text:
# Spectral functions of the Falicov-Kimball model with electronic ferroelectricity

## Abstract

We calculate the angular resolved photoemission spectrum of the Falicov-Kimball model with electronic ferroelectricity where $`d`$\- and $`f`$-electrons have different hoppings. In mix-valence regimes, the presence of strong scattering processes between $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons and a hole, created by emission of an electron, leads to the formation of pseudospin polarons and novel electronic structures with bandwidth scaling with that of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons. Especially, in the two-dimensional case, we find that flat regions exist near the bottom of the quasiparticle band in a wide range of the $`d`$\- and $`f`$-level energy difference.

Ferroelectric materials have long been important to physical research and technological application. Besides commonly known displacive and order-disorder mechanisms Kittel (1996), recently the idea of electronic ferroelectricity (EFE) has been attracting considerable attention. EFE was introduced by Portengen et al. Portengen et al. (1996a, b) in their mean field theory of an extended Falicov-Kimball model (FKM) Falicov and Kimball (1969). The FKM, having a long successful history in dealing with correlated electron systems, was then used to model a system consisting of two bands of different parity, say itinerant $`d`$ electrons and localized $`f`$ orbitals, in which mix-valence states may occur depending on the $`d`$-$`f`$ coupling strength. Portengen et al. pointed out that inclusion of a $`d`$-$`f`$ hybridization in the FKM could give rise to a spontaneous electric polarization due to a Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons when the excitation energy goes to zero at the critical value of the $`f`$-level energy Portengen et al. (1996a, b). It is expected that such a purely electronic mechanism would provide fascinating physical features which are desirable for many applications; for instance, the static dielectric constant in an electronic ferroelectric could exceed $`10^4`$ Portengen et al. (1996b).

However, EFE in the FKM is still controversial after tested by different theoretical treatments of the underlying strongly correlated electron system Czycholl (1999); Farkašovský (2002); Zlatić (2001). Most recently, Batista proposed a new extension of the FKM in which an $`f`$-$`f`$ hopping was included Batista (2002). Mapping the strong coupling limit of this model into an $`xxz`$ pseudospin $`1/2`$ model with a magnetic field along the $`z`$-axis and supported by quantum Monte Carlo calculations performed earlier by Schmid el al. Schmid et al. (2002), he showed that a BEC of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons does exist in the phase diagram Batista (2002).

The purpose of this Letter is to present a theoretical study of the angular resolved photoemission spectrum of this extended FKM. In the pseudospin picture Batista (2002), we study the spectral functions of one hole, created by emission of one electron, in an extended $`t`$-$`J`$ model with different hoppings for each pseudospin flavor. The problem of single hole motion in a local (pseudo)spin background has become an essential issue in understanding anomalous physical properties of high temperature superconductors Dagotto et al. (1995); Schmitt-Rink et al. (1988); Yin et al. (1998) and of colossal magnetoresistance manganites Yin et al. (2001); Bala et al. (2001). It has been demonstrated that quantum antiferromagnetic (pseudo)spin fluctuations have strong impact on the low-energy scale physics of these materials. In this Letter, we show that strong scattering processes between the hole and the $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons take place even in the ferroelectric regime that has a *ferromagnetic* pseudospin configuration, thus give rise to the formation of pseudospin polarons and novel electronic structures.

The extended Falicov-Kimball model for spinless fermions on a hypercubic lattice is Batista (2002):

$$H=ϵ_d\underset{𝐢}{}n_𝐢^d+ϵ_f\underset{𝐢}{}n_𝐢^f+t_d\underset{𝐢,𝐣}{}d_𝐢^{}d_𝐣+t_f\underset{𝐢,𝐣}{}f_𝐢^{}f_𝐣+U^{fd}\underset{𝐢}{}n_𝐢^dn_𝐢^f,$$
(1)
where $`n_𝐢^d=d_𝐢^{}d_𝐢`$ and $`n_𝐢^f=f_𝐢^{}f_𝐢`$ are the occupation numbers of $`d`$\- and $`f`$-orbitals, respectively. Representing the two orbital flavors by a spin $`1/2`$ variable, $`c_𝐢=d_𝐢`$ and $`c_𝐢=f_𝐢`$, and using the notion of the pseudospin operator $`\stackrel{}{\tau }_𝐢=_{\mu \nu }c_{𝐢\mu }^{}\stackrel{}{\sigma }_{\mu \nu }c_{𝐢\nu }`$ with $`\{\stackrel{}{\sigma }_{\mu \nu }\}`$ being the Pauli matrices, one can derive an effective $`t`$-$`J`$ model, $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}=H_t+H_J`$, in the strong coupling limit of (1) near half-filling Batista (2002):

$`H_J`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐢,𝐣}{}}[J_z\tau _𝐢^z\tau _𝐣^z+J_{}(\tau _𝐢^x\tau _𝐣^x+\tau _𝐢^y\tau _𝐣^y)]+B_z{\displaystyle \underset{𝐢}{}}\tau _𝐢^z,`$
$`H_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐢,𝐣,\sigma }{}}t_\sigma (\stackrel{~}{c}_{𝐢\sigma }^{}\stackrel{~}{c}_{𝐣\sigma }+\stackrel{~}{c}_{𝐣\sigma }^{}\stackrel{~}{c}_{𝐢\sigma }),`$ (2)
where $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{𝐢\sigma }=c_{𝐢\sigma }(1n_{𝐢\overline{\sigma }})`$ is the constrained fermion operator, $`t_{}=t_d`$, $`t_{}=t_f`$ , $`J_z=2(t_{}^2+t_{}^2)/U^{fd}`$, $`J_{}=4t_{}t_{}/U^{fd}`$, and $`B_z=ϵ_dϵ_f`$ is the $`d`$\- and $`f`$-level energy difference acing as a magnetic field along the $`z`$ direction.

At half filling only $`H_J`$ contributes to $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. The ground state of $`H_J`$ is one of the following phases: full $`d`$-band, full $`f`$-band, staggered orbital ordering, and the BEC of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons that is ferroelectric for $`J_{}<0`$ or antiferroelectric for $`J_{}>0`$ Batista (2002). We assume that the BEC of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons is single-phased – in the present case, the corresponding pseudospin configuration is a canting state with respect to the $`z`$ axis \[Fig. 1(c) or 1(d)\], where the canting angle $`\theta `$ is determined by

$$\mathrm{cos}\theta =\frac{|B_z|}{zS(J_z+|J_{}|)},$$
(3)
where $`S=1/2`$ is the value of the pseudospins and $`z`$ is the coordination number. Indeed, the spin excitation (i.e., $`d`$-$`f`$ exciton) in the canting state is a gapless Goldstone mode which corresponds to a uniform precession of the pseudospins around the $`z`$ axis. Now we diagonalize $`H_J`$ in linear spin wave theory and obtain the following phase diagram as shown in Fig. 2: The borderline between staggered orbital ordering and the BEC of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons is $`|B_z|=zS\sqrt{J_z^2J_{}^2}`$ and the corresponding phase transition is a first-order transition; the borderline between the BEC of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons and full $`d`$\- or $`f`$\- band is $`|B_z|=zS(J_z+|J_{}|)`$ and the corresponding transition is a second-order transition. In a whole, our results agree with the quantum Monte Carlo studies on finite size systems up to $`96\times 96`$ Schmid et al. (2002). Notice that in Fig. 2 the borderline between staggered orbital ordering and the BEC of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons obtained from linear spin wave theory (solid line) does not perfectly coincide with that from the Monte Carlo calculations (dashed line). This might result from our single phase approximation, indicating the existence of a phase separation regime between these two lines (shadow area). Nevertheless, the difference is small if the values of $`J_z`$ and $`|J_{}|`$ are close to each other, and this is favorable for ferroelectricity to take place Batista (2002). We shall analyze the hole dynamics in each phase in the following.

Full $`f`$-band not (a). The pseudospin configuration is a ferromagnetic state with all pseudospins down \[Fig 1(a)\]. The pseudospin wave spectrum is $`\omega _𝐪^{full}=B_zzS(J_z+|J_{}|\gamma _𝐪)`$ where $`\gamma _𝐪=_\delta e^{i𝐪\delta }/z`$ and $`\delta `$ is a unit vector connecting nearest neighbors. Since the hole motion will not change the pseudospin configuration, the hole can move freely with dispersion $`\epsilon _𝐤^{full}=zt_{}\gamma _𝐤`$.

Ferroelectric phase. The pseudospin configuration is considered here as a uniform canting state \[Fig 1(c)\]. The pseudospins are parallel, but they take new equilibrium direction which are tilted by a certain angle $`\theta `$ to the $`z`$ axis. This new axis of quantization is considered to lie in the $`x`$-$`z`$ plane as a result of spontaneous symmetry breaking. We perform a uniform rotation of the orbitals about the $`y`$ axis by $`\theta `$,

$`\stackrel{~}{c}_𝐢`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}e_𝐢\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}e_𝐢,\stackrel{~}{c}_𝐢=\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}e_𝐢+\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}e_𝐢,`$
$`\tau _𝐢^x`$ $`=`$ $`S_𝐢^x\mathrm{cos}\theta S_𝐢^z\mathrm{sin}\theta ,\tau _𝐢^z=S_𝐢^z\mathrm{cos}\theta +S_𝐢^x\mathrm{sin}\theta ,`$ (4)
to obtain the ferromagnetic configuration $`|\mathrm{}S_𝐢^zS_{𝐢+1}^z\mathrm{}=|\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$ as the vacuum state. Then, we employ the slave-fermion formalism to cope with the constraint of no doubly occupancy Schmitt-Rink et al. (1988). Defining holon (spinless fermion) operators $`h_𝐢`$ so that $`e_𝐢=h_𝐢^{}a_𝐢`$,$`e_𝐢=h_𝐢^{}`$ where $`a_𝐢=S_𝐢^{}`$ is the hard-core boson operator, we arrive at an effective pseudospin-polaron Hamiltonian in the momentum space

$`H_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤}{}}\epsilon _𝐤h_𝐤^{}h_𝐤+{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤,𝐪}{}}M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}h_𝐤^{}h_{𝐤𝐪}\alpha _𝐪+H.c.,`$ (5)
where $`\alpha _𝐪`$’s are pseudospin wave operators, $`a_𝐪=u_𝐪\alpha _𝐪+v_𝐪\alpha _𝐪^{}`$, with dispersion $`\omega _𝐪=zS(I_{\theta ,𝐪}^2C_\theta ^2\gamma _𝐪^2)^{1/2}`$. The transformation coefficients are $`u_𝐪=\{[I_{\theta ,𝐪}(I_{\theta ,𝐪}^2C_\theta ^2\gamma _𝐪^2)^{1/2}+1]/2\}^{1/2}`$ and $`v_𝐪=\mathrm{sgn}(C_\theta \gamma _𝐪)\{[I_{\theta ,𝐪}(I_{\theta ,𝐪}^2C_\theta ^2\gamma _𝐪^2)^{1/2}1]/2\}^{1/2}`$. Here the shorthand notations are $`B_\theta =(|J_{}|\mathrm{cos}^2\theta +J_z\mathrm{sin}^2\theta |J_{}|)/2`$, $`C_\theta =B_\theta +|J_{}|`$, and $`I_{\theta ,𝐪}=|J_{}|+B_\theta \gamma _𝐪`$. Hence $`\omega _{𝐪=\mathrm{𝟎}}=0`$. The bare hole dispersion is $`\epsilon _𝐤=z(t_{}\mathrm{cos}^2\frac{\theta }{2}+t_{}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\theta }{2})\gamma _𝐤`$, and the hole-pseudospin-wave coupling is

$$M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}=\mathrm{sin}\theta \frac{t_{}t_{}}{2}\frac{z}{\sqrt{N}}(\gamma _{𝐤𝐪}u_𝐪+\gamma _𝐤v_𝐪).$$
(6)
When both pseudospin flavors have the same hopping integral, i.e., $`t_{}=t_{}=t`$, $`H_t`$ has the SU(2) symmetry, leading to a vanishing $`M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}`$ and a free hole propagation with dispersion $`zt\gamma _𝐤`$. Hence, the fact that $`t_{}t_{}`$ accounts for the formation of the pseudospin-polaron even in the presence of a ferromagnetic pseudospin background.

Using the self-consistent Born approximation (SCBA) in which the spectral functions of one hole in a $`t`$-$`J`$-$`like`$ model can be accurately calculated Schmitt-Rink et al. (1988); Yin et al. (1998, 2001); Bala et al. (2001), we compute the hole Green’s function $`G(𝐤,\omega )=[\omega \epsilon _𝐤\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐤,\omega )+i0^+]^1`$ self-consistently with the self-energy,

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐤,\omega )=\underset{𝐪}{}M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^2G(𝐤𝐪,\omega \omega _𝐪).$$
(7)
Thus, the spectral functions are given by $`A(𝐤,\omega )=\mathrm{Im}G(𝐤,\omega )/\pi `$, and the quasiparticle dispersion is $`E_𝐤\epsilon _𝐤+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐤,E_𝐤)`$.

Antiferroelectric phase. This phase \[Fig 1(d)\] is possible when $`J_{}>0`$. We find that linear spin wave theories of the antiferroelectric and ferroelectric canting states are formally connected with a displacement of momentum: $`𝐪𝐪𝐐`$ where $`𝐐=(\pi ,\mathrm{},\pi )`$. The effective Hamiltonian for hole hopping is

$$H_t=\underset{𝐤}{}\epsilon _𝐤h_𝐤^{}h_𝐤+\underset{𝐤,𝐪}{}M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}h_𝐤^{}h_{𝐤𝐪}\alpha _{𝐪𝐐}+H.c.,$$
(8)
where $`\epsilon _𝐤=z(t_{}\mathrm{cos}^2\frac{\theta }{2}t_{}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\theta }{2})\gamma _𝐤`$ and

$$M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}=\mathrm{sin}\theta \frac{t_{}+t_{}}{2}\frac{z}{\sqrt{N}}(\gamma _{𝐤𝐪}u_{𝐪𝐐}+\gamma _𝐤v_{𝐪𝐐}).$$
(9)
Likewise, we employ (7) to calculate the hole self energy.

Staggered orbital ordering. The pseudospin configuration is a $`z`$-directional Néel state \[Fig 1(b)\]. Considering the Néel state as the vacuum state, we define holon operators $`h_𝐢`$ and $`g_𝐢`$ so that $`\stackrel{~}{c}_𝐢=h_𝐢^{},\stackrel{~}{c}_𝐢=h_𝐢^{}a_𝐢`$ on the $``$ sublattice and $`\stackrel{~}{c}_𝐣=g_𝐣^{}b_𝐣,\stackrel{~}{c}_𝐣=g_𝐣^{}`$ on the $``$ sublattice. Here $`a_𝐢=\tau _𝐢^{}`$ on the $``$ sublattice and $`b_𝐣=\tau _𝐣^+`$ on the $``$ sublattice are hard-core boson operators. We arrive at an effective pseudospin-polaron Hamiltonian

$`H_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤,𝐪}{}}{}_{}{}^{}M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{}h_𝐤^{}g_{𝐤𝐪}\alpha _𝐪+L_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}g_𝐤^{}h_{𝐤𝐪}\beta _𝐪+H.c.,`$ (10)
where $`\alpha _𝐪`$ and $`\beta _𝐪`$ are pseudospin wave operators, $`a_𝐪=u_𝐪\alpha _𝐪+v_𝐪\beta _𝐪^{}`$ and$`b_𝐪=u_𝐪\beta _𝐪+v_𝐪\alpha _𝐪^{}`$, with dispersion $`\omega _𝐪^\pm =zS(J_z^2J_{}^2\gamma _𝐪^2)^{1/2}\pm B_z`$, respectively, and $`u_𝐪=\{[zSJ_z/(\omega _𝐪^++\omega _𝐪^{})+1]/2\}^{1/2}`$, $`v_𝐪=\mathrm{sgn}(J_{}\gamma _𝐪)\{[zSJ_z/(\omega _𝐪^++\omega _𝐪^{})1]/2\}^{1/2}`$. The hole-pseudospin-wave coupling is $`M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}=z\sqrt{2/N}(t_{}\gamma _{𝐤𝐪}u_𝐪+t_{}\gamma _𝐤v_𝐪)`$ and $`L_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}=z\sqrt{2/N}(t_{}\gamma _{𝐤𝐪}u_𝐪+t_{}\gamma _𝐤v_𝐪)`$. The summations over $`𝐤`$ and $`𝐪`$ are restricted inside the reciprocal Brillouin zone of one sublattice. Within the SCBA, we obtain the following self-consistent equations for the two types of hole propagators: $`G_j(𝐤,\omega )=[\omega \mathrm{\Sigma }_j(𝐤,\omega )+i0^+]^1`$ where $`j=g,h`$ with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_h(𝐤,\omega )=_𝐪{}_{}{}^{}M_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{2}G_g(𝐤𝐪,\omega \omega _𝐪^+)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_g(𝐤,\omega )=_𝐪{}_{}{}^{}L_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{2}G_h(𝐤𝐪,\omega \omega _𝐪^{})`$.

To facilitate EFE, the system must be in a mix-valence regime and the two bands involved should have different parity, thus $`t_{}`$ and $`t_{}`$ have opposite signs, so do $`J_z`$ and $`J_{}`$; furthermore, it would be more probable if both bands have similar bandwidths Batista (2002). Hence, we adopt the following parameters not (b): $`t_{}=1`$, $`t_{}=0.8`$, $`U^{fd}=10`$, hence $`J_z=2(t_{}^2+t_{}^2)/U^{fd}=0.328`$ and $`J_{}=4t_{}t_{}/U^{fd}=0.32`$, with $`B_z=ϵ_dϵ_f`$ being a free parameter – in a real material, changing $`B_z`$ could be achieved by applying pressure or alloying. Our numerical results are illustrated in the two-dimensional case. In this case, the system transits from staggered orbital ordering to the BEC of $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons at $`|B_z|=0.144`$ and then to a non-mixed-valence regime at $`|B_z|=1.296`$ as $`B_z`$ increases. All numerical calculations were carried out on a $`16\times 16`$ square lattice.

In Figs. 3, 4, and 5, we show the spectral functions and the quasiparticle dispersions in the ferroelectric regime with $`B_z=0.2`$, $`0.8`$, and $`1.2`$, respectively not (c). First of all, as presented in Figs. 3(a), 4(a), and 5(a), the quasiparticle bandwidth $`W`$ and the pseudospin wave bandwidth $`W_{\mathrm{spw}}`$ have similar values. Such band narrowing can be understood in the following way: gapless pseudospin excitations are easily stimulated by incoherent hole motion, leading to the formation of the quasiparticle (QP), pseudospin polaron, which is the propagating hole surrounded by a cloud of polarized pseudospin waves. Therefore, $`W`$ does not scale with hopping integrals but with $`W_{\mathrm{spw}}`$.

As displayed in Figs. 3(b)-(d), for any $`𝐤`$, there is a well-defined quasiparticle pole (i.e., zero pseudospin wave) at the low energy side which is well separated from a broad, incoherent, multiple-pseudospin-wave background extending to the full free-electron bandwidth. Fig. 3(a) shows that the bottom and the top of the QP band locate at $`(\pi /2,\pi /2)`$ and $`(0,0)`$, respectively. Furthermore, there is a flat region around $`(\pi ,0)`$ at which the QP energy is close to its minimum, leading to a strongly distorted density of states with a massive peak near the bottom of the QP band. These features obtained for single hole motion in the ferromagnetic pseudospin background are quite similar to those in the cuprate $`t`$-$`J`$ model where the hopping integrals for both spin flavors are the same and the spin background is a Heisenberg antiferromagnet Yin et al. (1998). Note that the pseudospin wave spectrum does not vanish at $`(\pi ,\pi )`$ while it is gapless at $`(0,0)`$. Consequently, the QP energy at $`(\pi ,\pi )`$ is lower than that at $`(0,0)`$.

Further increasing $`B_z`$ will continue lowering the QP energy at $`(\pi ,\pi )`$. When $`B_z=0.8`$, $`(\pi ,\pi )`$ becomes the QP band bottom, as shown in Fig. 4(a). While the flat region around $`(\pi ,0)`$ is shrinking, a new, surprising flat region appears around $`(\pi ,\pi )`$. Therefore, the feature of an extended van Hove singularity near the bottom of the QP band survives up to $`B_z=0.8`$. In Figs. 4(b)-(d), the spectral functions are still characterized by sharp peaks at the low energy side which is well separated from a broad, incoherent background. However, apart from the QP band bottom, considerable spectral weights move to the incoherent part, indicating that the hole motion is more severely damped by incoherent processes.

When $`B_z`$ is increased to $`1.2`$ \[Figs. 5(b)-(d)\], almost all spectral weights locate in the incoherent part except near the QP band bottom, $`(\pi ,\pi )`$. This means that the hole spectral weights $`Z(𝐤)=[1\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐤,\omega )/\omega ]_{\omega =E_𝐤}^1`$ are strongly reduced by a cloud of polarized pseudospin waves. The shape of the QP dispersion \[Fig. 5(a)\] becomes similar to that of free hole dispersion $`\gamma _𝐤`$, yet with bandwidth $`WW_{\mathrm{spw}}`$. As $`B_z`$ further increases, $`Z(𝐤)`$ at wave vectors not very close to $`(\pi ,\pi )`$ goes to zero quickly until the pseudospin polaron picture becomes invalid at $`B_z=1.296`$. Then, the system evolves into full $`f`$-band with free hole motion, implying that $`Z(𝐤)1`$.

To summarize, we present a systematic study on the evolution of the spectral functions of a single hole in the FKM as a function of $`B_z`$, the $`d`$\- and $`f`$-level energy difference. We find that strong scattering processes between the hole and $`d`$-$`f`$ excitons exist in the mix-valence regimes, thus lead to the formation of pseudospin polarons and interesting electronic structures with bandwidth scaling with that of the pseudospin excitation, even for single hole propagation in a ferromagnetic pseudospin background (i.e., the ferroelectric phase) due to the different hopping integrals of the $`d`$\- and $`f`$-electrons. Furthermore, flat regions near the bottom of the quasiparticle band are found in a wide range of $`B_z`$ in the two-dimensional case. As we know, similar anomalous, yet crucial hole spectral features were found in high temperature superconductors Dagotto et al. (1995); Yin et al. (1998), thus we speculate that besides EFE, the extended Falicov-Kimball model could have many novel properties, especially upon hole doping.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work is supported by the Nebraska Research Initiative, the Nebraska EPSCOR-NSF Grant EPS-9720643, and Department of the Army Grants DAAG 55-98-1-0273 and DAAG 55-99-1-0106. W. N. M. is grateful for the support from the Office of Naval Research.


format: text

text:
# Kinematic response of the outer stellar disk to a central bar

## 1 Introduction

Several observations since the 1980s have shown beyond any doubt that the Milky Way is actually a barred galaxy. Although there is strong evidence that bars in galaxies are confined to regions within the radius $`R_{\mathrm{CR}}`$ of the co-rotation resonance (CR), a bar may nonetheless influence the outer parts of its host galaxy, most obviously by resonant phenomena. It has been shown by Dehnen (2000) and Fux (2001) that if the Sun is just outside the OLR such influence can explain the so-called $`u`$-anomaly. The latter is a bi-modality in the local velocity distribution of old stars, that has been inferred from HIPPARCOS data (Dehnen, 1998).

The galactic bar might also have some relevance in explaining the vertex deviation. This is the mis-alignment of the local velocity dispersion ellipsoid with respect to the local radial direction in the Galaxy and vanishes for any axisymmetric stellar dynamical equilibrium. Using HIPPARCOS data, the vertex deviation has been shown (Dehnen & Binney, 1998) to reach as high as $`30\mathrm{°}`$ for young stellar populations, and to be $`10\mathrm{°}`$ for the old ones. Whereas the high vertex deviation of the young populations is most probably due to moving groups, i.e. deviations from dynamical equilibrium, and thus in a sense accidental (Binney & Merrifield, 1998), there should be dynamical reasons for its occurrence with the old populations, i.e. deviations from axisymmetry.

Another anomaly in the stellar kinematics observed in the Solar neighbourhood that may also be related to the bar’s influence is the low value for the ratio $`\sigma _2^2/\sigma _1^2`$ of the principal components of the velocity-dispersion tensor of only $`0.42_{0.04}^{+0.06}`$ for old stellar populations (Dehnen & Binney, 1998). For a flat rotation curve for the Milky Way and in the limit of vanishing velocity dispersion, epicycle theory gives a lower limit of 0.5 for this ratio and the actual expectations from axisymmetric models are $`0.6`$ (Evans & Collett, 1993; Dehnen, 1999), significantly inconsistent with the data.

In the present work, we will follow the approach of Dehnen (2000) further by investigating the velocity distribution in its spatial variability. Our primary interest is in the low-order moments of this distribution, i.e. the mean (streaming) velocity and velocity dispersion. In particular, we want to quantify whether the influence of the Galactic bar may explain the aforementioned anomalies, the vertex deviation and velocity-dispersion axis ratio, observed for the old stellar populations. Our approach applies to the kinematics in the solar neighbourhood, while at the same time it constitutes a completely general analysis of the bar influence in a stellar disk.

The outline of the paper is as follows: In Sect. 2 we will describe our simulations, Sect. 3 gives a rather technical presentation of the results, and Sect. 4 concludes the paper by a discussion of the results.

## 2 Simulation of Bar Influence

Since we do not want to construct a self-consistent model of the Galaxy, we just study the stellar dynamics for a simple model potential. In order to arrive at (stationary) equilibrium, we slowly add to the underlying axisymmetric Galactic potential the non-axisymmetric component of the bar (the bar monopole is assumed to be already accounted for by the Galactic potential). We do not pay very much attention to the inner parts (inside co-rotation), and we neglect influences of vertical motion, so our model is two-dimensional. The calculation consists of orbit integration of a large ensemble of phase-space points representing the initial equilibrium. This numerical technique, which may be called *restricted $`N`$-body method*, is equivalent to first-order perturbation theory, since the self-gravity due to the wake induced by the perturbation (bar) is neglected. After the orbit integrations, the velocity moments at certain times are computed from the phase-space positions of the trajectories.

### 2.1 Sampling

The sampling of the initial phase-space points is done as described in Dehnen (1999), using the distribution function (eq. (10) in Dehnen, 1999).

$$f(E,L)=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }(R_E)\mathrm{\Sigma }(R_E)}{\pi \kappa (R_E)\sigma ^2(R_E)}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }(R_E)[LL_c(R_E)]}{\sigma ^2(R_E)}\right],$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }(R)`$, $`\kappa (R)`$, and $`L_c(R)`$ are the azimuthal and epicycle frequency and angular momentum of the circular orbit at radius $`R`$, while $`R_E`$ is the radius of the circular orbit with energy $`E`$. With this choice for the distribution function, the collisionless Boltzmann equation is satisfied at $`t=0`$ (since $`f`$ depends only on the integrals of motion $`E`$ and $`L`$) and the surface density and radial velocity dispersion of the disk follow approximately (for a quantitative comparison, see Dehnen, 1999, and also Fig. 3) those given with the *parameter functions* $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(R)`$ and $`\sigma (R)`$, respectively. Here, we assume exponentials for both of them:

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(R)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_0\mathrm{e}^{(R_0R)/R_\mathrm{\Sigma }},\sigma (R)=\sigma _0\mathrm{e}^{(R_0R)/R_\sigma }.$$
(2)
If not stated otherwise, we choose $`R_\sigma =R_0`$ and $`R_\mathrm{\Sigma }=0.33R_0`$ by standard, $`R_0`$ being the distance of the Sun from the galactic center. If not stated otherwise, $`\sigma _0=0.2v_0`$, where $`v_0`$ is the circular velocity at $`R_0`$. In this way, samples of $`K=10^7`$ initial phase-space points are created.

### 2.2 Model Potential and Orbit Integration

Orbit integration and adiabatic growth of a quadrupole bar is done similarly to Dehnen (2000). The galactic background potential is chosen to give a power law in the velocity curve

$$v_c(R)=v_0\left(R/R_0\right)^\beta ,$$
(3)
namely:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_0(R)=\{\begin{array}{cc}(2\beta )^1v_0^2\left(R/R_0\right)^{2\beta }\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{for}\beta 0\\ v_0^2\mathrm{ln}\left(R/R_0\right)\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{for}\beta =0\end{array}$$
(4)
For the bar potential $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\mathrm{\Phi }_1(R,\phi ,t)`$, we only use a quadrupole, since higher poles are much less important at large radii, following Dehnen (2000):

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_1=A_b(t)\mathrm{cos}2\phi \times \{\begin{array}{cc}2\left(R/R_b\right)^3\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{for}RR_b\\ \left(R_b/R\right)^3\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{for}R>R_b\end{array}$$
(5)
where $`R_b`$ is the size of the bar. The angle $`\phi `$ is defined in the frame rotating at pattern speed $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b`$ (see Fig. 1). The strength $`A_b`$ of the bar is increased from 0 to a value $`A_f`$ during time $`0<t<t_1`$ according to

$$A_b(t)=A_f\left(\frac{3}{16}\xi ^5\frac{5}{8}\xi ^3+\frac{15}{16}\xi +\frac{1}{2}\right),\xi =2\frac{t}{t_1}1$$
(6)
and stays constant at $`A_b=A_f`$ after $`t_1`$. With this functional form, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ and its first and second time derivative are continuous, thus representing adiabatic growth of the bar and ensuring a smooth transition. The final bar strength $`A_f`$ is controlled via the dimensionless model parameter $`\alpha _0=\alpha (R_0)`$ with

$$\alpha (R)=3\frac{A_f}{v_0^2}\left(\frac{R_b}{R}\right)^3,$$
(7)
which is the ratio of the forces due to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ at galacto-centric radius $`R>R_b`$ on the bar’s major axis. Our standard choice is $`\alpha _0=0.01`$, which is consistent with the data for the Milky Way.

Orbit integration is performed in the co-rotating frame up to a time $`t_2>t_1`$ using a 5th order integrator. In contrast to Dehnen (2000), we integrate forward in time.

### 2.3 Calculation of Velocity Moments

The $`(p,q)`$th moment of the velocity distribution at position $`𝒓`$ is defined as

$`M_{pq}(𝒓,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}vu^pv^qf(t,𝒙=𝒓,𝒗)`$ (8a)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d𝒙d𝒗\delta (𝒓𝒙)u^pv^qf(t,𝒙,𝒗)}`$ (8b)
with $`𝒗(u,v)`$, where $`u`$ and $`v`$ denote, respectively,the radial and azimuthal velocity component (see Fig. 1). We do not know the value $`f(t,𝒙,𝒗)`$ of the distribution function at any time $`t>0`$, but instead have a representative sample $`\{𝒙_k(t),𝒗_k(t)\}`$ of phase-space points. Hence, we compute the moment integral (8b) via Monte-Carlo integration, resulting in

$$M_{pq}(𝒓,t)=\frac{M_{\mathrm{tot}}}{K}\underset{k}{}\frac{1}{ϵ_k^2}w\left(\frac{|𝒙_k𝒓|}{ϵ_k}\right)u_k^pv_k^q.$$
(9)
where we have replaced the $`\delta `$ function in Eq. (8b) by $`ϵ_k^2w(|𝒙_k𝒓|/ϵ_k)`$ with the weight function

$$w(d)=\frac{2}{\pi }(1d^2)\theta (1d^2),$$
(10)
where $`\theta `$ is the Heaviside function. The parameter $`ϵ_k`$ gives the radius over which the $`k`$th trajectory contributes to the moment integrals. We adjusted $`ϵ_k`$ such that a constant number of sampled orbits was expected to fall in the area of radius $`ϵ_k`$ centered on $`𝒙_k`$ by the assumed exponential surface brightness distribution of the disk.

In practice, the zeroth, first and second moments are estimated in this way and the mean velocities and velocity dispersion tensor111Notation: $`\sigma _{uu}^2`$ etc. are components of the tensor $`𝝈^2`$, whose eigenvalues are the *squares* of the velocity dispersions in the principal directions. Note that $`\sigma _{uv}^2`$ may well be negative. are then evaluated from $`\mu _{pq}M_{pq}/M_{00}`$ as $`\overline{u}=\mu _{10}`$, $`\overline{v}=\mu _{01}`$ and $`\sigma _{uu}^2=\mu _{20}\mu _{10}^2`$, $`\sigma _{vv}^2=\mu _{02}\mu _{01}^2`$, $`\sigma _{uv}^2=\mu _{11}\mu _{10}\mu _{01}`$.

Once the orbit integration is done, one can easily switch to a model with initial distribution function $`f_1f`$ by weighting each orbit with the ratio $`f_1/f`$, which accounts for the fact that the trajectories were actually sampled from $`f`$. However, for this method to be useful, the ratio $`f_1/f`$ must not become too large, because otherwise the moment estimates are dominated by a few orbits with large weights. Since, by virtue of the collisionless Boltzmann equation, the values of the distribution functions are conserved along trajectories, the ratio $`f_1/f`$ is conserved, too, and can be evaluated at time $`t=0`$, for which the distribution functions can be computed via Eq. (1). In this way, we did a switch to exponential disks with velocity dispersions $`\sigma _0<0.2v_0`$ (the value of the sampling distribution function), such that $`f_1/f[0.2v_0/\sigma _0]^2`$ (this follows from Eq. (1); for $`\sigma _0>0.2v_0`$, the ratio $`f_1/f`$ can become very large)

### 2.4 Fourier Components of Velocity Moments

In order to most easily follow the evolution of the disk, it is useful to do a Fourier transform on the azimuthal angle $`\phi `$. We apply this to the mean velocities and dispersion tensor elements after we calculated these in the usual way (9), except that this time we do not use a weighting function, but take bins in $`R`$ and $`\phi `$ to make sure every calculated trajectory contributes to the final result. We use a discrete Fourier transform of the following kind:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}c_m\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{2}{N}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}f(\phi _j)\mathrm{cos}m\phi _j,\hfill \\ s_m\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{2}{N}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}f(\phi _j)\mathrm{sin}m\phi _j,\hfill \end{array}$$
(11)
where $`\phi _j=j\pi /N`$. This gives an approximate Fourier expansion

$$f(\phi )\frac{c_0}{2}+\frac{c_n}{2}\mathrm{cos}n\phi +\underset{m=1}{\overset{n1}{}}(c_m\mathrm{cos}m\phi +s_m\mathrm{sin}m\phi ),$$
(12)
where $`n=N/2`$ and $`N`$ is supposed to be even. This has been done for $`N=32`$ in 25 radial bins.

We also construct an estimate of the surface density $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ by dividing the number of sampled orbits per bin by the segment area of the bin, and apply the Fourier transform to this quantity as well.

### 2.5 Error Estimation

We employ a bootstrap method: the calculations leading from the data set of every radial bin to its Fourier coefficients are redone for arbitrary subsamples of this data set. The rms scatter in the outcome of many such calculations gives a measure of the error.

### 2.6 Symmetries and the Question of Stationarity

In order to check, whether or how far our distributions have reached a stationary equilibrium state, we employ a symmetry consideration. As noted by Fux (2001), velocity distributions in an $`m=2`$ symmetric potential have a symmetry

$$f(R,\phi ,u,v)=f(R,\pi \phi ,u,v),$$
(13)
which is a consequence of the azimuthal $`m=2`$ symmetry and the time-reversal symmetry of stellar dynamics in conjunction with stationarity of the distribution function. We can turn this argument around and use the degree of symmetry as a measure for stationarity. A quantitative measure of the symmetry can be obtained in the obvious way by subtracting corresponding distribution function values over a grid in phase space and doing a quadratic sum over the grid points. Results of this kind of analysis are shown in Fig. 2. As can be seen, the simulations show only a small increase in asymmetry of 15% above the noise level (as given by the initial state as well as a very long-time simulation), and this is dropping rapidly after bar growth is finished.

## 3 Results

Kuijken & Tremaine (1991) gave an analytical expression for the behaviour of the mean velocities under the influence of a non-axisymmetric perturbation of multipole order $`m`$ in a linear approximation. For our case, this yields

$`\overline{u}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha (R)v_0^2}{3R}}{\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{\Omega }_b\mathrm{\Omega }}{(\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{ILR}})(\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{OLR}})}}\mathrm{sin}2\phi ,`$
$`\overline{v}`$ $`=`$ $`v_0{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha (R)v_0^2}{6R}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\mathrm{\Omega }_b\mathrm{\Omega }}{(\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{ILR}})(\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{OLR}})}}\mathrm{cos}2\phi ,`$
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{ILR}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{OLR}}`$ refer to the circular frequencies at the radii of the inner and outer Lindblad resonance. For a flat rotation curve, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=v_0/R`$. In our range of interest, Eqs. (3) are dominated by a pole at the OLR.

The results of our simulation, presented below, agree roughly with these expectations: the mean velocities show modulations $`\overline{u}\mathrm{sin}2\phi `$, $`\overline{v}\mathrm{cos}2\phi `$. The sign of the modulations varies with radius, sign changes should indicate resonances. For the dispersion tensor the situation is similar: the off-diagonal component shows a $`\mathrm{sin}2\phi `$ perturbation, the diagonal components a $`\mathrm{cos}2\phi `$.

### 3.1 Fourier Analysis

Since we have an azimuthal $`m=2`$ symmetry, all coefficients of odd index $`m`$ are expected to vanish, what they do within their errors. Furthermore, in the undeveloped state before bar growth, all coefficients except those with $`m=0`$ are, by construction, zero within their errors.

#### 3.1.1 The $`m=0`$ Components:

The dashed lines in Fig. 3 represent the initial axisymmetric case, which shows an exponential decline of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ as well as in the diagonal components of velocity dispersion tensor. The mean azimuthal motion deviates from the circular speed $`v_0`$ by the asymmetric drift, which is stronger for large $`\sigma _0`$, as expected. The mean radial motion vanishes, as required for any stationary model.

The solid lines in Fig. 3 show the radial run of the $`m=0`$ components in the barred case. Apart from the components for $`\overline{u}`$ and $`\sigma _{uv}^2`$, which have to vanish for stationary models, some signs of perturbation are visible, the stronger the smaller $`\sigma _0`$.

First of all, we learn that dispersive effects are quite efficient in drawing resonance-induced features away from the actual position of the resonance. Whereas for small velocity dispersion the association of the features with the OLR at $`R_{\mathrm{OLR}}=0.92R_0`$ is clearly visible, they appear in the high dispersion case at a radial range of $`1.1`$ to $`1.4R_0`$, where naively one would not attribute them to the OLR.

In particular, we have a bump in the $`\overline{v}`$-curve outside of OLR, which becomes more explicit with decreasing dispersion while roughly keeping its absolute magnitude. In contrast to this, the asymmetric drift as the dominant deviation of $`\overline{v}`$ from the nominal rotation velocity $`v_0`$ diminishes with decreasing dispersion. There is a similar bump in $`\sigma _{uu}^2`$, whereas we have a two-fold feature in $`\sigma _{vv}^2`$.

Most of the perturbative features in the $`m=0`$ components are induced by the opposite orientation of the near-circular orbits on either side of the resonance.

#### 3.1.2 The $`m=2`$ Components

Because of the symmetry of the problem, we expect the $`m=2`$ components to be the dominant ones. As for every $`m>0`$, we have one more degree of freedom here, since we have a cosine- and a sine-component (see Fig. 4), or equivalently, an amplitude and a phase.

The cosine-terms of $`\overline{u}`$ and $`\sigma _{uv}^2`$ as well as the sine terms of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\overline{v}`$, $`\sigma _{uu}^2`$, and $`\sigma _{vv}^2`$ vanish (within their error), which is to be expected from Eq. (13) for a stationary model. The behaviour of the remaining non-vanishing terms agrees roughly with the expectation from simple linear theory, cf. Eq. (3). However, there are two significant deviations. First, as $`\sigma _0`$ increases (from left to right panels in Fig. 4), the resonant features are shifted away from $`R_{\mathrm{OLR}}`$ to larger radii and are also somewhat smoothed out. Second, there is an additional feature at $`R0.6R_0`$, in particular, for $`\overline{v}`$. When inspecting the orbits of stars dominating at this radius, we find that many belong to an orbit family associated with the stable Lagrange points L4 and L5, see Fig. 5. These orbits can reach radii far beyond co-rotation and, in a frame co-rotating with the bar, perform a retrograde motion around the Lagrange points. They thus result in a reduced $`\overline{v}`$ at azimuths perpendicular to the bar and hence lead to a positive $`\mathrm{cos}2\phi `$ component.

#### 3.1.3 Higher-Order Components

The $`m=4`$ components are usually smaller by at least a factor 3 compared to the $`m=2`$ modes, but they are significantly different from zero. In contrast, the analytical model (3) had no excitation of higher modes at all, since mode coupling is not included in a linear approximation.

The excitation of the $`m=4`$ modes follows the overall pattern seen in the $`m=2`$ case: in accordance with the symmetry requirements, we have a $`\mathrm{sin}(4\phi )`$ in $`u`$ and $`\sigma _{uv}^2`$, and a $`\mathrm{cos}(2\phi )`$ in all the other components. Our signal-to-noise ratio is in the range of about 3 for the $`m=4`$ case, and less for higher components, so surely the significance of our model is petering out. Nevertheless, some $`m=8`$ modes do seem to be discernible still.

### 3.2 Variation of Parameters

Doubling the bar strength leads to a doubling of the magnitude of the effects. This is true for the differences between the undeveloped and final state as well as for Fourier coefficients.

Changing the bar size, i.e. the parameter $`R_b`$ in (5), produces some local variations in the magnitude of the effects, but it does not shift them in location. Of course, this is to be expected if the location is determined by resonance conditions.

Variation of the disk scale length does not seem to have any strong effects, which is to be expected, since it only slightly affects the sampling of the orbits but not the dynamics.

The shape of the velocity curve has a mild effect: we tried models with a slightly rising ($`\beta =0.1`$) or falling ($`\beta =0.1`$) velocity profile, and found very similar results as for $`\beta =0`$. (Note that we kept the OLR radius fixed, so models with different velocity profiles have different rotation frequencies of the bar.) This is expected, too, since $`\beta `$ essentially controls the distances between various resonances (growing wider for larger $`\beta `$), while most of our results are dominated by a single resonance, the OLR.

### 3.3 The Axis Ratio of the Velocity Ellipsoid

Fig. 6 shows the ratio of the principal axes of the velocity dispersion ellipsoid, i.e. the eigenvalues $`\sigma _{1,2}^2`$ of the tensor $`𝝈^2`$. For a flat rotation curve, this ratio is often expected to be 0.5. Indeed, in the undisturbed case (for which $`\sigma _1=\sigma _{uu}`$ and $`\sigma _2=\sigma _{vv}`$)

$$\underset{\sigma 0}{lim}\frac{\sigma _2^2}{\sigma _1^2}=\frac{\kappa ^2}{4\mathrm{\Omega }^2}\frac{1}{2}\left(1+\frac{d\mathrm{ln}v_c}{d\mathrm{ln}R}\right),$$
(15)
where $`\kappa `$ is the epicycle frequency. This relation is often given without the limit and then referred to as Oort’s relation. It is, however, important to note that the error in Oort’s relation is considerable already for $`\sigma _0=0.2v_0`$ (Evans & Collett, 1993; Dehnen, 1999), which means that using it for the old stellar disk of the Milky Way is, at best, dangerous. This can be seen clearly from Fig. 6 showing that $`\sigma _2^2/\sigma _1^2`$ for the unperturbed case (dotted) significantly deviates from 0.5 for a warm stellar disk ($`\sigma _0=0.2v_0`$).

After formation of the bar perturbation, we have large variations in this quantity. For $`\sigma _0=0.2v_0`$ and at $`R=R_0`$, the values are generally somewhat higher than Oort’s value 0.5 but smaller than for an undisturbed disk. For directions that are roughly along the bar ($`\phi 0`$), this ratio rises sharply just outside the solar circle to values reaching as high as 0.8.

It is instructive to take a look at the same quantities for a smaller velocity dispersion of $`\sigma _0=0.05v_0`$ or $`0.1v_0`$ (left and middle panels of Fig. 6). First of all, the axis ratio in the undisturbed case (dashed line in the right panels) is much closer to Oort’s value of 0.5 here, as expected. Generally, the observed features have smaller width, i.e. they are less washed out by dispersion, but the effect of the bar, i.e. the difference between the solid and dashed lines, is still even quantitatively similar for the different velocity dispersions. Thus, the deviation of $`\sigma _2^2/\sigma _1^2`$ from Oort’s value may be decomposed into a velocity-dispersion dependent term, which consists of a general elevation of only mild radial dependence and a bar-induced term, which varies spatially and appears to be negative for the Solar position.

As a consequence, for mildly warm stellar disks ($`\sigma 0.2v_0`$), the ratio $`\sigma _2^2/\sigma _1^2`$ in the Solar neighbourhood may well drop below Oort’s value.

### 3.4 Vertex Deviation

The so-called vertex deviation

$$\mathrm{}_v=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{arctan}\frac{2\sigma _{uv}^2}{\sigma _{uu}^2\sigma _{vv}^2}$$
(16)
is the angle between the direction of the largest velocity dispersion and the line to the Galactic center, see also Fig. 1. For axisymmetric equilibrium models, $`\mathrm{}_v=0`$.

In Fig. 7, we plot $`\mathrm{}_v`$, computed from Fourier coefficients up to $`m=2`$ only in order to eliminate short-scale fluctuations. We find that the bar-induced vertex deviation decreases with increasing velocity dispersion from up to $`30\mathrm{°}`$ for $`\sigma _0=0.05v_0`$ to $`5\mathrm{°}`$$`10\mathrm{°}`$ for $`\sigma _0=0.2v_0`$. In the direction of the bar and perpendicular to it, $`\mathrm{}_v=0`$, as expected from symmetry. For moderately warm stellar disks ($`\sigma _00.1v_0`$) the vertex deviation at azimuth angles between $`0^{}`$ and $`90^{}`$ (including the Solar azimuth) is positive at and inside the solar circle and negative for some range outside. The actual radius where the sign change occurs is obviously coupled to the OLR, but again shifted to the outside. For a cold stellar disk, the bar-induced vertex deviation displays are more complicated pattern and may reach as high as $`40\mathrm{°}`$.

Obviously, the vertex deviation is antisymmetric with respect to $`\phi (\pi \phi )`$, whereas the velocity dispersion axis ratio is symmetric. This is a simple consequence of symmetry (13), which in particular implies $`(\sigma _{uu}^2,\sigma _{uv}^2,\sigma _{vv}^2)(\sigma _{uu}^2,\sigma _{uv}^2,\sigma _{vv}^2)`$.

## 4 Discussion

We have studied the bar-induced variations of the mean velocities and velocity dispersions in the outer disk of a barred galaxy with special emphasis on the situation in the Milky Way. We generally find that these variations are largest near the outer Lindblad resonance (OLR), the apparent radius of which, however, may be shifted outwards by 10-20% due to the non-circularity of the orbits in a warm stellar disk.

Radial motions $`\overline{u}`$ of standards of rest can be seen to occur quite frequently (see Fig. 8), and can reach magnitudes of the order of about $`0.02v_0`$, corresponding to about 5 km s-1 for the Milky Way. Because of the $`\mathrm{sin}2\phi `$ dependence, these would be maximal at $`\phi =45\mathrm{°}`$, which is quite near the proposed position of the Sun of $`\phi 30\mathrm{°}`$. In its radial dependence however, $`\overline{u}`$ swings through zero shortly outside of the OLR, and it may well be that the Sun just meets that point. So we cannot give a definite prediction for the bar-induced radial motion of the LSR here, not even by sign only, except that it should be very small (at most a few km s-1).

Variations of the mean azimuthal velocity are also present, but here we have to deal with several perturbation effects, the dominant one for realistic cases being traditional axisymmetric asymmetric drift. We can construct a picture of the bar-induced $`\overline{𝒗}`$-modifications only (see Fig. 8) by subtracting $`\overline{𝒗}`$ in the undeveloped case before bar growth, thus also canceling asymmetric drift. However, this is, of course, impossible for real galaxies, where only the combination of circular speed (LSR motion), asymmetric drift, and bar induced drift is measurable (in principle). In observational data, the effect of asymmetric drift can be corrected for, as done by Dehnen & Binney (1998), by calculating $`\overline{v}`$ for stellar populations with different velocity dispersions and extrapolating to vanishing dispersion. This approach, however, cannot be applied to the bar-induced perturbations in $`\overline{v}`$, since, as can be seen in Fig. 3, the relative magnitude of the bar-induced wiggle keeps constant at about 2%, independent of velocity dispersion. So, as long as only local measurements are available, there is no way to discern the bar-induced azimuthal velocity perturbations from variations in the background rotation curve, and so it will be rather hard to draw any observational constraints from the mean azimuthal velocities.

For an axisymmetric equilibrium, the no vertex deviation, i.e. $`\mathrm{}_v=0`$, is expected, while in the Solar neighbourhood $`\mathrm{}_v`$ is observed to drop from $`\mathrm{}_v30\mathrm{°}`$ for blue to $`10\mathrm{°}`$ for red main-sequence stars (Dehnen & Binney, 1998). The traditional interpretation of these vertex deviations is that young stars deviate from equilibrium, and thus even in an axisymmetric galaxy give rise to $`\mathrm{}_v0`$, which due to the decreasing number of young stars at later stellar types is a decreasing function of stellar colour.

Our calculations show that for an equilibrium in a barred Milky Way, with bar orientation, strength and pattern speed consistent with other data, a vertex deviation of the size and direction as observed emerges naturally. Moreover, we also found that for dynamically cooler sub-populations, i.e. bluer or younger stars, the bar-induced vertex deviation increases in amplitude, very similar to the observed values.

This gives strong support for the hypothesis that the vertex deviation observed in the Solar neighbourhood is predominantly caused by deviations from axisymmetry rather than from equilibrium. This explanation also naturally accounts for the fact that $`\mathrm{}_v`$ for young stars has the same direction as for old ones, which with the traditional explanation would be a chance coincidence.

The axis ratio of the (principal components of the) velocity dispersion tensor, $`\sigma _2^2/\sigma _1^2`$, is clearly affected by the central bar. In particular, values less than 0.5, Oort’s value for a flat rotation curve, are possible (Oort’s value is a *lower* limit for an axisymmetric galaxy, see Sect. 3.3 and Evans & Collett, 1993; Dehnen, 1999). This nicely fits to the values inferred from HIPPARCOS data (Dehnen & Binney, 1998), which give $`\sigma _2^2/\sigma _1^20.42`$ for the old stellar disk.

In the Milky Way, as well as in many barred galaxies, the bar is not the only deviation from a smooth axisymmetric background. Most prominently, spiral arm structure and an elliptic (or oval) disk and/or halo add further non-axisymmetric perturbations. However, we will defer the discussion of the influence of spiral arms on the outer disk kinematics to a future paper.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank Marc Verheijen for a careful reading of the manuscript.


text:
# Avoiding Monochromatic Sequences With Special Gaps

## 1 Introduction

Van der Waerden’s theorem on arithmetic progressions  states that for every partition of the natural numbers $``$ into $`r`$ sets, at least one of the sets will contain arbitrarily long arithmetic progressions. An equivalent form of this theorem says that for all positive integers $`k`$ and $`r`$, there exists a positive integer $`n=w(k;r)`$ such that within every $`r`$-coloring of $`[1,n]=\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$ there must be a monochromatic $`k`$-term arithmetic progression. By replacing the set of arithmetic progressions, $`AP`$, with another family $``$ of sets, one may ask if the corresponding theorem holds, i.e., is it true that for all $`k`$ and $`r`$, there exists a positive integer $`n=f(k,r)`$ such that for every $`r`$-coloring of $`[1,n]`$, there is a monochromatic $`k`$-term member of $``$? Examples may be found in .

In , the authors considered replacing $`AP`$ with a smaller collection of sets, namely the collection of those arithmetic progressions $`\{x+id:0ik1\}`$ whose common differences, $`d`$, belong to some prescribed set. Specifically, for a positive integer $`r`$, and $`A`$ a set of positive integers, call $`A`$ an $`r`$-large set if for every $`r`$-coloring of the positive integers there exist arbitrarily long monochromatic arithmetic progressions whose common differences belong to $`A`$. Further, define a set to be large if it is $`r`$-large for every $`r`$. They gave several sufficient conditions and some necessary conditions for largeness and 2-largeness. They also conjectured that any set that is 2-large must also be large.

In this paper we consider a property related to largeness. As with largeness, we consider sequences where the differences between consecutive terms belong to a prescribed set $`S`$; however, we do not insist that the sequence be an arithmetic progression. We begin with the following notation and definitions.

Notation. For any string $`w`$ and any $`t`$, we denote by $`w^t`$ the string $`\underset{t}{\underset{}{ww\mathrm{}w}}`$.

###### Definition 1.1

Let $`S`$. A sequence of positive integers $`\{x_1,\mathrm{},x_k\}`$ is a $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence if $`x_ix_{i1}S`$ for $`2ik`$.

###### Definition 1.2

Let $`r`$. A set of positive integers $`S`$ is called $`r`$-accessible is whenever $``$ is $`r`$-colored, there are arbitrarily long monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequences.

###### Definition 1.3

S is called accessible if $`S`$ is $`r`$-accessible for all positive integers $`r`$.

###### Definition 1.4

If $`S`$ is not accessible, the degree of accessibility of $`S`$ is the largest value of $`r`$ such that $`S`$ is $`r`$-accessible. We denote this by DA($`S`$).

We denote by $`f(S,k;r)`$ the least positive integer $`n`$ (if it exists) such that for every $`r`$-coloring of $`[1,n]`$ there is a monochromatic $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence. Obviously, if $`ST`$, then $`f(S,k;r)f(T,k;r)`$.

Denote the family of all accessible sets by $`𝒜`$ and the family of all $`r`$-accessible sets by $`𝒜_r`$. Likewise denote the families of large sets and $`r`$-large sets by $``$ and $`_r`$, respectively. Clearly, $`𝒜`$ and $`_r𝒜_r`$ for all $`r`$. In , it was conjectured that $`=_2`$. As we shall see, $`𝒜𝒜_2`$ and $`𝒜_2_2`$. We still do not know whether $`𝒜=`$.

In Section 2 we present some basic lemmas and consider a few elementary examples. Section 3 deals with sets consisting of certain congruence classes; in particular, we will see that for each positive integer $`d`$, there is some set having $`d`$ as its degree of accessibility (this is in contrast to what has been conjectured about large sets). In Section 4 we prove that for each odd positive integer $`t`$ there are arbitrarily long sequences of primes $`p_1<p_2<\mathrm{}<p_k`$ such that $`p_ip_{i1}P+t`$ for $`2ik`$, where $`P`$ is the set of primes. From this it will follow that $`P+t𝒜_2`$. Section 5 contains some open questions, as well as a table of computer-generated values of $`f(S,k;2)`$ for several different sets $`S`$ and values $`k`$.

## 2 A Few Simple Examples

We begin with two useful lemmas.

###### Lemma 2.1

Let $`c0`$ and $`r2`$, and let $`S`$ be a set of positive integers. If every $`(r1)`$-coloring of $`S`$ yields arbitrarily long monochromatic $`(S+c)`$-diffsequences, then $`S+c𝒜_r`$.

Proof. Let $`S=\{s_i:i\}`$ and assume every $`(r1)`$-coloring of $`S`$ admits arbitrarily long monochromatic $`(S+c)`$-diffsequences. Let $`\chi `$ be an $`r`$-coloring of $``$. By induction on $`k`$, we show that, under $`\chi `$, for all $`k`$ there are $`k`$-term monochromatic $`(S+c)`$-diffsequences. Since there are obviously 1-term sequences, assume $`k1`$ and that under $`\chi `$ there is a monochromatic $`(S+c)`$-diffsequence $`X=\{x_1,\mathrm{},x_k\}`$. We may assume $`X`$ has the color red. Consider $`A=\{x_k+s_i+c:s_iS\}`$. If some member of $`A`$ is colored red, then we have a red $`(k+1)`$-term $`(S+c)`$-diffsequence. Otherwise we have an $`(r1)`$-coloring of $`A`$ and therefore, by the hypothesis, $`A`$ must contain arbitrarily long monochromatic $`(S+c)`$-diffsequences. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark 1. The converse of Lemma 2.1 is false. As one example, let $`S=\{2\}(21)`$. Let $`\chi `$ be the 2-coloring of $`S`$ defined by $`\chi (x)=1`$ if $`x1`$(mod 4) or $`x=2`$, and $`\chi (x)=0`$ if $`x3`$(mod 4). Then $`\chi `$ does not yield arbitrarily long monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequences (there are none of length four). On the other hand, $`S𝒜_3`$ \[8, Remark (5)\], and in fact $`f(S,k;3)6k^213k+6`$; more generally, from this same reference it follows that if $`m`$ is even, and $`j`$ is a positive integer, then the set $`\{jm\}\{x:x\frac{m}{2}(`$mod $`m)\}`$ is 3-accessible.

###### Lemma 2.2

Let $`S`$ be a set of positive integers and let $`k,r,j`$. If $`f(S,k;r)=M`$, then $`f(jS,k;r)=j(M1)+1`$.

Proof. Since $`f(S,k;r)=M`$, under any $`r`$-coloring of the set $`\{1,j+1,2j+1,\mathrm{},(M1)j+1\}`$, there must exist a monochromatic $`k`$-term $`jS`$-diffsequence.

On the other hand, let $`\chi `$ be an $`r`$-coloring of $`[1,M1]`$ that avoids monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequences of length $`k`$. Define the $`r`$-coloring $`\chi ^{}`$ of $`[1,j(M1)]`$ by $`\chi ^{}[(i1)j+1,ij]=\chi (i)`$ for $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},M1`$. Assume, by way of contradiction, that $`\chi ^{}(x_1^{})=\mathrm{}=\chi ^{}(x_k^{})`$ with $`x_i^{}x_{i1}^{}jS`$ for $`2ik`$. Then, by the way $`\chi ^{}`$ is defined, there exist $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_k`$, monochromatic under $`\chi `$, belonging to $`[1,M1]`$, with $`x_ix_{i1}S`$ for $`2ik`$, a contradiction. $`\mathrm{}`$

Using Lemma 2.1, with $`r=2`$, it is clear that the set $`\{2^i:i0\}`$ is 2-accessible. The following result tells us more.

###### Theorem 2.3

Let $`a\{1,3\}`$, and let

$$S=\{(a1)a^j:j=0,1,2,\mathrm{}\}\{(a1)^2a^j:j=0,1,2,\mathrm{}\}.$$

Then $`2DA(S)a`$. Furthermore, $`f(S,k;2)a^ka+1`$ for all $`k1`$.

Proof. To show that DA$`(S)a`$, we exhibit an $`(a+1)`$-coloring of $``$ which avoids monochromatic 2-term $`S`$-diffsequences. Define $`\chi :\{0,1,\mathrm{},a\}`$ by $`\chi (x)=i`$ where $`xi(`$mod $`(a+1))`$. Assume that $`\chi (y)=\chi (z)`$ and that $`zyS`$. By the definition of $`\chi `$, $`a+1`$ divides $`zy`$, and therefore either $`(a+1)|(a1)a^j`$ or $`(a+1)|(a1)^2a^j`$ for some $`j0`$. Since gcd$`(a1,a)=1`$, we have $`(a+1)|a^j`$ or $`(a+1)|(a1)^2`$, but since $`a3`$, neither of these is possible.

Now let $`\alpha :[1,a^ka+1]\{0,1\}`$. To complete the proof we show that under $`\alpha `$ there must be a monochromatic $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence. We do this by induction on $`k`$. Obviously, it holds for $`k=1`$. Now assume $`k2`$, and that it holds for $`k1`$. Let $`X=\{x_1,\mathrm{},x_{k1}\}`$ be a monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequence, say of color $`0`$, that is contained in $`[1,a^{k1}a+1]`$. Consider the set $`A=\{x_{k1}+(a1)a^i:i=0,\mathrm{},k1\}`$. Note that $`A[1,a^ka+1]`$. If there exists $`yA`$ of color 0, then $`X\{y\}`$ is a monochromatic $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence. If, on the other hand, no such $`y`$ exists, then $`A`$ is a monochromatic $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 2.4

If $`S=\{2^i:i0\}`$, then DA$`(S)=2`$ and

$$8(k3)+1f(S,k,2)2^k1$$

for all $`k3`$.

Proof. The fact that DA$`(S)=2`$ and the upper bound are immediate from Theorem 2.3.

For the lower bound, first note that by direct calculation we find that $`f(S,3;2)=7`$ and $`f(S,4;2)=11`$. To complete the proof we show by induction on $`k`$ that, for $`k5`$, the 2-coloring $`\chi _k=(10010110)^{k3}`$ avoids monochromatic $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequences. It is easy to check directly that this statement is satisfied by $`k=5`$. So now assume $`k5`$, that $`\chi _k`$ avoids $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequences, and consider $`\chi _{k+1}`$.

Let $`X=\{x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_m\}`$ be a maximal length monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequence under $`\chi _{k+1}`$. We wish to show that $`mk`$. Assume, by way of contradiction, that $`mk+1`$. Then $`x_{m1},x_m[8(k3)+1,8(k2)]`$, or else the inductive assumption would be contradicted. We consider the following cases.

Case 1. $`\chi _{k+1}(X)=1`$.

Subcase (a). $`x_{m2}[8(k3)+1,8(k2)]`$.

In this subcase we must have $`x_{m2}=8k20`$, $`x_{m1}=8k18`$, and $`x_m=8k17`$. By the structure of $`\chi _k`$, we see that $`x_{m3}4`$(mod 8). Hence, there exists, under $`\chi _k`$, a monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequence of length $`m1`$, contradicting our assumption about $`\chi _k`$.

Subcase (b). $`x_{m2}[8(k3)+1,8(k2)]`$.

Then $`x_{m1}=8k18`$ and $`x_m=8k17`$. By the structure of $`\chi _k`$, this implies $`x_{m2}6`$(mod 8). Then there is an $`(m1)`$-term monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequence under $`\chi _k`$, a contradiction.

Case 2. $`\chi _{k+1}(X)=0`$.

Subcase (a). $`x_{m2}[8(k3)+1,8(k2)]`$.

For this case we have $`x_{m2}=8k22`$, $`x_{m1}=8k21`$, and $`x_m=8k19`$. Then either $`x_{m3}=8(k3)`$ or $`x_{m3}2`$(mod 8). If $`x_{m3}=8(k3)`$, then $`m3k3`$ because there can be only one term of an $`S`$-diffsequence per 10010110-string, a contradiction. If $`x_{m3}2`$(mod 8), then there is an $`(m1)`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence of color 0 under $`\chi _k`$, a contradiction.

Subcase (b). $`x_{m2}[8(k3)+1,8(k2)]`$.

Then $`x_{m1}=8k21`$ and $`x_m=8k19`$, and hence $`x_{m2}3`$(mod 8). This is not possible, since there would then be a monochromatic $`(m1)`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence under $`\chi _k`$. $`\mathrm{}`$.

We next show that $`a=2`$ is the only value of $`a`$ for which $`\{a^i:i0\}𝒜_2`$. To this end, we first prove the following lemma.

###### Lemma 2.5

Let $`m2`$ and $`i1`$ with gcd$`(i,m)=1`$. Let $`S=\{x:xi`$(mod $`m)\}`$. Then $`S𝒜_2`$.

Proof. Let $`\chi :\{0,1\}`$ be defined by $`\chi (x)=0`$ if and only if $`m`$ divides $`x`$. Then since any $`m`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence must include some multiple of $`m`$ and some non-multiple of $`m`$, there is no monochromatic $`m`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 2.6

If $`a3`$, then $`\{a^i:i0\}𝒜_2`$.

Proof. Let $`T=\{a^i:i0\}`$. Then $`T\{x:x1`$(mod $`a1)\}`$, and the result follows from Lemma 2.5. $`\mathrm{}`$

In  it was shown that if $`A_r`$ and $`B_s`$, then $`AB_{rs}`$ (hence, whenever a finite union of sets is large, at least one of the sets must be large). Essentially the same proof can be used to prove the following lemma. We omit the proof.

###### Lemma 2.7

If $`S𝒜_r`$ and $`T𝒜_s`$, then $`ST𝒜_{rs}`$.

It is easy to see, using Lemma 2.1, that the set $`S=\{2\}(21)`$ is 2-accessible, since the set of odd numbers itself is an $`S`$-diffsequence. The next theorem tells us more about $`S`$.

###### Theorem 2.8

If $`S=\{2\}(21)`$, then DA$`(S)=3`$. Furthermore, $`f(S,k;3)6k^213k+6`$ and

$$f(S,k;2)=\{\begin{array}{cc}3k4\hfill & \text{if }k\text{ is odd}\hfill \\ 3k3\hfill & \text{if }k\text{ is even}\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
Proof. The fact that $`DA(S)3`$ and the bound for $`f(S,k;3)`$ were mentioned in Remark 1. The fact that DA$`(S)<4`$ follows from Lemma 2.7. To see this, note that the $`2`$-coloring of $``$ given by $`001100110011\mathrm{}`$ shows that $`\{2\}`$ is not $`2`$-accessible and that the $`2`$-coloring of $``$ given by $`01010101\mathrm{}`$ shows that $`21`$ is not $`2`$-accessible. Hence, we have that DA$`(S)=3`$.

Let $`g(k)`$ be the function on the right side of (1). We next show that $`g(k)`$ is an upper bound for $`f(S,k;2)`$. By direct computation it is easily checked that $`f(S,k;2)g(k)`$ for $`k=2`$ and $`k=3`$. To show this inequality holds for $`k4`$, it suffices to show that for every $`\{0,1\}`$-coloring of $`[1,g(k)]`$, there exist $`S`$-diffsequences $`X_1=\{x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_{k_1}\}`$ and $`X_2=\{y_1,y_2,\mathrm{},y_{k_2}\}`$ where $`X_1`$ has color 0, $`X_2`$ has color 1, and $`k_1+k_22k1`$. This last fact is true for $`k=4`$ and $`k=5`$ by direct computation. To show it holds for all $`k`$ we proceed by induction on $`k`$, showing that its truth for $`k`$ implies its truth for $`k+2`$.

Assume that $`k4`$, and that for every 2-coloring of $`[1,g(k)]`$ there exist monochromatic sequences $`X_1`$ and $`X_2`$ as described above. Now 2-color $`[1,g(k+2)]=[1,g(k)+6]`$. To complete the proof we show that there exists a $`k_1^{}`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence of color 0 and a $`k_2^{}`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence of color 1 with

$$k_1^{}+k_2^{}2k+3.$$
(2)
We assume, without loss of generality, that $`k_1k_2`$. Let $`Y=\{x_{k_1}+1,x_{k_1}+2,\mathrm{},x_{k_1}+6\}`$. We consider the following cases.

Case 1. There exist at least four elements of $`Y`$ that have color 0.

It is easy to see that these four elements may be appended to $`X_1`$ to form a monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequence, and hence (2) holds.

Case 2. Exactly three elements of $`Y`$ have color 0.

Then there exist two elements, $`a`$ and $`b`$, of these three such that $`X_1\{a,b\}`$ forms a $`(k_1+2)`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence. Likewise there exist two members, $`c`$ and $`d`$, of $`Y`$, having color 1 and such that $`X_2\{c,d\}`$ forms a $`(k_2+2)`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence. This implies (2) for this case.

Case 3. Two or fewer elements of $`Y`$ have color 0.

Then we may extend $`X_2`$ to an $`S`$-diffsequence, monochromatic with color 1, of length $`k_2^{}k_2+4`$. Again (2) holds.

To complete the proof of the theorem, we show that $`f(S,k,2)g(k)`$ by exhibiting a 2-coloring of $`[1,g(k)1]`$ that avoids monochromatic $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequences. We begin with the case in which $`k`$ is even. Let $`C_k`$ be the following coloring of $`[1,3k4]`$: $`C_k=1(000111)^{\frac{k2}{2}}0`$. By symmetry it suffices to show there is no $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence with color 1. We prove this by induction on $`n`$, where $`k=2n`$. Obviously the coloring 10 avoids 2-term monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequences, and the coloring 10001110 avoids 4-term monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequences, and hence the result holds for $`n=1`$ and $`n=2`$.

Now assume $`n2`$, and that $`C_k`$ does not yield any $`k`$-term monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequences with color 1. Now $`C_{k+2}=C_k001110`$. Let $`X`$ be a monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequence of color 1 in $`C_k`$ having maximal length. So $`|X|<k`$. Obviously, at least one of $`\{3k7,3k6\}`$ belongs to $`X`$. Hence $`3k5`$ also belongs to $`X`$. Hence, at most two members of $`\{3k1,3k,3k+1\}`$ may be tacked on to $`X`$ to form a monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequence. Thus, under the coloring $`C_{k+2}`$, there is no $`k+2`$-term $`S`$-diffsequence with color 1. This completes the proof for $`k`$ even.

Now consider the case in which $`k`$ is odd. Let $`D_k=11(000111)^{\frac{k3}{2}}00`$. The proof is completed in a straightforward manner, similar to the even case, by induction on $`n=(k1)/2`$, by showing that the longest $`S`$-diffsequence with color 1 cannot have length greater than $`k1`$. We omit the details. $`\mathrm{}`$

It is a simple exercise to give an upper bound on $`f(S,k;2)`$ when $`S`$ is the set of Fibonacci numbers. The proof is left to the reader.

###### Proposition 2.9

Let $`F=\{F_1,F_2,F_3,\mathrm{}\}=\{1,1,2,\mathrm{}\}`$ be the sequence of Fibonacci numbers. Then $`f(F,k,2)F_{k+3}2`$.

We conclude this section with the following simple result, which provides us with examples of very sparse sets which are nonetheless accessible.

###### Theorem 2.10

Let $`T`$ be infinite. Then $`TT=\{ts:s<t\text{ and }s,tT\}𝒜`$.

Proof. Let $`r`$, and consider any $`r`$-coloring of $`TT`$. Fix $`sT`$. Let $`\{t_1,t_2,\mathrm{}\}=\{tT:t>s\}`$ where $`t_1<t_2<\mathrm{}`$, and let $`A=\{t_is:i=1,2,\mathrm{}\}`$ . Obviously, there is some color which contains an infinite subset, $`B`$, of $`A`$. Since $`B`$ is a $`(TT)`$-diffsequence, by Lemma 2.1, $`TT𝒜`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 Some Results on Sets of Congruence Classes

We now look at the accessibility of certain collections of congruence classes. In  it was proved that if a set $`A`$ belongs to $`_2`$, then $`A`$ must contain a multiple of every positive integer. We have seen that this is not true if we replace $`_2`$ with $`𝒜_2`$ (see, for example, Corollary 2.4 or Theorem 2.8). By the next lemma, we see that this condition is necessary in order for a set to be accessible.

###### Lemma 3.1

If $`r`$ and $`S`$ contains no multiple of $`r`$, then $`S𝒜_r`$.

Proof. Consider the $`r`$-coloring $`\chi :\{0,1,\mathrm{},r1\}`$ defined by $`\chi (x)=i`$ if $`xi(`$mod $`r`$). This coloring avoids 2-term monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequences. $`\mathrm{}`$

We now consider the set of positive integers that, for a given $`m`$, are not multiples of $`m`$. We shall denote this set by $`S_m`$. In , it was shown that $`S_m_2`$, and by Lemma 3.1, $`S_m𝒜`$. By the following result, $`S_m𝒜_2`$ for $`m>2`$, thus giving another example for which “2-accessible” does not imply “2-large.”

###### Theorem 3.2

Let $`m2`$. Then DA$`(S_m)=m1`$.

Proof. The fact that DA$`(S_m)m1`$ follows from Lemma 3.1.

To prove the reverse inequality, let $`\chi `$ be any $`(m2)`$-coloring of $`S`$. Then some color must contain an infinite number of elements from each of at least two of the residue classes 1 (mod $`m)`$, 2 (mod $`m)`$, …, $`(m1)`$ (mod $`m)`$. Thus, some color contains arbitrarily long $`S`$-diffsequences. By Lemma 2.1, $`S𝒜_{m1}`$, and the proof is complete. $`\mathrm{}`$.

An immediate and noteworthy corollary of Theorem 3.2 is the following.

###### Corollary 3.3

Let $`d`$. There exists $`S`$ such that $`DA(S)=d`$.

In the next theorem, we give the exact value of $`f(S_m,k;2)`$ for $`m=3`$ and $`m=4`$. We use $`g(k)`$ to denote the right-hand side of (1) (from Theorem 2.8).

###### Theorem 3.4

Let $`k2`$. Then (i) $`f(S_3,k;2)=4k5`$ and (ii) $`f(S_4,k;2)=g(k)`$.

Proof. To prove $`f(S_3,k;2)4k5`$, consider the coloring $`\chi :[1,4k6]\{0,1\}`$, defined by $`\chi (i)=0`$ if $`i2`$(mod 4) or $`i3`$ (mod 4), and $`\chi (i)=1`$ if $`i0`$(mod 4) or $`i1`$(mod 4). In each color there are $`k2`$ pairs of consecutive elements that differ by 3. Hence in each color there are at most $`2(k2)+1(k2)=k1`$ elements that can belong to the same $`S_3`$-diffsequence. Hence $`f(S_3,k;2)>4k6`$.

To prove the reverse inequality we will show the following stronger statement is true: for every 2-coloring $`\chi :[1,4k5]\{0,1\}`$ there exist $`S_3`$-diffsequences $`X=\{x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_{k_1}\}`$ and $`Y=\{y_1,y_2,\mathrm{},y_{k_2}\}`$ with $`\chi (X)=0`$ and $`\chi (Y)=1`$ and $`k_1+k_22k1`$. We prove this last statement by induction on $`k`$. It is easy to check that the statement holds for $`k=2`$. Now assume $`k2`$, and that the result holds for $`k`$. Let $`\chi `$ be any 2-coloring of $`[1,4k1]`$. By inductive hypothesis, within $`[1,4k5]`$, there exist monochromatic sequences $`X`$ and $`Y`$ as described above. Without loss of generality, we assume $`x_{k_1}y_{k_2}`$. We consider three cases.

Case 1. $`x_{k_1}y_{k_2}`$(mod 3).

Consider the numbers $`x_{k_1}+1`$ and $`x_{k_1}+2`$. Regardless of their colors, we now have monochromatic sets $`\{x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_{k_1^{}}\}`$ and $`\{y_1,y_2,\mathrm{},y_{k_2^{}}\}`$ with $`k_1^{}+k_2^{}=k_1+k_2+22k+1`$.

Case 2. $`x_{k_1}(y_{k_2}+1)`$(mod 3).

Let $`A=\{x_{k_1}+i:1i4\}`$, and let $`A_0=\{xA:\chi (x)=0\}`$ and $`A_1=\{xA:\chi (x)=1\}`$. We may break this into the following three subcases: (i) $`A_0`$ contains one of the pairs $`\{x_{k_1}+1,x_{k_1}+2\}`$, $`\{x_{k_1}+1,x_{k_1}+3\}`$, $`\{x_{k_1}+2,x_{k_1}+3\}`$, $`\{x_{k_1}+2,x_{k_1}+4\}`$; (ii) $`A_1`$ contains one of the pairs $`\{x_{k_1}+1,x_{k_1}+2\}`$, $`\{x_{k_1}+1,x_{k_1}+3\}`$, $`\{x_{k_1}+3,x_{k_1}+4\}`$; (iii) $`A_0=\{x_{k_1}+1,x_{k_2}+4\}`$ and $`A_1=\{x_{k_1}+2,x_{k_1}+3\}`$. In subcase (i), it is clear that there will be a $`(k_1+2)`$-term $`S_3`$-diffsequence with color 0, which gives the desired result. For subcase (ii), we have a $`(k_2+2)`$-term $`S_3`$-diffsequence with color 1. For subcase (iii) the monochromatic $`S_3`$-diffsequences $`X\{x_{k_1}+1\}`$ and $`Y\{x_{k_1}+3\}`$ yield the desired result.

Case 3. $`x_{k_1}(y_{k_2}+2)`$(mod 3).

Let $`A`$, $`A_0`$, and $`A_1`$ be defined as in Case 2. The following three subcases, which parallel the subcases of Case 2, yield the same respective results as those of Case 2:

* same as Case 2, subcase (i)
* $`A_1`$ contains one of the pairs $`\{x_{k_1}+2,x_{k_1}+3\}`$, $`\{x_{k_1}+2,x_{k_1}+4\}`$, $`\{x_{k_1}+3,x_{k_1}+4\}`$
* $`A_0=\{x_{k_1}+3,x_{k_1+4}\}`$ and $`A_1=\{x_{k_1}+1,x_{k_1}+2\}`$.

The fact that $`f(S_4,k;2)g(k)`$ follows immediately by Theorem 2.2, since $`\{2\}(21)S_4`$. Also, the colorings $`C_k`$ and $`D_k`$ used in the proof of Theorem 2.8 not only avoid monochromatic $`(\{2\}(21))`$-diffsequences, but they also avoid monochromatic $`S_4`$-diffsequences. Hence, $`f(S_4,k;2)g(k)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Although we do not have a formula for $`f(S_m,k;2)`$ for $`m>4`$, the next theorem gives a lower bound which we believe is the exact value of this function.

###### Theorem 3.5

Let $`m5`$, and let $`amk<(a+1)m`$. Then

$$2k+2a1f(S_m,k;2).$$

Furthermore, if $`1k<m`$, then $`f(S_m,k;2)=2k1`$.

Proof. For the case in which $`1k<m`$, choosing any 2-coloring of $`[1,2k2]`$ such that there are $`k1`$ elements of each color shows that $`f(S_m,k,2)2k1`$. On the other hand, every 2-coloring of $`[1,2k1]`$ yields a monochromatic set $`\{x_1,\mathrm{},x_k\}`$ such $`x_ix_{i1}<m`$ for $`2ik`$.

Now let $`a`$ be as in the statement of the theorem. The lower bound follows by observing that the 2-coloring

$$(10^{m1})^a(1^{m1}0)^a0^{ka(m1)1}1^{ka(m1)1}$$

avoids monochromatic $`k`$-term $`S_m`$-diffsequences. $`\mathrm{}`$

By Lemmas 2.2 and 2.5, we know that if $`m2`$ and $`c\{1,2,\mathrm{},m1\}`$ then the set of positive integers that are congruent to $`c`$ (mod $`m`$) is not 2-accessible. We would like to know about the function $`f(S,k;2)`$ when $`S`$ is the union of more than one congruence class modulo $`m`$, other than the case in which $`S=S_m`$. We present one example, but thus far have not found a general result.

###### Proposition 3.6

Let $`S=\{x:3x`$ and $`4x\}`$. Then $`f(S,k;2)=7k12`$ for $`k3`$.

Proof. To see that $`f(S,k;2)7k12`$ for $`k`$ even, note that the coloring $`1(10011000110011)^{\frac{k2}{2}}`$ avoids monochromatic $`k`$-term $`S`$-diffsequences. For $`k`$ odd, the same property holds for the coloring $`1(10011000110011)^{\frac{k3}{2}}(1001100)`$.

To establish the upper bound we prove the following stronger statement: every 2-coloring $`\chi `$ of $`[1,7k12]`$ admits monochromatic $`S`$-diffsequences $`X=\{x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_m\}`$ and $`Y=\{y_1,y_2,\mathrm{}y_n\}`$, with $`\chi (X)=0`$ and $`\chi (Y)=1`$, such that $`m+n2k1`$. We prove this by induction on $`k`$. Direct calculation shows that $`f(S,3;2)=9`$. Now assume the statement holds for $`k`$, and let $`\chi `$ be a 2-coloring of $`[1,7k5]`$. Without loss of generality, assume $`x_m>y_n`$. We may consider twelve cases, one each for the congruence class, modulo 12, that contains $`x_my_n`$. We give the details for two of these cases; the others are straightforward, and we omit them.

Case 5. $`x_my_n`$ 5(mod 12).

If $`\chi (x_m+1)=0`$, then regardless of the value of $`\chi (x_m+2)`$ we are done. Hence, assume that $`\chi (x_m+1)=1`$. If $`\chi (x_m+4)=0`$, then regardless of the value of $`\chi (x_m+2)`$ we are done. Hence, assume $`\chi (x_m+4)=0`$. Hence we may assume that $`\chi (x_m+2)=0`$, which implies that $`\chi (x_m+3)=0`$. Now, regardless of the value of $`\chi (x_m+7)`$, we are done.

Case 6. $`x_my_n`$ 6(mod 12).

If $`\chi (x_m+2)=0`$, then regardless of the value of $`\chi (x_m+1)`$, we are done. Hence, assume that $`\chi (x_m+2)=1`$. This implies that we may assume that $`\chi (x_m+1)=0`$, which in turn allows us to assume that $`\chi (x_m+6)=1`$. This implies that $`\chi (x_m+3)=1`$, or else we are done. From this we may assume that $`\chi (x_m+4)=\chi (x_m+5)=0`$. Now, if $`\chi (x_m+7)=1`$, we are done, so assume that $`\chi (x_m+7)=0`$. Then we have that $`X\{x_m+5,x_m+7\}`$ is monochromatic, completing this case. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Translations Of The Set Of Primes

In , the question was raised as to whether there exist any translations of $`P`$, the set of primes, that are large, or for that matter 2-large. Since a 2-large set must contain a multiple of every integer, $`P+e_2`$ if $`e`$ is even. Likewise, by Lemma 3.1, if $`e`$ is even, then $`P+e𝒜`$, and $`P`$ itself is not $`4`$-accessible. In fact, $`P𝒜_3`$. To see this, color the multiples of $`9`$ green, the remaining even numbers red, and the remaining odd numbers blue. It is easy to see that any sequences of $`9`$ reds, $`9`$ blues, or $`2`$ greens must have numbers which differ by a non-prime. We do not know whether $`P`$ is 2-accessible or whether any even translation of $`P`$ is 2-accessible. On the other hand, as we shall see in this section, all odd translations of $`P`$ are 2-accessible.

We use an application, given as Theorem 4.1 below, of a theorem due to Balog . Before stating the theorem, we introduce some notation.

Let $`𝐛=(b_1,b_2,\mathrm{},b_k)^k`$, $`pP`$, and $`x^+`$. We define:

$`\pi (x;𝐛)=|\{n:1<n+b_ix\mathrm{is}\mathrm{prime}\mathrm{for}\mathrm{every}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}1}ik\}|`$;

$`\rho (p)=\rho (p;𝐛)=|\{n(\text{mod }p):(n+b_1)(n+b_2)\mathrm{}(n+b_k)0(\text{mod }p)\}|;`$

$`\sigma (𝐛)=\{\begin{array}{cc}_{pP}\left(1\frac{1}{p}\right)^k\left(1\frac{\rho (p)}{p}\right)\hfill & \mathrm{if}\rho (p)<p\mathrm{for}\mathrm{all}\mathrm{primes}p\hfill \\ & \\ 0\hfill & \mathrm{otherwise};\hfill \end{array}`$

$`T(x;𝐛)=\underset{1ik}{\underset{1<n+b_ix}{}}\frac{1}{\mathrm{log}(n+b_1)\mathrm{log}(n+b_2)\mathrm{}\mathrm{log}(n+b_k)}.`$

Before stating Theorem 4.1, we remind the reader of the following notation.

Notation. Let $`f(x)`$ and $`g(x)`$ be functions and let $`k`$ be a parameter. We write $`f(x)g(x)`$ if there exists a constant, $`c`$, such that $`lim_x\mathrm{}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}c`$. We write $`f(x)_kg(x)`$ if the constant $`c`$ is dependent upon $`k`$.

###### Theorem 4.1

(Balog). Let $`k^+`$, let $`x^+`$ be sufficiently large, let $`t`$ be a fixed nonnegative integer, and let

$$B=\{(0,q_1+t,\mathrm{},\underset{i=1}{\overset{k1}{}}(q_i+t)):q_iP,kq_ix/2k,1ik1\}.$$

Define $`Z=\{𝐛=(b_1,\mathrm{},b_k)B:\{n:1<n+b_kx\}\mathrm{}\}`$. Then

$$\underset{𝐛Z}{}|\pi (x;𝐛)\sigma (𝐛)T(x;𝐛)|_k\frac{x^k}{\mathrm{log}^{2k}x}.$$

Remark. This follows from Balog’s theorem (, p.49) with $`A=2k`$, $`c=0`$, $`D=1`$, and $`a_i=1`$ for $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},k`$, since $`B`$ is a subset of $`Z`$ as defined in Balog’s theorem. $`\mathrm{}`$

We will need the following technical lemma. Before stating the lemma we give a definition.

Definition 5. Let $`p`$ be prime. We call a set of polynomials $`𝒫[y]`$ $`p`$-admissible if there exists an integer $`h`$ such that $`p`$ does not divide any element of the set when $`y=h`$. If $`𝒫`$ is $`p`$-admissible for all primes $`p`$, we call $`𝒫`$ admissible.

###### Lemma 4.2

Let $`k2`$ and let $`t1`$ be odd. For $`(z_1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_{k1})^{k1}`$, define the set of polynomials

$$Y_{(z_1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_{k1})}(y)=\{y+\underset{j=1}{\overset{i1}{}}(z_j+t):1ik\}[y]$$

and let

$$M=\{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1}):k<q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1}x/2k\text{ are primes and }Y_{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})}(y)\text{ is admissible}\}$$

for $`x^+`$ sufficiently large. Then $`|M|_k(\frac{x}{\mathrm{log}x})^{k1}`$.

Proof. Our approach is to show that for “most” $`(k1)`$-tuples of primes, $`Y_{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})}(y)`$ is admissible. First of all, for any $`(k1)`$-tuple of primes $`(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})`$, it is clear that $`Y_{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})}(y)`$ is $`p`$-admissible for any prime $`pk`$. Hence, we need to consider the $`q`$-admissibility for primes $`q<k`$. To this end, consider those primes $`r_1=2`$, $`r_2=3,\mathrm{},r_d`$ less than $`k`$. We will obtain a lower bound for the number of $`(k1)`$-tuples of primes which are $`r_i`$-admissible for all $`1id`$.

Let $`h`$ be odd. Below, we will find $`q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1}`$ such that $`Y_{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})}(y)`$ is admissible with $`y=h`$. (We are in fact proving something stronger: we prove that $`Y_{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})}(y)`$ is $`r_i`$-admissible with $`y=h`$ for $`1id`$, i.e., the same $`h`$ works for all $`r_i`$.) So that $`r_i(h+q_1+t)`$ for $`1id`$, it is sufficient that for each $`i`$, $`q_1ht(\mathrm{mod}r_i)`$ Letting $`m=_{i=1}^dr_i`$ we need only have $`q_1`$ belong to one specific residue class $`c_1`$ (mod $`m`$), where $`\mathrm{gcd}(c_1,m)=1`$. By Dirichlet’s theorem for primes in arithmetic progressions, we have $`_k\frac{x}{\mathrm{log}x}`$ choices for $`q_1`$.

Similarly, once $`h,q_1,q_2,\mathrm{},q_{j1}`$ have been chosen, we may choose $`q_j`$ so that for each $`r_i`$, $`q_j`$ avoids one specific residue class modulo $`r_i`$. Hence we need only choose $`q_j`$ so that it does not belong to any of the residue classes $`(h+q_1+q_2+\mathrm{}q_{j1}+jt)`$ (mod $`r_i`$), $`1id`$. So it suffices to have $`q_j`$ belong to one specific congruence class $`c_j`$(mod $`m`$), with $`\mathrm{gcd}(c_j,m)=1`$.

Combining this criteria for all primes less than $`k`$, we have at least $`_{i=2}^d(r_i2)`$ reduced residue classes modulo $`_{i=2}^dr_i`$. By Dirichlet’s Theorem we have $`_k\frac{x}{\mathrm{log}x}`$ choices for each $`q_i`$, and thus $`_k(\frac{x}{\mathrm{log}x})^{k1}`$ choices for the $`(k1)`$-tuple of primes $`(q_1,q_2,\mathrm{},q_{k1})`$ that belong to $`M`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Using Theorem 4.1 and Lemma 4.2, we have the following result.

###### Lemma 4.3

For $`k2`$, $`t1`$ and odd, and $`x𝐑^+`$, sufficiently large, define

$$W=\{(p,q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1}):p,q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1}\text{ are primes and }k<q_1,q_2,\mathrm{},q_{k1}\frac{x}{2k}\}.$$

For $`1ik1`$, let

$$S_i=\{(p,q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})W:p+\underset{j=1}{\overset{i}{}}(q_j+t)x\text{ is prime}\}$$

and let $`S=_{i=1}^{k1}S_i`$. Then $`|S|_k\frac{x^k}{\mathrm{log}^{2k1}x}.`$

Proof. We use the notation from Theorem 4.1 and Lemma 4.2; in particular, $`𝐛=(0,q_1+t,\mathrm{},_{i=1}^{k1}(q_i+t))`$ and $`M`$ is as in Lemma 4.2. In order to apply Theorem 4.1, we first obtain effective bounds for $`\rho ,\sigma `$, and $`T`$.

From Theorem 4.1 we see that we may restrict our attention to those $`𝐛`$ such that $`\sigma (𝐛)>0`$ and use the same given bound (since this restriction reduces the size of the sum in Theorem 4.1).

It is well known that $`\sigma (𝐛)<\mathrm{}`$ (see , for example). We next show that for all $`𝐛=(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})M`$ we have $`\sigma (𝐛)>0`$. Since

1. For any $`(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})M`$ we have that $`Y(y)=\{y+_{j=1}^i(q_i+t):1ik1\}[y]`$ is admissible,
2. and
3. $`Y(y)`$ is admissible if and only if $`\rho (p;𝐛)p1`$ for each prime $`p`$,

we see that for all $`𝐛=(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})M`$ we have $`\rho (p;𝐛)<p`$ for all primes $`p`$. Since it is also true that $`\rho (p;𝐛)k`$ for any prime we have

$$\sigma (𝐛)\underset{pk}{}\left(1\frac{1}{p}\right)^k\left(1\frac{p1}{p}\right)\underset{p>k}{}\left(1\frac{1}{p}\right)^k\left(1\frac{k}{p}\right)=\sigma _k,$$
(3)
a constant dependent upon only $`k`$. We now show that $`\sigma _k>0`$.

Clearly, we have the finite product in (3) positive, so we must show that the infinite product in (3) converges to a positive constant. To this end, let $`1+a_p=\left(11/p\right)^k\left(1k/p\right)`$. By the binomial theorem, we have $`a_p=\frac{_{i=2}^k(1)^{ki}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k}{i}\right)p^i}{(11/p)^k}`$. Since $`|a_p|\frac{_{i=2}^k\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k}{i}\right)p^i}{(11/p)^k}\frac{_{i=2}^k\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k}{i}\right)p^2}{(11/p)^k}\frac{_{i=2}^k\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k}{i}\right)p^2}{1/2^k}=2^k(2^kk1)p^2`$, we see that $`_{pP}a_p`$ converges absolutely. It follows that $`_{pP}(1+a_p)`$ converges to a positive number. Thus, from (3),

$$\text{for all }𝐛M,\sigma (𝐛)\sigma _k>0.$$
(4)
We next bound $`T(x;𝐛)`$ by using

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill |\{n:1<n+b_ix,1ik\}|& =(xb_k)+O(1)\hfill \\ & =x\underset{i=1}{\overset{k1}{}}(q_i+t)+O(1)\hfill \\ & >x\underset{i=1}{\overset{k1}{}}q_ikt+O(1)\hfill \\ & >xk\left(\frac{x}{2k}\right)+O(1)\hfill \\ & =\frac{x}{2}+O(1).\hfill \end{array}$$

(5)

This gives us

$$T(x;𝐛)>\left(\frac{x}{2}+O(1)\right)\frac{1}{\mathrm{log}^kx}.$$
(6)
From (5) we may apply Theorem 4.1 to get

$$\underset{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})M}{}\left||\{n:n+b_i\mathrm{prime},1ik\}|\sigma (𝐛)T(x;𝐛)\right|_k\frac{x^k}{\mathrm{log}^{2k}x}.$$
(7)
Using the bounds from (3), (4), and (6) along with Lemma 4.2, inequality (7) yields

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill |S|& \underset{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})M}{}|\{n:n+b_i\mathrm{prime},1ik\}|\hfill \\ & _k\underset{(q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1})M}{}\sigma (𝐛)T(x;𝐛)O\left(\frac{x^k}{\mathrm{log}^{2k}x}\right)\hfill \\ & _k\sigma _k|M|\left(\frac{x}{2}+O(1)\right)\left(\frac{x}{2\mathrm{log}^kx}\right)O\left(\frac{x^k}{\mathrm{log}^{2k}x}\right)\hfill \\ & _k\sigma _k\left(\frac{x}{\mathrm{log}x}\right)^{k1}\left(\frac{x}{2\mathrm{log}^kx}\right)O\left(\frac{x^k}{\mathrm{log}^{2k}x}\right)\hfill \\ & _k\frac{x^k}{\mathrm{log}^{2k1}x}\hfill \end{array}$$

for $`x`$ sufficiently large. $`\mathrm{}`$

Using Lemma 4.3 we have the following result concerning the existence of arbitrarily long sequences of primes with “special gaps.”

###### Theorem 4.4

Let $`t`$ be odd. For any $`k2`$, there exist $`p_1,p_2,\mathrm{},p_kP`$ such that $`p_ip_{i1}P+t`$ for $`i=2,\mathrm{},k`$.

Proof. By Lemma 4.3 we may choose primes $`p_1`$, $`q_1,\mathrm{},q_{k1}`$ so that

$$p_i=p_1+\underset{j=1}{\overset{i1}{}}(q_j+t)P,$$

$`2ik1`$. Since $`p_ip_{i1}=q_{i1}+t`$ for $`i=2,\mathrm{},k`$, we are done. $`\mathrm{}`$

Combining Theorem 4.4 with Lemma 2.1, we have the following immediate corollary.

###### Corollary 4.5

If $`t`$ is odd, then $`P+t𝒜_2`$.

## 5 Open Questions And Some Exact Values

There are many interesting questions left unanswered about accessibility. Here is a list of some that we would very much like to answer.

1. True or false: $`𝒜=`$? (this conjecture was posed by Tom Brown ). It was proved in  that a set $`S=\{s_1,s_2,\mathrm{}\}`$ cannot be large if $`lim\; inf\frac{s_{i+1}}{s_i}>1`$. From the present paper we know that $`TT𝒜`$ for any infinite $`T`$, so that a set can be very “sparse” and still be accessible. Perhaps an example showing the answer to the above question is false can be found by choosing the correct $`T`$; for example, is the set $`TT`$ large if $`T=\{n!:n\}`$?

2. For $`S=\{2^i:i0\}`$, what is the exact value of $`f(S,k;2)`$? We believe the lower bound of Corollary 2.1 is the exact value for $`k5`$. In Table 1 (below) we give the first few values of this function.

3. What is the exact value of $`f(S,k;3)`$ where $`S=\{2\}(21)`$?

4. What is a formula for $`f(S_m,k;2)`$ that generalizes Theorem 3.4? Calculations for the case $`m=6`$ support the conjecture that the lower bound of Theorem 3.5 is the actual value of $`f`$, i.e., that for $`k2`$,

$$f(S_6,k;2)=\{\begin{array}{cc}(5k4)/2\hfill & \text{ if }k2\text{(mod 4)}\hfill \\ (5k5)/2\hfill & \text{ if }k3\text{(mod 4)}\hfill \\ (5k6)/2\hfill & \text{ if }k0\text{(mod 4)}\hfill \\ (5k7)/2\hfill & \text{ if }k1\text{(mod 4)}\hfill \end{array}$$

5. If $`t`$ is an odd positive integer, what is DA($`P+t)`$? Moreover, is it true that for every 2-coloring of $`P`$, there exist arbitrarily long monochromatic $`(P+t)`$-diffsequences? If the answer to the latter question is true, then by Lemma 2.1, $`P+t𝒜_3`$.

6. What is the order of magnitude of $`f(P+t,k;2)`$ for a fixed odd positive integer $`t`$? Table 1 below includes some specific values of this function.

7. As stated earlier, $`P𝒜_3`$. Is $`P𝒜_2`$? If so, what is the magnitude of $`f(P,k;2)`$? We have calculated the first several values of $`f(P,k;2)`$ (see Table 1).

8. What is the degree of accessibility of the set of Fibonacci numbers? What is the order of magnitude of $`f(F,k;2)`$?

9. What can we say about DA($`S`$) and $`f(S,k;2)`$ where $`S`$ is the union of more than one congruence class modulo $`m`$? That is, generalize Proposition 3.6.

The following table gives the exact value of $`f(S,k;2)`$ for various choices of $`S`$ and $`k`$. The symbols $`T`$, $`F`$, and $`P`$ denote $`\{2^i:i0\}`$, the set of Fibonacci numbers, and the set of primes, respectively.

| $`Sk`$ | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`T`$ | 3 | 7 | 11 | 17 | 25 | 35 | 51 |
| $`F`$ | 3 | 5 | 9 | 11 | 15 | 19 | 21 |
| $`P`$ | 5 | 9 | 13 | 21 | 25 | 33 | ? |
| $`P+1`$ | 7 | 13 | 21 | 27 | 35 | ? | ? |
| $`P+2`$ | 9 | 17 | 25 | 33 | ? | ? | ? |
| $`P+3`$ | 11 | 21 | 31 | 42 | ? | ? | ? |
| $`P+4`$ | 13 | 25 | 37 | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| $`P+5`$ | 15 | 29 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| $`P+6`$ | 17 | 33 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| $`P+7`$ | 19 | 37 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| $`S_5`$ | 3 | 5 | 7 | 11 | 13 | 15 | 19 |
| $`S_6`$ | 3 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 13 | 15 | 17 |

Acknowledgments. We would like to thank Andrew Granville for guiding us to Balog’s theorem and for his invaluable assistance with the proof of Lemma 4.3. We would also like to thank Scott Ahlgren for helping with some details of the proof of Lemma 4.3.