text:
# SPONTANEOUS AND STIMULATED SYNCHROTRON RADIATION FROM RELATIVISTIC ELECTRONS IN ION CHANNEL

## I Introduction

An electron dynamics in plasma-focusing channel has important applications to new plasma technologies, such as advanced accelerators esarey-review , novel radiation sources, new types of lens lens . It is a key phenomenon for ion-channel laser (ICL) ion channel laser , ion-ripple laser ion ripple laser , plasma-wiggler free electron laser(FEL) plasma fel , which are perspective candidates for high brightness X-ray radiation sources. Such radiation sources are strongly needed for experimental research in physics, chemistry, biology and in engineering light sources .

Resent experiments that explore the interaction of intense 28.5-GeV electron beam with plasma at Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) wang ; joshi-review  have shown that ion channel can be successfully used to produce broadband X-ray radiation. Moreover, the high density of the ions in the channel provides much higher wiggler strength than that provided by a conventional magnet wiggler. This leads to a more effective generation of X-ray radiation than in conventional light sources and could be used for the development of next generation of radiation sources.

To create ion channel, electron beam have to interact with plasma in blow-out regime blow-out regime  when the electron beam density, $`n_b`$, is higher than plasma density, $`n_p`$. In this regime the electron beam charge quasistatically expels slow plasma electrons inside and around the beam volume and the ion channel is formed. Note that relativistic electrons of the beam are not expelled from the channel because of relativistic compensation of the beam electron charge force by the self-magnetic force book-beam . The channel radius, $`r_ir_0\sqrt{n_b/n_p}`$ is much more than electron beam radius, $`r_0`$, for dense $`n_bn_p`$ and narrow $`k_pr_01`$ electron beam beam radius , where $`k_p=c/\omega _p`$ is the plasma skin depth, $`\omega _p=\left(4\pi n_pe^2/m\right)^{1/2}`$ is the plasma frequency, $`e`$ is the electron charge, $`m`$ is the electron mass and $`c`$ is the speed of light. If all plasma electrons are expelled from the channel then the restoring force on the beam electrons due to the ion charge is given by Gauss’s low and in cylindrical geometry is:

$$𝐅_{res}=m\omega _p^2𝐫_{}/2,$$
(1)
where $`𝐫_{}`$ is the vector from an electron to the channel axis. The beam electrons in the ion channel will undergo betatron oscillations caused by this force. The wavelength for small betatron oscillations is close to $`\lambda _b=2\pi /k_b2\pi \sqrt{2\gamma }/k_p`$, where $`\gamma `$ is the relativistic factor of the electron beam betatron oscillations .

It is well known that accelerated charges emit electromagnetic (EM) radiation jackson . Therefore the electrons undergoing betatron oscillations in ion channel will emit short-wavelength EM radiation. Some features of this radiation spectrum have been studied in Ref. wang ; joshi-review ; esarey1 . The wavelength of the radiation is close to $`\lambda \lambda _b/\left(2\gamma ^2\right)`$ for small-amplitude near-axis betatron oscillations. If the amplitude of the betatron oscillations becomes large then electron radiates high harmonics. If the plasma wiggler strength,

$$K=\gamma k_br_0=1.3310^{10}\sqrt{\gamma n_e\left[cm^3\right]}r_0\left[\mu m\right],$$
(2)
is so high that $`K1`$ then radiation spectrum becomes quasi-continuous broadband, where $`r_0`$ is amplitude of electron betatron oscillation in the channel. The frequency dependence of the radiation spectrum becomes similar to the one of synchrotron radiation spectrum which is determined by the universal function

$$S\left(\omega /\omega _c\right)=\left(\omega /\omega _c\right)_{\omega /\omega _c}^{\mathrm{}}K_{5/3}\left(x\right)𝑑x,$$
(3)
where $`\omega _c`$ is the critical frequency (see Fig. 1) jackson . For frequencies well below the critical frequency $`\left(\omega \omega _c\right)`$ the spectrum increases with frequency as $`\omega ^{2/3}`$, reaches a maximum at$`0.29\omega _c`$, and then drops exponentially to zero above $`\omega _c`$. The critical frequency for a relativistic electron in an ion channel is esarey1

$$\omega _c=\frac{3}{2}\gamma ^3cr_0k_b^2=5.210^{24}\gamma ^2n_e\left[cm^3\right]r_0\left[\mu m\right]keV.$$
(4)
Because of the strongly relativistic motion of the electron the emitted radiation is confined in very narrow angle $`\theta K/\gamma `$. Synchrotron radiation in ion channel has been observed in recent experiments wang .

The averaged total power radiated by an electron undergoing betatron oscillations is esarey1

$$P_{total}\frac{e^2c}{12}N_b\gamma ^2k_b^4r_0^2,$$
(5)
where $`N_b`$ is the number of the betatron oscillations performed by the electron. We can introduce also the stopping power of an electron, that is the energy loss of an electron per unit distance

$$Q=P_{total}/c1.510^{45}\left(\gamma n_e\left[cm^3\right]r_0\left[\mu m\right]\right)^2\frac{MeV}{cm}.$$
(6)
The averaged number of the photons with averaged energy $`\mathrm{}\omega _c`$ is

$$N_{ph}\frac{4\pi }{9}\frac{e^2}{\mathrm{}c}N_bK1.0210^2N_bK.$$
(7)
It follows from Eq. (5) that the radiated power is proportional to the squared density of ions in the channel. This fact has been confirmed in the experiments wang . As it was mentioned above the ion density in the channel have to be less than electron density in the beam. This leads to the serious limits on the gain in radiated power. One of the ways to overcome the limits is to use laser-produced ion channel. The ion density in such channel can be about $`10^{19}cm^3`$ laser channel ; pukhov1  that is in 5 order higher than ion density in the channel produced in beam - plasma interaction experiments wang . So use of ion channel produced by laser pulse could increase the power of X-ray radiation in $`10^{10}`$ times! More detailed discussion on use of relativistic laser channel for X-ray generation will be presented in Conclusion.

Spontaneous emission in an ion channel has been studied in detail in Ref. esarey1 . The general expression for the spectrum has been derived. It is a complex expression that involves the sum of products of the Bessel function. Numerical evaluation of the spectrum becomes difficult in the limit $`K1`$. The simple asymptotic expression for the angular dependence of the radiated spectrum has been derived for this limit only for directions that are perpendicular to the plane of the betatron oscillation. The one of the purposes of our paper is to calculated the total angular dependence of the radiated spectrum.

Resonance interaction between EM radiation and the betatron oscillations of electron beam in ion channel leads to the bunching of the electron beam and then to the amplification (or damping) of EM radiation. It is a stimulated emission (or absorption). Stimulated emission is a basic process in ICLs ion channel laser  and FELs book-fel . Reverse process - stimulated absorption leads to the direct laser acceleration pukhov DLA  and to the magnetic field generation kostyukov IFE  in relativistic laser channel. Unfortunately stimulated emission (absorption) in ion channel has not yet been explored in the limit $`K1`$ that is another objective of our paper.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section II the motion of an electron is studied and Hamiltonian formulation of the problem is presented. In Section III, the spontaneous emission from electrons undergoing betatron oscillations in ion channel is analyzed. The general asymptotic expression of the radiation spectrum for arbitrary angular dependence is derived for $`K1`$. The spectrum averaged over azimuthal angle is calculated for axially symmetrical electron beam in the limit $`K1`$. Section IV discusses the stimulated emission processes. The gain of ion - channel synchrotron - radiation laser is derived. A summary discussion is presented in Sec. V.

## II Electron dynamics in ion channel

Relativistic equation of electron motion in cylindrical ion channel is

$$\frac{d𝐩}{dt}=𝐅_{res},$$
(8)
where $`𝐅_{res}`$ is the restoring force defined by Eq. (1). It follows from Eq. (8) that momentum along channel axis $`p_z`$ is a constant of motion. First we will consider the radial betatron oscillation as it takes place when the center of an electron bunch moves along the channel axis. Assuming that $`p_y=0`$ we get the equation for $`x`$ -coordinate:

$$\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}=\frac{\gamma _z^2}{2\gamma ^3}x,$$
(9)
where we introduce the constant of motion $`\gamma _z^2=1+p_z^2`$ and use the dimensionless units, normalizing the time to $`\omega _p^1`$, the length to $`c/\omega _p`$, the momentum to $`mc`$.

As Hamiltonian does not depend on time it is another constant of motion

$$H=\gamma +\frac{x^2}{4}=const=\gamma _z+\frac{r_0^2}{4},$$
(10)
where $`r_0`$ is the amplitude of the betatron oscillation. We can express $`\gamma `$ as function of $`x`$ from the obtained relation to resolve Eq. (9). Then transversal motion of electron can be reduced to the oscillations in effective potential

$$U\left(x\right)=\frac{8\gamma _z^2}{\left(4\gamma _z+r_0^2x^2\right)^2}.$$
(11)
The oscillations can be described in implicit form as follows

$`t`$ $`=`$ $`r_0{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\nu ^2+4}}{\nu }}E(arc\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{r_0}}\right),{\displaystyle \frac{\nu ^2}{\nu ^2+4}})`$ (12)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\nu \sqrt{\nu ^2+4}}}F(arc\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{r_0}}\right),{\displaystyle \frac{\nu ^2}{\nu ^2+4}}),`$
where $`E(x,k)`$ and $`F(x,k)`$ are the Elliptic integrals of the first and the second kinds special function , respectively, and $`\nu `$ is

$$\nu ^2=r_0^2/2\gamma _z.$$
(13)
The period of betatron oscillations is

$$T_b=\frac{2\pi }{\omega _b}=4r_0\frac{\sqrt{\nu ^2+4}}{\nu }\left[E\left(\frac{\nu ^2}{\nu ^2+4}\right)\frac{2}{\nu ^2+4}K\left(\frac{\nu ^2}{\nu ^2+4}\right)\right],$$
(14)
where $`K(x)`$ and $`E(x)`$ are the complete Elliptic integrals of the first and the second kinds special function , respectively. In the limit $`\nu ^21`$, parameter $`\nu `$ is the ratio between the longitudinal and transversal energy of the electron

$$\nu ^2p_x^2/\gamma _z^2p_{}^2/p_z^2,$$
(15)
where $`p_x`$ is the maximum of the transversal momentum which is at the channel axis $`x=0`$. In most applications transversal moment of the electron is much less than longitudinal one, so we assume that $`\nu 1`$. Then we can use expansion in $`\nu `$ to describe betatron oscillations:

$$\omega _b=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\gamma _z}}\left(1\frac{3}{8}\nu ^2+\mathrm{}\right),$$
(16)
$$x\left(t\right)=r_0\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega _bt\right)r_0\frac{3}{64}\nu ^2\mathrm{sin}\left(3\omega _bt\right)+\mathrm{}.$$
(17)
Using Eq. (10) we obtain the relations for the electron orbit in the zeroth order in $`\nu `$ that coincides with ones calculated in Ref. esarey1

$$\omega _b\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\gamma _z}},$$
(18)
$$x\left(t\right)r_0\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega _bt\right),$$
(19)
$$y\left(t\right)0,$$
(20)
$$z\left(t\right)z_0+\frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}\left(1\frac{\nu ^2}{4}\right)tr_0\frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}\frac{\nu }{8}\mathrm{sin}\left(2\omega _bt\right).$$
(21)
Notice that parameter $`\nu `$ coincides with the expression $`k_br_0`$ introduced in Ref. esarey1  and plasma wiggler strength parameter can be expressed through $`\nu `$ as $`K\gamma _z\nu p_{}`$.

More general regime of the betatron motion when $`p_y0`$ and an electron orbit is not plane has been considered and classified in Ref. kostyukov IFE  in the limit $`p_zp_{}`$. Equations of motion take a form in this case

$$x\left(t\right)\frac{p_x}{\sqrt{2\gamma _z}}\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega _bt\right),$$
(22)
$$y\left(t\right)\frac{p_y}{\sqrt{2\gamma _z}}\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega _bt+\psi \right),$$
(23)
$$z\left(t\right)z_0+\frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}\left[1\frac{p_x^2+p_y^2}{4\gamma _z^2}\frac{p_x^2}{8\gamma _z^2}\mathrm{sin}\left(2\omega _bt\right)+\frac{p_y^2}{8\gamma _z^2}\mathrm{sin}\left(2\omega _bt+2\psi \right)\right],$$
(24)
where $`\psi `$ is the phase difference between oscillations along $`x`$-axis and $`y`$-axis, $`p_x`$ and $`p_y`$ are the maximum of the electron momentum along $`x`$-axis and along $`y`$-axis, respectively, that occurs at the channel axis ($`x=0`$, $`y=0`$). If angular momentum of the electron, $`L=p_yxp_xy`$ is equal to zero, then electron executes radial harmonic oscillations through the origin with amplitude $`r_0=2\sqrt{H}`$. If $`L=\pm L_{\mathrm{max}}=\pm H/\omega _b`$ then an electron performs circular motion with radius $`r_0`$. In the general case (an arbitrary value of $`L_{\mathrm{max}}<L<L_{\mathrm{max}}`$) the electron trajectory is an ellipse-like and is confined between the maximal radius, $`\sqrt{\left(H+\sqrt{H^2\omega _b^2L^2}\right)}`$, and minimal radius, $`\sqrt{\left(H\sqrt{H^2\omega _b^2L^2}\right)}`$.

## III Spontaneous emission

Using Eqs. (22) - (24) for electron trajectory, the energy spectrum radiated by an electron can be calculated jackson ; esarey1 . The total radiation flux can be separated in two independent components with polarization in the $`𝐞_\theta `$ and $`𝐞_\varphi `$ directions, where unit vectors $`𝐞_\theta `$ and $`𝐞_\varphi `$ correspond to spherical coordinate system: $`x=r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi `$, $`y=r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi `$, $`z=r\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. Then energy radiated per frequency $`\omega `$ per solid angle in the direction $`𝐤=\left(\omega /c\right)\left(𝐞_x\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi +𝐞_y\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi +𝐞_z\mathrm{cos}\theta \right)`$ during the interaction time $`T`$ is esarey1 :

$$\frac{dW_{spon,j}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}=\frac{e^2}{4\pi ^2c}\eta ^2\left|I_j\right|^2,$$
(25)
$$I_\theta =\underset{T/2}{\overset{T/2}{}}\left(\frac{dx}{dt}\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi +\frac{dy}{dt}\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi \frac{dz}{dt}\mathrm{sin}\theta \right)e^{i\mathrm{\Psi }}𝑑t,$$
(26)
$$I_\varphi =\underset{T/2}{\overset{T/2}{}}\left(\frac{dx}{dt}\mathrm{sin}\varphi \frac{dy}{dt}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)e^{i\mathrm{\Psi }}𝑑t,$$
(27)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\eta \left[tx\left(t\right)\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi y\left(t\right)\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi z\left(t\right)\mathrm{cos}\theta \right],$$
(28)
where $`j=\theta ,\varphi `$ is the polarization index, the electron trajectory is given by Eqs. (22) - (24) and $`\eta =\omega /\omega _p`$. The final results can be expressed as double infinite series of the Bessel function products (see Eqs. (32) - (41) in Ref. esarey1  or can be expressed by the infinite series of the generalized Bessel function introduced in quantum electrodynamics general Bessel ). Unfortunately the series converge slowly in the limit $`K1`$ that makes the numerical evaluation of the radiation spectrum difficult. Energy spectrum and angular dependence of radiation have been derived only for directions that are perpendicular to the plane of the betatron oscillation (i. e., for $`\varphi =\pi /2`$) esarey1 . To extend this result we will use saddle point method saddle point  to evaluate integrals (26) and (27).

It is well known that radiation of accelerated relativistic electron is beamed in a very narrow cone in the direction of the electron momentum vector, and is seen by the observer as a short pulse of radiation as the searchlight beam sweeps across the observation point jackson  (see Fig. 2). So the time moments when the electron momentum, $`𝐩`$, is directed along wave number, $`𝐤`$, give the main contribution in integrals ( 26) and (27). As the pulse duration is very short it is necessary to know the electron momentum and the electron position over only a small arc of the trajectory whose tangent points in the direction that is close to the direction of $`𝐤`$. Then we can expand integrand in Eqs. (26) and (27) about this time moments and perform integration. This approach implies that we approximate the part of the electron trajectory near these time moments by the arc of a circular path jackson . In this case the radiation will have well-known synchrotron-like spectrum. It is noted in Ref. landau  that another necessary (the first is that the electron have to be relativistic) condition for use of the synchrotron radiation approach is that the electron deflection angle should be much more than simultaneous angle spread to which radiation is emitted. The electron momentum oscillates in cone angle $`p_{}/p_z`$ (electron deflection angle). The radiation of the relativistic particle is confined to angle $`1/\gamma `$ jackson . So the validity condition for synchrotron radiation approach is $`p_{}/p_z1/\gamma `$ that is equivalent to the condition for high harmonics generation discussed in Introduction $`K1`$. Therefore the radiation spectrum can be approximated by the synchrotron one if

$$\gamma p_{}1.$$
(29)
This condition is easily satisfied in experiments.

The arguments presented above justify the use of the saddle point method saddle point  to evaluate integrals (26) and (27). We can expand phase $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ about the moment of time $`\xi _n=\omega _bt_n`$ to the third order:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }_0+b_1(\xi \xi _n)+b_2(\xi \xi _n)^2+b_3(\xi \xi _n)^3,$$
(30)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }\left(\xi _n\right)=\alpha _0\xi _n\alpha _x\mathrm{sin}\left(\xi _n\right)\alpha _y\mathrm{sin}\left(\xi _n+\psi \right)`$ (31)
$`+\alpha _{zx}\mathrm{sin}\left(2\xi _n\right)+\alpha _{zy}\mathrm{sin}\left(2\xi _n+2\psi \right),`$
$`b_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Psi }}{d\xi }}|_{\xi =\xi _n}=\alpha _0\alpha _x\mathrm{cos}\left(\xi _n\right)\alpha _y\mathrm{cos}\left(\xi _n+\psi \right)`$ (32)
$`+2\alpha _{zx}\mathrm{cos}\left(2\xi _n\right)+2\alpha _{zy}\mathrm{cos}\left(2\xi _n+2\psi \right),`$
$`b_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{d\xi ^2}}|_{\xi =\xi _n}=\alpha _x\mathrm{sin}\left(\xi _n\right)+\alpha _y\mathrm{sin}\left(\xi _n+\psi \right)`$ (33)
$`4\alpha _{zx}\mathrm{sin}\left(2\xi _n\right)4\alpha _{zy}\mathrm{sin}\left(2\xi _n+2\psi \right),`$
$`b_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3\mathrm{\Psi }}{d\xi ^3}}|_{\xi =\xi _n}=\alpha _x\mathrm{cos}\left(\xi _n\right)+\alpha _y\mathrm{cos}\left(\xi _n+\psi \right)`$ (34)
$`8\alpha _{zx}\mathrm{cos}\left(2\xi _n\right)8\alpha _{zy}\mathrm{cos}\left(2\xi _n+2\psi \right),`$
where

$$\alpha _0=\frac{\eta }{\omega _b}\left[1\frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}\left(1\frac{p_x^2+p_y^2}{4\gamma _z^2}\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)\right],$$
(35)
$$\alpha _x=\frac{\eta }{\omega _b}\frac{p_x}{\gamma _z}\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi ,$$
(36)
$$\alpha _y=\frac{\eta }{\omega _b}\frac{p_y}{\gamma _z}\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi ,$$
(37)
$$\alpha _{zx}=\frac{\eta }{\omega _b}\frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}\frac{p_x^2}{8\gamma _z^2}\mathrm{cos}\theta ,$$
(38)
$$\alpha _{zy}=\frac{\eta }{\omega _b}\frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}\frac{p_y^2}{8\gamma _z^2}\mathrm{cos}\theta .$$
(39)
Then we can expand the pre-exponent factors in Eqs. (26) and (27) about the moment of time $`\xi _n=\omega _bt_n`$ o the first order:

$$\frac{dx}{dt}\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi +\frac{dy}{dt}\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi \frac{dz}{dt}\mathrm{sin}\theta =B_{\theta ,n}+D_{\theta ,n}(\xi \xi _n),$$
(40)
$$\frac{dx}{dt}\mathrm{sin}\varphi \frac{dy}{dt}\mathrm{cos}\varphi =B_{\varphi ,n}+D_{\varphi ,n}(\xi \xi _n),$$
(41)
where

$`B_{\theta ,n}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_x}{\gamma _z}}\mathrm{cos}\xi _n\mathrm{cos}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{p_y}{\gamma _z}}\mathrm{cos}\left(\xi _n+\psi \right)\mathrm{sin}\varphi \right)\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ (42)
$`\mathrm{sin}\theta {\displaystyle \frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}}\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{p_x^2}{4\gamma _z^2}}\mathrm{cos}\left(2\xi _n\right){\displaystyle \frac{p_y^2}{4\gamma _z^2}}\mathrm{cos}\left(2\xi _n+2\psi \right)\right],`$
$`D_{\theta ,n}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{p_x}{\gamma _z}}\mathrm{sin}\xi _n\mathrm{cos}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{p_y}{\gamma _z}}\mathrm{sin}\left(\xi _n+\psi \right)\mathrm{sin}\varphi \right]\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ (43)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_x^2}{2\gamma _z^2}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\left(2\xi _n\right){\displaystyle \frac{p_z}{\gamma _z}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_y^2}{2\gamma _z^2}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\left(2\xi _n+2\psi \right),`$
$$B_{\varphi ,n}=\frac{p_x}{\gamma _z}\mathrm{sin}\varphi \mathrm{cos}\left(\xi _n\right)\frac{p_y}{\gamma _z}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \mathrm{cos}\left(\xi _n+\psi \right),$$
(44)
$$D_{\varphi ,n}=\frac{p_x}{\gamma _z}\mathrm{sin}\varphi \mathrm{sin}\left(\xi _n\right)+\frac{p_y}{\gamma _z}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \mathrm{sin}\left(\xi _n+\psi \right).$$
(45)
Notice that it is sufficient to keep the leading term in the pre-exponent factor while only terms that are much less than unity can be neglected in the exponent argument.

The main contribution to the integral comes from the neighborhood of the saddle points specified by $`d\mathrm{\Psi }/d\xi =0`$ saddle point . The first-order term in phase expansion (30) can be written as follows

$$\frac{d\mathrm{\Psi }}{d\xi }|_{\xi =\xi _n}=\frac{\eta }{\omega _b}\left(1\frac{𝐤𝐩}{k\gamma }\right)\frac{\eta }{2\omega _b}\left(\frac{1}{\gamma ^2}+\phi ^2\right),$$
(46)
where $`\phi `$ is the angle between $`𝐤`$ and $`𝐩`$. It follows from Eq. (46) that $`d\mathrm{\Psi }/d\xi `$ is minimal and close to zero at $`\phi =0`$ when the electron momentum is directed along $`𝐤`$ that agrees with the qualitative argument presented above.

For simplicity we assume that $`p_y=0`$ that is the electron orbit is plane and the betatron oscillations is radial. It follows from Eq. (32) that the values of $`\xi `$ whose neighborhood gives the main contribution to the integral are defined by the relation

$$\mathrm{cos}\xi _n=\frac{\gamma _z}{p_x}\mathrm{tan}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi .$$
(47)
It is seen from Eq. (47) and Fig. 3 that the number of saddle points is $`2N_b=\omega _bT/\pi `$ that is the number of times when the direction of the electron momentum and the direction of the wave number coincides. It can be shown jackson  that the second-order term can be neglected in Eq. (30). Then Eqs.(26) and (27) take a form:

$`I_j`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega _b}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{2N_b}{}}}\mathrm{exp}\left(i\mathrm{\Psi }_{0,n}\right)R_{j,n},`$ (48)
$`R_{j,n}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑s_n\left(B_{j,n}+D_{j,n}s_n\right)\mathrm{exp}\left[ib_{1,n}s_n+ib_{3,n}s_n^3\right],`$ (49)
where $`j=\theta ,\varphi `$ is the polarization index, $`s_n=\xi _n\xi _0`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{0,n}`$ is the value of phase $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ in the $`n`$-th saddle point.

It follows from the definitions of saddle point Eq. (47) and from Eqs. (30) - (45) that $`R_{j,n}=R_{j,n1}=R_j`$, $`B_{j,n}=B_{j,n1}=B_j`$, $`D_{j,n}=D_{j,n1}=D_j`$, $`b_{m,n}=b_{m,n1}=b_m`$. Performing integration in Eq. (49) we obtain

$$R_j=\sqrt{\frac{8b_1}{3b_3}}\left[B_jK_{1/3}\left(\sqrt{\frac{8b_1^3}{9b_3}}\right)+D_j\sqrt{\frac{2b_1}{b_3}}K_{2/3}\left(\sqrt{\frac{8b_1^3}{9b_3}}\right)\right],$$
(50)
where $`K_{1/3}(x)`$ and $`K_{2/3}(x)`$ are the modified Bessel function special function . In the synchrotron regime of radiation $`\omega \omega _c\omega _p`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{0,n}1`$ then we can write for large number of the betatron periods ($`N_b1`$ )

$$\left|\underset{n=1}{\overset{2N_b}{}}\mathrm{exp}\left(i\mathrm{\Psi }_{0,n}\right)\right|^22N_b.$$
(51)
Using Eqs. (15), (25), (50) and condition (29) we finally get

$$\frac{dW_{spon,\theta }}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}=2N_b\frac{e^2\eta ^2\rho ^2\chi }{3\pi ^2c}\left[\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi K_{1/3}(q)+\sqrt{\chi }\mathrm{cos}\varphi K_{2/3}(q)\right]^2,$$
(52)
$$\frac{dW_{spon,\varphi }}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}=2N_b\frac{e^2\eta ^2\rho ^2\chi \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi }{3\pi ^2c}\left[\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi K_{1/3}(q)\sqrt{\chi }K_{2/3}(q)\right]^2,$$
(53)
where

$$\rho =\sqrt{\frac{2\gamma _z}{p_x^2/\gamma _z^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{cos}^2\varphi }}$$
(54)
is the curvature radius of the circular path that is used to approximate the part of the electron trajectory where electron emits in the direction of $`𝐤`$,

$$\chi =\gamma _z^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi ,$$
(55)
$$q=\frac{1}{3}\eta \rho \chi ^{3/2}.$$
(56)
The total radiation of the spontaneous emission from the electron in the channel is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dW_{spon,\theta }}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}}+{\displaystyle \frac{dW_{spon,\varphi }}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}}`$ (57)
$`=`$ $`2N_b{\displaystyle \frac{e^2\eta ^2\rho ^2\chi ^2}{3\pi ^2c}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi }{\chi }}K_{1/3}^2(q)+K_{2/3}^2(q)\right].`$
This is the general expression for the angular distribution of the radiation emitted by an a relativistic electron in ion channel and this is the one of the main results of the paper.

Let us consider some limiting cases. It follows from condition (29) that $`\theta 1`$. Then in the limit $`\varphi =\pi /2`$ Eq. (57) takes a form

$$\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}=N_b\frac{6e^2}{\pi ^2c}\frac{\gamma _z^2q^2}{\left(1+\gamma _z^2\theta ^2\right)}\left[\frac{\gamma _z^2\theta ^2}{\left(1+\gamma _z^2\theta ^2\right)}K_{1/3}^2(q)+K_{2/3}^2(q)\right],$$
(58)
that coincides with the asymptotic spectrum emitted by the relativistic electron in the channel for $`\varphi =\pi /2`$ (see Eq. (64) in Ref. esarey1 ). It was discussed above that in the limit $`K1`$ the radiation emitted from an electron at the given moment of time is similar to the synchrotron radiation emitted from an electron in instantaneously circular motion with the same curvature radius. Really, introducing notation $`\phi =\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi `$ and using relation $`\gamma \gamma _zp_z`$ we can reduce Eq. (57) to the known form

$$\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}=2N_b\frac{e^2\left(\eta \rho \right)^2}{3\pi ^2c}\left(\frac{1}{\gamma ^2}+\phi ^2\right)^2\left[K_{2/3}^2(q)+\frac{\phi ^2}{1/\gamma ^2+\phi ^2}K_{1/3}^2(q)\right],$$
(59)
that coincides with the expression for energy radiated by a relativistic electron in instantaneously circular motion with radius $`\rho `$ per unit frequency per unit solid angle $`2\pi \mathrm{cos}\phi d\phi `$ after $`2N_b`$ revolutions (see Eq. (14.83) in Ref. jackson ).

To visualize our results we use new angle coordinates $`\theta _x=\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi `$, $`\theta _y=\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi `$ instead of the spherical one $`(\theta ,\phi )`$ (see Fig. 2 and Fig. 3). It is seen from Fig. 3 that there is no radiation for $`\theta _x>\theta _{\mathrm{max}}`$ because the argument of the Bessel function in Eq. (57) goes to infinity and the Bessel function goes to zero for $`\theta _x=\theta _{\mathrm{max}}`$. Therefore in our approximation the emission angle along $`x`$-axis is confined to the electron deflection angle $`\theta _{\mathrm{max}}=p_x/p_z`$. However it is evident that electrons with maximal deflection angle radiation $`p_x/p_z`$ emit radiation up to the angle $`\theta =\pm \left(\theta _{\mathrm{max}}+\gamma ^1\right)`$. The emission angle is confined to the angle $`1/\gamma `$ in the direction of $`y`$-axis which is normal to the electron orbit plane. Hence our results agree with the qualitative analysis in Ref. esarey1 .

Averaging Eq. (57) over $`\theta _y`$ we obtain

$$_1^1\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}𝑑\theta _y=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}N_b\frac{e^2\gamma _z}{\pi c}S\left(\frac{2}{3}\frac{\sqrt{2}\eta }{\gamma _z^{3/2}\sqrt{p_x^2\gamma _z^2\theta _x^2}}\right),$$
(60)
where $`S\left(x\right)`$ is the universal function mentioned in Introduction. Expression (60) can be considered as a radiation power from electron flow in which electrons are evenly distributed over $`y`$-axis (over direction which is normal to the betatron oscillation plane).

Let us now consider a monoenergetic, axisymmetric electron beam. Radiation spectrum from electron beam with electron distribution function $`f\left(𝐩\right)`$ is defined by the relation:

$$\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}=_0^{2\pi }\frac{d\varphi }{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑𝐩f\left(𝐩\right)\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}(𝐤,𝐩).$$
(61)
Let all electrons have the same longitudinal and transversal energy before interaction and the electron distribution function is

$$f\left(𝐩\right)=\delta (p_z\gamma _z)\delta (\sqrt{p_x^2+p_y^2}p_{}).$$
(62)
Then the radiation spectrum from the beam takes a form

$$\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}=_0^{2\pi }\frac{d\varphi }{2\pi }\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}.$$
(63)
In the limit of near-axis radiation $`\theta 1/\gamma _z`$ the radiation spectrum is

$$\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}2N_b\frac{3e^2}{\pi ^2c}\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}\eta \gamma _z^3}{3p_x}\right)^2K_{2/3}^2\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}\eta \gamma _z^3}{3p_x}\right).$$
(64)
In the reverse limit $`\theta 1/\gamma _z`$ the main contribution to Eq. (63) is given by the small values of $`\varphi 1`$ that correspond to the minimum of $`q`$. The radiation spectrum in this limit is

$$\frac{dW_{spon}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}N_b\frac{e^2\gamma _z}{\pi c\theta }S\left(\frac{2}{3}\frac{\sqrt{2}\eta }{\gamma _z^{3/2}\sqrt{p_x^2\gamma _z^2\theta ^2}}\right).$$
(65)
Note that the obtained expression coincides with Eq. (60).

## IV Stimulated synchrotron radiation in ion channel

When EM wave of approximately the same frequency as the spontaneous emission is driven through the ion channel simultaneously with the electron beam, a significant exchange of energy between the beam and the wave can occur and can lead to the coherent efficient amplification of the wave energy. This amplification can be explained in terms of the stimulated emission processes which is determined the operation of ICL. Unlike ICL theory ion channel laser , here we will consider regime of strong wiggler ($`K1`$) when the emission process is close to synchrotron one. This is the regime of ion-channel synchrotron-radiation laser (ICSRL).

The difference between spontaneous and stimulated emissions is the following. The radiation fields generated by an electron undergoing betatron oscillations has a phase which depends on time of arrival of the electrons at the channel entrance. The fields produced by different electrons in a uniform input beam have a random phase relation to each other and sum up incoherently. This lead to incoherent spontaneous radiation. Contrary to the spontaneous emission, electrons in ion channel can be driven by an external EM wave in synchronous oscillation, the phase of which is no longer random but locked to the phase of the wave. As a result the external wave causes the bunching of the electron beam and more efficient interaction between the beam and the wave. Then the radiation fields of different electrons sum up coherently to each other and to the external wave, leading either to a decrease or to an increase of the power, depending on whether destructive or constructive interference is realized. So the external wave is either absorbed or amplified. In quantum approach the amplification/absorption can be viewed as a transition, forced by the external wave, between the quantum states of the electron in the ion channel with photon absorption/emission. An amplification process of this kind is called a stimulated emission. It is known from laser physics that stimulated emission can be much more efficient and powerful than spontaneous one.

As known in quantum physics haitler  there is the relation between the spontaneous and stimulated emission. Using this fact the elementary quantum methods based on the Einstein’s coefficients have been used to study the instability of EM waves in cosmic plasmas astro . Particularly, the synchrotron instability in a cold magnetoactive plasmas has been identified synhrotron instability . The relation between spontaneous and stimulated emission of the electrons in undulators is called Madey’s theorem in the theory of FELs Madey's theorem . It can be considered as extension of Einstein’s coefficient method to the classical limit. Generalized Madey’s theorem book-fel  enables us to reduce the problem of ICSRL gain to the problem solved in Sec. III that is the calculation of the power of spontaneous emission in ion channel.

To use Madey’s theorem we should formulate the problem within Hamiltonian approach. An electron motion in an ion channel and in EM wave can be described by a relativistic Hamiltonian

$$H=\sqrt{1+(𝐩_{}+𝐀_i)^2+p_z^2}+\frac{x^2+y^2}{4},$$
(66)
where $`𝐀_i`$ is the vector potential of the wave with $`\theta `$ or $`\varphi `$ polarizations ($`i=\theta ,\varphi `$):

$`𝐀_\theta `$ $`=`$ $`A_0\left(𝐞_x\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi +𝐞_y\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi 𝐞_z\mathrm{sin}\theta \right)`$ (67)
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\left[i\eta ti\eta \left(𝐤𝐫\right)/k\right],`$
$$𝐀_\varphi =A_0\left(𝐞_x\mathrm{sin}\varphi 𝐞_y\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)\mathrm{exp}\left[i\eta ti\eta \left(𝐤𝐫\right)/k\right].$$
(68)
Hamiltonian (66) is again written in the dimensionless units, normalizing the time to $`\omega _p^1`$, the length to $`c/\omega _p`$, the momentum to $`mc`$, the vector potential to $`mc^2/e`$. As usual we assume that the time of arrival of the electrons at the channel entrance is random. Assuming that external EM wave is weak we can consider it as perturbation and use the perturbation theory to calculate the work done upon the electron beam by EM wave with $`j`$-polarization. Then it follows from the generalized Madey’s theorem (see Eq. (5.52) in Ref. book-fel ) that this work per beam electron is

$$W_j=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\gamma _{1,j}^2}{\gamma _0}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{𝐤_{}}{k}\frac{\gamma _{1,j}^2}{𝐩_{}},$$
(69)
where $`\gamma _{1,j}`$ is the first-order work done upon a single electron moving along the unperturbed electron trajectory $`𝐫^0\left(t\right)`$ by EM wave with $`j`$-polarization

$$\gamma _{1,j}=_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑t\frac{d𝐫^0\left(t\right)}{dt}𝐀_i[t,𝐫^0\left(t\right)],$$
(70)
$`\gamma _0`$ and $`𝐩_{}`$ are the electron energy and the transversal momentum of the electron before the interaction. The unperturbed electron trajectory $`𝐫^0(t)`$ is determined by Eqs. (22) - (24). Averaging in Eq. (69) implies the averaging over the time of arrival of the electrons at the channel entrance. Mathematical statement of the Madey’s theorem is that the second-order quantity, $`W_j`$, is proportional to the average squared first-order quantities, $`\gamma _{1,j}`$. Therefore Madey’s theorem essentially simplifies calculations in the framework of the perturbation theory. Using instead of variables $`\gamma _0`$ and $`𝐩_{}`$ the initial value of the electron momentum $`𝐩=(𝐩_{},p_z)`$, Eq. (69) can be also rewritten in more symmetric form

$$W_j=\frac{1}{2}\frac{𝐤}{k}\frac{\gamma _{1,j}^2}{𝐩}.$$
(71)
Similar to the FEL theory we introduce the incremental gain of ICSRL as a ratio between a power generated by the electron beam and the incoming EM wave power

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_j=\frac{2\lambda ^2r_en_bW_j}{\pi A_0^2},$$
(72)
where $`n_b`$ is the density of the electron beam, $`r_e=mc^2/e^2`$ is the classical electron radius, $`\lambda =2\pi c/\omega `$ is wavelength of EM wave. It should be noted that to calculate $`W_j`$ we consider the given EM wave and do not consider the dynamics of EM wave during the interaction. Hence our calculations is valid for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1`$. This regime of interaction is called in the FEL theory as a small-signal small-gain regime book-fel .

It follows from Eqs. (26), (27) and (70) that $`\gamma _{1,j}`$ is proportional to $`I_j`$. That is the particular case of the general reciprocity relation between the far field of a moving electron and the work done by a plane EM wave on it book-fel . Therefore we can express quantity $`\gamma _{1,j}^2`$ through the energy of the spontaneous emission energy radiated per frequency per solid angle

$$\gamma _{1,j}^2=A_0^2\left(\frac{e^2}{4\pi ^2c}\frac{\omega ^2}{\omega _p^2}\right)^1\frac{dW_{spon,j}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}.$$
(73)
and can express the gain in term of $`\frac{dW_{spon,j}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}`$

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_j=\frac{\lambda ^2r_en_e}{\pi }\left(\frac{e^2}{4\pi ^2c}\frac{\omega ^2}{\omega _p^2}\right)^1\left(\frac{𝐤}{k}\frac{}{𝐩}\right)\frac{dW_{spon,j}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}.$$
(74)
It has been noted in previous Section that efficient spontaneous emission in direction $`𝐤`$ takes place only at a short moment of time when the electron moment is directed along $`𝐤`$. Therefore we can conclude from Eq. (74) that interaction with EM wave propagating in direction of $`𝐤`$ is only possible at the same moments of time. It was mentioned in Sec. III (see Fig. 3) that the number of the interactions moments is $`2N_b`$. The number of the electron oscillations in EM wave between interaction moments is extremely large: $`N_{EMW}\omega /\omega _b\omega _c/\omega _b3\gamma ^2K/2`$. For example for SLAC experiments $`N_{EMW}9.210^9`$. So we can consider the electron phases as random before each interaction moments and, therefore, can consider each interaction moments independently. Using this fact Eq. (74) can be rewritten as follows

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_j=2N_b\frac{\lambda ^2r_en_e}{\pi }\left(\frac{e^2}{4\pi ^2c}\frac{\omega ^2}{\omega _p^2}\right)^1\left(\frac{𝐤}{k}\frac{}{𝐩}\right)\left(\frac{dW_{spon,j}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}\frac{1}{N_b}\right).$$
(75)
For simplicity we assume that $`p_y=0`$. To take derivatives in Eq. (75) we should present $`\frac{dW_{spon,j}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ as a function of momentum, $`𝐩`$, and use the simplifying assumptions $`p_y=0`$ only after performing differentiation in Eq. (75). This is because the electron motion in the ion channel and in EM wave is no longer plane. Although the unperturbed betatron oscillations is in the plane $`y=0`$ the action of EM wave leads to the small oscillations along $`y`$-axis in the first-order of perturbation theory.

It follows from Eqs. (25), (48) and (51) that

$$\left(\frac{e^2}{4\pi ^2c}\frac{\omega ^2}{\omega _p^2}\right)^1\frac{dW_{spon,j}}{d\omega d\mathrm{\Omega }}\frac{1}{N_b}=\frac{2}{\omega _b^2}\eta ^2\left|R_j\right|^2.$$
(76)
Then using Eqs. (32)-(50) we can perform differentiation in Eq. (74). To do it we have to take into account that $`\gamma _z`$, $`\omega _b`$ are the function of $`p_z`$: $`\gamma _z\left(p_z\right)=\sqrt{1+p_z^2}`$, $`\omega _b\left(p_z\right)=`$ $`1/\sqrt{2\gamma _z\left(p_z\right)}`$. After performing differentiation we can put $`p_y=0`$. Then simplifying the obtained expression with help of MATHEMATICA MATHEMATICA  the gain of ICSRL can be derived

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`N_b{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}\lambda ^2r_en_e}{9\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^4\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi }{\gamma _z^3p_x}}\left[\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi K_{1/3}(q)\sqrt{\chi }K_{2/3}(q)\right]`$
$`\times [\sqrt{\chi }(3qT_0+\mathrm{sin}\theta \sqrt{\chi }T_1)K_{1/3}(q)`$
$`(3q\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi T_0+\chi ^{3/2}T_2)K_{2/3}(q)],`$
$`T_0`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{cos}^2\varphi [3p_x^38p_x^2\gamma _z\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi p_x\gamma _z^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{cos}^2\varphi `$
$`+2\gamma _z^3\mathrm{sin}^3\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi (1+2\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi )]3p_x^3,`$
$`T_1`$ $`=`$ $`6p_x^3\mathrm{cos}\varphi +2p_x^2\gamma _z\mathrm{sin}\theta \left(38\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi \right)`$
$`2p_x\gamma _z^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{cos}^3\varphi 2\gamma _z^3\mathrm{sin}^3\theta \mathrm{cos}^2\varphi (14\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi ),`$
$`T_2`$ $`=`$ $`3p_x^38p_x^2\gamma _z\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi p_x\gamma _z^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{cos}^2\varphi `$
$`+2\gamma _z^3\mathrm{sin}^3\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi (1+2\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi ),`$
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\theta `$ $`=`$ $`N_b{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}\lambda ^2r_en_e}{9\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^4}{\gamma _z^3p_x}}\left[\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi K_{1/3}(q)+\sqrt{\chi }\mathrm{cos}\varphi K_{2/3}(q)\right]`$
$`\times [\sqrt{\chi }(3q\mathrm{cos}\varphi T_0+\mathrm{sin}\theta \sqrt{\chi }T_3)K_{1/3}(q)`$
$`+(3q\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi T_0+\chi ^{3/2}T_4)K_{2/3}(q)],`$
$`T_3`$ $`=`$ $`6p_x^316p_x^2\gamma _z\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi 2p_x\gamma _z^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{cos}^2\varphi `$
$`+4\gamma _z^3\mathrm{sin}^3\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi \left(1+2\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi \right),`$
$`T_4`$ $`=`$ $`3p_x^3\mathrm{cos}\varphi +2p_x^2\gamma _z\mathrm{sin}\theta \left(34\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi \right)+p_x\gamma _z^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{cos}^3\varphi `$
$`4\gamma _z^3\mathrm{sin}^3\theta \mathrm{cos}^2\varphi \mathrm{sin}^2\varphi .`$
We have also checked the obtained results by the numerical differentiation for some values of parameters. EM wave can be amplified only if the wave propagates in some small angle to the axis $`z`$. It is seen from Fig. 4 that there is no amplification of EM wave when the wave propagates along the channel axis.

Eqs. (53) and (52) have been derived under assumption that all electrons have the same momentum before interaction. Now we will consider a monoenergetic, axisymmetric electron beam with electron distribution function given by Eq. (62). ICSRL gain for such electron beam is defined by the relation

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_j=_0^{2\pi }\frac{d\varphi }{2\pi }\mathrm{\Gamma }_j(𝐩,\varphi ).$$
(79)
We have performed integration in Eq. (79) numerically. It is seen from Fig. 5 that there is no amplification of EM wave by the beam $`\varphi `$ for given parameters. We are not able to find the wave amplification by the axisymmetric electron beam at least for considered beam parameters.

## V Discussion and Conclusions

First we would like to discuss the use a laser-produced ion channel for X-ray generation. As it was mentioned in Introduction an ion channel in plasma can be produced by an electron beam itself. However in this case the plasma density have to be less than beam density. Unfortunately the density of relativistic beam cannot be very high because of technology reasons. This leads to the serious limitation on the gain in radiated power as the power is quadratic in plasma density. Use of high-power laser could overcome this limitation. High-power laser pulse can expel plasma electrons by ponderomotive force and create the ion channel behind the pulse laser channel . Moreover, in strongly nonlinear ”bubble” regime pukhov1  electrons are completely evacuated from the first half-plasma wave excited behind the laser pulse. The ion density in this ”bubble” is higher in many order of magnitude than that in the ion channel formed in the beam - plasma interaction. For example, the ion density in the ”bubble” can be as high as $`10^{19}`$cm<sup>-3</sup> pukhov1 ; laser channel  that is in $`10^5`$ times higher than that in the beam - plasma interaction experiments wang . Therefore the radiated power in laser-produced channel can be in $`10^{10}`$ times higher than that in the experiments wang  for the same number of the betatron oscillations. The ”bubble” moves with group velocity of the laser pulse which is close to the speed of light. Relativistic electron bunch injected into the ”bubble” can propagate inside the ”bubble” over a long distance. Hence, in spite of the small length of the ”bubble” the electrons can oscillate in the ”bubble” a lot of time.

It should be noted that the self-generated forces of the electron bunch as well as of the relativistic plasma electrons in the column can be neglected because they cancel each other book-beam . The condition to neglect the self-generated forces is $`n_en_i\gamma ^2`$ that is easily satisfied in modern experiments. The number of the betatron oscillations performed by an electron can be calculated as a ratio of the time during which electron passes through the ”bubble” to the period of the betatron oscillation:

$$N_b=\frac{\omega _pL}{2\pi \sqrt{2\gamma }(cv_{gr})},$$
(80)
where $`v_{gr}`$ is the group velocity of the laser pulse.

Some estimations for parameters in possible and carried out experiments are presented in Table I. To calculate parameters in Table I we assume that $`L30\mu m`$ according to the numerical simulations pukhov1 . The group velocity of the laser pulse in rarefied plasma ($`\omega _L\omega _p`$) can be estimated as $`v_{gr}/c1\omega _p^2/\left(2\omega _L^2\right)`$, where $`\omega _L`$ is the laser frequency pukhov1 . Then Eq. (80) can be rewritten as follows

$$N_b4.710^{10}\frac{1}{\lambda _L\left[\mu m\right]\sqrt{\gamma n_e\left[cm^3\right]}}\left(\frac{L}{\lambda _L}\right),$$
(81)
where $`\lambda _L`$ is the laser wavelength.

It is seen from Table I that use of the laser-produced ion channel can dramatically increase the power of X-ray emission.

In this paper we have studied spontaneous and stimulated emission from electrons undergoing betatron motion in ion channel. We calculate the period of nonlinear betatron oscillations. The method based on the Bessel function expansion is used in Ref. esarey1  to calculate the spectrum of the spontaneous emission in ion channel. However, in synchrotron regime of emission ($`K>>1`$) the angular distribution of the radiation has been derived in this paper only in the direction which is perpendicular to the electron orbit plane. We extended this result to the arbitrary directions. The generalized Madey’s theorem was used to calculate the electron energy gain of ICSRL. The calculation shows that there is no wave amplification when the EM wave propagates along the channel axis and the amplification takes place only when the wave propagates at some small angle to the channel axis.

Our numerical simulations show that there is no amplification for axisymmetric electron beam at least for considered parameters of the beam. However further analysis is required to justify this conclusion. It may be possible to overcome this difficulty by appropriately tailoring the electron beam, that is, a narrow electron beam could be injected off-axis such that all of the beam electrons execute approximately the same betatron orbit.

To calculate the radiation spectrum and the gain of ICSRL for electron beam, we used a very simple distribution function. Further investigations should include the more realistic electron distribution functions. The gain of ICSRL was calculated in the small-signal small-gain limit. However, it is more interesting for application is to explore large-gain regime of ICSRL that needs further investigations.

###### Acknowledgements.

One of the authors (I. K.) gratefully acknowledges the hospitality of Institute for Theoretical Physics of Duesseldorf University. This work was support in part by Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (Germany) and by the Russian Fund for Fundamental Research (Grants No 01-02-16575, No 01-02-06488 and by Russian Academy of Science (Grant N 1999-37).


format: text

text:
# Doubly Special Relativity with light-cone deformation

## 1 Introduction

The fate of Lorentz symmetry at high energies close to the Planck scale is recently attracting growing interest. The reason for this is at least twofold. First, since the classical Lorentz symmetry group is non-compact we have only limited access to experimental verification of this symmetry. Second, the observed anomalies in the ultra-high energy cosmic rays and TeV photons  might indicate that relativistic kinematics may deviate from the standard Special Relativistic one when relevant energies becomes close to the Planck scale.

There are two major approaches to the “Planck scale phenomenology” (see  and  for reviews and extesive list of references). In the first one assumes that Lorentz symmetry becomes broken close to the Planck scale, so that effectively we have to do with some preferred frame, usually associated with the cosmic frame. In another approach, dubbed Doubly Special Relativity , , one assumes that Lorentz (and even Poincaré) symmetry is still present, but becomes deformed in the high energy regime. This approach borrows a lot from previous investigations on quantum deformation of Poincaré Hopf algebra, undertaken in 1990s (see e.g., , ).

Presently two Doubly Special Relativity models have received most attention111As shown in the series of papers , ,  there are in fact infinitely many DSR theories.. In the first, called DSR1 formulated in  and  the modified dispersion relation takes the form

$$m^2=\left(2\kappa \mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{P_0}{2\kappa }\right)\right)^2\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2}e_{}^{P_0/\kappa }.$$
(1)
while in the DSR2, proposed in  it reads

$$m^2=\frac{P_0^2\stackrel{}{P}^2}{\left(1\frac{P_0}{\kappa }\right)^2},$$
(2)
Let us note that the deformation in the dispersion relations (1), (2) act in the “energy” direction. This is a general feature of all DSR theories considered so far, and a natural question arises as to whether it is possible to construct DSR theories with different kind of deformations. For example is it possible to construct a DSR theory with deformation along “light cone” corresponding to the front form dynamics in the famous classification of Dirac  (see also e.g. ,  for extensive up-to-date discussion and list of references.) The answer to this question happens to be affirmative , , ,  and we devote this note to investigate most fundamental properties of such theories.

Our motivations to investigate light-cone DSR are manyfold. First, such DSR theories differ in many respects from the theories analyzed so far and therefore are of interest on its own. Moreover the standard light-cone dynamics has a number of distinctive features which, in the deformed case may shed some light on generic structure of Doubly Special Relativity. Among them one should mention the rational relation between energy and momentum on-shell $`P_{}=\frac{\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2}{P_+}`$ as compared to $`P_0=\sqrt{\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2}`$ of standard “instant” formulation of Special relativity, special structure of boosts of which one is a kinematical operator acting along the constant “light-cone time” surface, and the emergence of Galilean symmetry as a subgroup of the whole Poincaré algebra (and not the reduction of the latter, as in the standard case.) Last but not least, it were intuitions from the light cone dynamics that lead Susskind  to formulate his version of the holographic principle, so one may hope that proper understanding of the deformed light-cone dynamics may lead to better understanding of this principle.

## 2 DSR phase space in light-cone coordinates

Our starting point of the construction of the light-cone DSR theory will be the light-cone quantum $`\kappa `$-Poincaré algebra. This kind of algebras have been investigated first in , whose construction has been incorporated into the generalized $`\kappa `$-Poincaré framework in  and . As usual in the light-cone formulation momenta has components $`P_+`$, $`P_{}`$ along the light-cone and the transverse ones $`P_i`$ 222In what follows we will use the following index convention: Greek indices run through $`+,,1,2`$, small Latin indices denote transverse directions $`1,2`$, while capital ones run through $`,1,2`$.. The metric tensor in such parameterization has the form

$$g_{\mu \nu }=g^{\mu \nu }=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 1& 0& 0\\ 1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)$$

The action of Lorentz generators $`M^{\mu \nu }`$ satisfies the standard undeformed algebra

$$[M^{\mu \nu },M^{\lambda \sigma }]=i(g^{\mu \sigma }M^{\nu \lambda }g^{\nu \sigma }M^{\mu \lambda }+g^{\nu \lambda }M^{\mu \sigma }g^{\mu \lambda }M^{\nu \sigma }),$$
(3)
and the momenta commute

$$[P_\mu ,P_\nu ]=0.$$
(4)
As usual in DSR the action of Lorentz generators on momenta is deformed with the scale of deformation given by the parameter $`\kappa `$ of dimension of mass.

$`[M^{ij},P_+]`$ $`=`$ $`[M^i,P_+]=0`$
$`[M^{i+},P_+]`$ $`=`$ $`iP^i`$
$`[M^+,P_+]`$ $`=`$ $`i\kappa \left(1e^{P_+/\kappa }\right)`$
$`[M^{ij},P_{}]`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`[M^{i+},P_{}]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\kappa }}P^iP_{}`$
$`[M^i,P_{}]`$ $`=`$ $`iP^i`$
$`[M^+,P_{}]`$ $`=`$ $`iP_{}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\kappa }}\stackrel{}{P}^2`$
$`[M^{ij},P_k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(\delta _k^jP^i\delta _k^iP^j\right)`$
$`[M^{i+},P_k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\delta _k^i(P_{}e^{P_+/\kappa }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2}){\displaystyle \frac{i}{\kappa }}P^iP_k`$
$`[M^i,P_k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\kappa \delta _k^i\left(1e^{P_+/\kappa }\right)`$
$`[M^+,P_k]`$ $`=`$ $`iP_k\left(1e^{P_+/\kappa }\right),`$ (5)
where we define $`\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2}=P_1^2+P_2^2`$. The Casimir (dispersion relation) for this algebra reads

$$m^2=4\kappa P_{}e^{P_+/2\kappa }\mathrm{sinh}\frac{P_+}{2\kappa }\left(P_1^2+P_2^2\right)e^{P_+/\kappa }$$
(6)
which, of course, reduces (as well as the algebra above) to the standard relation of the null-frame Special Relativity in the $`\kappa \mathrm{}`$ limit. Note that in the large $`P_+`$ limit the dispersion relation becomes in the leading order

$$\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2}=2\kappa P_{}$$
(7)
independently of mass, as compared with the relation

$$\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2}+m^2=2P_+P_{}$$

of the undeformed case.

The fact that the algebra (5) can be extended to a quantum Hopf algebra makes it possible to use the co-product of the latter to construct the commutators algebra of the whole the phase space of the system. This procedure consists first of defining pairing between Lorentz generators and momenta position $`X^\mu `$. To do that one takes the Hopf algebra co-products

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{\Delta }(P_+)& =& 1P_++P_+1\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }(P_I)& =& P_Ie^{P_+/\kappa }+1P_I\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }(M^{IJ})& =& 1M^{IJ}+M^{IJ}1\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }(M^{I+})& =& M^{I+}e^{P_+/\kappa }+1M^{I+}\frac{1}{\kappa }M^{IJ}P_J\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }(X^\mu )& =& \mathrm{\Lambda }^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}X^\nu +X^\mu 1\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{})& =& \mathrm{\Lambda }^\mu {}_{\rho }{}^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^\rho _\nu \hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
and then defines the pairing as follows

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill <P_\mu ,X^\nu >& =& i\delta _\mu ^\nu \hfill \\ \hfill <\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{},M^{\alpha \beta }>& =& i\left(g^{\alpha \mu }\delta _\nu ^\beta g^{\beta \mu }\delta _\nu ^\alpha \right)\hfill \\ \hfill <\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{},1>& =& \delta _\nu ^\mu \hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
In the final step one uses eqs. (9) to derive relevant commutators according to the general formula

$$[𝒬,]=_{(1)}<𝒬_{(1)},_{(2)}>𝒬_{(2)}𝒬,$$
(10)
where we used a natural notation for co-product $`\mathrm{\Delta }=_{(1)}_{(2)}`$. The resulting non-vanishing phase space commutators read

$$[X^+,X^i]=\frac{i}{\kappa }X^i[X^+,X^{}]=\frac{i}{\kappa }X^{}$$
(11)
$$[P_i,X^j]=i\delta _i^j[P_i,X^+]=\frac{i}{\kappa }P_i$$
(12)
$$[P_{},X^{}]=i[P_{},X^+]=\frac{i}{\kappa }P_{}[P_+,X^+]=i$$
(13)
The transformation of positions under action of Lorentz generators are given by

$$[X^\mu ,M^{K+}]=i\left(g^{K\mu }X^+g^{+\mu }X^K\right)\frac{i}{\kappa }\left(\delta _+^\mu M^{K+}+\delta _L^\mu M^{KL}\right)$$
(14)
$$[X^\mu ,M^{KL}]=i\left(g^{K\mu }X^Lg^{L\mu }X^K\right)$$
(15)
To conclude this technical section stressing that the phase space algebra constructed above can be altered by redefinition of momenta of the form

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill P_+& & 𝒫_+(P_+,P_{},\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2})\hfill \\ \hfill P_{}& & 𝒫_{}(P_+,P_{},\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2})\hfill \\ \hfill P_{}& & 𝒫_i(P_+,P_{},\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2},P_i)=A(P_+,P_{},\stackrel{}{P}{}_{}{}^{2})P_i\hfill \end{array}$$

This redefinition is restricted only by the natural requirement that in the $`\kappa \mathrm{}`$ limit $`P_\mu =𝒫_\mu `$, which means that in this limit all the light-cone DSR theories reduce to Special Relativity in the null frame.

## 3 Properties of the phase space algebra

Let us now discuss the properties of the deformed phase space derived in the previous section. We will focus our attention on the fate of three distinguishing properties of Special Relativity formulated in null frame: split of the Poincaré generators into seven kinematical and three dynamical ones, the simple action of the boost in the third direction $`M^+`$ and the emergence of the Galilei algebra as a subalgebra of the Poinceré light-cone algebra. Before doing that, let us briefly describe these three features.

In his seminal paper  Dirac considered the possible forms of initial surfaces for relativistic dynamics. Given an initial surface it is important to know which Poincaré symmetry generators act along the surface (these are called kinematical) and which in the orthogonal direction (since these generators change the value of the coordinate orthogonal to the surface – the time variable – they are called dynamical.) In the case of constant time initial surface (instant form Special Relativity), it is well known that there are six kinematical (spacial momenta and rotations) generators and four dynamical ones (boosts and energy generator). In the null frame Special Relativity, when the initial surface is null it turns out that there are seven kinematical generators (it can be shown that this is the maximal possible number of them) and three kinematical ones.

The generator that is dynamical in the instant form, and becomes kinematical in the null form is the boost along the third axis $`M^+`$. Moreover this generator acts as a mere rescaling of positions and momenta, to wit

$$X^+e^\xi X^+,X^{}e^\xi X^{},P^+e^\xi P^+,P^{}e^\xi P^{},$$

where $`\xi `$ is the boost parameter. Clearly these transformation leaves the surface $`X^+=0`$ (or $`X^{}=0`$) invariant, so indeed $`M^+`$ is kinematical.

The last feature of the null frame form is that the subalgebra of the whole Poincaré algebra of the longitudinal symmetry generators is isomorphic to the Galilei  algebra with the following identification: $`P^i`$ correspond to Galilei momenta, $`M^{ij}`$ to rotations, $`P^{}`$ to Hamiltonian, while $`P^+`$ is a central charge of the subalgebra, corresponding to the Galilei mass (see below.) This situation should be compared with the instant form Special Relativity, where the Galilei algebra arises only as an appropriate limit of the Poincaré algebra.

To conclude these introductory remarks, let us note that contrary to the Special Relativistic case there is no $`+`$ symmetry between coordinates $`X^+`$ and $`X^{}`$ (and momenta $`P^+`$ and $`P^{}`$), and we must therefore consider the cases of null surfaces $`X^+=0`$ and $`X^{}=0`$ separately. As it will turn out these surfaces have very different properties.

### Kinematical generators

In the first case, in order to find out which generators are kinematical and which dynamical we must consider generators of the stability group of the surface $`X^+=0`$. Consider first the algebra (14), (15). We have

$$[X^+,M^{K+}]=\frac{i}{\kappa }M^{K+}$$
(16)
$$[X^+,M^{KL}]=i\left(g^{K+}X^Lg^{L+}X^K\right)$$
(17)
From (17) we learn that $`M^{ij}`$ is kinematical, as in the standard case. However $`M^{+i}`$ and $`M^+`$ have non-vanishing commutator (16) and therefore are not kinematical. The inspection of the algebra (12), (13) shows that also the momenta $`P_i`$, $`P_{}`$ are not kinematical.

Consider therefore the null surface $`X^{}=0`$. The algebra (14), (15) reads in this case

$$[X^{},M^{K+}]=iX^K\frac{i}{\kappa }M^K$$
(18)
$$[X^{},M^{KL}]=0$$
(19)
We see that now the kinematical generators are $`M^{ij}`$, $`M^+`$, $`M^i`$. From (12), (13) we see that also the momenta $`P_i`$, $`P_{}`$ are kinematical. Therefore in this case we have as many kinematical generators as in Special Relativity.

To conclude, for the initial surface $`X^+=0`$ the number of kinematical generators is small, but the coordinates on the surface are commutative. It is light-cone time $`X^+`$ that is non-commutative, and the light-cone energy can be associated with the $`P_+`$ generator. For the initial surface $`X^{}=0`$ the number of kinematical generators is exactly equal to the corresponding number in Special Relativity, but, the coordinates on the surface are not commutative. In this case $`X^{}`$ and $`P_{}`$ play a role of time and energy, respectively.

### The $`M^+`$ boost

To see what is the behavior of the $`M^+`$ boost for deformed algebra, let us first consider the commutators with momenta (5) and infer from them

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_+}{d\xi }}`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa \left(1e^{P_+/\kappa }\right)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_{}}{d\xi }}`$ $`=`$ $`P_{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}\stackrel{}{P}^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_k}{d\xi }}`$ $`=`$ $`P_k\left(1e^{P_+/\kappa }\right)`$
where $`\xi `$ is the rapidity parameter. The solution of these equations with the initial condition $`P_\mu (0)=\pi _\mu `$ reads

$$P_+(\xi )=\kappa \mathrm{log}\left[1+Ce^\xi \right],P_i(\xi )=\frac{(C+1)\pi _i}{1+Ce^\xi },$$

$$P_{}(\xi )=e^\xi \left[\pi _{}\frac{(C+1)\stackrel{}{\pi }^2}{2\kappa C}+\frac{(C+1)^2\stackrel{}{\pi }^2}{2\kappa C(1+Ce^\xi )}\right]$$
(20)
where $`C=e^{\pi _+/\kappa }1`$. This last equation can be simplified if one uses the dispersion relation satisfied by the initial values of momenta

$$4\kappa \pi _{}e^{\pi _+/2\kappa }\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi _+}{2\kappa }\stackrel{}{\pi }{}_{}{}^{2}e_{}^{\pi _+/\kappa }=m^2.$$

One gets

$$P_{}(\xi )=e^\xi \left[\frac{m^2}{2\kappa C}+\frac{(C+1)^2\stackrel{}{\pi }^2}{2\kappa C(1+Ce^\xi )}\right]$$
(21)
Expanding to the lowest order in $`\kappa `$ we get the standard relations

$$P_+(\xi )\pi _+e^\xi ,P_{}(\xi )\pi _{}e^\xi ,P_i(\xi )0$$
(22)
as it should be. The expansion for large boosts $`\xi \mathrm{}`$ gives instead (in the massless case, for simplicity)

$$P_+(\xi )\xi ,P_i(\xi )e^\xi ,P_{}(\xi )e^{2\xi }.$$
(23)
This expansion is consistent with relation eq. (7). Note that while the behavior of $`P_{}(\xi )`$ is similar to the standard one, $`P_+(\xi )`$ grows with $`\xi `$ much slower than in Special Relativity.

### Galilean symmetry

As mentioned above, the last interesting feature of the Special Relativity in the null frame is that there exist two subalgebras of the full Poincaré algebra that are isomorphic to the algebra of the two-dimensional Galilei group. These subalgebras consist of the rotation $`M^{ij}`$, Galilean boosts $`G_\pm ^i=M^{\pm i}`$, and $`P_\mu `$ and read

$`[M^{ij},G_\pm ^k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(g^{ik}G_\pm ^jg^{jk}G_\pm ^i\right)`$
$`[M^{ij},P_k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(\delta _k^jP^i\delta _k^iP^j\right)`$
$`[G_\pm ^i,P_+]`$ $`=`$ $`i\delta _+^\pm P^i`$
$`[G_\pm ^i,P_{}]`$ $`=`$ $`i\delta _{}^\pm P^i`$
$`[G_\pm ^i,P_k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\delta _k^iP_{}`$ (24)
Note that in the ‘–’ case $`P_+`$ is a central charge of the algebra and can be therefore identified with (twice) the Galilean mass, while $`P_{}`$ is the Hamiltonian (in the ‘+’ case the mass is identified with $`P_{}`$, and Hamiltonian with $`P_+`$.)

Inspection of the algebra (5) shows that in the deformed algebra this doubly structure is lost. Indeed, in this case only $`P_+`$ can be central charge, as it commutes with $`G_{}^i`$. In this way we obtain the deformed Galilei algebra, being a subalgebra of the deformed Poincaré algebra (5), to wit

$`[M^{ij},G^k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(g^{ik}G_\pm ^jg^{jk}G_\pm ^i\right)`$ (25)
$`[M^{ij},P_k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\left(\delta _k^jP^i\delta _k^iP^j\right)`$
$`[G^i,P_{}]`$ $`=`$ $`i\delta _{}^\pm P^i`$
$`[G^i,P_k]`$ $`=`$ $`i\kappa \delta _k^i\left(1e^{P_+/\kappa }\right)`$ (26)
where we used the notation $`G^i=G_{}^i`$. Since $`P_{}=P^+`$ is the Hamiltonian, it corresponds to the initial null surface defined by $`X^{}=0`$, because in this case $`X^{}`$ takes a role of time.

## 4 Conclusions

In this paper we investigated basic properties of a new Doubly Special Relativity in which the deformation acted along the light cone. This theory differs in many aspects from the DSR theories considered so far, and in our opinion deserves farther studies.

However it is our view that the final judgment of which theory is correct is provided by its experimental verification. In the case of the DSR theories one of the few experiments that can be performed in a near future are “time of flight experiments”, i.e., measurements of dependence of the speed of light on momentum carried by photons (see, e.g.,  and references therein.) Therefore, it is important to investigate in details the issue of velocity in DSR theories. We will address this problem in a future publication.

## Acknowledgement

We would like to thank J. Lukierski for discussion and bringing the paper  to our attention.


text:
# References

New classes of $`n`$-copy undistillable quantum states with negative partial transposition

Somshubhro Bandyopadhyay111Present address: Department of Chemistry, 80 Saint George Street, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3H6, Canada Email: som@ee.ucla.edu and Vwani Roychowdhury222Email: vwani@ee.ucla.edu

Department of Electrical Engineering, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA

## Abstract

The discovery of entangled quantum states from which one cannot distill pure entanglement constitutes a fundamental recent advance in the field of quantum information. Such bipartite bound-entangled (BE) quantum states *could* fall into two distinct categories: (1) Inseparable states with positive partial transposition (PPT), and (2) States with negative partial transposition (NPT). While the existence of PPT BE states has been confirmed, *only one* class of *conjectured* NPT BE states has been discovered so far. We provide explicit constructions of a variety of multi-copy undistillable NPT states, and conjecture that they constitute families of NPT BE states. For example, we show that for every pure state of Schmidt rank greater than or equal to three, one can construct $`n`$-copy undistillable NPT states, for any $`n1`$. The abundance of such conjectured NPT BE states, we believe, considerably strengthens the notion that being NPT is only a necessary condition for a state to be distillable.

In the past decade, the search for efficient tools to determine whether a given quantum state is entangled , and if so, whether it can be potentially used in quantum information processing protocols has led to several fundamental results about the nature of quantum entanglement . Almost all quantum communication protocols, such as teleportation  and super-dense coding , require maximally entangled states that are shared among the spatially separated parties in conjunction with classical communication. However, entangled states are noisy in general, due to environment induced decoherence effects. Hence, in order for an entangled state to be useful, one should be able to extract maximally entangled states (in the asymptotic sense) starting from an ensemble of the given state, while using only local operations and classical communication (LOCC). States which allow such extraction of maximally entangled states are referred to as distillable quantum states. Generalizations of classical information theory concepts have led to protocols for distillation of quantum entanglement from certain classes of quantum states .

Recent results have shown that even though most entangled states are distillable, some are not. The undistillable but entangled quantum states are said to possess bound entanglement . Bound entangled states cannot be prepared locally as they are entangled and being not distillable, cannot be directly used in quantum communication protocols. Interestingly, they can still enable non trivial quantum processes, such as activation  and superactivation of entanglement , remote concentration of information , that are not possible with separable states. In this sense, the nonlocal properties of bound entanglement can be distinctly utilized.

Many of the properties of entangled and distillable states are studied using the partial transposition (PT) operation . Let $`\rho ^{AB}`$ be a density matrix corresponding to a bipartite quantum system consisting of subsystems $`A`$ and $`B.`$ Then the partial transposition operation in an orthogonal product basis is defined as: $`\left(\rho _{m\mu ,n\nu }\right)^{PT}=\rho _{m\nu ,n\mu },`$ where the transpose is taken with respect to the subsystem $`B.`$ If $`\rho ^{PT}0`$, the state is said to be positive under PT (PPT), otherwise it is said to be NPT. If a state is not entangled (i.e., separable) then it must be PPT. For quantum systems in $`22`$ and $`23`$, the negativity under PT (NPT) is a necessary and sufficient for inseparability but only sufficient in higher dimensions . It was proved that PPT states are not distillable  and therefore, inseparable PPT states are bound entangled. This leaves an interesting open question: Are all NPT states distillable? If the answer is yes, then negativity under PT would be the necessary and sufficient condition for distillability. However, it turns out that even though most NPT states are distillable, some are possibly not. The existence of NPT states that are not distillable has been conjectured in Refs. .

A state $`\rho `$ is said to be distillable if and only if there exists a positive integer $`n`$ and a Schmidt-rank (SR) two state $`|\varphi `$ such that $`\varphi \left|\left(\rho ^{PT}\right)^n\right|\varphi <0`$ . Intuitively this means that in the tensor product Hilbert space $`H^n`$ there exists a $`22`$ subspace where the state is inseparable. Thus, a state is $`ncopy`$ *undistillable* if this condition is not satisfied by $`n`$ copies of the state. To prove that NPT bound entangled states exist, one needs to show that the *same state* is $`n`$-copy undistillable for all $`n1`$. In Refs  the conjectured NPT bound entangled states were proved to be one copy undistillable. Moreover, for any given number of copies, $`n`$, states that are $`n`$-copy undistillable were constructed. We explore this issue further, and provide evidence that such conjectured NPT BE states can be found at infinitely many neighborhoods of the Hilbert space.

*General Approach*
We now introduce a general technique  to construct $`n`$-copy undistillable NPT states. Consider a class of bipartite $`d\times d`$ density matrices $`\rho \left(ϵ\right)`$, $`0ϵ1`$, where $`\rho \left(ϵ\right)`$ is NPT when $`ϵ>0`$, and PPT for $`ϵ=0`$. Let us also assume that the null space of the partial transpose of the density matrix $`\left(\rho \left(ϵ=0\right)\right)^n,`$for all  $`d3`$ and $`n1`$,  does not contain any non-zero vector of Schmidt rank less than three. Now consider the following function

$$f(ϵ,n)=\underset{SR(|\varphi )=2}{\mathrm{min}}\varphi |\left(\rho ^{^{PT}}\left(ϵ\right)\right)^n\varphi ,$$
(1)
where, as shown, the minimum is taken over all Schmidt rank two states in the full $`d^nd^n`$ Hilbert space. Since by assumption any state $`|\varphi `$ of Schmidt rank 2 does not lie in the null space of $`\left(\rho ^n\left(ϵ=0\right)\right)^{PT}`$,333To be more precise, one needs to show that no Schmidt-Rank two vector can lie arbitrarily close to the null space of $`\left(\rho ^n\left(ϵ=0\right)\right)^{PT}`$. However, it turns out that for a finite $`n`$ it is sufficient to show that no Schmidt-Rank two vector lies in the null space. $`f\left(ϵ=0,n\right)>0`$. Hence, it follows from continuity arguments that for all $`n`$ there exists an $`ϵ_n`$ such that $`f(ϵ_n,n)0`$, when $`ϵ`$ is in the interval $`0ϵϵ_n`$. This implies that there is a finite range of $`ϵ>0`$ for every $`n`$ such that $`\rho \left(ϵ\right)`$ is $`n`$-copy *undistillable*. However, this argument is not sufficient to conclude complete undistillability because we have not established any result about the asymptotic behaviour of $`ϵ_n`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. It might so happen that $`ϵ_n0`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$ and then we cannot guarantee the existence of a state that is undistillable for any number of copies.

The purpose of the present note is to show that for quantum systems in $`d_1d_2,d_1,d_23,`$ one can construct several classes of states $`\rho \left(ϵ\right)`$, $`0ϵ1`$ such that (1) $`\rho \left(ϵ\right)`$ is NPT when $`ϵ>0`$, and PPT for $`ϵ=0`$, and (2) the null space of the partial transpose of the density matrix, $`\left(\rho \left(ϵ=0\right)\right)^n`$, for any $`n1`$, does not contain any nonzero vector of Schmidt rank less than three. Then by arguments of the preceding paragraph, for any $`n1`$ we can generate states that are $`n`$-copy undistillable.

*Constructions*
We first provide constructions of such $`\rho \left(ϵ\right)`$ for a pair of states $`(\sigma ,|\phi \phi |)`$ that satisfy the following properties.
Let $`\sigma `$ be an NPT state and let $`|\phi `$ be a pure entangled state of Schmidt rank $`k`$, $`3k\mathrm{min}(d_1,d_2)`$, $`|\phi =_{i=0}^{k1}\lambda _i|ii,`$ where $`\underset{i=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\left|\lambda _i\right|^2=1`$ and $`\lambda _i`$’s are real and positive such that $`\phi \left|\sigma ^{PT}\right|\phi =\left|\mathrm{\Lambda }\right|`$.
We will later show that *such combinations $`(\sigma ,\phi )`$ of states are easy to construct*. In fact one can start with any arbitrary $`|\phi `$ and accordingly choose $`\sigma `$ and vice versa.

Very recently it has been shown that the operator $`\frac{1}{D1}\left(𝐈|\phi \phi |\right)^{PT}`$where $`𝐈`$ is the identity operator of the total Hilbert space $`H`$, is a separable density matrix . The proof that it is PPT is based on the eigen-decomposition of the partial transposed operator $`\left(|\phi \phi |\right)^{PT}`$:

$$\left(|\phi \phi |\right)^{PT}=\underset{i=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\lambda _i^2|iiii\left|+\underset{i,j=0,i<j}{\overset{k1}{}}\lambda _i\lambda _j\right|\psi _{ij}^+\psi _{ij}^+\left|\underset{i,j=0,i<j}{\overset{k1}{}}\lambda _i\lambda _j\right|\psi _{ij}^{}\psi _{ij}^{}|,$$
(2)
where $`|\psi _{ij}^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|ij\pm |ji\right)`$.

We now construct the following density matrix

$$\rho \left(ϵ\right)=ϵ\sigma +\frac{\left(1ϵ\right)}{d^21}\left(𝐈|\phi \phi |\right)^{PT}.$$
(3)
It is easy to verify that the density matrix $`\rho \left(ϵ\right)`$ is NPT when $`ϵ>0`$, and separable for $`ϵ=0`$: The negativity follows from $`\phi \left|\rho ^{PT}\left(ϵ\right)\right|\phi =ϵ\phi \left|\sigma ^{PT}\right|\phi =ϵ\left|\mathrm{\Lambda }\right|`$.

The following result comprises the next crucial step in our proof for the existence of $`n`$-copy undistillable states.

Lemma 1 Given a $`\rho `$ as defined in Eq.(3), the null space of  $`\left(\rho ^{PT}\left(ϵ=0\right)\right)^n`$, for all $`d3`$ and $`n1`$ does not contain any nonzero vector of Schmidt rank less than three.

Proof: For a single copy the result is obvious since the only state that lies in the null space of $`\rho ^{PT}\left(ϵ=0\right)`$ is $`|\phi `$ which of course has Schmidt rank greater than two by construction. Before we outline our proof for n-copies, it is instructive to work with two copies in detail because the proof contains all the essential elements that we need for the case involving $`n`$-copies.

Let the following set be the basis for each of the Hilbert spaces concerned:

$$[\left\{|\phi _l\right\}_{l=0}^{k1},\left\{|ij\right\}_{i,j(i<j)=0}^{k1},\left\{|ij\right\}_{i,j=k}^{d1}],$$
(4)
where $`|\phi _l=\underset{i=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\lambda _{il}|ii`$. Note that $`\phi _l|\phi _s=\delta _{ls}`$ and furthermore, in this notation $`|\phi _0=|\phi .`$ The following set comprises a basis for the null space of the operator $`\frac{1}{\left(d^21\right)^2}\left(𝐈|\phi \phi |\right)^2`$:

$$\left[\begin{array}{c}|\phi _0^1|\phi _0^2,|\phi _0^1\left\{|\phi _l^2\right\}_{l=1}^{k1},|\phi _0^1\left\{|ij^2\right\}_{i,j(i<j)=0}^{k1},|\phi _0^1\left\{|ij\right\}_{i,j=k}^{d1},\\ \left\{|\phi _l^1\right\}_{l=1}^{k1}|\phi _0^2,\left\{|ij^1\right\}_{i,j(i<j)=0}^{k1}|\phi _0^2,\left\{|ij^1\right\}_{i,j=k}^{d1}|\phi _0^2\end{array}\right].$$
(5)
Note that the superscripts indicate the individual Hilbert spaces. Let us further simplify the notation before we proceed. We rewrite the above basis as:

$$[|\phi _0^1|\phi _0^2,|\phi _0^1|\phi _E^2,|\phi _0^1|\phi _P^2,|\phi _E^1|\phi _0^2,|\phi _P^1|\phi _0^2],$$
(6)
where the sub-scripts $`E`$ and $`P`$ refer to entangled and product states respectively. If there is a Schmidt rank two state in the null space it can be written as a linear combination of the above basis states. Using the fact that local projections cannot increase the Schmidt rank of a state, it readily follows that the coefficients of the basis states that are of the form $`|\phi _0^1|\phi _P^2`$ or $`|\phi _P^1|\phi _0^2`$ are zero. If any of these coefficients is not zero, then the reduced density matrix will have rank $`3`$. Therefore any Schmidt rank two state has to have the following form: $`\alpha |\phi _0^1|\phi _E^2+\beta |\phi _E^1|\phi _0^2`$. It is useful to analyze this explicitly. Let $`|\psi `$ be the Schmidt rank two state and hence it can be written as,

$$|\psi =\underset{i=1}{\overset{k1}{}}\alpha _i|\phi _0^1|\phi _{iE}^2+\underset{i=1}{\overset{k1}{}}\beta _i|\phi _{iE}^1|\phi _0^2+\gamma |\phi _0^1|\phi _0^2,$$
(7)
where the coefficients of the superposition are in general complex. On substituting the expressions for the states and rearranging it in the bipartite form one obtains

$$\underset{j,l=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{k1}{}}\left\{\alpha _i\lambda _{il}\lambda _{0j}+\beta _i\lambda _{0l}\lambda _{ij}\right\}+\gamma \lambda _{0j}\lambda _{0l}\right)|jl_A|jl_B.$$
(8)
The subscripts $`A,B`$ are used to emphasize the Schmidt form of the above state. Note that (8) is already in a Schmidt decomposed form, where the terms in the parentheses correspond to the Schmidt coefficients. If the state is indeed of Schmidt rank two, then we must have all the coefficients but two equal to zero. This amounts to solving $`k^2`$ linear equations for $`2k1`$ variables. One can explicitly write down the above equations in a matrix form: $`\mathrm{𝐀𝐱}=𝐲`$, where $`𝐀`$, $`𝐱`$, and $`𝐲`$ are of dimensions $`k^2\times (2k1)`$, $`(2k1)\times 1`$, and $`k^2\times 1`$, respectively ($`k3`$). Moreover, $`𝐲`$ has only two non-zero entries and $`k^22`$ zeros. The matrix $`𝐀`$ can be shown to have the following property: Any submatrix of $`𝐀`$ where *any* two of the rows are deleted (hence, the submatrix is of dimension $`(k^22)\times (2k1)`$)) is still of full column rank. Hence, $`𝐱=\mathrm{𝟎}`$, and it would imply that the above state has Schmidt rank zero. This completes the proof for two copies.

For $`n`$ copies, the proof follows the same line as for two copies. The basis for the n-copy case of the null space is given by

$$\left\{\left(\begin{array}{c}n\\ m\end{array}\right)\right|\phi _0^m|\phi _l^{nm}\},m=0,\mathrm{},n1:l=1,..k1$$
(9)
Following the same arguments as in the two copy case, one can obtain a similar set of linear equations. The number of equations is $`k^n`$ and the number of variables can easily be counted and turns out to be $`k^n(k1)^n`$; moreover, the right-hand-side of the equations (i.e., $`𝐲`$) has $`k^n2`$ zeros. Therefore, no matter how large $`n`$ may be, number of equations is always greater than the number of variables, and one can show from the properties of the matrix that the set of linear equations does not have any non-trivial solution. $`\mathrm{}`$

With the above result and the arguments provided in the beginning of the paper we can now directly state the following theorem.

Theorem 1  Let $`\sigma `$ be a bipartite $`d_1\times d_2`$ (where $`d_1,d_23`$) NPT state and let $`|\phi `$ be a pure state of Schmidt rank equal to $`k`$ ($`3kmin(d_1,d_2)`$), such that $`\phi \left|\sigma ^{PT}\right|\phi =\left|\mathrm{\Lambda }\right|`$. Then for any $`n1`$, there exists an $`ϵ_n>0`$, such that the state

$$\rho \left(ϵ\right)=ϵ\sigma +\frac{\left(1ϵ\right)}{d^21}\left(𝐈|\phi \phi |\right)^{PT}$$
(10)
is $`n`$-copy undistillable for $`0<ϵϵ_n`$.

We now show that *the pairs of states $`(\sigma ,\phi )`$ stipulated in Theorem 1 are fairly easy to construct*. In our first method we will specify $`\sigma `$ first, and then accordingly we will specify $`|\phi .`$ In our second example, we will do just the opposite, i.e., we will fix an arbitrary state $`|\phi `$ and based on the eigen decomposition of it’s partial transpose, we will construct $`\sigma .`$

Construction Method I: Choose any pure entangled state $`|\psi `$ of Schmidt rank $`m`$, $`2md1`$ of the form $`|\psi =\underset{i=0}{\overset{m1}{}}\beta _i|ii,`$ where $`_{i=0}^{m1}\left|\beta _i\right|^2=1`$ and the Schmidt coefficients $`\beta _is`$ are real and positive. Let $`\sigma =|\psi \psi |.`$ Since the Schmidt rank of $`|\psi `$ is at most $`(d1),`$ therefore there is at least one product state that is orthogonal to the subspace spanned by the eigenvectors of $`\sigma ^{PT}.`$ Let $`|\eta `$ be such a product state. From the eigendecomposition of any pure state (see Eq.(2)) having Schmidt rank greater than or equal to two, we know that the eigenvectors corresponding to the negative eigenvalues are of Schmidt rank two. In particular, they are of the form $`|\psi _{ij}^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|ij|ji\right),i<j`$ with negative eigenvalue $`\beta _i\beta _j.`$ Let $`|\chi `$ be one such eigenvector. Then, let $`|\phi =\sqrt{\alpha }|\psi _{ij}^{}+\sqrt{1\alpha }|\eta .`$ For instance, if $`|\psi `$ has Schmidt rank $`(d1)`$, then $`|\eta =|dd.`$ Clearly $`|\phi `$ has Schmidt rank three in this case but the Schmidt rank can be greater than $`3`$ if more than one mutually biorthogonal product states that are also orthogonal to $`\sigma ^{PT}`$ can be found. This would be determined by the Schmidt rank of $`|\psi .`$ It is now obvious that $`\phi |\sigma ^{PT}`$ $`|\phi =\alpha \beta _i\beta _j<0.`$

Construction Method II:  Let us choose *any arbitrary pure state $`|\phi `$ that has Schmidt rank* $`k`$, $`3k\mathrm{min}(d_1,d_2)`$,

$$|\phi =\underset{i=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\lambda _i|ii,$$
(11)
where $`\underset{i=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\left|\lambda _i\right|^2=1`$ and $`\lambda _i`$’s are real and positive. For any two operators $`A`$ and $`B`$ we have, $`Tr\left(AB^{PT}\right)=Tr\left(A^{PT}B\right)`$. For any $`\sigma ,`$ we therefore have, $`\phi \left|\sigma ^{PT}\right|\phi =Tr\left(|\phi \phi |\sigma ^{PT}\right)=Tr\left(|\phi ^{PT}\phi |\sigma \right)`$. It follows from Eq. (2) that if we choose $`\sigma `$ as the convex combination of the eigenvectors with the negative eigenvalue of $`|\phi ^{PT}\phi |,`$then $`\phi \left|\sigma ^{PT}\right|\phi `$ will be negative. We therefore take the following representation of $`\sigma `$:

$$\sigma =\underset{i,j=0,i<j}{\overset{k1}{}}\alpha _{ij}|\psi _{ij}^{}\psi _{ij}^{}|.$$
(12)
Then $`\phi \left|\sigma ^{PT}\right|\phi =\alpha _{ij}\lambda _i\lambda _j<0`$.

*Generalized Constructions*
We can generalize our states in the following way. Let $`m=\frac{d}{k}`$, where $`x`$ is the“floor” operator denoting the largest integer less than or equal to $`x`$. Define the following states: $`\rho _m\left(ϵ\right)=ϵ\sigma +\frac{\left(1ϵ\right)}{d^2m}\left(𝐈\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}|\phi _i\phi _i|\right)^{PT},`$ where $`|\phi _i`$ ’s are pure entangled states of Schmidt rank $`k3`$ states such that each of them are in orthogonal subspaces. Note that it is not necessary to have the Schmidt rank of the states to be equal but the choice was made for simplicity and convenience (notational). Clearly $`m`$ is maximum for a given $`d`$ when $`k=3`$. The states are defined as follows $`|\phi _i=\underset{j=k(i1)}{\overset{ki1}{}}\lambda _j^i|jj^i.`$ As before, $`\sigma `$ may be chosen to be the convex combination of the states with negative eigenvalues in the eigen decomposition of the partial transpose of the pure states $`|\phi _i.`$ Note that $`m=1`$ corresponds to the states in Theorem 1. One can then state the following generalization of Theorem 1.

Theorem 2. The states

$$\rho _m\left(ϵ\right)=ϵ\sigma +\frac{\left(1ϵ\right)}{d^2m}\left(𝐈\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}|\phi _i\phi _i|\right)^{PT}$$
(13)
for sufficiently small $`ϵ`$ is n-copy undistillable for any $`n1`$.

*Distance from the Maximally Mixed State*
We next explore how these NPT $`n`$-copy undistillable states are distributed in the Hilbert space, and in particular, how far they are from the maximally mixed state. For any two quantum states $`\rho _1`$ and $`\rho _2`$, the distance between the states is given by the Hilbert-Schmidt norm defined by $`\rho _1\rho _2=\sqrt{Tr\left(\rho _1\rho _2\right)^2}.`$ Let us first note that the operator $`\frac{1}{d^2m}\left(𝐈\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}|\phi _i\phi _i|\right)^{PT}`$ is a PPT density matrix. The proof can be easily obtained by using Eq. (2). Since our $`n`$-copy undistillable states exist arbitrarily close to this state, it is sufficient to find the distance of this state from the maximally mixed one. Using the H-S norm, one can show that the distance is given by $`\sqrt{\frac{m}{D(Dm)}}.`$ We also note that this distance is nothing but the distance of the maximally mixed state, $`\frac{1}{D}𝐈`$, from any normalized $`(Dm)`$ dimensional projector $`𝐈_{Dm}`$. Let us denote $`r_m=`$ $`\frac{𝐈}{D}\frac{𝐈_{Dm}}{Dm}.`$

Theorem 3  For a bipartite quantum system in $`dd,`$ the boundary of the balls of radius $`r_m`$ for all $`m=1,..,\frac{d}{k},k3,`$ around the maximally mixed state contains $`n`$-copy undistillable NPT states. For a given $`d,`$ maximum number of such balls is obtained when $`k=3.`$

It is instructive to analyze how close these states are relative to the largest separable ball, the radius of which has recently been obtained in Ref. , and is given by $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{D(D1)}}.`$ The result of Theorem 3 shows that the case $`m=1`$ corresponds to the NPT $`n`$-copy undistillable states that lie on the boundary of the largest separable ball. This is as close as the states can be to the maximally mixed state. Let us now try to answer how far from the maximally mixed state these NPT finite copy undistillable states can be found. In our construction, for a given $`d,`$ maximum $`r_m`$ is obtained for $`m=\frac{d}{3}.`$ This corresponds to a distance that grows as $`\frac{1}{D^{1/4}}.`$

*Comparison with Previously Conjectured NPT BE states*
We now point out a remarkable similarity of the class of states presented in this work with that obtained in Ref. . It turns out that for certain choices of the parameters in their class of states and for a particular choice of $`|\phi `$ in our case, the null space of the partial transposed operator is exactly the same! Let us denote the class of states in  as $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(c,ϵ)`$ (following their notation). When $`ϵ=0`$ and $`c=1/d(d+1),`$

$$\left(\stackrel{~}{\rho }\left(c=\frac{1}{d(d+1)},ϵ=0\right)\right)^{PT}=\frac{1}{d^21}\left(\underset{k=1}{\overset{d1}{}}|\phi _k\phi _k\left|+\underset{k,l=0,kl}{\overset{d1}{}}\right|klkl|\right)$$
(14)
where, $`|\phi _k=\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{d1}{}}e^{\frac{2\pi ijk}{d}}|jj,k=1..,d1.`$ Going back to our class, let us choose $`|\phi `$ to be the maximally entangled state of Schmidt rank $`d`$ (i.e., $`|\phi =\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\underset{i=0}{\overset{d1}{}}|ii`$), instead of our general original choice of any pure entangled state. If one expresses the identity operator as

$$\frac{1}{d^2}𝐈=\frac{1}{d^2}\left(|\phi \phi \left|+\underset{k=1}{\overset{d1}{}}\right|\phi _k\phi _k\left|+\underset{k,l=0,kl}{\overset{d1}{}}\right|klkl|\right)$$
(15)
and substitutes Eq. (12) and $`|\phi `$ in that of $`\rho ^{PT}\left(ϵ=0\right)`$ (see Eq. (10), one obtains

$$\rho ^{PT}\left(ϵ=0\right)=\frac{1}{d^21}\left(\underset{k=1}{\overset{d1}{}}|\phi _k\phi _k\left|+\underset{k,l=0,kl}{\overset{d1}{}}\right|klkl|\right).$$

The above similarity is striking considering the very different approaches adopted in the two construction methodologies.

*Discussions and Concluding Remarks*
We have shown that $`n`$-copy undistillable NPT states ($`n1`$) exist at infinitely many neighborhoods of the Hilbert space. Such states lie right on the surface of the largest separable ball (LSB); thus, they are as noisy as any inseparable state can be. They can also be found well outside of the LSB, where distillable and separable states coexist. Can the general approach adopted here lead to a proof of the existence of NPT BE states? Not in a straightforward manner: In our constructions, $`\rho ^{PT}(ϵ=0)`$ has $`D1`$ identical nonzero eigenvalues, $`\frac{1}{D1}`$. Hence, the function $`f\left(ϵ=0,n\right)=\underset{SR(\varphi |)=2}{\mathrm{min}}\varphi |\left(\rho ^{^{PT}}\left(ϵ=0\right)\right)^n\varphi `$ is bounded above by $`(\frac{1}{D1})^n`$, and $`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}f(ϵ=0,n)=0`$. Thus, we cannot claim that simple continuity arguments will yield the existence of states that are NPT but undistillable for any number of copies. However, since $`\rho (ϵ=0)`$ is a separable state (and hence, undistillable), one should expect $`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}f(ϵ=0,n)=0`$, and it provides no evidence that the provably $`n`$-copy undistillable states do not remain undistillable for any number of copies. In fact,  *we conjecture that all the $`n`$-copy undistillable states constructed here are also truly NPT bound entangled states*. Moreover, we believe that even in our approach it is possible to show that there exists a neighborhood $`0ϵϵ_{\mathrm{}}`$, where $`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}f(ϵ,n)=0`$; thus, proving that at least all the states in this neighborhood are also NPT BE states.

*Acknowledgements*
This work was sponsored in part by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) project MDA972-99-1-0017, and in part by the U. S. Army Research Office/DARPA under contract/grant number DAAD 19-00-1-0172.