1: 

2: 

3: 

4: %\documentclass{svjour2}                    % onecolumn

5: %\documentclass[twocolumn,fleqn]{svjour2}    % twocolumn

6: \documentclass[onecollarge]{svjour2}       % onecolumn "king-size"

7: %

8: \smartqed  % flush right qed marks, e.g. at end of proof

9: 

10: \usepackage{graphicx,epsfig}

11: \usepackage{natbib}

12: 

13: %

14: % \usepackage{mathptmx}      % use Times fonts if available on your TeX system

15: %

16: % insert here the call for the packages your document requires

17: %\usepackage{latexsym}

18: % etc.

19: %

20: 

21: 

22: %%% Example macros (some are not used in this sample file) %%%

23: 

24: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}} 

25: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}} 

26: \newcommand{\beqa}{\begin{eqnarray}} 

27: \newcommand{\eeqa}{\end{eqnarray}} 

28: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{array}} 

29: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{array}} 

30: 

31: \newcommand{\dd}{{\rm d}}

32: \newcommand{\pl}{\partial}

33: \newcommand{\inta}{\int_{-i\infty}^{+i\infty}} 

34: \newcommand{\lag}{\langle} 

35: \newcommand{\rag}{\rangle}

36: \newcommand{\law}{\stackrel{\rm law}{=}}

37: \newcommand{\ii}{{\rm i}}

38: \newcommand{\pv}{{\rm p.v.}}

39: 

40: \newcommand{\cP}{{\cal P}}

41: \newcommand{\cK}{{\cal K}}

42: \newcommand{\tG}{\tilde{G}}

43: \newcommand{\Hi}{H_{\infty}}

44: \newcommand{\tH}{\tilde{H}}

45: \newcommand{\tD}{\tilde{\Delta}}

46: \newcommand{\tR}{\tilde{R}}

47: \newcommand{\gam}{\gamma}

48: \newcommand{\cI}{{\cal I}}

49: \newcommand{\cC}{{\cal C}}

50: \newcommand{\hu}{{\hat u}}

51: \newcommand{\hf}{{\hat f}}

52: \newcommand{\hF}{{\hat F}}

53: \newcommand{\hp}{{\hat p}}

54: \newcommand{\hP}{{\hat P}}

55: \newcommand{\bP}{{\overline P}}

56: \newcommand{\PPsi}{\chi}

57: \newcommand{\cQ}{{\cal Q}}

58: \newcommand{\cX}{{\cal X}}

59: \newcommand{\bp}{{\overline p}}

60: \newcommand{\Pk}{{\cal P}}

61: \newcommand{\tN}{\tilde{N}}

62: \newcommand{\cG}{{\cal G}}

63: \newcommand{\cF}{{\cal F}}

64: 

65: \newcommand{\Ai}{\mbox{Ai}}

66: \newcommand{\Bi}{\mbox{Bi}}

67: \newcommand{\hphi}{\hat{\phi}}

68: \newcommand{\Arg}{\mbox{Arg}}

69: \newcommand{\erfc}{\mbox{erfc}}

70: \newcommand{\sinc}{\mbox{sinc}}

71: 

72: 

73: \journalname{Journal of Statistical Physics}

74: 

75: \begin{document}

76: 

77: \title{Statistical properties of the Burgers equation with Brownian initial velocity}

78: %\subtitle{} %Do you have a subtitle?\\ If so, write it here

79: \titlerunning{Burgers equation with Brownian initial velocity}        % if too long for running head

80: 

81: \author{Patrick Valageas}

82: 

83: \institute{Institut de Physique Th{\'e}orique, CEA Saclay, 

84: 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France\\

85: \email{valag@spht.saclay.cea.fr}}

86: 

87: \date{Received: date / Accepted: date}

88: 

89: 

90: \maketitle

91: 

92: \begin{abstract}

93: We study the one-dimensional Burgers equation in the inviscid limit for Brownian 

94: initial velocity (i.e. the initial velocity is a two-sided Brownian motion that 

95: starts from the origin $x=0$). We obtain the one-point distribution of the velocity 

96: field in closed analytical form. 

97: In the limit where we are far from the origin, we also

98: obtain the two-point and higher-order distributions. We show how they factorize

99: and recover the statistical invariance through translations for the distributions

100: of velocity increments and Lagrangian increments. We also derive the velocity 

101: structure functions and we recover the bifractality of the inverse Lagrangian map.

102: Then, for the case where the initial density

103: is uniform, we obtain the distribution of the density field and its $n$-point 

104: correlations. In the same limit, we derive the $n-$point distributions of the 

105: Lagrangian displacement field and the properties of shocks.

106: We note that both the stable-clustering ansatz and the Press-Schechter

107: mass function, that are widely used in the cosmological context, happen to

108: be exact for this one-dimensional version of the adhesion model.

109: \keywords{Inviscid Burgers equation \and Turbulence \and Cosmology: large-scale structure of the universe}

110: \end{abstract}

111: 

112: 

113: 

114: \section{Introduction}

115: \label{sec:intro}

116: 

117: 

118: The Burgers equation \cite{Burgersbook} is a very popular nonlinear evolution

119: equation that appears in many physical problems, see \cite{Bec2007}

120: for a recent review. It was first introduced 

121: as a simplified model of fluid turbulence, as it shares the same hydrodynamical

122: (advective) nonlinearity and several conservation laws with the Navier-Stokes

123: equation. Even though it was shown later on by \cite{Hopf1950} and \cite{Cole1951}

124: that it can be explicitly integrated and lacks the chaotic character associated

125: with actual turbulence, it still retains much interest for hydrodynamical studies.

126: In particular, it can serve as a useful benchmark to test various approximation

127: schemes devised for turbulence studies, since the nonlinearity is the same

128: for both dynamics \cite{Fournier1983}. On the other hand, it has appeared in other

129: physical situations, such as the propagation of nonlinear acoustic waves in

130: non-dispersive media \cite{Gurbatov1991}, the study of disordered systems and

131: pinned manifolds \cite{LeDoussal2008}, or the formation of large-scale

132: structures in cosmology \cite{Gurbatove1989,Vergassola1994}. There,

133: in the limit of vanishing viscosity, it is known as the ``adhesion model'' and it

134: provides a good description of the large-scale filamentary structure of the

135: cosmic web \cite{Melott1994}. In this context, one is interested in the

136: statistical properties of the dynamics, starting with random Gaussian initial

137: conditions \cite{Kida1979,Gurbatov1997} (i.e. ``decaying Burgers turbulence'' in 

138: the hydrodynamical context). 

139: Moreover, in addition to the velocity field, one is also interested in the

140: properties of the density field generated by this dynamics, starting with 

141: an initial uniform density. 

142: 

143: This problem has led to many studies, focusing 

144: on power-law initial spectra (fractional Brownian motion), especially for the

145: two peculiar cases of white-noise initial velocity 

146: \cite{Burgersbook,Kida1979,She1992,Frachebourg2000} or Brownian motion initial

147: velocity \cite{She1992,Sinai1992,Bertoin1998}. The initial velocity fluctuations 

148: are dominated by short wavelengths in the former case and by large wavelengths 

149: in the latter case. In the present Universe, where the power spectrum is not a power

150: law and converges at both ends, the velocity fluctuations are governed by scales

151: that are somewhat larger than those where structures have already formed (thus

152: the variance of the velocity field is still set by the linear theory) and this

153: scale ratio was larger in the past (as the size of nonlinear structures was 

154: smaller). In this sense the case of Brownian initial conditions is closer to the

155: cosmological scenario. From the viewpoint of hydrodynamics, this is also

156: an interesting configuration since in many hydrodynamical systems the power is 

157: generated by the larger scales. For instance, the Kolmogorov spectrum of turbulence,

158: $E(k)\propto k^{-5/3}$, displays such an infrared divergence. Thus, the case of

159: Brownian initial velocity was recently used in \cite{Frisch2005} to address

160: the issue of local homogeneity

161: 

162: In this article, we revisit the one-dimensional Burgers dynamics with two-sided 

163: Brownian initial velocity. In the spirit of the approach of \cite{Frachebourg2000},

164: using analysis methods (Laplace transforms)

165: we obtain closed analytical results for $n$-point distributions 

166: (mostly in the limit where we are far from the origin of the initial Brownian 

167: motion if $n\geq 2$). We check that our results agree with already known 

168: properties. In particular, we recover the property, derived by \cite{Bertoin1998}

169: through probabilistic tools for the one-sided Brownian initial velocity, that 

170: increments of the inverse Lagrangian map are independent and homogeneous.

171: In our case this only holds for particles that are on the same side of the

172: origin. We pay attention to issues that arise in the hydrodynamical

173: context (e.g., velocity structure functions, Lagrangian displacement field)  

174: as well as the cosmological context (e.g., statistics of the density field,

175: mass function of the collapsed structures associated with shocks).

176: In particular, we compare our exact results with phenomenological models

177: that are often used to describe the cosmological dynamics. 

178:  

179: We first describe in section~\ref{sec:Initial} the initial Brownian conditions 

180: and the standard geometrical interpretation in terms of parabolas of the

181: Hopf-Cole solution of the dynamics \cite{Burgersbook}. 

182: Adapting to our case the method presented in 

183: \cite{Frachebourg2000}, this will allow us to express all statistical 

184: properties in terms of the transition kernel associated with Brownian particles

185: moving above parabolic absorbing barriers. We present this propagator in

186: sect.~\ref{sec:transition}, decomposed over a continuous set of eigenfunctions 

187: built from the Airy function (whereas the white-noise case leads to a discrete 

188: spectrum, that is also built from Airy functions). Then, we derive closed

189: analytical expressions for the one-point velocity distribution

190: $p_x(v)$ in sect.~\ref{sec:velocity1}, as well as the distribution, $p_x(q)$, of the

191: initial Lagrangian position $q$ of the particle that is located at the position 

192: $x$ at time $t$. Next, we study the two-point and higher-order distributions

193: in sect.~\ref{sec:velocity2}, and we obtain simple analytical results in the

194: limit where all particles are far from the origin. This allows us to derive the

195: distribution of the density field in sect.~\ref{sec:Density}, for the case of

196: a uniform initial density. Next, we consider the statistics of the Lagrangian

197: displacement field in sect.~\ref{sec:Displacement}. In the same limit where the

198: particles are far from the origin, we obtain the $n-$point distributions, 

199: $p_{q_i}(x_i)$, of the positions $x_i$ at time $t$ of the particles that were

200: initially at positions $q_i$. We also derive the probability $\bp_q^{\rm shock}$

201: that two particles initially separated by a distance $q$ have coalesced into

202: a single shock by time $t$. Finally, we obtain in sect.~\ref{sec:shock} the

203: mass function of shocks and their spatial distribution.

204: 

205: The reader who is not interested in the technical details of our derivations

206: may directly go to section~\ref{sec:velocity2} to survey most of our practical 

207: results.

208: 

209: 

210: 

211: 

212: \section{Initial conditions and geometrical solution}

213: \label{sec:Initial}

214: 

215: 

216: We consider the one-dimensional Burgers equation for the velocity field $v(x,t)$

217: in the limit of zero viscosity,

218: \beq

219: \frac{\pl v}{\pl t} + v \frac{\pl v}{\pl x} = \nu \frac{\pl^2 v}{\pl x^2}

220: \hspace{1cm} \mbox{with} \hspace{1cm} \nu \rightarrow 0^+ .

221: \label{Burg}

222: \eeq

223: As is well-known \cite{Hopf1950,Cole1951}, introducing the velocity potential 

224: $\psi(x,t)$ and making the change of variable $\psi(x,t)=-2\nu\ln\theta(x,t)$ 

225: transforms the nonlinear Burgers equation into the linear heat equation. 

226: This gives the explicit solution 

227: \beq

228: v(x,t) = \frac{\pl\psi}{\pl x} \hspace{0.5cm} \mbox{with} \hspace{0.5cm} 

229: \psi(x,t)= -2\nu \ln \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd q}{\sqrt{4\pi\nu t}} \;

230: \exp\left[-\frac{(x-q)^2}{4\nu t}-\frac{\psi_0(q)}{2\nu}\right] ,

231: \label{psinu}

232: \eeq

233: where we introduced the initial condition $\psi_0(q)=\psi(q,t=0)$. 

234: Then, in the limit $\nu \rightarrow 0^+$ the steepest-descent method

235: gives

236: \beq

237: \psi(x,t) = \min_q \left[ \psi_0(q) + \frac{(x-q)^2}{2t} \right]

238: \hspace{0.5cm} \mbox{and} \hspace{0.5cm} v(x,t) = \frac{x-q(x,t)}{t} ,

239: \label{psinu0}

240: \eeq

241: where we introduced the Lagrangian coordinate $q(x,t)$ defined by

242: \beq

243: \psi_0(q) + \frac{(x-q)^2}{2t} \hspace{0.5cm} \mbox{is minimum at the point} 

244: \hspace{0.5cm} q = q(x,t) .

245: \label{qmin}

246: \eeq

247: The Eulerian locations $x$ where there are two solutions $q_-<q_+$ to the

248: minimization problem (\ref{qmin}) correspond to shocks (and all the matter

249: initially between $q_-$ and $q_+$ is gathered at $x$). The application

250: $q \mapsto x(q,t)$ is usually called the Lagrangian map, and

251: $x \mapsto q(x,t)$ the inverse Lagrangian map (which is discontinuous at

252: shock locations). For the case of Brownian initial velocity that we consider

253: in this paper, it is known that the set of regular Lagrangian points has

254: a Hausdorff dimension of $1/2$ \cite{Sinai1992}, whereas shock locations

255: are dense in Eulerian space \cite{Sinai1992,She1992}.

256: 

257: In this article, we take for the initial velocity field $v_0(q)$ a bilateral

258: Brownian motion starting from the origin $v_0(0)=0$, and we also normalize

259: the potential $\psi_0$ by $\psi_0(0)=0$. Thus, introducing a Gaussian

260: white noise $\xi(q)$, we can express the initial conditions by

261: \beq

262: v_0(q)= \int_0^q\dd q' \, \xi(q') , \;\;\;\;  

263: \psi_0(q)= \int_0^q\dd q' \int_0^{q'}\dd q'' \, \xi(q'') .

264: \label{xidef}

265: \eeq

266: All initial fields are Gaussian and fully determined by their two-point

267: correlation, which we normalize by

268: \beq

269: \lag\xi(q)\rag = 0, \;\;\;\; \lag\xi(q)\xi(q')\rag = D \, \delta(q-q') ,

270: \label{Ddef}

271: \eeq

272: where $\lag .. \rag$ is the average over all realizations of $\xi$.  

273: This gives for instance

274: \beq

275: \lag v_0(q_1) v_0(q_2)\rag = D \, q_1 , \;\;\;

276: \lag \psi_0(q_1) \psi_0(q_2)\rag = \frac{D}{2} 

277: \left[q_1^2 q_2 -\frac{q_1^3}{3}\right] ,

278: \;\;\; \mbox{for} \;\;\; 0 \leq q_1 \leq q_2 ,

279: \label{variance0}

280: \eeq

281: and for the initial velocity distribution at location $q$,

282: \beq

283: t=0 : \;\;\;\; p_{q}(v) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_{v_0}} \, 

284: e^{-v^2/(2\sigma_{v_0}^2)} \;\;\;\; \mbox{with} \;\;\;\; 

285: \sigma_{v_0}^2(q) = D q .

286: \label{Gaussian_t0}

287: \eeq

288: Note that the initial fields over the two sides $q<0$ and $q>0$ are independent.

289: The initial velocity $v_0(q)$ is not homogeneous, since the origin $q=0$

290: clearly plays a special role, but it has homogeneous increments, as seen

291: from the equality,

292: \beq

293: \mbox{for any} \;  q_1,q_2 : \;\;\;  

294: v_0(q_2)-v_0(q_1) = \int_{q_1}^{q_2}\dd q \, \xi(q) ,

295: \;\;\; \lag [v_0(q_2)-v_0(q_1)]^2 \rag = D |q_2-q_1| .

296: \label{Dv0}

297: \eeq

298: Then, the energy spectrum $E_0(k)$ of the initial velocity field is

299: \beq

300: E_0(k)=\frac{D}{2\pi} k^{-2} , \;\;\; \mbox{with} \;\;\;

301: \lag [v_0(q_2)-v_0(q_1)]^2 \rag = 2 \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd k \, 

302: (1-e^{\ii k (q_2-q_1)}) \, E_0(k) .

303: \label{E0}

304: \eeq 

305: 

306: Thanks to the scale invariance of the

307: Brownian motion, the scaled initial potential $\psi_0(\lambda q)$ has the same

308: probability distribution as $\lambda^{3/2} \psi_0(q)$, for any $\lambda>0$.

309: Then, using the explicit solution (\ref{psinu0}) we obtain the scaling laws

310: \beq

311: \psi(x,t) \law t^3 \psi(x/t^2,1) , \;\;\; v(x,t) \law t v(x/t^2,1) , \;\;\;

312: q(x,t) \law t^2 q(x/t^2,1) ,

313: \label{scalings}

314: \eeq

315: where $\law$ means that both sides have the same probability distribution.

316: Thus, any equal-time statistics at a given time $t>0$ can be expressed in terms

317: of the same quantity at the time $t=1$ through appropriate rescalings.

318: In this article we only investigate equal-time statistics, so that $t$ can

319: be seen as a mere parameter in the explicit solution (\ref{psinu})

320: from which we derive our results.

321: 

322: In the cosmological context, the time $t$ in the Burgers equation (\ref{Burg})

323: actually stands for the linear growing mode $D_+(t)$ of the density fluctuations,

324: the spatial coordinate $x$ is a comoving coordinate (that follows the

325: uniform Hubble expansion) and, up to a time-dependent factor, the velocity $v$ is 

326: the peculiar velocity (where the Hubble expansion has been subtracted), 

327: see \cite{Gurbatove1989,Vergassola1994}. 

328: In these coordinates, the evolution of the density

329: field is still given by the continuity equation (\ref{continuity}) below,

330: where the density $\rho$ is the comoving density. If we take $\nu=0$,

331: that is we remove the right hand side in Eq.(\ref{Burg}), this is the well-known

332: Zeldovich approximation \cite{Zeldovich1970,Valageas2007}, where particles 

333: always keep their

334: initial velocity and merely follow straight trajectories. The diffusive term

335: of (\ref{Burg}) is then added as a phenomenological device to prevent particles from

336: escaping to infinity after crossing each other and to mimic the gravitational

337: trapping of particles within the potential wells formed by the overdensities

338: \cite{Gurbatove1989}.

339: Of course, this cannot describe the inner structure of collapsed objects 

340: (e.g., galaxies) but it provides a good description of the large-scale structure

341: of the cosmic web \cite{Melott1994}.

342: 

343: As is well-known \cite{Burgersbook}, the minimization problem (\ref{qmin})

344: has a nice geometrical solution. Indeed, let us consider the 

345: downward\footnote{In the literature one usually defines the velocity potential

346: as $v=-\pl_x\psi$, which leads to upward parabolas. Here we prefer to define

347: $v=\pl_x\psi$ to simplify the interpretation of the process $(q,\psi_0,v_0)$

348: in terms of the dynamics of a Brownian particle.}

349: parabola $\cP_{x,c}(q)$ centered at $x$ and of maximum $c$, i.e. of vertex

350: $(x,c)$, of equation

351: \beq

352: \cP_{x,c}(q) = - \frac{(q-x)^2}{2 t} + c .

353: \label{paraboladef}

354: \eeq

355: Then, starting from below with a large negative value of $c$, such that the

356: parabola is everywhere well below $\psi_0(q)$ (this is possible thanks to the

357: scaling $\psi_0(\lambda q) \law \lambda^{3/2} \psi_0(q)$ which shows 

358: that $\psi_0(q)$ only grows as $|q|^{3/2}$

359: at large $|q|$), we increase $c$ until the two curves touch one another.

360: Then, the abscissa of the point of contact is the Lagrangian coordinate

361: $q(x,t)$ and the potential is given by $\psi(x,t)=c$.

362: (We show below in Fig.~\ref{figP1} the case where the Lagrangian coordinate

363: $q'(x,t)$ is somewhere in the range $0\leq q'\leq q$.)

364: 

365: 

366: \section{Transition kernel with parabolic absorbing barrier}

367: \label{sec:transition}

368: 

369: 

370: For the Brownian initial conditions (\ref{xidef}), the process 

371: $q\mapsto\{\psi_0,v_0\}$ is Markovian, going from $q=0$ towards positive or 

372: negative values. Then, following the approach of \cite{Frachebourg2000} 

373: (where it was applied to white-noise initial velocity),

374: from the geometrical construction (\ref{paraboladef})

375: we can see that a key quantity is the conditional probability density

376: $K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2)$ for the Markov process 

377: $\{\psi_0(q),v_0(q)\}$, starting from $\{\psi_1,v_1\}$ at $q_1 \geq 0$, to end at

378: $\{\psi_2,v_2\}$ at $q_2 \geq q_1 \geq 0$, while staying above the parabolic barrier,

379: $\psi_0(q)>\cP_{x,c}(q)$, for $q_1\leq q\leq q_2$. It obeys the 

380: advective-diffusion equation

381: \beq

382: \left[ \frac{\pl}{\pl q_2} + v_2 \frac{\pl}{\pl \psi_2} \right] 

383: K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) = \frac{D}{2} \frac{\pl^2}{\pl v_2^2}

384: K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2)

385: \label{diffK}

386: \eeq

387: over the domain $\psi \geq \cP_{x,c}(q)$, with the initial condition at $q_2=q_1$

388: \beq

389: K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_1,\psi_2,v_2) = \delta(\psi_2-\psi_1) \delta(v_2-v_1) ,

390: \label{initial}

391: \eeq

392: and the boundary condition

393: \beq

394: K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) = 0 

395: \;\;\; \mbox{at} \;\;\;  \psi_2=\cP_{x,c}(q_2)

396: \;\;\; \mbox{for} \;\;\; v_2 \geq \frac{\dd \cP_{x,c}}{\dd q}(q_2) .

397: \label{Kboundary}

398: \eeq

399: Equation (\ref{diffK}) is also the Klein-Kramers equation for the distribution

400: function $P(x,v;t)$ of Brownian particles, in the limit of zero external force

401: and zero friction coefficient but finite diffusion coefficient, where we identify

402: the position, velocity and time coordinates as $\{x,v;t\}=\{\psi_2,v_2;q_2\}$.

403: The boundary condition (\ref{Kboundary}) simply means that particles cannot

404: come back from the absorbing region (i.e. curves that cross the parabola

405: are ``lost'' and do not contribute to the probability density $K_{x,c}$).

406: 

407: In the case of white-noise initial velocity studied in \cite{Frachebourg2000}, 

408: the velocity potential $\psi$ itself is a Brownian motion so that the 

409: relevant propagator only involves one dependent variable, $\psi$,

410: as $K_{x,c}^{\rm w.n.}(q_1,\psi_1;q_2,\psi_2)$. In our case, since $\psi$ is now

411: the integral of the Brownian motion $v$, the propagator $K_{x,c}$ introduced 

412: in (\ref{diffK}) involves the two dependent variables $v$ and $\psi$.

413: Thus, we have a diffusion in a two-dimensional $\{\psi,v\}-$space rather than

414: the one-dimensional $\psi-$space as in \cite{Frachebourg2000}.

415: As we shall see below, the propagator $K_{x,c}$ involves an expansion

416: over a continuous spectrum of eigenfunctions that are built from the Airy function,

417: whereas the white-noise case leads to a different expansion over eigenfunctions that

418: are still built from the  Airy function but form a discrete spectrum, 

419: see \cite{Frachebourg2000}.

420: 

421: 

422: 

423: The conditional probability density $K_{x,c}$ associated with the left-handed

424: Brownian motion $q_2\leq q_1 \leq 0$ can be obtained from the symmetry 

425: $q\rightarrow-q$ as:

426: \beq

427: 0 \leq q_1 \leq q_2 : \;\; K_{x,c}(-q_1,\psi_1,v_1;-q_2,\psi_2,v_2) 

428: = K_{-x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,-v_1;q_2,\psi_2,-v_2) ,

429: \label{Kmq}

430: \eeq

431: hence we only need consider Eq.(\ref{diffK}) for $0\leq q_1 \leq q_2$.

432: To solve this equation it is convenient to make the change of variables

433: \beq

434: K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) = \cK(q_1,y_1,w_1;q_2,y_2,w_2) ,

435: \label{cKdef}

436: \eeq

437: \beq

438: \mbox{with} \;\;\;\;\;\; y=\psi-\cP_{x,c}(q) =\psi+\frac{(q-x)^2}{2 t}-c , 

439: \;\;\;\;\; w= v - \frac{\dd \cP_{x,c}}{\dd q}(q) =  v + \frac{q-x}{t} ,

440: \label{yw}

441: \eeq

442: to obtain a simpler boundary at the fixed vertical half-line $(y=0,w\geq 0)$ 

443: in the $(y,w)$ half-plane for $\cK$, $y\geq 0$ and $-\infty<w<\infty$, instead of 

444: the parabolic boundary for $K$.

445: From Eq.(\ref{diffK}) the kernel $\cK$ satisfies the equation with 

446: constant external force

447: \beq

448: \left[ \frac{\pl}{\pl q_2} + w_2 \frac{\pl}{\pl y_2} + \frac{1}{t} 

449: \frac{\pl}{\pl w_2}  \right] \cK = \frac{D}{2} \frac{\pl^2}{\pl w_2^2} \cK .

450: \label{cKdiff}

451: \eeq

452: Then, making the transformation

453: \beq

454: \cK(q_1,y_1,w_1;q_2,y_2,w_2) = \frac{2}{D} \, G(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) \,

455: \exp\left[\frac{w_2-w_1}{Dt}-\frac{q_2-q_1}{2Dt^2}\right] ,

456: \label{Gdef}

457: \eeq

458: \beq

459: \mbox{with} \;\;\;\;\;\; \tau=q_2-q_1 , \;\;\;\;\; r=\sqrt{\frac{2}{D}} \, y ,

460: \;\;\;\;\; u=\sqrt{\frac{2}{D}} \, w ,

461: \label{xu}

462: \eeq

463: we obtain the simpler advective-diffusion equation for $\tau \geq 0$ and

464: $x\geq 0$,

465: \beq

466: \frac{\pl G}{\pl\tau} + u_2 \frac{\pl G}{\pl r_2} = \frac{\pl^2 G}{\pl u_2^2} ,

467: \label{Gdiff}

468: \eeq

469: with the initial and boundary conditions

470: \beq

471: G(0;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) = \delta(r_2-r_1) \delta(u_2-u_1) ,

472: \;\;\; G(\tau;r_1,u_1;0,u_2) = 0 \;\;\; \mbox{for} \;\;\; u_2 \geq 0 .

473: \label{Gboundary}

474: \eeq

475: Thus, $G(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2)$ is the conditional probability density

476: of Brownian particles with unit diffusion coefficient and absorbing barrier

477: at $r=0$. This quantity was obtained in \cite{Burkhardt1993} and we briefly

478: recall below his procedure using our notations.

479: We first take the Laplace transform of $G$ as

480: \beq

481: \tG(s;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) = \int_0^{\infty} \dd\tau \, e^{-s\tau} 

482: G(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) ,

483: \label{tGdef}

484: \eeq

485: hence Eq.(\ref{Gdiff}) gives

486: \beq

487: \left(s+u_2 \frac{\pl}{\pl r_2}-\frac{\pl^2}{\pl u_2^2}\right) 

488: \tG(s;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) = \delta(r_2-r_1) \delta(u_2-u_1) .

489: \label{tGdiff}

490: \eeq

491: Next, to obtain an ordinary differential equation, it is convenient to expand

492: over the eigenfunctions $e^{-\nu^3 r_2} g_{s,\nu}(u_2)$ associated with 

493: Schr\"{o}dinger's equation

494: \beq

495: \left(s-\nu^3 u-\frac{\dd^2}{\dd u^2}\right) g_{s,\nu}(u) = 0 ,

496: \;\;\; \mbox{whence} \;\;\; 

497: g_{s,\nu}(u) = \Ai\left[-\nu u +\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] ,

498: \label{gsnudiff}

499: \eeq

500: using the fact that the standard Airy function $\Ai(x)$ is the only solution 

501: of $\Ai''(x)=x \Ai(x)$ that vanishes at both ends $x \rightarrow \pm\infty$

502: \cite{Abramowitz}. We recall in Appendix~\ref{Airy} some useful properties

503: of this entire function. Using the integral representation (\ref{Ai1int}),

504: we obtain the orthogonality property

505: \beq

506: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd u \, u \, \Ai\left[-\nu u +\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right]

507: \Ai\left[-\nu' u +\frac{s}{\nu'^2}\right] = \frac{1}{3\nu} \, \delta(\nu-\nu') ,

508: \label{orthogonality}

509: \eeq

510: and the closure relation

511: \beq

512: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd\nu \, 3\nu \, \Ai\left[-\nu u +\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right]

513: \Ai\left[-\nu u' +\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] = \frac{1}{u} \, \delta(u-u') .

514: \label{closure}

515: \eeq

516: Therefore, we can see from Eqs.(\ref{gsnudiff})-(\ref{closure}) that 

517: Eq.(\ref{tGdiff}) has the particular solution

518: \beqa

519: \tG_0(s;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) & = & \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd\nu \, 

520: e^{-\nu^3(r_2-r_1)} \, 3\nu \, \Ai\left[-\nu u_1 +\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] 

521: \Ai\left[-\nu u_2 +\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] \nonumber \\

522: && \times \left[ - \theta(-\nu) \theta(r_1-r_2)

523: + \theta(\nu) \theta(r_2-r_1) \right]

524: \label{tG0}

525: \eeqa

526: where $\theta$ is the Heaviside function.

527: We can check that $\tG_0$ vanishes for $|r|\rightarrow\infty$ and for

528: $|u|\rightarrow\infty$. Then, since we have not taken into account the

529: boundary condition at $r_2=0$ of (\ref{Gboundary}) yet, $\tG_0$ is the Laplace

530: transform of the probability density of Brownian particles over the unbounded

531: plane $(r,u)$ (thus $\tG_0$ only depends on the length $|r_2-r_1|$).

532: Note that the solution to this unbounded problem is well known to be 

533: the Gaussian \cite{Burkhardt1993}

534: \beq

535: G_0(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2\pi\tau^2} \, 

536: e^{-\frac{3}{\tau^3}(r_2-r_1-u_1\tau)^2

537: +\frac{3}{\tau^2}(r_2-r_1-u_1\tau)(u_2-u_1)-\frac{1}{\tau}(u_2-u_1)^2} ,

538: \label{G0tau}

539: \eeq

540: as can be checked by substitution into Eq.(\ref{Gdiff}). Therefore,

541: Eq.(\ref{G0tau}) is the inverse Laplace transform of Eq.(\ref{tG0}).

542: 

543: Next, in order to satisfy the second constraint (\ref{Gboundary}), we must 

544: subtract to $\tG_0$ an appropriate solution $\tG_1$ of the homogeneous form of 

545: Eq.(\ref{tGdiff}). From Eq.(\ref{gsnudiff}), we can see that $\tG_1$ 

546: can be written as a combination of eigenfunctions 

547: $e^{-\mu^3 r_2} g_{s,\mu}(u_2)$, that must be restricted

548: to $\mu>0$ to ensure that $\tG$ vanishes for $r_2\rightarrow +\infty$.

549: Moreover, for $r_2=0$ only the first part $\theta(-\nu) \theta(r_1-r_2)$

550: contributes to $\tG_0$ in Eq.(\ref{tG0}). Therefore, to compensate for this

551: term at $r_2=0$ for $u_2\geq 0$, we must look for a function $\tG_1$

552: of the form

553: \beq

554: \tG_1(s;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) = \int_0^{\infty} \dd\nu \, e^{-\nu^3 r_1} \, 3\nu \, 

555: \Ai\left[\nu u_1+\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] \phi_{s,\nu}(r_2,u_2) ,

556: \label{tG1def}

557: \eeq

558: where the function $\phi_{s,\nu}(r,u)$ can be written as

559: \beq

560: \phi_{s,\nu}(r,u) = \int_0^{\infty} \dd\mu \, W_{s,\nu}(\mu) \, e^{-\mu^3 r} 

561: \, \Ai\left[-\mu u+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right] ,

562: \label{phiW}

563: \eeq

564: with some weight $W_{s,\nu}(\mu)$, and satisfies the constraint

565: \beq

566: \phi_{s,\nu}(r=0,u) = \Ai\left[\nu u+\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] \;\;\;\;\;

567: \mbox{for} \;\;\;\;\; u\geq 0.

568: \label{phix0}

569: \eeq	

570: This is a half-range problem as we must decompose a given function (here

571: $\Ai[\nu u+s/\nu^2]$) over half the domain ($u\geq 0$) using only half of the

572: eigenfunctions $g_{s,\mu}(u)$.  

573: Using the results of \cite{Marshall1985}, who studied the Klein-Kramers equation,

574: and taking the limit of zero friction but non-zero diffusion, \cite{Burkhardt1993}

575: obtained:

576: \beq

577: \nu>0 : \;\;\; \phi_{s,\nu}(r,u) = \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

578: \frac{3\nu^{1/2}\mu^{3/2}}{\nu^3+\mu^3} \, 

579: e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} (\nu^{-3}+\mu^{-3})} \, e^{-\mu^3 r} \,

580: \Ai\left[-\mu u+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right] .

581: \label{phiint}

582: \eeq

583: Substituting into Eq.(\ref{tG1def}), we obtain for the solution $\tG$ 

584: of Eq.(\ref{tGdiff}), with the boundary conditions (\ref{Gboundary}),

585: \beq

586: \tG=\tG_0-\tG_1 , \;\;\; \mbox{with} 

587: \eeq

588: \beq

589: \tG_1 = \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\nu \dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

590: \frac{9\nu^{3/2}\mu^{3/2}}{\nu^3+\mu^3} 

591: \, e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} (\nu^{-3}+\mu^{-3})} \, e^{-\nu^3 r_1-\mu^3 r_2} 

592: \, \Ai\left[\nu u_1+\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] 

593: \Ai\left[-\mu u_2+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right] .

594: \label{tG1}

595: \eeq

596: We describe in Appendix~\ref{Half-range} how the

597: solution (\ref{phiint}) can be directly obtained for the half-range expansion 

598: problem (\ref{phiW})-(\ref{phix0}), associated with the Brownian dynamics

599: (\ref{Gdiff}), rather than first solving the problem associated with the

600: Klein-Kramers dynamics and next taking the limit of zero friction, see

601: Eq.(\ref{phi0intk1l0}).

602: This also allows us to derive the more general identities (\ref{phi0int}), 

603: (\ref{Expintkl}), that we need in the following sections.

604: 

605: We can see from the explicit expressions (\ref{tG0}), (\ref{tG1}),

606: that the kernel $G$ also satisfies the backward evolution equations

607: (compare with Eqs.(\ref{Gdiff}), (\ref{tGdiff}))

608: \beqa

609: \left(\frac{\pl}{\pl\tau} - u_1 \frac{\pl}{\pl r_1} - \frac{\pl^2}{\pl u_1^2} \right)

610: G(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) & = & 0 , \label{Gbackward} \\

611: \left(s-u_1 \frac{\pl}{\pl r_1}-\frac{\pl^2}{\pl u_1^2}\right) 

612: \tG(s;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) & = & \delta(r_2-r_1) \delta(u_2-u_1) ,

613: \label{tGbackward}

614: \eeqa

615: as well as the boundary condition (compare with (\ref{Gboundary}))

616: \beq

617: G(\tau;0,u_1;r_2,u_2) = 0 \;\;\; \mbox{for} \;\;\; u_1 \leq 0 .

618: \label{Gboundary1}

619: \eeq

620: Equation (\ref{Gboundary1}) merely states that the trajectory $r(\tau)$

621: starting on the absorbing barrier at $r_1=0$ must start in the upward

622: direction $u_1>0$ not to be immediately absorbed.  

623: 

624: For later calculations we also need two kernels $\Delta$ and $H$ that are derived

625: from $G$. Thus, we define the propagator $\Delta$, that will be associated with 

626: Brownian particles that come within a small distance $\epsilon$ from the 

627: parabolic absorbing barrier, by

628: \beq

629: \Delta(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) = \lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0} \frac{1}{\epsilon} 

630: [ G(\tau;r_1+\epsilon,u_1;r_2+\epsilon,u_2) - G(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) ] .

631: \label{Deltadef}

632: \eeq

633: From Eqs.(\ref{tG0}) and (\ref{tG1}) we have for its Laplace transform $\tD$

634: \beqa

635: \tD(s;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) & = & \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\nu\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

636: 9\nu^{3/2}\mu^{3/2} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} (\nu^{-3}+\mu^{-3})} 

637: \, e^{-\nu^3 r_1-\mu^3 r_2} \nonumber \\ 

638: && \times \Ai\left[\nu u_1+\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] 

639: \Ai\left[-\mu u_2+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right]  .

640: \label{Ds}

641: \eeqa

642: Next, we define the kernel $\Hi(r_1,u_1)$, associated with Brownian particles that

643: stay forever above the parabolic absorbing barrier, by

644: \beq

645: \Hi(r_1,u_1) = \lim_{\tau\rightarrow+\infty} e^{-\tau/\gam^2} H(\tau;r_1,u_1) ,

646: \label{Hidef}

647: \eeq

648: \beq

649: \mbox{with} \;\;\;\;

650: H(\tau;r_1,u_1) = \int_0^{\infty} \dd r_2 \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd u_2 

651: \, e^{u_2/\gam} \, G(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) .

652: \label{Hdef}

653: \eeq

654: Using Eqs.(\ref{tG0}) and (\ref{tG1}), and the property (\ref{IntExpAi}),

655: we obtain after integration over $r_2$ and $u_2$ for the Laplace transform $\tH$,

656: \beqa

657: \tH(s;r_1,u_1) & = & \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd\nu \frac{3}{\nu^3}

658:  \Ai\left[-\nu u_1+\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] 

659: e^{(\frac{s}{\gam}-\frac{1}{3\gam^3})/\nu^3}

660: \left[ \theta(\nu) - \theta(-\nu) (1-e^{\nu^3 r_1}) \right]  \nonumber \\

661: && - \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\nu\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

662: \frac{9\nu^{3/2}\mu^{-5/2}}{\nu^3+\mu^3} \, 

663: e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} (\nu^{-3}+\mu^{-3})} \, e^{-\nu^3 r_1} 

664: \Ai\left[\nu u_1+\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] 

665: e^{(\frac{s}{\gam}-\frac{1}{3\gam^3})/\mu^3} .

666: \label{Hs}

667: \eeqa

668: The behavior for $\tau\rightarrow\infty$ of $H(\tau;r_1,u_1)$ is determined by

669: the rightmost singularity of $\tH$, which is located at $s=1/\gam^2$.

670: At this point, the first integral in Eq.(\ref{Hs}) diverges for 

671: $\nu\rightarrow 0^+$ whereas the second integral diverges for 

672: $\mu\rightarrow 0^+$. Therefore, the singularity is governed by the behavior

673: of the integrand for $\nu\rightarrow 0^+$ and $\mu\rightarrow 0^+$, so that we

674: can expand the first Airy function and the ratio $1/(\nu^3+\mu^3)$, which yields

675: \beq

676: s\rightarrow\gam^{-2} : \;\; \tH \sim \frac{1}{s-\gam^{-2}} \left\{ e^{u_1/\gam} 

677: - \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\nu}{\sqrt{\pi}} 3 \nu^{-3/2} 

678: e^{-\frac{2}{3}\nu^{-3}-\nu^3 r_1/\gam^3} 

679: \Ai\left[\nu \frac{u_1}{\gam}+\frac{1}{\nu^2}\right] \right\} .

680: \label{Hsasymp}

681: \eeq

682: This gives for the function $\Hi(r_1,u_1)$:

683: \beq

684: \Hi(r_1,u_1) = e^{u_1/\gam} - \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\nu}{\sqrt{\pi}} 

685: 3 \nu^{-3/2} e^{-\frac{2}{3}\nu^{-3}-\nu^3 r_1/\gam^3} 

686: \Ai\left[\nu \frac{u_1}{\gam}+\frac{1}{\nu^2}\right] .

687: \label{Hieq}

688: \eeq

689: 

690: Finally, using the transformations (\ref{cKdef}) and (\ref{Gdef}), we obtain

691: in terms of the original variables

692: \beq

693: K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) \, \dd \psi_2 \dd v_2 = 

694: e^{-\tau/\gamma^2+(u_2-u_1)/\gamma} \, G(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) \, \dd r_2 \dd u_2 ,

695: \label{KG1}

696: \eeq

697: with

698: \beq

699: \tau=\gamma^2 (Q_2-Q_1) , \;\;\; 

700: r_i=2\gamma^3\left[ \Psi_i+\frac{(Q_i-X)^2}{2}-C \right], 

701: \;\;\; u_i= 2\gamma (V_i+Q_i-X) .

702: \label{riui}

703: \eeq

704: Here we introduced the dimensionless spatial coordinates

705: (which we shall note by capital letters in this article)

706: \beq

707: Q=\frac{q}{\gam^2} = \frac{q}{2Dt^2} , \hspace{0.5cm} 

708: X= \frac{x}{\gam^2} = \frac{x}{2Dt^2} , \hspace{0.5cm} \mbox{with}\hspace{0.5cm}

709: \gam = \sqrt{2D} \, t ,

710: \label{QXdef}

711: \eeq

712: and the dimensionless velocity

713: \beq

714: V=\frac{tv}{\gam^2}=\frac{v}{2Dt} , \;\;\; \mbox{whence} \;\;\; X=Q+V  \;\;\;

715: \mbox{for regular points} .

716: \label{Vdef}

717: \eeq

718: In a similar fashion, the dimensionless velocity potential coordinates 

719: in (\ref{riui}) are

720: \beq

721: \Psi = \frac{t\psi}{\gamma^4} \;\;\;\; \mbox{and} \;\;\;\;  C = \frac{t c}{\gamma^4} .

722: \label{PsiCdef}

723: \eeq

724: Next, from Eq.(\ref{Hidef}) the kernel associated with Brownian particles that 

725: remain forever above the parabola $\cP_{x,c}$ reads as

726: \beq

727: \lim_{q_2\rightarrow+\infty} \int \dd\psi_2\dd v_2 \, 

728: K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) = e^{-u_1/\gamma} \Hi(r_1,u_1) ,

729: \label{KcHi}

730: \eeq

731: whereas the propagator associated with Brownian particles that come within a small 

732: distance $\delta c$ from the parabolic absorbing barrier is from Eq.(\ref{Deltadef})

733: \beqa

734: \lim_{\delta c \rightarrow 0} \, \frac{1}{\delta c}

735: [K_{x,c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) 

736: - K_{x,c+\delta c}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2)] \, \dd\psi_2\dd v_2 & = & 

737: \nonumber \\

738: && \hspace{-5cm} 2\frac{t}{\gamma} \, e^{-\tau/\gamma^2+(u_2-u_1)/\gamma} 

739: \, \Delta(\tau;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2) \, \dd r_2 \dd u_2 .

740: \label{KDelta}

741: \eeqa

742:  

743: 

744: \section{One-point distributions}

745: \label{sec:velocity1}

746: 

747: 

748: 

749: \subsection{Results for arbitrary Eulerian location $x$}

750: \label{subsec:arbitrary_Eulerian_location_x}

751: 

752: 

753: 

754: In this section we consider the one-point velocity distribution $p_x(v)$

755: at the Eulerian location $x$. From the explicit solution (\ref{psinu0}),

756: it can be derived from the probability distribution $p_x(q)$ of the Lagrangian

757: coordinate $q(x,t)$. Thus, we have from Eq.(\ref{psinu0})

758: \beq

759: p_x(v) = t \, p_x(q) \hspace{0.8cm} \mbox{and} \hspace{0.8cm} q = x - v t ,

760: \label{pvpq}

761: \eeq

762: where we note $p_x(v)$ and $p_x(q)$ the probability distributions of the velocity

763: $v$ and of the Lagrangian coordinate $q$, at the Eulerian location $x$ and time

764: $t$. 

765: Here we used the property that $q(x,t)$ is well defined for any $x$ except

766: over a set of zero measure in Eulerian space associated with shocks

767: \cite{She1992}.

768: 

769: Then, from the geometrical construction (\ref{paraboladef}),

770: we are led to consider the bivariate probability distribution, 

771: $p_x(0\leq q'\leq q,c)\dd c$, that the first contact point of the potential 

772: $\psi_0(q')$

773: with the family of downward parabolas $\cP_{x,c}(q')$, with $c$ increasing from 

774: $-\infty$, occurs at an abscissa $q'$ in the range $0\leq q'\leq q$, with a 

775: parabola of height between $c$ and $c+\dd c$. 

776: This will give us in turn the cumulative distribution $p_x(0\leq q' \leq q)$ 

777: by integrating over $c$. 

778: Then, for $q \geq 0$, we can write this probability distribution as

779: \beqa

780: p_x(0\leq q'\leq q,c)\dd c & = & \lim_{q_{\pm}\rightarrow\pm\infty} 

781: \int \dd\psi_-\dd v_- \dd\psi\dd v \dd\psi_+\dd v_+

782: \, K_{x,c}(0,0,0;q_-,\psi_-,v_-)  \nonumber \\

783: && \hspace{-0.5cm} \times \, [ K_{x,c}(0,0,0;q,\psi,v) - K_{x,c+\dd c}(0,0,0;q,\psi,v) ] 

784: \, K_{x,c}(q,\psi,v;q_+,\psi_+,v_+) ,

785: \label{pxcq1}

786: \eeqa

787: where we used the Markovian character of the process $q\mapsto\{\psi,v\}$.

788: Thus, we could factorize in Eq.(\ref{pxcq1}) the probability 

789: $p_x(0\leq q'\leq q,c)\dd c$ into three terms, which correspond to the

790: probabilities that i) $\psi_0(q')$ stays above $\cP_{x,c}$ for $q'<0$,

791: ii) $\psi_0(q')$ stays above $\cP_{x,c}$, but does not everywhere remain above 

792: $\cP_{x,c+\dd c}$, over the range $0\leq q'\leq q$, while reaching an arbitrary value

793: $\{\psi,v\}$ at $q$, over which we will integrate, and iii) $\psi_0(q')$ 

794: stays above $\cP_{x,c}$ for $q '> q$. We show in Fig.~\ref{figP1} the geometrical 

795: interpretation of Eq.(\ref{pxcq1}) (where we did not try to draw an actual Brownian

796: curve $\psi_0(q)$ which has no finite second-derivative).

797: 

798: 

799: 

800: \begin{figure}

801: \begin{center}

802: \epsfxsize=9.5 cm \epsfysize=6. cm {\epsfbox{P1.eps}}

803: \end{center}

804: \caption{(color online) Geometrical interpretation of the initial conditions $\psi_0(q'')$ 

805: associated with the probability $p_x(0\leq q'\leq q,c)\dd c$. The Brownian curve

806: $\psi_0(q'')$ is everywhere above the parabola $\cP_{x,c}$ and goes below 

807: $\cP_{x,c+\dd c}$ somewhere in the range $0\leq q''\leq q$. From the constraints

808: $\psi_0(0)=0$ and $\psi_0'(0)=0$, see Eqs.(\ref{xidef}), it goes through the

809: origin with an horizontal tangent. To obtain the cumulative probability, 

810: $p_x(0\leq q'\leq q)$, we must then integrate over the height $c$ of the parabola.}

811: \label{figP1}

812: \end{figure}

813: 

814: 

815:  

816: We can easily check that in the limit $x\rightarrow +\infty$ and

817: $q\rightarrow +\infty$ with $q\gg x$, the integral over $c$ of Eq.(\ref{pxcq1})

818: gives unity as it should. It is convenient to first compute cumulative 

819: probabilities as in (\ref{pxcq1}) and to take the derivatives afterwards to

820: derive the probability densities. This ensures that probabilities are well

821: normalized and it avoids coming across ill-defined expressions. Indeed,

822: since the curve $\psi_0(q)$ has a continuous derivative, it is tangent to

823: the parabola $\cP_{x,c}$ at the first contact point. Then, this point corresponds to

824: $r=0$ and $u=0$ in terms of the reduced variables (\ref{xu}), where the Brownian

825: kernels are singular. For instance, the expression (\ref{tG0}) is not well

826: defined if we naively put $r_1=r_2=0$. Other ambiguities or seemingly divergent

827: quantities appear if we try to directly compute probability densities by using

828: Taylor expansions.   

829: 

830: Then, using the relations (\ref{KG1})-(\ref{KDelta}), we obtain

831: \beq

832: p_x(0\leq q'\leq q,r_0)\dd r_0 = e^{-q/\gam^2} \dd r_0 \int \dd r \dd u 

833: \, \Hi(r_0,\hu) \Delta(q;r_0,-\hu;r,u) \Hi(r,u) ,

834: \label{pHHD}

835: \eeq

836: where we defined

837: \beq

838: \hu= \sqrt{\frac{2}{D}} \frac{x}{t}

839: = \frac{2x}{\gamma} .

840: \label{hudef}

841: \eeq

842: Using the results of section~\ref{sec:transition}, the integration over 

843: $r$ and $r_0$ gives

844: \beq

845: p_x(0\leq q'\leq q) = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q} \, I(s) J(s,2X) ,

846: \label{pxQX1}

847: \eeq

848: where we introduced the dimensionless variables $Q$ and $X$ as in (\ref{QXdef})

849: and we defined the functions

850: \beq

851: I(s) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd z \, J(s,2z) ,

852: \label{Is1}

853: \eeq

854: and

855: \beqa

856: J(s,y) & = & e^y \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\nu}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, 3\nu^{-3/2} 

857: \, e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} \nu^{-3}} 

858: \Ai\left[-\nu y+\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right]   \nonumber \\

859: &&  - \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\nu\dd\mu}{\pi} \, 

860: \frac{9\nu^{-3/2}\mu^{3/2}}{\nu^3+\mu^3} \, 

861: e^{-\frac{2}{3} (\nu^{-3}+s^{3/2}\mu^{-3})} 

862: \Ai\left[\nu y+\frac{1}{\nu^2}\right] \Ai\left[-\mu y+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right] .

863: \label{JsX1}

864: \eeqa

865: For $y\geq 0$, we obtain using Eqs.(\ref{phi0int})-(\ref{Expu_int}),

866: \beq

867: y\geq 0 : \;\;\; J(s,y) = s^{-1/4} e^{(1-\sqrt{s})y} - 6 \int_0^{\infty}

868: \frac{\dd\nu}{\nu^2} \, e^{\frac{2}{3} (s^{3/2}-1) \nu^{-3}} 

869: \Ai\left[\nu y+\frac{1}{\nu^2}\right]  \Ai\left[\nu y+\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] .

870: \label{JsX2}

871: \eeq

872: For $y\leq 0$, using Eq.(\ref{Expintkl}) in the second term of Eq.(\ref{JsX1}), we

873: obtain

874: \beq

875: y\leq 0 : \;\;\; J(s,y) =  6 \int_0^{\infty}

876: \frac{\dd\mu}{\mu^2} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3} (s^{3/2}-1) \mu^{-3}} 

877: \Ai\left[-\mu y+\frac{1}{\mu^2}\right]  \Ai\left[-\mu y+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right] .

878: \label{JsX3}

879: \eeq

880: Therefore, since we have the primitive

881: \beqa

882: \int \dd u \, \Ai\left[\nu u+\frac{s_1}{\nu^2}\right] 

883: \Ai\left[\nu u+\frac{s_2}{\nu^2}\right] & = & \frac{\nu}{s_1-s_2} 

884: \nonumber \\

885: && \hspace{-2cm} \times \left\{  \Ai\,'\left[\nu u+\frac{s_1}{\nu^2}\right] 

886: \Ai\left[\nu u+\frac{s_2}{\nu^2}\right] - \Ai\left[\nu u+\frac{s_1}{\nu^2}\right] 

887: \Ai\,'\left[\nu u+\frac{s_2}{\nu^2}\right] \right\} ,

888: \label{prim1}

889: \eeqa

890: the integral (\ref{Is1}) reads as

891: \beq

892: I(s) = \frac{s^{-1/4}}{2(\sqrt{s}-1)} + \frac{3}{s-1} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \!

893: \frac{\dd\nu}{\nu} \, e^{\frac{2}{3}(s^{3/2}-1)\nu^{-3}} \left[ 

894: \Ai\,'\left(\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right) \Ai\left(\frac{1}{\nu^2}\right) \! 

895: - \! \Ai\left(\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right) \Ai\,'\left(\frac{1}{\nu^2}\right) \right] .

896: \label{Is2}

897: \eeq

898: Using Eq.(\ref{intmu1AipAiui02}) this yields the simple result

899: \beq

900: I(s) = \frac{1}{s-1} .

901: \label{Isresult}

902: \eeq

903: Therefore, in terms of dimensionless variables, the cumulative probability

904: (\ref{pxQX1}) reads as

905: \beq

906: P_X(0\leq Q'\leq Q) = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q} \, 

907: \frac{J(s,2X)}{s-1} .

908: \label{PXQ2}

909: \eeq

910: On the other hand, since the system is statistically invariant through reflection 

911: about the origin, we have the symmetry 

912: $p_x(0\leq q'\leq q) = p_{-x}(-q\leq q'\leq 0)$. This implies that the cumulative

913: probability distribution associated with a Lagrangian coordinate $q'$ on the 

914: negative real axis reads as

915: \beq

916: P_X(-Q\leq Q'\leq 0) = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q} \, 

917: \frac{J(s,-2X)}{s-1} .

918: \label{PXQm1}

919: \eeq

920: We can also check Eq.(\ref{PXQm1}) through an explicit calculation similar to

921: (\ref{pxcq1}).

922: 

923: From Eq.(\ref{pvpq}) and Eqs.(\ref{PXQ2})-(\ref{PXQm1}), the cumulative velocity 

924: distribution is given by

925: \beqa

926: v\leq \frac{x}{t} & : & \;\;\; p_x(v\leq v'\leq x/t) = p_x(0\leq q'\leq x-v t) 

927: = P_X(0\leq Q' \leq X-V) , 

928: \label{pxv1} \\

929: v\geq \frac{x}{t} & : & \;\;\; p_x(x/t\leq v'\leq v) = p_x(x-v t\leq q'\leq 0) 

930: = P_{-X}(0\leq Q'\leq V-X) ,

931: \label{pxv2}

932: \eeqa

933: where we introduced the dimensionless velocity $V$ defined as in (\ref{Vdef}).

934: Of course, Eqs.(\ref{PXQ2})-(\ref{pxv2}) agree with the 

935: scalings (\ref{scalings}).

936: 

937: 

938: Letting $|Q|\rightarrow\infty$ in Eqs.(\ref{PXQ2})-(\ref{PXQm1}), or 

939: $|V|\rightarrow\infty$ in Eqs.(\ref{pxv1})-(\ref{pxv2}), we obtain the 

940: probabilities that the Lagrangian coordinate $q$, associated with the Eulerian 

941: coordinate $x$, is located on either side of the origin (or that the velocity 

942: $v$ is smaller or greater than $x/t$):

943: \beqa

944: p_x(q\geq 0) = p_x(v\leq x/t) & = & J(1,2X) ,

945: \label{pqp1} \\

946: p_x(q\leq 0) = p_x(v\geq x/t) & = & J(1,-2X) .

947: \label{pqm1}

948: \eeqa

949: Here we used the fact that the large-$Q$ behavior of Eqs.(\ref{PXQ2})-(\ref{PXQm1})

950: is set by the rightmost singularity of the ratio $J(s,\pm 2X)/(s-1)$, which is

951: the simple pole at $s=1$. From Eqs.(\ref{JsX2})-(\ref{JsX3}) we obtain for $x\geq 0$:

952: \beq

953: x\geq 0 : \;\;\; p_x(q\leq 0) = \int_0^{\infty} \dd\nu \, \frac{6}{\nu^2} \, 

954: \Ai\left[\nu 2X+\frac{1}{\nu^2}\right]^2 ,

955: \;\;\;\;\;\; p_x(q\geq 0) = 1 - p_x(q\leq 0) .

956: \label{pqpm2}

957: \eeq

958: We can check that the sum of these two probabilities is equal to unity.

959: As expected, Eq.(\ref{pqpm2}) shows that $p_x(q\leq 0)$ decreases as $x$ gets larger 

960: and it goes to zero for $x\rightarrow+\infty$. For $x=0$, both quantities are equal

961: to $J(1,0)=1/2$, as can be checked from the explicit computation of the integral

962: in Eq.(\ref{pqpm2}). 

963: 

964: Finally, from Eqs.(\ref{PXQ2})-(\ref{PXQm1}) the probability densities are given 

965: by:

966: \beq

967: Q\geq 0: \;\; P_X(Q) = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q} J(s,2X) ,

968: \;\;\;\;\; P_X(-Q) = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q} J(s,-2X) .

969: \label{PXQdens}

970: \eeq

971: This also gives the velocity distributions through the relation (\ref{Vdef}).

972: 

973: 

974: 

975: \subsection{Velocity distribution at the origin $x=0$}

976: \label{subsec:origin_x=0}

977: 

978: 

979: 

980: 

981: 

982: \begin{figure}

983: \begin{center}

984: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{P0v.ps}}

985: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{lP0v.ps}}

986: \end{center}

987: \caption{(color online) {\it Left panel:} The probability distribution $P_0(V)$ of the 

988: reduced velocity $V=v/(2Dt)$ at the origin $x=0$, from Eq.(\ref{p0V}). The

989: dashed lines show the asymptotic behaviors (\ref{p0V0}) and (\ref{p0Vinfty}).

990: {\it Right panel:} Same as left panel but on a logarithmic scale.}

991: \label{figP0v}

992: \end{figure}

993: 

994: 

995: 

996: We consider here the one-point distribution at the origin $x=0$.

997: From Eq.(\ref{PXQdens}) we can check that the distribution

998: is even (we have $Q=-V$ at $X=0$). For $V\geq 0$ it is given by

999: \beq

1000: V\geq 0 : \;\;\; P_0(V) = \inta\frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii}\, e^{(s-1)V} \, J(s,0) ,

1001: \;\;\;\; P_0(-V) = P_0(V) .

1002: \label{p0V}

1003: \eeq

1004: The behavior for $V\rightarrow 0^+$ is determined by the behavior at 

1005: $s\rightarrow+\infty$ of $J(s,0)$. From Eq.(\ref{JsX3}) and using 

1006: Eq.(\ref{IntAiExp1}) we obtain

1007: \beq

1008: s\rightarrow+\infty: \;\;\; J(s,0) \sim \frac{\sqrt{3}}{\pi} \, s^{-1/2} ,

1009: \label{Js0infty}

1010: \eeq

1011: which leads to

1012: \beq

1013: V \rightarrow 0^+ : \;\;\; P_0(V) \sim \frac{1}{\pi} \sqrt{\frac{3}{\pi V}} .

1014: \label{p0V0}

1015: \eeq

1016: Thus, we obtain an inverse square-root divergence for $P_0(V)$ at 

1017: $V \rightarrow 0$.

1018: 

1019: The behavior of $P_0(V)$ for large $V$ is governed by the 

1020: rightmost singularity of $J(s,0)$, located at $s=0$ (associated with the

1021: branch cut along the negative real axis). There, $J(s,0)$ behaves as 

1022: $J(s,0) \sim s^{-1/4}$, because of the first term in Eq.(\ref{JsX2}). This yields

1023: \beq

1024: V \rightarrow +\infty : \;\;\; P_0(V) \sim \frac{1}{\Gamma[1/4]} \, V^{-3/4} 

1025: \, e^{-V} .

1026: \label{p0Vinfty}

1027: \eeq

1028: Note that initially, at time $t=0$, the velocity at the origin is not random

1029: as it is equal to zero, see (\ref{xidef}). Then, for $t>0$ the nonlinear 

1030: evolution of the velocity field $v(x,t)$ broadens this initial Dirac peak and 

1031: gives rise to the exponential tail (\ref{p0Vinfty}) at large velocities and to 

1032: the power-law peak (\ref{p0V0}) at low velocities. 

1033: We show in Fig.~\ref{figP0v} the velocity distribution $P_0(V)$, as well as

1034: the asymptotic behaviors (\ref{p0V0}) and (\ref{p0Vinfty}), that happen to

1035: describe very well most of the distribution.

1036: 

1037: We can note that since all quantities can be expressed in terms of the scaling

1038: variables (\ref{QXdef})-(\ref{Vdef}), the exponential tail (\ref{p0Vinfty})

1039: can be understood from simple scaling arguments applied to the initial velocity

1040: field. Thus, for a particle of initial Lagrangian position $q>0$ to reach the

1041: Eulerian position $x=0$ at time $t$, we can expect its initial velocity to be of

1042: order $v_0\sim -q/t$. From Eq.(\ref{Gaussian_t0}) this corresponds to a probability

1043: of order $e^{-v_0^2/(2\sigma_{v_0}^2(q))} \sim e^{-q/t^2} \sim e^{-Q}$,

1044: where we did not write factors of order unity in the exponent, which cannot be 

1045: obtained by such arguments. Thus, we recover the exponential tail (\ref{p0Vinfty})

1046: (at $X=0$ we have $V=-Q$).

1047: 

1048: 

1049: 

1050: 

1051: \subsection{Velocity distribution for $|x|\rightarrow\infty$}

1052: \label{subsec:far_away_x}

1053: 

1054: 

1055: 

1056: Finally, we consider the one-point velocity distribution at large $|x|$.

1057: By symmetry, we only need consider $x\rightarrow+\infty$. 

1058: Using the relation $X=Q+V$ and Eq.(\ref{PXQdens}), we can write the velocity 

1059: distribution in terms of the reduced variables $X$ and $V$ as

1060: \beq

1061: V\leq X : \;\;\; P_X(V) = \inta\frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii}\, e^{(s-1)(X-V)} \, J(s,2X) .

1062: \label{pXinfV1}

1063: \eeq

1064: We now consider the limit $X\rightarrow+\infty$ at fixed $V$. Then, making the

1065: change of variable $s=1+\ii k$, we obtain at leading order ($k$ being of order

1066: $X^{-1/2}$)

1067: \beq

1068: P_{X}(V) \sim \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd k}{2\pi}\, e^{\ii k(X-V)} 

1069: \, e^{(1-\sqrt{1+\ii k})2X} \sim

1070: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd k}{2\pi}\, e^{-\ii k V - X k^2/4} 

1071: = \frac{e^{-V^2/X}}{\sqrt{\pi X}} .

1072: \label{pXinfV2}

1073: \eeq

1074: Therefore, in terms of the variable $v$, we recover as expected the initial Gaussian

1075: (\ref{Gaussian_t0}).

1076: This can be understood as follows.

1077: A remote region $[x-L/2,x+L/2]$, with $L\ll x$, has a mean initial velocity 

1078: $v_0 \sim \sqrt{Dx}$ that is much larger than its initial velocity dispersion

1079: $\Delta v_0 \sim \sqrt{DL}$, see Eq.(\ref{Dv0}). Then, this domain remains

1080: well-defined and not strongly disturbed by neighboring regions until times

1081: of order $t_*$ with $\Delta v_0 t_*=L$, that is $D t_*^2=L$. Conversely,

1082: at any time $t$, for $x\gg D t^2$ (i.e. $X\gg 1$) it is possible to make

1083: such a separation of scales and to identify a region of size $L$ around $x$, 

1084: with $D t^2\ll L \ll x$, that moves in a collective fashion with a mean velocity

1085: $\simeq v_0(x)$ that is set by the initial velocity. Therefore, we recover at

1086: leading order the initial Gaussian velocity distribution, of variance

1087: $\sigma_v = \sqrt{D x}$ (i.e. $\sigma_V= \sqrt{X/2} \gg 1$), and the nonlinear

1088: evolution only modifies the velocity distribution by changes of order

1089: $\Delta v \sim D t$ (i.e. $\Delta V \sim 1$).   

1090: The result (\ref{pXinfV2}) confirms this simple scaling argument.

1091: This is an illustration of the ``principle of permanence of large eddies''

1092: \cite{Gurbatov1997}, that holds for more general energy spectra, 

1093: $E_0(k) \propto k^n$, with $n<1$.

1094: As suggested by this discussion, and as checked in numerical simulations

1095: \cite{Aurell1993,Gurbatov1999}, the stability of large-scale structures is not

1096: only a statistical property but actually holds on an individual basis, that is 

1097: for each random realization of the velocity field.

1098:  

1099: 

1100: 

1101: 

1102: 

1103: \begin{figure}

1104: \begin{center}

1105: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{Pqnegative.ps}}

1106: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{lPqnegative.ps}}

1107: \end{center}

1108: \caption{(color online) {\it Left panel:} The probability $p_x(q\leq 0)$ (equal to the reduced 

1109: cumulative probability $P_X(Q\leq 0)$), that a particle, located

1110: at a position $x>0$ at time $t$, was initially located on the negative real axis,

1111: $q<0$, from Eq.(\ref{pqpm2}). The dashed line is the asymptotic behavior 

1112: (\ref{pqmxinf}). 

1113: {\it Right panel:} Same as left panel but on a logarithmic scale.}

1114: \label{figPqnegative}

1115: \end{figure}

1116: 

1117: 

1118: 

1119: Of course, this reasoning does not apply to rare events, such as those where the

1120: displacement $x-q$ remains of order $x$. In particular, from Eq.(\ref{pqpm2}),

1121: we obtain for the cumulative probability to have a negative Lagrangian coordinate 

1122: $q$ the asymptotic behavior

1123: \beq

1124: x \rightarrow+\infty : \;\;\; p_x(q\leq 0) = p_x(v\geq x/t) \sim 

1125: \left(8\pi\sqrt{3}X\right)^{-1/2} \, e^{-4\sqrt{3}X} .

1126: \label{pqmxinf}

1127: \eeq

1128: Thus, we obtain an exponential tail for these very rare events. It can again

1129: be understood from simple scaling arguments, as for the exponential tail

1130: (\ref{p0Vinfty}). Thus, for a particle with Lagrangian coordinate $q<0$ to reach

1131: the position $x \gg 2Dt^2$, we can associate the initial velocity $v_0=(x-q)/t$

1132: and the probability $e^{-(x-q)^2/(t^2|q|)}$, using Eq.(\ref{Gaussian_t0}) without

1133: writing numerical factors. Then, the maximum over $q<0$ of this exponential weight

1134: is reached for $q=-x$, which gives a weight $\sim e^{-x/t^2} \sim e^{-X}$

1135: that agrees with Eq.(\ref{pqmxinf}). We show in Fig.~\ref{figPqnegative}

1136: the probability $p_x(q\leq 0)$, as well as the asymptotic decay (\ref{pqmxinf}).

1137: 

1138: 

1139: 

1140: 

1141: \section{Two-point and higher-order distributions}

1142: \label{sec:velocity2}

1143: 

1144: 

1145: \subsection{General results for $x_1 <  x_2$ and $0<q_1<q_2$}

1146: \label{subsec:general}

1147: 

1148: 

1149: 

1150: We now study the two-point Eulerian velocity distribution $p_{x_1,x_2}(v_1,v_2)$,

1151: with $x_1 <  x_2$. As in section~\ref{sec:velocity1}, we first consider the

1152: distribution $p_{x_1,x_2}(q_1,q_2)$ of the Lagrangian coordinates $q_1,q_2$,

1153: associated with the Eulerian positions $x_1,x_2$.

1154: For the Brownian initial conditions 

1155: (\ref{xidef})-(\ref{Ddef}) shocks are dense \cite{Sinai1992,She1992}. 

1156: Therefore, for $x_1<x_2$ there is almost surely

1157: a shock between $x_1$ and $x_2$ and these two Eulerian points are associated

1158: with two different Lagrangian coordinates $q_1 \neq q_2$.

1159: This can also be understood from the fact that at the contact point $q_1$ 

1160: (resp. $q_2$) the curve $\psi_0(q)$ is tangent to a parabola $\cP_{x_1,c_1}(q)$

1161: (resp.$\cP_{x_2,c_2}(q)$), from the geometric construction recalled in 

1162: (\ref{paraboladef}). Then, since two parabolas $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ and $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$

1163: with $x_1\neq x_2$ have different tangents at any point $q$ (indeed 

1164: $\dd \cP_{x,c}/\dd q = - (q-x)/t$), the curve $\psi_0(q)$ cannot be tangent to

1165: both parabolas at a common point $q_1=q_2$ (in both steps we used the property 

1166: that the derivative $\psi_0'(q)$ is continuous, being a Brownian motion). Therefore, 

1167: we almost surely have $q_1\neq q_2$. Then, since particles do not cross each other

1168: we have $q_1 < q_2$ for $x_1 <  x_2$.

1169: 

1170: 

1171: 

1172: \begin{figure}

1173: \begin{center}

1174: \epsfxsize=9.5 cm \epsfysize=5.5 cm {\epsfbox{P2s.eps}}

1175: \end{center}

1176: \caption{(color online) Geometrical interpretation of the initial conditions $\psi_0(q)$ 

1177: associated with the contribution

1178: $p_{x_1,x_2}^>(0\leq q_1'\leq q_1,c_1;q_2'\geq q_2)\dd c_1$. The Brownian curve

1179: $\psi_0(q)$ is everywhere above the parabola $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$, it goes below 

1180: $\cP_{x_1,c_1+\dd c_1}$ somewhere in the range $0\leq q_1'\leq q_1$, and it goes

1181: below the parabola $\cP_{x_2,c_*}$, of center $x_2$, that intersects $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$

1182: at $q_*=q_2$. This counts all paths with a first-contact parabola $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$ 

1183: such that $c_2\leq c_*$ and $q_*\geq q_2$ (which implies $q_2'\geq q_2$).}

1184: \label{figP2s}

1185: \end{figure}

1186: 

1187: 

1188: 

1189: As in section~\ref{subsec:arbitrary_Eulerian_location_x}, we first consider the

1190: cumulative probability distribution, $p_{x_1,x_2}(0\leq q_1'\leq q_1;q_2'\geq q_2)$,

1191: that the Lagrangian coordinates $q_1',q_2'$, associated with the Eulerian positions 

1192: $x_1,x_2$, are within the ranges $0\leq q_1'\leq q_1$ and $q_2\leq q_2'< +\infty$.

1193: Let us consider this probability in two steps. First, as for Eq.(\ref{pxcq1}),

1194: we consider the initial conditions such that $\psi_0(q)$ stays everywhere above

1195: a parabola $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ but goes below $\cP_{x_1,c_1+\dd c_1}$ somewhere in

1196: the range $0\leq q_1'\leq q_1$. Integrating over the height $c_1$ this will take

1197: care of the first constraint $0\leq q_1'\leq q_1$ for the Lagrangian coordinate

1198: associated with $x_1$. Second, we must only count among those initial conditions

1199: the ones that also satisfy $q_2'\geq q_2$. We split them into two contributions as

1200: follows. Let us note $q_*$ the unique abscissa where the two contact parabolas 

1201: $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ and $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$ intersect. From Eq.(\ref{paraboladef})

1202: it is given by

1203: \beq

1204: q_* = \frac{x_1+x_2}{2} - \frac{c_2-c_1}{x_2-x_1} t .

1205: \label{q*def}

1206: \eeq

1207: Then, we note $p^>$ the first contribution, associated with initial conditions

1208: such that $q_*>q_2$ (which implies $q_2'>q_*>q_2$). 

1209: Clearly, this actually corresponds to curves $\psi_0(q)$ 

1210: that at some point go below the parabola $\cP_{x_2,c_*}$ where $c_*$ is such 

1211: that $q_*=q_2$ (i.e. the second parabola intersects $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ at $q_2$).

1212: We note $p^<$ the second contribution, associated with $q_1<q_*<q_2$

1213: (since afterwards we shall consider the probability density 

1214: $p_{x_1,x_2}(q_1;q_2'\geq q_2)$ we only need to include the cases with $q_*>q_1$).

1215: We show in Figs.~\ref{figP2s} and \ref{figP2m}  the geometrical interpretation

1216: of these two contributions $p^>$ and $p^<$.

1217: 

1218: 

1219: 

1220: \begin{figure}

1221: \begin{center}

1222: \epsfxsize=9.5 cm \epsfysize=5.5 cm {\epsfbox{P2m.eps}}

1223: \end{center}

1224: \caption{(color online) Geometrical interpretation of the initial conditions $\psi_0(q)$ 

1225: associated with the contribution

1226: $p_{x_1,x_2}^<(0\leq q_1'\leq q_1,c_1;q_2'\geq q_2,c_2)\dd c_1\dd c_2$. 

1227: The Brownian curve $\psi_0(q)$ is everywhere above the parabolas $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ 

1228: and $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$, it goes below $\cP_{x_1,c_1+\dd c_1}$ somewhere in the range 

1229: $0\leq q_1'\leq q_1$, and below the parabola $\cP_{x_2,c_2+\dd c_2}$

1230: somewhere in the semi-infinite range $q_2'\geq q_2$. The height $c_2$ of the second

1231: parabola is such that both parabolas intersect at $q_*$ in the range 

1232: $q_1\leq q_*\leq q_2$.}

1233: \label{figP2m}

1234: \end{figure}

1235: 

1236: 

1237: 

1238: We describe in appendix~\ref{Computation-of-two-point} the computation of the

1239: two-point distribution $p_{x_1,x_2}(q_1,q_2)$ from these two contributions $p^>$ 

1240: and $p^<$. As for the one-point distribution computed in 

1241: section~\ref{subsec:arbitrary_Eulerian_location_x}, we first express the kernels

1242: $K$ in terms of the Brownian propagator $G$ obtained in section~\ref{sec:transition}

1243: and we use various properties of the Airy functions, described in 

1244: Appendices~\ref{Airy} and \ref{Half-range}, to simplify the integrals.

1245: We finally obtain for the sum of both contributions the probability density

1246: \beq

1247: P_{X_1,X_2}(Q_1,Q_2) = \inta \frac{\dd s_1 \dd s_2}{(2\pi\ii)^2} \, 

1248: e^{(s_1-1) Q_1+(s_2-1)Q_{21}} J(s_1,2X_1) \, e^{-(\sqrt{s_2}-1)2 X_{21}} .

1249: \label{PX1X2}

1250: \eeq

1251: Comparing with the one-point probability density (\ref{PXQdens}), we find that

1252: for $0\leq Q_1\leq Q_2$ the two-point probability density factorizes as

1253: \beq

1254: X_1\leq X_2, \;\; 0\leq Q_1\leq Q_2 : \;\;\; P_{X_1,X_2}(Q_1,Q_2) = P_{X_1}(Q_1) 

1255: \bP_{X_{21}}(Q_{21}) ,

1256: \label{PX1X2fact}

1257: \eeq

1258: where we introduced

1259: \beq

1260: \bP_X(Q) = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q} \, e^{-(\sqrt{s}-1)2 X} .

1261: \label{pBdef}

1262: \eeq

1263: Therefore, the conditional probability $P(X_2,Q_2|X_1,Q_1)$ obeys the property

1264: \beq

1265: X_1\leq X_2, \;\; 0\leq Q_1\leq Q_2 : \;\;\; P(X_2,Q_2|X_1,Q_1) = 

1266: \frac{P_{X_1,X_2}(Q_1,Q_2)}{P_{X_1}(Q_1)} = \bP_{X_{21}}(Q_{21}) ,

1267: \label{Pcond}

1268: \eeq

1269: that is, it only depends on the relative distances $X_{21}$ and $Q_{21}$, 

1270: and no longer on $Q_1$ and $X_1$, over the range $Q_1\geq 0$. 

1271: Thus, the system is statistically homogeneous with respect

1272: to Lagrangian and velocity increments as long as we remain on either side

1273: of the origin $Q=0$. Indeed, by symmetry through reflection about the origin

1274: we also have 

1275: \beqa

1276: X_1\leq X_2, \;\; Q_1\leq Q_2\leq 0 : \;\;\; P_{X_1,X_2}(Q_1,Q_2) 

1277: & = & P_{-X_2,-X_1}(-Q_2,-Q_1)  \nonumber \\

1278: && \hspace{-0.5cm} = P_{-X_2}(-Q_2) \bP_{X_{21}}(Q_{21}) 

1279: = P_{X_2}(Q_2) \bP_{X_{21}}(Q_{21}) .

1280: \label{PX1X2mfact}

1281: \eeqa

1282: Then, in the limits $X_1\rightarrow+\infty$, or $X_2\rightarrow-\infty$, where the

1283: weight of configurations such that $Q_1$ and $Q_2$ have different signs vanishes, 

1284: we recover the invariance through translation of the probability distributions 

1285: of relative displacements and velocity increments. Of course, this is related to the

1286: fact that the initial conditions have homogeneous velocity increments,

1287: see Eq.(\ref{Dv0}). However, the invariance through translation is only recovered

1288: in the exact nonlinear velocity distribution if we go infinitely far from the 

1289: origin $Q=0$. As we get closer to the origin it is broken by the increasing weight

1290: of configurations, such that $Q_1$ and $Q_2$ are on different sides of the origin,

1291: which do not satisfy the factorizations (\ref{PX1X2fact}) or (\ref{PX1X2mfact}).

1292: Indeed, note that Eq.(\ref{PX1X2mfact}) shows that the factorization 

1293: (\ref{PX1X2fact}) cannot be extended to $Q_1<0$, as for $Q_1<0$ and $Q_2<0$

1294: we must reach the other regime (\ref{PX1X2mfact}) that cannot hold simultaneously.

1295: 

1296: Thus, at finite distance from the origin the invariance through translation is

1297: always partly broken for the distribution $P_{x_1,x_2}(q_1,q_2)$ considered over

1298: the full range $-\infty<q_1\leq q_2<\infty$. Nevertheless, the invariance

1299: is exactly recovered over either the partial range $0\leq q_1\leq q_2<\infty$, 

1300: or $-\infty<q_1\leq q_2\leq 0$. This can be understood as follows, focussing

1301: on the case $q_1>0$ with again $x_1<x_2$. The probability density $p_{x_1}(q_1)$ 

1302: counts the configurations $\psi_0(q)$ that are tangent at $q_1$ with the highest 

1303: first contact parabola $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$, from the geometric construction

1304: described below (\ref{paraboladef}). Then, the conditional probability density 

1305: $p(x_{21},q_{21}|x_1,q_1)$ only counts among those the configurations that are also

1306: tangent at $q_2$ with the highest first contact parabola $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$.

1307: Independently of the behavior of the curve $\psi_0$ on either side of $q_1$, 

1308: the first-contact height parameter $c_2$ must be smaller than the value $c_*$ 

1309: such that $\cP_{x_2,c_*}$ runs through the point $\{q_1,\psi_0(q_1)\}$.  

1310: Then, for any $c_2<c_*$, we clearly have $\cP_{x_2,c_2}(q)<\cP_{x_1,c_1}(q)$

1311: for all $q<q_1$ (using $x_1<x_2$), whence $\cP_{x_2,c_2}(q)<\psi_0(q)$ for all 

1312: $q<q_1$ since we have already selected those configurations

1313: associated with $p_{x_1}(q_1)$ that are above $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ (and make contact

1314: at $q_1$). (In other words, the additional requirement $q(x_2)=q_2$ does not

1315: bring any additional constraint on $\psi_0(q)$ over $q<q_1$.) 

1316: Therefore, we are only sensitive to the behavior of $\psi_0$ to

1317: the right of $q_1$. 

1318: For the Brownian initial conditions (\ref{xidef}), the latter

1319: is fully determined by $\{\psi_0(q_1), v_0(q_1)\}$ and the white noise $\xi(q)$

1320: at $q\geq q_1$ (which is statistically homogeneous).

1321: Next, $p(x_{21},q_{21}|x_1,q_1)$ does not depend on $\psi_0(q_1)$ since

1322: a vertical translation of the curves $\psi_0$ and $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ is fully 

1323: absorbed by the same vertical translation of the parabola $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$,

1324: without affecting spatial coordinates $q$ and $x$.

1325: On the other hand, through Galilean invariance the relative

1326: displacements of the particles only depend on their relative velocities, hence

1327: $p(x_{21},q_{21}|x_1,q_1)$ only depends on the relative velocity field 

1328: $v_0(q)-v_0(q_1)$ 

1329: over $q\geq q_1$. For the Brownian initial conditions (\ref{xidef}), with 

1330: homogeneous velocity increments, the statistical properties of this relative 

1331: velocity field $v_0(q)-v_0(q_1)$ do not depend on $v_0(q_1)$, but only on the 

1332: distance $q-q_1$, see (\ref{Dv0}). Therefore, the distributions 

1333: $p(x_{21},q_{21}|x_1,q_1)$, of the Lagrangian position increment $q_{21}$, and 

1334: $p(x_{21},v_{21}|x_1,v_1)$, of the velocity increment $v_{21}$, only depend 

1335: on $x_{21}$, as in (\ref{Pcond}) and in (\ref{pBVnboth}) below.

1336: 

1337: In agreement with (\ref{PX1X2mfact}), we can check that this argument fails for 

1338: $q_1<0$. Indeed, again we are only sensitive to the behavior of $\psi_0(q)$ to 

1339: the right of $q_1$, but this range now includes the special point $q=0$ with 

1340: the constraints $\psi_0(0)=0$ and $v_0(0)=0$ that prevent us from absorbing 

1341: $\psi_0(q_1)$ and $v_0(q_1)$. For instance, we now have the new constraint

1342: that the first-contact parabola $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$ cannot go upward of the

1343: point $\{0,\psi_0(0)=0\}$ (which was irrelevant in the previous case $q_1>0$,

1344: since we already had $\cP_{x_2,c_2}<\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ over $q<q_1$ and

1345: $\cP_{x_1,c_1}(0)\leq 0$ by construction, being everywhere below $\psi_0$).

1346: 

1347: The property that the increments of the inverse Lagrangian map, $q(x_2)-q(x_1)$,

1348: are independent and homogeneous, as in Eq.(\ref{Pcond}), and the probability

1349: distribution (\ref{pBdef}), were already obtained by 

1350: \cite{Carraro1998} for intrinsic statistical solutions, and 

1351: by \cite{Bertoin1998} through probabilistic tools for $x\geq 0$ in the case of 

1352: one-sided Brownian initial conditions (i.e. $v_0(q)=0$ for $q\leq 0$).

1353: The latter work involves

1354: a similar reasoning to the one described above, using the property

1355: that the distribution of a Markov process after last passage at a given point does

1356: not depend on its previous path, but this mathematical proof uses the convex hull

1357: of the Lagrangian potential rather than the parabolas construction used here.

1358: For one-sided

1359: Brownian initial conditions, it is clear that if we consider Eulerian locations

1360: at $x\geq 0$, the particles can only come from the right side $q\geq 0$ so that

1361: we recover the configuration analyzed above for particles that are all located

1362: on the same side of the origin. The agreement with the results of \cite{Bertoin1998}

1363: provides a nice check of our calculations. The probabilistic proof is remarkably

1364: concise, as it first shows that the increments $q_{21}$ are independent and

1365: homogeneous and next derives their distribution. However, the analysis method 

1366: presented in the present work has the advantage of a large range of applicability.

1367: Thus, it allowed us to obtain the one-point distributions in closed form in 

1368: section~\ref{sec:velocity1} and it could also be applied to different-time

1369: statistics, where the parabolas would have different curvatures.

1370: Another application of the method described in this paper is presented in

1371: \cite{Valageas2008}, where we study ballistic aggregation for one-sided Brownian

1372: initial velocity.

1373: 

1374: The previous discussion can be extended to $n-$point distributions, which

1375: thus factorize as

1376: \beqa

1377: X_1\leq .. \leq X_n, \;\; 0 \leq Q_1 \leq .. \leq Q_n : \;\;\;

1378: P_{X_1,..,X_n}(Q_1,..,Q_n) & = & P_{X_1}(Q_1) \bP_{X_2-X_1}(Q_2-Q_1) \nonumber \\

1379: && \hspace{-3cm} \times \bP_{X_3-X_2}(Q_3-Q_2) ... \bP_{X_n-X_{n-1}}(Q_n-Q_{n-1}) .

1380: \label{pBn}

1381: \eeqa

1382: We obtain a similar identity for $Q_1 \leq .. \leq Q_n\leq 0$ by reflection

1383: through the origin, as for Eq.(\ref{PX1X2mfact}). 

1384: This also extends to the general case where the Lagrangian coordinates are 

1385: located on both sides of the origin as

1386: \beqa

1387: X_m'\leq .. \leq X_1' \leq X_1 \leq .. \leq X_n, \;\;\; 

1388: Q_m'\leq .. \leq Q_1' \leq 0 \leq Q_1 \leq .. \leq Q_n & : & \nonumber \\

1389: && \hspace{-11cm} P_{X_i';X_j}(Q_i';Q_j) 

1390: = P_{X_1',X_1}(Q_1',Q_1) \prod_{i=2}^m \bP_{X_{i-1,i}'}(Q_{i-1,i}') 

1391: \prod_{j=2}^{n} \bP_{X_{j,j-1}}(Q_{j,j-1})  ,

1392: \label{pBnboth}

1393: \eeqa

1394: where we defined relative distances such as $X_{j,j-1}=X_j-X_{j-1}$. 

1395: However, it appears that the probability distribution $P_{X_1',X_1}(Q_1',Q_1)$,

1396: with $Q_1' \leq 0 \leq Q_1$, does not greatly simplify and is given by

1397: intricate multiple integrals. Therefore, we shall not consider it further in

1398: this article. Note that for practical purposes one is mostly interested in

1399: the behavior far from the origin, where the invariance through translations

1400: is fully restored.

1401: 

1402: In terms of velocities, using the relation (\ref{Vdef}) for the dimensionless

1403: velocities $V_i$, we obtain from the previous results the factorization

1404: \beqa

1405: X_m'\leq .. \leq X_1' \leq X_1 \leq .. \leq X_n, 

1406: \;\; V_1' \geq X_1' , \;\;  V_{i,i-1}' \geq X_{i,i-1}' , 

1407: \;\; V_1 \leq X_1, \;\; V_{j,j-1} \leq X_{j,j-1} & : & \nonumber \\

1408: && \hspace{-13cm} P_{X_i';X_j}(V_i';V_j) 

1409: = P_{X_1',X_1}(V_1',V_1) \prod_{i=2}^m \bP_{X_{i-1,i}'}(V_{i-1,i}') 

1410: \prod_{j=2}^{n} \bP_{X_{j,j-1}}(V_{j,j-1})  ,

1411: \label{pBVnboth}

1412: \eeqa

1413: where the various factors are the velocity probabilities that may be obtained

1414: from the Lagrangian $Q-$probability densities through (\ref{Vdef}).

1415: As noticed above, the factorizations (\ref{pBnboth})-(\ref{pBVnboth}) also

1416: follow from the analysis of \cite{Bertoin1998}. However, although this provides

1417: the conditional distribution $\bP_{X_2-X_1}(Q_2-Q_1)$ of the Lagrangian increment

1418: it does not give the distributions $P_{X_i';X_j}(Q_i';Q_j)$ or 

1419: $P_{X_1',X_1}(V_1',V_1)$ that appear in these $n$-point distributions.

1420: Nevertheless, in the limit where we are far from the origin, we only need the

1421: one-point distribution $P_{X_1}(Q_1)$, which goes to the Gaussian (\ref{pXinfV2}),

1422: as would also be the case for one-sided initial conditions, besides in that limit

1423: we are mostly interested in the distributions of relative increments.

1424: 

1425: We can note that the the Burgers equation with Brownian initial velocity which

1426: we study in this paper was also used in a recent article \cite{Frisch2005}

1427: to discuss the concept of local homogeneity that is used in turbulence studies.

1428: Indeed, for systems which are not strictly homogeneous (the energy shows an

1429: infrared divergence) it is customary to assume incremental homogeneity so that

1430: the physical quantities of interest (e.g. velocity increments) remain homogeneous.

1431: However, as noticed in \cite{Frisch2005} this is not fully consistent because

1432: initial incremental homogeneity is destroyed at later times by the nonlinearity

1433: of the equations of hydrodynamics (the quadratic advective term).

1434: Then, they used numerical simulations and perturbative analysis of the $1$-D 

1435: Burgers dynamics with two-sided Brownian initial velocity to illustrate this point

1436: and to note that local homogeneity is only asymptotically recovered far from the

1437: reference point. 

1438: The results (\ref{pBnboth}) and (\ref{pBVnboth}) above explicitly show how

1439: the incremental homogeneity is indeed destroyed at finite distance from the

1440: origin but asymptotically recovered at large distances. A peculiarity of this system

1441: is that at finite distance it is already exactly recovered over a partial range

1442: of velocities.

1443: In fact, for the case of one-sided initial conditions ($v_0(q)=0$ for $q\leq 0$)

1444: the system is exactly homogeneous over $x>0$, as shown by the previous discussion

1445: and \cite{Bertoin1998}.

1446: 

1447: The factorizations (\ref{pBnboth}) and (\ref{pBVnboth}) also show that small scales

1448: are largely decoupled from long-wavelength modes. Note that this key property is

1449: usually assumed in hydrodynamical systems (so that one can ignore the details of

1450: the large-scale boundary conditions) but is often difficult to prove in a precise

1451: manner.

1452: 

1453: 

1454: 

1455: \subsection{Distribution of Lagrangian increments (i.e. of relative initial 

1456: Lagrangian distance)}

1457: \label{relative}

1458: 

1459: 

1460: 

1461: We now study in more details the probability distribution, $\bP_X(Q)$, of 

1462: the relative Lagrangian positions (i.e. relative initial distance 

1463: $q$ between particles that are separated by distance $x$ at time $t$),

1464: that is, of the increments of the inverse Lagrangian map 

1465: (here we omit the subscripts $''21''$ to simplify the notations).

1466: The following results apply far from the origin, or at any location on the

1467: right side of the origin if we have one-sided initial conditions ($v_0(q)=0$ at

1468: $q\leq 0$).

1469: 

1470: We can check from the integral representation (\ref{pBdef}) that for 

1471: $X\rightarrow 0$ we obtain as expected the Dirac distribution 

1472: $\bP_X(Q)\rightarrow\delta(Q)$ (whence $Q_2\rightarrow Q_1$ for 

1473: $X_2\rightarrow X_1$). In fact, Eq.(\ref{pBdef}) is a well-known inverse 

1474: Laplace transform \cite{Abramowitz} which gives the explicit expression

1475: \beq

1476: X\geq 0, \;\; Q \geq 0 : \;\;\;  \bP_X(Q) = \frac{X}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, Q^{-3/2} 

1477: \, e^{2X-Q-X^2/Q} = 

1478: \frac{X}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, Q^{-3/2} \, e^{-(\sqrt{Q}-X/\sqrt{Q})^2} .

1479: \label{pB1}

1480: \eeq

1481: Therefore, we obtain an exponential tail at large $Q$, as $\sim e^{-Q}$, 

1482: and a strong falloff at small $Q$, as $\sim e^{-X^2/Q}$. 

1483: For large relative distance $X$ this gives the Gaussian

1484: \beq

1485: X\rightarrow +\infty , \;\;\; |Q-X| \ll X : \;\;  \bP_X(Q) \sim 

1486: \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi X}} \, e^{-(Q-X)^2/X} .

1487: \label{PXQinf}

1488: \eeq

1489: This agrees with the expectation that over large distances particles are still

1490: governed by the initial velocity field, as discussed in 

1491: section~\ref{subsec:far_away_x} for Eq.(\ref{pXinfV2}).

1492: This is again an illustration of the ``principle of permanence of large eddies''

1493: \cite{Gurbatov1997}, see the discussion below Eq.(\ref{pXinfV2}).

1494: 

1495: 

1496: We show the probability density $\bP_X(Q)$ obtained for three relative distances

1497: $X$ in Fig.~\ref{figPQ}. We clearly see that for large $X$, which corresponds to

1498: large scales or small times, we recover a Gaussian centered on $X$, whereas for

1499: small $X$ we obtain a skewed distribution with an intermediate power-law regime

1500: $Q^{-3/2}$. 

1501: 

1502: 

1503: 

1504: \begin{figure}

1505: \begin{center}

1506: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{PQ.ps}}

1507: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{lPQ.ps}}

1508: \end{center}

1509: \caption{(color online) {\it Left panel:} The probability density $\bp_x(q)$ that two particles, 

1510: separated by the distance $x>0$ at time $t$, were initially separated by a 

1511: distance $q$ (in the limit where the particles are far from the origin, 

1512: or anywhere on the right side for one-sided initial conditions).

1513: This is the distribution of the increments of the inverse Lagrangian map,

1514: $x\mapsto q$.

1515: We show the reduced probabilities, $\bP_X(Q)$, in terms of the dimensionless 

1516: variables $X=x/(2Dt^2)$ and $Q=q/(2Dt^2)$, for three values of $X$, 

1517: from Eq.(\ref{pB1}). The probability is zero for $Q<0$. 

1518: For large relative distance $X$ we recover a Gaussian of center $X$ and variance 

1519: $\lag (Q-X)^2\rag=X/2$. 

1520: {\it Right panel:} The probability density $\bP_X(Q)$ on a logarithmic scale, 

1521: for three values of $X$.}

1522: \label{figPQ}

1523: \end{figure}

1524: 

1525: 

1526: 

1527: 

1528: From Eq.(\ref{pB1}) we obtain the moments of the Lagrangian increments

1529: $Q$ as \cite{Gradshteyn}

1530: \beq

1531: \lag Q^n \rag = \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, X^{n+1/2} \, e^{2X} \, K_{n-1/2}(2X)

1532: = X^n \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \frac{(n-1+k)!}{k!(n-1-k)!(4X)^k} ,

1533: \label{Qn}

1534: \eeq

1535: where the last equality only holds for $n\geq 1$, and $K_{\nu}$ is the 

1536: modified Bessel function of the second kind. 

1537: This gives for the first few moments

1538: \beq

1539: \lag Q \rag = X, \;\;\; \lag Q^2 \rag = X^2+\frac{X}{2} , 

1540: \;\;\; \lag Q^3 \rag = X^3+\frac{3X^2}{2}+\frac{3X}{4} .

1541: \label{Q123}

1542: \eeq

1543: We can note that the mean of the relative displacement, $\PPsi=X-Q$, is zero:

1544: the mean distance between particles does not change (far from the origin).

1545: On the other hand, if we define the usual moment-generating function $\Psi(y)$

1546: by

1547: \beq

1548: \Psi(y)= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-y)^n}{n!} \lag Q^n\rag 

1549: = \int_0^{\infty} \! \dd Q  \, e^{-y Q} \, \bP_X(Q) ,

1550: \;\;\; \bP_X(Q)= \inta \frac{\dd y}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{Qy} \, \Psi(y) ,

1551: \label{Psimomentsdef}

1552: \eeq

1553: we obtain from Eq.(\ref{pBdef}), making the change of variable $s=1+y$,

1554: \beq

1555: \Psi(y)= e^{-(\sqrt{1+y}-1)2X} .

1556: \label{Psimoments1}

1557: \eeq

1558: Therefore, the cumulant-generating function $\Phi(y)$, which satisfies 

1559: the standard relation

1560: \beq

1561: \Phi(y) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{(-y)^n}{n!} \lag Q^n\rag_c = \ln[\Psi(y)] ,

1562: \label{Phicumdef}

1563: \eeq

1564: is given by

1565: \beq

1566: \Phi(y) = -(\sqrt{1+y}-1)2X = - X y + 2X \sum_{n=2}^{\infty} 

1567: \frac{(2n-3)!!}{2^n \, n!} \, (-y)^n .

1568: \label{Phicum1}

1569: \eeq

1570: This yields the simple results

1571: \beq

1572: \lag Q \rag_c= X , \;\;\; \mbox{and for} \;\; n \geq 2 : \;\;\; 

1573: \lag Q^n \rag_c= \frac{(2n-3)!!}{2^{n-1}} \, X .

1574: \label{Qcum1}

1575: \eeq

1576: 

1577: We can note that the first equality in (\ref{Qn})

1578: also holds for non-integer $n$, and we obtain for small Eulerian distance,

1579: $(x_2-x_1)\rightarrow 0^+$, 

1580: \beqa

1581: \nu > \frac{1}{2} & : & \;\; \lag(q_2-q_1)^{\nu}\rag \sim (2Dt^2)^{(\nu-1)} 

1582: \, \frac{\Gamma[\nu-\frac{1}{2}]}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, (x_2-x_1) , \label{Qnuscalp} \\

1583: \nu < \frac{1}{2} & : & \;\; \lag(q_2-q_1)^{\nu} \rag \sim (2Dt^2)^{-\nu} 

1584: \, \frac{\Gamma[-\nu+\frac{1}{2}]}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, (x_2-x_1)^{2\nu} .

1585: \label{Qnuscalm}

1586: \eeqa

1587: Note that the second scaling also holds for any negative $\nu$. Indeed, the 

1588: strong cutoff, $e^{-X^2/Q}$, of the probability distribution (\ref{pB1}),

1589: ensures that all negative moments are finite. Equations 

1590: (\ref{Qnuscalp})-(\ref{Qnuscalm})

1591: show that we recover the bifractality of the inverse Lagrangian map,

1592: that was already derived in \cite{Aurell1997} for $\nu\geq 0$.

1593: As is well-known \cite{Frisch2001}, the scaling (\ref{Qnuscalp}) is universal as

1594: it is due to shocks. Indeed, if we have a shock of finite Lagrangian increment 

1595: $\delta q$ at position $x$, it gives a contribution 

1596: $[q(x+\ell/2)-q(x-\ell/2)]^n \sim (\delta q)^n$ which remains of order unity for 

1597: $\ell \rightarrow 0^+$ for any $n$. Next, the probability to have a shock of a 

1598: given finite strength $\delta q$ in a small Eulerian interval $\ell$ scales as 

1599: $\ell$ at small distances, which gives rise to the factor $(x_2-x_1)$ in 

1600: Eq.(\ref{Qnuscalp}). Note that in our case, the total number of shocks per

1601: unit length is actually infinite \cite{She1992,Sinai1992}, see 

1602: sect.~\ref{subsec:shockmass} below, as the shock mass function (\ref{Nshock2}) 

1603: leads to a divergence at low mass, but the number of shocks above a finite mass 

1604: threshold is finite and this is sufficient to make the scaling (\ref{Qnuscalp}) 

1605: universal. 

1606: However, the behavior observed at $\nu<1$ (the critical value $\nu_c=1/2$ and the

1607: exponent $2\nu$ observed below  $\nu_c$ in Eq.(\ref{Qnuscalm})) depends on the

1608: initial energy spectrum, through the low-mass tail of the shock mass function, see

1609: also \cite{Aurell1997} for more detailed discussions. 

1610: 

1611: 

1612: \subsection{Distribution of Eulerian velocity increments}

1613: \label{relative_velocities}

1614: 

1615: 

1616: We now consider the probability distribution, $\bP_X(V)$, of the relative Eulerian 

1617: velocities, that is of the velocity increments $V(X_2)-V(X_1)$.

1618: From Eq.(\ref{pB1}) we obtain

1619: \beq

1620: X\geq 0, \;\; V\leq X : \;\;\; \bP_X(V) = \frac{X}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, (X-V)^{-3/2} 

1621: \, e^{-(\sqrt{X-V}-X/\sqrt{X-V})^2} .

1622: \label{pBV1}

1623: \eeq

1624: In the limit of large relative Eulerian distance $X\rightarrow \infty$,

1625: at fixed $V$, the distribution (\ref{pBV1}) can be expanded around the

1626: maximum of the exponent at $V=0$ (corresponding to $Q=X$) and we again recover

1627: the initial Gaussian

1628: \beq

1629: |V|\ll X : \;\; \bP_X(V) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi X}} \, e^{-V^2/X} ,

1630: \label{PVinf}

1631: \eeq

1632: in agreement with the fact that over large distances particles are still

1633: governed by the initial velocity field (see also section~\ref{subsec:far_away_x}).

1634: We show in Fig.~\ref{figPV} the velocity distribution $\bP_X(V)$ for three values

1635: of $X$. We can again check that we recover a Gaussian for large $X$ (i.e. large

1636: scales or small times), whereas for smaller $X$ the upper bound $V\leq X$ is

1637: increasingly apparent while a power law develops at intermediate negative velocities.

1638: 

1639: 

1640: 

1641: \begin{figure}

1642: \begin{center}

1643: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{PV.ps}}

1644: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{lPV.ps}}

1645: \end{center}

1646: \caption{(color online) {\it Left panel:} The probability density $\bp_x(v)$ of the

1647: velocity increment $v=v(x_2)-v(x_1)$ for two positions separated by the distance

1648: $x=x_2-x_1$ (in the limit where we are far from the origin, 

1649: or anywhere on the right side for one-sided initial conditions). 

1650: We show the reduced probabilities, $\bP_X(V)$ in terms of the dimensionless variables

1651: $X=x/(2Dt^2)$ and $V=v/(2Dt)$, for three values of $X$, from Eq.(\ref{pBV1}).

1652: The probability is zero for $V>X$. 

1653: At large relative distance $X$ we recover a symmetric Gaussian of variance 

1654: $\lag V^2\rag=X/2$. 

1655: {\it Right panel:} The probability density $\bP_X(V)$ on a semi-logarithmic scale, 

1656: for three values of $X$.}

1657: \label{figPV}

1658: \end{figure}

1659: 

1660: 

1661: 

1662: 

1663: From Eq.(\ref{Qcum1}) the velocity cumulants are given by

1664: \beq

1665: n \geq 2 : \;\; \lag V^n\rag_c = (-1)^n \frac{(2n-3)!!}{2^{n-1}} \, X ,

1666:  \;\; \mbox{whence} \;\;

1667: \lag V\rag=0 , \;\; \lag V^2\rag= \frac{X}{2} , \;\; 

1668: \lag V^3\rag = - \frac{3X}{4} .

1669: \label{V123}

1670: \eeq

1671: We can note that the first moment exactly vanishes whereas the variance 

1672: $\lag V^2\rag$ remains equal to that of the initial Gaussian field,

1673: see (\ref{Dv0}), even though $\bP_X(V)$ is no longer Gaussian. Thus, in terms

1674: of the dimensional variables the velocity energy spectrum remains equal to the

1675: initial one,

1676: \beq

1677: \lag [v(x_2,t)-v(x_1,t)]^2 \rag = D |x_2-x_1| , \;\;\;\; 

1678: E(k,t)= E_0(k)= \frac{D}{2\pi} k^{-2} .

1679: \label{Ekt}

1680: \eeq

1681: Finally, in the limit of small separations we obtain from Eq.(\ref{V123})

1682: \beq

1683: n\geq 2 , \;\; (x_2-x_1)\rightarrow 0^+ : \;\;\; \lag (v_2-v_1)^n\rag \sim \frac{(2Dt^2)^{n-1}}{t^n} \,  (-1)^n \frac{(2n-3)!!}{2^{n-1}} (x_2-x_1) .

1684: \label{VnX0}

1685: \eeq

1686: Therefore, we recover the universal scaling at small distances 

1687: of the structure functions \cite{Frisch2001},

1688: $\lag [v(x+\ell)-v(x)]^n\rag \propto \ell$, that was also observed in the numerical

1689: simulations of \cite{She1992}. This is due to the contribution from shocks, as

1690: discussed below Eqs.(\ref{Qnuscalp})-(\ref{Qnuscalm}).

1691: Thus, if we have a shock of finite velocity jump $-\delta v=\delta q/t$ at location 

1692: $x$, then $[v(x+\ell/2)-v(x-\ell/2)]^n \sim (-\delta v)^n$ for $\ell \rightarrow 0^+$.

1693: Note that $\delta v$ is positive, since a shock is associated with particles from

1694: the left overtaking particles on the right, so that $v(x^-)>v(x^+)$, which agrees

1695: with the factor $(-1)^n$ in Eq.(\ref{VnX0}). Again, the factor $(x_2-x_1)$ in

1696: Eq.(\ref{VnX0}) comes from the probability to encounter a shock of strength larger

1697: than some finite threshold $\delta q$ in a small Eulerian interval $[x_1,x_2]$.

1698: 

1699: 

1700: 

1701: \section{Density field}

1702: \label{sec:Density}

1703: 

1704: 

1705: \subsection{Overdensity within finite size domains}

1706: \label{Overdensity}

1707: 

1708: 

1709: We consider here the evolution of a density field $\rho(x,t)$ that evolves through 

1710: the usual continuity equation, 

1711: \beq

1712: \frac{\pl \rho}{\pl t} + \frac{\pl}{\pl x} (\rho v) = 0 ,

1713: \label{continuity}

1714: \eeq

1715: whereas the velocity field $v(x,t)$ evolves through the Burgers equation 

1716: (\ref{Burg}). The initial conditions for the velocity are set by Eqs.(\ref{xidef}) 

1717: as in previous sections, whereas the initial density is a constant $\rho_0$.

1718: Thus, the mass $m$ between particles $q_1$ and $q_2$, with $q_1<q_2$, is 

1719: $m=\rho_0(q_2-q_1)$. This quantity is conserved by the dynamics since particles

1720: do not cross each other (though it is ambiguous at shock locations, but the latter

1721: have zero measure in Eulerian space).

1722: Then, the overall overdensity, $\eta=m/(\rho_0 x)$, over the length $x=x_2-x_1$, 

1723: is $\eta=(q_2-q_1)/(x_2-x_1)$ by conservation of matter, where $q_i$ is the 

1724: initial Lagrangian position of the particle that is located at $x_i$ at time $t$. 

1725: In terms of dimensionless variables this reads as the ratio of relative distances 

1726: $\eta=Q/X$. Therefore, far from the origin ($|x_1| \rightarrow \infty$),

1727: or on the right side of the origin for one-sided initial conditions,

1728: we obtain from Eq.(\ref{pB1}) the probability distribution of the overdensity at 

1729: scale $X$ as

1730: \beq

1731: \eta = \frac{m}{\rho_0 x} , \;\; \eta  \geq 0 : \;\;\;  

1732: P_X(\eta) = \sqrt{\frac{X}{\pi}} \, \eta^{-3/2} \, 

1733: e^{-X(\sqrt{\eta}-1/\sqrt{\eta})^2} = \sqrt{\frac{X}{\pi}} \, e^{2X} \, 

1734: \eta^{-3/2} \, e^{-X(\eta+1/\eta)} .

1735: \label{Peta}

1736: \eeq

1737: Over large scales we recover a Gaussian distribution, as for the variables $Q$ 

1738: and $V$, while on small scales, $X\rightarrow 0$, we obtain the power law 

1739: $\eta^{-3/2}$ between the low and high density cutoffs at 

1740: $\eta_- \sim x/(2Dt^2)$ and $\eta_+ \sim  (2Dt^2)/x$, as we can see in 

1741: Fig.~\ref{figPeta} where we show the overdensity distribution $P_X(\eta)$

1742: for three values of $X$. We can note that this is very similar to the behavior

1743: that is observed in cosmological numerical simulations for gravitational clustering

1744: \cite{Balian1989,Colombi1994,ValMun2004}.

1745: 

1746: 

1747: 

1748: \begin{figure}

1749: \begin{center}

1750: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{Peta.ps}}

1751: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{lPeta.ps}}

1752: \end{center}

1753: \caption{(color online) {\it Left panel:} The probability distribution $p_x(\eta)$ of the 

1754: overdensity, $\eta=m/(\rho_0 x)$, over a region of length $x$.

1755: We show $P_X(\eta)$ for three values of the reduced length $X=x/(2Dt^2)$, from

1756: Eq.(\ref{Peta}).

1757: Thus larger $X$ corresponds to larger scale or smaller time. For large

1758: $X$ we recover a Gaussian of mean $1$ and variance $\lag(\eta-1)^2\rag=1/(2X)$.

1759: For small $X$ the distribution becomes skewed and an intermediate power-law 

1760: region develops.

1761: {\it Right panel:} The probability density $P_x(\eta)$ on a logarithmic scale, 

1762: for three values of $X$.}

1763: \label{figPeta}

1764: \end{figure}

1765: 

1766: 

1767: 

1768: From Eqs.(\ref{Qn}) and (\ref{Qcum1}) we obtain for the moments and the cumulants

1769: of the overdensity at scale $X$: 

1770: \beq

1771: n\geq 1 : \;\; \lag \eta^n \rag = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} 

1772: \frac{(n-1+k)!}{k!(n-1-k)!(4X)^k} , \;\;\; \mbox{and for} \; n\geq 2 : \;\;

1773: \lag \eta^n \rag_c= \frac{(2n-3)!!}{(2X)^{n-1}} ,

1774: \label{etan}

1775: \eeq

1776: whence for the lowest orders

1777: \beq

1778: \lag \eta \rag=1, \;\;\;  \lag \eta^2 \rag_c= \frac{1}{2X} , \;\;\; 

1779: \lag \eta^3 \rag_c= \frac{3}{4X^2}  = 3 \lag \eta^2 \rag_c^2 .

1780: \label{eta123}

1781: \eeq

1782: We can note that the second result (\ref{etan}) gives the cumulant hierarchy

1783: \beq

1784: S_n = \frac{\lag \eta^n \rag_c}{\lag \eta^2 \rag_c^{n-1}} 

1785: = (2n-3)!!  \;\;\; \mbox{and} \;\;\;

1786: \varphi(y) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (-1)^{n-1} \, S_n \,\frac{y^n}{n!} = \sqrt{1+2y}-1 ,

1787: \label{Sndef}

1788: \eeq

1789: which shows that the ratios $S_n$ are constants that do not depend on time nor

1790: scale. We can note that in the cosmological context, associated with

1791: a gravitational dynamics in a 3-dimensional expanding Universe, for the case of

1792: an initial power-law density power spectrum, the coefficients $S_n$, still 

1793: defined as in (\ref{Sndef}), only show a weak dependence on scale in the 

1794: highly nonlinear regime, and they also asymptotically reach (different) finite 

1795: values at large scales in the quasi-linear regime 

1796: \cite{Colombi1994,Bernardeau2002}. Then, it has been proposed

1797: to use the approximation of constant $S_n$ to describe the highly nonlinear

1798: regime \cite{Peebles1980}. Moreover, the form (\ref{Sndef}) of the

1799: reduced cumulant generating function $\varphi(y)$ is one of the possibilities

1800: that have been studied in this context \cite{Balian1989}.

1801: This phenomenological ansatz is known 

1802: as the ``stable clustering model'' as it was derived by assuming that on small 

1803: physical scales, after nonlinear collapse and gravitational relaxation, 

1804: overdensities decouple from the Hubble expansion and keep a constant physical size 

1805: \cite{Davis1977}. In the present case, collapsed objects are actually Dirac

1806: peaks (shocks) of vanishing size. Then, it is easy to see from a multifractal

1807: analysis that shocks lead to finite ratios $S_n$ in the small-scale limit

1808: \cite{Balian1989b,Valageas1999}, so that the hierarchy (\ref{Sndef}) is universal,

1809: in the sense that the generating function $\varphi(y)$ has a finite limit at small

1810: scale, $x\rightarrow 0$. However, this non-trivial

1811: limit depends on the initial energy spectrum. 

1812: A specific property of the Brownian initial 

1813: conditions studied in this paper is that the ratios $S_n$ are actually constant 

1814: over all scales, from the linear to highly nonlinear scales. 

1815: Thus, it is interesting to note that the $1$-D Burgers

1816: equation with Brownian initial velocity provides an exact physical realization

1817: of this ansatz. 

1818: 

1819: 

1820: \subsection{Density correlations}

1821: \label{Density-correlations}

1822: 

1823: 

1824: We now consider the unsmoothed density field $\rho(x)$ itself (again in the limit

1825: where we are far from the origin so that the previous results apply).

1826: It is related to the smoothed overdensity $\eta$ over scale $x$ introduced 

1827: above through

1828: \beq

1829: \eta = \int_{x_1}^{x_1+x} \frac{\dd x'}{x} \; \frac{\rho(x')}{\rho_0} .

1830: \label{etax}

1831: \eeq

1832: Then, introducing the density power spectrum, $\Pk(k)$, by going to Fourier space as

1833: \beq

1834: \rho(x) - \rho_0 = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd k \, e^{\ii kx} \, \rho(k) ,

1835: \;\;\; \lag \rho(k_1) \rho(k_2) \rag = \delta(k_1+k_2) \, \rho_0^2 \, \Pk(k_1) ,

1836: \label{Pkdef}

1837: \eeq

1838: we obtain using the second Eq.(\ref{eta123}) and Eqs.(\ref{etax})-(\ref{Pkdef})

1839: \beq

1840: \frac{Dt^2}{x} = \lag\eta^2\rag_c = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd k \, 

1841: \sinc^2(\frac{kx}{2}) \,\Pk(k) , \;\;\;\; \mbox{and} \;\;\;\;

1842: \Pk(k,t) = \frac{Dt^2}{2\pi} ,

1843: \label{Pkt}

1844: \eeq

1845: where $\sinc(x)=\sin(x)/x$ is the cardinal sine. Thus, we obtain a white-noise

1846: density power spectrum, with an amplitude that grows as $t^2$. This yields the

1847: connected density two-point correlation

1848: \beq

1849: \lag \rho(x_1,t) \rho(x_2,t) \rag_c = \rho_0^2 \, C_2(x_1,x_2) , \;\;\;\;

1850: \mbox{with} \;\;\;\; C_2(x_1,x_2) = Dt^2 \, \delta(x_2-x_1) ,

1851: \label{Ceta}

1852: \eeq

1853: which remains a Dirac function at all times.

1854: 

1855: In fact, the factorization (\ref{pBn}) implies a similar factorization for the

1856: multivariate distributions of the smoothed density field, far from the origin 

1857: ($X_1\rightarrow +\infty$),

1858: \beq

1859: X_1\leq .. \leq X_n \;\; : \;\; 

1860: P_{X_{2,1};..;X_{n,n-1}}(\eta_{2,1};..;\eta_{n,n-1}) 

1861: = P_{X_{2,1}}(\eta_{2,1}) .. P_{X_{n,n-1}}(\eta_{n,n-1}) ,

1862: \label{Peta1n}

1863: \eeq

1864: where $\eta_{i,i-1}$ is the mean overdensity over the interval $[X_{i-1},X_i]$.

1865: Thus, the densities within non-overlapping domains are completely independent

1866: random variables. This agrees with the Dirac obtained in Eq.(\ref{Ceta})

1867: for the connected density two-point correlation.

1868: Moreover, this can be extended to all higher orders.

1869: Indeed, let us consider the density $n-$point connected correlation, defined as

1870: \beq

1871: \lag \rho(x_1) .. \rho(x_n) \rag_c = \rho_0^n \, C_n(x_1,..,x_n) .

1872: \label{Cndef}

1873: \eeq

1874: If there exists a position $x_i$ that is different from all other positions

1875: $x_j$, with $j\neq i$, then we can build a small region 

1876: $[x_i-\epsilon,x_i+\epsilon]$ where the density is independent from the density

1877: at all other points $x_j$, using the property (\ref{Peta1n}) and 

1878: $\epsilon\rightarrow 0^+$. Therefore, by definition of connected correlations,

1879: $C_n$ must vanish. Then, the $n-$point connected correlation

1880: can be written as the product of $n-1$ Dirac factors

1881: \beqa

1882: C_n(x_1,..,x_n) & = & (2n-3)!! \, (Dt^2)^{n-1} \, 

1883: \delta(x_2-x_1) \delta(x_3-x_1) ... \delta(x_n-x_1)  \label{CnDirac} \\

1884: & = & (2n-3)!! \, C_2(x_1,x_2) C_2(x_1,x_3) ... C_2(x_1,x_n) ,

1885: \label{Cnfact}

1886: \eeqa

1887: where the amplitude is obtained from Eq.(\ref{etan}), as well as Eq.(\ref{etax})

1888: which implies the relation

1889: $\lag\eta^n\rag_c = x^{-n} \int_0^x \dd x_1 .. \dd x_n C_n(x_1,..,x_n)$.

1890: 

1891: 

1892: 

1893: \begin{figure}

1894: \begin{center}

1895: \epsfxsize=13 cm \epsfysize=2.5 cm {\epsfbox{tree1.eps}}

1896: \end{center}

1897: \caption{The 15 heap ordered trees that can be associated with the $4-$point

1898: correlation $C_4(x_1,..,x_4)$. The labels refer to the positions $x_i$, which are

1899: ordered as $x_1\leq x_2 \leq x_3 \leq x_4$. We only show the 5 tree structures, 

1900: as the additional terms can be obtained from the previous diagram by permutations 

1901: over the labels that satisfy the ordering constraint that each path from the root

1902: has increasing labels as we proceed down to the leaves. Each link between nodes

1903: $i$ and $j$ yields a contribution $C_2(x_i,x_j)$ and the contribution of a tree

1904: is the product of the 3 factors $C_2$ associated with its 3 links.

1905: This gives $C_4$ as the sum over all these tree contributions.}

1906: \label{figtree}

1907: \end{figure}

1908: 

1909: 

1910: 

1911: We can note that $(2n-3)!!$ also counts the number of heap ordered trees with

1912: $n$ nodes, that is, rooted trees where the $n$ nodes are labelled as 

1913: $\{1,2,..,n\}$ and each path from the root has increasing labels

1914: \cite{Prodinger1983}. In our case, we can therefore construct the following

1915: combinatorial interpretation of Eq.(\ref{CnDirac}). First, the points $x_1,..,x_n$,

1916: are ordered such that $x_1\leq x_2 \leq .. \leq x_n$ (we choose

1917: one among several possibilities if several positions are equal). Then,

1918: the $n-$point connected correlation (\ref{CnDirac}) is obtained as the sum of the

1919: contributions of all heap ordered trees, where the contribution of each tree

1920: is simply the product of the $n-1$ factors $C_2(x_i,x_j)$ associated with the 

1921: $n-1$ links between nodes $x_i$ and $x_j$.

1922: 

1923: Of course, we may also write (\ref{CnDirac}) as the sum over 

1924: the products of $C_2(x_i,x_j)$ associated with any other class of $N$ trees, 

1925: multiplied by a weight $(2n-3)!!/N$. 

1926: However, this no longer recovers the amplitude $(2n-3)!!$ of Eq.(\ref{CnDirac})

1927: in a natural manner. We note that in the cosmological context, 

1928: within the stable-clustering ansatz discussed above, it has been proposed to 

1929: use as a phenomenological model a diagrammatic description such as 

1930: Fig.~\ref{figtree}, where the connected $n-$point density correlation is written 

1931: as the sum over trees of each product of $(n-1)$ factors $C_2(x_i,x_j)$ 

1932: associated with the internal links \cite{Fry1984,Schaeffer1985}.

1933: However, the tree diagrams used in this context are usually 

1934: not ordered, and each topology may have an additional multiplicative weight.  

1935: In the present case of the $1$-dimensional Burgers dynamics, we can note that

1936: the concept of ordering naturally arises since particles do not cross each other

1937: and one can order both Lagrangian and Eulerian positions on the line

1938: (this would no longer be the case for higher dimensions).

1939: 

1940: Thus, the $1$-D Burgers dynamics with Brownian initial velocity provides  

1941: a physical realization of the hierarchical structure such as (\ref{Cnfact}) for

1942: the many-body correlation functions. It is an interesting question to ask whether

1943: other real dynamical systems can be built that display the same factorization 

1944: property (possibly over other classes of trees) with other two-point correlations

1945: $C_2$.\footnote{In fact, as for the weaker property of constant ratios $S_n$,

1946: the author is not aware of other dynamical systems that

1947: exactly obey such a factorization property. In view of the many phenomenological

1948: works that have used such a diagrammatic construction for many-body correlations, 

1949: it is satisfying to find that it is at least obeyed by one truly dynamical system,

1950: even though the expression in terms of Dirac factors and the lack of large 

1951: distance correlation make this a very simple and specific case.}  

1952: On the other hand, one may wonder whether a factorization such as (\ref{Cnfact}),

1953: and a diagrammatic construction such as Fig.~\ref{figtree}, could be generalized,

1954: as an exact asymptotic solution or as a useful phenomenological model,

1955: to the $1$-dimensional Burgers dynamics with other initial conditions, where

1956: $C_2$ would no longer be the simple Dirac function (\ref{Ceta}).\footnote{The results

1957: of \cite{Bertoin1998} show that the Brownian case can be generalized to

1958: Levy processes with no positive jumps, where the increments of the inverse Lagrangian

1959: map again remain homogeneous and independent at all times. However, this does not

1960: provide another hierarchy for the many-body correlations as they remain of the

1961: Dirac type.}

1962: 

1963: 

1964: \subsection{Comparison with a perturbative approach}

1965: \label{perturbative-approach}

1966: 

1967: 

1968: We can note that the exact (far from the origin) nonlinear results 

1969: (\ref{Pkt})-(\ref{Ceta}) are identical to the perturbative predictions

1970: that would be obtained at linear order from Eq.(\ref{continuity}).

1971: Indeed, if we linearize the continuity and inviscid Burgers equations, we obtain 

1972: at lowest order for the density field $\pl\rho_L/\pl t= - \rho_0\pl v_L/\pl x 

1973: = - \rho_0 \pl v_0/\pl x = - \rho_0 \xi$, where $\xi$ is the initial white-noise 

1974: of Eq.(\ref{xidef}).

1975: This gives $\rho_L(x,t)=\rho_0 (1-t\xi(x))$, which leads in turn to 

1976: Eqs.(\ref{Pkt})-(\ref{Ceta}). The fact that for these Brownian initial

1977: conditions the nonlinear Burgers

1978: dynamics preserves the linear density power spectrum is reminiscent of the  

1979: invariance of the energy velocity spectrum (\ref{Ekt}). In both cases, one needs to

1980: consider higher-order correlations (or the full distribution) to measure the

1981: effects of the nonlinearities.

1982: 

1983: In fact, the agreement of the exact density two-point function with the linear theory

1984: actually extends to all order cumulants $\lag\eta^n\rag_c$, computed at leading order

1985: from quasi-linear theory. Indeed, at tree-order in perturbation theory, in the 

1986: inviscid limit, it can be shown that the cumulant-generating function $\varphi(y)$,

1987: defined as in Eq.(\ref{Sndef}), is given by the implicit system

1988: \beq

1989: \left\{ \bea{l} \tau= - y \, \cG'(\tau) \\ \\

1990: \varphi(y) = y \, \cG(\tau)+\frac{\tau^2}{2} \ea \right. \;\;\;

1991: \mbox{with} \;\;\; \cG(\tau) = \cF\left[-\tau \frac{\sigma(\cG \, x)}{\sigma(x)} 

1992: \right] = \cF\left[-\tau \, \cG^{-1/2} \right] ,

1993: \label{varphiyGtau}

1994: \eeq

1995: where $\sigma(x)^2=\lag \delta_L^2\rag=Dt^2/x$ is the variance of the linear density 

1996: contrast $\delta_L$ at scale $x$, and the function $\cF(\delta_L)$ describes 

1997: the evolution of spherical (here symmetric) density fluctuations 

1998: (see \cite{Bernardeau1994,Bernardeau2002,Valageas2002}

1999: for the similar case of the cosmological gravitational dynamics).

2000: The system $\{\tau,\cG\}\leftrightarrow\{y,\varphi\}$ in (\ref{varphiyGtau}) is 

2001: actually a Legendre transform and it arises from a saddle-point approximation.

2002: Indeed, in the quasi-linear limit (i.e. $\sigma\rightarrow 0$, which also corresponds 

2003: to $t\rightarrow 0$ or $x\rightarrow\infty$)

2004: the cumulant ratios $S_n$ are governed by the tails of the density distribution

2005: and the generating function $\varphi(y)$ can be obtained from a steepest-descent

2006: method\footnote{In fact, the steepest-descent method described in \cite{Valageas2002}

2007: is a non-perturbative approach, which can also be applied to the other limit of rare

2008: events at finite $\sigma$, where it allows to go beyond perturbative methods

2009: \cite{Valageas2002IV}. However, in the quasi-linear limit $\sigma\rightarrow 0$

2010: it gives the same results for $\varphi(y)$ as the usual perturbative expansion

2011: over powers of the linear growing mode of the density field (provided the latter

2012: gives finite results in this limit).}

2013: \cite{Valageas2002}. (In a somewhat similar fashion, the minimization

2014: problem (\ref{psinu0}), that also arises from a saddle-point method, can be written

2015: in terms of a Legendre transform of the Lagrangian potential, see \cite{Bec2007}.)

2016: As compared with Eq.(69) of \cite{Valageas2002} we made the change 

2017: $\sigma[(1+\cG)^{1/3}x] \rightarrow \sigma(\cG \, x)$ by taking $1+\cG\rightarrow\cG$

2018: and the exponent $1/3$ is changed to unity as we go from $3$-D to $1$-D.

2019: For the present $1$-D Burgers dynamics, we have:

2020: \beq

2021: \eta=\frac{q}{x} = \frac{q}{q+tv} , \;\;\;\; \mbox{whence at linear order} \;\;\;\;

2022: \eta_L=1-\frac{t v}{q} \;\;\; \mbox{and} \;\;\; \delta_L = - t \frac{v}{q} .

2023: \label{etaL}

2024: \eeq

2025: This yields

2026: \beq

2027: \cF(\delta_L) = \frac{1}{1-\delta_L} , \;\;\; \mbox{whence} \;\;\; 

2028: \cG(\tau)= \frac{(-\tau+\sqrt{\tau^2+4})^2}{4} \;\;\; \mbox{and} \;\;\;

2029: \varphi(y) = \sqrt{1+2y} -1 .

2030: \label{FGvarphi}

2031: \eeq

2032: Thus, we recover at tree-order the exact result (\ref{Sndef}). Therefore,  

2033: for Brownian initial velocity the Burgers dynamics happens to preserve the

2034: density cumulant-generating function $\varphi(y)$ that would be obtained at leading

2035: order (tree-order) from a perturbative approach, which does not take into account

2036: collisions between particles (shell-crossings). This is also why the ratios $S_n$

2037: are constants that apply to all scales, from the quasi-linear to the highly nonlinear 

2038: scales. Note that the perturbative approach breaks down beyond leading order

2039: as next-to-leading corrections actually involve divergent integrals (which means

2040: that one can no longer discard shocks, which requires non-perturbative methods).   

2041: For other initial conditions the coefficients $S_n$ would no longer remain equal

2042: to their tree-order values. However, they still asymptote to finite values

2043: in the highly nonlinear regime, because of the contribution from shocks, just

2044: as the Lagrangian and velocity increments scale linearly with $\ell$ for small 

2045: distances $\ell \rightarrow 0$, as discussed below 

2046: Eqs.(\ref{Qnuscalp})-(\ref{Qnuscalm}) and Eq.(\ref{VnX0}).

2047: 

2048: 

2049: 

2050: \section{Lagrangian displacement field}

2051: \label{sec:Displacement}

2052: 

2053: 

2054: \subsection{One-point distributions}

2055: \label{subsec:One-point}

2056: 

2057: 

2058: 

2059: We now consider the dynamics associated with the Burgers equation (\ref{Burg})

2060: from a Lagrangian point of view. That is, labelling particles by their initial

2061: position $q$ at time $t=0$, we follow their trajectory $x(q,t)$ and we note

2062: $\PPsi(q,t)=x(q,t)-q$ their displacement with respect to their initial location.

2063: Note that for regular points, which have kept their initial velocity, we have 

2064: $\PPsi= t v$, see Eq.(\ref{psinu}). Since particles do not cross each other

2065: they remain well-ordered. Then, it is clear that the probability, $p_q(x'\geq x)$, 

2066: for the particle $q$ to be to the right of the Eulerian position $x$, at time $t$, 

2067: is equal to the probability, $p_x(q'\leq q)$, for the Eulerian location $x$ to 

2068: be ``occupied'' by particles that were initially to the left of particle $q$.

2069: (Since shocks have zero measure in Eulerian space there are no ambiguities.) 

2070: Therefore, we obtain in terms of dimensionless variables, for the case $q\geq 0$,

2071: \beqa

2072: Q\geq 0 : \;\;\; P_Q(X'\geq X) & = & P_X(Q'\leq Q) = 

2073: P_X(Q'\leq 0)+P_X(0\leq Q'\leq Q) \nonumber \\

2074: & = & J(1,-2X) + \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q} \, 

2075: \frac{J(s,2X)}{s-1} ,

2076: \label{PQX1}

2077: \eeqa

2078: where we used the results of section~\ref{subsec:arbitrary_Eulerian_location_x}

2079: and the integration contour runs to the right of the pole $s=1$.

2080: Therefore, the probability density of the Eulerian position $X$ of particle $Q$

2081: reads as

2082: \beqa

2083: Q\geq 0 : \;\;\; P_Q(X) & = & - \frac{\pl}{\pl X} P_Q(X'\geq X)  \nonumber \\

2084: && =  - \frac{\pl}{\pl X} \left[ J(1,-2X) + \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, 

2085: e^{(s-1)Q} \, \frac{J(s,2X)}{s-1} \right] .

2086: \label{PQX2}

2087: \eeqa

2088: The case $Q<0$ can be obtained from Eq(\ref{PQX2}) through a reflection about the

2089: origin.

2090: 

2091: 

2092: 

2093: \begin{figure}

2094: \begin{center}

2095: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{P0x.ps}}

2096: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{lP0x.ps}}

2097: \end{center}

2098: \caption{(color online) {\it Left panel:} The probability distribution, $P_0(X)$, of the 

2099: reduced position $X=x/(2Dt)$ of the particle that was initially at the origin, 

2100: $q=0$, from Eq.(\ref{PQ0X1}). The dashed lines show the asymptotic behaviors 

2101: (\ref{PQ0X0}) and (\ref{PQ0Xinf}).

2102: {\it Right panel:} Same as left panel but on a logarithmic scale.}

2103: \label{figP0x}

2104: \end{figure}

2105: 

2106: 

2107: 

2108: Let us consider more precisely the case of the particle that was initially at

2109: rest at the origin, $q=0$. Following the previous discussion, we have

2110: $p_0(x'\geq x)=p_x(q'\leq 0)$, hence we can directly use 

2111: Eqs.(\ref{pqp1})-(\ref{pqpm2}) which give

2112: \beq

2113: X \geq 0 : \;\; P_0(X) = - \frac{\pl}{\pl X} \int_0^{\infty} \dd\nu \, 

2114: \frac{6}{\nu^2} \, \Ai\left[\nu 2X+\frac{1}{\nu^2}\right]^2 ,

2115: \;\;\; P_0(-X) = P_0(X) .

2116: \label{PQ0X1}

2117: \eeq

2118: At small $X$, we obtain from Eq.(\ref{PQ0X1}) the asymptotic

2119: \beq

2120: X \rightarrow 0^+ : \;\;  P_0(X) \sim - \frac{4\sqrt{3}}{\pi} \ln X  ,

2121: \label{PQ0X0}

2122: \eeq

2123: whereas the behavior for large displacement $X$ is set by the asymptotic 

2124: (\ref{pqmxinf}), which yields

2125: \beq

2126: X \rightarrow + \infty : \;\;  P_0(X) \sim 

2127: \left(\pi X /(2\sqrt{3})\right)^{-1/2} \, e^{-4\sqrt{3}X} .

2128: \label{PQ0Xinf}

2129: \eeq

2130: Thus, the central particle $q=0$, that was initially at rest ($v_0(0)=0$),

2131: has moved by time $t$ by a distance $\PPsi=X$ whose distribution shows an

2132: exponential tail at large $|X|$ and a logarithmic peak at low $|X|$.

2133: We can note that both the large-$X$ tail and the low-$X$ divergence

2134: are different from the asymptotics of the distribution of the

2135: Lagrangian coordinate, $Q=-V$, of the particle located at the Eulerian location 

2136: $X=0$ at the same time, see Eqs.(\ref{p0V0})-(\ref{p0Vinfty}).

2137: We show in Fig.~\ref{figP0x} the distribution $P_0(X)$ as well as the asymptotic

2138: behaviors (\ref{PQ0X0}) and (\ref{PQ0Xinf}). It appears that the logarithmic

2139: asymptote is only reached at very low $X$.

2140: 

2141: 

2142: 

2143: Finally, far away from the origin, in the limit $Q\rightarrow\infty$ at

2144: fixed $\PPsi=X-Q$, we obtain from Eq.(\ref{PQX2}) the asymptotic behavior

2145: (making the change of variable $s=1+\ii k$ as for Eq.(\ref{pXinfV2}))

2146: \beq

2147: Q\rightarrow +\infty, \;\; |\PPsi|\ll Q : \;\; P_Q(\PPsi) \sim 

2148: \frac{e^{-\PPsi^2/Q}}{\sqrt{\pi Q}} .

2149: \label{pQinPsi1}

2150: \eeq

2151: Therefore, we recover the property that far from the origin the displacement 

2152: of the particles is governed at leading order by the Gaussian distribution of the

2153: initial velocity field $v_0(q)$. This agrees with the discussion presented

2154: below Eq.(\ref{pXinfV2}) in section~\ref{subsec:far_away_x}.

2155: Again, this expresses the fact that at very large distances, where the initial

2156: velocity becomes increasingly large as $\sqrt{|q|}$, the motion with respect to

2157: the origin is dominated by the ``large-scale flow'' and the local fluctuations

2158: of the initial velocity field have only produced local subdominant shifts,

2159: see also \cite{Gurbatov1999,Aurell1993}.

2160: 

2161: 

2162: 

2163: \subsection{Two-point distributions}

2164: \label{subsec:Two-point}

2165: 

2166: 

2167: We now investigate the two-point probability distribution of the Lagrangian

2168: displacement field. As for the one-point distribution (\ref{PQX1}), it is

2169: related to its Eulerian counterpart through

2170: \beq

2171: P_{Q_1,Q_2}(X_1'\geq X_1,X_2'\geq X_2) = P_{X_1,X_2}(Q_1'\leq Q_1,Q_2'\leq Q_2) 

2172: \label{PQ1Q2PX1X2}

2173: \eeq

2174: Using Eqs.(\ref{pXinfV2}), (\ref{pBdef}), we obtain far away from the origin,

2175: in the limit $Q_1\rightarrow+\infty$ at fixed $Q_{21}=Q_2-Q_1>0$,

2176: \beqa

2177: Q_1\rightarrow+\infty , \; Q_{21}>0 : \;\;\; 

2178: P_{Q_1,Q_2}(X_1'\geq X_1,X_2'\geq X_2) & \sim & \int_0^{Q_1} \dd Q_1' 

2179: \int_{Q_1'}^{Q_2} \dd Q_2' \nonumber \\

2180: && \hspace{-5cm} \times \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd k}{2\pi} 

2181: e^{-\ii k(X_1-Q_1')-X_1 k^2/4} \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, 

2182: e^{(s-1)(Q_2'-Q_1')} \, e^{-(\sqrt{s}-1)2 X_{21}} .

2183: \label{PQ1Q2_1}

2184: \eeqa

2185: Integrating over $Q_1'$ and $Q_2'$ gives the cumulative distribution

2186: \beqa

2187: Q_1\rightarrow+\infty , \; Q_{21}>0 : \;\;\; 

2188: P_{Q_1,Q_2}(X_1'\geq X_1,X_2'\geq X_2) & \sim & \int \frac{\dd k}{2\pi} 

2189: \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \nonumber \\

2190: && \hspace{-3.5cm} \times \frac{e^{-\ii k X_1-X_1 k^2/4-(\sqrt{s}-1)2 X_{21}}}

2191: {(s-1)(\ii k-s+1)} \left[ e^{\ii k Q_1+(s-1)Q_{21}} - e^{(s-1)Q_2} \right] .

2192: \label{PQ1Q2_2}

2193: \eeqa

2194: Then, taking the derivatives with respect to $X_1$ and $X_2$, and integrating

2195: over $k$, gives in the limit $Q_1\rightarrow+\infty$, at finite $\PPsi_1=X_1-Q_1$, 

2196: the probability density

2197: \beq

2198: Q_1\rightarrow+\infty , \; Q_{21}>0 : \;\;\; 

2199: P_{Q_1,Q_2}(X_1,X_2) \sim \frac{e^{-\PPsi_1^2/Q_1}}{\sqrt{\pi Q_1}}

2200: \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q_{21}-(\sqrt{s}-1)2X_{21}} \,

2201: \frac{4}{(\sqrt{s}+1)^2} .

2202: \label{PQ1Q2_3}

2203: \eeq

2204: Thus, the comparison with Eq.(\ref{pQinPsi1}) shows that we obtain as expected

2205: a factorization of the form

2206: \beq

2207: Q_1\rightarrow+\infty , \; Q_{21}>0 : \;\; P_{Q_1,Q_2}(X_1,X_2) \sim P_{Q_1}(X_1)

2208: \bP_{Q_{21}}(X_{21}) ,

2209: \label{PQ1PQ21}

2210: \eeq

2211: where the distribution, $\bP_{Q_{21}}(X_{21})$, of the relative Eulerian distance 

2212: $X_{21}$ of the particles that were initially separated by the distance $Q_{21}$

2213: reads as

2214: \beq

2215: Q \geq 0 , \;\; X > 0 : \;\;\; \bP_Q(X) = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} 

2216: \, e^{(s-1)Q-(\sqrt{s}-1)2X} \, \frac{4}{(\sqrt{s}+1)^2} .

2217: \label{PQX}

2218: \eeq

2219: Therefore, we recover a factorization of the form (\ref{PX1X2fact}) that was

2220: obtained in the Eulerian framework. However, it is no longer exact at a finite 

2221: distance from the origin and only applies in the limit $Q_1\rightarrow\infty$

2222: (again, by symmetry we have a similar result for $Q_2\rightarrow-\infty$).

2223: 

2224: Multiplying Eq.(\ref{PQX}) by $e^{-4X}$ and taking the derivative with respect

2225: to $X$ we obtain a standard inverse Laplace transform \cite{Abramowitz}

2226: \beqa

2227: \frac{\dd}{\dd X} \left[e^{-4X}\bP_Q(X)\right] & = & - \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} 

2228: \, e^{(s-1)Q} \, \frac{8 \, e^{-(\sqrt{s}+1)2X}}{\sqrt{s}+1} \nonumber\\

2229: & = & - 8 \left[ \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi Q}} e^{-(\frac{X}{\sqrt{Q}}+\sqrt{Q})^2} - 

2230: \erfc\left(\frac{X}{\sqrt{Q}}+\sqrt{Q}\right) \right] ,

2231: \label{dPQX2}

2232: \eeqa

2233: where $\erfc(z)$ is the complementary error function. This can be integrated to

2234: give

2235: \beq

2236: \bP_Q(X) = 8 \, \bigl(X+Q+\frac{1}{2}\bigr) \, e^{4X} \, 

2237: \erfc\left(\frac{X}{\sqrt{Q}}+\sqrt{Q}\right) - 8 \, \sqrt{\frac{Q}{\pi}} 

2238: \, e^{-(\frac{X}{\sqrt{Q}}-\sqrt{Q})^2} .

2239: \label{PQX3}

2240: \eeq

2241: Using the asymptotic expansion of the complementary error function 

2242: \cite{Abramowitz} we obtain for large Lagrangian separation, $Q$, and fixed

2243: relative displacement, $\PPsi=X-Q$,

2244: \beq

2245: Q\rightarrow+\infty : \;\;\; \bP_Q(\PPsi) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi Q}} \, 

2246: e^{-\PPsi^2/Q} .

2247: \label{PQPsi1}

2248: \eeq

2249: As for Eqs.(\ref{pXinfV2}), (\ref{PVinf}), (\ref{pQinPsi1}), we recover 

2250: as expected the property that over large distances particles are still

2251: governed at leading order by the initial Gaussian velocity field. 

2252: Next, equation (\ref{PQX3}) yields for the asymptotic behavior at large $X$

2253: for finite $Q$,

2254: \beq

2255: X\rightarrow+\infty : \;\;\; \bP_Q(X) \sim \sqrt{\frac{Q}{\pi}} \, \frac{4}{X} \,

2256: e^{-(\frac{X}{\sqrt{Q}}-\sqrt{Q})^2} 

2257: = 4 \sqrt{\frac{Q}{\pi}} \, e^{-Q} \, X^{-1} \, e^{2X-X^2/Q} ,

2258: \label{PQXinf}

2259: \eeq

2260: whereas $\bP_Q(X)$ remains finite for $X\rightarrow 0^+$. We show our results

2261: for three values of $Q$ in Fig.~\ref{figPX}, that clearly illustrate the evolution

2262: of $\bP_Q(X)$ with scale or time (smaller $Q$ corresponds to smaller scale or larger

2263: time). As for the Eulerian probability distribution, the Gaussian tail

2264: (\ref{PQXinf}) can be understood from a simple scaling argument applied to the

2265: initial velocity field. Thus, the expansion of the initial Lagrangian interval 

2266: $q$ up to a very large size $x$ at time $t$ requires an initial velocity increment

2267: of order $v_0 \sim x/t$ (since $x\gg q$) which gives rise to a probability of order

2268: $e^{-(x/t)^2/q} \sim e^{-X^2/Q}$, using Eq.(\ref{Gaussian_t0}), which agrees with 

2269: the large-$X$ tail (\ref{PQXinf}).

2270: 

2271: 

2272: 

2273: \begin{figure}

2274: \begin{center}

2275: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{PX.ps}}

2276: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{lPX.ps}}

2277: \end{center}

2278: \caption{(color online) {\it Left panel:} The probability density $\bp_q(x)$ that two particles, 

2279: that were initially separated by a distance $q$, are separated by the distance 

2280: $x>0$ at time $t$ (in the limit where the particles are far from the origin).

2281: We show the reduced probabilities, $\bP_Q(X)$, in terms of the dimensionless variables

2282: $Q=q/(2Dt^2)$ and $X=x/(2Dt^2)$, for three values of $Q$, from Eq.(\ref{PQX3}).

2283: The probability is zero for $X<0$. 

2284: For large initial relative distance $Q$ we recover a Gaussian of center $Q$ and 

2285: variance $\lag (X-Q)^2\rag=Q/2$. 

2286: {\it Right panel:} The probability density $\bP_Q(X)$ on a logarithmic scale, 

2287: for three values of $Q$.}

2288: \label{figPX}

2289: \end{figure}

2290: 

2291: 

2292: 

2293: 

2294: 

2295: 

2296: \begin{figure}

2297: \begin{center}

2298: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{PQshock.ps}}

2299: \epsfxsize=6.3 cm \epsfysize=5 cm {\epsfbox{lPQshock.ps}}

2300: \end{center}

2301: \caption{(color online) {\it Left panel:} The probability, $\bp_q^{\rm shock}$, that two

2302: particles, that were initially separated by a distance $q$, have coalesced within

2303: a single shock by time $t$ (in the limit where the particles are far from the 

2304: origin). We show the reduced probability, $\bP_Q^{\rm shock}$, from 

2305: Eq.(\ref{PQshock1}). The dashed lines are the asymptotic behaviors 

2306: (\ref{PshockQinf}) and (\ref{PshockQ0}).

2307: {\it Right panel:} The probability $\bP_Q^{\rm shock}$ on a logarithmic scale.}

2308: \label{figPQshock}

2309: \end{figure}

2310: 

2311: 

2312: 

2313: 

2314: 

2315: From Eq.(\ref{PQX3})

2316: we also obtain for the asymptotic behaviors of $\bP_Q(0^+)$ with respect to

2317: $Q$

2318: \beq

2319: Q\rightarrow 0 : \;\;\; \bP_Q(0^+) \rightarrow 4 , \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; 

2320: Q\rightarrow+\infty : \;\;

2321: \bP_Q(0^+) \sim \frac{4}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, Q^{-3/2} \, e^{-Q} .

2322: \label{PQX0}

2323: \eeq

2324: However, note that the limits $X\rightarrow 0$ and $Q\rightarrow 0$ do not commute.

2325: Indeed, it is clear from Eq.(\ref{PQX3}) that for any $X>0$ we have 

2326: $\bP_Q(X)\rightarrow 0$ for $Q\rightarrow 0$. As we shall see below, this is

2327: the signature of the contribution due to shocks.

2328: Thus, from Eq.(\ref{PQX}) we obtain the cumulative distribution as

2329: \beq

2330: Q \geq 0 , \;\; X > 0 : \;\;\; \bP_Q(X'\geq X) = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} 

2331: \, e^{(s-1)Q} \, \frac{2 \, e^{-(\sqrt{s}-1)2X}}{(s-1)(\sqrt{s}+1)} , \;\;

2332: \Re(s) > 1 ,

2333: \label{PQ>X}

2334: \eeq

2335: where the integration path is located to the right of the pole at $s=1$,

2336: so that $\bP_Q(X'\geq X)\rightarrow 0$ for $X\rightarrow+\infty$.

2337: However, we note that it does not reach unity in the limit $X\rightarrow 0^+$,

2338: since we have

2339: \beq

2340: Q \geq 0 : \;\; \lim_{X\rightarrow 0^+} \bP_Q(X'\geq X) = 1 + 

2341: \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, e^{(s-1)Q} \, \frac{2}{(s-1)(\sqrt{s}+1)} , 

2342: \;\; 0 < \Re(s) < 1 ,

2343: \label{PQ>X0}

2344: \eeq

2345: where the integration path crosses the real axis in the range $0<s<1$.

2346: This means that there is a non-zero contribution due to shocks, where particles

2347: that were initially located at different positions, $q_1\neq q_2$, have collided

2348: by time $t$ and are now located at the same Eulerian position, $x_1=x_2$, in the

2349: same massive shock. Therefore, to the contribution (\ref{PQX}) we must add the

2350: contribution from shocks, that reads as

2351: \beqa

2352: Q \geq 0 & : & \;\;\; \bP_Q^{\rm shock}(X) = \bP_Q^{\rm shock} \, \delta(X-0^+) , 

2353: \;\;\;\; \mbox{with the amplitude} \nonumber \\

2354: && \bP_Q^{\rm shock} = \inta \frac{\dd s}{2\pi\ii} \, 

2355: e^{(s-1)Q} \, \frac{2}{(1-s)(\sqrt{s}+1)} , 

2356: \;\;\; 0 < \Re(s) < 1 ,

2357: \label{PQshock}

2358: \eeqa

2359: so that the full probability is normalized to unity, see Eq.(\ref{PQ>X0}).

2360: Thus, the amplitude $\bP_Q^{\rm shock}$ is the probability that two particles,

2361: that were initially separated by the (dimensionless) distance $Q$, are both located

2362: in the same shock at time $t$ (in the limit where the particles are far from

2363: the origin, or anywhere on the right side for one-sided initial conditions).

2364: At large initial Lagrangian separation $Q$, we obtain from Eq.(\ref{PQshock})

2365: the exponential decay (that again can be understood from simple scaling arguments)

2366: \beq

2367: Q\rightarrow+\infty : \;\;\; \bP_Q^{\rm shock} \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} 

2368: \, Q^{-3/2} \, e^{-Q} ,

2369: \label{PshockQinf}

2370: \eeq

2371: whereas for small initial distance $Q$ we have

2372: \beq

2373: Q\rightarrow 0 : \;\;\; \bP_Q^{\rm shock} \sim 1 - 4 \sqrt{\frac{Q}{\pi}} .

2374: \label{PshockQ0}

2375: \eeq

2376: Therefore, in the limit $Q\rightarrow 0$ the probability that both particles are

2377: within the same shock reaches unity whereas the weight associated with the

2378: ``regular'' contribution (\ref{PQX3}) vanishes (while its cutoff decreases as $Q$).

2379: This agrees with the well-known result that the set of regular Lagrangian points

2380: has a Hausdorff dimension equal to $1/2$ \cite{She1992,Sinai1992}, 

2381: so that with probability $1$ a random Lagrangian point $q$ belongs to a shock 

2382: at any given time $t>0$. This clearly implies that $\bP_Q^{\rm shock}\rightarrow 1$ 

2383: for $Q\rightarrow 0$, as in Eq.(\ref{PshockQ0}). Moreover, the behavior 

2384: $1-\bP_Q^{\rm shock} \propto Q^{1/2}$ also shows that the set of regular Lagrangian 

2385: points has a box-counting dimension equal to $1/2$, in agreement with these works.

2386: 

2387: Taking the derivative of Eq.(\ref{PQshock}) yields again a standard inverse Laplace 

2388: transform \cite{Abramowitz} that provides a convenient integral expression for

2389: $\bP_Q^{\rm shock}$,

2390: \beq

2391: \frac{\dd \bP_Q^{\rm shock}}{\dd Q} = 2 \left[ \erfc(\sqrt{Q}) - 

2392: \frac{e^{-Q}}{\sqrt{\pi Q}} \right] , \;\;\; \mbox{hence} \;\;\;

2393: \bP_Q^{\rm shock} = 2 \int_Q^{\infty} \dd Q' \, \left( \frac{e^{-Q'}}{\sqrt{\pi Q'}}

2394: - \erfc(\sqrt{Q'}) \right) .

2395: \label{PQshock1}

2396: \eeq

2397: We show in Fig.~\ref{figPQshock} the same-shock probability $\bP_Q^{\rm shock}$

2398: as a function of $Q$, as well as the asymptotic behaviors (\ref{PshockQinf}) 

2399: and (\ref{PshockQ0}).

2400: 

2401: 

2402: 

2403: \subsection{Higher-order distributions}

2404: \label{subsec:n-point}

2405: 

2406: 

2407: We can obtain the higher-order $n-$point distributions $p_{q_1,..,q_n}(x_1,..,x_n)$

2408: by the same method which we applied in the previous section for the two-point

2409: distribution. Thus, as in Eq.(\ref{PQ1Q2PX1X2}), we can related the Lagrangian 

2410: and Eulerian cumulative probabilities by

2411: \beq

2412: P_{Q_1,..,Q_n}(X_1'\geq X_1,..,X_n'\geq X_n) = 

2413: P_{X_1,..,X_n}(Q_1'\leq Q_1,..,Q_n'\leq Q_n) ,

2414: \label{PQ1QnPX1Xn}

2415: \eeq

2416: with $Q_1 < Q_2 <..<Q_n$ and $X_1 < X_2 <..<X_n$.

2417: Then, in the limit $Q_1\rightarrow+\infty$, using again the factorization 

2418: (\ref{pBn}) and the expressions (\ref{pXinfV2}) and (\ref{pBdef}), we can

2419: integrate over $Q_1',..,Q_n'$. Differentiating with respect to $X_1,..,X_n$, gives

2420: the $n-$point probability density (compare with Eq.(\ref{PQ1Q2_3}))

2421: \beqa

2422: Q_1\rightarrow\infty : \;\; P_{Q_1,..,Q_n}(X_1,..,X_n) & \sim & 

2423: \frac{e^{-\PPsi_1^2/Q_1}}{\sqrt{\pi Q_1}} 

2424: \inta \! \frac{\dd s_2 .. \dd s_n}{(2\pi\ii)^{(n-1)}} \, 

2425: e^{(s_2-1)Q_{2,1}+..+(s_n-1)Q_{n,n-1}} \nonumber \\

2426: && \hspace{-0cm} \times 

2427: \frac{2^n \, e^{-(\sqrt{s_2}-1)2X_{2,1}-..-(\sqrt{s_n}-1)2X_{n,n-1}}}

2428: {(1+\sqrt{s_2})(\sqrt{s_2}+\sqrt{s_3})..(\sqrt{s_{n-1}}+\sqrt{s_n})(\sqrt{s_n}+1)} ,

2429: \label{PQ1Qn_1}

2430: \eeqa

2431: with $X_{i,i-1}=X_i-X_{i-1}$, $Q_{i,i-1}=Q_i-Q_{i-1}$, $\Psi_1=X_1-Q_1$.

2432: Note that this $n-$point distribution does not factorize.

2433: 

2434: From Eq.(\ref{PQ1Qn_1}) we can obtain the contributions associated with shocks 

2435: in the same manner as in section~\ref{subsec:Two-point}. For instance, far from the

2436: origin ($Q_1\gg 1$), the probability density, 

2437: $\bP_{Q_{21},Q_{32},Q_{43}}^{\rm shock}(X_{32})$, that each pair $\{Q_1,Q_2\}$,

2438: and $\{Q_3,Q_4\}$, has coalesced within two shocks that are separated by a distance

2439: in the range $[X_{32},X_{32}+\dd X_{32}]$, reads as

2440: \beqa

2441: \bP_{Q_{21},Q_{32},Q_{43}}^{\rm shock}(X_{32}) & = & \inta 

2442: \frac{\dd s_2 \dd s_3 \dd s_4}{(2\pi\ii)^3} \, 

2443: e^{(s_2-1)Q_{21}+(s_3-1)Q_{32}+(s_4-1)Q_{43}} \nonumber \\

2444: && \hspace{-0cm} \times \, \frac{4 \, e^{-(\sqrt{s_3}-1)2X_{32}}}

2445: {(s_2-1)(\sqrt{s_2}+\sqrt{s_3})(\sqrt{s_3}+\sqrt{s_4})(s_4-1)} , 

2446: \label{PX32shock}

2447: \eeqa

2448: where the integration contour is such that $\Re(s_2)<1$, $\Re(s_3)>1$ and 

2449: $\Re(s_4)<1$. 

2450: 

2451:  

2452: 

2453: \subsection{Computing the density power spectrum from the Lagrangian statistics}

2454: \label{subsec:PkLag}

2455: 

2456: 

2457: Finally, it is interesting to note that the statistics of the Lagrangian 

2458: displacement field also allow us to compute the Eulerian density power spectrum 

2459: and to recover the result (\ref{Pkt}). Indeed, as is well-known the conservation

2460: of matter implies that the density $\rho(x)$ may be written as

2461: \beq

2462: \rho(x) = \rho_0 \left(\frac{\pl x}{\pl q}\right)^{-1} = \rho_0 \int \dd q \, 

2463: \delta(x-q-\PPsi(q)) ,

2464: \label{rhoPsi1}

2465: \eeq

2466: where $\PPsi(q)=x(q)-q$ is the Lagrangian displacement of particle $q$.

2467: Note that the last expression is still valid when there are shocks, as may be

2468: seen by computing the mass within some interval $[x_1,x_2]$. Going to Fourier

2469: space as in (\ref{Pkdef}), we can write

2470: \beq

2471: \lag \rho(k_1)\rho(k_2)\rag = \rho_0^2 \int\frac{\dd q_1 \dd q_2}{(2\pi\ii)^2} \,

2472: e^{-\ii(k_1q_1+k_2q_2)} \lag e^{-i(k_1\PPsi_1+k_2\PPsi_2)}\rag .

2473: \eeq

2474: Then, in the regime where the invariance through translations is recovered (i.e. 

2475: far from the origin), making the changes of variables $q_2=q_1+q$ and 

2476: $\PPsi_2=\PPsi_1+\PPsi$, we obtain

2477: \beqa

2478: \cP(k) & = & \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd q}{\pi} \int_0^{\infty} \dd x \, \bp_q(x) 

2479: \cos(kx)  \\

2480: & = & \gamma^2 \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd Q}{\pi} \int_{0^+}^{\infty} 

2481: \dd X \, \bP_Q(X) \cos(\gamma^2kX) + \gamma^2 \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd Q}{\pi} 

2482: \, \bP_Q^{\rm shock} .

2483: \eeqa

2484: In the second line, written in terms of dimensionless variables, we separated

2485: the two contributions associated with the regular part (\ref{PQX3}) and with

2486: the singular part (\ref{PQshock}) of the distribution of the relative Eulerian 

2487: distance $X$. Using Eq.(\ref{PQX}), we can check that the first contribution

2488: actually vanishes (as expected since all the mass is enclosed within shocks,

2489: see Eq.(\ref{Nshocknorm}) below and \cite{She1992,Sinai1992}), whereas the

2490: shock contribution is obviously independent of $k$ and using Eq.(\ref{PQshock})

2491: we recover the amplitude (\ref{Pkt}).

2492: 

2493: 

2494: 

2495: 

2496: \section{Properties of shocks}

2497: \label{sec:shock}

2498: 

2499: 

2500: 

2501: \subsection{Shock mass function}

2502: \label{subsec:shockmass}

2503: 

2504: 

2505: From the probability $\bp_q^{\rm shock}$ that two particles, initially separated

2506: by a distance $q$, are located in the same shock at a time $t>0$,

2507: we can now derive the mass function of shocks. First, we note that if a shock 

2508: has Lagrangian end-points $q_-$ and $q_+$, its mass is simply $m=\rho_0 (q_+-q_-)$,

2509: where $\rho_0$ is the uniform initial density, as discussed in 

2510: section~\ref{sec:Density}. Then, within an interval of length $\cQ$ in 

2511: Lagrangian space,

2512: we now count the number, $\cQ n_{\cQ}(m) \dd m$, of shock-intervals of length in 

2513: the range $[q,q+\dd q]$, whence of mass in $[m,m+\dd m]$, with $m=\rho_0 q$.

2514: The limit $\cQ\rightarrow \infty$ gives the probability density $n(m)$ 

2515: for a Lagrangian point to belong to a shock of mass $m$. Since on large scales

2516: particles are still governed by the initial Gaussian velocity field and have

2517: only moved by a relative distance $\PPsi \sim \sqrt{\cQ}$, see for instance

2518: Eq.(\ref{PQPsi1}), the corresponding Eulerian relative distance, $\cX$, obeys

2519: $\cX/\cQ\rightarrow 1$ for $\cQ\rightarrow\infty$. Therefore, $n(m)\dd m$ is

2520: also the mean number of shocks, per unit Eulerian length, with a mass in the range 

2521: $[m,m+\dd m]$.

2522: 

2523: Let us now relate the mass function $n(m)$ to the shock probability 

2524: $\bp_q^{\rm shock}$ that we obtained in Eq.(\ref{PQshock}). The latter is the

2525: probability that a Lagrangian interval, $q=q_2-q_1$, chosen at random, has 

2526: coalesced by time $t$ within a single shock. This clearly means that this shock

2527: has a length $q^{\rm s}$ larger than $q$ and that $q_1$ is located within

2528: a distance smaller than $q^{\rm s}-q$ from its left boundary. Therefore, in terms 

2529: of dimensionless variables, we have the relation

2530: \beq

2531: \bP_Q^{\rm shock} = \int_Q^{\infty} \dd M \, N(M) \, (M-Q) , 

2532: \;\;\; \mbox{with} \;\;\; M = \frac{m}{\rho_0 \gam^2} .

2533: \label{Nshock1}

2534: \eeq

2535: Here $N(M)$ is the dimensionless mass function. From Eq.(\ref{Nshock1}) and

2536: Eq.(\ref{PshockQ0}), taking $Q=0$, we obtain at once the normalization

2537: \beq

2538: \int_0^{\infty} \dd M \, M \, N(M) = 1 ,

2539: \label{Nshocknorm}

2540: \eeq

2541: which means that all the mass is included within shocks, at any time $t>0$.

2542: This agrees with previous results discussed below Eq.(\ref{PshockQ0}), 

2543: see \cite{She1992} and \cite{Sinai1992}.

2544: Differentiating twice Eq.(\ref{Nshock1}) with respect to $Q$, and using the first

2545: Eq.(\ref{PQshock1}), gives the simple expression

2546: \beq

2547: N(M)= \left. \frac{\dd^2 \bP_Q^{\rm shock}}{\dd Q^2} \right|_{Q=M} ,  \;\;\;

2548: \mbox{whence} \;\;\;  N(M) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, M^{-3/2} \ e^{-M} .

2549: \label{Nshock2}

2550: \eeq

2551: Thus, we recover the low-mass power law $M^{-3/2}$ that was already obtained

2552: in \cite{She1992,Sinai1992}. At large masses we obtain the exponential falloff

2553: that was heuristically derived in \cite{Vergassola1994}, following the same scaling

2554: arguments as those described in previous sections for the tails of the Eulerian or 

2555: Lagrangian distributions. The full mass function

2556: (\ref{Nshock2}) was also obtained in \cite{Bertoin1998} for the one-sided

2557: Brownian initial velocity. Indeed, in that case the Lagrangian increments $q_{21}$

2558: have the same distribution for $x\geq 0$, as discussed in 

2559: section~\ref{subsec:general}, which clearly leads to identical shock properties.

2560: 

2561: It is interesting to compare the exact result (\ref{Nshock2}) with the 

2562: Press-Schechter ansatz that is widely used in the cosmological context to

2563: count the number of collapsed objects \cite{Press1974}. This model attempts

2564: to identify such objects from the properties of the linear fields, obtained from

2565: the linearization of the equations of motion. For our case,

2566: this heuristic approach would state that the fraction of matter, $F(>m)$, 

2567: that is enclosed within collapsed objects (here infinitesimally thin shocks, 

2568: as we consider the Burgers equation in the inviscid limit) of mass larger than 

2569: $m$, with $m=\rho_0 q$, is given by the probability that, choosing a Lagrangian 

2570: point $q_c$ at random, the linear-theory Eulerian relative distance $x_L$ at 

2571: time $t$ between the particles $q_c+q/2$ and $q_c-q/2$ vanishes.

2572: (For a 3-dimensional Universe one considers the probability the a sphere of

2573: mass $m$ centered on $q_c$ has collapsed to a point.) In terms of dimensionless

2574: variables this reads as

2575: \beq

2576: F^{\rm PS}(\geq M) = P_Q^L(X_L \leq 0)  \;\; \mbox{at} \;\; M=Q , 

2577: \;\; \mbox{with} \;\;  P_Q^L(X_L)= \frac{e^{-(X_L-Q)^2/Q}}{\sqrt{\pi Q}} ,

2578: \label{FPS1}

2579: \eeq

2580: where $P^L$ refers to the distribution obtained by linear theory, where particles

2581: always keep their initial velocity and shocks are discarded.

2582: This gives

2583: \beq

2584: F^{\rm PS}(\geq M) = \int_{\sqrt{M}}^{\infty} \dd y \, 

2585: \frac{e^{-y^2}}{\sqrt{\pi}} .

2586: \label{FPS2}

2587: \eeq

2588: As usual, Eq.(\ref{FPS2}) implies $F^{\rm PS}(\geq 0)=1/2$, which means that only

2589: half of the mass would be within collapsed structures. Therefore, it is customary

2590: to multiply this by a somewhat ad-hoc factor $2$ \cite{Press1974}.

2591: Thus, differentiating with respect to $M$, the standard Press-Schechter recipe gives 

2592: in our case the mass function

2593: \beq

2594: 2F^{\rm PS}(\geq M) = \int_M^{\infty} \dd M \, M \, N^{\rm PS}(M) , \;\; 

2595: \mbox{whence} \;\; N^{\rm PS}(M) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, M^{-3/2} \ e^{-M} .

2596: \label{NPS}

2597: \eeq

2598: Therefore, we find that for the $1$-D Burgers dynamics with Brownian initial

2599: velocity the Press-Schechter ansatz happens to give the exact mass function

2600: (\ref{Nshock2}). The agreement of the Press-Schechter mass function at both small

2601: and large masses for the one-dimensional case was already noticed in 

2602: \cite{Vergassola1994}, for more general power-law initial velocity energy 

2603: spectra (although there were no exact results available at large masses but 

2604: heuristic predictions). This can be somewhat surprising in view of the many

2605: effects that could have made the Press-Schechter ansatz fail (especially at the

2606: low-mass tail), such as the so-called ``cloud-in-cloud problem'', associated 

2607: here with the fact that, even though particles $q_c\pm q/2$, evolved according to

2608: linear theory, may have not collided yet, on a larger scale $\ell >q$ it may happen

2609: that particles $q_c\pm \ell/2$ had very large inward velocities and have formed

2610: by time $t$ a massive shock that includes the smaller scale $q$.

2611: Nevertheless, in the cosmological context, numerical simulations have shown that,

2612: even though the Press-Schechter mass function is not exact, is usually gives

2613: reasonably good estimates (e.g., \cite{Sheth1999}), so that it is still widely 

2614: used today. It is satisfying to find out that in a related dynamical system, 

2615: it actually happens to

2616: coincide with the exact result. This makes the reasonable agreement observed in

2617: other cases somewhat less surprising than would be expected at first sight.

2618: As found in \cite{Vergassola1994}, this also suggests that it could provide

2619: a reasonable estimate for the Burgers dynamics itself with more general initial 

2620: conditions.

2621: 

2622: 

2623: 

2624: 

2625: 

2626: \subsection{Spatial distribution of shocks}

2627: \label{subsec:shockcorrelation}

2628: 

2629: 

2630: Finally, from the $n-$point distributions (\ref{PQ1Qn_1}) we can derive the 

2631: many-body distributions of shocks, far from the origin. 

2632: Thus, in a fashion similar to Eq.(\ref{Nshock1}), we can relate the trivariate mass 

2633: function, $N(M_1,M,M_2;X)\dd M_1 \dd M \dd M_2 \dd X_1 \dd X$, that counts the 

2634: probability to have a shock of mass $M_1$ within $[X_1,X_1+\dd X_1]$, another 

2635: shock of mass $M_2$ at distance $[X,X+\dd X]$, and a mass $M$ 

2636: in-between both shocks, to the three-point conditional shock probability,

2637: $\bP_{Q_{21},Q_{32},Q_{43}}$, of Eq.(\ref{PX32shock}). This reads as

2638: \beqa

2639: \bP_{Q_{21},Q_{32},Q_{43}}(X) & = & \int_0^{Q_{32}} \dd M 

2640: \int_{Q_{21}}^{\infty} \dd M_1 \int_{Q_{43}}^{\infty} \dd M_2 \, N(M_1,M,M_2;X) 

2641: \int_0^{M_1-Q_{21}} \dd Q_1 \nonumber \\

2642: && \hspace{0cm} \times \, \theta(Q_1\!+\!Q_{21}\!+\!Q_{32}\!-\!M_1\!-\!M) \,

2643: \theta(M_1\!+\!M\!+\!M_2\!-\!Q_1\!-\!Q_{21}\!-\!Q_{32}\!-\!Q_{43}) ,

2644: \label{N12shocks1}

2645: \eeqa

2646: where the two Heaviside factors ensure that $Q_3$ and $Q_4$ are within the second

2647: shock of mass $M_2$. Then, differentiating with respect to $Q_{21}$ and $Q_{43}$

2648: yields

2649: \beq

2650: \frac{\pl^2 \bP_{Q_{21},Q_{32},Q_{43}}}{\pl Q_{21}\pl Q_{43}} =  

2651: \int_0^{Q_{32}} \! \dd M \int_{Q_{43}}^{Q_{43}+Q_{32}-M} \! \dd M_2 \, 

2652: N(Q_{21}\!+\!Q_{32}\!+\!Q_{43}-\!M\!-\!M_2,M,M_2;X) .

2653: \label{N12shocks2}

2654: \eeq

2655: Taking the shifted Laplace transform of both quantities, in the form

2656: \beq

2657: N(M_1,M,M_2;X) = \inta \frac{\dd s_1 \dd s \dd s_2}{(2\pi\ii)^3} 

2658: e^{(s_1-1) M_1+(s-1)M+(s_2-1)M_2} \, \tN(s_1,s,s_2;X) ,

2659: \label{tNs1}

2660: \eeq

2661: and using Eq.(\ref{PX32shock}), we obtain

2662: \beq

2663: \tN(s_1,s,s_2;X) = \frac{4 \, (s-s_1)(s-s_2) \, e^{-(\sqrt{s}-1)2X}}

2664: {(\sqrt{s_1}+\sqrt{s})(\sqrt{s}+\sqrt{s_2})} .

2665: \label{tNs2}

2666: \eeq

2667: 

2668: If we now consider the multiplicity of shocks at positions $X_1$ and $X_2$,

2669: independently of the mass $M$ in-between, we integrate over $M$ and $s$, 

2670: which gives the bivariate mass function of shocks separated by a distance $X$:

2671: \beq

2672: N(M_1,M_2;X) = \inta \frac{\dd s_1 \dd s_2}{(2\pi\ii)^2} 

2673: e^{(s_1-1) M_1+(s_2-1)M_2} \,  \frac{4(1-s_1)(1-s_2)}

2674: {(\sqrt{s_1}+1)(1+\sqrt{s_2})} = N(M_1)\,  N(M_2) ,

2675: \label{N12shocks3}

2676: \eeq

2677: where we used Eqs.(\ref{Nshock2}) and (\ref{PQshock}) to recognize the product

2678: $N(M_1) N(M_2)$. Therefore, we find that the bivariate mass function $n(m_1,m_2;x)$

2679: does not depend on the inter-shock distance $x$ and merely factorizes as 

2680: $n(m_1) \times n(m_2)$ (far from the origin $x_1=0$).

2681: 

2682: Thus, shocks are not correlated and there is no bias: knowing that there is a shock

2683: of mass $m_1$ at position $x_1$ does not bias in any way the shock multiplicity

2684: at position $x_2=x_1+x$. We can note that this is consistent with the fact that

2685: the densities within separate regions are uncorrelated, as seen in 

2686: Eqs.(\ref{Ceta}) and (\ref{Peta1n}). In fact, from Eq.(\ref{Peta1n}), which shows

2687: that the density fields over separate regions are completely independent,

2688: we can see that this must extend to all $n-$point shock mass functions, thus

2689: shocks at different positions are uncorrelated. The fact that shocks form

2690: a Poisson point process was also obtained in \cite{Bertoin1998} for the case of

2691: one-sided Brownian velocity. 

2692: 

2693: 

2694: 

2695: \section{Conclusion}

2696: \label{sec:conclusion}

2697: 

2698: 

2699: 

2700: We have shown in this paper how to derive the equal-time statistical properties of 

2701: the solution of the Burgers equation with Brownian initial velocity, using the

2702: transition kernel associated with Brownian particles over a parabolic absorbing

2703: barrier. This initial velocity field is not homogeneous, as the initial velocity 

2704: is Gaussian with a variance 

2705: $\lag v_0^2\rag \propto |x|$ at distance $|x|$. However, it has homogeneous 

2706: increments. Then, although the one-point distributions, 

2707: $p_x(v)$ and $p_x(q)$, of the velocity $v$ and initial Lagrangian position $q$,

2708: depend on the position $x$, the two-point distributions exactly factorize provided 

2709: that all spatial coordinates remain on the same side of $x=0$, such as

2710: $p_{x_1,x_2}(v_1,v_2)=p_{x_1}(v_1) \bp_{x_{21}}(v_{21})$ and 

2711: $p_{x_1,x_2}(q_1,q_2)=p_{x_1}(q_1) \bp_{x_{21}}(q_{21})$ for

2712: $q_i>0$. A similar factorization holds for higher-order distributions.

2713: This agrees with the results that were obtained for the one-sided Brownian 

2714: initial velocity by \cite{Bertoin1998}.

2715: In the limit where we are far from the origin, this implies that we recover the

2716: invariance through translations for the distributions of velocity and Lagrangian 

2717: increments. Then, we have focussed on the properties of the system

2718: in this limit, where many simple explicit results can be derived.

2719: 

2720: As expected, we have found that on large scales, or at early times, all statistical

2721: properties converge to the Gaussian distributions set by the initial conditions

2722: (the nonlinear evolution being subdominant). On small scales, or at late times, 

2723: the distributions of the velocity increment, Lagrangian increment,

2724: or mean overdensity $\eta$ within a region of length $x$, increasingly depart 

2725: from the Gaussian. They exhibit widely separated exponential cutoffs, of the form

2726: $e^{-\eta}$ and $e^{-1/\eta}$, while a power law $\eta^{-3/2}$ develops in the

2727: intermediate range. However, we find that the variance of these distributions

2728: remains unchanged by the nonlinear dynamics, that is, it is equal to the value

2729: that would be obtained by discarding collisions and shocks, and letting particles

2730: cross each other and always keep their initial velocity. In particular,

2731: the second-order velocity structure function and its energy spectrum do not evolve

2732: with time, while the density correlation remains a Dirac function with an amplitude

2733: that grows as $t^2$. 

2734: 

2735: In fact, the densities within non-overlapping regions are uncorrelated

2736: and, at any order, the $n-$point connected density correlation can be written 

2737: as a product of $n-1$ Dirac factors: it is non-vanishing only when all points 

2738: coincide. Then, it can also be written as a product of $n-1$ two-point correlations,

2739: that connect the $n$ points, with a constant amplitude that happens to be the number

2740: of heap ordered trees. This allows a combinatorial interpretation that is similar

2741: to the hierarchical tree models that were devised as a phenomenological

2742: tool in the cosmological context, with the difference that in our case we must

2743: consider ordered trees (note that in the present $1$-D system,

2744: where particles do not cross, it is meaningful to order particles by their 

2745: positions so that the concept of ordering appears rather natural).

2746: Then, the cumulants of the overdensity exactly scale as 

2747: $\lag\eta^n\rag_c \propto \lag\eta^2\rag_c^{(n-1)}$, with an amplitude that is 

2748: independent of time and scale. Thus, they happen to exactly satisfy the

2749: so-called ``stable-clustering ansatz''. In fact, the density cumulant-generating 

2750: function remains exactly equal to the one obtained at tree-order from a perturbative 

2751: approach (which breaks down beyond leading order as next-to-leading corrections

2752: actually are divergent, which signals the need for a non-perturbative method that

2753: takes into account shocks).

2754:  

2755: We have also studied the Lagrangian displacement field, associated with a Lagrangian

2756: description of the dynamics. In the limit where we are far from the origin, we 

2757: find that it satisfies a similar factorization and recovers the invariance 

2758: through translations for the distributions of relative displacements.

2759: This also allows us to derive the properties of shocks. Thus, in agreement with

2760: previous works, we find that all of the mass is enclosed within shocks, at any time

2761: $t>0$, and that the shock mass function has the very simple expression 

2762: (\ref{Nshock2}). It agrees with the asymptotic behaviors that were already

2763: obtained through analytical means or numerical simulations in 

2764: \cite{She1992,Sinai1992} or \cite{Vergassola1994} and the exact result of 

2765: \cite{Bertoin1998}. Finally, shocks are not correlated as the bivariate 

2766: multiplicity function

2767: $n(m_1,m_2;x)$, that counts shocks of mass $m_1$ and $m_2$ separated by the

2768: distance $x$, factorizes as $n(m_1) \times n(m_2)$, in agreement with the same

2769: lack of correlation obtained for the density field.

2770: 

2771: Thus, the equal-time statistical properties of the Burgers dynamics with Brownian

2772: initial velocity are remarkably simple. It appears that the nonlinear dynamics

2773: preserves some properties of the initial fields (e.g. the second-order structure

2774: functions, the independence and homogeneity of velocity increments and of the 

2775: densities in separate domains) and that simple 

2776: explicit expressions can be derived in the limit where we are far from the origin

2777: (or on the right side for one-sided initial conditions). 

2778: 

2779: At finite distance from the origin, in addition

2780: to the quantities given here we need the two-point distribution associated with 

2781: the case where the two particles are on different sides of the origin $x=0$.

2782: Although we can obtain explicit expressions by the method presented in this article,

2783: this leads to multidimensional integrals that do not seem to greatly simplify

2784: (although we obtained simple expressions for the one-point distributions).

2785: However, for practical purposes, one is mostly interested in the limit

2786: where we are far from the origin and homogeneity is recovered.

2787: From a physical point of view, the initial conditions (\ref{xidef}) are meant

2788: to represent a system with homogeneous velocity increments, which scale as

2789: $\lag(\Delta v_0)^2\rag \propto |\Delta q|$ as in(\ref{Dv0}) over a finite

2790: range, and an energy spectrum $E_0(k)\propto k^{-2}$ as in (\ref{E0}) over the

2791: range of interest. Thus, in practice there would be an infrared cutoff, $\Lambda$,

2792: below which $E_0(k)$ would grow more slowly than $1/k$ so that the velocity

2793: field is actually homogeneous (in an experimental setup there would actually be

2794: a finite lower wavenumber, set by the size of the box, and homogeneity would only

2795: apply far from the boundaries). Then, the initial conditions (\ref{xidef})

2796: studied in this article can be viewed as a convenient mathematical device

2797: to represent such a system, with the understanding that the special role

2798: played by the origin is a mathematical artifact and that only the properties

2799: far from the origin are meaningful in the physical sense described above.

2800: Note that this identification is possible because small scales are not strongly

2801: coupled to large scales, in agreement with the fact that over large scales 

2802: we recover the initial fields and no strong correlations develop.

2803: 

2804: To put this study in a broader context, it may be useful to recall here the

2805: main properties of ``decaying Burgers turbulence'' for more general Gaussian

2806: initial conditions. It is customary to study the Burgers dynamics (\ref{Burg})

2807: for power-law energy spectra, $E_0(k) \propto k^n$ (here we focussed on the 

2808: case $n=-2$, see Eq.(\ref{E0})). Indeed, at late times the asymptotic statistical

2809: properties of the velocity field no longer depend on the details of the high-$k$ 

2810: spectrum (assuming a strong enough falloff) nor on the precise value of the 

2811: viscosity $\nu$, as a self-similar evolution develops 

2812: \cite{Gurbatov1991,Molchanov1995}. 

2813: Then, depending on the exponent $n$, the integral scale of turbulence, $L(t)$, 

2814: which measures the typical distance between shocks and the correlation length, 

2815: and the shock and velocity probability distributions show the following behaviors.

2816: 

2817: For $-3<n<-1$ (which includes the case $n=-2$ studied in this article, associated

2818: with a Brownian initial velocity), the initial velocity is not homogeneous but it 

2819: has homogeneous increments, while for $-1<n<1$ (which includes the case $n=0$

2820: associated with a white-noise initial velocity), the initial velocity itself is 

2821: homogeneous. In both cases, the integral scale grows as $L(t) \sim t^{2/(n+3)}$, 

2822: and the tails of the cumulative shock distribution and velocity distribution

2823: satisfy $\ln[n(>m)] \sim -m^{n+3}$, $\ln[n(>|v|)] \sim -|v|^{n+3}$, for $m\rightarrow

2824: \infty,|v|\rightarrow\infty$, see \cite{She1992,Molchan1997}.

2825: At low wavenumbers, below $1/L(t)$, the energy spectrum keeps its initial form,   

2826: $E(k,t) \propto k^n$, whereas at high wavenumbers it shows the universal law, 

2827: $E(k,t) \propto k^{-2}$, due to shocks \cite{Gurbatov1997,Noullez2005}.

2828: The preservation of the large-scale part, $E(k,t) \propto k^n$, is associated with

2829: the ``principle of permanence of large eddies'' \cite{Gurbatov1997}. Physically,

2830: this means that, at a given time $t$, structures of size larger than $L(t)$ have not

2831: had time to be strongly distorted by the dynamics (in agreement with the simple

2832: scaling argument $t\sigma_{v_0}(x) \ll x$ which gives $x\gg L(t)$). In particular,

2833: not only statistical properties but each random realization is stable against 

2834: small-scale perturbations \cite{Aurell1993,Gurbatov1999}. 

2835: Then, the tails of the shock and velocity distributions can be understood from the

2836: initial velocity field. Thus, the velocity difference between the left and right 

2837: boundaries of a shock of mass $m=\rho_0 q$ is $q/t$, which leads to a probability

2838: $\sim e^{-(q/t)^2/\sigma_{v_0}(q)^2} \sim e^{-m^{n+3}/t^2}$ (where we did not write

2839: constants in the exponent) \cite{Vergassola1994}.

2840: We can check that these properties agree with the results derived for $n=-2$

2841: in this paper.

2842: 

2843: For $1<n<2$ the system shows a more complex behavior, since there are three scaling

2844: regions for the energy spectrum: first a $k^n$ region at very low wavenumbers, 

2845: below $k_s(t) \sim t^{-1/2(2-n)}$, next a $k^2$ region between $k_s(t)$ and 

2846: $k_L(t) \sim t^{-1/2}$, and finally the standard $k^{-2}$ region above $k_L(t)$

2847: \cite{Gurbatov1997}. Therefore the evolution is no longer self-similar.

2848: For $n>2$ the $k^n$ region disappears (it gives subdominant corrections) and the

2849: leading-order evolution is again self-similar but independent of $n$

2850: \cite{Gurbatov1997,Gurbatove1981}.

2851: 

2852: We can hope that the exact results presented in this article for the case

2853: of Brownian initial velocity could serve as a useful benchmark to test 

2854: approximation schemes which could be devised to handle other initial 

2855: conditions where no exact results are available. 

2856: In particular, in the cosmological context, the Zeldovich approximation, which

2857: corresponds to removing the diffusive term altogether, has already been used to

2858: test for instance field-theoretic methods that attempt to resum perturbative series

2859: \cite{Valageas2007}. The Burgers equation in the inviscid limit, which corresponds

2860: to the more efficient adhesion model, might also be used for such purposes.

2861: In a similar fashion, the general properties of the Burgers dynamics (associated

2862: with shocks) have already been used to test approximation schemes devised for

2863: the study of turbulence \cite{Fournier1983}.

2864: 

2865: Finally, we note that the method described in this article could also be applied 

2866: to different-time statistics, where the parabolas used in the geometrical 

2867: interpretations would now have different curvatures. However, we leave such 

2868: studies for future works. 

2869: 

2870: 

2871: 

2872: 

2873: 

2874: 

2875: \appendix

2876: 

2877: 

2878: \section{Some properties of the Airy functions}

2879: \label{Airy}

2880: 

2881: 

2882: We recall here some properties of the Airy functions $\Ai(x)$ and $\Bi(x)$ that 

2883: are used repeatedly in the calculations presented in this article. These two 

2884: Airy functions are two linearly independent solutions to the second-order 

2885: differential equation $y''(x)-x y(x)=0$. The first one, $\Ai(x)$, is the only 

2886: solution that vanishes at both ends, $x \rightarrow \pm\infty$,

2887: whereas $\Bi(x)$ grows to infinity at $x\rightarrow +\infty$ \cite{Abramowitz}.

2888: Both are entire functions and they are related through

2889: \beq

2890: \Bi(x) = e^{\ii \pi/6} \Ai(e^{\ii 2\pi/3} x) 

2891: + e^{-\ii \pi/6} \Ai(e^{-\ii 2\pi/3} x) ,

2892: \label{BiAi}

2893: \eeq

2894: while their Wronskian is constant and given by

2895: \beq

2896: \Ai(x) \, \Bi\,'(x) - \Ai\,'(x) \, \Bi(x) = \frac{1}{\pi} .

2897: \label{Wronskian}

2898: \eeq

2899: We also have the integral representation \cite{Abramowitz}

2900: \beq

2901: \Ai(x) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd t}{2\pi} 

2902: \, e^{\ii (\frac{t^3}{3}+x t)} .

2903: \label{Ai1int}

2904: \eeq

2905: At $x=0$ we have

2906: \beq

2907: \frac{\Bi(0)}{\sqrt{3}} = \Ai(0)= \frac{1}{3^{2/3} \Gamma[2/3]} , \;\;\;\;

2908: \frac{-\Bi\,'(0)}{\sqrt{3}} = \Ai\,'(0)= \frac{-1}{3^{1/3} \Gamma[1/3]} ,

2909: \label{Aix0}

2910: \eeq

2911: and for $|x|\rightarrow\infty$:

2912: \beq

2913: |\Arg(x)| < \pi : \;\;\; \Ai(x) \sim \frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}} \, x^{-1/4} \,

2914: e^{-\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}} , 

2915: \label{Aiinf}

2916: \eeq

2917: \beq

2918: |\Arg(x)| < \frac{2\pi}{3} : \;\;\; \Ai(-x) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, 

2919: x^{-1/4} \, \sin\left[\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}+\frac{\pi}{4}\right] ,

2920: \label{Aipinf}

2921: \eeq

2922: \beq

2923: |\Arg(x)| < \frac{\pi}{3} : \;\;\; \Bi(x) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, x^{-1/4} \,

2924: e^{\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}} , 

2925: \label{Biinf}

2926: \eeq

2927: \beq

2928: |\Arg(x)| < \frac{2\pi}{3} : \;\;\; \Bi(-x) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, 

2929: x^{-1/4} \, \cos\left[\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}+\frac{\pi}{4}\right] .

2930: \label{Bipinf}

2931: \eeq

2932: For $|\Arg(x)|<2\pi/3$, the Airy function can also be expressed in terms of the 

2933: modified Bessel function of the second kind $K_{\nu}$ as

2934: \beq

2935: |\Arg(x)|<\frac{2\pi}{3} : \;\; \Ai(x)= \frac{1}{\pi} \sqrt{\frac{x}{3}} 

2936: K_{1/3}\left(\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}\right) ,

2937: \;\;\; \Ai\,'(x)= \frac{-x}{\pi\sqrt{3}} K_{2/3}\left(\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}\right) .

2938: \label{AiKnu}

2939: \eeq

2940: Four useful integrals, that may be obtained from the integral representation

2941: (\ref{Ai1int}), are \cite{ValleeSoares}

2942: \beq

2943: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd x \, e^{\alpha x} \Ai(x) = e^{\alpha^3/3} ,

2944: \;\;\; \mbox{whence} \;\;\; 

2945: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd x \, e^{\alpha x} x \Ai(x) = \alpha^2 e^{\alpha^3/3} ,

2946: \label{IntExpAi}

2947: \eeq

2948: \beq

2949: \nu_1 \neq \nu_2 : \;\;\; \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd u \, 

2950: \Ai\left[\nu_1 u+\frac{s_1}{\nu_1^2}\right] 

2951: \Ai\left[\nu_2 u+\frac{s_2}{\nu_2^2}\right] =

2952: \frac{1}{|\nu_1^3-\nu_2^3|^{1/3}} \Ai \left[ (\nu_1^3-\nu_2^3)^{-1/3} 

2953: \left( \frac{\nu_1 s_2}{\nu_2^2} - \frac{\nu_2 s_1}{\nu_1^2} \right) \right] ,

2954: \label{IntAi3}

2955: \eeq

2956: and

2957: \beq

2958: \nu_1 \neq \nu_2 : \;\;\; \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd u \, u \,

2959: \Ai\left[\nu_1 u+\frac{s_1}{\nu_1^2}\right] 

2960: \Ai\left[\nu_2 u+\frac{s_2}{\nu_2^2}\right] = 

2961: \frac{s_2-s_1}{(\nu_1^3-\nu_2^3)^{4/3}} \Ai \left[ (\nu_1^3-\nu_2^3)^{-1/3} 

2962: \left( \frac{\nu_1 s_2}{\nu_2^2} - \frac{\nu_2 s_1}{\nu_1^2} \right) \right] ,

2963: \label{IntAi4}

2964: \eeq

2965: with the conventions: 

2966: $(\nu_1^3-\nu_2^3)^{-1/3} \rightarrow - (\nu_2^3-\nu_1^3)^{-1/3}$ and

2967: $(\nu_1^3-\nu_2^3)^{4/3} \rightarrow - (\nu_2^3-\nu_1^3)^{4/3}$

2968: if $\nu_1<\nu_2$. This also implies the relation

2969: \beq

2970: \nu_1 \neq \nu_2 : \;\;\; \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd u \, u \,

2971: \Ai\left[\nu_1 u+\frac{s_1}{\nu_1^2}\right] 

2972: \Ai\left[\nu_2 u+\frac{s_2}{\nu_2^2}\right] = 

2973: \frac{s_2-s_1}{\nu_1^3-\nu_2^3} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \dd u \, 

2974: \Ai\left[\nu_1 u+\frac{s_1}{\nu_1^2}\right] 

2975: \Ai\left[\nu_2 u+\frac{s_2}{\nu_2^2}\right] ,

2976: \label{IntAi5}

2977: \eeq

2978: that could be obtained from the property $\Ai''(x)=x\Ai(x)$.

2979: 

2980: Finally, using the property \cite{Gradshteyn}

2981: \beqa

2982: \mu>\nu , \;\; \alpha+\beta>0 : \;\;\; \int_0^{\infty} \dd x \, x^{\mu-1} 

2983: e^{-\alpha x} K_{\nu}(\beta x) & = & \frac{\sqrt{\pi} (2\beta)^{\nu}}

2984: { (\alpha+\beta)^{\mu+\nu}} \frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu) \Gamma(\mu-\nu)}

2985: {\Gamma(\mu+\frac{1}{2})}  \nonumber \\

2986: && \hspace{-2cm} \times \; _2F_1\left(\mu+\nu,\nu+\frac{1}{2};\mu+\frac{1}{2};

2987: \frac{\alpha-\beta}{\alpha+\beta}\right) ,

2988: \eeqa

2989: and the relations (\ref{AiKnu}), we obtain

2990: \beqa

2991: \nu>0 , \;\; \alpha+\beta>0 : \;\; \int_0^{\infty} \dd x \, x^{\nu-1} 

2992: e^{-\alpha x} \Ai\left[\left(\frac{3\beta x}{2}\right)^{2/3}\right] & = & 

2993: \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, 3^{-1/6} \beta^{2/3} (\alpha+\beta)^{-\nu-\frac{2}{3}} 

2994: \nonumber \\

2995: && \hspace{-4cm} \times \; \frac{\Gamma(\nu+\frac{2}{3}) \Gamma(\nu)}

2996: {\Gamma(\nu+\frac{5}{6})} \; _2F_1\left(\nu+\frac{2}{3},\frac{5}{6};

2997: \nu+\frac{5}{6};\frac{\alpha-\beta}{\alpha+\beta}\right) ,

2998: \label{IntAiExp1}

2999: \eeqa

3000: \beqa

3001: \nu>0 , \;\; \alpha+\beta>0 : \;\; \int_0^{\infty} \dd x \, x^{\nu-1} 

3002: e^{-\alpha x} \Ai\,'\left[\left(\frac{3\beta x}{2}\right)^{2/3}\right] & = & 

3003: \frac{-1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, 3^{1/6} \beta^{4/3} (\alpha+\beta)^{-\nu-\frac{4}{3}} 

3004: \nonumber \\

3005: && \hspace{-4.5cm} \times \; \frac{\Gamma(\nu+\frac{4}{3}) \Gamma(\nu)}

3006: {\Gamma(\nu+\frac{7}{6})} \; _2F_1\left(\nu+\frac{4}{3},\frac{7}{6};

3007: \nu+\frac{7}{6};\frac{\alpha-\beta}{\alpha+\beta}\right) .

3008: \label{IntAipExp1}

3009: \eeqa

3010: 

3011: 

3012: 

3013: 

3014: %\beq

3015: %|\Arg(x)|<\frac{2\pi}{3} : \;\;\; \Ai(x) = \frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}} \, x^{-1/4} 

3016: %\, e^{-\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}} 

3017: %\int_0^{\infty} \dd z \, \frac{\rho(z)}{1+\frac{3}{2}x^{-3/2} z} ,

3018: %\label{Ai_int}

3019: %\eeq

3020: %\beq

3021: %\mbox{with} \;\;\; \rho(z)= \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, \left(\frac{3}{2}\right)^{1/6} 

3022: %\, z^{-5/6} \, e^{-z} \, \Ai\left[\left(\frac{3z}{2}\right)^{2/3}\right] ,

3023: %\label{rhoz}

3024: %\eeq

3025: 

3026: 

3027: 

3028: 

3029: 

3030: 

3031: 

3032: 

3033: 

3034: \section{Half-range expansion and useful integrals}

3035: \label{Half-range}

3036: 

3037: 

3038: We show in this appendix how to obtain the solution (\ref{phiint}) to the 

3039: half-range expansion problem (\ref{phiW})-(\ref{phix0}). The same method also

3040: allows us to derive other useful identities that we need to perform the 

3041: calculations presented in this article. Thus, we consider

3042: the function $f(p)$ of the complex variable $p$ defined by

3043: \beq

3044: s \geq 0 , \;\;\; u \geq 0 , \;\;\; |\Arg(p)|<\pi : \;\;\; 

3045: f(p)= p^{-1/6} \, e^{\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}/p} \, 

3046: \Ai\left[p^{1/3} u +\frac{s}{p^{2/3}}\right] .

3047: \label{fdef}

3048: \eeq

3049: This function is regular over the complex plane except for a branch cut along

3050: the negative real axis. Moreover, from the asymptotic behavior (\ref{Aiinf}) 

3051: of the Airy function we obtain

3052: \beq

3053: u>0 : \;\; f(p) \sim \frac{u^{-1/4}}{2\sqrt{\pi}} \, p^{-1/4} \, 

3054: e^{-\frac{2}{3} u^{3/2} p^{1/2}} \;\; \mbox{as} \;\;

3055: |p|\rightarrow\infty \;\; \mbox{with} \;\; |\Arg(p)|<\pi ,

3056: \label{fpasymp1}

3057: \eeq

3058: and

3059: \beq

3060: u=0 : \;\; f(p) \sim \Ai(0) \, p^{-1/6} \;\; \mbox{as} \;\;

3061: |p|\rightarrow\infty \;\; \mbox{with} \;\; |\Arg(p)|<\pi .

3062: \label{fpasymp2}

3063: \eeq

3064: Next, we introduce the general integral 

3065: $F_{k,\ell}(\nu_1,..,\nu_k;\lambda_1,..,\lambda_{\ell})$ defined by

3066: \beq

3067: F_{k,\ell}(\nu_i;\lambda_j) = \int_{c-\ii\infty}^{c+\ii\infty} 

3068: \frac{\dd p}{2\pi\ii} \, \frac{f(p)}{\prod_{i=1}^k (p-\nu_i^3) \,

3069: \prod_{j=1}^{\ell} (p+\lambda_j^3)}  \;\;\;\; \mbox{with} \;\;\;\;  

3070: c>\max_i\{\nu_i^3\} ,

3071: \label{fIdef}

3072: \eeq

3073: with the conditions

3074: \beq

3075: \nu_i>0, \;\; \nu_i\neq\nu_{i'} \;\; \mbox{for} \;\;i\neq i' ; \;\;\; 

3076: \lambda_j>0 , \;\; \lambda_j\neq\lambda_{j'} \;\; \mbox{for} \;\; j\neq j' ;

3077: \;\;\; k+\ell \geq 1 .  

3078: \eeq

3079: If $k=0$ or $\ell=0$ one of the products in Eq.(\ref{fIdef}) is removed and 

3080: replaced by a factor $1$. If $k=0$ the contour in Eq.(\ref{fIdef}) again runs

3081: to the right of all singularities, that is $c>0$. 

3082: 

3083: Then, from the asymptotics (\ref{fpasymp1})-(\ref{fpasymp2}), we can see that

3084: we can push the contour in Eq.(\ref{fIdef}) to the right, as 

3085: $c\rightarrow+\infty$, which shows that $F_{k,\ell}=0$ (using $k+\ell \geq 1$). 

3086: On the other hand, by pushing the contour to the 

3087: left, using again the asymptotics (\ref{fpasymp1})-(\ref{fpasymp2}), we can see

3088: that $F_{k,\ell}$ is the sum of the $k$ residues at $p=\nu_i^3$ and of the 

3089: contribution associated with the branch cut along the negative real axis. 

3090: This yields

3091: \beq

3092: 0 = \sum_{i=1}^k \frac{\nu_i^{-\frac{1}{2}} \, e^{\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}\nu_i^{-3}} 

3093: \, \Ai\left[\nu_i u +\frac{s}{\nu_i^2}\right]}{\prod_{j\neq i} (\nu_i^3-\nu_j^3)

3094: \, \prod_j (\nu_i^3+\lambda_j^3)} + \int_{\cal C} \frac{\dd p}{2\pi\ii}

3095: \, \frac{p^{-\frac{1}{6}} \, e^{\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}/p} \, 

3096: \Ai\left[p^{1/3} u +\frac{s}{p^{2/3}}\right] }{\prod_j (p-\nu_j^3) \,

3097: \prod_j (p+\lambda_j^3)}  ,

3098: \eeq

3099: where ${\cal C}$ is the anticlockwise Hankel contour that bends around the 

3100: negative real axis. Then, pushing the contour towards both sides of the negative 

3101: real axis, making the change of variable $p=-\mu^3 \pm \ii \epsilon$ with

3102: $\mu>0$ and $\epsilon\rightarrow 0^+$, and using

3103: \cite{Abramowitz}

3104: \beq

3105: \Ai\left[ e^{\pm \ii 2\pi/3} x\right] = \frac{1}{2} \, 

3106: e^{\pm \ii \pi/3} \left[ \Ai(x) \mp \ii \,\Bi(x) \right] ,

3107: \label{AiBi1}

3108: \eeq

3109: as well as the Sokhatsky-Weierstrass theorem, written here in concise form as

3110: \beq

3111: \lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0^+} \frac{1}{\mu^3-\nu^3+\ii\epsilon} 

3112: = \pv \frac{1}{\mu^3-\nu^3} - \frac{\ii\pi}{3\mu^2} \delta(\mu-\nu) ,

3113: \label{Weierstrass}

3114: \eeq

3115: we obtain

3116: \beqa

3117: \!u\geq 0 : \;\; \pv \!\int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, \frac{3\mu^{3/2} \, 

3118: e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} \mu^{-3}} \, \Ai\left[-\mu u+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right]}

3119: {\prod_{j=1}^k (\mu^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j=1}^{\ell} (\mu^3-\lambda_j^3)} 

3120: & = & 

3121: \sum_{i=1}^k \frac{\nu_i^{-\frac{1}{2}} \, e^{\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}\nu_i^{-3}} 

3122: \, \Ai\left[\nu_i u +\frac{s}{\nu_i^2}\right]}{\prod_{j\neq i} (-\nu_i^3+\nu_j^3)

3123: \, \prod_j (-\nu_i^3-\lambda_j^3)} 

3124: \nonumber \\

3125: && \hspace{-3cm} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} 

3126: \frac{\lambda_i^{-\frac{1}{2}} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}\lambda_i^{-3}} 

3127: \, \Bi\left[-\lambda_i u +\frac{s}{\lambda_i^2}\right]}

3128: {\prod_j (\lambda_i^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j\neq i} (\lambda_i^3-\lambda_j^3)} .

3129: \label{phi0int}

3130: \eeqa

3131: Here, the symbol $\pv$ stands for the Cauchy principal value and must be understood

3132: with respect to $\mu^3$ (rather than $\mu$). That is, the integrals are regularized

3133: by cutting around each pole $\lambda_j$ the interval $[\mu_-,\mu_+]$, with

3134: $\mu^3_{\pm}=\lambda_j^3\pm\epsilon$, which is symmetric in terms of $\mu^3$

3135: around $\lambda_j^3$, and taking the limit $\epsilon\rightarrow 0^+$. If $\ell=0$

3136: the integral is regular and there is no need to introduce the principal value.

3137: In particular, the case $k=1$ and $\ell=0$ yields, with $\nu>0$,

3138: \beq

3139: u\geq 0 : \;\; \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

3140: \frac{3\mu^{3/2}}{\mu^3+\nu^3} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} \mu^{-3}} 

3141: \, \Ai\left[-\mu u+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right] 

3142: = \nu^{-1/2} \, e^{\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}\nu^{-3}} \, 

3143: \Ai\left[\nu u +\frac{s}{\nu^2}\right] .

3144: \label{phi0intk1l0}

3145: \eeq

3146: This implies that $\phi_{s,\nu}(r,u)$ defined by Eq.(\ref{phiint}) is

3147: the solution of the form (\ref{phiW}) that satisfies the constraint 

3148: (\ref{phix0}). Note that the restriction to $u\geq 0$ is essential.

3149: For instance, as $\Arg(u)$ grows from $0$, the function $f(p)$ displays

3150: an exponential growth for $\pi-3\Arg(u)<\Arg(p)<\pi$ and we can no longer 

3151: bend the integration contour onto the negative real axis.

3152: 

3153: Alternatively, as in \cite{Burkhardt1993}, we can obtain Eq.(\ref{phi0intk1l0})

3154: from the analysis of \cite{Marshall1985} and \cite{Marshall1987},

3155: or of \cite{Hagan1989}, who studied several problems associated with the

3156: Klein-Kramers equation, by taking the limit of zero friction. However, these

3157: problems lead to discrete spectra and require a sophisticated analysis

3158: that involves infinite products to handle the poles associated with all

3159: eigenvalues.

3160: 

3161: Finally, making the change $k\rightarrow k+1$ and taking the limit 

3162: $\nu_{k+1}\rightarrow 0^+$ in Eq.(\ref{phi0int}) gives the useful identity 

3163: \beqa

3164: \hspace{0cm} u\geq 0 : \;\; \pv \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

3165: \frac{3\mu^{-3/2} \, 

3166: e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} \mu^{-3}} \, \Ai\left[-\mu u+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right]}

3167: {\prod_{j=1}^k (\mu^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j=1}^{\ell} (\mu^3-\lambda_j^3)} 

3168: & = & \frac{s^{-\frac{1}{4}} \, e^{-\sqrt{s}u}}{2\sqrt{\pi} \,

3169: \prod_j \nu_j^3 \, \prod_j (-\lambda_j^3)}

3170: \nonumber \\

3171: && \hspace{-6.3cm} - \sum_{i=1}^k \frac{\nu_i^{-\frac{7}{2}} \, 

3172: e^{\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}\nu_i^{-3}} \, \Ai\left[\nu_i u +\frac{s}{\nu_i^2}\right]}

3173: {\prod_{j\neq i} (-\nu_i^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_j (-\nu_i^3-\lambda_j^3)} 

3174: + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} 

3175: \frac{\lambda_i^{-\frac{7}{2}} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}\lambda_i^{-3}} 

3176: \, \Bi\left[-\lambda_i u +\frac{s}{\lambda_i^2}\right]}

3177: {\prod_j (\lambda_i^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j\neq i} (\lambda_i^3-\lambda_j^3)} .

3178: \label{Expintkl}

3179: \eeqa

3180: Equation~(\ref{Expintkl}) now applies to any $k\geq 0, \ell\geq 0$. In particular,

3181: the case $k=\ell=0$ yields

3182: \beq

3183: u\geq 0 : \;\;\;  e^{-\sqrt{s} u} = s^{1/4} \int_0^{\infty} 

3184: \frac{\dd\mu}{\sqrt{\pi}} \, 3\mu^{-3/2} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3} s^{3/2} \mu^{-3}} 

3185: \, \Ai\left[-\mu u+\frac{s}{\mu^2}\right] .

3186: \label{Expu_int}

3187: \eeq

3188: Note that $s$ can be absorbed in Eq.(\ref{Expu_int}) through the change of 

3189: variables $v=\sqrt{s} u$ and $\nu=\mu/\sqrt{s}$.

3190: By letting $m$ parameters $\nu_i$ going to zero in a sequential manner, we could 

3191: derive a series of similar identities for integrals of the form of 

3192: (\ref{Expintkl}) with a prefactor $\mu^{3/2-3m}$ for any $m\geq 0$. However, 

3193: in this article we do not need to go beyond $m=1$ as in 

3194: Eqs.(\ref{Expintkl})-(\ref{Expu_int}).

3195: 

3196: In a similar fashion, we now consider the function $\hf(p)$ of the complex 

3197: variable $p$ defined for $s_i \geq 0, u_i\geq 0$,  by

3198: \beq

3199: \hf(p)= e^{\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})/p} \, 

3200: \Ai\,'\left[p^{1/3} u_1 +\frac{s_1}{p^{2/3}}\right]  \, 

3201: \Ai\left[e^{-\ii \pi/3} p^{1/3} u_2 

3202: + e^{\ii 2\pi/3}\frac{s_2}{p^{2/3}}\right] .

3203: \label{hfdef}

3204: \eeq

3205: It has a branch cut along the negative real axis and it grows as most as 

3206: $p^{1/12}$ for $|p|\rightarrow\infty$ and $0< \Arg(p)<\pi$. 

3207: Then, in a manner similar to Eq.(\ref{fIdef}), we introduce the integral 

3208: $\hF_{k,\ell}(\nu_1,..,\nu_k;\lambda_1,..,\lambda_{\ell})$ defined by

3209: \beq

3210: \hF_{k,\ell}(\nu_i;\lambda_j) = \int_{-\infty+\ii c}^{\infty+\ii c} 

3211: \frac{\dd p}{2\pi} \, \frac{\hf(p)}{\prod_{i=1}^k (p-\nu_i^3) \,

3212: \prod_{j=1}^{\ell} (p+\lambda_j^3)}  \;\;\;\; 

3213: \mbox{with} \;\;\;\;  c > 0 ,

3214: \label{hfIdef}

3215: \eeq

3216: with the conditions

3217: \beq

3218: \nu_i>0, \;\; \nu_i\neq\nu_{i'} \;\; \mbox{for} \;\;i\neq i' ; \;\;\; 

3219: \lambda_j>0 , \;\; \lambda_j\neq\lambda_{j'} \;\; \mbox{for} \;\; j\neq j' ;

3220: \;\;\; k+\ell \geq 2 .  

3221: \eeq

3222: Note that the integration contour is now parallel to the real axis, in the upper

3223: half-plane, and that the asymptotic behavior of $\hf(p)$ for large

3224: $|p|$, with $0< \Arg(p)<\pi$, now requires $k+\ell\geq 2$. Pushing the contour

3225: upward, as $c\rightarrow+\infty$, we can see that $\hF_{k,\ell}=0$.

3226: Next, pushing the contour towards the real axis, by making the change of variable

3227: $p=\pm\mu^3 + \ii \epsilon$ with $\mu>0$ and $\epsilon\rightarrow 0^+$,

3228: and using Eq.(\ref{AiBi1}), that also yields

3229: \beq

3230: \Ai\,'\left[ e^{\pm \ii 2\pi/3} x\right] = \frac{1}{2} \, 

3231: e^{\mp \ii \pi/3} \left[ \Ai\,'(x) \mp \ii \,\Bi\,'(x) \right] ,

3232: \label{AipBip1}

3233: \eeq

3234: as well as Eq.(\ref{Weierstrass}), we obtain after taking the real part

3235: \beqa

3236: \hspace{0cm}u_i\geq 0 : \;\; \pv \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

3237: \frac{3\mu^2 \, e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\mu^{-3}} \, 

3238: \Ai\,'\left[-\mu u_1+\frac{s_1}{\mu^2}\right] 

3239: \Ai\left[\mu u_2+\frac{s_2}{\mu^2}\right]}

3240: {\prod_{j=1}^k (\mu^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j=1}^{\ell} (\mu^3-\lambda_j^3)} 

3241: & = & \nonumber \\

3242: && \hspace{-6cm} - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^k 

3243: \frac{e^{\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\nu_i^{-3}} \, 

3244: \Ai\,'\left[\nu_i u_1 +\frac{s_1}{\nu_i^2}\right]

3245: \Bi\left[-\nu_i u_2 +\frac{s_2}{\nu_i^2}\right]}

3246: {\prod_{j\neq i} (-\nu_i^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_j (-\nu_i^3-\lambda_j^3)} \nonumber \\

3247: && \hspace{-6cm} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} 

3248: \frac{e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\lambda_i^{-3}} \, 

3249: \Bi\,'\left[-\lambda_i u_1 +\frac{s_1}{\lambda_i^2}\right]

3250: \Ai\left[\lambda_i u_2 +\frac{s_2}{\lambda_i^2}\right]}

3251: {\prod_j (\lambda_i^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j\neq i} (\lambda_i^3-\lambda_j^3)} .

3252: \label{intAipAi1}

3253: \eeqa

3254: Taking the imaginary part gives another identity, that involves the integral

3255: over $\mu$ of products $\Bi\,'\Ai$ and $\Ai\,'\Bi$, which we do not need for

3256: the present calculations. Again, in Eq.(\ref{intAipAi1}) the Cauchy principal

3257: value is understood with respect to $\mu^3$.

3258: Exchanging the derivative in expression

3259: (\ref{hfdef}), we obtain an identity similar to Eq.(\ref{intAipAi1}) where

3260: the derivatives are exchanged:

3261: \beqa

3262: \hspace{0cm}u_i\geq 0 : \;\; \pv \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

3263: \frac{3\mu^2 \, e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\mu^{-3}} \, 

3264: \Ai\left[-\mu u_1+\frac{s_1}{\mu^2}\right] 

3265: \Ai\,'\left[\mu u_2+\frac{s_2}{\mu^2}\right]}

3266: {\prod_{j=1}^k (\mu^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j=1}^{\ell} (\mu^3-\lambda_j^3)} 

3267: & = & \nonumber \\

3268: && \hspace{-6cm} - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^k 

3269: \frac{e^{\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\nu_i^{-3}} \, 

3270: \Ai\left[\nu_i u_1 +\frac{s_1}{\nu_i^2}\right]

3271: \Bi\,'\left[-\nu_i u_2 +\frac{s_2}{\nu_i^2}\right]}

3272: {\prod_{j\neq i} (-\nu_i^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_j (-\nu_i^3-\lambda_j^3)} 

3273: \nonumber \\

3274: && \hspace{-6cm} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} 

3275: \frac{e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\lambda_i^{-3}} \, 

3276: \Bi\left[-\lambda_i u_1 +\frac{s_1}{\lambda_i^2}\right]

3277: \Ai\,'\left[\lambda_i u_2 +\frac{s_2}{\lambda_i^2}\right]}

3278: {\prod_j (\lambda_i^3+\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j\neq i} (\lambda_i^3-\lambda_j^3)} .

3279: \label{intAiAip1}

3280: \eeqa

3281: Next, making the change $k\rightarrow k+1$ and taking the limit 

3282: $\nu_{k+1}\rightarrow 0$ gives, for $k+\ell\geq 1$,

3283: \beqa

3284: \hspace{0cm}u_i\geq 0 : \;\; \pv \! \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, 

3285: \frac{3\mu^{-1} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\mu^{-3}}}

3286: {\prod_j (\mu^3\!+\!\nu_j^3) \, \prod_j (\mu^3\!-\!\lambda_j^3)} 

3287: \left[ \Ai\,'\bigl(-\mu u_1\!+\!\frac{s_1}{\mu^2}\bigr) 

3288: \Ai\bigl(\mu u_2\!+\!\frac{s_2}{\mu^2}\bigr) - \Ai \, \Ai\,' \right]

3289: & = & \nonumber \\

3290: && \hspace{-11cm} \frac{1}{4\pi} \left[ \bigl(\frac{s_1}{s_2}\bigr)^{1/4}

3291: +\bigl(\frac{s_1}{s_2}\bigr)^{-1/4} \right] 

3292: \frac{e^{-\sqrt{s_1}u_1-\sqrt{s_2}u_2}}{\prod_j \nu_j^3 \prod_j (-\lambda_j^3)}

3293: \nonumber \\

3294: && \hspace{-11cm} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^k 

3295: \frac{\nu_i^{-3}\, e^{\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\nu_i^{-3}}}

3296: {\prod_{j\neq i} (-\nu_i^3\!+\!\nu_j^3) \, \prod_j (-\nu_i^3\!-\!\lambda_j^3)}

3297: \left[ \Ai\,'\bigl(\nu_i u_1\!+\!\frac{s_1}{\nu_i^2}\bigr) 

3298: \Bi\bigl(-\nu_i u_2\!+\!\frac{s_2}{\nu_i^2}\bigr) 

3299: - \Ai \, \Bi\,' \right]

3300: \nonumber \\

3301: && \hspace{-11cm} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} 

3302: \frac{\lambda_i^{-3} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\lambda_i^{-3}}}

3303: {\prod_j (\lambda_i^3\!+\!\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j\neq i} (\lambda_i^3\!-\!\lambda_j^3)}

3304: \left[ \Bi\,'\bigl(-\lambda_i u_1\!+\!\frac{s_1}{\lambda_i^2}\bigr) 

3305: \Ai\bigl(\lambda_i u_2\!+\!\frac{s_2}{\lambda_i^2}\bigr) - \Bi \, \Ai\,' \right] .

3306: \label{intmu1AipAi1}

3307: \eeqa

3308: Here we combined both Equations (\ref{intAipAi1})-(\ref{intAiAip1}), and in

3309: each bracket the second product, such as $\Ai \, \Ai\,'$, is equal to the first

3310: product where we exchange the derivative. Next, for the case $u_1=u_2=0$, 

3311: we again make the change $k\rightarrow k+1$ and take the limit 

3312: $\nu_{k+1}\rightarrow \infty$. This yields for any $k\geq 0$, $\ell\geq 0$,

3313: \beqa

3314: \pv \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{2\pi} \, \frac{3\mu^{-1} \, 

3315: e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\mu^{-3}}}

3316: {\prod_j (\mu^3\!+\!\nu_j^3) \, \prod_j (\mu^3\!-\!\lambda_j^3)} 

3317: \left[ \Ai\,'\bigl(\frac{s_1}{\mu^2}\bigr) \Ai\bigl(\frac{s_2}{\mu^2}\bigr) 

3318: - \Ai \, \Ai\,' \right] & = & - \frac{\delta_{k+\ell,0}}{2\pi}  \nonumber \\

3319: && \hspace{-8cm} + \frac{\bigl(\frac{s_1}{s_2}\bigr)^{1/4}

3320: +\bigl(\frac{s_1}{s_2}\bigr)^{-1/4}}{4\pi \prod_j \nu_j^3 \prod_j (-\lambda_j^3)}

3321: + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^k 

3322: \frac{\nu_i^{-3}\, e^{\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\nu_i^{-3}}}

3323: {\prod_{j\neq i} (-\nu_i^3\!+\!\nu_j^3) \, \prod_j (-\nu_i^3\!-\!\lambda_j^3)}

3324: \left[ \Ai\,'\bigl(\frac{s_1}{\nu_i^2}\bigr) \Bi\bigl(\frac{s_2}{\nu_i^2}\bigr) 

3325: - \Ai \, \Bi\,' \right] \nonumber \\

3326: && \hspace{-8cm} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} 

3327: \frac{\lambda_i^{-3} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\lambda_i^{-3}}}

3328: {\prod_j (\lambda_i^3\!+\!\nu_j^3) \, \prod_{j\neq i} (\lambda_i^3\!-\!\lambda_j^3)}

3329: \left[ \Bi\,'\bigl(\frac{s_1}{\lambda_i^2}\bigr) 

3330: \Ai\bigl(\frac{s_2}{\lambda_i^2}\bigr) - \Bi \, \Ai\,' \right] ,

3331: \label{intmu1AipAiui01}

3332: \eeqa

3333: where we used the Wronskian property (\ref{Wronskian})

3334: and $\delta_{k+\ell,0}$ is the Kronecker symbol. In particular, for $k=\ell=0$

3335: we obtain

3336: \beq

3337: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\dd\mu}{\mu} \, 

3338: e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})\mu^{-3}}   

3339: \left[ \Ai\,'\bigl(\frac{s_1}{\mu^2}\bigr) \Ai\bigl(\frac{s_2}{\mu^2}\bigr) 

3340: - \Ai \, \Ai\,' \right] = \frac{1}{6} \left[ \bigl(\frac{s_1}{s_2}\bigr)^{1/4}

3341: + \bigl(\frac{s_1}{s_2}\bigr)^{-1/4} - 2 \right] .

3342: \label{intmu1AipAiui02}

3343: \eeq

3344: Since the integral is convergent at $\mu=0$ there is no need to

3345: use the principal value.

3346: 

3347: 

3348: 

3349: \section{Computation of the two-point distribution}

3350: \label{Computation-of-two-point}

3351: 

3352: We present here the computation of the two-point distribution (\ref{PX1X2})

3353: from the two contributions $p^>$ and $p^<$ described in 

3354: Figs.~\ref{figP2s} and \ref{figP2m}.

3355: 

3356: Let us first consider the contribution $p^>$.

3357: In a fashion similar to Eq.(\ref{pxcq1}), using the Markovian character of the 

3358: process $q\mapsto\{\psi,v\}$, it reads as

3359: \beqa

3360: p_{x_1,x_2}^>(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1,c_1; q_2' \geq q_2) \dd c_1 & = &

3361: \lim_{q_{\pm}\rightarrow\pm\infty} \int \dd\psi_-\dd v_- 

3362: K_{x_1,c_1}(0,0,0;q_-,\psi_-,v_-) \nonumber \\

3363: && \hspace{-5cm} \times \int \dd\psi_1\dd v_1 

3364: [ K_{x_1,c_1}(0,0,0;q_1,\psi_1,v_1) - K_{x_1,c_1+\dd c_1}(0,0,0;q_1,\psi_1,v_1) ] 

3365: \nonumber \\

3366: && \hspace{-5cm} \times \left\{ \int \dd\psi_+\dd v_+ 

3367: K_{x_1,c_1}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_+,\psi_+,v_+)

3368: - \int \dd\psi_2\dd v_2 K_{x_1,c_1}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) \right.

3369: \nonumber \\

3370: && \hspace{-4cm} \times \left. \int \dd\psi_+\dd v_+ 

3371: K_{x_2,c_2}(q_2,\psi_2,v_2;q_+,\psi_+,v_+) \right\} .

3372: \label{px1x2cq1}

3373: \eeqa

3374: Then, we recognize $p_{x_1}(0\leq q_1'\leq q_1)$ in the contribution associated 

3375: with the first term in the bracket, and we can write

3376: \beq

3377: p_{x_1,x_2}^>(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1; q_2' \geq q_2) = p_{x_1}(0\leq q_1'\leq q_1)

3378: - \hp_{x_1,x_2}^>(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1; q_2' \geq q_2) ,

3379: \label{hp>def}

3380: \eeq

3381: where we introduced the remaining part

3382: \beqa

3383: \hp_{x_1,x_2}^>(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1,c_1; q_2' \geq q_2) \dd c_1 & = & 

3384: \lim_{q_{\pm}\rightarrow\pm\infty} \int \dd\psi_-\dd v_- \dd\psi_1\dd v_1 

3385: \dd\psi_2\dd v_2 \dd\psi_+\dd v_+  \nonumber \\

3386: && \hspace{-5cm} \times K_{x_1,c_1}(0,0,0;q_-,\psi_-,v_-)

3387: [ K_{x_1,c_1}(0,0,0;q_1,\psi_1,v_1) - K_{x_1,c_1+\dd c_1}(0,0,0;q_1,\psi_1,v_1) ]

3388: \nonumber \\

3389: && \hspace{-5cm} \times K_{x_1,c_1}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) 

3390: K_{x_2,c_2}(q_2,\psi_2,v_2;q_+,\psi_+,v_+) .

3391: \label{hp>1}

3392: \eeqa

3393: In Eq.(\ref{hp>def}) we have also integrated $\hp^>$ over $c_1$.

3394: 

3395: We can note that $p_{x_1,x_2}^>$ and $\hp_{x_1,x_2}^>$ satisfy the following

3396: boundary conditions. First, taking the derivative with respect to $q_1$

3397: to obtain the probability density $p_{x_1,x_2}^>(q_1;q_2'\geq q_2)$, we have

3398: \beq

3399: \lim_{q_2\rightarrow q_1^+} p_{x_1,x_2}^>(q_1;q_2'\geq q_2) \rightarrow 

3400: p_{x_1}(q_1) , \;\;\; \mbox{whence} \;\;\; \lim_{q_2\rightarrow q_1^+} 

3401: \hp_{x_1,x_2}^>(q_1;q_2'\geq q_2) = 0 .

3402: \label{limp>q2q1}

3403: \eeq

3404: Indeed, following the discussion at the beginning of section~\ref{subsec:general}, 

3405: if $\psi_0(q)$ is tangent to

3406: $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ at $q_1$, the second parabola $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$ can only cross

3407: the first one at a point $q_*>q_1$ (otherwise, $\psi_0'$ being continuous,

3408: if we had $q_*=q_1$ the curve $\psi_0(q)$ would go below $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$ just beyond

3409: $q_1$). Then, all curves tangent to $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ at $q_1$ satisfy both

3410: properties $q_*>q_1$ and $q_2>q_1$, so that they are all included in the contribution

3411: $p_{x_1,x_2}^>$ as we take the limit $q_2\rightarrow q_1^+$ and we must recover

3412: $p_{x_1}(q_1)$, as stated in (\ref{limp>q2q1}).

3413: Second, for large $q_2$ we obviously have the asymptotics

3414: \beq

3415: \lim_{q_2\rightarrow +\infty} p_{x_1,x_2}^>(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1; q_2' \geq q_2) 

3416: = 0 , \;\;\; \lim_{q_2\rightarrow +\infty} 

3417: \hp_{x_1,x_2}^>(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1; q_2' \geq q_2) = p_{x_1}(q_1) .

3418: \label{limp>q2inf}

3419: \eeq

3420: This latter constraint can be directly checked on Eq.(\ref{hp>1}).

3421: 

3422: Using the transformations (\ref{cKdef}) and (\ref{Gdef}), we obtain

3423: \beqa

3424: \hp_{x_1,x_2}^>(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1; q_2' \geq q_2) & = &

3425: e^{\frac{\hu_{21}}{\gam}-\frac{q_2}{\gam^2}} \int \dd r_1 \dd u_1 

3426: \dd r_2 \dd u_2 \dd r_3 \, \Hi(r_3,\hu_1) \nonumber \\

3427: && \hspace{-3cm} \times \Delta(q_1;r_3,-\hu_1;r_1,u_1) 

3428: G(q_2-q_1;r_1,u_1;r_2,u_2+\hu_{21}) \Hi(r_2,u_2) ,

3429: \label{hp>3}

3430: \eeqa

3431: where we introduced as in (\ref{hudef}) the quantities

3432: \beq

3433: \hu_i = \sqrt{\frac{2}{D}} \frac{x_i}{t} ,  \;\;\;

3434: \hu_{21} = \hu_2 - \hu_1 .

3435: \label{hudef21}

3436: \eeq

3437: Next, taking the derivative with respect to $q_1$, using the backward

3438: equation (\ref{Gbackward}) for $G$ and the forward equation (\ref{Gdiff})

3439: that is also satisfied by $\Delta$, we obtain a total differential over $r_1$,

3440: which only leaves the boundary term at $r_1=0$:

3441: \beqa

3442: \hp_{x_1,x_2}^>(q_1; q_2' \geq q_2) & = &

3443: e^{\frac{\hu_{21}}{\gam}-\frac{q_2}{\gam^2}} \int \dd u_1 

3444: \dd r_2 \dd u_2 \dd r_3 \, \Hi(r_3,\hu_1) u_1 \Delta(q_1;r_3,-\hu_1;0,u_1)

3445: \nonumber \\

3446: && \hspace{2cm} \times G(q_2-q_1;0,u_1;r_2,u_2+\hu_{21}) \Hi(r_2,u_2) .

3447: \label{hp>4}

3448: \eeqa

3449: We can check from the explicit expressions of $\Delta$ and $G$ that the

3450: integrations by parts leading to Eq.(\ref{hp>4}) are valid. The expression 

3451: (\ref{hp>4}) clearly satisfies the property (\ref{limp>q2q1}).

3452: Indeed, for $q_2\rightarrow q_1^+$ the factor $G$ implies $r_2\rightarrow 0$,

3453: using the first boundary condition (\ref{Gboundary}), which in turns

3454: leads to $u_2+\hu_{21}\leq 0$ because of the second boundary condition in 

3455: (\ref{Gboundary}). However, the last factor $\Hi$ also implies $u_2\geq 0$,

3456: using the boundary condition (\ref{Gboundary1}) applied to $\Hi$.

3457: Since $\hu_{21}>0$ both constraints on $u_2$ cannot be simultaneously satisfied

3458: which leads to (\ref{limp>q2q1}). This can also be checked on Eq.(\ref{hp>4})

3459: using the explicit expressions of $\Delta$ and $\Hi$.

3460: 

3461: Then, using the explicit expressions of $G,\Delta$, and $\Hi$, and the results

3462: of Appendices \ref{Airy} and \ref{Half-range}, it is possible to greatly simplify 

3463: Eq.(\ref{hp>4}).

3464: Indeed, the integrals over $r_i$ are immediate (they only involve factors of the

3465: form $e^{-\nu^3 r}$) whereas the integral over $u_1$ can be transformed using

3466: Eq.(\ref{IntAi5}). Next, integrals over $u_i$ are typically split over 

3467: $u_i\leq 0$ and $u_i\geq 0$, and each factor of the form $\Ai(-\mu u_i + s/\mu^2)$ 

3468: with $u_i\geq 0$, or $\Ai(\mu u_i + s/\mu^2)$ with $u_i\leq 0$, can be integrated 

3469: over $\mu$ using the results (\ref{phi0int})-(\ref{Expu_int}) of 

3470: Appendix~\ref{Half-range}. This leads to products of the form

3471: $\Ai(\mu u_i + s_1/\mu^2) \Ai(\mu u_i + s_2/\mu^2)$ that can be integrated

3472: over $u_i$ using the primitive (\ref{prim1}), that also extends to the second

3473: Airy function $\Bi$. Then, these terms can be further simplified using

3474: the Wronskian (\ref{Wronskian}) and the results 

3475: (\ref{intAipAi1})-(\ref{intmu1AipAiui02}) of Appendix~\ref{Half-range}.

3476: We eventually obtain in terms of dimensionless variables

3477: \beq

3478: \hP_{X_1,X_2}^>(Q_1,Q_2'\geq Q_2) = \inta \frac{\dd s_1 \dd s_2}{(2\pi\ii)^2} \, 

3479: e^{(s_1-1)Q_1+(s_2-1)Q_{21}} J(s_1,2X_1) I(s_2,2 X_{21}) ,

3480: \label{hP>5}

3481: \eeq

3482: with

3483: \beq

3484: Q_1 \geq 0, \;\; Q_{21}=Q_2-Q_1\geq 0 , \;\; \mbox{and} \;\;

3485: I(s,2X) = \frac{1}{s-1} \, e^{-(\frac{2}{3}s^{3/2}-s+\frac{1}{3})2X/(s-1)} .

3486: \label{Is2Xdef}

3487: \eeq

3488: We can check that Eq.(\ref{hP>5}) agrees with both constraints 

3489: (\ref{limp>q2q1})-(\ref{limp>q2inf}). Then, taking the derivative with respect

3490: to $Q_2$ we obtain the full probability density associated with $q_*>q_2$ as

3491: \beq

3492: P_{X_1,X_2}^>(Q_1,Q_2) = \inta 

3493: \frac{\dd s_1 \dd s_2}{(2\pi\ii)^2} \, e^{(s_1-1)Q_1+(s_2-1)Q_{21}} J(s_1,2X_1) 

3494: (s_2-1) I(s_2,2 X_{21}) ,

3495: \label{P>6}

3496: \eeq

3497: since the derivative with respect to $Q_2$ of the first term in the right hand 

3498: side of (\ref{hp>def}) vanishes.

3499: 

3500: We now consider the second contribution, $p^<$, associated with the intersection

3501: $q_*$ between both parabolas, $\cP_{x_1,c_1}$ and $\cP_{x_2,c_2}$, being in the

3502: range $q_1<q_*<q_2$. Proceeding as for (\ref{pxcq1}) and (\ref{px1x2cq1}) it

3503: reads as

3504: \beqa

3505: p_{x_1,x_2}^<(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1,c_1; q_2' \geq q_2,c_2) \dd c_1 \dd c_2 & = &

3506: \lim_{q_{\pm}\rightarrow\pm\infty} \int \dd\psi_-\dd v_- 

3507: K_{x_1,c_1}(0,0,0;q_-,\psi_-,v_-) \nonumber \\

3508: && \hspace{-6cm} \times \int \dd\psi_1\dd v_1 

3509: [ K_{x_1,c_1}(0,0,0;q_1,\psi_1,v_1) - K_{x_1,c_1+\dd c_1}(0,0,0;q_1,\psi_1,v_1) ] 

3510: \nonumber \\

3511: && \hspace{-6cm} \times \int \dd\psi_*\dd v_* 

3512: K_{x_1,c_1}(q_1,\psi_1,v_1;q_*,\psi_*,v_*) \int \dd\psi_2\dd v_2 

3513: K_{x_2,c_2}(q_*,\psi_*,v_*;q_2,\psi_2,v_2) 

3514: \nonumber \\

3515: && \hspace{-6cm} \times \int \dd\psi_+\dd v_+ 

3516: [ K_{x_2,c_2}(q_2,\psi_2,v_2;q_+,\psi_+,v_+) - 

3517: K_{x_2,c_2+\dd c_2}(q_2,\psi_2,v_2;q_+,\psi_+,v_+) ] ,

3518: \label{px1x2<1}

3519: \eeqa

3520: which we must integrate over both $c_1$ and $c_2$. We can note that it satisfies 

3521: the boundary conditions

3522: \beq

3523: \lim_{q_2\rightarrow q_1^+} p_{x_1,x_2}^<(q_1;q_2'\geq q_2) \rightarrow 0 ,

3524: \;\;\; \mbox{and} \;\;\; \lim_{q_2\rightarrow +\infty} 

3525: p_{x_1,x_2}^<(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1;q_2'\geq q_2) = 0 .

3526: \label{limp<q2q1}

3527: \eeq

3528: Using again Eqs.(\ref{cKdef}), (\ref{Gdef}), we obtain

3529: \beqa

3530: p_{x_1,x_2}^<(0 \leq q_1' \leq q_1; q_2' \geq q_2) & = &

3531: e^{\frac{\hu_{21}}{\gam}-\frac{q_2}{\gam^2}} \int \dd r_1 \dd u_1 \dd r_* \dd u_*

3532: \dd r_2 \dd u_2 \dd r_3 \dd r_4 \, \Hi(r_3,\hu_1) \nonumber \\

3533: && \hspace{-3cm} \times \Delta(q_1;r_3,-\hu_1;r_1,u_1) 

3534: G(q_*-q_1;r_1,u_1;r_*,u_*) G(q_2-q_*;r_*,u_*-\hu_{21};r_2,u_2) 

3535: \frac{\pl\Hi}{\pl r_2}(r_2,u_2) .

3536: \label{p<2}

3537: \eeqa

3538: Next, taking again the derivative with respect to $q_1$ and using the forward

3539: and backward equations (\ref{Gdiff}), (\ref{Gbackward}), gives

3540: \beqa

3541: p_{x_1,x_2}^<(q_1; q_2' \geq q_2) & = &

3542: e^{\frac{\hu_{21}}{\gam}-\frac{q_2}{\gam^2}} \int \dd u_1 \dd r_* \dd u_*

3543: \dd r_2 \dd u_2 \dd r_3 \dd r_4 \, \Hi(r_3,\hu_1) u_1 \Delta(q_1;r_3,-\hu_1;0,u_1) 

3544: \nonumber \\

3545: && \hspace{0cm} \times G(q_*-q_1;0,u_1;r_*,u_*) 

3546: G(q_2-q_*;r_*,u_*-\hu_{21};r_2,u_2) \frac{\pl\Hi}{\pl r_2}(r_2,u_2) .

3547: \label{p<3}

3548: \eeqa

3549: As for the derivation of Eq.(\ref{hP>5}), using the explicit expressions of 

3550: $G,\Delta$, and $\Hi$, and the results of Appendices \ref{Airy} and 

3551: \ref{Half-range}, as well as the property (\ref{closure}), we obtain

3552: \beqa

3553: \! P_{X_1,X_2}^<(Q_1,Q_2'\geq Q_2) & = & 2 X_{21} \, e^{2X_{21}-Q_2} \!

3554: \int_{Q_1}^{Q_2} \!\! \dd Q_* \inta \! \frac{\dd s_1 \dd s \dd s_2}{(2\pi\ii)^3} \, 

3555: e^{s_1 Q_1+s(Q_*-Q_1)+s_2(Q_2-Q_*)} \nonumber \\

3556: && \hspace{0cm} \times J(s_1,2X_1) \frac{1}{s_2-1}

3557: [ L(1,s;2 X_{21}) - L(s_2,s;2 X_{21}) ] ,

3558: \label{P<4}

3559: \eeqa

3560: with

3561: \beq

3562: L(s_1,s_2;2X) = \frac{1}{2X} \, e^{-\frac{2}{3}(s_1^{3/2}-s_2^{3/2})2X/(s_1-s_2)} ,

3563: \; \mbox{whence} \;\;\; L(s,s;2X) = \frac{1}{2X} \, e^{-\sqrt{s}2X} .

3564: \label{Ls1s22Xdef}

3565: \eeq

3566: We now have three inverse Laplace transforms because of the three terms

3567: $\Delta G G$ in Eq.(\ref{p<3}). The integration over $Q_*$ is associated

3568: with $r_4$ in Eq.(\ref{p<3}) and $c_2$ in Eq.(\ref{px1x2<1}) ($q_*$ being

3569: related to $c_2$ through Eq.(\ref{q*def})).

3570: It gives a factor $[e^{s Q_{21}}-e^{s_2 Q_{21}}]/(s-s_2)$. 

3571: Then, choosing for instance a contour such that $\Re(s_2)>\Re(s)>1$,

3572: we can integrate the first term over $s_2$, which gives zero by pushing the

3573: contour to the right, $\Re(s_2)\rightarrow+\infty$, and the second term over $s$,

3574: which gives the contribution associated with the pole at $s=s_2$. This yields

3575: \beqa

3576: P_{X_1,X_2}^<(Q_1,Q_2'\geq Q_2) & = & 2 X_{21} \, e^{2X_{21}} 

3577: \inta \frac{\dd s_1 \dd s_2}{(2\pi\ii)^2} \, 

3578: e^{(s_1-1) Q_1+(s_2-1)Q_{21}} \nonumber \\

3579: && \hspace{-1cm} \times J(s_1,2X_1) \frac{1}{s_2-1}

3580: [ L(1,s_2;2 X_{21}) - L(s_2,s_2;2 X_{21}) ] ,

3581: \label{P<5}

3582: \eeqa

3583: We can check that Eq.(\ref{P<5}) agrees with the constraints (\ref{limp<q2q1}).

3584: Then, taking the derivative with respect to $Q_2$ we obtain the probability

3585: density

3586: \beqa

3587: P_{X_1,X_2}^<(Q_1,Q_2) & = & 2 X_{21} \, e^{2X_{21}} 

3588: \inta \frac{\dd s_1 \dd s_2}{(2\pi\ii)^2} \, 

3589: e^{(s_1-1) Q_1+(s_2-1)Q_{21}} \nonumber \\

3590: && \hspace{0cm} \times J(s_1,2X_1) 

3591: [ L(s_2,s_2;2 X_{21}) - L(1,s_2;2 X_{21}) ] .

3592: \label{P<6}

3593: \eeqa

3594: Finally, combining Eqs.(\ref{P>6}) and (\ref{P<6}) we find that two terms

3595: cancel out and we are left with the total probability density (\ref{PX1X2}).

3596: 

3597: 

3598: 

3599: % BibTeX users please use one of

3600: %\bibliographystyle{spbasic}      % basic style, author-year citations

3601: %\bibliographystyle{spmpsci}      % mathematics and physical sciences

3602: %\bibliographystyle{spphys}       % APS-like style for physics

3603: \bibliographystyle{plain}

3604: 

3605: \bibliography{ref}   % name your BibTeX data base

3606: 

3607: 

3608: \end{document}

3609: