1: \documentclass[showpacs,amsmath,amssymb,twocolumn]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
3: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
4: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
5: \usepackage{overpic}
6:
7: \begin{document}
8:
9: \title{\bf\large{Phase Diagram of Neutron-Proton Condensate in Asymmetric Nuclear Matter}}
10: \author{\normalsize{Meng Jin$^{1,2}$, Lianyi He$^1$, and Pengfei Zhuang$^1$}}
11: \affiliation{$^1$Physics Department, Tsinghua University, Beijing
12: 100084, China\\
13: $^2$Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal
14: University, Wuhan 430070, China}
15:
16: \begin{abstract}
17: We investigate the phase structure of homogeneous and
18: inhomogeneous neutron-proton condensate in isospin asymmetric
19: nuclear matter. At extremely low nuclear density the condensed
20: matter is in homogeneous phase at any temperature, while in
21: general case it is in Larkin-Ovchinnikov-Fulde -Ferrell phase at
22: low temperature. In comparison with the homogeneous superfluid,
23: the inhomogeneous superfluid can survive at higher nuclear density
24: and higher isospin asymmetry.
25: \end{abstract}
26:
27: \pacs{21.65.+f, 21.30.Fe, 26.60.+c}
28:
29: \maketitle
30:
31: It is well-known that the neutron-proton ($np$) pairing plays an
32: important role in nuclear physics and astrophysics, such as the
33: structure of medium-mass nuclei produced in radioactive nuclear
34: beam facilities\cite{goodman}, the deuteron formation in
35: intermediate energy heavy-ion collisions\cite{baldo}, the pion and
36: kaon condensation\cite{brown}, the $r$-process\cite{kratz,chen},
37: and the cooling of neutron stars. The microscopic calculations
38: show that the nuclear matter supports $np$ Cooper pairing in the
39: $^3$S$_1-^3$D$_1$ channel due to the tensor component of the
40: nuclear force, and the pairing gap is of the order of $10$
41: MeV\cite{alm,von,baldo2,alm2,alm3,sedrakian,elg} at the saturation
42: nuclear density. At low enough density the $np$ Cooper pairs would
43: go over to Bose-Einstein condensation(BEC) of deuterons in
44: symmetric nuclear matter\cite{alm2,baldo}.
45:
46: The emergence of isospin asymmetry will generally suppress the
47: $np$ pairing, and the condensate will disappear when the asymmetry
48: becomes sufficiently large. Near the saturation density, the $np$
49: pairing correlation depends crucially on the mismatch between the
50: two Fermi surfaces, and a small isospin asymmetry can break the
51: condensate due to the Pauli blocking effect. At very low density,
52: when neutrons and protons start to form deuterons and when the
53: spatial separation between deuterons and between deuterons and
54: neutrons is large, the Pauli blocking loses its efficiency in
55: destroying a $np$ condensate. In such situation, the isospin
56: asymmetry can be very large, and the $np$ condensate survives in
57: the form of deuteron-neutron mixture in momentum
58: space\cite{lombardo,isayev}. Different from the symmetric nuclear
59: matter where the thermal motion destroys the $np$ condensate, for
60: asymmetric nuclear matter the temperature effect will melt the
61: condensate on one hand and increase the overlapping between the
62: two effective Fermi surfaces on the other hand. As a result of the
63: competition, in a wide density regime the temperature dependence
64: of the superfluidity is very strange\cite{sedrakian2,akhiezer}:
65: The maximum condensate is not located at zero temperature, and the
66: pairing even occurs only at intermediate temperature for large
67: isospin asymmetry.
68:
69: The above results are obtained by assuming the condensate is
70: homogeneous in the ground state. What is the true phase structure
71: of $np$ condensate with isospin asymmetry when the inhomogeneous
72: Larkin-Ovchinnikov-Fulde -Ferrell(LOFF) phase\cite{LOFF} is taken
73: into account? How will the LOFF phase change the strange
74: temperature behavior of $np$ condensate found in
75: \cite{sedrakian2}? In fact, there should exist a rich phase
76: structure in asymmetric nuclear matter, since the isospin
77: asymmetry essentially plays the same role as the population
78: imbalance in the two-component resonantly interacting atomic Fermi
79: gas\cite{pao}. Different to the cold atoms , in nuclear matter the
80: phase separation at large length scale may be forbidden and the
81: LOFF phase may be energetically favored. Although the LOFF phase
82: was discussed in asymmetric nuclear matter at saturation
83: density\cite{LOFFN}, the phase structure including the LOFF phase
84: in the whole density, temperature and isospin asymmetry space and
85: the effect of the LOFF phase on the strange temperature behavior
86: of the $np$ condensate are still unknown. We will present in this
87: paper the phase diagrams in the density, temperature and isospin
88: asymmetry space.
89:
90: The often used formulae for superfluid in nuclear matter are
91: discussed in detail in \cite{akhiezer2} where the superfluid state
92: is described by a normal and an anomalous nucleon distribution
93: functions ${\cal F}$ and ${\cal G}$. Generally, they are functions
94: of momentum ${\bf p}$ and matrices in spin and isospin space. The
95: formulae can be easily generalized to study the isospin asymmetric
96: superfluid with total pair momentum $2{\bf q}$. We will start with
97: the LOFF phase, and the homogeneous phase can be recovered by
98: taking ${\bf q}=0$. Like the studies in
99: \cite{sedrakian2,akhiezer,lombardo,LOFFN,isayev}, we discuss the
100: $np$ pairing in the $^3$S$_1-^3$D$_1$ channel with total spin
101: $S=1$, isospin $T=0$ and their projections $S_z=T_z=0$. In this
102: case the distribution functions take the structure
103: \begin{eqnarray}
104: {\cal F}({\bf p})&=&{\cal F}_{00}({\bf p})\sigma_0\tau_0+{\cal
105: F}_{03}({\bf
106: p})\sigma_0\tau_3,\nonumber\\
107: {\cal G}({\bf p})&=&{\cal G}_{30}({\bf p})\sigma_3\sigma_2\tau_2,
108: \end{eqnarray}
109: where $\sigma_i$ and $\tau_i$ are the Pauli matrices in spin and
110: isospin spaces. Using the minimum principle of the thermodynamic
111: potential and the procedure of block
112: diagonalization\cite{akhiezer3}, we can express the elements as
113: \begin{eqnarray}
114: {\cal F}_{00}({\bf p})&=&1/2-\xi_{\bf p}\left[1-f(E_{\bf p}^+)-f(E_{\bf p}^-)\right]/\left(2E_{\bf p}\right),\nonumber\\
115: {\cal F}_{03}({\bf p})&=&\left[f(E_{\bf p}^-)-f(E_{\bf p}^+)\right]/2,\nonumber\\
116: {\cal G}_{30}({\bf p})&=&-\Delta_{\bf p}\left[1-f(E_{\bf
117: p}^+)-f(E_{\bf p}^-)\right]/\left(2E_{\bf p}\right)
118: \end{eqnarray}
119: with the notations $\xi_{\bf p} = \left({\bf p}^2+{\bf
120: q}^2\right)/\left(2m\right)-\mu$, $E_{\bf p} = \sqrt{\xi_{\bf
121: p}^2+\Delta^2_{\bf p}}$ and $E_{\bf p}^\pm = E_{\bf
122: p}\pm\left(\delta\mu+{\bf p}\cdot{\bf q}/m\right)$, where $m$ is
123: the effective nucleon mass in the medium and $f(x)=1/(e^{x/T}+1)$
124: is the Fermi-Dirac function with $T$ being the temperature. We
125: have introduced the average chemical potential
126: $\mu=(\mu_n+\mu_p)/2$ and the mismatch $\delta\mu=(\mu_n-\mu_p)/2$
127: instead of the neutron and proton chemical potentials $\mu_n$ and
128: $\mu_p$. We have also neglected the possible neutron-proton mass
129: splitting induced by the isospin asymmetry which is believed to be
130: small. The $np$ condensate $\Delta_{\bf p}$ is generally momentum
131: dependent and satisfies the gap equation
132: \begin{equation}
133: \label{gap1} \Delta_{\bf p}=\int\frac{d^3{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}V({\bf
134: p},{\bf k}){\cal G}_{30}({\bf k}),
135: \end{equation}
136: where $V$ is the nucleon-nucleon (NN) interaction potential. The
137: LOFF momentum ${\bf q}$ should be determined via minimizing the
138: the free energy ${\cal E}$, which ensures the total current ${\bf
139: j}_s$ in the ground state to be zero,
140: \begin{eqnarray}
141: \label{gap2}\rho |{\bf q}|- 4\int\frac{d^3{\bf
142: p}}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{{\bf p}\cdot{\bf q}}{|{\bf q}|}{\cal
143: F}_{03}({\bf p})=0,
144: \end{eqnarray}
145: where we have used the total nucleon density $\rho=\rho_n+\rho_p$
146: and the isospin density asymmetry $\delta\rho=\rho_n-\rho_p$
147: instead of the neutron and proton densities $\rho_n$ and $\rho_p$,
148: \begin{equation}
149: \label{number} \rho=4\int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}{\cal
150: F}_{00}({\bf p}),\ \ \delta\rho=4\int\frac{d^3{\bf
151: p}}{(2\pi)^3}{\cal F}_{03}({\bf p}).
152: \end{equation}
153:
154: Once the NN potential $V$ is known, we can solve the coupled set
155: of gap equations (\ref{gap1}) and (\ref{gap2}) together with the
156: density equations (\ref{number}) at given temperature $T$, baryon
157: density $\rho$ or equivalently the Fermi momentum
158: $k_F=(1.5\pi^2\rho)^{1/3}$ and isospin asymmetry
159: $\alpha=\delta\rho/\rho$, and obtain all possible phases, namely
160: the normal phase $\Delta_{\bf p}=0$, the homogeneous superfluid
161: phase $\Delta_{\bf p}\neq 0,\ {\bf q}=0$ and the LOFF phase
162: $\Delta_{\bf p}\neq 0,\ {\bf q}\neq 0$. By comparing their free
163: energies we can determine the true ground state.
164:
165: The details of the phase diagram depend on the NN potential $V$ we
166: will chose in the numerical calculations, however, the qualitative
167: topology structure of the phase diagram does not depend on that.
168: To show this, we analyze the stability of the homogeneous
169: superfluid phase against the formation of a nonzero Cooper pair
170: momentum. For this purpose, we investigate the response of the
171: free energy ${\cal E}$ to a small pair momentum ${\bf q}$ via the
172: small ${\bf q}$ expansion, ${\cal E}({\bf q})={\cal E}({\bf
173: 0})+{\bf j}_s\cdot{\bf q}/m+\rho_s{\bf q}^2/(2m)+\cdots$, where
174: ${\bf j}_s=m\partial{\cal E}/\partial{\bf q}$ is the total current
175: which is proportional to the left hand side of (\ref{gap2}), and
176: $\rho_s$ is just the superfluid density defined by $\rho_s=
177: m\partial^2{\cal E}/\partial {\bf q}^2$ of which the explicit form
178: reads
179: \begin{equation}
180: \label{rhos} \rho_s=\rho+\frac{2}{m}\int\frac{d^3{\bf
181: p}}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{{\bf p}^2}{3}\left[f^\prime(E_{\bf
182: p}^+)+f^\prime(E_{\bf p}^-)\right]\big|_{{\bf q}=0}
183: \end{equation}
184: with the definition $f'(x)=df(x)/dx$. The current ${\bf j}_s$
185: vanishes due to the gap equation for ${\bf q}$, and the sign of
186: $\rho_s$ controls the stability of the homogeneous superfluid,
187: i.e., a negative $\rho_s$ means the LOFF phase has lower free
188: energy than the homogeneous superfluid phase.
189:
190: The momentum dependence of the gap function $\Delta_{\bf p}$ is
191: normally rather weak in a wide momentum region\cite{lombardo}, and
192: we can approximately treat it as a constant $\Delta$ for a
193: qualitative analysis. At zero temperature, once the isospin
194: asymmetry is turned on, there must exist a sharp breached region
195: where the quasiparticle energy $E_{\bf p}^-<0$ with the necessary
196: condition $\delta\mu>\Delta$, and the momentum integration in
197: (\ref{rhos}) can be analytically carried out,
198: \begin{equation}
199: \rho_s=\rho\left[1-\frac{p_+^3\Theta(\mu_+)+p_-^3\Theta(\mu_-)}{3\pi^2\rho}\frac{\delta\mu}{\sqrt{\delta\mu^2-\Delta^2}}\right],
200: \end{equation}
201: where $p_\pm=\sqrt{2m\mu_\pm}$ are possible gapless nodes with
202: $\mu_\pm=\mu\pm \sqrt{\delta\mu^2-\Delta^2}$. At high density the
203: matter is in BCS regime where $\delta\mu,\Delta\ll\mu$, and the
204: breached region is $p_-<|{\bf p}|<p_+$. Since $p_\pm$ are close to
205: the Fermi momentum $k_F$, the superfluid density should be
206: negative since $\rho_s\simeq
207: \rho(1-\delta\mu/\sqrt{\delta\mu^2-\Delta^2})$. On the other hand,
208: at low enough density the matter is in BEC regime, the chemical
209: potential $\mu$ becomes negative which leads to $\mu_-<0$ and a
210: reduced breached region $0<|{\bf p}|<p_+$. In this case $p_+$ is
211: much smaller than $k_F$ and the superfluid density becomes
212: positive. Therefore, at zero temperature the superfluid is
213: expected to evolve from an inhomogeneous phase to the homogeneous
214: phase when the nuclear density decreases, which is a general
215: phenomenon for BCS-BEC crossover with population
216: imbalance\cite{pao}.
217:
218: At finite temperature, the breached region is smeared due to the
219: thermal excitation, and $\delta\mu>\Delta$ is not necessary. At
220: the critical temperature $T_c$ there should be a second order
221: phase transition from the superfluid to normal state, and for
222: temperature $T\lesssim T_c$ the pairing gap behaves as
223: $\Delta(T)\propto(1-T/T_c)^{1/2}$ which leads to the regular
224: behavior of the superfluid density $\rho_s(T)\propto(1-T/T_c)>0$.
225: This means the temperature tends to stabilize the homogeneous
226: phase. Combining with the behavior of the superfluid density at
227: zero temperature, the homogeneous phase at sufficiently low
228: density will keep stable at any temperature below $T_c$, while at
229: high density there must exist a turning temperature $T_s$ where
230: $\rho_s$ changes sign, and the superfluid should be in
231: inhomogeneous phase at low temperature $T<T_s$ and in homogeneous
232: phase at high temperature $T_s<T<T_c$. Since the homogeneous state
233: is unstable at low temperature, combining with the fact that the
234: critical isospin asymmetry for the LOFF phase is much larger than
235: the homogeneous phase\cite{LOFFN}, the strange temperature
236: behavior of the pairing gap found in \cite{sedrakian2} is probably
237: unrealistic.
238: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
239: \begin{figure}
240: \centering
241: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig11.eps}
242: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig12.eps}
243: \caption{The pairing gap $\Delta$ for homogeneous (dashed lines)
244: and inhomogeneous (solid lines) condensates and LOFF momentum $q$
245: as functions of temperature at normal density $\rho_0$ and for two
246: values of isospin asymmetry. \label{fig1}}
247: \end{figure}
248: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
249:
250: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
251: \begin{figure}
252: \centering
253: \includegraphics[width=6.6cm]{fig2.eps}
254: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig3.eps}
255: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig4.eps}
256: \caption{The phase diagrams in $k_F-\alpha$, $k_F-T$ and
257: $\alpha-T$ planes. In each plane, the labels HS, LOFF and Normal
258: indicate homogeneous superfluid, LOFF superfluid and normal phase,
259: the dashed line is the border of the unstable HS, and the three
260: phases meet at a Lifshitz point L. \label{fig2}}
261: \end{figure}
262: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
263:
264: We now move to numerical calculations. The Paris NN potential is
265: often used to describe the nuclear structure and nucleon
266: superfluidity, and describes well the BCS-BEC crossover of $np$
267: condensate\cite{baldo,lombardo}. Since the qualitative topology
268: structure of the phase diagram does not depend on specific models,
269: for the sake of simplicity, we employ a separable form of the
270: Paris NN potential
271: \begin{equation}
272: V({\bf r}_1,{\bf r}_2)=v_0\left[1-\eta\left({\rho\left(\frac{{\bf
273: r}_1+{\bf r}_2}{2}\right)\over
274: \rho_0}\right)^\gamma\right]\delta({\bf r}_1-{\bf r}_2),
275: \end{equation}
276: which was developed in \cite{garrido} to reproduce the pairing gap
277: in $S=1,T=0$ channel and the bound state between zero energy and
278: deuteron binding energy, where $\rho_0$ is the normal nuclear
279: density and the parameters $v_0, \eta, \gamma$ and an energy
280: cutoff $\varepsilon_c$ to regulate the model are determined by
281: recovering the pairing gap in the realistic Paris NN potential.
282: This separable form can also describe well the BCS-BEC crossover
283: of $np$ condensate\cite{isayev}. In our numerical calculation, we
284: choose $v_0=-530$ MeV$\cdot$fm$^3$, $\eta=0, \varepsilon_c=60$ MeV
285: and take $m$ as the density-dependent nucleon mass corresponding
286: to the Gogny force D1S\cite{d1s}. We have checked that different
287: parameter sets\cite{garrido} lead to only a slight change in the
288: numerical results.
289:
290: In the low density BEC regime, the homogeneous phase is stable at
291: any temperature below $T_c$, and the condensate is a regular
292: decreasing function of temperature. Beyond this regime the strange
293: phenomenon of the homogeneous condensate arises: The maximum
294: pairing gap is located at non-zero temperature, and the condensate
295: even appears only at intermediate temperature with two critical
296: temperatures $T_o$ and $T_c$ for large isospin asymmetry, which is
297: shown as dashed lines in the upper panel of Fig.\ref{fig1} for
298: saturation density without loss of generality. However, the
299: superfluid density $\rho_s$ for the homogeneous phase is negative
300: at $T<T_s$ and positive at $T_s<T<T_c$, where the turning
301: temperature $T_s$ is larger than the lower critical temperature
302: $T_o$. This tells us that the homogeneous phase is stable at high
303: temperature $T>T_s$ and unstable to formation of LOFF condensate
304: at low temperature $T<T_s$. By calculating the LOFF pairing gap
305: $\Delta$ and momentum $q=|{\bf q}|$ which are shown as solid lines
306: in the upper and lower panels of Fig.\ref{fig1} and comparing the
307: free energies for the homogeneous and LOFF states, the LOFF phase
308: is energetically more favored than the homogeneous phase at
309: $T<T_s$. Especially, different to the homogeneous condensate, the
310: LOFF condensate always starts at zero temperature. Therefore,
311: after considering both homogeneous and inhomogeneous condensates,
312: the strange temperature dependence of the pairing
313: gap\cite{sedrakian2,akhiezer} disappears and the condensate
314: becomes a regular decreasing function of temperature. The LOFF
315: momentum $q$, shown in the lower panel of Fig.\ref{fig1}, drops
316: down with increasing temperature and approaches to zero
317: continuously at $T_s$, which indicates a continuous phase
318: transition from homogeneous phase to LOFF phase. The continuity
319: can be proven analytically. The gap equation (\ref{gap2}) for $q$
320: can be written as $qW(q)=0$ with a trivial solution $q=0$ for the
321: homogeneous phase and a non-zero solution from $W(q)=0$ for the
322: LOFF phase. Using the expansion for ${\cal E}$ we find
323: $\rho_s=W(0)$. Therefore, we must have $q=0$ at $T=T_s$, providing
324: that the LOFF solution is unique.
325:
326: The phase diagrams of the $np$ pairing are shown in
327: Fig.\ref{fig2}. We first discuss the one in the $k_F-\alpha$ plane
328: at a very low temperature $T=0.1$ MeV. When $\rho\rightarrow 0$ we
329: find $\mu\rightarrow-\varepsilon_b/2$ at $\alpha=0$ where
330: $\varepsilon_b$ is the deuteron binding energy, which means that
331: the $np$ condensate survives in the form of deuteron BEC.
332: Consistent with the findings in atomic Fermi gas\cite{pao}, the
333: homogeneous phase (HS) is stable only at very low density BEC
334: regime. In this regime, the critical isospin asymmetry can be very
335: large, and even approaches to $1$ for $k_F<0.23\ $fm$^{-1}$.
336: Beyond this extremely low density regime, the superfluid density
337: of the homogeneous phase becomes negative which indicates that the
338: LOFF phase is energetically favored. By calculating the superfluid
339: density of the HS phase and the LOFF solution, we can determine
340: the phase boundaries between HS and LOFF and between LOFF and
341: normal phase. The LOFF momentum is large at high $\rho$ and high
342: $\alpha$ and approaches to zero at the HS-LOFF boundary which
343: means a continuous phase transition. If we consider HS only, the
344: HS-Normal boundary (dashed line) is below the LOFF-Normal
345: boundary, this shows that the introduction of LOFF phase enlarges
346: the superfluid region. In the $k_F-T$ and $\alpha-T$ planes, the
347: HS and LOFF phases are separated by the turning temperature $T_s$.
348: Note that $T_s$ starts at $k_F\ne 0$ in $k_F-T$ plane which
349: corresponds to the stable HS at extremely low density but starts
350: at $\alpha=0$ in $\alpha-T$ plane for high density which means
351: that the HS with small isospin asymmetry is easy to be stabilized.
352: Again, in comparison with the calculation with only HS, the
353: superfluid is extended to higher density or higher asymmetry
354: region due to the introduction of the LOFF phase, and the unstable
355: HS-Normal boundary (dashed lines) which reflects the strange
356: ``intermediate temperature superfluidity" is replaced by the
357: LOFF-Normal boundary. The phase transitions in the three planes
358: are all of second order, and in any case the three phases meet at
359: a Lifshitz point L\cite{lifshitz}. The $\alpha-T$ phase diagram we
360: obtained is very similar to the generic phase diagram of
361: two-component ultracold Fermi gas in a potential
362: trap\cite{machida}.
363:
364: In summary, we have qualitatively investigated the phase structure
365: of $np$ condensate in isospin asymmetric nuclear matter and
366: confirmed our analysis with a model NN potential. The important
367: findings are: 1) The LOFF phase is the ground state in a wide
368: region of nuclear density, temperature and isospin asymmetry,
369: except for very low density and high temperature. 2) The strange
370: temperature behavior of the $np$ condensate is washed out by the
371: LOFF phase at low temperatures. 3)The superfluid region is
372: expanded to high density and high asymmetry due to the
373: introduction of LOFF phase.
374:
375: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
376: {\bf Acknowledgement:} The work was supported by the grants
377: NSFC10575058, 10428510, 10435080 and 10447122.
378:
379: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
380: \small
381: \bibitem{goodman} A.L.Goodman, Phys.Rev.{\bf C60}, 014311(1999).
382: \bibitem{baldo} M.Baldo, U.Lombardo, and P. Schuck, Phys.Rev.{\bf C52}, 975(1995).
383: \bibitem{brown} G.E.Brown, and H.A.Bethe, Astrophys.J.{\bf 423}, 659(1994).
384: \bibitem{kratz} B.K.-L.Kratz et al., Astrophys.J.{\bf 403}, 216(1995).
385: \bibitem{chen} B.Chen et al., Phys.Lett.{\bf B355},37(1995).
386: \bibitem{alm} T.Alm, G.Roepke and M.Schmidt, Z.Phys.{\bf A337}, 355(1990).
387: \bibitem{von} B.E.Vonderfecht et al., Phys.Lett.{\bf B253}, 1(1991).
388: \bibitem{baldo2} M.Baldo, I.Bombaci and U.Lombardo, Phys.Lett.{\bf B283}, 8(1992).
389: \bibitem{alm2} T.Alm et al., Nucl.Phys.{\bf A551}, 45(1993).
390: \bibitem{alm3} T.Alm et al., Nucl.Phys.{\bf A406}, 491(1996).
391: \bibitem{sedrakian} A.Sedrakian, T.Alm and U.Lombardo, Phys.Rev.{\bf C55}, R582(1997).
392: \bibitem{elg} O.Elgaroy et al., Phys.Rev.{\bf C57}, R1069(1998).
393: \bibitem{lombardo} U.Lombardo et al., Phys.Rev.{\bf C64}, 064314(2001).
394: \bibitem{isayev} A.A.Isayev, JETP Lett. {\bf 82}, 551(2005).
395: \bibitem{sedrakian2} A.Sedrakian and U.Lombardo, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 602(2000).
396: \bibitem{akhiezer} A.I.Akhiezer et al., Phys.Rev. {\bf C63}, 021304(R)(2001).
397: \bibitem{pao} C.H.Pao, S.T.Wu and S.K.Yip, Phys. Rev. {\bf B73}, 132506(2006); D.T.Son and M.A.Stephanov, Phys.Rev.{\bf A74}, 013614(2006).
398: \bibitem{LOFF} P.Fulde and R.A.Ferrell,Phys. Rev {\bf 135}, A550(1964); A.I.Larkin and Yu.N.Ovchinnikov, Sov.Phys. JETP {\bf 20}, 762(1965).
399: \bibitem{LOFFN} A.Sedrakian, Phys.Rev. {\bf C63}, 025801(2001); H.Muther and A.Sedrakian, Phys.Rev. {\bf C67}, 015802(2003).
400: \bibitem{akhiezer2} A.I.Akhiezer et al., Sov.Phys.JETP{\bf 85},1(1997).
401: \bibitem{akhiezer3} A.I.Akhiezer et al., Phys.Rep.{\bf 245}, 1(1994).
402: \bibitem{garrido} E.Garrido, et.al., Phys.Rev.{\bf C63}, 037304(2001).
403: \bibitem{d1s} J.F.Berger, M.Girod and D.Gogny, Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 63}, 365(1991).
404: \bibitem{lifshitz} P.M.Chaikin and T.C.Lubensky, ``\emph{Principles of
405: condensed matter physics}" (Cambridge Univ. Press,
406: Cambridge,1995).
407: \bibitem{machida} K.Machida, T.Mizushima and M.Ichioka, Phys.Rev.Lett.{\bf 97}, 120407(2006).
408:
409: \end{thebibliography}
410: \end{document}
411: