1: \documentclass{article}
2: \usepackage{epsfig}
3: %\textheight=18cm
4: \voffset=0.6cm
5: \hoffset=1cm
6: \def\openone{\leavevmode\hbox{\small1\kern-3.3pt\normalsize1}}
7: \def\tr{\mbox{tr\,}}
8: \def\tg{\mbox{tg\,}}
9: \def\re{\mbox{Re\,}}
10: \def\im{\mbox{Im\,}}
11: \def\ad{\mbox{ad\,}}
12: \def\mod{\mbox{mod\,}}
13: \renewcommand\topfraction{0.5}
14: \renewcommand\bottomfraction{0.5}
15: \arraycolsep=2pt
16: \begin{document}
17:
18: \begin{center}
19:
20: \begin{flushright}{}
21: {\bf nlin.IS/0104022}
22: \end{flushright}
23: \bigskip
24:
25: {\Large\bf Adiabatic Interaction of $N$ Ultrashort Solitons:
26:
27: \medskip
28: Universality of the Complex Toda Chain Model}
29:
30: \bigskip
31:
32: {\bf V. S. Gerdjikov}\\
33: {\sl Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, 1784
34: Sofia, Bulgaria}
35:
36: \bigskip
37:
38: {\bf E. V. Doktorov}\\ {\sl B. I. Stepanov Institute of Physics,
39: 220072 Minsk, Belarus}
40:
41: \bigskip
42:
43: {\bf J. Yang}\\ {\sl Department of Mathematics and Statistics,
44: University of Vermont, \\ Burlington, VT 05401, USA}
45:
46: \begin{abstract}
47: Using the Karpman-Solov'ev method we derive the equations for the
48: $2 $-soliton adiabatic interaction for solitons of the modified
49: nonlinear Schr\"odin\-ger equation (MNSE). Then we generalize
50: these equations to the case of $N$ interacting solitons with
51: almost equal velocities and widths. On the basis of this result
52: we prove that the $N $ MNSE-soliton train interaction ($N>2$) can
53: be modeled by the completely integrable complex Toda chain (CTC).
54: This is an argument in favor of universality of the complex Toda
55: chain which was previously shown to model the soliton train
56: interaction for nonlinear Schr\"odinger solitons. The
57: integrability of the CTC is used to describe all possible
58: dynamical regimes of the $N $-soliton trains which include
59: asymptotically free propagation of all $N $ solitons, $N
60: $-soliton bound states, various mixed regimes, etc. It allows
61: also to describe analytically the manifolds in the $4N
62: $-dimensional space of initial soliton parameters which are
63: responsible for each of the regimes mentioned above. We compare
64: the results of the CTC model with the numerical solutions of the
65: MNSE for $2 $ and $3 $-soliton interactions and find a very good
66: agreement.
67:
68: \end{abstract}
69: \end{center}
70:
71: \section{Introduction}\label{sec:In}
72:
73: The analytical description of the dynamics of picosecond solitons
74: in single-mode nonlinear fibers is based on the nonlinear
75: Schr\"odinger equation (NSE)~\cite{Agraw,Kod1}. The NSE serves as
76: a very good integrable model admitting comprehensive investigation
77: in the framework of the inverse spectral transform
78: (IST)~\cite{NMPZ}. IST provides the complete analytical
79: description of the soliton interaction in a generic case of
80: asymptotically free $N$ solitons moving with pair-wise different
81: velocities~\cite{NMPZ,Takh-Fad}. On the other hand, the
82: practically important case, especially in a soliton-based fiber
83: transmission, deals with the so-called $N$-soliton trains, i.e.,
84: with an ordered sequence of $N$ ($N\ge 2$) solitons which are
85: spaced apart almost equally and have almost (or exactly) equal
86: amplitudes and velocities. In a number of recent
87: papers~\cite{Gerd1,Gerd2,Gerd3,Gerd4}, an effective formalism was
88: developed for studying the dynamics of well-separated NSE
89: solitons within the $N$-soliton train. This approach is based on
90: a generalization of the two-soliton quasiparticle method by
91: Karpman and Solov'ev~\cite{KS} to the case of $N$ solitons. In the
92: framework of this approach, the soliton interaction is governed
93: by a dynamical system for $4N$ soliton parameters. Such an
94: approximation is called adiabatic because interaction between the
95: solitons is displayed as a slow deformation of their parameters,
96: a possible presence of radiation being ignored. It is important
97: to realize that the above generalization from two to $N$ solitons
98: is nontrivial because of lack of the superposition principle for
99: the nonlinear dynamical system.
100:
101: Under some additional restrictions imposed on the soliton parameters,
102: which ensure the validity of the adiabatic approximation, the above
103: dynamical system is reduced to the complex Toda chain (CTC) equations with
104: $N$ nodes~\cite{Arn}. Extensive use of the fact that the CTC is a
105: completely integrable model permits to classify soliton parameter regions
106: with different asymptotic regimes of the $N$-soliton
107: train~\cite{Gerd1,Gerd2,Gerd3,Gerd4}. It was also shown in~\cite{Gerd4}
108: that the CTC can be associated with any equation from the NSE hierarchy.
109:
110: One of the purposes in the optical fiber soliton communication is
111: to achieve as high of a bit rate as possible. A natural way in
112: this direction is the use of shorter optical pulses. It should be
113: noted, however, that when dealing with ultrashort optical pulses
114: with duration $\le 100$ fs, the NSE should be modified to take
115: into account some additional effects, such as the nonlinearity
116: dispersion, the intrapulse Raman scattering and the higher-order
117: dispersion~\cite{Agraw}. As a rule, the extra terms added to the
118: NSE violate its integrability. On the other hand, if these
119: additional terms are small, the IST-based soliton perturbation
120: theory is usualy treated as the relevant method to account for their
121: influence on the soliton behavior~\cite{Kaup,KM,Kiv-Mal}.
122:
123: It is remarkable that adding a term accounting for the nonlinearity
124: dispersion to the NSE preserves the integrability of the equation. In
125: other words, the modified nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation (MNSE)
126: \begin{equation}\label{eq:1}
127: iu_t+{1\over 2}u_{xx}+i\alpha\left(|u|^2u\right)_x+|u|^2u=0
128: \end{equation}
129: is still integrable by means of IST, though the associated
130: spectral problem (the so called Wadati-Konno-Ichikawa spectral
131: problem~\cite{WKI}, or quadratic bundle) does not belong to the
132: familiar Zakharov-Shabat class. The parameter $\alpha$ in
133: (\ref{eq:1}) governs the strength of the nonlinearity dispersion.
134: The case $\alpha=0$ corresponds to NSE. Thereby, the effect of
135: the nonlinearity dispersion is considered non-perturbatively in
136: (\ref{eq:1}). Moreover, we have to stress that it is the
137: completely integrable model (\ref{eq:1}) that should be
138: considered as a true starting point for analytical investigation
139: of subpicosecond soliton dynamics. Indeed, it was shown
140: in~\cite{Ohkuma} that numerical simulation of the soliton
141: propagation according to the MNSE (\ref{eq:1}) revealed various
142: kinds of dynamical behavior which cannot be accounted for by
143: treating the nonlinearity dispersion term of the MNSE
144: (\ref{eq:1}) as a perturbation term in the NSE. Analogous idea
145: in treating the perturbed NSE was developed by Kodama
146: and Hasegawa in~\cite{Kod}. There the NSE with perturbations like the
147: third order dispersion, nonlinear gain and nonlinear dispersion
148: was treated as a perturbed higher order NSE.
149:
150: The relevance of Eq. (\ref{eq:1}) to the problem of ultrashort
151: pulse propagation in fibers was demonstrated
152: in~\cite{Tzoar,Anders}. MNSE (\ref{eq:1}) is also used in plasma
153: physics~\cite{Mio} and is relevant for description of a deformed
154: continuous Heisenberg ferromagnet~\cite{India}. It is the Alfv\'en
155: waves in magnetized plasma where the first successful application
156: of IST to the quadratic bundle was achieved on an example of the
157: derivative NSE~\cite{DNLS} which is Eq. (\ref{eq:1}) without the
158: last term. Both equations are interrelated by a gauge-like
159: transformation, see, for example,~\cite{Mihal,Gerd-Iv}. The
160: soliton solutions and the Hamiltonian structures of the MNSE were
161: obtained for the first time in~\cite{Gerd-Iv}. $N$-soliton
162: solutions were further rederived by different methods: by IST
163: using the above relation with the derivative NSE~\cite{Vysl}, by
164: B\"acklund and Darboux transformations~\cite{Rao}, by technique of
165: determinant calculations~\cite{Chen}, by the Hirota
166: method~\cite{Lin}, by the $\bar\partial$-method~\cite{I&Val}. It
167: should be noted that the solutions obtained in these papers refer
168: to the general case of asymptotically free solitons and being
169: exact were too complicated for practical use.
170:
171: Recently, a novel parametrization for the MNSE solitons was
172: proposed within the framework of the Riemann-Hilbert formulation
173: of IST~\cite{Val&I}. The convenient parametrization of the MNSE
174: soliton facilitated the development of an effective adiabatic
175: soliton perturbation theory for the MNSE which is able to take into
176: account non-zero terms in the right-hand side of (\ref{eq:1}),
177: see~\cite{Val&I}.
178:
179: The next natural step is to derive dynamical equations of the
180: Karpman-Solov'ev type for the adiabatic evolution of the soliton
181: parameters for the MNSE $N$-soliton train. Several questions
182: arise in the process of solving this problem. Is it possible to
183: associate an $N$-node chain model, like the CTC, with this
184: dynamical system? Will this chain model be different from the CTC
185: and, therefore, is the CTC valid only for the NSE hierarchy? How
186: well do the numerical simulations of the MNSE with adiabatic
187: $N$-soliton train initial conditions agree with the chain-like
188: model predictions? All these questions will be answered below.
189:
190: The purpose of this paper is to derive a dynamical system for the
191: $4N$ soliton parameters for the MNSE $N$-soliton train. To this
192: end we will generalize to the quadratic bundle the similar
193: investigations performed for the NSE. In the next section we
194: apply the Karpman-Solov'ev approach to the MNSE (\ref{eq:1}) and
195: derive the dynamical system for the 2-soliton train. In Sec. 3 we
196: show how this result can be generalized to the MNSE $N$-soliton
197: train for $N>2$. We show in Sec. 4 that after some
198: additional assumptions the corresponding dynamical system for the
199: soliton parameters acquires the form of the CTC. Thus we find
200: that the CTC is characteristic not only for the NSE hierarchy
201: \cite{Gerd4}, but has wider field of applications. This is an
202: argument in favor of its universality.
203:
204: In Section 5 we show how the integrability of the CTC can be used
205: to determine the dynamical regimes of the $N $-soliton trains. We
206: demonstrate on the examples of $N=2 $ and $N=3 $ how one can
207: describe analytically the manifolds in the $4N $-dimensional
208: space of initial soliton parameters which are responsible for the:
209: i)~$N $-soliton bound state regime; ii)~asymptotically free
210: regimes; iii)~various mixed regimes, etc. Although the analysis
211: follows closely the ideas developed in \cite{Gerd1,Gerd2,Gerd3}
212: the description of the corresponding manifolds differs from the
213: ones for the NSE soliton trains. The reason for this lies in the
214: fact that the CTC fields $Q_j(t) $ are parametrized in a different
215: way; in particular, $\im Q_j $ depend not only on the soliton
216: phases $\delta _j $ (as is the case for the NSE) but also on the
217: soliton amplitudes.
218:
219: In Secton 6 predictions of the CTC model are compared with the
220: numerical results from the MNSE and find an excellent match for
221: most regimes with $N=2 $ and $N=3 $. We found some disagreement
222: between the CTC and numerical MNSE solution in the regimes when
223: CTC predicts a very slow soliton separation.
224:
225: \section{$2 $-soliton interactions for the MNSE}\label{sec:II}
226:
227: First of all we summarize the basic results concerning the soliton
228: solution of the MNSE (\ref{eq:1})~\cite{Val&I}. This equation
229: admits the Lax representation
230: \begin{eqnarray}
231: \Phi_x &=& -\frac{2i}{\alpha} \left( k^2-\frac{1}{4} \right) \left[
232: \sigma_3,\Phi \right] + 2ikQ\Phi,
233: \label{eq:2} \\
234: \Phi_t&=&-\frac{4i}{\alpha^2}\left(k^2-\frac{1}{4}\right)^2
235: \left[\sigma_3,\Phi\right] \nonumber\\
236: &+&\left(\frac{4i}{\alpha}k^3Q+2ik^2Q^2\sigma_3-\frac{i}{\alpha}
237: kQ+kQ_x\sigma_3-2i\alpha kQ^3\right)\Phi. \nonumber
238: \end{eqnarray}
239: Here the Hermitian matrix $Q=\pmatrix{0 &u\cr \bar u& 0\cr}$
240: stands for the potential of the spectral problem (\ref{eq:2}), $k$
241: is a spectral parameter. There exist various parametrizations of
242: the soliton solution of the MNSE, the first one having been
243: proposed in~\cite{Gerd-Iv}. We follow here the parametrization
244: given in~\cite{Val&I} which was proven to be useful for practical
245: calculations and admits a simple (though nontrivial) reduction to
246: the NSE for $\alpha\to0$. Namely, the MNSE soliton solution is
247: written as follows:
248: \begin{equation}
249: u_s(z,t)=i\frac{\nu}{\alpha}\frac{ke^{-z}+\bar ke^z}{(ke^z+\bar
250: ke^{-z})^2}e^{i\phi}. \label{eq:3}
251: \end{equation}
252: Here $k=k_R-ik_I,\quad k_I>0, \quad \lambda\equiv
253: 4k^2-1=\mu-i\nu$,
254: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:4}
255: z &=& -\frac{\nu}{\alpha}\left(x-\xi(t)\right), \qquad
256: \phi=\frac{\mu}{\nu}z+\delta(t), \nonumber\\
257: \xi(t)&=&-\frac{\mu}{\alpha}t+\xi_{(0)}, \qquad
258: \delta(t)=\frac{1}{2\alpha^2}(\mu^2+\nu^2)t+\delta_{(0)}.
259: \end{eqnarray}
260: It should be stressed that the soliton (\ref{eq:3}) is not of the
261: hyperbolic-secant type with a real argument, characteristic
262: for the NSE. It is specified by four real parameters $\mu$, $\nu$,
263: $\xi_{(0)}$, and $\delta_{(0)}$ with $(-\mu/\alpha)$ being the
264: soliton velocity, $(\alpha/\nu)$ is its width, $\delta_{(0)}$ and
265: $\xi_{(0)}$ are initial phase and position of the soliton. To
266: carry out the limit reduction to the NSE, one should decompose
267: the spectral parameter in the following manner:
268: \begin{equation}
269: k=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{\alpha}{2}\left(\mu^{\rm NSE}+i\nu^{\rm
270: NSE}\right)+{\cal O}(\alpha^2), \qquad \alpha\to 0, \label{eq:5}
271: \end{equation}
272: which gives $(-\mu/\alpha)\to 2\mu^{\rm NSE}$ and
273: $(\alpha/\nu)\to(2\nu^{\rm NSE})^{-1}$, as should be.
274:
275: If there is a small perturbation in a system described by the MNSE, we
276: will deal with a perturbed MNSE:
277: \begin{equation}
278: iu_t+{1\over 2}u_{xx}+i\alpha\left(|u|^2u\right)_x+|u|^2u=r(x,t),
279: \label{eq:6}
280: \end{equation}
281: where $r(x,t)$ describes a functional form of the perturbation.
282: In what follows we will restrict ourselves to the adiabatic
283: approximation of the soliton perturbation theory. In other words,
284: we suppose that a perturbation causes a slow variation of the
285: soliton parameters only. The evolution equations for the
286: perturbation-induced soliton parameters are given in~\cite{Val&I}.
287: Here we write them in terms of the parameters (\ref{eq:4}). The
288: key equation has a very simple form:
289: \begin{equation}
290: \frac{\mbox{d}k}{\mbox{d}t}=\frac{i}{2}\alpha k^2\int_{-\infty}^\infty
291: \frac{R_+e^z}{(ke^{-z}+\bar ke^z)^2}\mbox{d}z, \label{eq:7}
292: \end{equation}
293: where $R_\pm=\exp[-i\phi(z,t)]r(z,t)\pm\exp[i\phi(-z,t)]\bar
294: r(-z,t)$. Taking into account (\ref{eq:4}), we obtain
295: \begin{eqnarray}
296: \frac{\mbox{d}\mu}{\mbox{d}t}&=&2i\alpha\int_{-\infty}^\infty
297: \frac{k^3e^z-\bar k^3e^{-z}}{(ke^{-z}+\bar ke^z)^2}R_+\mbox{d}z,
298: \label{eq:8}\\
299: \frac{\mbox{d}\nu}{\mbox{d}t}&=&-2\alpha\int_{-\infty}^\infty
300: \frac{k^3e^z+\bar k^3e^{-z}}{(ke^{-z}+\bar ke^z)^2}R_+\mbox{d}z.
301: \label{eq:9}
302: \end{eqnarray}
303: Evolution of $\xi$ and $\delta$ is given by the following formulae:
304: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:10}
305: \frac{\mbox{d}\xi}{\mbox{d}t}&=&-\frac{\mu}{\alpha}-\frac{1}{\alpha\nu}
306: \left(\int_0^t\mbox{d}t'\mu(t')\right)\frac{\mbox{d}\nu}{\mbox{d}t}
307: \nonumber\\
308: & +& \frac{4\alpha^2}{\nu^2}\int_{-\infty}^\infty\frac{
309: \mbox{d}zR_-}{(ke^{-z}+\bar ke^z)^2}\left[z\left(k^3e^z+\bar
310: k^3e^{-z}\right)+\frac{i\nu}{8}\left(ke^z+\bar ke^{-z}\right)\right], \\
311: \frac{\mbox{d}\delta}{\mbox{d}t} &=& \frac{\mu^2+\nu^2}{2\alpha^2}+
312: \frac{1}{\alpha^2\nu}\left(\int_0^t\mbox{d}t'\mu(t')\right)
313: \left(\mu\frac{\mbox{d}\nu}{\mbox{d}t}-\nu\frac{\mbox{d}\mu}
314: {\mbox{d}t}\right) \nonumber\\
315: &+& \frac{4i\alpha}{\nu} \int_{-\infty}^\infty\frac{\mbox{d}zR_-}
316: {(ke^{-z}+\bar ke^z)^2}\Big[|k^2|\left(ke^{-z}+\bar k e^z\right)
317: \nonumber\\
318: &-& \frac{1}{8}\left(\bar\lambda ke^z-\lambda\bar ke^{-z}\right)
319: +\frac{iz}{\nu}\left(\bar\lambda k^3e^z+\lambda\bar k^3e^{-z}\right)
320: \Big]. \label{eq:11}
321: \end{eqnarray}
322: It should be noted that for the symmetric perturbations obeying
323: the condition $\exp[-i\phi(z,t)]r(z,t)=\exp[i\phi(-z,t)]\bar
324: r(-z,t)$, i.e., $R_-=0$, the complicated integrals in the right
325: hand sides of (\ref{eq:10}) and (\ref{eq:11}) disappear.
326:
327: Now we have all the necessary information
328: to derive the Karpman-Solov'ev-like
329: dynamical system of equations for the adiabatic interaction of two
330: well-separated MNSE solitons. Below we will formulate more precisely the
331: condition of sufficient separability of solitons. We suppose that a
332: two-soliton solution to the MNSE (\ref{eq:1}) is well approximated by the
333: sum of two MNSE solitons:
334: \begin{equation}
335: u(x,t)=u_1(z_1,t)+u_2(z_2,t), \label{eq:12}
336: \end{equation}
337: where $u_j(z_j,t)$, $j=1,2$, is given by (\ref{eq:3}) with
338: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:nn}
339: z_j&=&-\frac{\nu_j}{\alpha}(x-\xi_j), \qquad \phi_j=\frac{\mu_j}{\nu_j}
340: z_j+\delta_j. \nonumber\\
341: \xi_j(t)&=&-\frac{1}{\alpha}\int_0^t{\rm d} t'\mu_j(t')+\xi_{j0},
342: \quad \delta_j(t)=\frac{1}{2\alpha^2}\int_0^t{\rm d}
343: t'\left(\mu_j^2(t')+\nu_j^2(t')\right)+\delta_{j0},\nonumber
344: \end{eqnarray}
345: where we took into account for the possible evolution of $\mu_j$
346: and $\nu_j$. Substituting now (\ref{eq:12}) into the MNSE
347: (\ref{eq:1}), it is easy to see that, because of the
348: nonlinearity, each soliton feels the presence of the other one
349: and the interaction is described by the perturbed MNSE
350: \begin{equation}
351: iu_{jt}+{1\over 2}u_{jxx}+i\alpha\left(|u_j|^2u_j\right)_x+|u_j|^2u_j=r_j,
352: \label{eq:13}
353: \end{equation}
354: where
355: \begin{equation}
356: r_j=-i\alpha\left(2|u_j|^2u_{3-j}+u_j^2\bar u_{3-j}\right)_x-
357: \left(2|u_j|^2u_{3-j}+u_j^2\bar u_{3-j}\right).\label{eq:14}
358: \end{equation}
359: It should be stressed that the perturbation (\ref{eq:14}) arises
360: effectively as a result of treating two-soliton solution as the sum
361: (\ref{eq:12}) of the one-soliton ones.
362:
363: Now we formulate the conditions which provide the representation
364: (\ref{eq:12}) as a two-soliton solution of the MNSE (\ref{eq:1}). At first
365: we express $z_2$ in terms of $z_1$,
366: \[
367: z_2=\left(1+\frac{\nu_2-\nu_1}{\nu_1}\right)z_1+
368: \frac{\nu_2}{\alpha}(\xi_2-\xi_1).
369: \]
370: We suppose that solitons have almost equal widths, i.e.,
371: \begin{equation}
372: \frac{|\nu_2-\nu_1|}{\nu_0}\ll 1, \label{eq:15}
373: \end{equation}
374: where $\nu_0=(1/2)(\nu_1+\nu_2)$. Hence, we have
375: \begin{equation}
376: z_2-z_1\simeq\frac{\nu_0}{\alpha}(\xi_2-\xi_1). \label{eq:16}
377: \end{equation}
378: Calculation of the overlap integral $|\int_{-\infty}^\infty
379: u_1(z_1,t)u_2(z_2,t){\rm d} x|$ (or, equivalently,
380: $\int_{-\infty}^\infty{\rm d} x|u_1(z_1,t)u_2(z_2,t)|$) gives an
381: expression containing the factor
382: $\exp[-(\nu_0/\alpha)(\xi_2-\xi_1)]\equiv\epsilon$ for
383: $\xi_2>\xi_1$. Just this exponential factor determines a measure
384: of overlapping neighboring solitons. We take in the following
385: \begin{equation}
386: \frac{\nu_0}{\alpha}|\xi_2-\xi_1|\gg 1 \label{eq:17}
387: \end{equation}
388: (or $\epsilon \ll 1$) which means weak overlapping between the solitons.
389:
390: Let us consider now the phase difference
391: $\phi_2-\phi_1=(\mu_2/\nu_2)z_2-(\mu_1/\nu_1)z_1+\delta_2-\delta_1$.
392: Accounting for (\ref{eq:15}) and (\ref{eq:16}) we may write
393: \[
394: \phi_2-\phi_1=\frac{1}{\nu_2}\left[\mu_2-\left(1+\frac{\nu_2-\nu_1}
395: {\nu_1}\right)\mu_1\right] z_1+ \frac{\mu_2}{\alpha}\frac{\nu_0}
396: {\nu_2}(\xi_2-\xi_1)+\delta_2-\delta_1.
397: \]
398: Since we consider solitons moving with small relative velocities we
399: assume:
400: \begin{equation}
401: \frac{|\mu_2-\mu_1|}{\nu_0}\ll 1. \label{eq:18}
402: \end{equation}
403: Then the phase difference will not contain the $z$-dependence.
404: Furthermore,
405: \[
406: \frac{\mu_2}{\alpha}\frac{\nu_0}{\nu_2}(\xi_2-\xi_1)=
407: \frac{\mu_2}{\alpha}\left(1+\frac{\nu_0-\nu_2}{\nu_2}\right)(\xi_2-\xi_1).
408: \]
409: As the last condition we suppose
410: \begin{equation}
411: |\nu_j-\nu_0|(\xi_2-\xi_1)\ll 1, \label{eq:19}
412: \end{equation}
413: hence, the phase difference takes the form
414: \[
415: \phi_2-\phi_1=\frac{\mu_0}{\alpha}(\xi_2-\xi_1)+\delta_2-\delta_1.
416: \]
417: Therefore, the conditions (\ref{eq:15}), (\ref{eq:17}), (\ref{eq:18}),
418: (\ref{eq:19}) provide a possibility to consider a two-soliton solution of
419: the MNSE (\ref{eq:1}) as the sum of the form (\ref{eq:12}).
420:
421: To derive the Karpman-Solov'ev-like equations for the soliton parameters,
422: we use Eqs. (\ref{eq:7})--(\ref{eq:11}) with the perturbation
423: (\ref{eq:14}). Accounting for the above conditions, we obtain after
424: simple but tedious calculations ($j=1,2$):
425: \begin{equation}
426: \frac{\mbox{d}\lambda_j}{\mbox{d}t}=(-1)^j 4
427: k_j\left(\frac{w_j\nu_j} {\alpha}\right)^2
428: \frac{w_{3-j}\nu_{3-j}}{\bar k_{3-j}}e^{-\Delta-i\psi},
429: \label{eq:20}
430: \end{equation}
431: \begin{equation}
432: \frac{\mbox{d}\mu_j}{\mbox{d}t}=(-1)^j\frac{2}{\alpha^2}\nu_j^2
433: \nu_{3-j}\left(w_j^2 w_{3-j}\frac{k_j}{\bar
434: k_{3-j}}e^{-i\psi}+\bar w_j^2\bar w_{3-j}\frac{\bar
435: k_j}{k_{3-j}}e^{i\psi}\right)e^{-\Delta}, \label{eq:21}
436: \end{equation}
437: \begin{equation}
438: \frac{\mbox{d}\nu_j}{\mbox{d}t}=(-1)^{j+1}\frac{2i}{\alpha^2}\nu_j^2
439: \nu_{3-j}\left(w_j^2 w_{3-j}\frac{k_j}{\bar
440: k_{3-j}}e^{-i\psi}-\bar w_j^2\bar w_{3-j}\frac{\bar
441: k_j}{k_{3-j}}e^{i\psi}\right)e^{-\Delta}, \label{eq:22}
442: \end{equation}
443: \begin{eqnarray}
444: \frac{\mbox{d}\xi_j}{\mbox{d}t}&=&-\frac{1}{\alpha}\mu_j + (-1)^j
445: \frac{2i}{\alpha^3}\nu_j\nu_{3-j} \left(\int_0^t\mbox{d}t'\mu_j(t')\right)
446: \nonumber\\
447: &\times & \left(w_j^2 w_{3-j}\frac{k_j}{\bar k_{3-j}}
448: e^{-i\psi}-\bar w_j^2\bar w_{3-j}\frac{\bar k_k}{k_{3-j}}
449: e^{i\psi}\right)e^{-\Delta} \nonumber \\
450: &+&\frac{i}{\alpha}\nu_{3-j}\Bigg(\left[\left(1+\bar w_j^2\right)
451: \left(1-2\bar w_j^2\right)+4is_j\right] w_j^2 w_{3-j}\frac{k_j}
452: {\bar k_{3-j}}e^{-i\psi} \nonumber \\
453: &-&\left[\left(1+w_j^2\right)\left(1-2w_j^2\right)-4is_j\right]
454: \bar w_j^2\bar w_{3-j}\frac{\bar k_j}{k_{3-j}}e^{i\psi}\Bigg)
455: e^{-\Delta},\label{eq:23}
456: \end{eqnarray}
457: \begin{eqnarray}
458: \frac{\mbox{d}\delta_j}{\mbox{d}t}&=&\frac{1}{2\alpha^2}
459: \left(\mu_j^2+\nu_j^2\right) - (-1)^j\frac{2i}{\alpha^4}
460: \nu_j\nu_{3-j}\left(\int_0^t\mbox{d} t'\mu_j(t') \right) \nonumber\\
461: &\times &\left(\lambda_j w_j^2 w_{3-j}\frac{k_j}{\bar
462: k_{3-j}}e^{-i\psi}-\bar\lambda_j\bar w_j^2\bar w_{3-j}
463: \frac{\bar k_j}{k_{3-j}}e^{i\psi}\right)e^{-\Delta} \nonumber \\
464: &-&\frac{i}{\alpha^2}\bar\lambda_j\nu_{3-j}\Bigg(\left[
465: \left(1+\bar w_j^2\right)\left(1-2\bar
466: w_j^2\right)+4is_j\right]w_j^2
467: w_{3-j}\frac{k_j}{\bar k_{3-j}}e^{-i\psi} \nonumber \\
468: &-&\left[\left(1+w_j^2\right)\left(1-2w_j^2\right)-4is_j\right]
469: \bar w_j^2\bar w_{3-j}\frac{\bar k_j}{k_{3-j}}e^{i\psi}\Bigg)
470: e^{-\Delta}.\label{eq:24}
471: \end{eqnarray}
472: Above we used the notations
473: \begin{eqnarray*}
474: w_j = {k_j\over \bar k_j} = \exp(-2is_j), &\qquad & \Delta= {\nu_0
475: \over \alpha} |\xi_2-\xi_1|, \\
476: \psi = {\mu_0 \over \alpha} (\xi_2-\xi_1)+\delta_2-\delta_1, & \qquad &
477: s_j={1\over 2} \arctan {\nu _j \over 1+\mu _j} ,
478: \end{eqnarray*}
479: where the last relation follows from $\lambda _j=4k_j^2-1 =\mu _j -i\nu _j
480: $.
481:
482: Equations (\ref{eq:21})--(\ref{eq:24}) are the analog of the
483: Karpman-Solov'ev equations in the case of the adiabatic
484: interaction of two well-separated MNSE solitons and reduce to the
485: NSE dynamical system in the limit (\ref{eq:5}).
486:
487: The dynamical system (\ref{eq:21})--(\ref{eq:24}) is rather
488: complicated and needs further simplification to perform its
489: analytical investigation. Integrable approximation is of special
490: importance, and finding such an approximation is one of our
491: purposes. But first of all we will generalize these equations to
492: the case of $N$ MNSE solitons.
493:
494: \section{$N $-soliton train interactions for the MNSE}\label{sec:3}
495:
496: Since the Karpman-Solov'ev-like dynamical system is nonlinear, it
497: does not allow the superposition principle. It is physically
498: clear because in the case of the $N$-soliton train with $N\ge3$ a
499: middle soliton will be influenced by its neighbors from both
500: sides. Hence, it is not possible to describe the interaction of
501: $N\ge3$ solitons within the framework of two-soliton interaction
502: like (\ref{eq:21})--(\ref{eq:24}).
503:
504: The first remark we should keep in mind is that the interaction
505: force between the solitons is of the order of their overlap.
506: Therefore, we can take into account only the nearest neighbor
507: interaction. Indeed, for the $N$-soliton train we assume that
508: \begin{equation}
509: u=\sum_{j=1}^Nu_j \label{eq:25}
510: \end{equation}
511: where $u_j$ is the MNSE soliton (\ref{eq:3}) whose center of mass
512: is located at $\xi_j$. Assume that $\xi_1<\xi_2<\dots<\xi_N$.
513: Inserting this {\it ansatz} into the cubic term of the MNSE
514: (\ref{eq:1}) gives
515: \begin{equation}
516: |u^2|u=\sum_{j=1}^N|u_j^2|u_j+\sum_{j\ne l}\left(|u_j^2|u_l+2u_j^2
517: \bar u_l\right)+\sum_{j\ne l\ne n}u_j\bar u_lu_n. \label{eq:26}
518: \end{equation}
519: Straightforward analysis shows that the integrals in
520: (\ref{eq:7})--(\ref{eq:11}) corresponding to each type of terms in
521: (\ref{eq:26}) are of the following order of magnitude:
522: \begin{eqnarray}
523: |u_k|^2 u_m , \quad u_k^2 \bar u_m \qquad &\leftrightarrow &
524: \qquad {\cal O}(\epsilon^{-|k-m|}), \nonumber\\
525: u_j \bar u_l u_n , \quad j<l<n \qquad &\leftrightarrow & \qquad
526: {\cal O}(\epsilon^{-|j-l|-|l-n|}).\nonumber
527: \end{eqnarray}
528: Here $\epsilon$ is of the order of
529: $\exp[-(\nu_0/\alpha)|\xi_j-\xi_l|]$ for $|j-l|=1$. Because we
530: keep only terms of the order of $\epsilon$, we see that it is
531: enough to take into account only terms with $|j-l|=1$. In other
532: words, the 'triple' terms like $u_j \bar u_l u_n$ can be
533: neglected. Quite analogous is the situation with the cubic terms
534: containing $x$-derivative.
535:
536: Secondly, as in Sec. 2, we pose the conditions
537: \[
538: |\nu_j-\nu_l|\ll \nu_0, \quad |\mu_j-\mu_l|\ll \nu_0, \quad
539: \nu_0|\xi_{0j}-\xi_{0l}|\gg 1, \quad
540: |\nu_j-\nu_l||\xi_{0j}-\xi_{0l}|\ll 1,
541: \]
542: where $\nu_0=N^{-1}\sum_{j=1}^N\nu_j$, $\mu_0=N^{-1}\sum_{j=1}^N\mu_j$.
543: They mean that we consider the chain-like configuration of $N$ solitons
544: with equal or nearly equal velocities and widths. Substituting the soliton
545: solutions (\ref{eq:3}) into the perturbation
546: \begin{equation}
547: r_j=-\sum_{l=j\pm1}\left[i\alpha\left(2|u_j|^2u_l+u_j^2\bar
548: u_l\right)_x+\left(2|u_j|^2u_l+u_j^2\bar u_l\right)\right]
549: \label{eq:27}
550: \end{equation}
551: and calculating the integrals in (\ref{eq:7}), we obtain
552: \begin{equation}
553: \frac{{\rm d}\lambda_j}{{\rm
554: d}t}=-k_j\left(\frac{2w_j\nu_j}{\alpha} \right)^2\sum_{l=j\pm
555: 1}s_{lj} \frac{w_l\nu_l}{\bar
556: k_l}e^{-|\Delta_{lj}|}e^{-is_{lj}\psi_{lj}}.\label{eq:28}
557: \end{equation}
558: where
559: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:28'}
560: s_{lj}&=& \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1 & \mbox{for} \quad l = j+1, \\
561: -1 & \mbox{for} \quad l = j-1, \end{array} \right. \qquad
562: \Delta_{lj}=\frac{\nu_0}{\alpha} |\xi_l-\xi_j| , \nonumber\\
563: \psi_{lj}&\equiv & \psi _l -\psi _j = \frac{\mu_0}{\alpha}
564: (\xi_l-\xi_j)+\delta_l-\delta_j.
565: \end{eqnarray}
566: The corresponding formulae for $\mu_j$ and $\nu_j$ follow from
567: (\ref{eq:28}) as real and imaginary parts. It is not
568: difficult to derive also the equations for the rest two
569: parameters $\xi_j$ and $\delta_j$ generalizing those
570: (\ref{eq:23}) and (\ref{eq:24}) for the two-soliton interaction.
571: Keeping in mind, however, our aim to formulate the equations for
572: the adiabatic interaction of the MNSE solitons in the form
573: tractable analytically, it is sufficient to represent the
574: equations for $\xi_j$ and $\delta_j$ in the following form:
575: \begin{eqnarray}
576: \frac{\mbox{d}\xi_j}{\mbox{d}t}&=&-\frac{\mu_j}{\alpha}+{\cal O}(\epsilon),
577: \label{eq:29}\\
578: \frac{\mbox{d}\delta_j}{\mbox{d}t}&=&\frac{\mu_j^2+\nu_j^2}{2\alpha^2}+
579: {\cal O}(\epsilon).\label{eq:30}
580: \end{eqnarray}
581: Indeed, let us impose the conditions on the scattering data of the
582: spectral problem (\ref{eq:2}) which correspond to the adiabatic
583: approximation. Just as for the NSE, we require that the eigenvalues of the
584: Lax operator are clustered around their mean value:
585: \[
586: |\lambda _j -\lambda _0|^2 \simeq {\cal O}(\epsilon ), \qquad
587: \lambda _0 = {1 \over N } \sum_{j=1}^{N} \lambda _j.
588: \]
589: Thus we obtain the estimates in (\ref{eq:29}) and (\ref{eq:30}) which
590: mean that we can neglect the perturbation-induced evolution of the
591: parameters $\xi_j$ and $\delta_j$ as compared to their main
592: (unperturbed) evolution. At the same time $s_j $ and $w_j $
593: characterize the initial conditions and it is important to take
594: them into account in the right hand side of the equation (\ref{eq:28}).
595:
596: \section{Derivation of the complex Toda chain model}\label{sec:4}
597:
598: The next important step towards deriving a model of $N$ MNSE-soliton
599: interactions tractable analytically consists in a careful account for the
600: terms of the order of $\epsilon$. First note that because the right-hand
601: side of (\ref{eq:28}) is of the order of $\epsilon$, we may approximate
602: $k_j$ by $|k_0|e^{-is_j} $ where $k_0 $ is the mean value
603: \[
604: k_0=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^Nk_j.
605: \]
606: Thereby we neglect terms like $|\nu_0-\nu_j|\epsilon$ and $|\mu_0-\mu_j|
607: \epsilon$ which due to (\ref{eq:15}) and (\ref{eq:18}) are of the higher
608: order in $\epsilon$. Hence, eq. (\ref{eq:28}) is written as follows:
609: \begin{equation}
610: \frac{\mbox{d}\lambda_j}{\mbox{d}t}=\frac{4\nu_0^3}{\alpha^2}
611: \left( e^{Q_{j+1}-Q_j}f_j - e^{Q_j-Q_{j-1}} g_j\right), \label{eq:31}
612: \end{equation}
613: where
614: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:1.8}
615: Q_{j+1} - Q_j &=& - {\nu _0 \over \alpha } (\xi_{j+1} -\xi_j )
616: \nonumber\\
617: &-& i \left[ \pi + {\mu _0 \over \alpha } (\xi_{j+1} -\xi_j ) + \delta
618: _{j+1} - \delta _j + 4s_{j+1} + 4s_j \right], \\
619: \label{eq:1.8a}
620: f_j &=& e^{i(s_{j+1}-s_j)}, \qquad g_j = e^{i(s_{j-1}-s_j)}.
621: \end{eqnarray}
622: The recurrent relation (\ref{eq:1.8}) can be solved for $Q_j $ with the
623: result
624: \begin{equation}
625: Q_j=-\frac{\nu _0}{\alpha}\xi_j -i \left[ j\pi + \frac{\mu_0}{\alpha}
626: \xi_j +\delta_j +\delta_0 +\sum_{k=1}^{j-1} 8s_k + 4s_j \right], \qquad
627: \delta_0=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^N\delta_j. \label{eq:32}
628: \end{equation}
629:
630: The next step is to derive the evolution equation for $Q_j$ (\ref{eq:32}).
631: It should be noted first of all that up to terms of the order of
632: $\epsilon$
633: \begin{eqnarray}
634: \frac{\mbox{d}\delta_0}{\mbox{d}t}&=&\frac{1}{2\alpha^2N}
635: \sum_{j=1}^N(\mu_j^2+ \nu_j^2)\nonumber\\
636: &=&\frac{1}{2\alpha^2N} \sum_{j=1}^N\left[ \mu_0^2+\nu_0^2+ 2\mu_0
637: (\mu_j-\mu_0) +2\nu_0 (\nu_j-\nu_0)+{\cal O}(\epsilon)\right] \nonumber\\
638: &=&\frac{1}{2\alpha^2}\left(\mu_0^2+\nu_0^2+{\cal O}(\epsilon)\right).
639: \nonumber
640: \end{eqnarray}
641: Then, in view of (\ref{eq:29}) and (\ref{eq:30}), we get
642: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:33}
643: \frac{{\rm d}Q_j}{{\rm d}t}&=&\frac{i}{\alpha^2}(\mu_0-i\nu_0)
644: \mu_j-\frac{i}{2\alpha^2}(\mu_j^2+\nu_j^2+\mu_0^2 +\nu_0^2) \\
645: &=&\frac{i}{2\alpha^2}\left[-(\mu_j-\mu_0)^2-(\nu_j-\nu_0)^2-
646: 2i\nu_0(\mu_j-i\nu_j)\right] \nonumber\\
647: &=&\frac{\nu_0}{\alpha^2}\lambda_j +{\cal O}(\epsilon). \nonumber
648: \end{eqnarray}
649: Finally, keeping only the leading-order terms and replacing $f_j \simeq 1$
650: and $g_j \simeq 1$ we find from (\ref{eq:1.8}) and (\ref{eq:33})
651: \begin{equation}
652: \frac{{\rm d}^2Q_j}{{\rm d}t^2}=4\left(\frac{\nu_0}{\alpha}
653: \right)^4\left(e^{Q_{j+1}-Q_j}- e^{Q_j-Q_{j-1}}\right), \label{eq:34}
654: \end{equation}
655: i. e., the CTC model. Hence we see that the CTC model arises naturally as
656: the integrable limit of the Karpman-Solov'ev-like equations describing the
657: adiabatic interaction of $N$ MNSE solitons within the train of solitons
658: with near velocities and widths.
659:
660: As we will see in the next section the interactions of the MNSE
661: solitons are substantially different from the ones of the NSE. As
662: it can be seen from (\ref{eq:1.8}) the dependence of $Q_j $ on
663: the soliton parameters is different from that for the NSE case. An
664: important point here is that $\im Q_j $ depends explicitly also
665: on the amplitudes of the solitons through $s_j =\arctan \left(
666: \nu _j/(\alpha (1+\mu _j)\right) $.
667:
668: \section{Dynamical regimes of the $N $-soliton trains}\label{sec:5}
669:
670: It is well known that the CTC is a completely integrable
671: dynamical system. Most of the results concerning the CTC such as
672: the Lax representation, the integrals of motion, explicit
673: solutions etc. are direct consequences of the classical results
674: by Toda and Moser~\cite{Toda,Moser} on the real Toda chain (RTC).
675: However there is a qualitative difference between the RTC and the
676: CTC when one tries to analyze the dynamical regimes of the two
677: systems, see \cite{Gerd1,Gerd3,GEI}.
678:
679: Indeed, the Lax representation of the CTC (\ref{eq:34}) is of the
680: form:
681: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:Lax}
682: {dL \over d\tau } &=& [L, M], \\
683: \label{eq:L} L(\tau)&=&\sum_{j=1}^{N} \left( b_j E_{j,j} +
684: a_j(E_{j,j+1}+ E_{j+1,j})
685: \right), \\
686: \label{eq:M} M(\tau) &=& \sum_{j=1}^N a_j(E_{j+1,j} - E_{j,j+1}),
687: \end{eqnarray}
688: where
689: \[
690: \tau = c_0 t, \qquad c_0=2\nu _0^2/\alpha ^2 ,\qquad a_j={1 \over
691: 2}\exp{(Q_{j+1}-Q_j)/2} ,
692: \]
693: \[
694: b_j=-{1\over 2} { {\rm d}Q_j/{\rm d}\tau }=-\lambda_j/4\nu_0,
695: \qquad (E_{i,j})_{ln} =\delta_{il} \delta _{jn} ,
696: \]
697: see (\ref{eq:33}). In fact, without loss of generality we can
698: assume that $\tr L=0 $. This can be achieved by subtracting
699: $\zeta _0\openone $ from $L $ where $\zeta _0
700: =\sum_{j=1}^{N}\zeta _j/N = \sum_{j=1}^{N}b_j/N $. Note that
701: $\zeta _0 $ is obviously an integral of motion for the CTC, i.
702: e., ${\rm d}\zeta _0/{\rm d}\tau =0 $.
703:
704: The explicit solution to the CTC is given by
705: \begin{equation}\label{eq:qaa}
706: q_k(\tau)=q_1(0) + \ln {A_{k}(\tau)\over A_{k-1}(\tau)},
707: \end{equation}
708: where $A_0\equiv 1 $,
709: \begin{equation}\label{eq:A1}
710: A_1(\tau)=\sum_{k=1}^{N}r_{k}^{2} e^{-2\zeta_k \tau},
711: \end{equation}
712: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:Ak}
713: A_{k}(\tau)= \sum_{1\leq l_{1}< \ldots <l_{k}\leq N}
714: (r_{l_1} \ldots r_{l_k})^{2} W^{2}(l_k,l_{k-1},\ldots ,l_1)
715: e^{-2(\zeta _{l_1} + \dots + \zeta _{l_k})\tau }
716: \end{eqnarray}
717: and
718: \begin{equation}\label{eq:A_NConst}
719: A_N = W^2(N,N-1,\dots,2,1) e^{-2(\zeta _{1} + \dots + \zeta
720: _{N})\tau } \prod_{k=1}^{N} r_k^2.
721: \end{equation}
722: Here $\zeta _j $ are the eigenvalues of the Lax matrix $L $,
723: $W(l_k,\dots, l_1) $ denotes the Vandermonde determinant:
724: \begin{equation}\label{eq:Wan}
725: W(l_k,\dots , l_1) = \prod_{\scriptsize \begin{array}{c} {s>p} \\
726: {s,p \in \{ l_1,\dots , l_k\}}\end{array}} (2\zeta _s - 2\zeta
727: _p),
728: \end{equation}
729: and $r_j $ are the first components $r_j=\vec{v}_{j,1} $ of the
730: eigenvectors:
731: \begin{equation}\label{eq:L-ev}
732: L \vec{v}_j = \zeta _j \vec{v}_j,
733: \end{equation}
734: normalized by
735: \begin{equation}\label{eq:v-norm}
736: (\vec{v}_j, \vec{v}_j) \equiv \sum_{k=1}^{N} \left( \vec{v}_{j,k}
737: \right)^2 =1.
738: \end{equation}
739: Due to the fact that $L $ is a symmetric matrix we find also
740: \begin{equation}\label{eq:r-norm}
741: \sum_{j=1}^{N} r_j^2 = 1.
742: \end{equation}
743:
744: Using the explicit solution for $Q_j(t) $ we can estimate the asymptotic
745: behavior of $Q_j(\tau ) $ for $\tau \to \infty $.
746:
747: Such an analysis for the RTC, i. e., when $Q_j $, $a_j $, and $b_j
748: $ are real, shows that: i)~$r_j $ and $\zeta _j $ are real-valued,
749: ii)~$\zeta _j\neq \zeta _k $ for $j\neq k $. Therefore one finds
750: that for $\tau\to\infty $ each 'particle' $Q_j $ moves
751: uniformly with a velocity $2\zeta _j $ \cite{Moser}. Since $
752: \zeta _j $ are pair-wise different we conclude that the only
753: possible dynamical regime is the asymptotically free (AFR) one.
754:
755: The same considerations applied to the CTC lead however to a
756: qualitatively different results. Indeed, now $r_j $ and $\zeta_j =\kappa
757: _j+i\eta_j $ become complex-valued and there are no restrictions on the
758: eigenvalues $\zeta _j $. Then evaluating the limits of $Q_j(\tau ) $ for
759: $\tau \to\infty $ we find that the asymptotic velocity of $Q_j $ is
760: determined by $2\kappa _j = 2\re \zeta _j$. As a result we have a much
761: wider spectra of dynamical regimes. The reason for that is also in the
762: fact that CTC can be viewed as a dynamical system of $N $ `complex`
763: particles which are characterized not only by their positions $\re Q_j $
764: and velocities $v_j=\re b_j $, but also by their phases and phase
765: velocities; the latter are related to $\im Q_j $ and $\im b_j $.
766: Physically speaking these `complex` particles have, just like the bright
767: NLS solitons, an internal degree of freedom. This makes the interaction
768: between the particles more complicated and as a result the number of the
769: possible dynamical regimes increases substantially.
770:
771: The AFR which takes place if $\kappa _j\neq \kappa _k $ for
772: $j\neq k $ is just one of the options. Another option is $\kappa
773: _1=\kappa _2 = \dots =\kappa _N =0$ which corresponds to a bound
774: state regime (BSR) of all $N $ `complex' particles (solitons) in
775: the train. There is also a large class of intermediate or mixed
776: regimes (MR) for which only several of the parameters $\kappa _j
777: $ are equal. For example, if $\kappa _1=\kappa _2=\kappa _3 >
778: \kappa _4 \dots >\kappa _N $ then the first three particles
779: (solitons) will form a bound state while the rest $N-3 $
780: particles will be asymptotically free.
781:
782: Note that this variety of regimes exist in the generic case when
783: the eigenvalues $\zeta _j $ of $L $ are pair-wise different; so in
784: the previous case we assume that $\eta_1\neq \eta_2 \neq \eta_3
785: $. One may consider also degenerate regimes (when two or more of
786: the eigenvalues $\zeta _j $ become equal) and singular regimes
787: (when one or more of the functions $Q_j(\tau ) $ develop
788: singularities for finite $\tau $).
789:
790: There is also another important consequence from the
791: integrability of CTC. From the Lax representation one easily
792: finds that the eigenvalues $\zeta _j $ are the integrals of
793: motion for the CTC, i.e., $\zeta _j $ are time independent.
794: Therefore we can evaluate them, for example, at the initial moment
795: $t =0 $ using for this the initial values of the soliton
796: parameters. Then, knowing $\zeta _j $ and, more specifically,
797: $\kappa _j $ we can predict the asymptotic regime of the
798: corresponding $N $-soliton train.
799:
800: We can also answer another question: describe the set of initial
801: soliton parameters for which the corresponding $N $-soliton train
802: will develop a specific dynamic regime. In other words, we can
803: describe the set of initial soliton parameters for which we will
804: have, say, an $N $-soliton bound state regime. To describe the
805: BSR all we need to do is to solve the corresponding
806: characteristic equation
807: \begin{equation}\label{eq:ch-eq}
808: \det (L-\zeta \openone ) =0,
809: \end{equation}
810: and impose the condition $\kappa _1=\kappa _1=\dots=\kappa _N=0 $.
811: Since the coefficients of (\ref{eq:ch-eq}) and consequently
812: $\kappa _j $ will be expressed in terms of the initial soliton
813: parameters we will have a set of nonlinear equations describing
814: the BSR. Analogously, if we need to describe the AFR we must solve
815: for $\kappa _j\neq \kappa _k $ for $k\neq j $.
816:
817: We will show how this can be done analytically for the simplest
818: non-trivial cases with $N=2 $ and $N=3 $. For generic values of
819: $N $ this can always be done by numeric means; one needs only to
820: solve algebraic equation (\ref{eq:ch-eq}) of order $N $.
821:
822: Let us briefly describe the manifolds of soliton parameters
823: responsible for each of the dynamical regimes for $N=2 $
824: and $N=3 $. As it is clear from the above considerations, we have
825: to solve the characteristic equation (\ref{eq:ch-eq}) and to
826: express the eigenvalues $\zeta _j $ of $L $ in terms of the
827: soliton parameters.
828:
829: \subsection{$ N=2 $ case.}\label{ssec:5.1}
830:
831: For simplicity from now on we shall consider trains with zero
832: initial velocities, $\mu{_j(0)}=0$, i. e., in the relevant moving
833: coordinate system. The matrix $L_0\equiv L(t=0)=\pmatrix{b &a\cr
834: a &-b}$ with $\tr L=0 $ is built from the initial soliton
835: parameters:
836: \[
837: a=-\frac{i}{2}\exp\left(-\frac{\nu_0}{2\alpha}r_0-\frac{i}{2}\Gamma\right),
838: \qquad b=\frac{i}{4}d,
839: \]
840: where
841: \begin{equation}\label{eq:5.5}
842: r_0=\xi_{2(0)}-\xi_{1(0)}, \qquad \Gamma=\delta_{2(0)}- \delta_{1(0)}+
843: 4s_1+ 4s_2, \qquad d=(\nu_{1(0)}-\nu_0)/\nu_0.
844: \end{equation}
845: Then
846: \begin{equation}\label{eq:6.2}
847: \zeta _{1,2} = \pm \sqrt{b^2 + a^2} = \pm {i \Delta_{\rm cr,2}
848: \over 4} \sqrt{y_0^2 + e^{-i\Gamma}}.
849: \end{equation}
850: with
851: \begin{equation}\label{eq:5.5a}
852: \Delta _{\rm cr,2} = 2e^{-\nu _0r_0/(2\alpha) }, \qquad y_0 = {d
853: \over \Delta _{\rm cr,2} }.
854: \end{equation}
855: Obviously if $\Gamma \neq 0, \pi $ then $\re \zeta _{1,2} \neq 0
856: $ and we will have an asymptotically free regime (AFR).
857:
858: If $\Gamma =0 $, then $\re \zeta _{1,2}=0 $ and we have a bound
859: state regime (BSR).
860:
861: If $\Gamma =\pi $, then $\re \zeta _{1,2}=0 $, i. e., we will have
862: a BSR only provided
863: \begin{equation}\label{eq:6.3}
864: |d| > \Delta _{\rm cr,2}.
865: \end{equation}
866: If $|d| < \Delta _{\rm cr,2} $, both roots $\zeta _{1,2} $ become
867: real and we go into the AFR.
868:
869: It was already noted that the conditions $\Gamma =0, \pi $
870: involve, besides the phases $\delta _j $, also the amplitudes of
871: the solitons through $s_j $. In particular for $\nu _0=\alpha =1
872: $ and $\mu _j=0 $ we have $s_1 + s_2 = \pi/4 $. Therefore two
873: such MNSE solitons {\em attract} each other and form a bound state
874: provided $\delta _2-\delta _1=\pi $ and {\em repulse} each other
875: (which leads to AFR) for $\delta _2-\delta _1=0 $. Such behavior
876: of the two-soliton interaction is quite to the contrary to that
877: known for the NSE two-soliton interaction.
878:
879: The explicit solution to the CTC with $N=2 $ is of the form
880: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:6.4}
881: Q_1(t) &=& -Q_2(t) = \ln {\cosh(2\zeta _1 c_0 t -\gamma _1) \over 2\zeta
882: _1 }, \qquad \gamma _1 = \ln {r_1 \over r_2 },
883: \end{eqnarray}
884: where
885: $\zeta _1 $ is expressed in terms of the soliton parameters
886: (\ref{eq:6.2}) and
887: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:9.1}
888: \gamma_1 = {1 \over 2 } \ln {\sqrt{y_0^2 +
889: e^{-i\Gamma }} + y_0 \over \sqrt{y_0^2 + e^{-i\Gamma }} - y_0 }.
890: \end{eqnarray}
891: Obviously for $\Gamma =0 $ the solution $Q_1(t) $
892: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:55'}
893: Q_1(t) &=& \ln {2\cos (Y_0 c_0 t/2 + i\gamma _{10} \over iY_0 }, \\
894: Y_0 &=& \Delta _{\rm cr,2} \sqrt{y_0^2+1}, \qquad \gamma _{10} =
895: {1 \over 2 } \ln {\sqrt{y_0^2 +1} + y_0 \over \sqrt{y_0^2 +1} - y_0 }.
896: \nonumber
897: \end{eqnarray}
898: becomes a periodic function of $t=\tau/c_0 $ with period depending on
899: $y_0 $:
900: \begin{equation}\label{eq:9.5}
901: T_{\rm 2s;1} = {4\pi \over c_0\Delta _{\rm cr,2} \sqrt{y_0^2 +1} }.
902: \end{equation}
903:
904: Analogously for $\Gamma =\pi $ from (\ref{eq:9.1}) we have
905: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:9.6}
906: Q_1(t) &=& -Q_2(t) = \ln {2 \cosh(i\Delta _{\rm cr,2}\sqrt{y_0^2 -1} c_0
907: t/2 -\gamma _{11}) \over i\Delta _{\rm cr,2} \sqrt{y_0^2-1} },
908: \nonumber\\
909: \gamma _{11} &=& {1\over 2} \ln {\sqrt{y_0^2-1} +y_0 \over \sqrt{y_0^2-1}
910: -y_0 }.
911: \end{eqnarray}
912: The solution is periodic only if $y_0>1 $ and the period is
913: \begin{equation}\label{eq:9.7}
914: T_{\rm 2s;2} = {4\pi \over c_0\Delta _{\rm cr,2}\sqrt{y_0^2-1} }.
915: \end{equation}
916: As a conclusion, the BSR for $N=2 $ provides periodic
917: solutions. For $\Gamma =\pi $, $y_0<1 $ we have AFR and the
918: solution is not periodic.
919:
920: The final remark in this subsection is that for $y_0\to 0 $ the
921: solution (\ref{eq:6.4}) becomes singular and blows up
922: periodically with period $4\pi/(c_0\Delta _{\rm cr,2}) $. In this
923: limit we have two `equal' solitons with amplitudes $\nu _j=\nu
924: _0=1 $ with phase difference $\pi $.
925:
926: \subsection{$ N=3 $ case.}\label{ssec:5.2}
927:
928: For the case of the three-soliton train with zero initial
929: velocities the matrix $L_0$ has the form
930: \[
931: L_0=\pmatrix{b_1 &a_1& 0\cr a_1 &b_2 &a_2\cr 0& a_2& b_3}, \qquad
932: \tr L_0=0
933: \] with
934: \[
935: a_j=-{i\over
936: 2}\exp(-\frac{\nu_0}{2\alpha}r_0-\frac{i}{2}\Gamma_j), \qquad
937: b_j={i\over4}d_j,
938: \]
939: where
940: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:N_3}
941: d_j &=& \frac{\nu_{j(0)}-\nu_0}{\nu_0}, \qquad
942: r_0=\xi_{2(0)}-\xi_{1(0)}=\xi_{3(0)}-\xi_{2(0)}, \nonumber\\
943: \Gamma_j &=& \delta_{j+1(0)}-\delta_{j(0)}+4s_{j+1}+4s_j.
944: \end{eqnarray}
945: Then the characteristic equation takes the form:
946: \begin{equation}\label{eq:16.1}
947: \zeta ^3 + p\zeta + q=0,
948: \end{equation}
949: where
950: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:16.2}
951: p&=& - {1 \over 16 } (d_1 d_2 + d_2 d_3 + d_1 d_3 ) + {1 \over
952: 4 } e^{-r_0\nu _0/\alpha } \left( e^{-i\Gamma _1} +
953: e^{-i\Gamma _2} \right), \nonumber\\
954: q&=& {i \over 64 } d_1d_2d_3 - {i \over 16 } e^{-r_0\nu
955: _0/\alpha } \left( d_1 e^{-i\Gamma _2} + d_3 e^{-i\Gamma _1}
956: \right).
957: \end{eqnarray}
958:
959: It is natural to make use of the well known Cardano formulae for
960: solving cubic equations. We first consider the cases when $p $
961: and $q $ are real. The roots of (\ref{eq:16.1}) are given by
962: \begin{equation}\label{eq:13.2}
963: \zeta _1 = A+B, \qquad \zeta _2 = \omega A + \omega ^2 B, \qquad
964: \zeta _3 = \omega^2 A + \omega B,
965: \end{equation}
966: where
967: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:13.3}
968: A &=& \sqrt[3]{-{ q \over 2 } + \sqrt{Q}}, \qquad
969: B = \sqrt[3]{-{ q \over 2 } - \sqrt{Q}}, \\
970: Q&=& {q^2 \over 4 } + {p^3 \over 27}, \qquad \omega =
971: \exp\left(\frac{2\pi i}{3}\right). \nonumber
972: \end{eqnarray}
973:
974: If both $p $ and $q $ are real, then so is $Q $. Here we have four
975: subcases corresponding to qualitatively different sets of roots
976: for real $p$ and $q$.
977:
978: {\bf i)} ${\bf Q < 0 }$. This is possible only if $p< p_{\rm cr}
979: $, $p_{\rm cr}=-3(q^2/4)^{1/3} $. Then $A=B^* $ and all three
980: roots $\zeta _j $ become real $\zeta _j=\kappa _j $ and pair-wise
981: different:
982: \begin{equation}\label{eq:AFR}
983: \kappa _1 = 2 |A|\cos \Omega _0, \qquad \kappa _{2,3} = 2 |A|\cos
984: \left(\Omega _0 \pm {2\pi \over 3 }\right),
985: \end{equation}
986: with $\Omega _0\neq 0, \pi $. Obviously this leads to AFR. If
987: $\Omega _0=0 $ or $\pi $ then $\kappa _2=\kappa _3 $ and a MR
988: follows.
989:
990: {\bf ii) ${\bf Q>0} $ and ${\bf q\neq 0} $.} Here both $A $ and
991: $B $ are real and formula (\ref{eq:13.2}) shows that one root
992: $\zeta_1$ is real, while the other two are complex conjugate:
993: \begin{equation}\label{eq:MR}
994: \re \zeta _1 = - 2\re \zeta _2 =-2\re \zeta _3, \qquad \mbox{or}
995: \qquad \kappa _1 = - 2\kappa _2 =-2\kappa _3,
996: \end{equation}
997: which corresponds to a MR.
998:
999: {\bf iii) ${\bf Q>0} $ and ${\bf q= 0} $.} Now $p>0$, the cubic
1000: equation (\ref{eq:16.1}) simplifies and is trivially solved by
1001: \begin{equation}\label{eq:BSR-r}
1002: \zeta _1=0, \qquad \zeta _{2,3} =\pm \sqrt{-p}.
1003: \end{equation}
1004: All the roots have zero real parts which obviously corresponds to
1005: BSR.
1006:
1007: {\bf iv) ${\bf Q=0} $}. If $p$ and $q$ are nonzero, all the rots
1008: are real and pair-wise different:
1009: \[
1010: \zeta_1=3q/p, \qquad \zeta_2=\zeta_3=-3q/2p,
1011: \]
1012: we have AFR. If $p$ and $q$ are zero, we get a degenerate case
1013: with all three zero roots.
1014:
1015: The symmetry in the eigenvalues leads also to a symmetry in the
1016: solutions of the CTC. Therefore the configuration
1017: (\ref{eq:BSR-r}) corresponds to a particular type of BSR's. This
1018: is due to the fact that we restricted so far both $q $ and $p $ to
1019: be real. Of course this is not necessary; moreover, from
1020: (\ref{eq:16.2}) we see that generically both $q $ and $p $ are
1021: complex. If we want to specify the soliton parameters that are
1022: responsible for the BSR we may also use Viette formulae which show
1023: that the characteristic equation (\ref{eq:16.1}) will have purely
1024: imaginary roots if $p $ is real and negative and $q $ is purely
1025: imaginary. That is why we will consider also the configuration
1026: v) below.
1027:
1028: {\bf v)~${\bf p={\bar p}} $, ${\bf q=-{\bar q}} $.} In this case
1029: we have two qualitatively different possibilities depending on
1030: whether $Q $ is positive or negative.
1031:
1032: Note that since $q=-{\bar q} $ we should modify our reasoning as
1033: compared to the above analysis. Indeed, with $q=iq' $, $q' $ real
1034: and $Q\geq 0 $ we find that $A=-\bar B $. Therefore from
1035: (\ref{eq:13.2}) and (\ref{eq:13.3}) we have that all the roots
1036: $\zeta _k $ satisfy $\zeta _k=-\bar\zeta _k $, i. e., are purely
1037: imaginary and BSR takes place.
1038:
1039: Analogously, if $Q<0 $ then the roots $\zeta _k $ satisfy $\zeta
1040: _1=-\bar\zeta _1 $ and $\zeta _3=-\bar\zeta _2 $ which leads to
1041: AFR.
1042:
1043: Hence, we revealed two possibilities to realize bound state
1044: regime: subcase iii) and subcase v) with $Q>0$.
1045:
1046: Let us now briefly describe the sets of soliton parameters relevant to
1047: each of the regimes mentioned above. For definiteness we will use two
1048: configurations of soliton widths:
1049: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:23.2a}
1050: \mbox{W1:} \qquad d_1=-d_3, \qquad d_2=0, \\
1051: \label{eq:23.2b} \mbox{W2:} \qquad d_1=d_3, \qquad d_2=-2d_1.
1052: \end{eqnarray}
1053:
1054: The condition that $p $ is real immediately means that
1055: \begin{equation}\label{eq:23.3}
1056: \Gamma _1=-\Gamma _2\equiv\Phi .
1057: \end{equation}
1058: Then
1059: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:24.1}
1060: p&=& -{1 \over 16 } (d_1 d_2 + d_1d_3 + d_2 d_3) + {1 \over 2 } e^{-\nu
1061: _0r_0/\alpha } \cos \Phi , \\
1062: \label{eq:24.2}
1063: q&=& {i \over 64 } d_1 d_2 d_3 - {i \over 16 } e^{-\nu _0r_0/\alpha }
1064: \left( d_1 e^{i\Phi } + d_3 e^{-i\Phi } \right), \\
1065: \label{eq:24.3} \Phi &=& \delta _2 - \delta _1 + 4s_1 + 4s_2.
1066: \end{eqnarray}
1067: Choosing the sets of widths to be W1 and W2 we get respectively:
1068: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:24.4a}
1069: p^{(1)} &=& {d_1^2 \over 16 } + {\epsilon _0^2 \over 2 } \cos
1070: \Phi ,
1071: \nonumber\\
1072: q^{(1)} &=& {d_1\epsilon _0^2 \over 8 } \sin \Phi ,
1073: \end{eqnarray}
1074: where $\epsilon _0 = \exp(-\nu _0r_0/(2\alpha )) $, and
1075: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:24.4b}
1076: p^{(2)} &=& {3d_1^2 \over 16 } + {\epsilon _0^2 \over 2 } \cos
1077: \Phi ,
1078: \nonumber\\
1079: q^{(2)} &=& -{id_1^3 \over 32 } -{id_1\epsilon _0^2 \over 8 } \cos
1080: \Phi.
1081: \end{eqnarray}
1082:
1083: {\bf Case I.} ${\bf q=0 }$. The characteristic equation
1084: (\ref{eq:16.1}) has the roots
1085: \begin{equation}\label{eq:24.5}
1086: \zeta _1=0, \qquad \zeta _{2,3} =\pm \sqrt{-p}.
1087: \end{equation}
1088: From (\ref{eq:24.4a}) we get that for the W1 configuration the
1089: condition $q^{(1)}=0 $ holds provided
1090: \begin{equation}\label{eq:24.6}
1091: \Phi =k\pi, \qquad k=0,1,
1092: \end{equation}
1093: which means that
1094: \begin{equation}\label{eq:24.7}
1095: p^{(1)} = {d_1^2 \over 16} + (-1)^k {\epsilon _0^2 \over 2 }.
1096: \end{equation}
1097: As a consequence we find that $p^{(1)}>0 $ for $k=0 $; for $k=1 $ we get
1098: that $p^{(1)}>0 $ only provided $|d_1| $ is greater than the critical
1099: value:
1100: \begin{equation}\label{eq:24.8}
1101: |d_1| > \Delta _{\rm cr,3} , \qquad \Delta _{\rm cr,3} = 2 \sqrt{2}
1102: \epsilon _0.
1103: \end{equation}
1104: In all these cases $\zeta _{2,3} $ are purely imaginary, i.e.
1105: these sets of parameters lead to BSR.
1106:
1107: Note that (\ref{eq:24.6}) means
1108: \begin{equation}\label{eq:24.9}
1109: \delta _2 = \delta _1 + k\pi - 4s_1 - 4 s_2, \qquad k=0,1.
1110: \end{equation}
1111:
1112: If instead of (\ref{eq:24.8}) we have $|d_1|<\Delta _{\rm cr,3} $
1113: then $p^{(1)}<0 $ and the roots $\zeta _{2,3} $ become real. That
1114: means that taking $d_1 $ below the critical value we will see a
1115: transition from BSR to AFR.
1116:
1117: The same considerations applied to the W2 configuration lead to
1118: different results. From (\ref{eq:24.4b}) we see that $q^{(2)}=0 $
1119: holds if
1120: \begin{equation}\label{eq:25.1}
1121: \cos \Phi = - {d_1^2 \over 4\epsilon _0^2 },
1122: \end{equation}
1123: which implies that
1124: \begin{equation}\label{eq:25.2}
1125: |d_1| \leq 2\epsilon _0 = {\Delta _{\rm cr,3} \over \sqrt{2} }
1126: \end{equation}
1127: and
1128: \begin{equation}\label{eq:25.3}
1129: p^{(2)} = {d_1^2 \over 16 } \geq 0.
1130: \end{equation}
1131: Such configurations obviously lead to BSR. If $|d_1| $ is chosen
1132: to be greater than the critical value in the right hand side of
1133: (\ref{eq:25.2}) we find that then $q^{(2)} $ becomes purely
1134: imaginary; such situation is considered below.
1135:
1136: Let us briefly treat also the case of `equal' solitons, i.e.,
1137: $d_j=0 $. Then obviously $q=0 $, $s_1=s_2=s_3=\pi/8 $ and $
1138: p=(\epsilon _0^2/2) \cos \Phi$. As a result we find that if
1139: \begin{equation}\label{eq:25.7}
1140: - {\pi \over 2 } < \Phi < {\pi \over 2 }, \qquad \mbox{i.e.,}
1141: \qquad {\pi \over 2 } < \delta _2 - \delta _1 < {3\pi \over 2 },
1142: \end{equation}
1143: then $p>0 $ and we have BSR; if
1144: \begin{equation}\label{eq:25.8}
1145: {\pi \over 2 } < \Phi < {3\pi \over 2 }, \qquad \mbox{i.e.,}
1146: \qquad -{\pi \over 2 } < \delta _2 - \delta _1 < {\pi \over 2 },
1147: \end{equation}
1148: then $p<0 $ and AFR follows.
1149:
1150: {\bf Case II. ${\bf p=0} $.} In this case the characteristic
1151: equation (\ref{eq:16.1}) has as roots
1152: \begin{equation}\label{eq:25.4}
1153: \zeta _k = \sqrt[3]{-q} \omega ^k, \qquad \omega =e^{2\pi i/3},
1154: \qquad k=0,1,2.
1155: \end{equation}
1156: If in addition $q $ is real then (\ref{eq:25.4}) leads to a MR;
1157: otherwise we get AFR.
1158:
1159: For the W1 configuration $p^{(1)}=0 $ means
1160: \begin{equation}\label{eq:25.5}
1161: \cos \Phi = - {d_1^2 \over (\Delta _{\rm cr,3})^2 };
1162: \end{equation}
1163: this is possible only if $|d_1| \leq \Delta _{\rm cr,3} $. From
1164: (\ref{eq:24.4a}) we get that $q^{(1)} $ is real and such
1165: configuration leads to MR.
1166:
1167: For the W2 configuration $p^{(2)}=0 $ holds if
1168: \begin{equation}\label{eq:25.6}
1169: \cos \Phi = - {3d_1^2 \over 8\epsilon _0^2 } = - {3d_1^2 \over
1170: (\Delta _{\rm cr,3})^2 },
1171: \end{equation}
1172: which is possible only if $|d_1| \leq \Delta _{\rm cr,3}/\sqrt{3}
1173: $. From (\ref{eq:24.4b}) we find that $q^{(2)} $ is purely
1174: imaginary, i.e., AFR follows.
1175:
1176: {\bf Case III: ${\bf p={\bar p}}$ and ${\bf q=-{\bar q}\neq 0}$.}
1177: This is possible only for the W2 configuration, so $p $ and $q $
1178: are given by (\ref{eq:24.4b}). The resolvent of the cubic
1179: equation (\ref{eq:16.1}) in this case takes the form:
1180: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:26.1}
1181: Q&=& {(p^{(2)})^3 \over 27 } + {(q^{(2)})^2 \over 4 } \nonumber\\
1182: &=& {\epsilon _0^6 \over 8 } \left[ \left(y^2 + {c \over 3 }\right)^3 -
1183: y^2 \left( y^2 + {c \over 2 }\right)^2 \right] \nonumber\\
1184: &=& {\epsilon _0^6 \over 8 } {c^2 \over 12 } \left(y^2 +
1185: {4c\over 9}\right) ,
1186: \end{eqnarray}
1187: where $y= d_1/\Delta _{\rm cr,3} $ and $c=\cos \Phi $.
1188:
1189: It is easy to check that $Q(y,c) $ is nonnegative for all $c>
1190: -9y^2/4 $ and vanishes for $c=0 $ and $c=-9y^2/4 $. We have to
1191: keep in mind also that $|c|\leq 1 $. Therefore if $9y^2/4 >1 $
1192: then $Q\geq 0 $ in the whole interval $-1 \leq c \leq 1 $.
1193: Following the arguments in v) above we conclude that this
1194: configurations leads to BSR.
1195:
1196: If we choose
1197: \begin{equation}\label{eq:26.4}
1198: |d_1| < {2 \over 3 }\Delta _{\rm cr,3}
1199: \end{equation}
1200: then there will be an interval for $\Phi $ (\ref{eq:24.3}),
1201: \begin{equation}\label{eq:26.5}
1202: \varphi _{\rm cr} \leq \Phi \leq 2\pi - \varphi _{\rm cr} , \qquad
1203: \varphi _{\rm cr} = \arccos \left(-{9d_1^2 \over 4(\Delta _{\rm cr,3})^2
1204: } \right) ,
1205: \end{equation}
1206: for which $Q<0 $; i.e., if (\ref{eq:26.5}) holds we have AFR.
1207:
1208: If $\Phi $ belongs to the complementary interval:
1209: \begin{equation}\label{eq:26.6}
1210: -\varphi _{\rm cr} \leq \Phi \leq \varphi _{\rm cr} ,
1211: \end{equation}
1212: then $Q(y,c)\geq 0 $ and we have BSR.
1213:
1214: The interested reader can easily extend this studies to other relevant
1215: configurations of soliton parameters.
1216:
1217: \section{The CTC versus the numerical solutions of the MNLS}\label{sec:6}
1218:
1219: It is our aim here to compare the predictions of the CTC model
1220: with the numerical solutions of the MNSE. Since the full
1221: numerical investigation of the problem is a voluminous and
1222: ambitious task we limit ourselves with $N=2 $ and $N=3 $ soliton
1223: trains and fix up $\alpha =1 $ and the average width $\nu _0=1 $.
1224:
1225: With this choice of $\alpha =1 $ the derivative term in the MNSE
1226: can not be treated as a perturbation to the NSE. With this choice
1227: we are able to exhibit the differences between the MNSE and NSE
1228: $N $-soliton train interactions. As we mentioned above the
1229: dependence of the soliton interaction of the MNSE solitons on the
1230: soliton phase difference is qualitatively different from the one
1231: of the NSE solitons.
1232:
1233: Indeed, let us start with $N=2 $ soliton trains. The formulas from
1234: Section~5.1 with $\alpha =1 $ and $\nu _0=1 $ show that `equal'
1235: solitons (i.e., solitons with equal widths) with phase difference
1236: $\delta _2-\delta _1=\pi $ (or $\Gamma =0 $) attract each other. In fact
1237: this choice of the soliton parameters corresponds to $y_0=0 $ and
1238: according to (\ref{eq:6.4}), (\ref{eq:9.1}) the solution to the CTC becomes
1239: singular. From Fig.~\ref{fig:2s(f)} we see that apart from a small
1240: neighborhood around the singular points the CTC gives a good
1241: description of the $2 $-soliton train of the MNSE; the singular
1242: points match rather well with the points at which the two
1243: solitons are closest to each other. The distance to the first
1244: singular points matches $T_{\rm 2s,1}/4 $ with $T_{\rm 2s,1} $ given by
1245: formula (\ref{eq:9.5}) with $y_0=0 $.
1246:
1247: %Here goes fig.1= 2s - (f)
1248: \begin{figure}{}
1249: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1250: \epsfbox{FIG1.EPS}
1251:
1252: \caption{Two-soliton interactions and their comparison with the CTC model.
1253: Solid curve: numerical results; dashed curves: predictions from the
1254: Toda chain model. $\nu _1=\nu _2=1.0 $, $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta _2=\pi $.
1255: \label{fig:2s(f)}}
1256: \end{figure}
1257:
1258:
1259: Choosing the solitons to have different widths leads to $\gamma
1260: _{10}\neq 0 $ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:55'}) and removes the singularity
1261: of the corresponding solution of the CTC system even if $\Gamma
1262: =0 $. This can be seen from Fig.~\ref{fig:2s(a)} which corresponds to a
1263: BSR. Of course now the match between the MNSE simulation and the
1264: CTC solution is better than in the previous case.
1265:
1266: %Here goes fig.2= 2s(a)
1267: \begin{figure}{}
1268: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1269: \epsfbox{FIG2.EPS}
1270:
1271: \caption{Two-soliton interactions and their comparison with the CTC model.
1272: Solid curve: numerical results; dashed curves: predictions from the Toda
1273: chain model. $\nu _1= 0.95$, $\nu _2=1.05 $, $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta
1274: _2=\pi $.\label{fig:2s(a)}}
1275:
1276: \end{figure}
1277:
1278: The situation changes if we consider solitons with phase
1279: differences such that $\Gamma =\pi $. There we find a threshold
1280: value for $d_1=-d_2=(\nu_1-\nu_0)/\nu _0 $, see
1281: Eq.~(\ref{eq:6.3}). Whenever $d_1<\Delta _{\rm cr,2} $ we get an
1282: AFR (see Fig.~\ref{fig:2s(c-b)}a while for $d_1>\Delta _{\rm cr,2} $ we get
1283: an BSR (see Fig.~\ref{fig:2s(c-b)}b.)
1284:
1285: %Here goes fig:3 2s(c)
1286: %Here goes fig:4 2s(b)
1287: \begin{figure}{}
1288: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1289: \epsfbox{FIG3A.EPS}
1290: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1291: \epsfbox{FIG3B.EPS}
1292:
1293: \caption{Two-soliton interactions and their comparison with the CTC model.
1294: Solid curve: numerical results; dashed curves: predictions from the Toda
1295: chain model. a) $\nu _1= 0.97$, $\nu _2=1.03 $, $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta
1296: _2=0 $; b) $\nu _1= 0.96$, $\nu _2=1.04 $, $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta
1297: _2=0 $.\label{fig:2s(c-b)} }
1298:
1299: \end{figure}
1300:
1301:
1302: Let us now consider the 3-soliton interactions. The choices of
1303: the soliton parameters illustrates each of the three main
1304: configurations outlined in Section~5.2 above.
1305:
1306: The figures \ref{fig:Ib(i-ii)} provide examples of 3-soliton
1307: configurations with $q=0 $ characteristic for case I. Both sets
1308: of parameters are such that $\Phi =\pi $. Besides on
1309: Fig.~\ref{fig:Ib(i-ii)}a we have $d_1<\Delta _{\rm cr,3} $ and as a
1310: consequence an AFR must follow. In the next Fig.~\ref{fig:Ib(i-ii)}b we
1311: have $d_1>\Delta _{\rm cr,3} $ for which the CTC model predicts a BSR; the
1312: match with the simulation here is not that good.
1313:
1314: \begin{figure}{}
1315: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1316: \epsfbox{FIG4A.EPS}
1317: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1318: \epsfbox{FIG4B.EPS}
1319:
1320: \caption{Three-soliton interactions and their comparison with the CTC
1321: model. Solid curve: numerical results; dashed curves: predictions from
1322: the Toda chain model. a) $\nu _1= 1.04$, $\nu _2=1.0 $, $\nu _3=0.96 $,
1323: $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta _2=-0.0392 $, $\delta _3=0.0016 $; b) $\nu _1=
1324: 1.07$, $\nu _2=1.0 $, $\nu _3=0.93 $, $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta _2=-0.0676
1325: $, $\delta _3=0.0049 $.\label{fig:Ib(i-ii)}}
1326:
1327: \end{figure}
1328:
1329:
1330: The figures \ref{fig:IIa(i)-b(ii)} show a 3-soliton
1331: configurations with $p=0 $ characteristic for case II. In
1332: fig~\ref{fig:IIa(i)-b(ii)}b the set of widths is W1 and $d_1<\Delta _{\rm
1333: cr,3} $ and therefore a MR follows
1334:
1335: \begin{figure}{}
1336: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1337: \epsfbox{FIG5A.EPS}
1338: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1339: \epsfbox{FIG5B.EPS}
1340:
1341:
1342: \caption{Three-soliton interactions and their comparison with the CTC
1343: model. Solid curve: numerical results; dashed curves: predictions from
1344: the Toda chain model. a) $\nu _1= 1.04$, $\nu _2=1.0 $, $\nu _3=0.96 $,
1345: $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta _2=2.1703 $, $\delta _3=0.0016 $; b) $\nu _1=
1346: 1.02$, $\nu _2=0.96 $, $\nu _3=1.02 $, $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta _2=-1.0862
1347: $, $\delta _3=0.0420 $.\label{fig:IIa(i)-b(ii)}}
1348:
1349: \end{figure}
1350:
1351:
1352: In the last two figures \ref{fig:III(ii)-(vii)} we used W2
1353: set of soliton widths and a choice of parameters characteristic for case
1354: III, i.e. $p $ is real while $q $ is purely imaginary. In
1355: Fig.~\ref{fig:III(ii)-(vii)}a $Q>0 $ with BSR, and in
1356: Fig.~\ref{fig:III(ii)-(vii)}b, we have $Q<0 $ and AFR.
1357:
1358: \begin{figure}{}
1359: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1360: \epsfbox{FIG6A.EPS}
1361: \epsfxsize=6.0cm
1362: \epsfbox{FIG6B.EPS}
1363:
1364: \caption{Three-soliton interactions and their comparison with the CTC
1365: model. Solid curve: numerical results; dashed curves: predictions from
1366: the Toda chain model. a) $\nu _1= 1.02$, $\nu _2=0.96 $, $\nu _3=1.02 $,
1367: $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta _2=3.142 $, $\delta _3=0.0420 $; b) $\nu _1=
1368: 1.02$, $\nu _2=0.96 $, $\nu _3=1.02 $, $\delta _1=0 $, $\delta _2=0.0
1369: $, $\delta _3=0.0420 $.\label{fig:III(ii)-(vii)}}
1370:
1371:
1372: \end{figure}
1373:
1374:
1375: \section{Conclusions}\label{sec:7}
1376:
1377: In this paper we extend the formalism by Karpman and Solov'ev
1378: proposed to describe the NSE 2-soliton interaction~\cite{KS} and
1379: generalized to arbitrary number of solitons
1380: ~\cite{Gerd1,Gerd2,Gerd3,Gerd4}, to the case of the modified
1381: nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation. The aim of our paper was
1382: two-fold. First, we would like to investigate a possibility to
1383: apply an integrable chain-like model to capture adiabatic
1384: dynamics of MNSE solitons within the $N$-soliton train. Because a
1385: functional form of the MNSE soliton is not of the familiar
1386: hyperbolic-secant type with a real argument, we might expect an
1387: existence of some novel features as compared with the NSE case.
1388: We show that, under specific well-defined conditions, the
1389: dynamical system of $4N$ equations for soliton parameters is
1390: reduced to the completely integrable complex Toda chain model
1391: with $N$ nodes. This is a strong argument in favor of
1392: universality of the CTC model for $N$-soliton interactions. Though
1393: the same CTC arises also for the NSE, there are a few
1394: peculiarities inherent in the MNSE solitons. In particular, we
1395: found out more complicated phase behavior of the $N$-soliton
1396: train. Using the integrability of the CTC, we are able to predict
1397: various asymptotic regimes of the MNSE $N$-soliton train
1398: evolution. Besides, we point out the sets of the initial soliton
1399: parameters corresponding to each of the dynamical regimes.
1400: Numerical simulations of the MNSE 2- and 3-soliton interactions
1401: are in very good agreement with the CTC-based predictions.
1402: Evidently, the results obtained can be extended to treat also
1403: multicomponent (vector) generalizations of both the NSE (see,
1404: e.g., \cite{Yang,Yang2,VS-36} and references therein) and MNSE
1405: ~\cite{Hisakado1,Hisakado2,Dok-Jpn}. Work in this direction is
1406: now in progress. We note that in non-integrable wave systems,
1407: Toda-chain type equations may still be
1408: derived for the adiabatic interaction of $N$ nearly identical
1409: solitary waves, but such equations are generally non-integrable
1410: as well \cite{Arn,Yang2}.
1411:
1412: Secondly, we consider the MNSE as a true starting integrable
1413: model to describe subpicosecond pulse evolution in nonlinear
1414: media. Strictly speaking, to justify a relevance of our results
1415: to actual ultrashort pulses, we should also account in our model
1416: at least two additional effects, the third-order dispersion and
1417: intrapulse Raman scattering. These effects break the
1418: integrability of the CTC, and we are faced with a truly perturbed
1419: MNSE. Following the lines of recently established interrelations
1420: between the perturbed NSE and perturbed CTC~\cite{Gerd4}, we can
1421: extend the above formalism to account for small actual
1422: perturbations which act along with the effective perturbation
1423: (\ref{eq:14}). The corresponding results will be published
1424: elsewhere. The single MNSE soliton dynamics in the presence of
1425: the intrapulse Raman scattering is discussed in the recent
1426: paper~\cite{Afan}.
1427:
1428: Recently we were informed~\cite{Val} that the CTC model arises
1429: also in the case of the soliton-train propagation in a system
1430: governed by the classical Thirring model~\cite{Thir,Kuzn}. This
1431: seems natural in view of the facts that: i)~CTC describes the
1432: adiabatic soliton interactions for all NLEE of the NLS hierarchy;
1433: ii)~MTM is just another representative of the MNLS hierarchy.
1434:
1435: There remain several natural questions that will be addressed in
1436: sequels of this paper. The first one is the limit $\alpha \to 0 $
1437: in which we should recover the results for the NSE $N $-soliton
1438: trains. We have proved that the Karpman-Solov'ev-like equations
1439: for MNSE $N$ solitons transform under this limit to the known NSE
1440: formulae. The second one concerns the treatment of the perturbed
1441: versions of the MNSE and the corresponding perturbed CTC model;
1442: for the NSE such perturbed CTC models have been briefly analyzed
1443: in \cite{Gerd4}.
1444:
1445: \section*{Acknowledgements}\label{sec:Ack}
1446:
1447: The authors gratefully acknowledge many stimulating discussions
1448: with Dr. V. Shchesnovich. Substantial part of this work was done
1449: during the RCP 264 Conference held in June 2000 in Montpellier.
1450: V.G. and E.D. are grateful to Professors J.-G. Caputo and P.
1451: Sabatier for their support which made our participation in this
1452: conference possible. The work of E.D. was supported in part by
1453: the Grant F98-044 from the Belarussian Foundation for Fundamental
1454: Research. The work of J.Y.
1455: was supported in part by the Air Force Office of Scientific
1456: Research under contract F49620-99-1-0174,
1457: and by the National Science Foundation under grant DMS-9971712.
1458:
1459: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1460:
1461: \bibitem{Agraw} G. P. Agrawal, {\it Nonlinear Fiber Optics}, 2nd ed.
1462: (Academic, San Diego, 1995).
1463:
1464: \bibitem{Kod1} A.~Hasegawa and Y.~Kodama. Solitons in Optical
1465: Communications (Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1995).
1466:
1467: \bibitem{NMPZ} S. P. Novikov, S. V. Manakov, L. P. Pitaevski, and V. E.
1468: Zakharov, {\it Theory of Solitons, the Inverse Scattering Method}
1469: (Consultant Bureau, New York, 1984).
1470:
1471: \bibitem{Takh-Fad} L. A. Takhtadjan and L. D. Faddeev, {\it Hamiltonian
1472: Approach to Soliton Theory} (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986).
1473:
1474: \bibitem{Gerd1} V. S. Gerdjikov, D. J. Kaup, I. M. Uzunov, and E. G.
1475: Evstatiev, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 77}, 3943 (1996).
1476:
1477: \bibitem{Gerd2} V. S. Gerdjikov, I. M. Uzunov, E. G. Evstatiev, and G.
1478: L. Diankov, Phys. Rev. E {\bf 55}, 6039 (1997).
1479:
1480: \bibitem{Gerd3} V. S. Gerdjikov, E. G. Evstatiev, D. J. Kaup, G. L.
1481: Diankov, and I. M. Uzunov, Phys. Lett. A {\bf 241}, 323 (1998).
1482:
1483: \bibitem{Gerd4} V. S. Gerdjikov and I. M. Uzunov, Physica D (2001, to
1484: be published), solv-int/0004031.
1485:
1486: \bibitem{KS} V. I. Karpman and V. V. Solov'ev, Physica D {\bf 3},
1487: 487 (1981).
1488:
1489: \bibitem{Arn} J. M. Arnold, Proc. URSI Electromagnetic Theory
1490: Symposium, St. Petersburg, 1995, p. 553; J. Opt. Soc. Amer. A
1491: {\bf 15}, 1450 (1998); Phys. Rev. E {\bf 60}, 979-986 (1999).
1492:
1493: \bibitem{Kaup} D. J. Kaup, SIAM J. Appl. Math. {\bf 31}, 121 (1976).
1494:
1495: \bibitem{KM} V. I. Karpman and E. M. Maslov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.
1496: {\bf 73}, 537 (1977) [Sov. Phys. JETP {\bf 46}, 281 (1977)].
1497:
1498: \bibitem{Kiv-Mal} Yu. S. Kivshar and B. A. Malomed, Rev. Mod. Phys.
1499: {\bf 61}, 768 (1989).
1500:
1501: \bibitem{WKI} M. Wadati, K. Konno, and Y. H. Ichikawa, J. Phys. Soc.
1502: Jpn {\bf 46}, 1965 (1979).
1503:
1504: \bibitem{Ohkuma} K. Ohkuma, Y. H. Ichikawa, and Y. Abe, Opt. Lett.
1505: {\bf12}, 516 (1987).
1506:
1507: \bibitem{Kod} Y. Kodama, J. Stat. Phys. {\bf 39}, 597 (1985);
1508: Y. Kodama and A. Hasegawa, IEEE J. Quant. Elecron. {\bf QE-23},
1509: 510 (1987).
1510:
1511: \bibitem{Tzoar} N. Tzoar and M. Jain, Phys. Rev. A {\bf 23}, 1266
1512: (1981).
1513:
1514: \bibitem{Anders} D. Anderson and M. Lisak, Phys. Rev A {\bf 27}, 1393
1515: (1983).
1516:
1517: \bibitem{Mio} K. Mio, T. Ogino, K. Minami, and S. Takeda, J. Phys.
1518: Soc. Jpn {\bf 41}, 265 (1976).
1519:
1520: \bibitem{India} K. Porsezian, K. M. Tamizhmani, and M. Lakshmanan,
1521: Phys. Lett. A {\bf 124}, 159 (1987).
1522:
1523: \bibitem{DNLS} D. J. Kaup and A. C. Newell, J. Math. Phys. {\bf 19},
1524: 798 (1978).
1525:
1526: \bibitem{Mihal} D. Mihalache, N. Truta, N.-C. Panoiu, and D.-M.
1527: Baboiu, Phys. Rev. A {\bf 47}, 3190 (1993).
1528:
1529: \bibitem{Gerd-Iv} V. S. Gerdjikov and M. Ivanov, Bulgarian J. Phys.
1530: {\bf 10}, 13 (1983); {\it ibid.\,} {\bf 10}, 130 (1983).
1531:
1532: \bibitem{Vysl} V. A. Vysloukh and I. V. Cherednik, Theor. Math.
1533: Phys. {\bf 78}, 24 (1989).
1534:
1535: \bibitem{Rao} A. Rangwala and J. A. Rao, J. Math. Phys. {\bf 31},
1536: 1126 (1990).
1537:
1538: \bibitem{Chen} Z.-Y. Chen and N.-N. Huang, Phys. Rev. A {\bf 41},
1539: 4066 (1990).
1540:
1541: \bibitem{Lin} S.-L. Lin and W.-Z. Wang, Phys. Rev. E {\bf 48}, 3054
1542: (1993).
1543:
1544: \bibitem{I&Val} E. V. Doktorov and V. S. Shchesnovich, J. Math. Phys.
1545: {\bf 36}, 7009 (1995).
1546:
1547: \bibitem{Val&I} V. S. Shchesnovich and E. V. Doktorov, Physica D {\bf
1548: 129}, 115 (1999).
1549:
1550: \bibitem{GEI} V. S. Gerdjikov, E. G. Evstatiev, and R. I. Ivanov,
1551: J. Phys. A: Math \& Gen. {\bf 31}, 8221 (1998); {\it ibid.\,}
1552: {\bf 33}, 975 (2000).
1553:
1554: \bibitem{Yang} J. Yang, Phys. Rev. E {\bf 59}, 2393
1555: (1999).
1556:
1557: \bibitem{Yang2} J. Yang, ``Interactions of vector solitons.'' Submitted.
1558:
1559: \bibitem{VS-36} V. S. Gerdjikov, {\it Dynamical models of adiabatic $N
1560: $-soliton interaction.} {\bf nlin.SI/0009036}; Balkan. Phys. Lett.
1561: (In press).
1562:
1563: \bibitem{Toda} M. Toda, {\it Theory of Nonlinear Lattices}.
1564: (Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1989 ).
1565:
1566: \bibitem{Moser} J. Moser, {\it Dynamical Systems, Theory and
1567: Applications. Lecture Notes in Physics} {\bf 38} (Berlin:
1568: Springer Verlag) 467, 1975 ; J. Moser, {\it Adv.\ Math. } {\bf
1569: 16} 197, (1975).
1570:
1571: \bibitem{Hisakado1} M. Hisakado, T. Iizuka, and M. Wadati, J.
1572: Phys. Soc. Jpn {\bf 63}, 2887 (1994).
1573:
1574: \bibitem{Hisakado2} M. Hisakado and M. Wadati, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn
1575: {\bf 64}, 408 (1995).
1576:
1577: \bibitem{Dok-Jpn} E. V. Doktorov, S. Yu. Sakovich, and R. A.
1578: Vlasov, J Phys. Soc. Jpn {\bf 65}, 876 (1996).
1579:
1580: \bibitem{Afan} A. A. Afanas'ev, E. V. Doktorov, R. A. Vlasov, and
1581: V. M. Volkov, Optics Comm. {\bf 153}, 83 (1998).
1582:
1583: \bibitem{Val} V. S. Shchesnovich, {\it Complex Toda chain for the soliton
1584: trains of the massive Thirring model and optical gap system},
1585: (unpublished).
1586:
1587: \bibitem{Thir} W. E. Thirring, Ann. Phys. (N. Y.) {\bf 3}, 91
1588: (1958).
1589:
1590: \bibitem{Kuzn} E. A. Kuznetsov and A. V. Mikhailov, Theor. Math.
1591: Phys. {\bf 30}, 193 (1977).
1592: \end{thebibliography}
1593:
1594: \newpage
1595: \listoffigures
1596:
1597: \end{document}
1598: