1: %\documentclass[aps,prl,draft,twocolumn,showpacs,groupedaddress]{revtex4}
2: %\input{tcilatex}
3: %\input{tcilatex}
4: %\input{tcilatex}
5: %\input{tcilatex}
6: %\input{tcilatex}
7: %\input{tcilatex}
8: %\input{tcilatex}
9: %\input{tcilatex}
10: %\input{tcilatex}
11: %\input{tcilatex}
12: %\input{tcilatex}
13: %\input{tcilatex}
14: %\input{tcilatex}
15: %\input{tcilatex}
16: %\input{tcilatex}
17: %\input{tcilatex}
18: %\input{tcilatex}
19: %\input{tcilatex}
20:
21:
22: \documentclass[aps]{revtex4}
23: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
24: \usepackage{amssymb}
25: \usepackage{amsmath}
26: \usepackage{graphicx}
27:
28: \setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{10}
29: %TCIDATA{OutputFilter=Latex.dll}
30: %TCIDATA{Version=4.00.0.2321}
31: %TCIDATA{LastRevised=Tuesday, April 24, 2007 18:49:31}
32: %TCIDATA{<META NAME="GraphicsSave" CONTENT="32">}
33: %TCIDATA{Language=American English}
34:
35: \def \dangle {\rangle \langle}
36: \def \be {{\begin{equation}}}
37: \def \ee {{\end{equation}}}
38: \def \bea {\begin{eqnarray}}
39: \def \eea {\end{eqnarray}}
40: \def \mea {\nonumber\\}
41: %\input{tcilatex}
42:
43: \begin{document}
44:
45: \title{On electron-positron pair production using a two level on resonant
46: multiphoton approximation}
47: \author{I. Tsohantjis\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{*}\thanks{
48: Email: \texttt{ioannis2@otenet.gr}}, S. Moustaizis\renewcommand{%
49: \thefootnote}{**}\thanks{
50: Email: \texttt{moustaiz@science.tuc.gr}} and I. Ploumistakis%
51: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{***}\thanks{
52: Email: \texttt{iploumistakis@isc.tuc.gr}}}
53: \affiliation{Technical University of Crete, Department of Sciences, Institute of Matter
54: Structure and Laser Physics,\\
55: Chania GR-73100, Crete, Greece}
56: \date{\today}
57:
58: \begin{abstract}
59: We present an indepth investigation of certain aspects of the two level on
60: resonant multiphoton approximation to pair production from vacuum in the
61: presence of strong electromagnetic fields. Numerical computations strongly
62: suggest that a viable experimental verification of this approach using
63: modern optical laser technology can be achieved. It is shown that use of
64: higher harmonic within the presently available range of laser intensities
65: can lead to multiphoton processes offering up to 10$^{12}$ pairs per laser
66: shot. Finally the range of applicability of this approximation is examined
67: from the point of view of admissible values of electric field strength and
68: energy spectrum of the created pairs.
69: \end{abstract}
70:
71: \maketitle
72:
73: %\pacs{23.20.Ra}
74:
75: %\begin{titlepage}
76:
77: %\end{titlepage}
78:
79: \section{Introduction}
80:
81: Electron-positron pair production from vacuum in the presence of strong
82: electromagnetic fields is one of the most intriguing non-linear phenomena in
83: QED of outstanding importance specially nowadays where high intensity lasers
84: are available for experimental verification (for a concise review see \cite%
85: {greiner}, \cite{Fradkin}, \cite{Grib}). The theoretical treatment of this
86: phenomenon can be traced back to Klein \cite{Klein}, Sauter\cite{Sauter},
87: Heisenberg and Euler\cite{Heisenberg} but it was Schwinger \cite{Schwinger}
88: that first thoroughly examined this phenomenon, often called Schwinger
89: mechanism. Schwinger implementing the proper time method obtained the
90: conditions under which pair production is possible: the invariant quantities
91: $\mathcal{F=}\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }=-\frac{1}{2}\left( \mathcal{%
92: \vec{E}}^{2}-c^{2}\mathcal{\vec{B}}^{2}\right) $, $\mathcal{G=}\frac{1}{4}%
93: F_{\mu \nu }\tilde{F}^{\mu \nu }=c\mathcal{\vec{E}\cdot \vec{B}}$, where $%
94: F_{\mu \nu }$ and $\tilde{F}_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon _{\mu \nu \alpha
95: \beta }$ $F^{\alpha \beta }$ are the electromagnetic field tensor and its
96: dual respectively, must be such that neither $\mathcal{F=}0$ , $\mathcal{G=}%
97: 0 $ (case of plane wave field) nor $\mathcal{F>}0$ , $\mathcal{G=}0$ (pure
98: magnetic field). For the case of a static spacially uniform electric field
99: (where $\mathcal{F<}0$ , $\mathcal{G=}0$) he obtained a nonperturbative
100: result for the probability $w_{s}$ for a pair to be created per unit volume
101: and unit time to be $w_{s}(x)\sim \sum_{l=1}^{\infty }(1/l^{2})\exp (-\frac{%
102: l\pi m^{2}}{e\mathcal{E}})$. However in order to have sizable effects the
103: electric field strength $\mathcal{E}$ \ must exceed the \textit{critical
104: value} $\mathcal{E}_{c}$ $=\frac{mc^{2}}{e\lambda _{c}}\simeq 1.3\times
105: 10^{18}V/m$ . Brezin and Itzykson \cite{Brezin} \ examined the case of \
106: pair creation in the presence of a pure oscillating electric field $\mathcal{%
107: E}$ (the presence of such electric field only can be achieved by using two
108: oppositely propagating laser beams so that in the antinodes of the standing
109: wave formed $\mathcal{F<}0$ and pair production can occur) by applying a
110: version of WKB approximation and treating the problem in an analogous way as
111: in the ionization of atoms(where the three basic mechanisms multiphoton,
112: tunneling and over the barrier ionization are present), considering the
113: pairs as bound in vacuum with binding energy $2mc^{2}$. The probability per
114: 4-Compton volume of $\ e^{+}e^{-}$ pair creation is given by
115: \begin{equation}
116: w_{BI}=\frac{e^{2}\mathcal{E}^{2}}{\pi \hbar c}\frac{1}{g(\gamma )+\frac{%
117: \gamma g^{\prime }(\gamma )}{2}}\exp \left( -\frac{\pi m^{2}}{e\mathcal{E}}%
118: g(\gamma )\right) ,\;\gamma =\frac{mc\omega }{e\mathcal{E}}=\frac{\hbar
119: \omega \mathcal{E}_{c}}{mc^{2}\mathcal{E}} \label{bi}
120: \end{equation}%
121: where $g(\gamma )=\frac{4}{\pi }\int_{0}^{1}\left( \frac{1-y^{2}}{1+\gamma
122: ^{2}y^{2}}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}dy$ \ and the parameter $\gamma $ $=$%
123: (Photon\ energy/work\ of$\ \mathcal{E}\ $in\ a$\ \lambda _{Compton}$) is the
124: equivalent of the Keldysh parameter in the ionization of atoms. The formula
125: for $w_{BI}$ interpolates between two physically important regimes. For $%
126: \gamma \ll 1$ (high electric field strength and low frequency ), $g(\gamma
127: )=1-(1/8)\gamma ^{2}+O(\gamma ^{4})$, $w_{BI}$ $\sim \exp (-\pi (\mathcal{E}%
128: _{c}/\mathcal{E})g(\gamma ))$ and thus the adiabatic non-perturbative
129: tunneling mechanism dominates. When $\mathcal{E}$ $\ll \mathcal{E}_{c}$, $%
130: w_{s}(x)\simeq w_{BI}$ . For $\gamma \gg 1$ (low electric field strength and
131: high frequency), $g(\gamma )=(4/\pi \gamma )\ln (4\gamma /e)+O(1/\gamma
132: ^{3}) $ and $w_{BI}$ $\sim (\mathcal{E}/\mathcal{E}_{c})^{2n_{0}}(1+O(1/%
133: \gamma ^{2}))$ ($n_{0}=2m/\omega $). This power-law behavior of $w_{BI}$ \
134: in the external field $\mathcal{E}$, is indicative of typical multiphoton
135: processes of order $n\geq $ $2m/\omega $ and $w_{BI}$ corresponds to the
136: n-th order perturbation theory in $\mathcal{E}$, n being the minimum number
137: of \ photons to create a pair. Soon after the work of \ Brezin and Itzykson,
138: in the work of Popov \cite{Popov1} (see also \cite{Nikishov2}, \cite{niki} ,%
139: \cite{Troup},\cite{popov2}) using the imaginary time method, the results of
140: \cite{Brezin} (and \cite{Schwinger}) were confirmed and investigated further
141: by determining also the pre exponential factor in $w_{BI}$ taking in to
142: account interference effects and treating again the system in analogous way
143: as in the ionization of atoms. In particular, with $\tau $ being the pulse
144: duration and $\lambda $ the electromagnetic wavelength, it was shown in \cite%
145: {Popov1} that for a spacially uniform oscillating electric field $\mathcal{E}
146: $ with frequency $\omega $ and under the conditions $\mathcal{E}$ $\ll
147: \mathcal{E}_{c}$, $\hbar \omega \ll $ $mc^{2}$ (which are both satisfied
148: from present laser technology) the probabilities over a Compton 4-volume $%
149: \lambda ^{3}\tau =\lambda ^{4}/c$ , can be obtained for any value of $\gamma
150: $ as a sum of probabilities $w_{n}$ of multiphoton processes of order $n$: $%
151: w_{P}=\sum_{n>n_{0}=2m/\omega }w_{n}$. For the exact rather lengthy formula
152: of $w_{n}$, which depends on $\gamma $, $g(\gamma )$ we refer the reader to
153: \cite{Popov1}, \cite{popov2}, \cite{Ringwald}. In the case $\gamma \ll 1$
154: the spectrum of $n\omega $ of the $n$-photon processes is practically
155: continuous giving the non-perturbative result $w_{P}\sim \left( \mathcal{E}/%
156: \mathcal{E}_{c}\right) ^{\frac{5}{2}}\exp (-\pi (\mathcal{E}_{c}/\mathcal{E}%
157: )g(\gamma ))$ (see \cite{popov2}). However in the typical multiphoton (and
158: of perturbative nature) case $\gamma \gg 1$, $w_{n}\sim \left( \mathcal{E}/%
159: \mathcal{E}_{c}\right) ^{2n}q\left( n-n_{0}\right) $ where $q\left(
160: n-n_{0}\right) =(1/2)e^{-2\left( n-n_{0}\right) }\int_{0}^{2\left(
161: n-n_{0}\right) }e^{t}t^{-1/2}dt$. The number of pairs created in the two
162: regimes are given by (see \cite{popov2})
163: \begin{eqnarray}
164: N(\tau ) &=&2^{-3/2}n_{0}^{4}\left( \mathcal{E}/\mathcal{E}_{c}\right) ^{%
165: \frac{5}{2}}\exp (-\frac{\pi \mathcal{E}_{c}}{\mathcal{E}}(1-\frac{1}{%
166: 2\left( n_{0}\frac{\mathcal{E}}{\mathcal{E}_{c}}\right) ^{2}}))(\omega \tau
167: /2\pi ),\;\gamma \ll 1 \label{pop1} \\
168: N(\tau ) &\approx &2\pi n_{0}^{3/2}\left( \frac{8\mathcal{E}_{c}}{n_{0}e%
169: \mathcal{E}}\right) ^{-2n_{0}}(\omega \tau /2\pi ),\;\gamma \gg 1.
170: \label{pop2}
171: \end{eqnarray}%
172: One can easily see by comparing the above results that the multiphoton
173: processes are by far more efficient for pair production. Treatment of
174: Schwinger mechanism for non-oscillating electric fields and time dependent
175: magnetic fields see also \cite{WangWong}, \cite{gavgit} ,\cite{cal}, \cite%
176: {niki2}, \cite{kim}. For the role of temporal and spacial inhomogeneities in
177: the nonperturbative branch of pair production see \cite{kim}, \cite{dunne},
178: \cite{gies}, \cite{piazza}.
179:
180: On the other hand the first experimental verification of $e^{-}e^{+}$ pair
181: production took place at SLAC ( E-144 experiment)\cite{Burke} where a
182: combination of nonlinear Compton scattering and multiphoton Breit-Wheeler
183: mechanism allowed for $e^{-}$ $e^{+}$ pair production to occur since the
184: available electric field intensities in the area of interaction of the
185: back-scattered photons with the laser used to produced them reached the
186: necessary values . The number of positrons measured in 21962 laser pulses
187: was 175$\pm 13$ and the multiphoton order of the process was found to be $%
188: n=5.1\pm 0.2(statistical)_{-0.8}^{+0.5}(systematic)$ , in very good
189: agreement with the theory. This experiment has led to a resent interest of
190: the subject especially as to whether modern laser technology can produce the
191: strong electric field required for experimental verification. As explicitly
192: analyzed by Ringwald \cite{Ringwald} both for the generalized WKB or
193: imaginary time methods, the optical laser technology available \cite{mourou}%
194: , as far as power densities and electric fields concerns, does not seem to
195: be implementable for experimental verification of $e^{-}e^{+}$ pair
196: creation, while for the X-Ray Free Electron Laser (XFEL) should be a very
197: promising facility (see also \cite{Melissinos}, \cite{chen}, \cite{tajima}).
198:
199: However in a recent paper Avetissian et al \cite{Avetissian} treated the
200: problem of $e^{-}e^{+}$ production in a standing wave of oppositely directed
201: laser beams of plane transverse linearly polarized electromagnetic waves of
202: frequency $\omega $ and wavelength $\lambda $, using a two level multiphoton
203: on resonant approximation. As was shown there and qualitatively argued in
204: \cite{ctm} this approach if experimentally implemented will result in much
205: higher\ $e^{-}e^{+}$ production rate for the case of conventional
206: femto-second lasers systems. The main difference of this approach to the one
207: mentioned above is the resonance condition. Also, since the fundamental
208: parameter of the theory is $\xi =e\mathcal{E}\mathbf{/}mc\omega \leq 1$, the
209: results of this method can only be compared with the corresponding ones from
210: the perturbative multiphoton regime $\gamma \geq 1$ above.
211:
212: The aim of this article is to investigate further this approximation mainly
213: focusing on numerical computations that convincingly support the possibility
214: of experimentally detectable pair creation with available optical laser
215: technology. Of special interest is the use of higher harmonics such as 3$%
216: \omega $ and 5$\omega $. Moreover the close resemblance of this
217: approximation with multiphoton ionization of \ atoms highlights a lot of \
218: the physically interesting characteristics that one might expect to detect
219: in the laboratory. In particular, ultrashort laser systems such as Nd-Yag or
220: Ti-Sapphire, with an intensity at the fundamental frequency $\omega $, of \
221: the order of 10$^{22}W/m^{2}$ , when working on the multiphoton on resonant
222: regime, is shown to produce number of pairs of the order of 10$^{8}$ or more
223: per laser shot. On the other hand such laser systems, with intensities up to
224: the order of 10$^{30}W/m^{2}$ , can provide higher harmonics pair creation,
225: such as 3$\omega $ and 5$\omega $, where the number of pairs is shown to
226: reach up to 10$^{12}$ per laser shot. As is demonstrated one can keep the
227: frequency fixed and gradually change the electric field strength, and
228: perform that for each frequency chosen. However for the laser systems under
229: consideration it is difficult to adjust $\mathcal{E}$ while being on
230: resonant and moreover there are limitations on the increase of it as will be
231: shown . What is experimentally viable is to increase the frequency and,
232: without having to focus in the diffraction limit, increase the intensity so
233: that the resulting increase in $\mathcal{E}$ will be such that the ratio $%
234: \xi =e\mathcal{E}\mathbf{/}mc\omega $ \ is fixed. In section two we briefly
235: present the results of \cite{Avetissian} referring the reader to that
236: article for their derivation. In section three we investigate the behavior
237: of the probability density and the number of pair created by the fundamental
238: and higher harmonics of a conventional laser with respect to changes in the
239: electric field strength and the energy spectrum of the created
240: electrons(positron). We end this section by showing that there exist bounds
241: on the values of the electric field strength, the multiphoton order and the
242: energy spectrum for the two level on resonant multiphoton approximation to
243: hold. Finally in section four we conclude with suggested ways of
244: experimental verification and future line of research. All numerical results
245: have been produce for an Nd-Yag laser of photon energy $1.17eV$ and
246: intensity 1.35$\times 10^{22}W/m^{2}$ and using Mathematica and Maple
247: packages.
248:
249: \section{Basic results of the two-level on resonant multiphoton
250: approximation of pair production from vacuum.}
251:
252: Following \cite{Avetissian} a standing wave $\overrightarrow{A}=2%
253: \overrightarrow{A}_{0}\cos \overrightarrow{k}\overrightarrow{r}\cos \omega t$
254: is formed by two oppositely propagating laser beams of frequency $\omega $
255: and wavelength $\lambda $ (see also \cite{Ringwald}). Pair production
256: essentially occurs close to the antinodes and in spacial dimensions $l$ $\ll
257: \lambda $ so that $\overrightarrow{k}\overrightarrow{r}=\frac{2\pi }{\lambda
258: }l$ \ \ is very small and thus the spacial dependence of the resulting wave
259: can be disregarded, that is $\overrightarrow{A}=2\overrightarrow{A}_{0}\cos
260: \omega t$. Moreover since the interaction Hamiltonian is of the form $%
261: \overrightarrow{p}\overrightarrow{A}$ the most significant contribution in
262: the pair creation process in the regions of antinodes will be at the
263: direction along the electric field. Due to space homogeneity in these
264: regions the 4-momentum of a particle is conserved, transitions occur between
265: two energy levels from $\mathcal{-}E$ to $E$ by the absorption of $n$
266: photons and the multiphoton probabilities will have maximum values for
267: resonant transitions
268: \begin{equation}
269: n=2E/\omega \label{res1}
270: \end{equation}%
271: Non-linear solutions of the Dirac equation under these conditions were
272: obtained resulting to the following probability for an n-photon $e^{-}e^{+}$
273: pair creation, summed over the spin states
274: \begin{equation}
275: W_{n}=2f_{n}^{2}\frac{\sin ^{2}\left( \Omega _{n}\tau \right) }{\Omega
276: _{n}^{2}} \label{wn1arm}
277: \end{equation}%
278: where
279: \begin{equation}
280: f_{n}=\frac{E}{4p\cos \theta }\left( 1-\frac{p^{2}\cos ^{2}\theta }{E^{2}}%
281: \right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}n\omega J_{n}(4\xi \frac{mp\cos \theta }{E\omega })
282: \label{fn}
283: \end{equation}%
284: $\xi $ is the relativistic invariant parameter given by,
285: \begin{equation}
286: \xi =\frac{e\mid \mathcal{E}_{o}\mid }{mc\omega }\lesssim 1 \label{ksi}
287: \end{equation}%
288: $\Omega _{n}$ and $\Delta _{n}$ is the 'Rabi frequency' of the Dirac vacuum
289: at the interaction with a periodic electromagnetic field and respectively
290: given by,
291: \begin{equation}
292: \Omega _{n}=\sqrt{f_{n}^{2}+\frac{\Delta _{n}^{2}}{4}}\ll \omega ,\;
293: \label{rabi}
294: \end{equation}%
295: $\theta $\ is the angle between the momentum of $e^{-}\left( e^{+}\right) $
296: and $A_{0}$, $\mathcal{E}_{o}$ is the amplitude of the electric filed\
297: strength of one incident wave, $\Delta _{n}=2E-n\omega $ is the detuning of
298: resonance, and $\tau $ is the interaction time. In obtaining the above
299: probability it has been assumed without loss of generality that $p_{z}=0$
300: since there is a symmetry with respect to the direction of $A_{0}$ (taken to
301: be the Oy axis) and thus $\mathbf{p}=(p_{x}=p\sin \theta ,p_{y}=p\cos \theta
302: ,0)$. As usual in applying the resonance approximation on a two level system
303: the probability amplitudes are slow varying functions which is equivalently
304: expressed here by the condition in (\ref{rabi}), corresponding to such field
305: intensities for which the condition in (\ref{ksi}) is satisfied. For short
306: interaction time i.e. when $\Omega _{n}\tau \ll 1$, $\frac{\sin ^{2}\left(
307: \Omega _{n}\tau \right) }{\Omega _{n}^{2}}\rightarrow 2\pi \tau \delta
308: \left( \Delta _{n}\right) $ and the differential probability per unit time
309: summed over the spin states in the phase-space volume $Vd^{3}p/\left( 2\pi
310: \right) ^{3}$ \ is $dw_{n}=\frac{1}{2\pi ^{2}}f_{n}^{2}\delta (2E-n\omega
311: )Vd^{3}p$ which after integration over the $e^{-}$($e^{+}$) energy, the
312: angular distribution of a n-photon differential probability of the created $%
313: e^{-}$, $e^{+}$ pair, per unit time in unit space volume ($V=1$), on exact
314: resonance is given by:
315: \begin{equation}
316: \frac{dw_{n}}{do}=\frac{n\omega }{8\pi ^{2}}f_{n}^{2}\left( n^{2}\omega
317: ^{2}-4m^{2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}} \label{dwndoarm}
318: \end{equation}%
319: where $do=\sin \theta d\theta d\varphi $. The total angular distribution of
320: probability is $\frac{dw}{do}=\sum_{n=n_{0}}\frac{dw_{n}}{do}$\ (where $%
321: n_{0}=2mc^{2}/\hbar \omega $ is the threshold number of photons for the pair
322: production process to occur) and integrating over the solid angle we obtain
323: the total probability per unit time in unit space volume of the $e^{-}$, $%
324: e^{+}$ pair production $w=\sum_{n=n_{0}}w_{n}$ as:
325: \begin{eqnarray}
326: w &=&\sum_{n=n_{0}}\frac{n^{5}\omega ^{5}}{32\pi p}((\frac{2Z_{0}^{2}}{%
327: 4n^{2}-1}-1)J_{n}^{2}\left( Z_{0}\right) +\frac{Z_{0}^{2}J_{n-1}^{2}\left(
328: Z_{0}\right) }{2n(2n-1)}+\frac{Z_{0}^{2}J_{n+1}^{2}\left( Z_{0}\right) }{%
329: 2n(2n+1)} \notag \\
330: &&-\frac{4p^{2}}{n^{2}\omega ^{2}}\frac{Z_{0}^{2n}}{\left( 2n+1\right)
331: \left( n!\right) ^{2}2^{2n}}\times \;_{2}F_{3}\left( n+\frac{1}{2},n+\frac{1%
332: }{2};n+1,2n+1,n+\frac{3}{2};-Z_{0}^{2}\right) ) \label{warm}
333: \end{eqnarray}%
334: where $Z_{0}=\left( \frac{4\xi m}{\omega }\right) \left( 1-\frac{4m^{2}}{%
335: n^{2}\omega ^{2}}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}$. The total number of pairs $N$
336: created for a given laser characteristics can be estimated by (see \cite%
337: {Avetissian})
338: \begin{equation}
339: N\sim wV\tau ,\;V\sim \sigma ^{2}l \label{npairs}
340: \end{equation}%
341: where $V$ is the space-volume, $\sigma $ is the cross section radius, $l\ll
342: \lambda $ as stated above and $\tau $ is the interaction time. For focused
343: optical lasers in the diffraction limit $\sigma \sim \lambda $ $\sim
344: 10^{-6}m $ and $\tau \sim 10^{-14}s$. For the investigation that will follow
345: \begin{equation}
346: \frac{dN_{n}}{do}=\frac{dw_{n}}{do}V\tau \label{dn}
347: \end{equation}%
348: is the angular distribution of the number of pairs created from an $n$%
349: -photon process and
350: \begin{equation*}
351: N_{n}=w_{n}V\tau
352: \end{equation*}%
353: is the number of pairs created from that process.
354:
355: \section{Numerics and applicability of the on resonant multiphoton
356: approximation of pair production from vacuum.}
357:
358: As can be seen from section II a basic role in the physical interpretation
359: of the numerical computations that will follow, is played by the function $%
360: f_{n}$ (Rabi frequency on exact resonance), as the probabilities and number
361: of produced pairs obtained are heavily depend on its behavior (see (\ref%
362: {wn1arm}), (\ref{dwndoarm})). For a given value of the $\xi $ and $n$, as
363: can be seen from (\ref{fn}), $\ f_{n}$ and all derived angular dependent
364: quantities in the above section, maximizes at $\ \theta =0$ and this is true
365: for every $\xi $ and $n$. Consequentially we shall concentrate our analysis
366: at this angle of observation of created pairs. Not only this simplifies the
367: numerics that will be presented below but also helps to clarify the behavior
368: of this approximation in particular as far as future experimental
369: verification. From now on $c$ and $\hbar $ should be explicitly stated in
370: the formulas. On exact resonance, $n$ is given by (see \ref{res1})
371: \begin{equation}
372: n=2E/\hbar \omega =2qmc^{2}/\hbar \omega ,\;q\geq 1, \label{res}
373: \end{equation}%
374: where we have expressed the energy $E$ of the created electron (positron) in
375: terms of its rest energy as $E=qmc^{2}$. Thus $q$ characterizes the spectrum
376: of the created pairs. At $\ \theta =0$, a suitable expression for $f_{n}$, $%
377: f_{n}$, can be obtained from (\ref{fn}) with $E=qmc^{2}$, $p=(1/c)\sqrt{%
378: E^{2}-m^{2}c^{4}}$, and using the asymptotic behavior of the Bessel
379: function\ $J_{n}(x)$ at $x\simeq n$ (see also \cite{Avetissian}). In fact,
380: as can be seen from (\ref{res}) for optical lasers where $\omega $ is very
381: small (of the order of $eV$), $n$ is very large and as $\xi \lesssim 1$, the
382: argument of the Bessel function in (\ref{fn}), which now becomes $x=\frac{%
383: 2n\xi }{q}\left( 1-\frac{1}{q^{2}}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}$, is also very
384: large and of the same order as $n$, not mentioning Bessel's extreme
385: sensitivity on $\xi $ too. Thus to obtain executable numerical computations,
386: we shall from now\ on adopt this asymptotic behavior of the Bessel function
387: by writing $J_{n}(x)=J_{n}(nsecha)=(1/\sqrt{2\pi ntanha})\exp \left(
388: ntanha-na\right) $ where $a$=$sech^{-1}(\frac{2\xi }{q}\left( 1-\frac{1}{%
389: q^{2}}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}})$. Then $f_{n}$ is given by
390: \begin{equation}
391: f_{n}=\frac{1}{4}\left( q^{2}-1\right) ^{-\frac{1}{2}}n\hbar \omega \frac{%
392: \exp \left( ntanha-na\right) }{\sqrt{2\pi ntanha}} \label{fna}
393: \end{equation}%
394: The function $f_{n}$ can now be used together with (\ref{dwndoarm}) and (\ref%
395: {dn}), to obtain the number of pairs at $\ \theta =0$, $N_{0}=\frac{dN_{n}}{%
396: do}|_{\theta =0}$ as
397: \begin{equation}
398: N_{0}=\frac{dN_{n}}{do}|_{\theta =0}=\frac{1}{4\pi ^{2}}\frac{V\tau }{V_{e}}%
399: \frac{q\sqrt{q^{2}-1}}{m^{2}c^{4}}f_{n}^{2} \label{numberpairs}
400: \end{equation}%
401: where $V_{e}=7.4\times 10^{-59}m^{3}s$ is the four Compton volume of an
402: electron.
403:
404: Using (\ref{res}), (\ref{fna}),\ the envelope of $\ f_{n}$ as a function of $%
405: q$ can be plotted for fixed values of \ $\xi $. This allow to investigate
406: the envelop of \ $\ f_{n}$, from electric field strength , frequency of
407: radiation or both point of view. In fig.\ref{fig1}(a) (see also \cite%
408: {Avetissian}), \ we plot the envelops of $\ \ f_{n}$, for the case of $%
409: \omega =1.17eV$ , $3\omega $ and $5\omega $ and for values of $\xi =0.9995$,
410: $0.9990$ and $0.9987$ respectively. The corresponding electric fields $%
411: \mathcal{E}_{o}$ are approximately given by (\ref{ksi}) as $3.\,\allowbreak
412: 024\,2\times 10^{12}$ V/m, $9.\,\allowbreak 068\,1\times 10^{12}V/m$, $%
413: 1.\,\allowbreak 510\,9\times 10^{13}V/m$. Each point in a curve of fig.\ref%
414: {fig1}(a) corresponds via (\ref{res}) to an order $n$ multiphoton process
415: and to an energy $E=qmc^{2}$ of the \ electron (positron) to be created in
416: the area of antinodes under the application of fixed field strength and
417: frequency. The most probable process corresponds to the peaks of the curves
418: which will be labeled with the triplet ($n_{p}$ ,$q_{p}$, $\xi $). For the
419: three cases of fig.\ref{fig1}(a) , using common differential calculus, we
420: find peaks approximately at ($1.2369\times 10^{6}$, $1.41408$, $0.9995$), ($%
421: 4.1226\times 10^{5}$, $1.41395$, $0.9990$) and ($2.4734\times 10^{5}$, $%
422: 1.41387$, $0.9987$) respectively.
423:
424: \begin{figure}[tbp]
425: \includegraphics[width=17.5cm]{fig_1.eps}\newline
426: \caption{(a) The envelops of $f_{n}$(at $\protect\theta =0$), as a function
427: of the units of rest energy $q$, for $\protect\xi =0.9987$ and $5\protect%
428: \omega $ (top curve), $\protect\xi =0.9990$ and $3\protect\omega $ (middle
429: curve) and $\protect\xi =0.9995$ and $\protect\omega =1.17eV$ (bottom
430: curve), $k=10^{21}$. (b) The envelops of $f_{n}$(at $\protect\theta =0$) as
431: a function of the units of rest energy $q$ for $\protect\xi =0.9987$ and for
432: $\protect\omega =1.17eV$ (bottom curve with $k=10^{40}$), $3\protect\omega $
433: (middle curve with $k=10^{24}$), $5\protect\omega $ (top curve with $%
434: k=10^{21}$).}
435: \label{fig1}
436: \end{figure}
437:
438: A quite interesting case when dealing with higher harmonics is to
439: investigate the behavior of $f_{n}$(at $\ \theta =0$) for $\xi $ fixed. As
440: we change from $\omega $ to $2\omega $, $3\omega $ etc., an appropriate,
441: experimentally viable, increase of the laser intensity can lead $\mathcal{E}%
442: _{o}$ to increase by the same amount as $\omega $. In fig.\ref{fig1}(b),
443: such case is presented for $\xi =0.9987$ and $\omega =1.17eV$ , $3\omega $
444: and $5\omega $ where the corresponding envelops have peaks ($n_{p}$ ,$q_{p}$%
445: ) at (1.2367$\times 10^{6}$, 1.41390), (4.1223$\times 10^{5}$, 1.41388) and
446: (2.4734$\times 10^{5}$, 1.41387) respectively. Both from fig.\ref{fig1}(a,
447: b), it is seen that passing to higher harmonics the peak value of $\ f_{n}$
448: increases rapidly leading to an increase of the probability of pairs
449: created., with a subsequent decrease of \ the most probable multiphoton
450: order $n_{p}$ and corresponding energy $E_{p}=$ $q_{p}mc^{2}$ of
451: electron(positron) created. Moreover the range of the energy spectrum of the
452: pairs broadens thus facilitating their observation: from approximately $%
453: 0.720MeV$ to $0.726MeV$ which is for $\omega $ , to, $0.715MeV$ to $0.731MeV$
454: which is for 5$\omega $. An explanation for the choices of values for $\xi $
455: will be conferred till the end of this section.
456:
457: Corresponding to each envelop of $\ f_{n}$ we can plot the envelop of \ the
458: number of pairs created by n-photon processes\ $N_{0}$ $,$ as a function of
459: \ $q$, using (\ref{dwndoarm}), (\ref{dn}), (\ref{res}), (\ref{fna}), (\ref%
460: {numberpairs}). Examples are presented in fig.\ref{fig2}(a) (see also fig.%
461: \ref{fig1}(a)) for the cases $\omega =1.17eV$ , $3\omega $, $5\omega $ and
462: for values of $\xi =0.9995$, $0.9990$ and $0.9987$ respectively. The four
463: volume used in each case has been calculated by (\ref{npairs}), with $\tau
464: \sim 10^{-14}s$ , $\lambda =1.074\times 10^{-6}$m and $\sigma \sim 10^{-5}m$%
465: , leading to $V\tau \sim \sigma ^{2}l\tau \sim \sigma ^{2}(0.1\lambda
466: /k)\tau ,$ where $k=1,3,5$ for the corresponding harmonics. Note that we do
467: not necessarily have to work in the diffraction limit $\sigma \sim \lambda $
468: as the number of pairs created is adequately high for observation, while to
469: conform with the developed approximation where $l\ll \lambda ,$ the choice $%
470: l=0.1\lambda /k$ demonstrates the fact that when going to higher harmonics
471: the area close to the antinodes that the pair creation essentially happens
472: decreases. Each of these curves essentially give the energy spectrum of the
473: created number of pairs at $\theta =0$ after the application of a fixed
474: electric field strength and laser frequency and for all $n$-photon process
475: at exact resonance. Their peaks can be labeled by the triplet ($N_{p}$ ,$%
476: q_{p}$, $\xi $), $N_{p}$ being the maximum (and most probable) number of
477: pairs created for the $n_{p}$-photon processes of fig.\ref{fig1}(a). These
478: three cases have peaks approximately at (5.856$\times 10^{8}$,1.41408, $%
479: 0.9995$), (1.815$\times 10^{9}$,1.41395, $0.9990$) and ( 2.372 $\times
480: 10^{10}$,1.41387, $0.9987$) respectively. The corresponding values of \ $%
481: \mathcal{E}_{o}$ and the range of the energy spectrum are as those in fig.%
482: \ref{fig1}(a) above. Experimentally such curves are important as one can
483: detect the electron(positron) energies coming up from the various $n$-photon
484: processes for a given $\mathcal{E}_{o}$ and laser frequency and compare with
485: these theoretical estimates.
486:
487: \begin{figure}[tbp]
488: \includegraphics[width=17.5cm]{fig_2.eps}\newline
489: \caption{(a) Envelop of number of pairs created $N_{0}$, as a function of
490: the units of rest mass $q$, at angle $\protect\theta =0$ for the multiphoton
491: processes $\protect\omega =1.17eV$ (bottom curve with $k=10^{-7}$), $3%
492: \protect\omega $ (middle curve with $k=10^{-7}$) and $5\protect\omega $ (top
493: curve with $k=10^{-8}$) of fig.1(a).(b)Envelop of number of pairs created $%
494: N_{0}$, as a function of the units of rest mass $q$, at angle $\protect%
495: \theta =0$ and $\protect\xi =0.9987$, for the multiphoton processes $\protect%
496: \omega =1.17eV$ (bottom curve with $k=10^{29}$), $3\protect\omega $ (middle
497: curve with $k=10^{-2}$) and $5\protect\omega $ (top curve with $k=10^{-8}$)
498: of fig.1(b).}
499: \label{fig2}
500: \end{figure}
501:
502: The case corresponding to fig.\ref{fig1}(b) is presented in fig.\ref{fig2}%
503: (b), where for $\omega =1.17eV$ , $3\omega $ and $5\omega $ and \ $\xi
504: =0.9987$ fixed (and thus for $\mathcal{E}_{0}$, 3$\mathcal{E}_{0}$ and $5%
505: \mathcal{E}_{0}$), the corresponding envelops have peaks ($N_{p}$ ,$q_{p}$)
506: approximately at (2.430$\times 10^{-28}$, 1.41390), (1.104$\times 10^{4}$,
507: 1.41388) and ( 2.391 $\times 10^{10}$, 1.41387) \ corresponding to the $%
508: n_{p} $-photon processes of fig.\ref{fig1}(b). It is easily seen from both
509: these figures that going to higher harmonics, the number of pairs increases
510: very rapidly with simultaneous increase of the range of energies of the
511: pairs but decrease of their maximum energy.
512:
513: We turn now to a commonly experimentally verifiable behavior of multiphoton
514: processes given by the log-log plot of the number of particles created
515: versus the value of electric field strength $\mathcal{E}_{o}$. In fig.\ref%
516: {fig3} we present the log-plots of the number of pairs $N_{0}$ as a function
517: of $\xi $ , using (\ref{dwndoarm}), (\ref{dn}), (\ref{res}), (\ref{fna}), (%
518: \ref{numberpairs}), for three on resonant multiphoton process with $%
519: n_{1}\sim 1.\,\allowbreak 233\times 10^{6}$ ($q\sim 1.41$), $n_{2}\sim
520: 1.237\times 10^{6}$ ($q\sim 1.4141$) and $n_{3}\sim 1.\,\allowbreak
521: 242\times 10^{6}$ ($q\sim 1.42$) chosen from the bottom curve of fig.\ref%
522: {fig1}(a) where $\omega =1.17eV$ is kept fixed (see also bottom curve of fig.%
523: \ref{fig2}(a)). Note that the energies of the created particles for each of
524: the above on resonance multiphoton processes are close enough given
525: approximately by $E_{1}$ $\sim $0 .721 MeV, $E_{2}$ $\sim $ $0.723\,$MeV and
526: $E_{3}$ $\sim \allowbreak 0.726$ MeV respectively while the range of change
527: of $\mathcal{E}_{o}$ producing observationally enough pairs is between $%
528: 3.\,\allowbreak 023\,8\times 10^{12}$ V/m to $3.\,\allowbreak 024\,5\times
529: 10^{12}$V/m. The range of change of $\mathcal{E}_{o}$ (and thus of $\xi )$
530: is very small even for higher harmonics because of the extreme sensitivity
531: of the Bessel function and its approximation in $\xi $. This suggests that
532: an experimental verification of such curves is rather difficult for optical
533: lasers. As $\omega $ is fixed and thus the appearance of the different on
534: resonant multiphoton processes originate only from the different energies
535: involved (see values of $q$), crossings in these curves, which traditionally
536: appear in multiphoton ionization, are not to be expected. Further more, as
537: will be explained in the end of this section, such curves terminate from
538: above for a maximum value of $\mathcal{E}_{o}$ (and thus of $\xi )$ .
539:
540: \begin{figure}[tbp]
541: \includegraphics[width=17.5cm]{fig_3.eps}\newline
542: \caption{Log-plot of the number of pairs created $N_{0}$, as a function of $%
543: \protect\xi $, at angle $\protect\theta =0$, for three multiphoton processes
544: from the bottom curve of fig.1, with $q=1.41$ (middle curve) , $q\sim
545: \protect\sqrt{2}$ (top curve) and $q=1.42$ (bottom curve).}
546: \label{fig3}
547: \end{figure}
548:
549: In fig.\ref{fig4}(a) we give the log-plot of the number of pairs $N_{0}$
550: versus $\xi $ for the most probable multiphoton processes of $\omega =1.17eV$
551: , $3\omega $, $5\omega $ of fig.\ref{fig1}(a) (see also fig.\ref{fig2}(a))
552: where ($n_{p}$ ,$q_{p}$, $\xi $)$\sim $($1.2369\times 10^{6}$, $1.41408$, $%
553: 0.9995$), ($4.1226$ $\times 10^{5}$, $1.41395$, $0.9990$) and ($2.4734$$%
554: \times 10^{5}$, $1.41387$, $0.9987$) respectively . In contrast with the
555: case presented in fig.\ref{fig3}, crossings are expected as the laser
556: frequency changes. However for the developed approximation, the values of $%
557: \xi $ where these occur are not applicable as $\xi $ $>1$. Similar results
558: arise when we consider the most probable multiphoton processes ($n_{p}$ ,$%
559: q_{p}$, $0.9987$) of fig.\ref{fig1}(b) (see also fig.\ref{fig2}(b)) and are
560: presented in fig.\ref{fig4}(b), where for $\omega $, 3$\omega $ and 5$\omega
561: ,$ ($n_{p}$ ,$q_{p}$)$\sim $(1.2367$\times 10^{6}$, 1.41390), (4.1223$\times
562: 10^{5}$, 1.41388) and (2.4734$\times 10^{5}$, 1.41387) respectively.
563:
564: \begin{figure}[tbp]
565: \includegraphics[width=18.5cm]{fig_4.eps}\newline
566: \caption{(a) Log-plot of the number of pairs created $N_{0}$, as a function
567: of $\protect\xi $, for the most probable multiphoton processes of fig.1(a)
568: with $\protect\omega =1.17eV$ (bottom curve) , $3\protect\omega $ (middle
569: curve) and $5\protect\omega $ (top curve). (b) Log-plot of the number of
570: pairs created $N_{0}$, as a function of $\protect\xi $, for the most
571: probable multiphoton processes of fig.1(b) with $\protect\omega =1.17eV$
572: (bottom curve) , $3\protect\omega $ (middle curve) and $5\protect\omega $
573: (top curve).}
574: \label{fig4}
575: \end{figure}
576:
577: Given an initial laser frequency and power density, the obvious question to
578: be raised concerns on one hand the range of possible multiphoton processes
579: that can be obtain within this approximation (or equivalently the range of
580: energy of the created pairs per rest energy of e$^{-}$ , $q$ ) and on the
581: other hand the range of values of $\xi $ (or equivalently of the electric
582: field strength $\mathcal{E}_{0}$) for which these are realized. The physical
583: acceptable values of $\xi $, $q$ have not only to conform with the condition
584: of applicability of resonant approximation $\Omega _{n}\ll \omega $ (i.e.$%
585: \xi \precsim 1$) but also to energy considerations stating that the energy
586: per laser shot, $E_{b}$ , provided by the incident beam , should not be less
587: than the total energy of the pairs created, that is
588: \begin{equation}
589: E_{b}\geqslant 2qmc^{2}N \label{encon}
590: \end{equation}%
591: where $N$ is the total number of pairs created. $E_{b}$ can be calculated
592: from the available power density of the laser $S_{b}=\frac{1}{\mu _{0}c}$ $%
593: \mathcal{E}_{0}^{2}$ as
594: \begin{equation}
595: E_{b}=S_{b}\pi \sigma ^{2}\tau \label{laserenergy}
596: \end{equation}%
597: where $\sigma $ is the radius of the cross section and $\tau $ is the pulse
598: duration. To get a sufficiently convincing answer to the above question we
599: can consider the energy difference
600: \begin{equation}
601: \Delta E_{b}=S_{b}\pi \sigma ^{2}\tau -2qmc^{2}N_{0} \label{energydif}
602: \end{equation}%
603: which by means of (\ref{fna}) and (\ref{numberpairs}) is considered as a
604: function of $\xi $(or $\mathcal{E}_{0}$) and $q$(or $n$) . Keeping $E_{b}$
605: fixed (i.e. for given laser characteristics $\omega $, $S_{b}$, $\sigma $, $%
606: \tau $) and for a given $q\geq 1$, $\xi $ can be increased up to a value $%
607: \xi =h$ (or maximum $\mathcal{E}_{0}$) for which $\Delta E_{b}=0$(minimum
608: physically acceptable value of $\Delta E_{b}$) provided that $h\ngtr 1$.
609: Consequentially, for given values of $q,$ we can quit sufficiently estimate
610: the applicability of the present approximation by numerically computing the
611: upper bounds $h$ of $\xi $, using $S_{b}\pi \sigma ^{2}\tau =2qmc^{2}N_{0}$
612: (of course we could also keep $\xi \precsim 1$ fixed and numerically compute
613: $q$, but for experimental reasons, we are merely interested in the maximum
614: applicable $\mathcal{E}_{0}$ for the present approximation to hold). In fig.%
615: \ref{fig5}
616:
617: \begin{figure}[tbp]
618: \includegraphics[width=16.5cm]{fig_5.eps}\newline
619: \caption{Upper bound $h$ of $\protect\xi $ as a function of $q$ for the
620: cases $\protect\omega =1.17eV$ (top curve), $3\protect\omega $ (middle
621: curve) and $5\protect\omega $ (bottom curve).}
622: \label{fig5}
623: \end{figure}
624: we plot the maximum admissible values $h$ of $\xi $ (or $\mathcal{E}_{0}$)
625: as a function of $q$ (and thus of $n$), for the three cases $\omega $, 3$%
626: \omega $ and 5$\omega $ where computations have been performed using $\Delta
627: E_{b}=0$ for $\omega =1.17eV$, $S_{b}=s\times 1.35\times 10^{22}W/m^{2}$ ($%
628: s=1,3^{2},5^{2}$ respectively), $\sigma \sim 10^{-5}m$ and $\tau \sim
629: 10^{-14}s$. The\ factor $s$ in $S_{b}$ is justified by the approach adopted
630: to increase the laser intensity in order to increase $E_{b}$ , rather than
631: going to the diffraction limit ($\sigma \sim \lambda ^{\prime }$) to
632: increase it, as this would be experimentally tedious when going to higher
633: harmonics $\omega ^{\prime }=k\omega $, where $\lambda ^{\prime }=\lambda /k,
634: $ $k=1,2,3...$. From the curves of fig.\ref{fig5} the range of the
635: applicable on resonant multiphoton processes can easily be read off via the
636: range of values of $q$ shown and using (\ref{res}). Moreover the maximum
637: applicable values of $\xi $ (and thus via (\ref{ksi}) of $\mathcal{E}_{0}$)
638: for each one of them can also be read off. Points ($q$, $h$) for $h>1$ are
639: unacceptable for the two level on resonant approximation of pair production.
640: Also because of the existence of $h$ for each $q$ (and $n$) points in the
641: log-plots of figs \ref{fig3},\ref{fig4}(a, b), where $\xi >h$ should be
642: disregarded, and thus the curves for these plots should be terminated at $%
643: \xi =h$ or equivalently at $\mathcal{E}_{0}=\mathcal{E}_{0\max }=hmc\omega
644: ^{\prime }/e$. That is also why crossing points cannot be present in the
645: log-plots.
646:
647: As an example of the above consider the three peak points of the curves $%
648: \omega $, $3\omega $, $5\omega $ in fig.\ref{fig2}(a). The $q_{p}$ values of
649: these points are situated close to the bottom of the corresponding curves of
650: fig. \ref{fig5} from which we can infer their corresponding $h$s to be
651: approximately $h\sim 0.99956$, $0.99916$, $0.99886$. Moreover as can be seen
652: from fig. \ref{fig4}(a, b), when $\xi $ approaches $h$ the number of pairs
653: created for the corresponding $n_{p}$ multiphoton processes reaches a
654: maximum value. This explains the choices of $\xi $ chosen in the above
655: numerical computations to be close to $h$. Consequentially points ($\xi $, $%
656: N_{0}$) in figs \ref{fig3}, \ref{fig4}(a, b) with values of $\xi >h$ \emph{%
657: should not} be taken in to account.
658:
659: Another important consequence of the upper bound $h$, concerns the value of $%
660: \xi $ chosen when examining the spectrum of created pairs, for fixed $\omega
661: ^{\prime }$, via plots of fig.\ref{fig2}(a, b). For simplicity consider $%
662: \omega ^{\prime }=\omega $. In fig.\ref{fig3} the three terminal points of
663: these curves, which maximize $N_{0}$, corresponds to the points (1.41,
664: 0.99957), ($\sqrt{2}$, 0.99956), (1.42, 0.99959) of the $\omega $-curve of
665: fig.\ref{fig5}, ($\sqrt{2}$, 0.99956) being the lowest point of it. If one
666: chooses to work with an $h\neq $0.99956, say $h=$0.99959, then fig.\ref{fig3}
667: shows that energies with $q<1.42$ can never be observed. However plots such
668: as fig.\ref{fig2}(a) with $\xi =$0.99959 can be drawn showing that points
669: with values of $q$ in the physically forbidden range do contribute in $N_{0}$%
670: . Obviously this is a completely unphysical situation and should be taken
671: care in experimental verification of plots such as fig.\ref{fig2}(a, b). In
672: fact the only consistent value of $\xi $ is the one of the lowest point ($%
673: q_{l\text{ }}$, $\xi =h_{l}$) of the $\omega ^{\prime }$-curve of fig.\ref%
674: {fig5} as this guarantees both observability of all energies around $q_{l%
675: \text{ }}=q_{p\text{ }}$ as given in fig.\ref{fig2}(a, b) and maximization
676: of $N_{0}$ for this $q_{p}$.
677:
678: \section{Conclusion}
679:
680: From the above analysis\ it is evident that present ultrashort laser
681: technology seems to suffices in order to experimentally verify the validity
682: of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pair production from vacuum using a two level on resonance
683: multiphoton approximation. In particular, emphasis has been given in the
684: implementation of higher harmonics such as 3$\omega $ and 5$\omega $ while
685: the electric field strengths required, are obtained by increasing the laser
686: energy rather than focusing to the diffraction limit. This improves the
687: model in various advantageous ways. The need of higher harmonics is dictated
688: by the limitation imposed by the upper value of electric field $\mathcal{E}%
689: _{o}$ of the fundamental due to the condition $\xi =\frac{e\mathcal{E}_{o}}{%
690: mc\omega }\lesssim 1$. In order to work with $\xi \lesssim 1$ but increase
691: the $\mathcal{E}_{o}$ higher $\omega $ values are necessarily.
692:
693: Firstly, as shown in figs \ref{fig1}, \ref{fig2}, the range of the created
694: spectrum widens and the maximum number of pairs created increases
695: drastically reaching $N_{0}=$10$^{12}$ pairs per laser shot for 5$\omega $
696: while, because of the resonant condition, the electric fields needed are low
697: $\mathcal{E}_{0}$ $\sim 10^{13}V/m$, compared with other multiphoton
698: approximations such as the one leading to (\ref{pop2}). In fact this is
699: mainly why there is no need to focus in the diffraction limit to achieve
700: such electric fields as present laser energies and achievable power can
701: provide them.
702:
703: Secondly the confirmation of the power law behavior of the number of
704: pairs created as a function of electric field strength, typical of
705: multiphoton processes, is demonstrated by figs \ref{fig3},
706: \ref{fig4}, showing again a drastic increase of $N_{0}$ in higher
707: harmonics. However such log-plots can not probably be subjected to
708: experimental verification since the range of \ change of \
709: $\mathcal{E}_{0}$ is very small and thus difficult if not
710: technically impossible to be performed. However what it is suggested
711: in the
712: present work is the verification of higher harmonic curves of fig.\ref{fig2}%
713: , of the number of pairs $N_{0}$versus their spectrum, when measuring the
714: number and the momenta of the created electrons(positrons) at angle $\theta
715: =0$.
716:
717: Finally the range of applicability of this approximation have been
718: investigated and the results are presented in fig.\ref{fig5}. In particular
719: working with a chosen frequency, for each q there exists a maximum value $%
720: \xi =h$ and thus a maximum electric field $\mathcal{E}_{0\max }$ that can be
721: used. As has been demonstrated by the analysis of fig.\ref{fig5} in section
722: III there important consequences for a potential experimental verification
723: of the suggested plots of fig.\ref{fig2}(a, b). Consequently one can
724: describe the following attractive experimental scenario. Initially one
725: should choose a laser energy $E_{b}$ capable of generating a higher harmonic
726: $\omega ^{\prime }=k\omega $ beam. Then by appropriate focusing, increase
727: the electric field at the value $\mathcal{E}_{0\max }=h_{l}mck\omega /e$
728: where $h_{l}$ is the lowest value of the $k\omega $ curve of fig.\ref{fig5},
729: and form the standing wave as required by the theory. The number of pairs $%
730: N_{0}$ created at the antinodes versus their spectrum will be given
731: by figures such as those of fig.2(a, b) drawn for $\xi =h_{l}$. Then
732: $N_{0}$ maximizes for pairs with energy $E=2q_{p}mc^{2}$ where
733: ($q_{p}$, $h_{l}$) is the lowest point of the $k\omega $ curve of
734: fig.\ref{fig5}. Higher harmonics thus give a wider pair spectrum and
735: a lower $\mathcal{E}_{0\max }$ value required, both been of great
736: experimental advantage.
737:
738: In concluding one should state that use of XFEL technology (equivalent to
739: ultrahigh harmonics) overcomes the difficulties of so high order of
740: multiphoton processes present in the optical regime, while giving a wider
741: range of electric field changes. Investigations along the lines of the
742: present article of the application of the resonant approximation using XFEL
743: are in progress.
744:
745: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
746: \bibitem{greiner} W. Greiner, B. Muller, J. Rafelski, `Quantum
747: Electrodynamics of Strong Fields', Springer -- Verlag, Berlin, 1985.
748:
749: \bibitem{Fradkin} E. S. Fradkin, D. M. Gitman and Sh. M. Shvartsman,
750: 'Quantum Electrodynamics with unstable vacuum' Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991.
751:
752: \bibitem{Grib} A. A. Grib, S. G. Mamaev and V. M. Mostapanenko, 'Vacuum
753: Quantum Effects in Strong Fields' Atomizdat, Moscow, 1998; Fr iedmann
754: Laboratory Publishing, St. Petersburg 1994.
755:
756: \bibitem{Klein} O. Klein, Z. Phys., \textbf{53}, 157 (1929).
757:
758: \bibitem{Sauter} F. Sauter, Z. Phys. \textbf{69}, 742 (1931).
759:
760: \bibitem{Heisenberg} W. Heisenberg, H. Euler, Z. Phys. \textbf{98}, 718
761: (1936).
762:
763: \bibitem{Schwinger} J. W. Schwinger, Phys. Rev., \textbf{82}, 664 (1951).
764:
765: \bibitem{Brezin} E. Brezin and C. Itzykson, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{2}, 1191
766: (1970).
767:
768: \bibitem{Popov1} V.S. Popov, JETP Lett. \textbf{13}, 185 (1971); Sov. Phys.
769: JETP \textbf{34}, 709 (1972); Sov. Phys. JETP \textbf{35}, 659 (1972); V.S.
770: Popov and M. S. Marinov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.\textbf{16}, 449 (1973) ; JETP
771: Lett. \textbf{18}, 255 (1974); Sov. J. Nucl. Phys., \textbf{19}, 584 (1974).
772:
773: \bibitem{Nikishov2} A. I. Nikishov, Nucl. Phys. B\textbf{21}, 346 (1970).
774:
775: \bibitem{niki} N.B. Narozhnyi and A. I. Nikishov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.\textbf{%
776: 11}, 596 (1970); \ Sov. Phys. JETP, \textbf{38}, 427 (1974).
777:
778: \bibitem{Troup} G.J. Troup and H.S. Perlman, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{6}, 2299
779: (1972).
780:
781: \bibitem{popov2} V.S. Popov, Phys. Let. A\textbf{298}, 83 (2002).
782:
783: \bibitem{Ringwald} A. Ringwald, Phys. Let. B \textbf{510}, 107 (2001).
784:
785: \bibitem{WangWong} R.C. Wang and C.Y. Wong, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{38}, 348
786: (1988).
787:
788: \bibitem{gavgit} S. P. Gavrilov and D. M. Gitman Phys. Rev. D \textbf{53},
789: 7162 (1995).
790:
791: \bibitem{cal} G. Calucci, "Pair production in a time dependent magnetic
792: field", hep-th/9905013.
793:
794: \bibitem{niki2} A. I. Nikishov, "On the theory of scalar pair production by
795: a potential barrier", hep-th/0111137.
796:
797: \bibitem{kim} S. P. Kim and Don N. Page, Phys. Rev. D\textbf{73} : 065020,
798: (2006); "Schwinger pair production in electric and magnetic fields"
799: hep-th/0301132.
800:
801: \bibitem{dunne} G. V. Dunne, Q. Wang, H. Gies and C. Schubert, Phys. Rev. D%
802: \textbf{73} : 065028, (2006); hep-th/0602176.
803:
804: \bibitem{gies} H. Gies and K. Klingmuller, Phys. Rev. D\textbf{72} : 065001,
805: (2005); hep-ph/0505099.
806:
807: \bibitem{piazza} A. DiPiazza, Phys. Rev. D\textbf{70} : 053013, (2004);
808:
809: \bibitem{Burke} D.L. Burke et. al., Phys. Rev. Let., \textbf{79}, 1626
810: (1997).
811:
812: \bibitem{mourou} M. Perry and G. Mourou, Science \textbf{264}, 917 (1994).
813:
814: \bibitem{Melissinos} A.C. Melissinos, in Quantum Aspects of Beam Physics,
815: Proc.15th Advanced ICFA Beam Dynamics Workshop, Monterey, Cal., 4-9 Jan 1998
816: (World Scientific, Singapore, 1998) p. 564.
817:
818: \bibitem{chen} P. Chen and C. Pellegrini, in Quantum Aspects of Beam
819: Physics, Proc.15th Advanced ICFA Beam Dynamics Workshop, Monterey, Cal., 4-9
820: Jan 1998 (World Scientific, Singapore, 1998) p. 571.
821:
822: \bibitem{tajima} P. Chen and T. Tajima, Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{83}, 256
823: (1999).
824:
825: \bibitem{Avetissian} H. K. Avetissian, A. K. Avetissian, G. F. Mkrtchian and
826: Kh. V. Sedrakian, Phys. Rev. E \textbf{66}, 016502 (2002).
827:
828: \bibitem{ctm} C. Kaberidis, I. Tsohantjis and S. Moustaizis 'Multiphoton
829: approach on pair production under the light of recent experimental and
830: theoretical investigations', Proceedings of the Sixth International
831: Symposium `Frontiers of Foundamental and Computational Physics' Udine,
832: Italy, 26-29 September 2004, Sidharth B.G, Honsell F., de Angelis A. (Eds.)
833: 2005 pp. 279-283
834: \end{thebibliography}
835:
836: \end{document}
837: