
respectively. Then, without solving these equations explicitly we can rewrite the mass $`M`$ and angular momentum $`J`$ in terms of these outer and inner horizons as follows

$$M=\frac{r_+^2+r_{}^2}{l^2},J=\frac{2r_+r_{}}{l}.$$
(13)
Furthermore by using these relations, we can rewrite the lapse and shift functions as

$$N^2=\frac{(r^2r_+^2)(r^2r_{}^2)}{r^2l^2},N^\varphi =\frac{r_+r_{}}{r^2l},$$
(14)
respectively. Here one notes that this BTZ space originates from AdS one via the geodesic identification $`\varphi =\varphi +2\pi `$. The (2+2) AdS GEMS $`ds^2=(dz^0)^2(dz^1)^2(dz^2)^2+(dz^3)^2`$ is then given by the coordinate transformations for $`rr_+`$ as follows

$`z^0`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{(r^2r_+^2)(r_+^2r_{}^2)}{r_+^2l^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sinh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_+}{l^2}}t{\displaystyle \frac{r_{}}{l}}\varphi \right),`$ (15)
$`z^1`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{(r^2r_+^2)(r_+^2r_{}^2)}{r_+^2l^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{cosh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_+}{l^2}}t{\displaystyle \frac{r_{}}{l}}\varphi \right),`$ (16)
$`z^2`$ $`=`$ $`l\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2r_{}^2}{r_+^2r_{}^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sinh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_+}{l}}\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{r_{}}{l^2}}t\right),`$ (17)
$`z^3`$ $`=`$ $`l\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2r_{}^2}{r_+^2r_{}^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{cosh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_+}{l}}\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{r_{}}{l^2}}t\right),`$ (18)
where the surface gravity is given as $`k_H=(r_+^2r_{}^2)/(r_+l^2)`$. For the trajectories, which follow the Killing vector $`\xi =_tN^\varphi _\varphi `$, one can obtain constant 3-acceleration

$$a=\frac{r^4r_+^2r_{}^2}{r^2l(r^2r_+^2)^{1/2}(r^2r_{}^2)^{1/2}}.$$
(19)
and the Hawking temperature

$$T=\frac{a_4}{2\pi }=\frac{r(r_+^2r_{}^2)}{2\pi r_+l(r^2r_+^2)^{1/2}(r^2r_{}^2)^{1/2}}.$$
(20)
Here these trajectories do not describe pure Rindler motion in the GEMS combining accelerated motion in the $`(z^0,z^1)`$ plane with a spacelike motion in $`(z^2,z^3)`$ .

Finally, the entropy of the rotating BTZ space is given by $`2\pi r_+(J)`$ which reproduces the uncharged static BTZ black hole entropy $`2\pi r_H`$ in the vanishing $`J`$ limit. Note that all results in this subsection will be useful to analyze the dS cases.

### C Charged BTZ Space

We now newly consider the charged static BTZ black hole solution where the 3-metric (1) is described by the charged lapse

$$N^2=M+\frac{r^2}{l^2}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}r.$$
(21)
Here the mass $`M`$ can be rewritten as $`M=\frac{r_H^2}{l^2}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}r_H`$ with the horizon $`r_H(Q)`$, which is the root of $`M+\frac{r^2}{l^2}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}r=0`$.

As in the previous two cases, we can first find the $`r^2d\varphi ^2`$ term in the 3-metric by introducing two coordinates $`(z^3,z^4)`$ in Eq. (33), giving $`(dz^3)^2+(dz^4)^2=r^2d\varphi ^2+\frac{l^2}{r_H^2}dr^2`$. Then, in order to obtain the $`N^2dt^2`$ term, we make ansatz of two coordinates, $`(z^0,z^1)`$ in Eq. (33), which, together with the above $`(z^3,z^4)`$, yields

$`(dz^0)^2(dz^1)^2(dz^3)^2+(dz^4)^2`$ (22)
$`=N^2dt^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_H^2(\frac{r^2}{l^2}\frac{Q^2r_H}{r})^2}{(\frac{r_H^2}{l^2}Q^2)^2(\frac{r^2r_H^2}{l^2}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}\frac{r}{r_H})}}{\displaystyle \frac{l^2}{r_H^2}}\right)dr^2r^2d\varphi ^2.`$ (23)
Since the combination of $`N^2dr^2`$ and $`dr^2`$ term in Eq. (22) can be separated into positive definite part and negative one as follows

$`\left(k_H^1Q^2{\displaystyle \frac{l[r^2+r_H^2+2r^2f(r,r_H)]^{1/2}}{r_H^2r[1\frac{Q^2l^2}{r_H^2}f(r,r_H)]^{1/2}}}\mathrm{d}r\right)^2\left(k_H^1Q{\displaystyle \frac{[2r_H^2+\frac{r_H^4+Q^4l^4}{r_H^2}f(r,r_H)]^{1/2}}{r_H^2[1\frac{Q^2l^2}{r_H^2}f(r,r_H)]^{1/2}}}\mathrm{d}r\right)^2`$ (24)
$`(dz^2)^2(dz^5)^2,`$ (25)
we can obtain desired flat global embeddings of the corresponding curved 3-metric as

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`(dz^0)^2(dz^1)^2(dz^2)^2(dz^3)^2+(dz^4)^2+(dz^5)^2`$ (26)
$`=`$ $`N^2dt^2N^2dr^2r^2d\varphi ^2.`$ (27)
Note that the $`z^2`$ and $`z^5`$ are monotonic functions in the range of $`Qlr_H<r`$.

As results, we here summarize the (3+3) AdS GEMS given by the following coordinate transformations with an additional timelike dimension $`z^5`$

$`z^0`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2r_H^2}{l^2}}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sinh}k_Ht`$ (28)
$`z^1`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2r_H^2}{l^2}}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{cosh}k_Ht`$ (29)
$`z^2`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1Q^2{\displaystyle dr\frac{l[r^2+r_H^2+2r^2f(r,r_H)]^{1/2}}{r_H^2r[1\frac{Q^2l^2}{r_H^2}f(r,r_H)]^{1/2}}}`$ (30)
$`z^3`$ $`=`$ $`l{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l}}\varphi `$ (31)
$`z^4`$ $`=`$ $`l{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l}}\varphi `$ (32)
$`z^5`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1Q{\displaystyle dr\frac{[2r_H^2+\frac{r_H^4+Q^4l^4}{r_H^2}f(r,r_H)]^{1/2}}{r_H^2[1\frac{Q^2l^2}{r_H^2}f(r,r_H)]^{1/2}}},`$ (33)
where the surface gravity is given by $`k_H=[(r_H/l)^2Q^2]/r_H`$ and

$$f(r,r_H)=\frac{2r_H^2}{r^2r_H^2}\mathrm{ln}\frac{r}{r_H}$$
(34)
which, due to L’Hospital’s rule, approaches to unity as $`r`$ goes to infinity.

In static detectors ($`\varphi `$, $`r=`$ const) described by a fixed point in the ($`z^2`$,$`z^3`$) plane (for example $`\varphi =0`$ gives $`z^2=0`$, $`z^3=`$const), one can have constant 3-acceleration

$$a=\frac{rQ^2l^2/r}{l[r^2r_H^22Q^2l^2\mathrm{ln}(r/r_H)]^{1/2}}$$
(35)
and constantly accelerated motion in ($`z^0`$,$`z^1`$) with the Hawking temperature

$$T=\frac{a_6}{2\pi }=\frac{r_HQ^2l^2/r_H}{2\pi l[r^2r_H^22Q^2l^2\mathrm{ln}(r/r_H)]^{1/2}},$$
(36)
which is also attainable via the relation (9). Note that, in the GEMS where one can have a constant Rindler-like accelerated motion, the temperature (36) measured by the detector agrees with the temperature given by the response function of particle detectors. Here one can easily check that, in the uncharged limit where the spacelike $`z^2`$ and timelike $`z^5`$ dimensions in Eq. (33) vanish, the above coordinate transformations are exactly reduced to the previous one (6) for the uncharged static BTZ case. Moreover, the desired black hole temperature is given as

$$T_0=g_{00}^{1/2}T=\frac{(r_H/l)^2Q^2}{2\pi r_H},$$
(37)
which enters into the black hole thermodynamics relations. Here one notes that use of incomplete embedding spaces, that cover only $`r>r_H`$ (as for example in Ref. ), will lead to observers there for whom there is no event horizon, no loss of information, and no temperature.

We now see how the BTZ solution yields a finite Unruh area due to the periodic identification of $`\varphi `$ mod $`2\pi `$. The Rindler horizon condition $`(z^1)^2(z^0)^2=0`$ implies $`r=r_H`$ and the remaining embedding constraints yield $`z^2=f_1(r)`$, $`z^5=f_2(r)`$ and $`(z^4)^2(z^3)^2=l^2`$ where $`f_1(r)`$ and $`f_2(r)`$ can be read off from Eq. (33). The area of the Rindler horizon is now described as

$`{\displaystyle dz^2dz^3dz^4dz^5\delta (z^2f_1(r))\delta (z^5f_2(r))\delta ([(z^4)^2(z^3)^2]^{1/2}l)}`$

which, after performing trivial integrations over $`z^2`$ and $`z^5`$, yields the desired entropy of the charged BTZ space

$`{\displaystyle _{l\mathrm{sinh}(\pi r_H/l)}^{l\mathrm{sinh}(\pi r_H/l)}}dz^3{\displaystyle _0^{[(z^3)^2+l^2]^{1/2}}}dz^4\delta ([(z^4)^2(z^3)^2]^{1/2}l)`$ (38)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{l\mathrm{sinh}(\pi r_H/l)}^{l\mathrm{sinh}(\pi r_H/l)}}dz^3{\displaystyle \frac{l}{[l^2+(z^3)^2]^{1/2}}}=2\pi r_H(Q),`$ (39)
which reproduces the entropy $`2\pi r_H`$ of the uncharged BTZ case in the limit $`Q0`$.

It seems appropriate to comment on the minimal extra dimensions needed for desired GEMS. As you may know, spaces of constant curvature can be embedded into flat space with only single extra dimension. This is seen in the previous subsections for the static and rotating BTZ cases, which are embedded in (2+2)-dimensional spaces. On the other hand, since the charged BTZ solution is not locally AdS, we have introduced three extra dimensions for desired GEMS. In the next section, we will also obtain similar results for the uncharged and charged (2+1)-dimensional dS cases.

## III  (2+1) de Sitter Black Holes

### A  Static de Sitter Space

The static dS black hole  is described by the 3-metric (1) with the lapse function

$$N^2=M\frac{r^2}{l^2}.$$
(40)
It arises from dS upon making the geodesic identification $`\varphi =\varphi +2\pi `$. The coordinate transformations to the (3+1) dS GEMS $`ds^2=(dz^0)^2(dz^1)^2(dz^2)^2(dz^3)^2`$ are for $`rr_H`$ with the event horizon $`r_H=M^{1/2}l`$

$`z^0`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_H^2r^2}{l^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l^2}}t,`$ (41)
$`z^1`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_H^2r^2}{l^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l^2}}t,`$ (42)
$`z^2`$ $`=`$ $`l{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l}}\varphi ,`$ (43)
$`z^3`$ $`=`$ $`l{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l}}\varphi ,`$ (44)
where the constant $`r_H`$ are related to the mass.

Even though there is no longer a one to one mapping between the dS GEMS and the BTZ like dS space due to the $`\varphi `$ identification, following a detector motion with certain initial condition such as $`\varphi (t=0)=0`$ still yields a unique trajectory in the embedding space. If the detector trajectory maps into an Unruh one in the dS GEMS without ambiguity, then one can exploit it to evaluate temperature.

Now let us consider static detectors ($`\varphi `$, $`r`$ $`=`$ const). These detectors have constant 3-acceleration

$$a=\frac{r}{l(r_H^2r^2)^{1/2}},$$
(45)
and are described by a fixed point in the ($`z^2,z^3`$) plane (for example $`\varphi =0`$ gives $`z^2=0,`$ $`z^3=`$const), to yield constantly accelerated motion in ($`z^0,z^1`$) with the Hawking temperature

$$T=\frac{a_4}{2\pi }=\frac{r_H}{2\pi l(r_H^2r^2)^{1/2}},$$
(46)
which is connected with $`a`$ by the relation $`a_4=(a^2+l^2)^{1/2}`$. Thus, in the GEMS described in (44), we have a constant Rindler-like accelerated motion and the temperature (46) measured by the detector, which agrees with the temperature given by the response function of particle detectors . We also obtain the entropy $`2\pi r_H`$ of the static dS space as in the BTZ case.

### B Rotating de Sitter Space

The rotating Kerr-dS black hole is described by the 3-metric (10) with the lapse and shift functions

$$N^2=M\frac{r^2}{l^2}+\frac{J^2}{4r^2},N^\varphi =\frac{J}{2r^2}.$$
(47)
Similarly to the rotating BTZ black hole case, we can also rewrite the mass $`M`$ and angular momentum $`J`$ in terms of outer and inner horizons $`r_\pm (J)`$ as follows

$$M=\frac{r_+^2r_{}^2}{l^2},J=\frac{2r_+r_{}}{l}.$$
(48)
Furthermore, by using these relations, we can obtain the lapse and shift functions

$$N^2=\frac{(r_+^2r^2)(r^2+r_{}^2)}{r^2l^2},N^\varphi =\frac{r_+r_{}}{r^2l},$$
(49)
respectively. It arises from dS upon making the geodesic identification $`\varphi =\varphi +2\pi `$. The coordinate transformations to the (3+1) dS GEMS $`ds^2=(dz^0)^2(dz^1)^2(dz^2)^2(dz^3)^2`$ are for $`rr_+`$

$`z^0`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{(r_+^2+r_{}^2)(r_+^2r^2)}{r_+^2l^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sinh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_+}{l^2}}t{\displaystyle \frac{r_{}}{l}}\varphi \right),`$ (50)
$`z^1`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{(r_+^2+r_{}^2)(r_+^2r^2)}{r_+^2l^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{cosh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_+}{l^2}}t{\displaystyle \frac{r_{}}{l}}\varphi \right),`$ (51)
$`z^2`$ $`=`$ $`l\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2+r_{}^2}{r_+^2+r_{}^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_+}{l}}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{r_{}}{l^2}}t\right),`$ (52)
$`z^3`$ $`=`$ $`l\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2+r_{}^2}{r_+^2+r_{}^2}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_+}{l}}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{r_{}}{l^2}}t\right),`$ (53)
where the constants $`r_\pm (J)`$ are related to the mass and angular momentum as in Eq. (48).

Similar to the rotating BTZ case, for the trajectories which follow the Killing vector $`\xi =_tN^\varphi _\varphi `$, we obtain constant 3-acceleration

$$a=\frac{r^4+r_+^2r_{}^2}{r^2l(r_+^2r^2)^{1/2}(r^2+r_{}^2)^{1/2}},$$
(54)
and the Hawking temperature

$$T=\frac{a_4}{2\pi }=\frac{r(r_+^2+r_{}^2)}{2\pi r_+l(r_+^2r^2)^{1/2}(r^2+r_{}^2)^{1/2}}.$$
(55)
Note that as in the rotating BTZ black hole these trajectories do not describe pure Rindler motion in the GEMS. On the other hand, the entropy $`2\pi r_+(J)`$ of the rotating Kerr-dS space also reproduces the uncharged static dS black hole entropy $`2\pi r_H`$ in the vanishing $`J`$ limit.

### C Charged de Sitter Space

We now consider the charged static dS black hole solution where the 3-metric (1) is described by the charged lapse

$$N^2=M\frac{r^2}{l^2}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}r.$$
(56)
Here the mass $`M`$ can be rewritten as $`M=\frac{r_H^2}{l^2}+2Q^2\mathrm{ln}r_H`$ with the horizon $`r_H(Q)`$, which is the root of $`M\frac{r^2}{l^2}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}r=0`$.

After similar algebraic manipulation by following the previous steps described in Sec. II.C, we obtain the (3+2) dS GEMS $`ds^2=(dz^0)^2(dz^1)^2(dz^2)^2(dz^3)^2+(dz^4)^2`$ given by the coordinate transformations with only one additional timelike dimension $`z^4`$, in contrast to the BTZ case where one needs to require additionally one spacelike and one timelike dimensions

$`z^0`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_H^2r^2}{l^2}}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sinh}k_Ht,`$ (57)
$`z^1`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_H^2r^2}{l^2}}2Q^2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{cosh}k_Ht,`$ (58)
$`z^2`$ $`=`$ $`l{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l}}\varphi ,`$ (59)
$`z^3`$ $`=`$ $`l{\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_H}}\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{r_H}{l}}\varphi ,`$ (60)
$`z^4`$ $`=`$ $`k_H^1Q{\displaystyle dr\frac{\{Q^2l^2[r^2+r_H^2+2r^2f(r,r_H)]+r^2[2r_H^2+\frac{r_H^4+Q^4l^4}{r_H^2}f(r,r_H)]\}^{1/2}}{r_H^2r(1+\frac{Q^2l^2}{r_H^2}f(r,r_H))^{1/2}}},`$ (61)
where the surface gravity is given by $`k_H=[(r_H/l)^2+Q^2]/r_H`$ and $`f(r,r_H)`$ is given by Eq. (34). Here one can easily check that, in the uncharged limit, the above coordinate transformations are reduced to the previous one (44) for the uncharged static dS case. Note that in dS space we need only one additional dimension $`z^4`$ since the $`Q^2`$ term in the numerator has the same sign with respect to the second term, differently from the charged static BTZ case where we have the opposite relative sign between these two terms to yield two additional dimensions, namely the spacelike $`z^2`$ and timelike $`z^5`$ in (33).

In static detectors ($`\varphi `$, $`r=`$ const) described by a fixed point in the ($`z^2`$, $`z^3`$) plane (for example $`\varphi =0`$ gives $`z^2=0`$, $`z^3=`$const), one can have constant 3-acceleration

$$a=\frac{r+Q^2l^2/r}{l[r_H^2r^22Q^2l^2\mathrm{ln}(r/r_H)]^{1/2}}$$
(63)
and the Hawking temperature in constantly accelerated motion in ($`z^0`$,$`z^1`$)

$$T=\frac{a_5}{2\pi }=\frac{r_H+Q^2l^2/r_H}{2\pi l[r_Hr^22Q^2l^2\mathrm{ln}(r/r_H)]^{1/2}}.$$
(64)
In the GEMS one can thus have a constant Rindler-like accelerated motion and the above Hawking temperature measured by the detector. Note that, in the uncharged static limit $`Q0`$, the above 3-acceleration and Hawking temperature are reduced to the previous ones (45) and (46). The desired black hole temperature is then given as

$$T_0=g_{00}^{1/2}T=\frac{(r_H/l)^2+Q^2}{2\pi r_H}.$$
(65)
Note that the entropy $`2\pi r_H(Q)`$ of the charged dS black hole is also given by the Rindler horizon condition. This is also reduced to the entropy $`2\pi r_H`$ for the uncharged static dS case in the limit of $`Q0`$.

## IV Conclusion

In conclusion, we have shown that Hawking thermal properties map into their Unruh equivalents by globally embedding various curved (2+1) dimensional BTZ and dS spaces into higher dimensional flat ones. The relevant curved space detectors become Rindler ones, whose temperature and entropy reproduce the originals. It would be interesting to consider other interesting applications of GEMS, for example to superradiance in rotating Kerr type geometries  or Chan’s new classes of static BTZ black hole solution due to a chosen asymptotically constant dilation and scalar .

Finally, it seems appropriate to comment on the rotating version of charged BTZ black hole. As pointed out by several authors, if one includes electric charge $`Q`$, the solution of the field equations is attainable only when the angular momentum $`J`$ vanishes . However, very recently several authors  have analyzed the case when all three ’hairs’ $`M,J,`$ and $`Q`$ are different from zero although they have treated in some restricted ranges. Therefore, it is very interesting to show whether the solutions of the rotating charged BTZ and dS black holes may be obtained or not in terms of GEMS approach through further investigation.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank W.T. Kim and M.I. Park for helpful discussions. We acknowledge financial support from the Ministry of Education, BK21 Project No. D-0055, 1999.