text:
# Alberta-Thy-04-00 Quantum Radiation of a Uniformly Accelerated Refractive Body

## 1 Introduction

Electromagnetic radiation from a uniformly accelerated charge is an example of an “eternal problem” of physics. Starting with the work by Born  different aspects of this problem have been discussed again and again (see e.g  and references therin). In this paper we consider a peculiar quantum analogue of this problem.

Consider a small uncharged body and assume that it has internal degrees of freedom interacting with the electromagnetic field. A polarizable body is a well known example of such a system. Electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations induce dipole moments in the body. If a polarizable body is at rest, corrections to the field connected with this effect after averaging result in the change of the energy of the system. In the presence of two polarizable bodies the energy shift depends on the distance between them and results in the well known Casimir effect (see e.g. ). For an accelerated motion of a polarizable body the net result of the emission of its induced fluctuating dipole moment is quantum radiation, or so called dynamical Casimir effect . For a non-relativistic motion and relativistic motion in 2 dimensional spacetime this effect is studied quite well, especially in the special case when the polarizability is very high and a surface of the body can be approximated by a reflecting mirror-like boundary . Much less results have been obtained for the relativistic motion in physical 4 dimensional spacetime. Exception are cases of a uniformely accelerated plane mirror  and relativistic expanding spherical mirrors . See also  where quantum radiation from an accelerated spherical body with a mirror boundary was considered. In this paper we study the effect of quantum radiation generated by an accelerated motion of a small polarizable body.

To simplify calculations, we assume that internal degrees of freedom of a body interact not with the electromagnetic field but with a scalar massless field. We assume that a “refractive index” $`n`$ inside a small ball differs from its vacuum value, 1. To solve the problem, we assume also that $`n`$ is close to 1 and use the perturbation expansion in a small parameter $`n1`$. We consider a simplest accelerated motion when the direction and the value of the acceleration (as measured in the comoving frame) are constant. We calculate a correction to the vacuum Hadamard function created by a uniformly accelerated motion of the body. The main result of the paper is the expression for the quantum average energy density flux at infinity for this problem.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the set up of the problem. We formulate the equation for a massless scalar field in a presence of “refracting” matter and discuss the case when a refractive ball is uniformely accelerated. Section 3 contains the calculation of the perturbed Hadamard function in the presence of the accelerated refractive ball of small size. We also discuss symmetry relations for observables at $`𝒥^+`$ connected with the boost invariance of the problem. The expressions for $`\widehat{\phi }^2^{\text{ren}}`$ and $`\widehat{T}_\nu ^\mu ^{\text{ren}}`$ in the wave zone are obtained and discussed in Section 4. Section 5 contains a discussion of the obtained results.

## 2 Model

### 2.1 A “refractive” body in a static spacetime

Our purpose is to study quantum radiation from a an accelerated “refractive” body. We shall use a simplified model by assuming that a body interacts with a quantum massless scalar field $`\phi `$.

In order to describe the model let us consider first a static gravitational field described by metric

$$dS^2=A^2dt^2+\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j.$$
(2.1)
Here $`A`$ and $`\gamma _{ij}`$ do not depend on $`t`$; $`\xi ^\mu _\mu =_t`$ is a Killing vector, and

$$A^2=\xi ^\mu \xi _\mu .$$
(2.2)
It is well known (see ) that the Maxwell equations in the metric (2.1) are identical to the Maxwell equations in a media with $`\epsilon =\mu =A`$. Thus $`A^1`$ plays the role of the refraction index $`n=1/\sqrt{\epsilon \mu }`$. We use this observation to introduce an effective refraction index into the equations for the scalar field.

Consider a new metric $`dS_n^2`$ related to (2.1) as follows

$$dS_n^2=\frac{A^2}{n}dt^2+n\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j,$$
(2.3)
where the effective refraction index $`n=n(x^i)`$ does not depend on time $`t`$. We choose an equation for the scalar field $`\phi `$ in the form

$$\mathrm{}_n\phi =0,$$
(2.4)
where $`\mathrm{}_n`$ is the “box”-operator in the metric (2.3). Equation

$$dS_n^2=0,$$
(2.5)
gives characteristics for the equation (2.4). Consider a Killing observer moving with a four-velocity $`u^\mu =\xi ^\mu /A`$. In the reference frame of this observer, $`d\tau =Adt`$ is a proper time, $`dl=\sqrt{\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j}`$ is a proper distance, and equation (2.5) takes the form

$$\frac{dl}{d\tau }=\frac{1}{n}.$$
(2.6)
The characteristics of the scalar field equation (2.4) are rays moving with a velocity $`c/n`$ with respect to a static observer, and hence $`n`$ really plays the role of the refraction index.

The equation (2.4) can be identically rewritten in the form

$$\mathrm{}\phi =D(n)\phi ,$$
(2.7)
where

$$D(n)\phi =\frac{n^21}{A^2}_t^2\phi .$$
(2.8)
In the case when $`|n1|1`$, the term $`D(n)\phi `$ can be consided as a perturbation111There is an ambiguity in the form of the metric (2.3). One can multiply the metric by any function $`f(n)`$ which for $`n=1`$ takes the value 1. This operation would modify the form of the operator $`D(n)`$. In particular, a term proportional $`n`$ would be generated. For a wave of characteristic frequency $`\omega `$ it gives a contribution $`\omega \mathrm{\Delta }n/b`$ where $`b`$ is a size of the body. It can be considered as a perturbation only if it is much smaller than the leading derivative terms of the unperturbed operator which are of the order $`\omega ^2`$. For our problem $`\omega a`$ where $`a`$ is the acceleration of the body, and $`ab1`$. In order to escape problems connected with the applicability of the perturbation approach and to simplify the calculations we choose the special case $`f=1`$. . It should be emphasized that the form of the operator $`D(n)`$ implies that equations (2.7)-(2.8) can be easily generalized to the case of a media with dispersion. For a monochromatic wave of frequency $`\omega `$, $`_t^2\omega ^2`$, and in order to take into account the dispersion it is sufficient to put $`n=n(\omega )`$.

In our set-up we assume that $`n=1`$ everywhere outside some four-dimensional region $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ where a refractive body is located, and $`n=\text{const}1`$ inside this region. We assume that a body is static and rigid. Let $`B`$ be a three-dimensional volume occupied by the body at $`t=t_0`$ and $`S=B`$ be a surface of the body. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ a three-dimensional surface formed by Killing trajectories passing through $`S`$. The region $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is defined as a four-dimensional region located inside $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Thus we have $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

The operator (2.8) in a spacetime with such a body is of the form

$$D(n)=\frac{n^21}{A^2}\vartheta (\mathrm{\Gamma })_t^2,$$
(2.9)
where $`\vartheta `$ is the Heavyside step function.

### 2.2 Uniformly accelerated body

Now we adopt the above scheme to the case of a uniformly accelerated body moving in a flat spacetime. Let $`(T,X,Y,Z)`$ be standard Cartesian coordinates so that the metric is

$$dS^2=dT^2+dX^2+dY^2+dZ^2.$$
(2.10)
Denote by $`\gamma `$ a world line of a uniformly moving observer. If $`X`$ is the direction of motion and $`a`$ is the acceleration, $`\gamma `$ is described by the equation

$$X^2T^2=l^2a^2.$$
(2.11)
In what follows the length parameter $`l`$ will play an important role. For this reason it is convenient from the very beginning to introduce dimensional coordinates

$$t=\frac{T}{l},x=\frac{X}{l},y=\frac{Y}{l},z=\frac{Z}{l}.$$
(2.12)
Denote

$$x=(1+\xi )\mathrm{cosh}\eta ,t=(1+\xi )\mathrm{sinh}\eta .$$
(2.13)
Then the metric (2.10) takes the Rindler form

$$dS^2=l^2\left[(1+\xi )^2d\eta ^2+d\xi ^2+dy^2+dz^2\right].$$
(2.14)
This metric is valid in the wedge $`x>|t|`$. The equation (2.11) for $`\gamma `$ takes the form

$$\xi =0,$$
(2.15)
while $`l\eta `$ is a proper time along $`\gamma `$.

Surface $`\eta =\eta _0`$ is a plane with a three-dimensional flat metric. It is convenient to introduce spherical coordinates $`(\beta ,\theta ,\varphi )`$ related to $`(\xi ,y,z)`$ as

$$(\xi ,y,z)=\beta n^i,$$
(2.16)
where

$$n^i=(\mathrm{cos}\theta ,\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi ,\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi )$$
(2.17)
is a unit vector directed from the origin $`\xi =y=z=0`$ to the point $`(\xi ,y,z)`$.

Consider a small uniformly accelerated body, i.e. with the size much smaller than $`l`$. Such a body is at rest in the reference frame (2.14). In the general case the surface of the body is described by the equation

$$\beta =\beta _0(\theta ,\phi ).$$
(2.18)
Relation (2.18) is the equation which defines the surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, while (2.18) together with $`\eta =\eta _0`$ determines a position of the surface of the body at time $`\eta _0`$. Later we consider a special case when the body is a ball and its surface is a sphere of radius $`b`$. For this case

$$\beta _0=\frac{b}{l}=\text{const}.$$
(2.19)
## 3 Quantum Radiation of an Accelerated Refractive Body

### 3.1 Hadamard functions and stress-energy tensor

To find quantum radiation of an uniformly accelerated body with $`|n1|1`$, we consider the operator $`D(n)`$ as a perturbation and use perturbation expansion to obtain an answer.

In the absence of the body the field equation is

$$\mathrm{}\phi =0.$$
(3.1)
Denote

$$G_0^{(1)}(x,x^{})=0|\widehat{\phi }(x)\widehat{\phi }(x^{})+\widehat{\phi }(x^{})\widehat{\phi }(x)|0,$$
(3.2)
the Hadamard function for the standard Minkowski vacuum $`|0`$. One has

$$G_0^{(1)}(x,x^{})=\frac{1}{2\pi ^2l^2}\frac{1}{s^2(x,x^{})},$$
(3.3)
where

$$s^2(x,x^{})=(tt^{})^2+(xx^{})^2+(yy^{})^2+(zz^{})^2,$$
(3.4)
$`(t,x,y,z)`$ and $`(t^{},x^{},y^{},z^{})`$ being dimensionless Cartesian coordinates of points $`x`$ and $`x^{}`$.

Consider the inhomogeneous equation

$$\mathrm{}\phi =j.$$
(3.5)
Its solution is

$$\phi (x)=\phi _0(x)l^4G_0^{\text{ret}}(x,x^{})j(x^{})d^4x^{}.$$
(3.6)
where the retarded Green function $`G_0^{\text{ret}}`$ is

$$G_0^{\text{ret}}(x,x^{})=\frac{1}{2\pi l^2}\delta (s^2(x,x^{}))\vartheta (tt^{}).$$
(3.7)
By considering the right-hand side of (2.7) as a perturbation and using (3.6) one gets

$$G^{(1)}(x,x^{})=G_0^{(1)}(x,x^{})+G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}(x,x^{}),$$
(3.8)
where

$$G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}(x,x^{})=l^4\{_\mathrm{\Gamma }d^4x^{\prime \prime }[G_0^{\text{ret}}(x,x^{\prime \prime })D^{\prime \prime }G_0^{(1)}(x,x^{\prime \prime })$$

$$+G_0^{\text{ret}}(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })D^{\prime \prime }G_0^{(1)}(x,x^{\prime \prime })]\}.$$
(3.9)
Notation $`D^{\prime \prime }`$ indicates that the operator $`D`$ acts on the argument $`x^{\prime \prime }`$. We also use notation $`G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}`$ for $`G^{(1)}G_0^{(1)}`$. That is this object that is required for the calculation of physically observable quantities obtained by subtracting contribution of zero-point fluctuations in an empty spacetime. The integration in (3.9) is performed over the interior of the world-tube $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

By calculating $`G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}(x,x^{})`$ we can find $`\phi ^2^{\text{ren}}`$ and $`T_{\mu \nu }^{\text{ren}}`$ which characterize change in the fluctuations and in the stress-energy tensor generated by the moving body:

$$\phi ^2(x)^{\text{ren}}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{x^{}x}{lim}G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}(x,x^{}),$$
(3.10)
$$T_{\mu \nu }(x)^{\text{ren}}=\underset{x^{}x}{lim}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu ^{}}G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}(x,x^{}).$$
(3.11)
Here

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu ^{}}=\left(\frac{1}{2}\xi \right)_{(\mu }_{\nu ^{})}+\left(\xi \frac{1}{4}\right)g_{\mu \nu ^{}}g^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha _\beta ^{}\frac{1}{2}\xi \left(_{(\mu }_{\nu )}+_{(\mu ^{}}_{\nu ^{})}\right),$$
(3.12)
and $`\xi `$ is a parameter of non-minimal coupling. For $`\xi =0`$ one gets the canonical stress-energy tensor, while for $`\xi 1/6`$ one gets the “improved” one with vanishing trace.

### 3.2 $`\phi ^2(x)^{\text{ren}}`$ and $`T_{\mu \nu }(x)^{\text{ren}}`$ on $`𝒥^+`$

We shall perform calculations assuming that a point of observation, $`x`$, is located very far away from the moving body, in the so-called radiation zone. Denote

$$r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2},u=tr,(x,y,z)=rN^i,$$

$$N^i=(\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Phi }).$$
(3.13)
The coordinate $`u`$ is the dimensionless retarded time, and $`(r,\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Phi })`$ are spherical coordinates in the inertial reference frame. The wave-zone corresponds to taking the limit $`r\mathrm{}`$ with $`u`$ and $`N^i`$ fixed.

For calculations it is convenient to make the point splitting in $`t`$-direction, i.e. to choose $`x`$ and $`x^{}`$ (the arguments of $`G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}`$) so that

$$r=r^{},N^i=N^i^{}.$$
(3.14)
We also put

$$u=u_0\frac{h}{2},u^{}=u_0+\frac{h}{2}.$$
(3.15)
For such a point splitting, $`G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}(x,x^{})`$ becomes a function of $`r,N^i,u_0`$ and $`h`$:

$$G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}(x,x^{})|_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\text{point}}{\text{splitted}}}=G(r,u_0,N^i,h).$$
(3.16)
Since $`G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}`$ is a symmetric function of its coordinates $`x`$ and $`x^{}`$, $`G`$ is an even function of its argument $`h`$.

To obtain $`\phi ^2^{\text{ren}}`$, (3.10), it is sufficient to put $`h=0`$ in (3.16). The calculations of the energy density flux are more involved. One obtains

$$\frac{dE}{dUd\mathrm{\Omega }}R^2T_{UU}^{\text{ren}}r^2T_{uu}^{\text{ren}}=4\pi r^2\underset{h0}{lim}\left[\mathrm{\Pi }_{uu}G(r,u_0,N^i,h)\right],$$
(3.17)
where

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{uu}=\frac{1}{8}\left(14\xi \right)_{u_0}^2\frac{1}{2}_h^2.$$
(3.18)
As we shall see, the leading term of $`G`$ in the wave zone is proportional to $`r^2`$, so that

$$G(r,u_0,N^i,h)=\frac{1}{r^2l^2}\left[𝒢_1(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })+h^2𝒢_2(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })+O(h^4)\right].$$
(3.19)
We include factor $`l^2`$ to restore the correct dimensionality of $`G`$. Functions $`𝒢_1`$ and $`𝒢_2`$ are dimensionless. They do not depend on $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ since the system is invariant with respect to rotation in $`(y,z)`$plane. Combining these results, we get

$$\phi ^2^{\text{ren}}\frac{𝒢_1(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })}{2r^2l^2},$$
(3.20)
$$\frac{dE}{dUd\mathrm{\Omega }}\frac{1}{l^2}\left[\frac{1}{8}\left(14\xi \right)_{u_0}^2𝒢_1(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })𝒢_2(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })\right].$$
(3.21)
### 3.3 Boost invariance

An important additional information about $`\phi ^2^{\text{ren}}`$ and the energy flux at $`𝒥^+`$ can be obtained by using the symmetry of the problem. The spacetime with a uniformly accelerated body is invariant under boost transformations

$$t\stackrel{~}{t}=\gamma (t+vx),$$

$$x\stackrel{~}{x}=\gamma (x+vt),$$
(3.22)
$$\stackrel{~}{y}=y,\stackrel{~}{z}=z,\gamma =(1v^2)^{1/2}.$$

It is easy to determine how this symmetry transformation acts on $`𝒥^+`$. To do this, we introduce retarded spherical coordinates $`(u,r,\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Phi })`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{u},\stackrel{~}{r},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Theta }},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }})`$ for both Minkowski frames $`x`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$, and using (3.22), we find the relation between them. In the wave-zone limit, $`r\mathrm{}`$, $`(u,\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Phi })`$ – fixed, we have

$$\stackrel{~}{r}=\gamma r(1+v\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta })+\gamma \frac{vu\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }}{1+v\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }},$$

$$\stackrel{~}{u}=\frac{\gamma ^u}{1+v\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }},$$
(3.23)
$$\mathrm{tan}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Theta }}=\frac{\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }}{\gamma (\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }+v)},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}=\mathrm{\Phi }.$$

The invariance of $`\phi ^2^{\text{ren}}`$ under the transformation (3.22) requies that

$$𝒢_1(\stackrel{~}{u},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Theta }})=\gamma ^2(1+v\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta })^2𝒢_1(u,\mathrm{\Theta }).$$
(3.24)
The invariance condition (3.24) can be written in the infinitesimal form. For this we put $`v=\delta v`$ and put the first variation of (3.24) with respect to $`\delta v`$ at $`v=0`$ equal to zero. This gives the following relation

$$\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{u}}{v}\right)_{v=0}_u𝒢_1+\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Theta }}}{v}\right)_{v=0}_\mathrm{\Theta }𝒢_1=2\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }𝒢_1.$$
(3.25)
Using (3.23), we get

$$\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{u}}{v}\right)_{v=0}=u\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta },\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Theta }}}{v}\right)_{v=0}=\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }.$$
(3.26)
Hence we have

$$\frac{𝒢_1}{(\mathrm{ln}u)}+\frac{𝒢_1}{\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta })}=2𝒢_1.$$
(3.27)
A general solution of the equation (3.27) can be presented in the form

$$𝒢_1(u,\mathrm{\Theta })=\frac{1}{u^2}_1(\frac{\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }}{u}).$$
(3.28)
In a similar way we get

$$𝒢_2(u,\mathrm{\Theta })=\frac{1}{u^4}_2(\frac{\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }}{u}).$$
(3.29)
## 4 $`\phi ^2^{\text{ren}}`$ and $`T_{\mu \nu }^{\text{ren}}`$ in the Wave Zone

### 4.1 Wave zone approximation

To calculate functions $`𝒢_1`$ and $`𝒢_2`$, we rewrite (3.9) in a more explicit form. Since integration is performed over the world tube $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, it is convenient to write the integral in (3.9) in the Rindler coordinates

$$_\mathrm{\Gamma }d^4x^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}=𝑑\eta 𝑑\omega _0^{\beta _0(\theta ,\varphi )}\beta ^2A𝑑\beta \mathrm{}d^4v\mathrm{},$$
(4.1)
where $`A=1+\beta \mathrm{cos}\theta `$, $`d\omega =\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta d\varphi `$ and $`\beta _0`$ defines the boundary of the body, see (3.20). In these coordinates we also have

$$D=\frac{(n^21)𝒟}{l^2},$$
(4.2)
$$𝒟=A^2\vartheta (\beta _0(\theta ,\varphi )\beta )_\eta ^2.$$
(4.3)
Both Green functions $`G_0^{\text{ret}}`$ and $`G_0^{(1)}`$ depend only on the distance $`s`$ between a point in the wave zone and a point inside or on the boundary of the world tube $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Simple calculations give

$$s^2(x,x^{\prime \prime })=2rwu^2+2uA\mathrm{sinh}\eta +1+2\beta n^1+\beta ^2,$$
(4.4)
where

$$w=u+\beta 𝒏_{}𝑵_{}F(\eta )A,F(\eta )=\mathrm{sinh}\eta N^1\mathrm{cosh}\eta .$$
(4.5)
Here $`(u,r,\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Phi })`$ are retarded spherical coordinates of the point $`x`$ in the wave zone, and $`(\eta ,\beta ,\theta ,\varphi )`$ are Rindler spherical coordinates of the point $`x^{\prime \prime }`$ in the tube $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The vectors $`𝒏`$ and $`𝑵`$ are defined by equations (2.17) and (3.13), respectively, and $`𝒏_{}=(0,n^2,n^3)`$, $`𝑵_{}=(0,N^2,N^3)`$.

An important observation is that the leading, $`1/r^2`$, term of $`G_{\text{ren}}^{(1)}`$ in the wave zone can be obtained by neglecting the terms independent of $`r`$ in (4.4), that is by using the following approximate expressions

$$s^2(x,x^{\prime \prime })2rw_{},s^2(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })2rw_+,$$
(4.6)
where

$$w_\pm =w_0\pm \frac{h}{2},w_0=u_0+\beta 𝒏_{}𝑵_{}F(\eta )A.$$
(4.7)
Combining all these results and using (3.19), we get

$$𝒢_1(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })+h^2𝒢_2(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })+\mathrm{}$$

$$=\frac{n^21}{16\pi ^3}d^4v\left[\delta (w_{})𝒟(\frac{1}{w_+})+\delta (w_+)𝒟(\frac{1}{w_{}})\right].$$
(4.8)
We omitted $`\vartheta `$-function which enters the definition (3.7) of $`G_0^{\text{ret}}`$ since a future-directed null cone emitted from a point in the wave zone never crosses the tube $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

### 4.2 Calculation of integrals

Denote by $`I(\eta _0,h)`$ the following integral

$$I(\eta _0,h)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\eta \delta (w_{})_\eta ^2(\frac{1}{w_+}).$$
(4.9)
Notice that

$$_\eta ^2(\frac{1}{w_+})=\frac{FA}{w_\pm ^2}+\frac{2(F^{})^2A^2}{w_\pm ^3},$$
(4.10)
where $`()^{}=_\eta ()`$. We use here the following property of the function $`F(\eta )`$

$$F^{\prime \prime }(\eta )=F(\eta ).$$
(4.11)
For $`\mathrm{\Theta }0`$, $`F(\eta )`$ is a monotonically increasing function which changes from $`\mathrm{}`$ (at $`\eta =\mathrm{}`$) to $`+\mathrm{}`$ (at $`\eta =\mathrm{}`$). Thus equation $`w_0(\eta )=c`$ has a unique solution for any $`c`$. We denote by $`\eta _0`$ and $`\eta _\pm `$ the solutions of the following equations

$$w_0(\eta _0)=0,w_0(\eta _\pm )=\frac{h}{2}.$$
(4.12)
The integral (4.9) can be easily calculated by using the relation

$$\delta (w_{})=\frac{\delta (\eta _{})}{F^{}(\eta _{})A}.$$
(4.13)
We get

$$I(\eta _0,h)=\frac{1}{F^{}(\eta _{})}\left[\frac{1}{h^2}F(\eta _{})+\frac{2}{h^3}(F^{}(\eta _{}))^2A\right].$$
(4.14)
Now we use the following Taylor expansions

$$\eta _{}=\eta _0+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{h^n}{n!}z_n,$$
(4.15)
$$w_0(\eta _{})=A\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n!}F_0^{(n)}(\eta _{}\eta _0)^n,$$
(4.16)
where $`F_0^{(n)}=F^{(n)}(\eta _0)`$. Substituting (4.15) into (4.16) and using (4.11), we solve equation

$$w_0(\eta _{})=\frac{h}{2}$$
(4.17)
to determine $`z_n`$ in terms of $`F_0`$ and $`F_0^{}`$. For calculations we use Maple. The result is

$$z_1=\frac{1}{2AF_0^{}},z_2=\frac{F_0}{4A^2(F_0^{})^3},z_3=\frac{3(F_0)^2+(F_0^{})^2}{8A^3(F_0^{})^5},$$

$$z_4=\frac{3F_0[5(F_0)^2+3(F_0^{})^2]}{16A^4(F_0^{})^7},$$
(4.18)
$$z_5=\frac{3[35(F_0)^430(F_0)^2(F_0^{})^2+3(F_0^{})^4]}{32A^5(F_0^{})^9}.$$

We performed calculations up to the order $`h^5`$ which is required to calculate (4.9) up to the order $`h^2`$.

Next steps of the calculations are the following:

1. Write $`F(\eta _{})`$ as

$$F(\eta _{})=F_0\mathrm{cosh}(\eta _{}\eta _0)+F_0^{}\mathrm{sinh}(\eta _{}\eta _0).$$
(4.19)
2. Substitute (4.15) into expression (4.19) and using (4.18) get the expression for $`F(\eta _{})`$ in powers of $`h`$.
3. Use the obtained expansion to calculate $`I(\eta _0,h)`$ defined by (4.14).
4. Calculate $`J_0(\eta _0,h)=I(\eta _0,h)+I_0(\eta _0,h)`$ to obtain the expression for

$$J(\eta _0,h)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\eta \left[\delta (w_{})_\eta ^2(\frac{1}{w_+})+\delta (w_+)_\eta ^2(\frac{1}{w_{}})\right].$$
(4.20)

We performed these calculations using Maple. The final result is

$$J(\eta _0,h)=\frac{F_0\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }}{2A^2(F_0^{})^5}[1+\frac{h^2}{8A^2(F_0^{})^4}[(4\mathrm{cosh}^2\eta _0+3)\mathrm{cos}^2\mathrm{\Theta }$$

$$\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}\mathrm{sinh}\eta _0\mathrm{cosh}\eta _0\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }7+4\mathrm{cosh}^2\eta _0]].$$
(4.21)
Thus the right-hand side of (4.8) is

$$\frac{n^21}{16\pi ^3}𝑑\omega _0^{\beta _0(\theta ,\varphi )}𝑑\beta \beta ^2A^1J(\eta _0,h).$$
(4.22)
In this relation $`\eta _0`$ is a solution of the equation

$$F(\eta _0)=A^1(u_0+\beta 𝒏_{}𝑵_{}).$$
(4.23)
Since $`\beta 1`$, one can solve this equation perturbatively. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }_0`$ be a solution of the equation

$$F(\stackrel{~}{\eta }_0)=u_0,$$
(4.24)
then

$$\eta _0\stackrel{~}{\eta }_0\frac{\beta }{F_{}^{}{}_{0}{}^{}}(𝒏_{}𝑵_{}u_0\mathrm{cos}\theta ),$$
(4.25)
where $`F_{}^{}{}_{0}{}^{}=F^{}(\stackrel{~}{\eta }_0)`$. In order to take into account the dependence of $`J(\eta _0,h)`$ on $`\beta `$ it is sufficient to expand $`J`$ near $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }_0`$ and use (4.25). The obtained corrections contain an additional small factor $`b/l`$, where $`b`$ is the size of the body. By neglecting this correction and similar corrections in $`A`$, we get

$$\frac{(n^21)V}{16\pi ^3l^3}J_0(\stackrel{~}{\eta }_0,h),$$
(4.26)
where $`V`$ is the volume of the body. By comparison with (4.8) we get

$$𝒢_1(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })=\frac{F_0\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }}{(F_0^{})^5},$$
(4.27)
$$𝒢_2(u_0,\mathrm{\Theta })=\frac{F_0\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }}{8(F_0^{})^9}\left(4F_0^23\mathrm{sin}^2(\mathrm{\Theta })\right),$$
(4.28)
where

$$=\frac{(n^21)V}{32\pi ^3l^3}.$$
(4.29)
Let us emphasize once again that since we are considering the leading in $`b/l`$ terms, to calculate $`F_0`$ and $`F_0^{}`$ one must put $`b=0`$. In particular, $`F_0=u_0`$. In order to get $`F_0^{}`$ one must first solve the equation

$$F_0\mathrm{sinh}\eta _0\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{cosh}\eta _0=u_0,$$
(4.30)
and determine $`\eta _0=\eta _0(u_0,\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta })`$, ans substitute this value into the definition of $`F_0^{}`$

$$F_0^{}\mathrm{cosh}\eta _0\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{sinh}\eta _0.$$
(4.31)
### 4.3 $`\phi ^2^{\text{ren}}`$ and energy density flux

It is easy to check that $`𝒢_{1,2}`$ obey the symmetry relations (3.28)–(3.29). Really by using relations (4.30) and (4.31) one can rewrite $`𝒢_{1,2}`$ in the form

$$𝒢_1(u,\mathrm{\Theta })=\frac{g_1(z)}{u^2},𝒢_2(u,\mathrm{\Theta })=\frac{g_2(z)}{u^4},$$
(4.32)
where $`z=\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Theta })/u`$ and

$$g_1(z)=\frac{z^2}{(1+z^2)^{5/2}},g_2(z)=\frac{z^2(43z^2)}{8(1+z^2)^{9/2}}.$$
(4.33)
Using equations (3.20) and (3.21), we get

$$\phi ^2^{\text{ren}}\frac{(n^21)b^3ag_1(z)}{48\pi ^2R^2U^2},$$
(4.34)
$$\frac{dE}{dUd\mathrm{\Omega }}=\frac{(n^21)b^3a}{12\pi ^2U^4}(15\xi )g_3(z).$$
(4.35)
Here

$$g_3(z)=\frac{13z^2/4}{(1+z^2)^{9/2}}.$$
(4.36)
In the previous relations we restored dimensional coordinates $`R`$ and $`U=TR`$, and $`z`$ which enters these relations is $`\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Theta })/(aU)`$, where $`a`$ is the acceleration of the body. Plots of functions $`g_1`$ and $`g_3`$ are shown in Figure 1

By integrating over angles one gets the total energy density flux

$$\frac{dE}{dU}=\frac{(n^21)b^3a^3}{30\pi U^2}(15\xi )f(aU),$$
(4.37)
where

$$f(u)=\frac{1+4u^2+5u^4+10u^6}{(1+u^2)^4}.$$
(4.38)
## 5 Conclusion

In this paper we considered the vacuum polarization effects in the presence of a uniformly accelerated dielectic body. We considered a scalar field model. Under assumption that a size of the body, $`b`$, is much smaller than the inverse acceleration, $`a^1`$, we calculated the energy density flux created by the accelerated body at infinity. This flux is given by (4.37), and for the canonical energy (i.e. for $`\xi =0`$) it is always negative. Its divergence $`U^2`$ near $`U=0`$ is connected with the idealization of the problem: it is assumed that the motion remains uniformly accelerated for an infinite interval of time. The boost-invariance property connected with this assumption significantly simplifies calculations. In particular, the quantity $`dE/(dUd\mathrm{\Omega })`$ giving the anglular distribution of the energy density flux at $`𝒥^+`$ at given moment of the retarted time $`U`$, besides common scale dependence, $`U^4`$, depends on the function of one variable, $`\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }/aU`$.

It would be interesting to repeat calculations for a more realistic case of the electromagnetic field. One can expect that some general features, especially those that are related to the symmetry of the problem, will remain similar to the case of the scalar massless field, while details, such as the angular distribution of the energy flux which might depend on the spin of the field will differ. It should be specially emphasized that the dependence of the electromagnetic field equations on the dielectric and magnetic properties of the media is uniquely fixed, while in the model case of a scalar field there is an ambiguity which we specially fixed to simplify the model.

In our consideration we assumed that a uniformly accelerated refractive body is cold, that is its temperature is zero. One can also consider a case when a body is heated. Especialy interesting is a case when the temperature of he body coincides with the Unruh temperature corresponding to its acceleration. General arguments given in  allows one to expect that in this case the quantum radiation vanishes. We hope to return to these problems somewhere else.

Acknowledgments: This work was partly supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. One of the authors (V.F.) is grateful to the Killam Trust for its financial support.


format: text

text:
# I Introduction

## I Introduction

Semi-exclusive reactions of the type $`A+BC+Y`$, where particle $`C`$ emerges with large transverse momentum and the mass of the inclusive system $`Y`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}M_YE_{cm}`$, provide a new tool for probing the structure of hadrons. It is analogous to DIS, $`epeX`$, in the sense that particles $`A`$ and $`C`$ form an effective current which probes the target $`B`$ at large momentum transfer $`t=(p_Ap_C)^2`$, producing the inclusive system $`Y`$. Semi-exclusive cross sections factorize into a calculable short distance interaction times a standard target parton $`(b)`$ distribution $`f_{b/B}(x_S,t)`$ according to

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dtdx_S}(A+BC+Y)=\underset{b}{}f_{b/B}(x_S,t)\frac{d\sigma }{dt}(AbCd),$$
(1)
where

$$x_s=t/(M_Y^2t)$$
(2)
and the momentum transfer $`t`$ serves as factorization scale. For large $`t`$ only compact configurations of particles $`A`$ and $`C`$ participate in the reaction, and their re-interactions with the target are suppressed. The final parton(s) $`d`$ merges with the target spectators to form the inclusive system $`Y`$ (Fig. 1a).

We shall discuss the feasibility of measuring semi-exclusive photon photoproduction, $`\gamma p\gamma Y`$ at HERA. Here the incoming and outgoing photons together form an effective current which probes a parton (quark or gluon) in the target with resolution $`t`$ (Fig. 1a). This picture is valid provided that the final photon emerges isolated from all hadrons in the inclusive system $`Y`$, which is ensured by the kinematic requirement $`W^2/M_Y^21`$, where $`W`$ is the total $`\gamma p`$ center of mass energy, and $`M_Y`$ is the mass of the hadronic system $`Y`$. Scattering on a single parton implies large $`t`$, typically of order $`M_Y^2`$. As we shall see, luminosity limitations impose $`tM_Y^2`$ at HERA, implying small $`x_s`$ in Eq. (2).

It is not a priori obvious how stringent the kinematic restrictions need to be to ensure semi-exclusive dynamics. At moderate $`W^2/M_Y^2`$, photons may be produced via parton fragmentation, following a hard process like $`\gamma qgq`$ (Fig. 1b). Such a process will typically generate hadrons comoving with the photon, implying $`W^2/M_Y^21`$. Depending on the probability that the photon takes most of the momentum of the fragmenting parton such processes can nevertheless be significant at moderate values of $`W^2/M_Y^2`$. Based on the PYTHIA  and LUCIFER  Monte Carlo generators we conclude that fragmentation processes are insignificant for $`W^2/M_Y^2\stackrel{>}{_{}}10`$ and $`t\stackrel{>}{_{}}4\mathrm{GeV}^2`$.

Resolved photon contributions (Fig 1c) are analogously suppressed since hadrons in the beam direction must carry little energy for $`W^2/M_Y^2`$ to be large. This requires the beam parton to carry nearly all the photon energy, and not to emit collinear bremsstrahlung prior to its hard scattering. The pointlike photon component transfers the full beam energy into the hard process and will thus dominate at large $`W^2/M_Y^2`$ and $`t`$.

We also estimate the contribution of the Bethe-Heitler process (Fig. 1d), where the beam photon is virtual and the final photon is emitted from the electron. This process is typically detected because of a large angle recoil of the electron. We find that the Bethe-Heitler process is in any case negligible for invariant momentum transfers $`Q^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}0.1\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ between the initial and final electrons.

HERA data  on photon production at large transverse momentum have previously been compared with QCD calculations  in terms of an isolation cut , which imposes low accompanying transverse energy in a cone around the photon direction. Such a cut removes a large fraction of the photons produced by parton fragmentation, but allows resolved photon contributions. The isolation procedure requires modelling the non-perturbative fragmentation process. This is avoided for the semi-exclusive cross section (1), which depends only on standard structure functions and perturbatively calculable quantities.

Low order PQCD subprocess amplitudes which contribute to the hard vertex $`H`$ of Fig. 1a are shown in Fig. 2. It is important to notice that the lowest order contributions of Fig. 2a,b actually are suppressed in the Regge limit $`\widehat{s}=x_sW^2\mathrm{}`$ at fixed (but large) $`t`$, which is relevant for semi-exclusive dynamics. A (dimensionless) amplitude involving the exchange of two particles of spins $`j_1`$ and $`j_2`$ in the $`t`$-channel behaves in the Regge limit as $`(\widehat{s}/t)^\alpha `$, where $`\alpha =j_1+j_21`$. Hence the contribution of Fig. 2b, with $`j_1=j_2=1/2`$, has $`\alpha =0`$. The amplitude of Fig. 2a also has $`\alpha =0`$. On the other hand, the higher order amplitude of Fig. 2c has $`j_1=j_2=1`$ and thus $`\alpha =1`$. At even higher orders logarithmic corrections from repeated gluon ladders are expected to build up hard Pomeron exchange in the BFKL approximation, as has been studied extensively for the present process .

It is interesting to explore at what value of $`\widehat{s}/t`$ the higher order diagrams begin to dominate. We find that the BFKL amplitude is numerically important compared to the lowest order contributions in the whole semi-exclusive range $`\widehat{s}/t\stackrel{>}{_{}}10`$. If the BFKL approximation is reliable (or the amplitude of Fig. 2c dominates) at such moderate values of the subprocess energy then the subprocess cross section will be found to grow (or be constant) in this whole range. Alternatively, if the lowest order diagrams dominate, the subprocess cross section will decrease in the lower range of $`\widehat{s}/t`$. This would make it smaller than the BFKL estimate at high $`\widehat{s}/t`$.

## II Subprocess Cross Sections

The lowest order cross section for $`\gamma q\gamma q`$ (Fig. 2a) is

$$\frac{d\sigma _{\mathrm{LO}}}{dt}(\gamma q\gamma q)=\frac{2\pi e_q^4\alpha ^2}{\widehat{s}^2}\left(\frac{\widehat{s}}{\widehat{u}}+\frac{\widehat{u}}{\widehat{s}}\right),$$
(3)
with $`\alpha =e^2/4\pi `$. For the lowest order $`\gamma g\gamma g`$ process (Fig. 2b) we have analogously ,

$$\frac{d\sigma _{\mathrm{LO}}}{dt}(\gamma g\gamma g)=2\left(\underset{q}{}e_q^2\right)^2\frac{\alpha ^2\alpha _s^2}{64\pi \widehat{s}^2}\left[|M_1(\widehat{s},t,\widehat{u})|^2+|M_1^{}(\widehat{u},t,\widehat{s})|^2+|M_1^{}(t,\widehat{s},\widehat{u})|^2+20\right],$$
(4)
where

$`|M_1(\widehat{s},t,\widehat{u})|^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left(2+2{\displaystyle \frac{t\widehat{u}}{\widehat{s}}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\widehat{u}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{t^2+\widehat{u}^2}{\widehat{s}^2}}\left[\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\widehat{u}}}+\pi ^2\right]\right)^2,`$ (5)
$`|M_1^{}(\widehat{u},t,\widehat{s})|^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left(2+2{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}t}{\widehat{u}}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}}{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}^2+t^2}{\widehat{u}^2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}}{t}}\right)^2+4\pi ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}^2+t^2}{\widehat{u}^2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}}{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}t}{\widehat{u}}}\right)^2.`$ (6)
It is interesting to compare the size of the BFKL cross section to the LO ones given above. The $`\gamma g\gamma g`$ BFKL cross section is to leading logarithmic accuracy given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma _{\mathrm{BFKL}}}{dt}}(\gamma g\gamma g)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{81}{16}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2\alpha _s^4}{576t^2}}\pi \left({\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2\right)^2\left[G\left({\displaystyle \frac{3\alpha _s}{\pi }}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}}{t}}\right)\right]^2,\text{with}`$ (7)
$`G(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\nu }{1+\nu ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\nu ^2}{\left(\nu ^2+\frac{1}{4}\right)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tanh}(\pi \nu )}{\pi \nu }}2(11+12\nu ^2)\mathrm{exp}\left[z\chi (\nu )\right],`$ (8)
$`\chi (\nu )`$ $`=`$ $`2\psi (1)2\mathrm{R}\mathrm{e}\left[\psi \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+i\nu \right)\right].`$ (9)
In Fig. 3 we show the dimensionless lowest order cross sections $`\widehat{s}^2d\sigma /dt`$ for $`\gamma u\gamma u`$ (solid line) and $`\gamma g\gamma g`$ (times 10, dot-dashed line). The small size of the lowest order $`\gamma g\gamma g`$ cross section means that it will be insignificant also in the physical process $`\gamma N\gamma Y`$, even though the gluon distribution is larger than the quark one at low values of $`x_s`$. The dashed line shows the BFKL cross section (9) for $`\gamma g\gamma g`$, based on iterating higher order diagrams like that in Fig. 2c. We used the fixed value $`\alpha _s=0.2`$ indicated by BFKL fits to HERA and Tevatron data . The BFKL cross section is comparable to the lowest order one already at $`\widehat{s}/t10`$, with their ratio growing roughly as $`(\widehat{s}/t)^2`$. It should be stressed, however, that the BFKL analysis is expected to be reliable only for $`\widehat{s}/t\stackrel{>}{_{}}100`$ , and that there may be sizeable corrections from NLO corrections .

## III Semi-exclusive photon electroproduction at HERA

The $`epe\gamma Y`$ electroproduction cross section is in the semi-exclusive limit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}^2t,M_Y^2W^2`$ related to the subprocesses through

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dydtdx_s}(epe\gamma Y)=f_{\gamma /e}(y,Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2)\underset{iq,g}{}f_{i/p}(x_s,t)\frac{d\sigma }{dt}(\gamma i\gamma i).$$
(10)
Here $`y`$ is the fraction of momentum that the photon, of virtuality $`Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2`$, takes of the electron beam. The Weizsäcker-Williams function $`f_{\gamma /e}(y,Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2)`$ is given in ,

$$f_{\gamma /e}(y,Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2)=\frac{\alpha }{2\pi }\left[\frac{(1+(1y)^2)}{y}\mathrm{ln}\frac{Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2(1y)}{m_e^2y^2}+2m_e^2y\left(\frac{1}{Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2}\frac{1y}{m_e^2y^2}\right)\right].$$
(11)
In our kinematical range the Weizsäcker-Williams scale is identical to the upper limit of the momentum transfer $`Q_{max}^2`$ between the electrons, as the hard scale $`t`$, which characterizes the production process, is much larger than $`Q_{max}^2`$. A detailed discussion of the choice of the Weizsäcker-Williams scale can be found in Refs. . For the parton distributions $`f_{i/p}(x_s,t)`$ we use the GRV94 LO parameterizations .

In this section we first estimate the kinematic region in which the semi-exclusive production mechanism dominates, and then evaluate the physical cross section in this region.

### A Background from Fragmentation and Decay in Photoproduction

Large transverse momentum photons can be produced through quark and gluon fragmentation $`q,g\gamma +X`$, following standard hard scattering processes such as photon gluon fusion $`\gamma gq\overline{q}`$ and gluon bremsstrahlung $`\gamma qqg`$. A second source of contributions are photons from hadronic decays like $`\pi ^0\gamma \gamma `$. In the following we call both background contributions ‘fragmentation’. Such processes typically give hadrons in the photon direction, and are thus suppressed in the limit where $`M_Y^2W^2`$.

We have used the Monte Carlo event generators PYTHIA  and LUCIFER  to estimate the range of $`W^2/M_Y^2`$ in which semi-exclusive production dominates over fragmentation. These event generators include the direct (semi-exclusive) $`\gamma q\gamma q`$ cross section only at lowest order. As we observed in the introduction, the higher order contribution of Fig. 2c (and its possible BFKL enhancement) actually dominates the lowest order process (Fig. 2a) at high $`\widehat{s}/t`$. Hence comparing the fragmentation background to only the LO semi-exclusive cross-section gives a conservative estimate of the kinematic region where semi-exclusive dynamics dominates. It should also be kept in mind that the fragmentation contribution can be reduced with the help of photon isolation cuts .

We evaluate the contributions from the direct process $`\gamma q\gamma q`$ and that from the background $`\gamma gq\overline{q}`$ and $`\gamma qqg`$ processes separately. If the final state contains several photons, we choose the one with largest energy $`E_\gamma ^{CM}`$ in the CM frame of the photon and the nucleon. The invariant mass $`M_Y^2`$ of the remaining particles is then given by $`M_Y^2=W^22WE_\gamma ^{CM}`$.

In Fig. 4 we show the PYTHIA and LUCIFER results for $`W=200\mathrm{GeV}`$ and two ranges of photon transverse momentum, $`4\mathrm{GeV}^2<t<10\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ and $`10\mathrm{GeV}^2<t<30\mathrm{GeV}^2`$. It may be seen that the semi-exclusive process $`\gamma q\gamma q`$ starts to dominate for $`W^2/M_Y^2\stackrel{>}{_{}}10`$. We have checked that the same conclusion holds for $`W=80\mathrm{GeV}`$. Note that for $`M_Y^2t`$, the subprocess variable $`\widehat{s}/t`$ of Fig. 3 is in the semi-exclusive limit simply related to $`W^2/M_Y^2`$,

$$\frac{W^2}{M_Y^2}=\frac{\widehat{s}}{t}\left(1\frac{t}{M_Y^2}\right)\frac{\widehat{s}}{t}.$$
(12)
### B Background from the Bethe-Heitler Process in Electroproduction

When the incoming photon is virtual the final photon may be radiated off the electron in the Bethe-Heitler (BH) process of Fig. 5 a. We wish to determine the maximum value of $`Q^2`$ for which the BH cross section can be neglected compared to that of photon emission from the quark, i.e., the Virtual Compton Scattering (VCS) process of Fig. 5 b.

At finite $`Q^2`$ the lowest order $`epe\gamma Y`$ cross section can be written

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma _{LO}(epe\gamma Y)}{dx_sdW^2dQ^2dtd\varphi }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(4\pi )^4x_sW_{ep}^4(\widehat{s}+Q^2)}}{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}f_{q/p}(x_s,t)\overline{|_q|^2},\text{with}`$ (13)
$`\overline{|_q|^2}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{|_q^{VCS}|^2}+\overline{|_q^{BH}|^2}+\overline{2\mathrm{R}\mathrm{e}\left(_q^{BH}_{q}^{VCS}{}_{}{}^{}\right)}.`$ (14)
Here $`Q^2=q^2=(ll^{})^2`$ and $`\widehat{s}=(q+p)^2=x_sW_{\gamma p}^2`$ in the notation of Fig. 5. $`\varphi `$ is the angle between $`\stackrel{}{q}\times \stackrel{}{p}_\gamma `$ and $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\times \stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}^{}`$ with the three-vectors given in the $`CM`$ frame of the virtual photon and the proton, while $`W_{ep}300\mathrm{GeV}`$ is the $`epCM`$ energy. We also define

$$\widehat{s}_l=(l^{}+p_\gamma )^2,\widehat{u}_l=(łp_\gamma )^2$$
(15)
which can be obtained from $`\widehat{s}`$ and $`\widehat{u}`$ by replacing the quark momentum $`p(p^{})`$ with the lepton momentum $`l(l^{})`$.

The squared VCS and BH matrix elements can now be written as

$`\overline{|_q^{VCS}|^2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4(4\pi \alpha )^3e_q^4}{Q^2\widehat{s}\widehat{u}}}F,`$ (16)
$`\overline{|_q^{BH}|^2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4(4\pi \alpha )^3e_q^2}{t\widehat{s}_l\widehat{u}_l}}F,`$ (17)
with the common factor $`F`$ given by

$$F=\widehat{s}^2+(\widehat{s}+t)^2+\widehat{u}_l^2+(2W_{eq}^2+\widehat{u}_l)^22\widehat{s}(2W_{eq}^2+\widehat{u}_l)2t(W_{eq}^2+\widehat{u}_l)+2Q^2(2\widehat{s}+t3W_{eq}^22\widehat{u}_l)+3Q^4,$$
(18)
and $`W_{eq}^2=(ł+p)^2=x_sW_{ep}^2`$.

$`\overline{2\mathrm{R}\mathrm{e}\left(_q^{BH}_{q}^{VCS}{}_{}{}^{}\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8(4\pi \alpha )^3e_q^3}{Q^2t}}\{Q^2[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{s}\widehat{u})({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{s}_l}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{u}_l}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{u}_l}}(lp+lp^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{s}_l}}(l^{}p+l^{}p^{})]`$ (25)
$`+t\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{s}_l\widehat{u}_l)\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{s}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{u}}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{u}}}(lp+l^{}p){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{s}}}(lp^{}+l^{}p^{})\right]`$
$`8(lpl^{}p^{}+lp^{}l^{}p)\left({\displaystyle \frac{lp}{\widehat{u}\widehat{u}_l}}+{\displaystyle \frac{lp^{}}{\widehat{s}\widehat{u}_l}}+{\displaystyle \frac{l^{}p}{\widehat{u}\widehat{s}_l}}+{\displaystyle \frac{l^{}p^{}}{\widehat{s}\widehat{s}_l}}\right)`$
$`+lp\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}\widehat{s}_l}{\widehat{u}\widehat{u}_l}}3+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\widehat{u}\widehat{u}_l}}\left(\widehat{s}l^{}p+\widehat{s}_llp^{}(\widehat{u}+\widehat{u}_l)l^{}p^{}\right)\right]`$
$`+lp^{}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{u}\widehat{s}_l}{\widehat{s}\widehat{u}_l}}3+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\widehat{s}\widehat{u}_l}}\left(\widehat{s}_llp\widehat{u}l^{}p^{}+(\widehat{s}+\widehat{u}_l)l^{}p\right)\right]`$
$`+l^{}p\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}\widehat{u}_l}{\widehat{u}\widehat{s}_l}}3+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\widehat{u}\widehat{s}_l}}\left(\widehat{s}lp\widehat{u}_ll^{}p^{}+(\widehat{u}+\widehat{s}_l)lp^{}\right)\right]`$
$`+l^{}p^{}[{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{u}\widehat{u}_l}{\widehat{s}\widehat{s}_l}}3+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\widehat{s}\widehat{s}_l}}(\widehat{u}lp^{}+\widehat{u}_ll^{}p(\widehat{s}+\widehat{s}_l)lp)]\}.`$
The results presented in Eqs. (16) - (25) have previously been computed, e.g., in Ref. , but with our particular choice of kinematical variables we obtained more compact expressions.

In Fig. 6 we compare the VCS to the total VCS+BH cross section for $`epe\gamma Y`$ as a function of $`Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2`$, the maximum momentum transfer between the electrons. The differential cross section (13) was integrated over the ranges $`x_s[0.01,0.7]`$, $`W[40\mathrm{GeV},160\mathrm{GeV}]`$, $`\varphi [0,2\pi ]`$, $`t[4\mathrm{GeV}^2,10\mathrm{GeV}^2]`$, and $`Q^2[m_e^2,Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2]`$***In order to ensure that the electron propagators are far off-shell we also required $`\widehat{s}_l,\widehat{u}_l>t_{\mathrm{min}}=4\mathrm{GeV}^2`$. This cut is, however, irrelevant for $`Q^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}1\mathrm{GeV}^2`$..

### C The Semi-Exclusive Cross Section

We have found that the process $`epe\gamma Y`$ can be used to study semi-exclusive photon production at HERA in the kinematic range $`W^2/M_Y^2\stackrel{>}{_{}}10`$, $`Q^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}0.1\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ and $`t\stackrel{>}{_{}}4\mathrm{GeV}^2`$. In Fig. 7 we show the cross section

$$\frac{d\sigma (epe\gamma Y)}{d(W^2/M_Y^2)}=_{0.25}^{0.75}𝑑yf_{\gamma /e}(y,Q_{\mathrm{max}}^2=0.1\mathrm{GeV}^2)_{|t|_{\mathrm{min}}}^{|t|_{\mathrm{max}}}𝑑t\frac{t(1x_s)^2}{W^2}\underset{iq,g}{}f_{i/p}(x_s,t)\frac{d\sigma }{dt}(\gamma i\gamma i)$$
(26)
for two ranges of momentum transfer, $`4\mathrm{GeV}^2<t<10\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ and $`10\mathrm{GeV}^2<t<30\mathrm{GeV}^2`$. The full curve shows the contribution of the LO process of Eq. (3) (Fig. 2a). The dashed curve shows the contribution of the BFKL subprocess of Eq. (9) (Fig. 2c, plus gluon ladder iterations), together with the corresponding $`\gamma q\gamma q`$ sea quark BFKL contribution ,

$$\frac{d\sigma _{\mathrm{BFKL}}}{dx_sdt}=\left[g(x_s,t)+\frac{16}{81}\mathrm{\Sigma }(x_s,t)\right]\frac{d\sigma _{\mathrm{BFKL}}}{dt}(\gamma g\gamma g),$$
(27)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ denotes the quark singlet distribution $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=_q[f_{q/p}+\overline{f}_{q/p}]`$. We use $`\alpha _s=0.2`$ in the BFKL cross section and assume three (four) active flavors in the low (high) $`|t|`$-range. The horizontal dash-dotted line indicates the 1 event level per unit of $`W^2/M_Y^2`$, given a nominal HERA luminosity of 100 events/pb.

We should emphasize that the BFKL approximation may not be reliable for $`W^2/M_Y^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}100`$ , hence the dashed curve is an extrapolation. It is nevertheless interesting to observe that this extrapolation dominates the LO $`q\gamma q\gamma `$ contribution over the whole semi-exclusive range $`W^2/M_Y^2\stackrel{>}{_{}}10`$. This conclusion is insensitive to the $`t`$-range and also to the range of $`y`$ (not shown).

## IV Conclusions

Semi-exclusive processes $`A+BC+Y`$ provide a new tool for investigating hadron structure. Effective currents formed by the $`A\overline{C}`$ system generalize the virtual photon probe familiar from DIS and can carry charge, flavor, baryon and other quantum numbers . Before this tool can be put to use, at least two questions need to be answered:

(i) How stringent limits $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}^2t,M_Y^2W^2`$ must be imposed in order for the semi-exclusive production mechanism to dominate?
(ii) Can the hard $`A\overline{C}`$ vertex be reliably computed using PQCD?

In this paper we studied the process $`\gamma p\gamma Y`$, which is especially simple in the sense that both particles $`A`$ and $`C`$ have a point like component. Based on simulations with the PYTHIA and LUCIFER event generators we concluded that semi-exclusive dynamics should dominate for $`W^2/M_Y^2\stackrel{>}{_{}}10`$ and $`t\stackrel{>}{_{}}4\mathrm{GeV}^2`$. Photon emission from the electron (the Bethe-Heitler process) is insignificant for incoming photon virtualities $`Q^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}0.1\mathrm{GeV}^2`$, and can be further suppressed with angular cuts. The semi-exclusive cross section should be measurable at HERA, assuming that the subprocess cross section $`\widehat{\sigma }(\gamma q\gamma q)`$ is not smaller than its lowest order (LO) PQCD approximation.

Point (ii) above is non-trivial, since the semi-exclusive kinematics implies a high energy (Regge) limit for the subprocess, $`\widehat{s}/t1`$. Little is known about the importance of higher order (HO) PQCD corrections in this limit. In the process under study the situation is particularly intriguing since the LO subprocess diagrams shown in Fig. 2a,b correspond to $`q\overline{q}`$ exchange in the $`t`$-channel. At high subenergies $`\widehat{s}`$ they are therefore suppressed by a factor $`1/\widehat{s}^2`$ in the cross section compared to the $`𝒪(\alpha _s^4)`$ gluon exchange contribution of Fig. 2c. The latter is, on the other hand, just the first term in the series of gluon ladder diagrams which is supposed to build up the BFKL Pomeron in this process .

It is not clear from which value of $`\widehat{s}/t`$ HO contributions like Fig. 2c start to dominate the LO processes of Fig. 2a,b. The BFKL approximation has been assumed to be relevant for $`\widehat{s}/t\stackrel{>}{_{}}100`$ . Extrapolating the BFKL cross section to lower energies we found (Fig. 7) that it would in fact dominate the LO cross section in the whole range of semi-exclusive dynamics, $`\widehat{s}/t\stackrel{>}{_{}}10`$. The ratio $`\sigma _{HO}/\sigma _{LO}`$ behaves approximately like $`(W^2/M_Y^2)^2`$, closely reflecting the $`\widehat{s}/t`$ dependence of the respective subprocesses, cf. Eq. (12). A measurement of the $`(W^2/M_Y^2)^2`$ dependence of the cross section will thus directly determine the nature of the dominant $`t`$-channel exchange.

We conclude that the large HERA energy in principle allows accessing the semi-exclusive kinematic region, with its double hierarchy of large scales. The limiting factor will be the luminosity. If the cross section is approximately given by the lowest order contribution in Fig. 7 then only a restricted range of $`(W^2/M_Y^2)^2`$ can be studied. Since the higher order two gluon exchange (BFKL) contributions fall off more slowly with $`(W^2/M_Y^2)^2`$ they will eventually dominate. If their normalization is even close to that indicated by the BFKL extrapolation of Fig. 7 there should be a rich semi-exclusive phenomenology at HERA, not only for photon but also for meson ($`\pi ,\rho ,J/\psi `$) production. Further work is needed to estimate the feasibility of measuring charge exchange processes and the three gluon (Odderon) contribution to $`\pi ^0`$ production.

Acknowledgements. We are grateful for helpful discussions with Stan Brodsky and Markus Diehl. This work is supported in part by the EU/TMR contract EBR FMRX-CT96-0008.