format: text

text:
# CSL-1: chance projection effect or serendipitous discovery of a gravitational lens induced by a cosmic string?

## 1 Introduction

The Capodimonte - Sternberg - Lens candidate n.1 (or CSL-1) is a peculiar object discovered in the OACDF (Osservatorio Astronomico di Capodimonte - Deep Field): a medium-deep multicolour imaging survey covering in three broad and in several intermediate-width bands a $`0.5\times 1`$ deg wide field located at high galactic latitude. The OACDF data were collected at La Silla, Chile, using the Wide–Field Imager at the ESO-MPI 2.2m telescope. An additional set of frames in the $`H`$ band filter were taken in March 2002 at the Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (TNG) with the Near Infrared Camera and Spectrograph (NICS). In Table 1 we summarize the most relevant information on the OACDF. More details on the OACDF data reduction and calibration can be found in Capaccioli et al. cap01 (2001), and Alcalá et al. eso02 (2002).

The photometric criteria listed in Schneider et al. sch92 (1992) as rules of thumb for identifying gravitational lens candidates, i. e. the presence of at least two images with small (few arcsecs) angular separation and having the same flux ratio in different spectral bands, were applied to the OACDF first visually and then on the matched catalogues, leading to the identification of several faint gravitational lens candidates. After the rejection of a few spurious objects, the list of candidates was reduced to four objects (named by us Capodimonte-Sternberg Lens candidates or CSL-1, CSL-2, etc …).

So far, the spectroscopic follow-up’s needed to confirm or disprove the gravitationally lensed nature of the objects could be performed only for the first candidate (CSL-1), which turned out to be a rather interesting case.

This paper is structured as follows: in Section 2 we summarize the measured photometric and spectroscopic properties of CSL-1 and in Section 3 we discuss the possible explanations of the observables. In Section 4, after introducing some aspects of the string phenomenology, we present our model for the lensing by a cosmic string and the simulation performed in order to assess whether it may explain the strange properties of CSL-1. Finally, in Section 5 we sumarise our results and discuss possible future observations.

## 2 The observed properties of CSL-1

### 2.1 Morphological and photometric properties

CSL-1 consists of two sources (A and B, as marked in Fig. 1) separated by 1.9 arcsec. Visual inspection shows that in all bands, the two sources have (within the errors) the same morphology: a bright nucleus surrounded by a faint halo with undistorted and almost circular isophotes.

In Table 2 we list, in each of the OACDF broad bands, the measured FHWM of the two components together with the FWHM of the PSF measured on non–saturated stars near the position of CSL-1 . Also in Table 2 we give the integrated magnitudes of the two components in the various bands. It is apparent that, within the errors, the colors of the two components are identical.

In order to investigate the light profile, we performed a two dimensional fit of the observed light distribution with a 2-D Sersic profile $`I_S(r)=I_0exp(b(\frac{r}{r_c})^{1/n})`$ convolved with the measured PSF, where:

$$r^2=\frac{1+e}{2}(x^2+y^2)+\frac{1e}{2}(x^2+y^2)\mathrm{cos}2\psi +\frac{1e}{2}xy\mathrm{sin}2\psi $$

$`x`$ and $`y`$ being the Cartesian coordinates measured from the central peak, $`e`$ the ellipticity of the corresponding isophote, and $`\psi `$ the position angle of the isophote. The best fit was obtained for $`n=4`$, id est for a “de Vaucouleurs” devauc (1948) law. In Fig. 2 we show the surface brightness profiles obtained for the two components in the $`914\AA `$ band; in ordinate we have the logarithm of the surface brightness normalized to the peak value, while the abscissa is in $`pixel^{1/4}`$. The slopes of the linear parts of the two profiles are identical within the errors. For those bands where the surface brightness profile covered a large enough range in magnitudes we also attempted to derive estimates of the effective radii of the two components (see 2). These values, however, suffer of very large errors due to the intrinsic faintness of the source and to the inadequate sampling attained in some bands, and therefore must be regarded as indicative only.

The two dimensional fit was also used to produce a residuals map $`(observedmodel)`$ of the light distribution which did not show any systematic trend, with the possible exception of a very faint light excess on the East side. We wish to stress, however, that even in our deepest images ($`R_{lim}24.5`$) we could not detect any residual light in between the two images (see Fig. 8).

Finally, we wish to emphasize that the fainter isophotes of the two components, even though very noisy, have, within the errors, almost identical shapes.

### 2.2 Spectral properties

We obtained two sets of long-slit spectra (with the slit aligned along the direction joining the two images) of both components of CSL-1 . The first one was obtained at the Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (TNG) under non photometric conditions and therefore could not be calibrated, while the second one was obtained at the ESO-New Technology Telescope (NTT) in photometric conditions (cf. Table 3) and the spectrophotometric standards Hiltner 600 and Eg274 were also observed. Spectra were reduced using standard IRAF routines and the sky was removed using the AFI package Lorenz et al. (1993).

In Figure 3 we show both sets of spectra after applying - for visualization purposes only - a slight vertical shift to the spectrum of component A with respect to the spectrum of component B. In the figure we also mark the position of the most significant features which could be identified. No emission lines could be detected in any of the available spectra.

The cross correlation between the spectra of the two components in the same exposure, gives a differential radial velocity of $`27\pm 25`$ km/s, and the redshift is $`z=0.46\pm 0.008`$ (independently from both data sets).

The small difference which is observable in the vicinity of Ca line, is very likely instrumental. In order to show the correspondence between the two spectra, in Figure 3 we also show the ratio of the spectra of the two components, which, within the errors is equal to 1 over the whole spectral range. In Fig.4 we show the correlation function of the two spectra, which confirms that the spectra are identical with a confidence level higher than $`99.9\%`$.

### 2.3 Putting all together

The available photometric and spectroscopic data suggest that both components of CSL-1 are early-type galaxies at a redshift $`z=0.46`$. We wish to stress that at such a distance (with $`H_0=65`$ km/s/Mpc, the distance is $`1.9`$ Gpc), the lower limit for the linear separation between the two objects would be $`20`$ Kpc. In Table 2 we give the absolute magnitude in each band and the estimate effective radii for component A (component B has identical values). All these facts converge in identifying the two images of CSL-1 as giant elliptical galaxies.

Whether the two components of CSL-1 are two identical ellipticals which happen to lay almost along the same line of sight, or rather two images of the same background object produced by a gravitational lens is much more difficult to disentangle. Here we just want to emphasize that the lack of any excess light in between the two images, implies that, if CSL-1 is a lensed object, then the lens is invisible and should be a very peculiar “dark” one cf. Jackson et al. (1998) which, furthermore, does not distort the overall morphology of the lensed object.

As we shall demonstrate in Section 5, the only gravitational lens able to produce such a morphology is a cosmic string but, before examining this odd possibility, we need to rule out or at least investigate all other possible, even though equally unlikely, alternatives.

### 2.4 CSL-1 as a peculiarly obscured object

The observed morphology could be the result of obscuration by a gigantic strong dust lane. There are several reasons which allow, however, to reject this hypothesis. First of all, with a minimum separation between the two sources of 20 Kpc, it would be by far the largest such structure ever observed; second, in order to produce identical and symmetric sources it should have a perfectly tailored shape. Furthermore, even in such unlikely case, such an obscuring layer would fail to reproduce the light profiles observed at the various wavelengths.

To prove it quantitatively we performed a simple simulation. The underlying hypothetical galaxy was modeled assuming, as previously done, a de Vaucouleurs profile and for the dust lane a standard absorbing law given by $`exp(\tau (x))`$, where $`x`$ is the coordinate along the profile and $`\tau `$ is the geometry factor describing the distribution of dust at a given $`x`$: $`\tau (x)=\frac{f(x)}{\lambda ^n}`$. In this formula, $`n`$ is the so called dust index (cf. Hildebrand hil83 (1983); Ferrari fer02 (2002); Chini chi84 (1984)) which, from optical to radio, assumes values inside the range $`1÷2`$. The above formulae allow us to derive the light profile to be expected in any given band relative to the $`R`$ frame assumed as template. In Figure 5 we show the expected and the observed H profiles for a dust lane capable to reproduce the dip observed in the R profile.

As an additional test, in order to investigate whether the combined effects of dust extinction and very strong colour gradients could reproduce the observed morphology, we measured colour in the wings and between peaks of the B, V, and R profiles. The results show that colour gradients, if present, are smaller than $`0.1`$ mag and therefore are of no help in explaining the observed morphology by means of a dust lane.

Therefore we are left with only two possible explanations for CSL-1 . Either we are dealing with i) the projection of two giant elliptical galaxies which are identical (at a 99% level of confidence) in terms of magnitudes, colours, morphology and, what is more relevant, also in terms of spectral properties, or ii) we are seeing the effects of an unconventional and so far never observed gravitational lens which does not distort extended images.

## 3 CSL-1 as a gravitational lens

### 3.1 Compact lens models

The peculiar properties of CSL-1 cannot be explained in terms of lensing by a compact lens such as, for instance, the models listed in the Keeton catalogue of models (Keeton 2002). As a template case, let us take into consideration that of a Singular Isothermal Sphere (SIS), id est the most commonly used (and reliable) model for a gravitational lens. In Fig.6 (left panel) we show the results of the simulation of a SIS lensing effect for an extended object: as it can be easily seen, the SIS model produces a distortion of the outer isophotes. The simulation was performed as follows: we assumed a ”de Vaucouleur”-like 2D light distribution and then mapped it to the lens plane accordingly to the gravitational field generated by a SIS. Afterwards, the modelled image was smoothed with the observed Point Spread Function and a realistic (id est with the same statistics of the real image) noise was added. As optimization value we took the difference between the observed and modelled images squared and optimized over the parameters of the light distribution and of the SIS. The distorsions introduced by the SIS are clearly visible. In Fig.6 (right panel) we show the residuals between the modelled and observed images: as it can be seen, the residuals exceed by 5$`\sigma `$ the noise level. This behavior of the residuals is confirmed also by the analysis performed in all other available bands and we wish to stress that, since in different bands the noise in uncorrelated, the residuals may be considered as independent events and, therefore, the composite probability of having the same fluctuations in the same positions is absolutely negligible.

Furthermore, in the unlikely case of ordinary lensing by a massive object, one could also estimate some characteristics of the lens. First of all we can restrict the redshift range for the lens inside $`0.1<z<0.4`$. The velocity dispersion (mass parameter for a SIS lens) should therefore be in the range 200 km/s up to 400 km/s. Such value is typical of a giant galaxy and therefore, if we assume a lens made of ordinary matter, it should be clearly visible in our images which is not a case. Therefore one have to suppose that it is a case of dark lens. As stressed above, such a ”dark” gravitational lens, while being completely invisible, would introduce significant and measurable distortions in the lensed images (producing arc-like features) which are not observed in CSL-1.

### 3.2 Cosmic string model

Cosmic strings were introduced in theoretical cosmology by Kibble kib76 (1976), Zeldovich zel80 (1980), Vilenkin vil81 (1981), Gott got85 (1985), de Laix et al. lai96 (1996), Bernardeau et al. ber01 (2001). Vilenkin vil81 (1981) also suggested that they could be revealed by means of gravitational lensing phenomena.

From a physical point of view, a cosmic string is characterized by a mass per unit length $`\mu `$ and by a tension $`T=\mu `$ along the string. Therefore, a string has only one parameter defining both its microscopic physical properties and the macroscopic properties of the surrounding space-time. The microscopic characteristic of the string is the diameter, which is of the order of the square root of $`\mu ^1`$. Below we shall use Planck units, so that $`\mu =1`$ corresponds in usual units to $`1.410^{28}`$ g/cm and the diameter of a cosmic string would be of the order of $`10^{33}`$ cm. All modern theories, however, predict $`\mu 1`$ thus implying a larger but still microscopic value for the expected diameter of a string. We can therefore safely assume that, on a cosmic scale, the diameter of the string can be neglected with respect to all the other linear quantities involved.

From the lensing point of view, a cosmic string produces a conical space time where the cusp of the cone coincides with the position of the string. The complete turn in a plan perpendicular to the string gives the total angle $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ (smaller than $`2\pi `$). The difference $`2\pi \mathrm{\Phi }`$ is called “angle deficit” and it is defined by the string density:

$$D=8\pi \mu $$
(1)
in the case of $`\mu 1`$. In order to understand the lensing properties of a cosmic string let us assume the following geometry: a distant point-like source (for instance a QSO) and a cosmic string interposed along the line of sight and at rest with respect to the observer. Let the angular cosmological distance from the observer to the string be $`R_s`$ and that between the QSO and the observer $`R_q`$. If the angular distance between the QSO and the string (as seen from the observer) is less than $`D`$, then the observer sees two images of the QSO separated by the angle (Gott, 1985):

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\theta =D\mathrm{sin}\alpha \frac{R_qR_s}{R_q},$$
(2)
where $`\alpha `$ is the angle between the string and the vector coinciding with the observer and the point source.

In what follows we shall assume for simplicity that $`R_sR_q`$ and $`\alpha =\pi /2`$ that is $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta =D`$. The proper distances depend on the cosmological model (we shall assume a standard cosmological model: FRW metric with flat space $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{tot}=1`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}=0.3`$ according to modern measurements de Bernardis et al., dber01 (2002)). When the source is still far away from the string, no lensing is induced and the image is unperturbed, while when the angular separation reaches $`D`$, the lensing phenomenology sets in and a second image of the source begins to form on the opposite side of the string, at an angular distance $`D`$ from the source position. We wish to stress that, on the contrary of what happens in other lensing models, the lensing by a cosmic string does not introduce any amplification of the signal from the background source.

In Figure 7 we show (as 3-D light distribution and as isocontours) the results of our simulation of the observed photometric properties of CSL-1 in the band $`\lambda =914\AA `$. As before, the background source was modelled using de Vaucouleurs law. The figure gives the outcome of the simulation for two different seeing: the observed one and a 40 milliarcsec seeing assumed to be representative of the HST average operating conditions. Finally, in Figure 8 we plot the isocontours for the residuals (observed - modelled) of our best fitting model. No systematic trend can be observed. As it can be seen, lensing by a cosmic string should produce a characteristic signature consisting in isophotes with very sharp edges. This signature, however cannot be observed under average seeing conditions. In fact, if the seeing FWHM is comparable with the size of the secondary image (as it is the case for our data), the observer sees smooth and nearly circular images with the secondary one slightly fainter.

## 4 Discussion and conclusions

As discussed above, the optical morphology of the candidate lens CSL-1 can be explained in terms of lensing by a cosmic string. Even though this may seem unlikely due to the expected rarity of such strings and to the fact that on the basis of present observational evidence we cannot yet rule out the only other (also unlikely) possible explanation in terms of projection effects, we want to stress that, if confirmed, this would be the first clear cut evidence ever for a cosmic string, and would therefore have a far reaching impact in both cosmology and particle physics. There is, however, an easy way to disentangle between the two possible explanations. As shown above, a cosmic string would introduce a clear cut signature in the shape of the lensed object which can be detected in high angular resolution optical data. In the case of positive detection, the parameters derived for the cosmic string will allow us to determine its linear density and thus measure the energy scale of simmetry breaking and of the energy scale of Grand Unification Theory (GUT).

Observation in radiofrequency bands would also be needed. A straight long string induces temperature fluctuation on the cosmic microwave background radiation, and is therefore expected to produce a linelike discontinuity at the place of the string. The amplitude of fluctuation is given by Kaiser and Stebbins kai84 (1984):

$$\frac{\delta T}{T}8\pi \mu v$$

here $`v`$ is the velocity of string perpendicular to the line of sight in the units of light velocity. Usually the velocity of cosmic string is expected to be close to unity due to stresses which are inside the string. If the velocity is close to unity, one can expect significant anisotropy which will form a strip of $`\delta T/T`$ along the position of the string with angular width of the order of 2” and amplitude $``$ 30 $`\mu `$K. This strip would cross the optical images of CSL-1 perpendicularly to the line connecting the two components. Although the expected angular scale is very small, the amplitude is easily detectable with modern radiometers (see, for instance, de Bernardis et al. dber01 (2002)).

If we accept the interpretation of CSL-1 as a gravitational lens produced by a cosmic string, it is possible to derive the scale of energy at which the symmetry breaking occurred. The physical mechanism which produces cosmic strings is related to the phase transition in the early Universe: cf. Gott, got85 (1985) and Dolgov Sazhin and Zeldovich, dol90 (1990). This phase transition took place when the temperature of the Universe felt below a critical temperature defined by some energy scale which, on the other end, defines the unification of physical interactions, and, probably, also the main parameters of the inflation. The distance between the peaks of the two images $``$ 2” of CSL-1 roughly corresponds to the ”deficit angle” $`D`$. One can therefore estimate the density of the string as $`410^9`$ $`m_{pl}^2`$, or in CGS physical units $`5.410^{21}`$ g/cm. This value, if our interpretation of CSL-1 is correct, may be used to estimate many physical parameters.

For grand unified strings one can expect

$$\mu \frac{m^2}{\alpha }$$
(3)
where $`\alpha `$ is a running coupling constant and $`m`$ is the typical mass scale of the symmetry breaking. Particle physicists believe that symmetry breaking took place at an energy scale of the order of $`E10^{16\pm 0.3}`$ GeV. This value is derived from the extrapolation of accelerators data Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, and Staud, kla91 (1995). Near this scale, all running coupling constants of physical interactions merge, and the value of united coupling constant is:

$$\alpha ^1=25.7\pm 1.7$$
(4)
Taking into account (3) and (4) and the value of the deficit angle derived from our data, one can estimate the mass scale of symmetry breaking as $`210^{15}`$ GeV, which is in reasonable agreement with extrapolated accelerators data.

## Acknowledgements

M.V. Sazhin acknowledges the Capodimonte Astronomical Observatory for hospitality and financial support, also acknowledges the financial support of RFFI grant 00-02-16350. This research was partly funded by the Italian Ministry for Public Instruction, University and Research through a COFIN grant. Authors are also indebted to G. Busarello for fruitful discussions and to the ESO and TNG staff for support during the observations.


text:
# Acknowledgement

## Acknowledgement

This work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research Nos. 12640270 and 02041.


text:
# On the Stability of the Einstein Static Universe

## I Introduction

The possibility that the universe might have started out in an asymptotically Einstein static state has recently been considered in , thus reviving the Eddington-Lemaître cosmology, but this time within the inflationary universe context. It is therefore useful to investigate stability of the family of Einstein static universes. In 1930, Eddington  showed instability against spatially homogeneous and isotropic perturbations, and since then the Einstein static model has been widely considered to be unstable to gravitational collapse or expansion. Nevertheless, the later work of Harrison and Gibbons on the entropy and the stability of this universe reveals that the issue is not as clear-cut as Newtonian intuition suggests.

In 1967, Harrison  showed that all physical inhomogeneous modes are oscillatory in a radiation-filled Einstein static model. Later, Gibbons  showed stability of a fluid-filled Einstein static model against conformal metric perturbations, provided that the sound speed satisfies $`c_\mathrm{s}^2dp/d\rho >\frac{1}{5}`$.

The compactness of the Einstein static universe, with an associated maximum wavelength, is at the root of this “non-Newtonian” stability: the Jean’s length is a significant fraction of the maximum scale, and the maximum scale itself is greater than the largest physical wavelength. Here we generalize Gibbons’ results to include general scalar, vector, and tensor perturbations and a self-interacting scalar field. We also show that the Einstein static model is unstable to spatially homogeneous gravitational wave perturbations within the Bianchi type IX class of spatially homogeneous universes.

Consider a Friedmann universe containing a scalar field $`\varphi `$ with energy density and pressure given by

$`\rho _\varphi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\varphi }^2+V(\varphi ),p_\varphi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\varphi }^2V(\varphi ),`$

and a perfect fluid with energy density $`\rho `$ and pressure $`p=w\rho `$, where $`\frac{1}{3}<w1`$. The cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is absorbed into the potential $`V`$. The fluid has a barotropic equation of state $`p=p(\rho )`$, with sound speed given by $`c_\mathrm{s}^2=dp/d\rho `$. The total equation of state is $`w_\mathrm{t}=p_\mathrm{t}/\rho _\mathrm{t}=(p+p_\varphi )/(\rho +\rho _\varphi )`$.

Assuming no interactions between fluid and field, they separately obey the energy conservation and Klein-Gordon equations,

$`\dot{\rho }+3(1+w)H\rho `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (1)
$`\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+V^{}(\varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (2)
The Raychaudhuri field equation

$$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=\frac{8\pi G}{3}\left[\frac{1}{2}(1+3w)\rho +\dot{\varphi }^2V(\varphi )\right],$$
(3)
has the Friedmann equation as a first integral,

$$H^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3}\left[\rho +\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V(\varphi )\right]\frac{K}{a^2},$$
(4)
where $`K=0,\pm 1`$, and together they imply

$$\dot{H}=4\pi G\left[\dot{\varphi }^2+(1+w)\rho \right]+\frac{K}{a^2}.$$
(5)
## II The Einstein static universe

The Einstein static universe is characterized by $`K=1`$, $`\dot{a}=\ddot{a}=0`$ . It is usually viewed as a fluid model with a cosmological constant that is given a priori as a fixed universal constant, and this is the view taken in previous stability investigations . However, in the context of inflationary cosmology, where the Einstein static model may be seen as an initial state, we require a scalar field $`\varphi `$ as well as a fluid, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is not an a priori constant but determined by the vacuum energy of the scalar field. The vacuum energy is determined in turn by the potential $`V(\varphi )`$ of the scalar field, which is given by some physical model. An initial Einstein static state of the universe arises if the field starts out in an equilibrium position:

$$V^{}(\varphi _0)=0,\mathrm{\Lambda }=8\pi GV(\varphi _0).$$
(6)
We will first discuss the simple case where $`V`$ is trivial, i.e., a flat potential. A general Einstein static model has $`\dot{\rho }=0=V^{}=\ddot{\varphi }`$ by Eqs. (1)–(5), and satisfies

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1+3w)\rho _0+\dot{\varphi }_0^2`$ $`=`$ $`V_0,`$ (7)
$`(1+w)\rho _0+\dot{\varphi }_0^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi Ga_0^2}}.`$ (8)
If the field kinetic energy vanishes, that is if $`\dot{\varphi }_0=0`$, then by Eq. (8), $`(1+w)\rho _0>0`$, so that there must be fluid in order to keep the universe static; but if the static universe has only a scalar field, that is if $`\rho _0=0`$, then the field must have nonzero (but constant) kinetic energy . Qualitatively, this means that there must be effective total kinetic energy, i.e. $`\rho _\mathrm{t}+p_\mathrm{t}>0`$, in order to balance the curvature energy $`a^2`$ in the absence of expansion or contraction, as shown by Eq. (5).

Equations (7) and (8) imply

$`w_\mathrm{t}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}},`$ (9)
$`w_\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{V_0+(1+3w)\rho _0/2}{V_0(1+3w)\rho _0/6}}\right].`$ (10)
It follows that $`w_\varphi \frac{1}{3}`$ since $`w>\frac{1}{3}`$ and $`\rho _00`$. In other words, the presence of matter with (non-inflationary) pressure drives the equation of state of the scalar field below $`\frac{1}{3}`$. If the field has no kinetic energy, then by Eqs. (7) and (8), its equation of state is that of a cosmological constant,

$$\dot{\varphi }_0=0w_\varphi =1.$$
(11)
If there is no fluid ($`\rho _0=0`$), then the field has maximal kinetic energy,

$$\rho _0=0w_\varphi =\frac{1}{3}=w_\mathrm{t}.$$
(12)
In this case, the field rolls at constant speed along a flat potential, $`V(\varphi )=V_0`$. Dynamically, this pure scalar field case is equivalent to the case of $`w=1`$ pure fluid with cosmological constant. This can be seen as follows: equating the radii $`a_0`$ of the pure-field and fluid-plus-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ cases, using Eq. (8), implies $`V_0=(1+w)\rho _0`$, by Eq. (7). This then leads to $`w_\varphi =(3+5w)/(5+3w)`$, by Eq. (10). However, we know that $`w_\varphi =1`$ for the fluid-plus-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ case, and equating the two forms of $`w_\varphi `$ leads to $`w=1`$.

Thus there is a simple one-component type of Einstein static model, which may be realised by perfect fluid universes with cosmological constant (the pure scalar field case is equivalent to the $`w=1`$ fluid model). This is the case considered by Eddington, Harrison and Gibbons. The general case, of most relevance to cosmology, involves a scalar field with nontrivial potential $`V(\varphi )`$, so that the Einstein static model is an initial state, corresponding to an equilibrium position ($`V_0^{}=0`$). This general case is a two-component model, since in addition to the scalar field, a fluid is necessary to provide kinetic energy and keep the initial model static.

## III Inhomogeneous perturbations of the fluid model

We consider first the effect of inhomogeneous density perturbations on the simple one-component fluid models. Density perturbations of a general Friedmann universe are described in the 1+3-covariant gauge-invariant approach by $`\mathrm{\Delta }=a^2\mathrm{D}^2\rho /\rho `$, where $`\mathrm{D}^2`$ is the covariant spatial Laplacian. The evolution of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is given by

$`\ddot{\mathrm{\Delta }}+(26w+3c_\mathrm{s}^2)H\dot{\mathrm{\Delta }}+[12(wc_\mathrm{s}^2){\displaystyle \frac{K}{a^2}}`$ (13)
$`+4\pi G(3w^2+6c_\mathrm{s}^28w1)\rho +(3c_\mathrm{s}^25w)\mathrm{\Lambda }]\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (14)
$`c_\mathrm{s}^2\mathrm{D}^2\mathrm{\Delta }w\left(\mathrm{D}^2+3{\displaystyle \frac{K}{a^2}}\right)=0,`$ (15)
where $``$ is the entropy perturbation, defined for a one-component source by

$$p=a^2\mathrm{D}^2p\rho c_\mathrm{s}^2\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
(16)
For a simple (one-component perfect-fluid) Einstein static background model, $`=0`$ and Eq. (15) reduces to

$$\ddot{\mathrm{\Delta }}_k=4\pi G(1+w)\left[1+(3k^2)c_\mathrm{s}^2\right]\rho _0\mathrm{\Delta }_k,$$
(17)
where we have decomposed into Fourier modes with comoving index $`k`$ (so that $`\mathrm{D}^2k^2/a_0^2`$). It follows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k`$ is oscillating and non-growing, i.e. the Einstein static universe is stable against gravitational collapse, if and only if

$$(k^23)c_\mathrm{s}^2>1.$$
(18)
In spatially closed universes the spectrum of modes is discrete, $`k^2=n(n+2)`$, where the comoving wavenumber $`n`$ takes the values $`n=1,2,3\mathrm{}`$ in order that the harmonics be single-valued on the sphere . Formally, $`n=0`$ gives a spatially homogeneous mode ($`k=0`$), corresponding to a change in the background, and the violation of the stability condition in Eq. (18) is consistent with the known result  that the Einstein static models collapse or expand under such perturbations. This follows from the Raychaudhuri equation (3).

For the first inhomogeneous mode ($`n=1`$), the stability condition is also violated, so that the universe is unstable on the corresponding scale if there is initial data satisfying the constraint equations. However this is a gauge mode which is ruled out by the constraint equations ($`G_{0i}=8\pi GT_{0i}`$). This mode reflects a freedom to change the 4-velocity of fundamental observers. (For multiple fluids with different velocities, one can in principle have isocurvature modes with $`n=1`$ that are not forced to zero by the Einstein constraint equations.) The physical modes thus have $`n2`$. Stability of all these modes is guaranteed if

$$c_s^2>\frac{1}{5}.$$
(19)
This condition was also found by Gibbons  in the restricted case of conformal metric perturbations; we have generalized the result to arbitrary adiabatic density perturbations. Harrison  demonstrated stability for a radiation-filled model and instability of the dust-filled model, which are included in the above result.

Thus an Einstein static universe with a fluid that satisfies Eq. (19) (and with no scalar field), is neutrally stable against adiabatic density perturbations of the fluid for all allowed inhomogeneous modes. The case $`w=1`$ covers the pure scalar field (no accompanying fluid) models. When $`c_\mathrm{s}^2>0`$ the stability of the model is guaranteed by Eq. (18) for all but a finite number of modes. The universe becomes increasingly unstable as the fluid pressure drops. Clearly, a dust Einstein static universe ($`c_\mathrm{s}^2=0`$) is always unstable. In that case, Eq. (17) reads $`\ddot{\mathrm{\Delta }}_k=4\pi G\rho _0\mathrm{\Delta }_k`$, implying exponential growth of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k`$ (the Jeans instability; see ).

The physical explanation of this rather unexpected stability lies in the Jeans length associated with the model . Although there are always unstable modes (i.e., with wavelength above the Jeans scale) in a flat space, in a closed universe there is an upper limit on wavelength. It turns out that, for sufficiently large speed of sound, all physical wavelengths fall below the Jeans length. By Eq. (8), the maximum wavelength $`2\pi a_0`$ depends on the equation of state and is given by

$$\lambda _{\mathrm{max}}=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{G\rho _0(1+w)}}.$$
(20)
The Jeans length is $`2\pi a_0/n_\mathrm{j}`$, where $`\ddot{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{k_\mathrm{j}}=0`$ and $`k_\mathrm{j}^2=n_\mathrm{j}(n_\mathrm{j}+2)`$. Hence, by Eq. (17), we have

$$\lambda _\mathrm{j}=\left(\frac{c_\mathrm{s}}{\sqrt{4c_\mathrm{s}^2+1}c_\mathrm{s}}\right)\lambda _{\mathrm{max}}.$$
(21)
Stability means $`\lambda <\lambda _\mathrm{j}`$, which leads to Eq. (19). For dust, $`\lambda _\mathrm{j}=0`$ and all the modes are clearly unstable. For radiation, $`\lambda _\mathrm{j}=0.61\lambda _{\mathrm{max}}`$, and for a stiff fluid $`\lambda _\mathrm{j}=0.81\lambda _{\mathrm{max}}`$. In both of these cases the Jeans length comprises a considerable portion of the size of the universe, and is greater than all allowed wavelengths. This would also place important restrictions on the evolution of non-linear density inhomogeneities by shock damping or black hole formation.

We also note that the stability condition entails neutral stability; the oscillations in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are not damped by expansion, since the background is static. In the cosmological context, where an initial Einstein static state begins to expand under a homogeneous perturbation, the expansion will damp the inhomogeneous perturbations. However, the Einstein static will not be an attractor; instead, the attractor will be de Sitter spacetime.

Vector perturbations of a fluid are governed by the comoving dimensionless vorticity $`\varpi _a=a\omega _a`$, whose modes satisfy the propagation equation

$$\dot{\varpi }_k=\left(13c_\mathrm{s}^2\right)H\varpi _k.$$
(22)
For a fluid Einstein static background, this reduces to

$$\dot{\varpi }_k=0,$$
(23)
so that any initial vector perturbations remain frozen. Thus there is neutral stability against vector perturbations for all equations of state on all scales.

Gravitational-wave perturbations of a perfect fluid may be described in the covariant approach  by the comoving dimensionless transverse-traceless shear $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ab}=a\sigma _{ab}`$, whose modes satisfy

$`\ddot{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_k+3H\dot{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_k+[{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{a^2}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{K}{a^2}}`$ (24)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi G}{3}}(1+3w)\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\mathrm{\Lambda }]\mathrm{\Sigma }_k=0.`$ (25)
For the Einstein static background, this becomes

$$\ddot{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_k+4\pi G\rho _0(k^2+2)(1+w)\mathrm{\Sigma }_k=0,$$
(26)
so that there is neutral stability against tensor perturbations for all equations of state on all scales. However this analysis does not cover spatially homogeneous modes. It turns out that there are various unstable spatially homogeneous anisotropic modes, for example a Bianchi type IX mode which we discuss below. The associated anisotropies can die away in the case where the instability results in expansion. If this is the case, despite the extra spatially homogeneous unstable modes, the expanding inflationary universe will be an attractor.

In summary, for the simplest models (one-component perturbations), we find neutral stability on all physical inhomogeneous scales against adiabatic density perturbations if $`c_\mathrm{s}^2>\frac{1}{5}`$, and against vector and tensor perturbations for any $`c_\mathrm{s}^2`$ and $`w`$, thus generalizing previous results.

## IV Scalar-field perturbations

We turn now to the case of a self-interacting scalar field, i.e., where the scalar field is governed by a non-flat potential $`V(\varphi )`$, with initial Einstein static state at $`\varphi =\varphi _0`$, i.e., $`V_0^{}=0=\dot{\varphi }_0`$. This is the general dynamical problem: the stability analysis of the Einstein static universe as an initial equilibrium position within a physically motivated (non-flat) potential. (Some realizations of this scenario are discussed in .) Since we are interested only in the behaviour close to the Einstein static solution, we can treat $`H`$ and $`V^{}`$ as small in the perturbation equations. The lowest-order solution for density perturbations, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(0)}`$, thus corresponds to $`H=0=V^{}`$, and is given by the fluid perturbation solution, Eq. (17),

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(0)}(t)=A_k\mathrm{cos}\omega _0t+B_k\mathrm{sin}\omega _0t,`$ (27)
$`\omega _0^2=4\pi G(1+w)\rho _0\left[(k^23)c_\mathrm{s}^21\right],`$ (28)
with $`A_k`$ and $`B_k`$ constants for each mode. The next order contains contributions from the scalar field perturbations,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_k=\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(0)}+\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(1)}+\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(1)}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{\varphi k},$$
(29)
during the time when the background is close to the Einstein static equilibrium position.

The entropy term in Eq. (15) has no intrinsic fluid contribution since we assume the fluid is adiabatic. A scalar field generically has intrinsic entropy perturbations, which follow from Eq. (16) as

$$_\varphi =\frac{1c_\varphi ^2}{w_\varphi }\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi .$$
(30)
(See  for the corresponding expression in the metric-based perturbation formalism.) These entropy perturbations have a stabilizing effect on density perturbations of the scalar field: the entropy term in Eq. (15) cancels the preceding Laplacian term $`c_\varphi ^2\mathrm{D}^2\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$, which would produce instability when $`c_\varphi ^2<0`$; what remains is the term $`\mathrm{D}^2\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$, which contributes to stability.

For an initial Einstein static state, the entropy contribution from the scalar field to lowest order is,

$$\left[w_\varphi _\varphi \right]_k^{(1)}=2\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(1)},$$
(31)
where we used $`[c_\varphi ^2]^{(0)}=1`$. There is also a relative entropy contribution, arising from the relative velocity between the field and the fluid. We expect this contribution to be negligible.

We now expand all the dynamical quantities in Eq. (15) to incorporate the lowest order effect of the self-interacting scalar field. In particular, $`a=a_0+a_{(1)}`$ and $`\rho =\rho _0+\rho _{(1)}`$, where $`\rho _{(1)}=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }_{(1)}^2+V_{(1)}`$, and similarly for the pressure. Then $`ww+w_{(1)}`$, where

$`w_{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p_{(1)}w\rho _{(1)}}{\rho }},`$ (32)
and $`c_\mathrm{s}^2c_\mathrm{s}^2+c_{(1)}^2`$, where $`c_{(1)}^2`$ is determined by the form of the potential $`V(\varphi )`$ near $`\varphi _0`$. It also follows from the background equations that

$`H_{(1)}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi G}{3}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\varphi }_{(1)}^2+V_{(1)}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{a_0^3}}a_{(1)},`$ (33)
$`\ddot{\varphi }_{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`V_{(1)}^{}.`$ (34)
Using these results, Eq. (15) gives the evolution equation for the contribution from scalar field perturbations:

$$\ddot{\mathrm{\Delta }}_k^{(1)}+\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0^2\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(1)}=F\dot{\mathrm{\Delta }}_k^{(0)}+G\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(0)},$$
(35)
where

$`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0^2`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi G(1+w)\rho _0\left[(k^23)(c_\mathrm{s}^2+2)1\right]`$ (36)
$`F(t)`$ $`=`$ $`(26w+3c_\mathrm{s}^2)H_{(1)},`$ (37)
$`G(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a_0^2}}\{12[c_{(1)}^2w_{(1)}]+24[wc_\mathrm{s}^2]{\displaystyle \frac{a_{(1)}}{a_0}}`$ (41)
$`+6ww_{(1)}+6c_{(1)}^28w_{(1)}`$
$`+[3w^28w+6c_\mathrm{s}^21]{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{(1)}}{\rho _0}}`$
$`+k^2[c_{(1)}^22c_\mathrm{s}^2{\displaystyle \frac{a_{(1)}}{a_0}}]\}.`$
The change in the frequency, $`\omega _0\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0`$, shows the stabilizing effect of scalar-field entropy perturbations, which effectively increase the adiabatic sound speed term in $`\omega _0`$: $`c_\mathrm{s}^2c_\mathrm{s}^2+2`$. The solution of Eq. (35) is given by Green’s method in the form

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(1)}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0t}{\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(0)}\left[(F\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0t)^{}G\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0t\right]𝑑t}`$ (42)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0t}{\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Delta }_k^{(0)}\left[(F\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0t)^{}G\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0t\right]𝑑t}.`$ (43)
Since $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0^2>0,`$ for $`k^23`$, we see that stability is not changed by the introduction of scalar-field perturbations. We note that if general relativity is extended to include higher-order curvature corrections to the gravitational Lagrangian, then the existence and stability conditions for the Einstein static universe are changed in interesting ways  which are linked to the situation of general relativity plus a pure scalar field through the conformal equivalence of the two problems .

## V Spatially homogeneous tensor perturbations

We now investigate the stability of the Einstein static universe to spatially homogeneous gravitational-wave perturbations of the Bianchi type IX kind. The anisotropy in these spatially homogeneous perturbations, which is absent within the Friedmann family, is what allows for tensor modes.

The Einstein static universe is a particular exact solution of the Bianchi type IX, or Mixmaster, universe containing a perfect fluid and a cosmological constant. The Mixmaster is a spatially homogeneous closed (compact space sections) universe of the most general type. It contains the closed isotropic Friedmann universes as particular subcases when a fluid is present. Physically, the Mixmaster universe arises from the addition of expansion anisotropy and 3-curvature anisotropy to the Friedmann universe. It displays chaotic behaviour on approach to the initial and final singularities if $`w<1`$. This is closely linked to the fact that, despite being a closed universe, its spatial 3-curvature is negative except when it is close to isotropy.

The diagonal type IX universe has three expansion scale factors $`a_i(t)`$, determined by the Einstein equations, which are :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{(\dot{a}_1a_2a_3)^{}}{a_1a_2a_3}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4[(a_2^2a_3^2)^2a_1^4]}{(a_1a_2a_3)^2}}`$ (45)
$`+\mathrm{\Lambda }+4\pi G(1w)\rho ,`$
and the two equations obtained by the cyclic interchanges $`a_1a_2a_3a_1,`$ together with the constraint

$$\frac{\ddot{a}_1}{a_1}+\frac{\ddot{a}_2}{a_2}+\frac{\ddot{a}_3}{a_3}=\mathrm{\Lambda }4\pi G(1+3w)\rho ,$$
(46)
and the perfect fluid conservation equation (with $`w`$ constant)

$$\rho (a_1a_2a_3)^{w+1}=\text{ const}.$$
(47)
The Einstein static model is the particular solution with all $`a_i=a_0=`$ const. We consider the stability of this static isotropic solution by linearizing the type IX equations about it: $`a_i(t)=a_0+\delta a_i(t)`$ , $`\rho (t)=\rho _0+\delta \rho (t)`$, and $`\delta p=w\delta \rho `$.

The linearized field equations lead to

$`\ddot{\delta a}_i+{\displaystyle \frac{12}{a_0^2}}\delta a_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8}{a_0^2}}\left(\delta a_1+\delta a_2+\delta a_3\right)`$ (49)
$`+4\pi G(1w)\delta \rho .`$
The conservation equation to linear order gives

$$\delta \rho =4\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{8\pi G}+\rho _0\right)\left(\frac{\delta a_1+\delta a_2+\delta a_3}{a_0}\right).$$
(50)
If we define an arithmetic-mean perturbed scale factor by

$$\delta A(t)\frac{\delta a_1+\delta a_2+\delta a_3}{a_0},$$
(51)
then it obeys

$`\ddot{\delta A}`$ $`=`$ $`3\delta A\left[{\displaystyle \frac{4}{a_0^2}}(1w)(\mathrm{\Lambda }+8\pi G\rho _0)\right]`$ (52)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\delta A}{a_0^2}}(1+3w).`$ (53)
The first term on the right-hand side arises from the pure spatially homogeneous gravitational wave modes of Bianchi type IX (i.e., with $`\delta \rho =0=\delta p`$). The second term on the right-hand side arises from the matter perturbations. Thus we see that the perturbation grows and the Einstein static solution is unstable to spatially homogeneous pure gravitational-wave perturbations of Bianchi type IX,

$$\delta A\mathrm{exp}\left(2t\sqrt{\frac{3}{a_0}}\right).$$
(54)
When the matter perturbations are included the instability remains unless $`1+3w<0`$, which we have ruled out for a fluid. In this case, the perturbations oscillate. This condition corresponds to a violation of the strong energy condition and this ensures that a Mixmaster universe containing perfect fluid matter will expand forever and approach isotropy. Notice that the matter effects disappear at this order when $`w=1`$. This is a familiar situation in anisotropic cosmologies where a $`w=1`$ fluid behaves on average like a simple form of anisotropy “energy”.

The instability to spatially homogeneous gravitational wave modes is not surprising. Mixmaster perturbations allow small distortions of the Einstein static solution to occur which conserve the volume but distort the shape. Some directions expand whilst others contract. Note that these $`SO(3)`$-invariant homogeneous anisotropy modes are different to the inhomogeneous modes considered in the perturbation analysis. Mixmaster oscillatory behaviour is not picked out by the eigenfunction expansions of perturbations of Friedmann models.

The relationship between the stability of the Einstein static to inhomogeneous and spatially homogeneous gravitational-wave perturbations can be considered in the light of the relationships between the Bianchi type modes and inhomogeneous modes. In open universes, Lukash  has pointed out the correspondence between Bianchi type VII anisotropy modes and the inhomogeneous gravitational wave perturbation spectrum that emerges when appropriate eignfunctions are chosen for solutions of the Helmholz equation on negatively curved spaces. These Bianchi type modes correspond to choosing complex wavenumbers . In the case of a closed universe of Bianchi type IX a similar characterisation of the homogeneous tensor mode as arising by choice of an imaginary wave number would lead to the Mixmaster instability found above in the case of $`k^2<2`$. If such modes are admitted in the spectrum of perturbation modes for the closed geometry, then they will lead to instability. However, since superpositions of them lead to non self-adjointness of the Laplacian , there will be problems with quantum analogues of these modes and it is not clear that they are physically admissible in the real universe.

## VI Conclusions

There is considerable interest in the existence of preferred initial states for the universe and in the existence of stationary cosmological models. So far this interest has focussed almost entirely upon the de Sitter universe as a possible initial state, future attractor, or global stationary state for an eternal inflationary universe. Of the other two homogeneous spacetimes, the Einstein static provides an interesting candidate to explore whether it could play any role in the past evolution of our Universe. It is important to know whether it can provide a natural initial state for a past eternal universe, whether it allows the universe to evolve away from this state, and whether under any circumstances it can act as an attractor for the very early evolution of the universe. We might also ask whether it is not possible for it to provide the globally static background state for an inhomogeneous eternal universe in which local regions undergo expansion or contraction, manifesting an instability of the Einstein static universe. With these questions in mind we have investigated in detail the situations under which Einstein static universe is stable and unstable.

We have shown that the Einstein static universe is neutrally stable against inhomogeneous vector and tensor linear perturbations, and against scalar density perturbations if $`c_\mathrm{s}^2>\frac{1}{5}`$, extending earlier results of Gibbons for purely conformal density perturbations. However, we find that spatially homogeneous gravitational-wave perturbations of the most general type destabilise a static universe. We pointed out the link that can be forged between this homogeneous instability and the behaviour of the inhomogeneous gravitational wave spectrum by choosing modes with imaginary wave number. Our results show that if the universe is in a neighbourhood of the Einstein static solution, it stays in that neighbourhood, but the Einstein static is not an attractor (because the stability is neutral, with non-damped oscillations). Expansion away from the static state can be triggered by a fall in the pressure of the matter. Typically, expansion away from the static solution will lead to inflation. If inflation occurs, then perturbations about a Friedmann geometry will rapidly be driven to zero. The nonlinear effects (which will certainly be important in these models because of the initial infinite time scale envisaged) will be discussed in a further paper, as will other aspects of the spatially homogeneous anisotropic modes.

Acknowledgements

We thank Marco Bruni, Anthony Challinor and Peter Dunsby for useful discussions. GE and CT are supported by the NRF. RM is supported by PPARC, and thanks the Cosmology Group at Cape Town for hospitality while part of this work was done.


text:
# Bouncing Neutrons and the Neutron Centrifuge

## I Introduction:

In an elegant experiment, Nesvizhevsky et al Nesvizhevsky (2002) et al (2000) have observed the quantum states of a neutron bouncing freely under gravity. Their experiment shows that the state exists with approximately the predicted properties by observing its extinction by lowering a neutron absorber. In this paper, we discuss a method for purifying the ground state and then discuss experiments to exploit it.

Ultracold neutron (UCN) technology Golub et al. (1991) has been around for many years, and it is exploited in the latest EDM experiments Ramsey (1996). This relies on the observation that (for example) beryllium metal totally reflects neutrons at a temperature of below 100 K. This implies the existence of the quantum state; that of a neutron bouncing freely under gravity. Although the idea is a fairly obvious one, and the theory is very old Flugge (2002), Romo and Watson (1983), it appears that no attempts were made to observe it until recently. It seems possible that if the ground state of the system could be isolated, there are several experiments which could be performed

In the next section we show that a simple device based on a classical centrifuge could be used to purify the ground state. We then show that the lifetime of the state is expected to be long. We then consider two possible applications to fundamental physics. Firstly, it is well-known that the breakdown of CP invariance and hence T invariance in fundamental interactions implies the existence of an electric dipole moment (EDM) for the neutron. Predictions of the magnitude vary from $`10^{25}`$ e-cm down to $`10^{35}`$ e-cm, while the current limit is $`0.5\times 10^{25}`$ e cm. Obviously it is of considerable interest to lower this, since it restricts possible extensions of the standard model considerably. Finally we investigate the possibility of using the system to test for extra gravitational interactions at very short range.

## II The bouncing neutron

In this section we review the theory for the one-dimensional case. The bounce eigenfunctions $`Z_n(z)`$ are defined by the Schrodinger equation which describes the neutron under gravity is

$$\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\frac{d^2}{dz^2}Z\left(z\right)+\left(\sigma zE\right)Z\left(z\right)=0,\sigma =mg$$
(1)
This can be converted to a dimensionless form via the substitution

$$y=\beta zy_n,\beta =\left(\frac{2m\sigma }{\mathrm{}^2}\right)^{1/3}$$
(2)
The boundary condition for a totally reflecting ”ground” is that the wave-function vanishes at z = 0. This gives

$$\frac{d^2}{dy^2}Z_n\left(y\right)+(yy_n)Z_n\left(y\right)=0$$
(3)
with

$$Z_n\left(y_n\right)=0$$
(4)
As is well known, this is the equation for the Airy function, and hence $`y_n`$ is the n-th zero of the function. This gives rise to an energy $`E_n`$ and a ”bounce height” $`z_n`$

$$E_n=\frac{\mathrm{}^2\beta ^2}{2m}y_n,z_n=\frac{y_n}{\beta }$$
(5)
For the neutron, the ground state parameters are $`E_0=1.407peV`$ and $`z_0=13.7\mu `$ (these results differ slightly from those quoted in et al (2000). The latter number implies that one could build a macroscopic apparatus sensitive to the parameters of a quantum state. The usual method of looking for bound states, by measuring the spectrum of emitted photons, is not available. The frequency for the 1-photon transition between the first excited and the ground state is 254 Hz 111It might be noted that this is almost exactly middle C. There is unlikely to be any significance in this observation and one can estimate the radiative lifetime of the first excited state to be much larger than the Hubble time!

## III The Neutron Centrifuge

The basic concept is shown in Fig 1

UCN’s are injected into the centre of the apparatus. The height of the step h is adjusted so that the lowest energy bounce states will be trapped in the middle of the apparatus while the higher energy ones will bounce over the step and will be centrifuged out. It is obvious that this will work classically: it is less obvious that it will work quantum-mechanically. In order to investigate this, we need to solve the 3-D Schrodinger equation which describes the neutron:

$$\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}^2\mathrm{\Psi }\left(\stackrel{}{r}\right)+\left(\sigma zE\right)\mathrm{\Psi }\left(\stackrel{}{r}\right)=0,\sigma =mg$$
(6)
In the case where the step-height h = 0, the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_m(r,z,\varphi )`$ can be separated to give

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{k\mathrm{ln}}(r,z,\varphi )=f_{lk}\left(r\right)Z_n\left(z\right)e^{il\phi }$$
(7)
We now want to use these as the basis functions for the problem with a step. The step is defined in general via a function $`H(r)`$: in this case

$`H\left(r\right)=0r<R_1`$ $`H\left(r\right)=hrR_1`$ (8)
We can then define the new wave function as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_m(r,z,\varphi )=a_{k\mathrm{ln}}^m(r,z)\mathrm{\Psi }_{k\mathrm{ln}}(r,z,\varphi )$$
(9)
The solution of this problem is shown in the appendix.

To simulate the passage of a large number of neutrons through the centrifuge, we first choose a random superposition of the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m(r,z)`$.

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_0(r,z)=b_m^0\mathrm{\Phi }_m(r,z)$$
(10)
After passing once through the centrifuge, all components of the wave function lying beyond $`r=R_s`$ are eliminated, so we find a new wave function

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_i(r,z)=b_m^i\mathrm{\Phi }_m(r,z)$$
(11)
where

$$b_m^i=d_{mm^{}}b_m^{}^{i1}$$
(12)
and

$$d_{mm^{}}=\mathrm{\Phi }_m(r,z)\mathrm{\Phi }_m^{}(r,z)\theta \left(R_sr\right)r𝑑r𝑑z$$
(13)
Note that the $`d_{mm^{}}`$ only depend on the eigenfunctions, so it acts as a transfer matrix. The phases of the $`b_m^i`$ are randomized for each pass round the centrifuge. Strictly speaking, this is not adequate: instead we should form wave-packets and project out a superposition of the radial and bounce states. However, the process we have defined here is essentially equivalent.

To obtain actual results, we must choose a set of parameters. We use $`R_1=10\mu ,R_2=20\mu ,R_3=35\mu ,R_{slit}=30\mu `$ and $`h=17\mu `$: these are fairly arbitrary, with the exception of h which must lie between the bounce heights for the ground and first excited states. The set of basis functions includes 12 bounce states and 6 radial states, for a total of 72: again this is not a critical parameter.

The process is very efficient: in fig 2

we show the initial probability $`P_0(r,z)=\left|\mathrm{\Theta }_0(r,z)\right|^2`$ In in fig 3 we show the corresponding probability $`P_{100}(r,z)`$ after 100 passes.

Obviously the wave function is very strongly concentrated in the central region, and corresponds on the lowest bounce states (n = 1). It is not straightforward to quantify this further, since our actual wavefunctions are a mixture of various bounce and radial states. However, it is possible to find the mean height after each passage through the apparatus, and compare this to the mean height of the lowest bounce state, which turns out to be 9.6 $`\mu `$. This is shown in fig 4 where we plot the mean height as a function of the number of passes.

These results are for l = 1: they are in fact more dramatic for larger l, as intuition would suggest.

We conclude that this entirely passive device will perform a very effective job of separating the lowest bounce state. Two points should be noted, however. In practice we will not know if there is a neutron in the device. Secondly the step effectively mixes bounce and radial states and their energies, so that (e.g) each bounce state would be spread over a number of radial states. Careful adjustment of the radial parameters can minimize this.

## IV Finite penetration effects

We have assumed above that the neutron is perfectly reflected. In fact this is not correct: the potential barrier at the metal has a finite height, given by the Fermi quasi-potential Golub et al. (1991)), which allows the wave-function to penetrate into the surface222 The importance of this consideration was pointed out to me by Mike Pendlebury.. This has two effects: firstly the calculated energies and bounce heights will not be correct. Secondly the penetration of the neutron allows it to be either absorbed or scattered inelastically by phonons: obviously either of these would destroy the state. Hence even the ground state would be expected to have a finite lifetime: if the lifetime is shorter than the neutron lifetime, it would seriously affect any potential experiments, so it is important to estimate it.

Provided that the penetration depth is small, we can estimate these effects by perturbation theory. The potential inside the metal is

$$\delta V=\delta V_R+i\delta V_i$$
(14)
where

$$\delta V_R=252neV,\delta V_i=1.26peV$$
(15)
are the values appropriate for Be Golub et al. (1991): other choices of material do not significantly affect the argument. The wave function for the n’th excited state inside the surface is given by

$$\widehat{Z}_n\left(z\right)=A_ne^{\kappa _nz}\left(z<0\right)$$
(16)
with

$$\kappa _n=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}\sqrt{2m\left(E_bE_n\right)}$$
(17)
where $`E_b`$ is the barrier height and $`E_n`$ is the energy of the n’th level. Above the surface the wave function is given by

$$\widehat{Z}_n\left(z\right)=Z_n\left(z+\delta z\right)\left(z>0\right)$$
(18)
so that effectively the wave function has been shifted downwards by a small penetration depth $`\delta z`$.

Obviously $`\widehat{Z}\left(z\right)`$ must be continuous and differentiable at $`z=0`$, giving

$`\delta z_n={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa _n}}`$ $`A_n=\delta z_nZ_n^{}\left(0\right)=\delta z_n\beta Ai^{}\left(y_n\right)`$ (19)
This gives the probability of the neutron being inside the metal

$$P_n=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{0}{}}\left|\widehat{Z}_n\left(z\right)\right|^2𝑑z=\frac{A_n^2}{2\kappa _n}$$
(20)
Provided $`P_n`$ is small, the calculation is self-consistent. We find the penetration depth and the probability

$$\delta z_n0.01\mu ,P_n2\times 10^9$$
(21)
Both increase very slowly with n, as classical intuition would suggest. This gives a correction to the real part of the energy

$$\delta E_n=P_nE_b0.01peV$$
(22)
which is less than a $`1\%`$ change. Potentially more important is the imaginary part of the potential, which gives rise to a lifetime

$$\tau _n=\frac{\mathrm{}}{2\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{0}{}}\left|\widehat{Z}_n\left(z\right)\right|^2\delta V_i𝑑z}1.4\times 10^5s$$
(23)
This is almost certainly over-optimistic, since the lifetime of higher energy UCN’s is rather less than would be predicted by this method Byrne (1995). However, it does suggest that the confinement time for these states is likely to be at least comparable to the neutron lifetime of 885 s.

## V Magnetic dipole interaction and the EDM measurement

To utilize this apparatus, we assume that neutrons are trapped in this lowest state with all the higher energy states centrifuged out. The first observation is that it would be very easy to produce polarized neutron states by applying a static magnetic field. The magnetic and gravitational forces on the neutron are equal for $`d_{mag}\frac{dB}{dz}=mg`$ or a modest $`\frac{dB}{dz}=1.7Tm^1`$. Hence by applying such a field, one spin state would have its binding energy reduced, its bounce height increased and hence would be centrifuged out , while the other spin state would be more strongly bound. Such a field could easily be achieved by a current loop surrounding the apparatus, although the spatial variation slightly complicates matters.

To study the state in more detail, we consider a technique of resonantly exciting a neutron in the n= 1 state to the n = 2 or higher. This could be done via a physical oscillation of the form discussed in Felber et al. (1996), or an oscillating magnetic field.

$$\stackrel{}{B}(z,r)=\stackrel{}{B}_0(z,r)\mathrm{cos}\left(\omega t\right)$$
(24)
If the field is spatially uniform, the excitation matrix elements will vanish identically. We therefore assume that the magnetic field is produced by a loop of wire as above. This gives rise to an interaction matrix element of the form

$$T_n=n\left|\stackrel{}{\mu }.\stackrel{}{B}\right|1$$
(25)
The probability for resonant transition to the first excited state (we follow Flugge (2002) is given by

$$P=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{\gamma ^2}\mathrm{sin}^2\left(\gamma t\right)$$
(26)
where

$$\gamma ^2=\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\delta \omega ^2,\mathrm{\Omega }^2=\frac{T_n^2}{\mathrm{}^2},\delta \omega ^2=\left(\omega _1\omega _2\right)^2\omega ^2$$
(27)
The frequency $`\gamma `$ must satisfy

$$\gamma <<\left|\omega _1\omega _2\right|=254Hz$$
(28)
which implies a maximum magnetic field of a few milligauss. Since the excited states will have an extremely small natural width, one could, in principle, measure the transition energy quite accurately.

To make an EDM measurement requires a field as large as possible, since the dipole moment is very small: we assume $`E_{\mathrm{max}}=10^7Vm^1`$. To show what limits one could expect to put on the EDM, we suppose that the oscillating field $`\stackrel{}{E}(z,r)=\stackrel{}{E}_0(z,r)\mathrm{cos}\left(\omega t\right)`$ is supplied by a small charged sphere on the axis of symmetry of the apparatus, at a depth $`z_0`$. This gives rise to a perturbing potential of the form

$$\stackrel{}{d}_{el}.\stackrel{}{E}=\frac{d_{el}E_{\mathrm{max}}\left(z+z_0\right)\left(R_1^2+z_0^2\right)}{\left(\left(r+R_1\right)^2+\left(z+z_0\right)^2\right)^{3/2}}$$
(29)
If $`\delta \omega `$ is set equal to zero, we obtain the transition probabilities shown in Fig 5, for 4 values of the dipole moment $`d_{el}`$, where we have included the neutron lifetime. The transition time $`1/\gamma `$ for $`d_{el}=3\times 10^{21}`$ is approximately 1300 s, which is comparable to the neutron half-life. Clearly an optimized design would improve the result, but probably not by more than a factor of 10 at best. Hence this technique cannot give a result which is competitive with the best current methods.

## VI Short distance behaviour of gravity

Several models have suggested that the short distance behaviour of gravity may be modified from Newton’s law. It has been pointed out by Bertolami and Nunes Bertolami and Nunes (2002) that, in principle, the system provides a method of measuring corrections to the gravitational interaction with a range of a few microns. We consider whether this could be done in practice. The gravitational potential is taken to be

$$V(r)=\frac{Gm_1m_2}{r}+\frac{Km_1m_2}{r}e^{\lambda r}$$
(30)
A slab of material of density $`\rho `$ under the apparatus gives rise to a extra interaction the form

$$\delta V(z)=\frac{2\pi K\rho m_N}{\lambda ^2}\left(\lambda z+1\right)e^{\lambda z}$$
(31)
This, of course, depends on our assumption of the slab being infinite: in practice, if the thickness of the slab is t, the approximation breaks down for $`\lambda t^1`$. This modifies the energy spectrum and hence in principle could be measured. For $`\lambda <<h^1`$ (i.e. $`\lambda 10^4\mu ^1`$ or less), this term simplifies to give a constant term (which can be ignored, since it shifts all the levels equally) and a term of the form

$$\delta V(z)=\pi K\rho m_Nz^2$$
(32)
which is independent of $`\lambda `$.

In Fig 6 , we show the shift in the transition energy for the 5 lowest levels as a function of $`\lambda `$, for K = 1. We conclude that if the extra coupling constant was large and energy shifts could be measured down to 0.1 peV, it would be possible to look for an extra gravitational shift with a range of $`\lambda ^11\mu `$.

One can again use resonant excitation of the ground state to put a better limit on the extra interaction. We assume that the slab is vibrated vertically with a frequency $`\omega `$ with an amplitude $`z_0`$ so that the distance from the top of the slab to the neutron is given by

$$\widehat{z}\left(t\right)=z+z_0\left(1\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega t\right)\right)$$
(33)
This means that the neutron would feel a time-varying potential of the form

$$\delta V(z,t)=\frac{2\pi K\rho m_N}{\lambda ^2}\left(\lambda \widehat{z}\left(t\right)+1\right)e^{\lambda \widehat{z}\left(t\right)}$$
(34)
which is obviously highly anharmonic. We can use the expansions Abramowitz and Stegun (1972)

$$e^{\lambda z_0\mathrm{cos}\left(\omega t\right)}=I_o\left(\lambda z_0\right)+2\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}I_k\left(\lambda z_0\right)\mathrm{cos}\left(\omega t\right)$$
(35)
Since the transition energy to the n’th excited bounce state $`\omega _1\omega _n`$ is not a simple multiple of $`\omega =\left|\omega _1\omega _2\right|`$ , the resonance condition means that we can ignore all terms except one in the expansion. This gives rise to an interaction of the form

$`\delta V(z,t)=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\left(\omega t\right){\displaystyle \frac{2\pi K\rho m_N}{\lambda ^2}}e^{\lambda \left(z+z_0\right)}`$
$`\times \left(\left(\lambda \left(2z+z_0\right)+4\right)I_1\left(\lambda z_0\right)2\lambda z_0I_1\left(\lambda z_0\right)\right)`$
This gives rise to an transition time which depends linearly on K and non-linearly on $`\lambda `$.

In Fig 7 we show this time as a function of $`\lambda `$ for K=1. It would be possible to use this to investigate short range changes to the gravitational interaction, but this does not allow a measurement to be extended down into the the phenomologically interesting range of $`KG`$.

## VII Conclusions

We conclude that it is possible to isolate this novel quantum state, which, of course, has its own intrinsic interest, since the number of simple quantum mechanical states is small, and this, along with Rydberg states, are unique in having a macroscopic size. It is obviously disappointing that it does not seem possible to set new limits on the neutron EDM, but it does appear possible to test the gravitational interaction at very short distances.

We do not underestimate the problems of performing a real experimental measurement. It would obviously be very hard to observe the bouncing neutron at all, given the low flux rates combined with the huge flux of more energetic neutrons. Even if a neutron is captured in the n=1 state, it will then be quite difficult to excite it and detect it on its escape from the centrifuge.

There is no reason in principle why this method cannot be extended to atoms. Atomic fountain experiments provide atoms which can have temperatures as low as 1 nK, and hence would provided a much more numerous source. The major unknown is that atom-surface Van der Waals interactions are likely to be fairly strong and attractive. This would seriously distort the lowest bounce states. However, atoms are stable and cannot easily be absorbed.

Finally we note that, with the addition of an appropriate static magnetic field, it would be possible to produce quantum states with an even lower energy in a controlled fashion.

###### Acknowledgements.

I am very grateful to Bill Romo and Mike Pendlebury for their comments, and particularly to M. K. Sundaresan for pointing out an error in an earlier version of this work and advice on the solution given in the appendix. I would like to thank Frank Close and his colleagues at Oxford for their hospitality. Financial support from NSERC is gratefully acknowledged.

## Appendix A Numerical solution of the Schrodinger equation

The unperturbed wave function can be written

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{k\mathrm{ln}}(r,z,\varphi )=f_{lk}\left(r\right)Z_n\left(z\right)e^{il\phi }$$
(37)
The radial function has to vanish at $`r=R_1`$ and $`r=R_3`$. The first gives the solution

$$f(r)=Y_l\left(\kappa R_1\right)J_l\left(\kappa r\right)J_l\left(\kappa R_1\right)Y_l\left(\kappa r\right)$$
(38)
and satisfying the second condition defines the eigenvalues $`\kappa _{kl}`$ via

$$Y_l\left(\kappa _{kl}R_1\right)J_l\left(\kappa _{kl}R_3\right)J_l\left(\kappa _{kl}R_1\right)Y_l\left(\kappa _{kl}R_3\right)=0$$
(39)
This is solved numerically: it is easy to get an asymptotic form for the eigenvalues:

$$\kappa _{kl}=\frac{k\pi }{R_3R_1}$$
(40)
We must now find the perturbed wave functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m(r,z)`$ for the problem with a step in terms of the unperturbed wave-functions $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{k\mathrm{ln}}(r,z)`$ (the dependence on $`\varphi `$ is irrelevant). To satisfy the boundary conditions with the step, we write

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_m(r,z)={\displaystyle a_{k\mathrm{ln}}^m}`$ (41)
$`\left(\psi _{k\mathrm{ln}}(r,z)t(r,z,z_s\left(r\right))\psi _{k\mathrm{ln}}(r,z_s\left(r\right))\right)`$
or

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_m(r,z)=a_{k\mathrm{ln}}^m\widehat{\psi }_{k\mathrm{ln}}(r,z,z_s\left(r\right))$$
(43)
The function $`t(r,z,z_s\left(r\right))`$ must satisfy $`t(r,z_s\left(r\right),z_s\left(r\right))=1`$. so that $`\widehat{\psi }_{k,n}(r,z_s\left(r\right),z_s\left(r\right))=0`$, must vanish as $`z\mathrm{}`$ at least as fast as the Airy function itself, and must vanish as $`rR_1`$. It must also be smooth. Apart from this it is quite arbitrary: we use

$$t(r,z,z_s\left(r\right))\begin{array}{c}=\frac{(R_2r)}{(R_2R_1)}z<h,r<R_2\\ =\frac{(u_hu)}{u_h}e^{\beta ^2(zh)^2)}zh,r<R_1\\ =e^{\beta ^2(zh)^2)}zh,rR_1\end{array};,$$
(44)
where

$`u=\left(\left(zh\right)^2+\left(R_2r\right)^2\right)^{1/2}`$
$`u_h=\left(R_2R_1\right)\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{zh}{R_2r}}\right)^2+1\right)^{1/2}`$ (45)
which satisfies these properties.

These states have energy given by

$$\widehat{E}_m=\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_m|\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}^2+\sigma z|\mathrm{\Phi }_m}{\mathrm{\Phi }_m|\mathrm{\Phi }_m}$$
(46)
or

$`\widehat{E}_m{\displaystyle \underset{kl}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k^{}l^{}}{}}a_{kl}^ma_{kl}^m{\displaystyle \widehat{\psi }_{kl}(\stackrel{}{r})\widehat{\psi }_{kl}(\stackrel{}{r})𝑑\stackrel{}{r}}`$
The principal problem is caused by evaluating

$$^2\widehat{\psi }_{k,n}(r,z,z_s\left(r\right))$$

. This must in general be done numerically. We regard the $`a_k`$ as variational parameters and use them to minimize $`\widehat{E}_m`$. This gives

$$\widehat{E}_m\underset{0}{\overset{N}{}}a_kG_{kl}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{0}{\overset{N}{}}a_k\left(H_{kl}+H_{lk}\right)$$
(48)
where

$$G_{kl}=\widehat{\psi }_k\widehat{\psi }_l𝑑r𝑑z,H_{kl}=\widehat{\psi }_kH\widehat{\psi }_l(x)𝑑r𝑑z$$
(49)
which is an eigenvalue equation for the $`\widehat{E}_m`$. Note that $`G_{kl}`$ is symmetric but $`H_{kl}`$ is not. However, the resulting eigenvalue equation contains only symmetric matrices and can be solved by the techniques of Press et al. (2002).