one of the methods for studying extensive air showers of high energies ( @xmath1 ev ) is to register their images in the optical ( mainly fluorescence ) light .
this can be done by observing showers from the side in order to avoid the more intense cherenkov light emitted rougly in the shower direction .
the observations are made by a number of optical telescopes , each containing a large mirror and a camera with a matrix of photomultipliers ( pmts ) placed at the focus of the optical system ( hires @xcite , the pierre auger observatory @xcite , the telescope array @xcite ) , so that photons arriving from a given direction on the sky are focused on a particular pmt ( pixel ) .
photon arrival time can also be measured if the time structure of the pmt signals is recorded . a cosmic ray induced shower produces at a given time a light spot on the camera which moves across it as the shower develops in the atmosphere so that succeeding pmts are being hit .
+ it would have been ideal if the light producing a shower image had contained the fluorescence photons only .
this is because there exists experimental evidence that the number of fluorescence photons induced by a charged electron in the atmosphere is proportional to the energy lost by it for ionisation @xcite . as practically all primary particle energy
is eventually used for ionisation , this energy can be determined by measuring the fluorescence light emitted along the shower track in the atmosphere .
+ however , there are several problems in deriving the flux of the fluorescence light emitted by a shower from that arriving at the detector .
firstly , the arriving light contains not only the fluorescence but also cherenkov photons . if the viewing angle ( the angle between the line of sight and the shower direction ) is large ( say , @xmath2 ) then it is mainly the cherenkov light
_ scattered _ in the atmosphere region just passed by the shower and observed by the detector ( this light , before being scattered , travels roughly along the directions of the shower particles ) .
typically its fraction at the detector is about @xmath3 of the fluorescence flux . for smaller viewing angles
it is the cherenkov light _
produced _ at the observed part of the shower that may dominate even the fluorescence signal .
the contribution of the cherenkov light , which has to be subtracted from the total signal , has been extensively studied @xcite . + the subject of this paper is another phenomenon , affecting shower images , most commonly called the multiple scattering ( ms ) of light
. photons produced at the observed shower element , whatever their origin ( fluorescence or cherenkov ) , may undergo scattering in the atmosphere on their way from the shower to the detector , causing an attenuation of the light flux arriving at the detector and a smearing of the image .
this scattering may take place on the air molecules ( rayleigh scattering ) or on larger transparent particles , aerosols ( mie scattering ) .
most of the scattered photons change their directions , so that they no longer arrive at the pixel registering the not scattered ( direct ) light .
moreover , they arrive later having longer path lengths to pass . on the other hand ,
photons emitted by the shower at earlier times and scattered somewhere , may fall in the field of view of the pixels just registering the direct photons emitted at a later time .
the net effect is that the scattered light forms its own instantaneous image superimposed on that in the direct light .
+ our aim is to calculate the shower images in the multiply scattered light , so that this effect could be allowed for ( subtracted ) when determining the shower primary energy from the pmt signals .
this problem was already studied by roberts @xcite , by us in several , short conference contributions @xcite and more recently by pkala et al @xcite .
the approach of the other authors was based on monte carlo simulations of photons emitted by a shower .
photons were followed up to 5 - 6 scatterings and their arrival directions and time were registered by the detector .
many shower simulations were needed to obtain the ms images for various distances , heights , viewing angles of the observed shower parts .
finally , a phenomenological parametrisation of the number of ms photons was made as a function of the parameters found as relevant .
+ in contrast to roberts and pkala et al this approach is based on an analytical treatment .
the main idea is to consider the arriving ms light as a sum of the photons scattered only once ( the first generation ) , of those scattered two times ( the second generation ) and so on and calculate separately the angular and temporal distributions for each generation .
+ we start ( section 2 ) with a consideration of the simplest situation when a point source of isotropic light flashes for a very short time in an uniform medium .
we derive analytical expressions for the angular and temporal distributions of the first and next generations of light arriving at a particular distance from the source . + as our aim is to apply our results to cosmic ray showers we need to consider a non - uniform medium like the atmosphere . assuming an exponential distribution of the gas density and similarly for aerosols we show that an effective scattering length between any two points in the atmosphere can be easily calculated analytically .
signals of the first two generations arriving at a particular detector within a given angle @xmath4 to the direction to the source are found as a function of time ( section 3 ) .
+ using these it is straightforward to derive the corresponding distributions if the source moves across the atmosphere , integrating the point source distributions over changing distance and time of light emission . in section 4
we consider a moving light source , modelling a distant shower .
we calculate angular distributions of ms light arriving at a detector at the same time as the direct ( not scattered ) photons emitted by the shower .
this particular approach is quite natural because the data from optical detectors consist of the recorded signals by the camera pmts within short time intervals @xmath5 so that one needs to know how much of the ms light has to be subtracted from the main , direct signal .
the method for calculating images in the ms light _ simultaneous _ with images in the direct light is relatively simple ( for the first and the second generations ) as it is based on the geometry of the scattered photons in the particular generation .
it does not require time - consuming monte - carlo simulations that were done for various shower - observer geometries .
making some approximations we derived analytical formula for a shower image produced by the first generation ( section 4.2 ) .
our analytical derivations allowed us to choose easily the variables on which and how to parametrise the ms signals .
they also made us to realise that the dependence of it on the viewing angle was different for rayleigh and mie scatterings .
thus , we introduced a new , simple parametrisation of the fraction of the scattered photons arriving at the telescope within a given viewing cone , depending on the viewing angle of the shower ( what has not been done before ) , separately for the two scatterings .
for the same reason we also parametrised separately the second generation ( section 4.3 ) .
+ a discussion of the results and the implication of the ms effect on the derivation of shower parameters is given in section 5 .
the last section ( 6 ) contains a summary and conclusions .
at any fixed time a distant shower can be regarded as a point source emitting isotropically fluorescence light ( about cherenkov light see later ) . as explained above
, we treat the light scattered in the medium as a sum of consecutive generations consisting of photons scattered only once , twice , and so on , on their way from the source to the observation point .     of a sphere with radius @xmath6 .
two rays shown are scattered at points @xmath7 and @xmath8 , correspondingly , arriving at the surface of the sphere with radius @xmath6 at angles @xmath9 and @xmath10.,width=288 ]      let us consider the first generation , consisting of photons scattered once only .
we shall calculate the flux of these photons , @xmath11 , at a distance @xmath6 from the source , such that @xmath12 is the number of photons scattered only once , arriving at time @xmath13 after the flash , within a solid angle @xmath14 at the surface @xmath15 ( perpendicular to the arrival direction ) located at a distance @xmath6 . to do this
we shall calculate first the number of photons crossing the sphere of radius @xmath6 ( from inside ) at an angle ( @xmath16 ) with respect to the normal , at time ( @xmath17 ) ; see fig .
the average number of photons , per one photon emitted , interacting at a distance ( @xmath18 ) from the source and scattered at an angle @xmath19 within @xmath20 , equals @xmath21 where @xmath22 is the mean scattering path length , @xmath23 is the probability that , once the scattering has occured , the scattering angle is @xmath19 within . to each pair of variables
@xmath24 there corresponds another pair @xmath25 related to the former by @xmath26 and @xmath27 where @xmath28 and @xmath29 is the speed of light .
+ the jacobian of the transformation gives @xmath30 thus , we obtain @xmath31 finally , the number of photons arriving at a unit surface at an angle @xmath32 ( all azimuths ) at time @xmath13 equals @xmath33 and @xmath34      for the rayleigh scattering we have @xmath35 expressing @xmath19 as a function of @xmath36 and @xmath37 ( eq .
2 ) we obtain @xmath38\ ] ] where @xmath39 .
thus , the flux @xmath40 of the first generation , defined above , equals @xmath41 where @xmath42 is the mean free path length for the rayleigh scattering . however , @xmath22 in the exponent depends on all the scattering processes active . in general
it is determined by @xmath43 for @xmath44 processes .
thus , if both molecular and aerosol scatterings are active but one wants to calculate the flux of photons scattered by the rayleigh process only , @xmath22 in the exponent equals @xmath45 but in the denominator one has @xmath42 .
+ from eq .
10 one can find the number of photons @xmath46 arriving per unit time at a unit surface within a given angle @xmath4 , as a function of time .
+ we have @xmath47 the integral can be found analytically , giving the result @xmath48\cdot\frac{y_2^{i+1}-y_1^{i+1}}{i+1}+ \nonumber \\ & & + \big [ ( \tau^2 + 1)a_0-a_{-1 } \big ] ln \frac{y_2}{y_1}-a_2 \frac{y_2
^ 3-y_1 ^ 3}{3 } \bigg)\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath49 , @xmath50 , @xmath51 , @xmath52 , @xmath53 , @xmath54 , @xmath55 .
+ we have also calculated analytically a similar distribution @xmath56 if the scattering was isotropic . i.e. if @xmath57 ( appendix a )
. + one can also find analytically the angular distribution @xmath58 of the arriving light ( integrated over time ) , but for small angles only ( appendix b ) .
the result is @xmath59 \bigg ) \nonumber\\ \,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath60 , @xmath61 , if there is no mie scattering and @xmath62 is the euler constant
. + the ratio of all photons arriving within a small angle @xmath36 to those not scattered @xmath63 , equals @xmath64 where terms @xmath65 have been neglected .      in the next paragraph
we shall consider the scattering of light emitted by showers developing in the real atmosphere , i.e. with the density depending on height .
in addition to the rayleigh process one has to take into account the mie scattering occurring on particles ( aerosols ) larger that the light wavelength .
the mie angular distribution is concentrated at rather small angles , in contrast to the rayleigh case . moreover , in the deeper parts of the atmosphere the mean free path length for the mie scattering may be comparable to that for rayleigh , so that it is necessary to calculate the distribution of the light scattered by the mie process only .
+ as before , we start with a simpler case - a uniform medium .
the angular distribution of light scattered on particles with sizes larger than the light wavelength depends on the distribution of the sizes and is not a well known function .
roberts @xcite adopts a function of the form @xmath66 here , however , we prefer an expression allowing us to perform some integrations analytically .
most crucial is to have the number of numerical integrations for the second generation as few as possible .
we shall see that to find @xmath67 for the rayleigh scattering ( section 2.3 ) there is only one integration ( over @xmath68 ) to be done numerically since the form of @xmath69 enables one to integrate analytically over @xmath70 and @xmath71 ( eq .
25 and 26 ) .
thus , we adopt the following form for the mie angular distribution : @xmath72 where @xmath73 , @xmath74 , @xmath75 . +
this function is normalised as follows @xmath76 it describes quite reasonably the distribution used by roberts .
+ from eq . 6 and 7
we have @xmath77}{2\pi \lambda_m r^2(\tau^2 - 2\tau\,cos\theta+1)}\ ] ] where @xmath78
if @xmath79 + and @xmath80 if @xmath81 + since @xmath82 we obtain @xmath83\ ] ] where @xmath84 , and @xmath85 is determined as before . in principle , it is possible to find analytically the number of photons @xmath86 arriving within an angle @xmath4 after time @xmath87 per unit time . however , each of the nine integrals @xmath88 contains many terms itself , so that an analytical dependence on @xmath4 and/or @xmath37 would be practically lost .
thus , we have found @xmath89 by integrating the flux ( eq .
21 ) numerically ( similarly to eq .
+ finally , the total flux of the first generation is the sum of the two fluxes arising from the two active mechanisms of the scattering @xmath90       and the detector is the surface of the sphere with radius @xmath6 . the picture shows the last scattering.,width=288 ]        these are the photons scattered exactly two times .
we shall consider first a general case when there are more than one scattering processes ( as rayleigh and mie ) .
let us call the process of the first scattering as @xmath91 and this of the second one as @xmath92 . both @xmath91 and @xmath92 can be either rayleigh or mie .
we denote their mean scattering path lengths by @xmath93 and @xmath94 , and the angular distribution functions of the scattering by @xmath95 and @xmath96 , correspondingly .
the light source flashes isotropically at the centre of a sphere with radius @xmath6 at time @xmath97 ( fig .
2 ) . as before we want to calculate the number of photons crossing the surface of the sphere from inside at a given angle @xmath36 , at time @xmath87 , per unit time .
+ let us consider the photons scattered for the second time at a distance @xmath98 from the source .
the number of photons incident on a small surface @xmath99 at an angle @xmath71 ( within @xmath100 ) at time @xmath101 and scattered within a spherical shell of thickness @xmath102 by an angle @xmath103 ( within @xmath104 ) equals @xmath105 where @xmath106 . as now both processes are active the meaning of @xmath22 in the factor @xmath107 in the expression for @xmath108 is the effective mean path length for both processes . + the direction of the scattered photons is at an angle @xmath19 to the radius of the sphere and @xmath109 , where @xmath110 is the azimuth of the photons scattered for the second time . for
any given direction @xmath111 before and @xmath112 after the second scattering , the scattering angle @xmath103 fulfils the relation @xmath113 .
the only function depending on the azimuth angle @xmath70 of the incident photons is @xmath114 . denoting @xmath115 and integrating ( 25 ) over @xmath71 we obtain for the number of photons incident on @xmath99 and scattered within @xmath102 into the solid angle @xmath20 the following expression @xmath116 where the function @xmath117 is defined by the integral in the l.h.s . of ( 26 ) .
+ the pair of fixed variables @xmath98 and @xmath19 defines another pair @xmath68 and @xmath36 , where @xmath68 is the photon path length after the second scattering .
the jacobian of the transformation gives the relation @xmath118 putting @xmath119 , the contribution of photons scattered for the second time at a distance @xmath120 to arrive at an angle @xmath32 at the sphere with radius @xmath6 equals @xmath121\cdot } \nonumber \\ & & \cdot 4\pi r^2\cdot 2\pi sin\theta\,|cos\theta| \ , \ , dx'd\theta dt\end{aligned}\ ] ] the factor @xmath122 multiplied by @xmath123 in the expression for @xmath108 gives @xmath124 , independent of @xmath68 .
integration over @xmath68 gives the total number of the above photons @xmath125 where @xmath126 .
+ the maximum value of @xmath68 results from fixing time @xmath87 .
we have that @xmath127 thus , the flux of the second generation @xmath128 equals @xmath129 and , integrated over @xmath36 for @xmath130 , gives @xmath131 . with the rayleigh and mie
processes active we must take into account all four cases @xmath132 or @xmath133 and @xmath134 or @xmath133 .
finally , the flux of the combined second generation photons is a sum of all specific fluxes @xmath135 some of the integrals defined in this section can be found as analytical functions ( appendix c ) .
it is of some importance when calculating higher generations ( see the next section ) .
any next generation of the scattered photons can be calculated in the same way as the second one has been found from the previous one ( the first ) . to calculate the flux @xmath136 of the @xmath137 generation , given @xmath138 we proceed as before when calculating the second generation from the first one ( eq .
the number of photons , incident on @xmath99 at an angle @xmath139 within @xmath140 at time @xmath141 and scattered along @xmath142 into @xmath143 equals : @xmath144 if there are two scattering processes , @xmath145 , then @xmath146 is the scattering probability by an angle @xmath147 by any process per unit distance per unit solid angle .
the rest of the derivation of @xmath148 is the same as in the previous section .
however , for each next generation the number of numerical integrations increases , unless values of @xmath149 are stored as a 3-dimension matrix .
thus , it is convenient to find analytical solutions of the integrals @xmath150 and/or @xmath151 , if possible .      fig .
3a shows the number of photons arriving at the detector within an angle @xmath152 per unit area per unit @xmath28 as a function of @xmath153 .
the upper curves refer to the first generation , the lower - to the second one .
we also compare here the time distributions obtained for the rayleigh with those for the isotropic scattering .
the distance detector- source equals to one scattering length ( @xmath154 ) .
+ first of all we notice that for short times ( @xmath155 ) the first generation dominates over the second one , and ( as we can guess ) over the higher ones .
it can be seen from the formulae for the isotropic scattering ( appendix a ) that the ratio @xmath156 for any given time should be proportional to @xmath157 , so that the importance of the second ( and the higher ) generation will be bigger for larger @xmath158 .
+ we can also see that the number of photons arriving within an opening angle @xmath4 reaches the dependence @xmath159 only at later times .
this reflects the fact that the initial angular distribution of light is steep and becomes almost flat at times @xmath160 or so . when comparing the rayleigh curves with the isotropic ones one can see that the latter are slightly flatter for shorter times , as might be expected but become parallel to the former for later times .
+ next , we consider a situation when there are two scattering processes , rayleigh and mie with quite different angular distributions @xmath161 ( as discussed before ) .
we adopt    @xmath162    and @xmath163 for simplicity .
+ the result for the first and the second generation depending on time is shown in fig .
3b . there is now more light at earlier times than in the previous case ( fig .
3a ) due to the strong mie scattering in the forward directions .
however , the flux of the first generation decreases about 3 times quicker over the considered time region .
although the ratio of the second to the first generation is practically the same at @xmath164 in both cases @xmath165 .
the importance of the second one is reached at later times when the mie scattering is present .
, shown by numbers , looking from the detector ( at @xmath166 , @xmath167 ) to a point on the line , for @xmath168 and @xmath169 at the ground and the scale heights @xmath170 and @xmath171.,height=326 ]    now we shall study the situation when a point light source flashes in a non - uniform medium , such as the atmosphere .
we assume that the atmosphere is composed of two sorts of matter , molecules and aerosols , each having its density decreasing with height exponentially with a different scale heights , @xmath172 - for molecules and @xmath173 for aerosols , and having the corresponding mean path lengths for scattering at the ground @xmath174 and @xmath175 .
it is not difficult to derive that the effective mean free path for a scattering for light travelling between two arbitrary points @xmath176 and @xmath177 equals @xmath178 where @xmath179 and @xmath180 are the heights of points @xmath176 and @xmath177 above the level , where the rayleigh and mie scattering path lengths are correspondingly @xmath174 and @xmath175 .
if the source ( point @xmath176 ) is at a distance @xmath6 from the detector ( point @xmath181 on the ground ) then the ratio @xmath158 , of @xmath6 to the mean free path length along @xmath182 equals @xmath183 \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] it can be seen that increasing the distance @xmath6 to infinity ( keeping @xmath184 constant ) the ratio @xmath158 reaches its maximum finite value @xmath185 this situation is illustrated in fig .
a vertical cross - section of the atmosphere is shown .
detector is at @xmath186 and lines represent constant values of @xmath158 corresponding to the straight path from the detector to the point on the line .
we have adopted the following values : @xmath187 , @xmath188 and @xmath189 .
these values describe approximately the atmospheric conditions at the pierre auger observatory @xcite .
+ from fig .
4 one can also deduce that relevant values of @xmath158 , if light sources are at distances @xmath190 ( as extensive air showers seen by auger ) are @xmath191 .
thus , this will be the region of our interest .    ,
detector at @xmath181 .
scattering takes place at @xmath177.,width=288 ]     after time @xmath192 .
the corresponding numbers are equal to @xmath193 .
light source is at @xmath176 , detector at @xmath181 .
, width=288 ]      as the medium is non - uniform , we can not use the idea of a sphere to be crossed by the scattered photons , as in section 2 .
now their flux will depend on the zenith angle @xmath184 of the source and on the azimuth angle @xmath110 around the direction towards it .
5 shows a trajectory @xmath194 of a first generation photon scattered at @xmath177 .
we want to calculate the angular distribution of the first generation as a function of time , for a fixed @xmath6 and @xmath184 , @xmath195 , crossing a unit area perpendicular to the direction towards the source .
+ we notice that for a fixed arrival direction of photons @xmath196 and time @xmath87 , the scattering point @xmath177 is uniquely determined .
to arrive at the detector at angles @xmath197 within @xmath198 after time @xmath13 , photons have to cross the surface @xmath199 ( shaded in the figure ) and be scattered along a path length @xmath142 by the angle @xmath19 determined by eq.2 .
the number of such photons equals @xmath200 where @xmath201 , @xmath202 , @xmath203 is the angle between the normal to the surface @xmath199 and the direction of the incident photons @xmath204 , @xmath205 is the solid angle determined by the unit area at @xmath181 and the scattering point @xmath177 ( @xmath206 ) .
there is no need to calculate @xmath203 because @xmath207 , so that it cancels out .
it can be shown that @xmath208 inserting this into ( 40 ) we obtain @xmath209 one can see that this formula is practically the same as ( 7 ) for the uniform medium , the only difference being in the scattering path lengths depending not only on distances but also on the geometry . +
the height of the scattering point @xmath177 necessary to calculate @xmath210 and @xmath211 equals : @xmath212 we calculate numerically the time distributions of light @xmath213 , arriving at the detector at angles smaller than @xmath4 for different zenith angles of the source .
the results , in the form of the ratio : @xmath214 are presented in figs . 7 , 8 and 9 , where @xmath215 are the distributions obtained in the previous section for a uniform medium . +     in real atmosphere to that in uniform medium @xmath215 as a function of time ( @xmath216 ) for the rayleigh scattering only for various values of zenith angle of the source .
solid lines - @xmath217 , dashed lines - @xmath218 , @xmath219.,height=288 ]    . ,
height=288 ]    .
each group of lines is for @xmath220 , and @xmath221 from bottom to top ( at @xmath164 ) .
, height=288 ]    to compare the light flux obtained for the real atmosphere with that for a uniform medium we adopt the same value of @xmath158 and the same distance from the source to detector for both cases . to understand the effect of a purely exponential atmosphere we start with considering only the rayleigh scattering ( fig .
7 ) , neglecting mie ( @xmath222 ) . understanding the behaviour of the curves in this figure is easier with the help of fig . 6 .
each ellipse is a cross - section of a rotational ellipsoid with the symmetry axis determined by point @xmath181 - the detector and point @xmath176 - the light source .
these are the focal points of all the ellipses .
photons arriving at the detector at @xmath181 after some fixed time @xmath223 ( in units of the distance pd ) must have been scattered on the surface of an ellipsoid with the eccentricity @xmath224 equal @xmath225 the ellipses refer to @xmath226 and @xmath227 keeping the right proportions .
the detector field of view cuts only a part of the ellipsoid surface where the photons registered after time @xmath228 must have been scattered .
we notice that all ratios @xmath229 in fig . 7 are smaller than 1 and decrease with time ( although those for @xmath217 are practically constant ) and ratios for @xmath218 are larger than those for @xmath217 .
all this becomes clear when inspecting fig .
6 and the corresponding scattering sites .
for example - the constancy of @xmath230 ) for times @xmath231 reflects the fact that the scattering takes place very close to point @xmath176 during all this time and starts to move away from it ( higher in the atmosphere ) only for larger times i.e @xmath232 . since the scattering path length in the uniform medium
is chosen equal to the effective path length in the atmosphere @xmath233 ( eq .
36 ) , we have that @xmath234 and the scattering probability at @xmath176 is smaller in the exponential atmosphere .
+ let us consider now a more realistic atmosphere with both processes , rayleigh and mie at work . fig .
8 shows time dependence of the ratio @xmath235 for @xmath217 and @xmath236 and zenith angles
let us take a closer look at the case @xmath217 and @xmath238 ( upper solid curve ) .
it may seem strange that the ratio @xmath229 increases since in the case of the rayleigh scattering only it decreases , although very slowly .
we have checked that a similar slow decrease takes place if the scattering is only mie .
the behaviour of the curves in this figure would be hard to understand without the presentation of the scattering sites in fig .
it can be seen that for @xmath193 smaller than a few @xmath239 the scattering sites are close to the source at @xmath176 .
thus , we may approximate the ratio @xmath229 as follows @xmath240 where @xmath241 are some effective angular distributions of photons scattered by rayleigh ( mie ) on the cut surface . as time increases , none of the @xmath242 changes much .
however , the typical scattering angles increase , what affects much more @xmath243 than @xmath244 , so that @xmath245 decreases . since @xmath246 the numerator decreases by a smaller factor than the denominator so that the ratio @xmath229 increases .
it can be seen from fig .
6 that for @xmath247 the scattering angles of the registered photons do not change much ( the denominator stays constant ) but now @xmath248 and @xmath249 have to be substituted by @xmath250 and @xmath251 , where @xmath177 is an effective scattering point with growing height . as @xmath252 , the ratio @xmath253 decreases and so does @xmath229 .
+ a different behaviour of @xmath254 can be explained also with the help of fig .
at first @xmath229 decreases ( the smaller @xmath184 - the stronger decrease ) because the detector field of view cuts out a growing part of the deep atmosphere where the scattering is strong in the real atmosphere . at @xmath255 @xmath229
starts to increase for the same reason as just described in the case @xmath217 .
it must finally decrease since the scattering takes places further and further behind the source , where @xmath256 and @xmath257 are growing in the real atmosphere .
9 we show @xmath258 for @xmath259 for several intermediate values of @xmath4 , and for two values @xmath260 and @xmath261 . note that changing @xmath262 must result in changing @xmath6 - the distance to the source .
this is the main reason why the curves for @xmath263 are lower than those for @xmath260 .
it can be seen from fig .
5 that for @xmath259 ( the scales on both axes are the same so in the figure the angles are correctly represented ) the distance @xmath6 is much shorter for @xmath260 than for @xmath263 , implying that the corresponding heights of the source differ considerably . inspecting fig . 6 we can estimate that for @xmath264 and @xmath217 the curves for @xmath263 should be down with respect to those for @xmath260 by a factor @xmath265 where @xmath266 and @xmath267 are positions of the source referring to @xmath260 and 1 respectively , with the meaning of all @xmath242 as defined before .
in our example @xmath268 , @xmath269 , @xmath270 , @xmath271 so that the above factor equals @xmath272 whereas the exact ratio from fig .
9 @xmath273 .       to the first generation
@xmath274 as a function of time ( @xmath216 ) from a flash ( at @xmath97 ) of a point source at zenith angle @xmath238 in the real atmosphere .
fluxes are integrated within @xmath217 ( solid lines ) and @xmath218 ( dashed lines ) .
three curves for each @xmath4 refer to @xmath275 ( from bottom to top ) .
dotted line refers to a uniform medium with rayleigh scattering only , for @xmath263 , @xmath217.,height=288 ]    we proceed like in the case of the first generation ( fig . 5 ) , but now point @xmath177 refers to the second scattering .
photons scattered only once arrive at the surface @xmath199 from all directions according to @xmath276 , where @xmath277 .
thus , the number of photons @xmath278 incident on @xmath199 and scattered for the second time towards the detector ( to arrive there within @xmath279 after time @xmath13 equals @xmath280 where the integration has to be done over full solid angle @xmath281 , @xmath282 is the path length for the second scattering to occur ( @xmath283 ) and @xmath284 is the angle of the second scattering . now
the pair of variables , @xmath36 and @xmath87 , does not determine uniquely the positions of the second scattering , since the times @xmath285 elapsed from photon emission to their arrival at @xmath177 ( or strictly speaking , at @xmath199 ) have some distribution .
however , @xmath285 can not be smaller than @xmath286 , thus @xmath287 . expressing @xmath288 as a function of @xmath36 , @xmath87 and @xmath6
only we obtain @xmath289 and the distribution of the second generation equals @xmath290    finally , the number of photons within an angle @xmath4 equals @xmath291 the above integrals have been calculated numerically .
+ the ratio @xmath292 as a function of @xmath293 in the real atmosphere , where the source is at @xmath259 at the distance @xmath294 corresponding to @xmath263 , within two opening angles of the detector @xmath217 and @xmath295 , is presented in fig . 10 . for comparison
we have also drawn there the same ratio for the uniform medium , for @xmath263 with rayleigh scattering active only ( following from fig .
3a for @xmath217 ) .
first we see that the contribution of the second generation increases with time as it should be expected .
next , it is considerably larger for the uniform medium than for the real atmosphere , which may not be so obvious at first sight .
in fact , at @xmath296 the curve for the uniform medium is @xmath297 times higher than that for the real atmosphere .
this factor equals ( for simplicity we neglect the operators @xmath298 ) @xmath299 the numerator @xmath300 as explained in the previous paragraph .
the denominator refers to photons scattered exactly two times . for small @xmath193
the scatterings must take place close to the source or along the field of view ( @xmath217 in our example ) .
thus we should have that @xmath301 our calculations show that @xmath302 for @xmath303 few @xmath239 so that @xmath304 , in agreement with the exact calculations .
so far we have been interested in the light signals from a flash of a stationary point source in a detector at a given distance , within a given field of view , as a function of time .
+ now , we shall consider a moving point emitting light on its way through the atmosphere .
this is a reasonable model of a distant cosmic ray shower exciting atmosphere what results in emitting isotropic fluorescence light .
moreover , the cherenkov light produced by @xmath305 of shower electrons @xcite , propagating alongside the particles will be scattered to the sides by the rayleigh and mie processes in an anisotropic way .
thus , in principle , a shower is a moving source , emitting light anisotropically .
our aim is to find an instantaneous optical image of the shower , produced by the scattered light at _ the same time _ as the shower image in the direct ( not scattered ) light .
+ the image obtained for a small integration time @xmath5 is a radially symmetric light spot , corresponding ( roughly ) to the emission distribution at the shower lateral cross - section @xcite .
it is produced mainly by the direct light .
but at the same time as the direct light , there arrive also photons produced by shower particles at an earlier stage of shower evolution and scattered in the atmosphere . as shower parameters follow straightforwardly from the amount of the direct light , it is important to calculate this effect and to take it into account when deriving the flux of the direct light .
+ let us assume that we know the geometry and the timing of the shower .
if the source is at point @xmath306 at time @xmath87 and emits @xmath307 photons per unit length , the telescope will record the following number of the direct photons at time @xmath308 , in the time bin @xmath5 :    @xmath309    where @xmath310 is the angle between the shower direction and the direction from point @xmath306 to the detector @xmath181 , @xmath311 is the effective mean free path for attenuation along the distance @xmath6 , @xmath91 is the diaphragm area determining the collection solid angle and @xmath312 is the angular distribution of the emitted light . + in the case of isotropic fluorescence light @xmath313 and
@xmath307 equals to the number of photons produced per unit length ( @xmath314 , per one electron ) . in the case of the scattered cherenkov photons , or those from a laser ,
@xmath315 for the rayleigh scattering ( or a corresponding distribution for mie ) and @xmath316 , where @xmath317 is the mean free path ( in length units ) for the process in consideration at point @xmath306 and @xmath318 is the number of cherenkov photons at the observed shower level propagating ( approximately ) in the direction of the shower .
the number of the scattered cherenkov photons to the fluorescence ones is typically @xmath319 , and a lot of the former are scattered by rayleigh , what is not far from isotropic .
thus , with a good approximation one can treat a shower as a moving isotropic light source .
this is what has been adopted in this paper : @xmath320 .
+ simultaneously with the direct light some photons produced earlier ( above point @xmath306 ) will also arrive at the telescope .
however , as we already mentioned , they must have been scattered on their way to the telescope .
our earlier calculations @xcite showed that if the distance to the shower is not very much longer than the mean scattering path , then the main contribution to the scattered light is due to the photons scattered only once ( the first generation ) . here , we will calculate the fraction of the total light consisting of the first and the second generations .
let us consider photons produced at point @xmath176 , along a shower path element @xmath282 ( fig .
the first generation photons arriving at the detector @xmath181 at the same time as the direct photons produced at @xmath306 must have been scattered on the surface of the rotational ellipsoid with the focal points at @xmath181 and @xmath176 , with the @xmath321 line being the rotational symmetry axis of the ellipsoid .
+ as we have already mentioned , the main interest of the shower experiments is to measure the direct light .
thus , we are interested in the light arriving from the direction of point @xmath306 and the region around it . in practice
( as it is in the pierre augere experiment ) the light signal arriving simultaneously with the direct light from point @xmath306 is measured within a certain angle @xmath4 around the line @xmath322 .
the cone with the opening angle @xmath4 cuts out on the surface of the ellipsoid a region of our interest ( the shaded surface ) .
it is at this part of the ellipsoid that the photons produced at @xmath176 have to be scattered to arrive simultaneously with the direct light produced at @xmath306 , within an angle smaller than @xmath4 with respect to the latter .
thus , to find the contribution of the first generation to the direct light one has to integrate the number of the scattered photons over the cutout surface , and then integrate the result over the distance @xmath323 ( the upper part of the shower ) .
+    , scattered once and arriving at detector @xmath181 within its field of view simultaneously with direct photons produced at @xmath306 .
@xmath324.,height=288 ]     and scattered on the shaded surface ( inside field of view of detector @xmath181 ) of the ellipsoid arrives at @xmath181 simultaneously with the direct light produced at @xmath306 . , width=288 ]    the proportions in fig .
11 have not been preserved .
for example the actual distance from point @xmath176 to the detector at @xmath181 is much longer than @xmath325 ( although in principle the integration over @xmath326 should go far up the shower , the distances contributing to the total scattered light are rather close to point @xmath306 )
. also the angle @xmath4 does not need to be larger than a few degrees , but on the figure it is much larger for the sake of clarity .
+ let us first find the contribution to the first generation from photons produced by the shower at point @xmath176 along a path length element @xmath282 , assuming that @xmath176 lies outside the detector field of view .
[ [ a - theta_pzeta - fig.-11 ] ] _ a ) _ @xmath327 _ ( fig .
11 ) _ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    @xmath328\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath329 , @xmath330 , @xmath331 , @xmath36 is the arrival angle ( with respect to the direction to the source at @xmath176 ) , and @xmath332 .
+ the azimuth angle @xmath110 is measured in the plane perpendicular to the axis @xmath182 and @xmath333 refer to points on the shower - detector plane ( fig .
11 plane ) .
the length @xmath334 can be found from the triangle @xmath335 : @xmath336 and @xmath337 .
[ [ b - theta_pzeta ] ] _ b ) _ @xmath338 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    ( fig .
+ it is clear from the figure that now the integration limits of @xmath36 and @xmath110 are different so that one has to add to the integral in case a ) the following term    @xmath339\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    and the lower limit of @xmath36 in the term a ) changes sign , so that @xmath340 . to find the total flux of the first generation arriving at the same time as the direct light from point @xmath306 one has to integrate over @xmath326 the contribution from case b ) from 0 to @xmath341 , ( where @xmath342 ) , and add to it the contribution from a ) integrated from @xmath343 to @xmath344 .
( it turns out that contribution from points with @xmath345 are negligible ) .
+ if there are two scattering processes the first generation means the sum of the number of photons scattered by rayleigh and those by mie and then @xmath346 , and in the attenuation exponent @xmath347 and @xmath348 are the effective mean free paths for both processes .      by making some approximations
we have found an analytical solution of the shower image in the first generation light scattered by the rayleigh process .
+ we shall treat separately light produced within the detector field of view @xmath350 and that outside it , @xmath351 , starting with the former ( fig .
as the scattering points lie close to point @xmath306 we assume that @xmath352 .
for the same reason we assume that the exponential factor describing light attenuation equals @xmath353 . our main assumption , however , consists in integrating over the symmetric ( with respect to axis @xmath182 ) part of the ellipsoid so that we could solve the integrals over @xmath354 and finally @xmath326 .
expressing scattering angle @xmath19 as a function of @xmath36 and @xmath355 ( eq .
2 ) we obtain that the contribution from a shower path element @xmath282 equals @xmath356 where @xmath357 , @xmath358 .
+ we adopt @xmath359 being the mean of the limiting values of @xmath36 in the exact integration .
+ in the air shower experiments it is the direct light which should be measured so that the viewing angle @xmath4 is small ( a few degrees ) and so are angles @xmath36 .
this leads to @xmath360 .
taking all this into account the result of the integration over @xmath36 is    @xmath361\frac{dl}{r'^2}\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath362 . from geometrical considerations
it can be derived that @xmath363d\tau'\simeq } \\ & & \simeq\frac{d\tau'}{r(1-cos\delta ) } = \frac{\zeta dx}{r(1-cos\delta ) } \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have dropped the second term @xmath364 .
+ to obtain @xmath365 it remains to integrate ( 59 ) over @xmath366 ( including ( 60 ) from @xmath367 to @xmath368 , corresponding to point @xmath176 lying on the edge of the viewing cone ( @xmath369 ) .
again , assuming that @xmath370 , it can be derived that @xmath371 ( for @xmath372 ) .
the result of the integration is the following @xmath373 where @xmath374 .
+     must be scattered for the second time ( point @xmath375 ) within detector @xmath181 field of view .
first scattering ( @xmath267 ) must occur on the surface of the ellipsoid with focal points at @xmath176 and @xmath375 .
direct light from @xmath306 arrives at @xmath181 at the same time : @xmath376.,height=288 ]    to calculate the contribution from the outer part of the shower i.e. outside the field of view we keep the previous approximate assumptions .
however , since now the scattering surface looks differently ( fig . 11 ) we make another simplifications .
we assume that all scattering angles equal @xmath310 so that @xmath377
. next , as @xmath4 is small we assume that all @xmath378 .
integration over @xmath379 , the solid angle of the field of view , is then reduced to multiplying the integrand for @xmath378 by @xmath380 .
thus we have @xmath381 it can be derived that the denominator in the above expression equals @xmath382 assuming needs to allow for light attenuation along @xmath326 in the integration over @xmath326 .
the correction to @xmath383 is a few percent , being negligible for the total @xmath384 . ]
that @xmath385 , we obtain @xmath386 since @xmath387 we have @xmath388 and @xmath389 expressing the number of photons @xmath390 as the ratio to that of the direct light ( eq . 54 for @xmath391 ) we finally obtain @xmath392\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath374 ( in radians ) .
terms @xmath393 and of higher order have been neglected .
we can see that , with the approximations adopted , the ratio @xmath394 is proportional to @xmath395 reflecting the fact ( as we shall see below ) that most scatterings take place close to point @xmath306 since @xmath396 is proportional to the shower path segment seen by the detector .
for @xmath397 and the dependence on @xmath310 separates from that on other parameters .
it becomes also obvious that it must be different for different angular distributions @xmath161 , of photons at scattering .
as @xmath398 is quite different from @xmath399 which is peaked in forward directions , we expect another dependence on @xmath310 for the latter .
+ while deriving the analytical formula ( 66 ) we have also assumed that the length of the shower segment cut out by the detector field of view is small when compared to the distance @xmath6 .
for @xmath370 it is fulfilled for almost all @xmath310 , apart from the case when @xmath310 is close to 0 or @xmath400 .
we have calculated analytically the ratio @xmath394 for @xmath401 for @xmath402 . however , as the derivation is lengthy and ( as it will be seen later ) agrees with the exact , numerical results only at @xmath403 , we present here only the final result : @xmath404 these values are marked as stars ( for @xmath403 ) in fig .
+            we have not tried to calculate @xmath405 because the function @xmath399 is not well known , depending on the sizes of the aerosol particles and , anyway , our analytical approach is approximate .
thus , it seems better to calculate it exactly numerically and , being led by our analytical solutions for rayleigh , find an appropriate parametrisation of the numerical results .
the ratio of the first generation to the direct light arriving simultaneously is obtained by numerical integration of point contributions over @xmath326 ( shower track above point @xmath306 ) and dividing the result by @xmath408 .
14 shows the ratio for the rayleigh a ) and mie b ) scattering as a function of @xmath409 for @xmath410 and @xmath411 and for several different distances @xmath6 .
it can be seen that for the rayleigh case the ratio is proportional to @xmath412 and @xmath4 , as it has been derived analytically .
for mie the dependence follows a power law , with the indices depending slightly on @xmath4 .
however , in each case there is practically no dependence on the distance @xmath6 itself .
these results are for @xmath413 . + the dependence on @xmath310 is shown in fig .
15a , b for @xmath414 1 and @xmath415 and @xmath411 .
one can see the difference of the behaviour of this dependence between rayleigh and mie . in the figure a comparison of our analytical calculations with the exact ones
is also shown .
the biggest difference reaches some @xmath416 at large @xmath310 .
there is no normalisation there .
we find this agreement quite satisfactory .
+ nevertheless , as the agreement is not perfect we have parametrised the exact numerical results . for the rayleigh scattering the ratio @xmath417
can be expressed as @xmath418 where @xmath419 , @xmath4 is in degrees , and @xmath420 for mie the factorisation is not as complete as for rayleigh , and our fit to the numerical results is the following : @xmath421 @xmath422 these fits are also shown in fig .
14 and 15 .
it is seen that they do not deviate from the exact values by more than a few percent .
+ the second generation has been calculated numerically .
13 should be helpful for understanding the calculation .
the thin solid line shows a path of a photon produced at @xmath176 , scattered at points @xmath267 and @xmath375 and arriving at @xmath181 .
the point @xmath375 of the second scattering must lie somewhere inside the viewing cone .
fixing it at a distance @xmath423 from the detector corresponds to fixing the value of the remaining photon path length @xmath424 .
we have that    @xmath425    where @xmath426 and @xmath427 . + in order to assure that the photons scattered twice arrive at @xmath181 at the same time as the direct light emitted at @xmath306 , point @xmath267 must lie anywhere on the surface of the ellipsoid with focal points at @xmath176 and @xmath375 .
thus , to calculate the number of photons produced at @xmath176 and scattered twice one has to integrate the contributions like in ( 49 ) over the position of the first scattering ( the whole surface of the ellipsoid ) and then integrate the result over the volume of the viewing cone . finally , the integration has to be performed over the distance @xmath428 .
+        the ratio @xmath407 , including rayleigh and mie scatterings as a function of @xmath429 for @xmath430 and as a function of @xmath310 for @xmath431 is presented in fig
various point signs refer to different distances @xmath6 . as in the case of the first generation
the ratios depend on @xmath432 rather than @xmath6 itself . however , now they are proportional to the second power of it .
we have parametrise the obtained numerical results as follows @xmath433
as we see the numbers of the scattered photons , @xmath435 and @xmath436 , depend on the angle @xmath4 within which they arrive at the detector .
this angle has to be chosen in such a way as to encompass the total direct signal from the shower .
it is obvious that for closer showers @xmath4 has to be larger and for those more distant - smaller , so that @xmath396 - meaning the lateral spread of the direct light - should remain constant .
our approximations show that in this case ( @xmath437 ) @xmath438 depends only on height ( by @xmath317 ) and @xmath310 .
the power indices in the dependence of @xmath406 on @xmath6 and @xmath4 are close to @xmath261 , whereas @xmath439 ( roughly ) , so that their dependence on the distance @xmath6 itself should be weak .
17 presents the contributions of the individual components of the scattered light as a function of height , for @xmath440 , @xmath430 and two ( quite different ) values of @xmath6 : 12 and 36 @xmath441 .
the dependence of the sum @xmath434 on @xmath6 is very weak , indeed , the more so as the ratios @xmath442 and @xmath407 change in opposite directions .
the chosen value @xmath443 corresponds to a shower lateral radius of @xmath444 , equal to @xmath445 ( molire radii ) .
this may seem too large to contain the total fluorescence signal .
however , deep in the atmosphere it is the shower cherenkov light what determines its lateral dimensions and it goes up to @xmath446 @xcite .
+ as the typical viewing angles @xmath310 are not far from @xmath447 one can draw a conclusion that the maximum contribution of the ms light is @xmath448 for @xmath449 and the adopted atmospheric parameters
.      , dashed lines @xmath452 .
curves denoted by `` rayleigh '' and `` mie '' refer to the first generation , by `` n2 '' - to the second one . if a constant lateral dimension is chosen ( @xmath453 , @xmath430 ) the ratios do not ( practically ) depend on shower distance @xmath6 .
, height=288 ]    let us estimate how not allowing for the ms effect would affect a reconstructed value of a shower primary energy @xmath450 .
the total signal would then be treated as the direct light , therefore the primary energy would be overestimated . to estimate how much it would be let us consider a typical ( for auger ) shower with @xmath454 ev , falling to the ground 25@xmath441 away from the light detector , at @xmath455 and azimuthal angle @xmath456 ( angle between the direction from the detector to the shower core and the projection of the shower axis on the ground ) . if the primary is a proton the mean depth of its maximum equals @xmath457 , corresponding to the height above auger level ( @xmath458 ) @xmath459 . from fig .
17 we see that the contribution of the scattered light is @xmath460 if @xmath443 , what corresponds to @xmath461 .
however , in the auger telescopes the individual pixel has a diameter of @xmath462 , so that it would be necessary to choose also the neighbouring pixels around the one with the stronger signal to collect the total direct light .
thus , we choose @xmath463 . within this angle
the ms light grows to @xmath464 , overestimating the number of particles at @xmath451 by this value . for shower parts near the ground , where shower age equals 1.25
, this number grows to @xmath465 . to find the shower primary energy @xmath450 ( by integrating the energy deposit over depth @xmath466 ) it is necessary to extrapolate the shower for larger ages , so that the overestimation from these parts would be even larger .
we estimate that not allowing for the ms effect would increase the reconstructed @xmath450 by @xmath0 .
+ not allowing for the ms light would also lead to an overestimation of the depth of the shower maximum @xmath451 . fitting a new cascade curve to that from the previous example with the increased values according to the ms contribution
, we obtain that the overestimation equals @xmath467 . with the difference between the depths of an average proton and iron showers being @xmath468 ,
this is not a negligible number for drawing conclusions about the mass composition of the highest energy cosmic rays .      at first sight
it may seem odd that it is only the first two generations that contribute to the scattered light .
one might expect that the main contribution should come from the generation with the number closest to the value @xmath469 , according to the poisson distribution ( although we have shown that the first two generations scale with @xmath470 rather than with @xmath469 ) . for @xmath471 and @xmath472 and
a shower close to the ground we have @xmath473 .
thus , if the distance @xmath474 then @xmath475 , so should one expect the third and the fourth generations to contribute even more than the first one ?
the answer is no , since the scattered photons should fall into the detector field of view , so that it is not the path length of a scattering _ by any angle _
( what @xmath311 means ) that counts but by some _ particular values _ of it .
this decreases the probability of such a scattering and can be viewed as an increase of the ( actually ) effective mean free path length @xmath476 for the process _ we are interested in _ ( i.e. photons arriving at the detector ) .
one could estimate its value from the ratio @xmath477 or @xmath478 adopting for this aim a poisson distribution of the number of contributing generations .
the two obtained values differ typically by 30 - 60@xmath479 , so that an estimation of the share of the remaining generations on the basis of this uncertain @xmath476 is uncertain as well . however , let us take an example : @xmath480 , elevation angle @xmath481 , @xmath482 , what are typical conditions for registered showers in the auger observatory .
the two values of the mean number of ( effective ) scatterings are @xmath483 ( from @xmath477 ) and @xmath484 ( from @xmath478 ) . assuming the larger one , one gets @xmath485 for a fraction of the third and higher generations . + however , as our earlier work for a uniform medium @xciteb ) shows , where the third generation was calculated , its share was two times smaller than that deduced from the poisson model and the ratios @xmath477 and @xmath478 , so that this estimation may be too high .
thus , we estimate that the contribution of the higher number generations should be small , at least for the conditions of auger .
integrated within angle @xmath4 , for shower 24 @xmath441 away from the detector , at elevation angle @xmath221 .
our results ( first and second generation ) are represented by thick solid lines for @xmath486 and thin solid lines - for @xmath487 and @xmath488 ( second generation ) .
parametrisation from monte - carlo works : roberts - dashed line and pkala et al - dotted line.,height=288 ]    the problem of the influence of the scattered light on the shower image in the direct light was first undertaken by roberts @xcite .
he treated it by monte - carlo simulations of tracks of individual photons emitted by vertical showers . such shower
( although , strictly speaking , non - existing ) enabled the author to introduce a detector in a form of a ring around the shower as its symmetry axis , increasing dramatically the number of registered photons .
although the author appreciate that the singly scattered photons dominated the total ms signal , his simulations went to more than five scatters , including both rayleigh and mie .
he obtained a parametrisation of the ratio of the ms signal to the total signal ( ms + direct ) in the form @xmath489 where @xmath490 is the total optical depth ( molecular and aerosol ) between the detector and the light source , @xmath19 - total scattering coefficient ( in @xmath491 ) at the source . in our terms
@xmath492 , @xmath493 , where @xmath311 is determined by formula ( 36 ) and @xmath317 depends only on the height in the stable atmosphere , so that ( 74 ) would mean the following @xmath494 this parametrisation differs from those obtained in the present work although not very much .
it has a weaker dependence on the angle @xmath4 , which in our case is as ( about ) @xmath495 .
the smaller power index at @xmath496 ( @xmath497 in our case ) is to some extent compensated by the term @xmath498 . +
another work , dealing with the present problem was that of pkala et al @xcite .
the calculation method was monte - carlo as well .
this paper did consider inclined showers so that the cylindrical symmetry , as in the previous case did not apply . instead large `` packages '' of photons were assumed to behave in the same way , according to simulated points and directions of their scattering .
after extensive simulations the authors arrived at a parametrisation of the ratio @xmath133 of the ms signal to the direct one as follows @xmath499 with @xmath500 .
for a one component exponential atmosphere with the scale height @xmath501 we would have @xmath502 indeed , it is not difficult to check that an effective scale height of the two - component atmosphere used by the authors for @xmath503 is about @xmath504 what approximately equals @xmath501 . thus , their parametrisation would be as @xmath505 it is not far from our derivation for the first generation , where the term @xmath506 does not appear .
a comparison of the ratio of the total ms signal to the direct one as a function of @xmath4 , obtained in this study with that of roberts and pkala et al is presented in fig .
the agreement is quite good for @xmath507 but for larger @xmath4 the other authors seem to have underestimated a little the effect .
previous studies of the influence of the scattering of photons on their way from the shower to the detector on the shower image used monte - carlo simulations .
the effect has been called `` the multiple scattering '' since it was not clear how many times the photons arriving simultaneously with the direct light actually scatter .
although roberts @xcite appreciated the importance of photons scattered one time only he went on with simulating till several scatterings .
+ the main idea of this study was to divide the scattered light into separate generations : the first generation being photons scattered exactly one time , the second one two times , and so on .
this enabled us to find analytically the angular distributions of photons as a function of time for the first generation which turned out to be the most important one .
we also showed that any next generation can be found by some numerical integrations of the previous one .
these results were obtained for a point source in a uniform medium as well as in the actual atmosphere ( although more numerical integrations were needed in the latter case ) . by considering
separately the first generation it was easy to understand the differences between the two cases .
the ratio of the second to the first generation is very small for small times after the light emission which will turn out to be relevant when considering the scattered light from extensive air showers what is a final aim of this study .
+ in particular , this aim was to calculate the angular distributions of scattered photons arriving simultaneously with the direct ( not scattered ) light emitted by an extensive air shower and find relevant parameters determining these distributions .
the solutions for a point source were useful here since a shower could be treated as a series of consecutive ( in space and time ) point sources . for the first and the second generations ( the most important ) we have explained where actually the scattering points took place , so that we were able to integrate over all of them .
+ we have derived an analytical expression ( although approximate ) for the angular distribution of the first generation photons , scattered by the rayleigh process , fitting quite well the exact numerical distributions .
the analytical solutions have led us to a proper choice of the independent variables for a final parametrisation of the numerical results .
for example the number of photons in the n - th generation turns out to be proportional to @xmath508 , at least for @xmath509 ( although for mie with some correction ) . knowing the positions of the scatterings we were able to show that there should be a dependence on the viewing angle @xmath310 , not taken into account in the considerations of the previous authors .
moreover , this dependence should be different for the rayleigh and the mie scatterings .
thus , we parametrised the first generation separately for these two processes .
concerning the second generation we combined all four possibilities of the two scatterings ( rr , rm , mr and mm ) to give just one parametrisation since its contribution was rather small .
+ from our parametrisation it follows that for @xmath510 ( corresponding to a constant observed lateral dimension of a shower ) the contribution of the ms component to the direct light depends practically only on the height of the observed shower element and on the viewing angle ( the latter dependence being rather mild ) .
a typical overestimation of the primary shower energy ( if the ms effect was ignored ) would be @xmath0 and of the depth of shower maximum @xmath467 .
our analytical and numerical approach gives similar results as the previous monte - carlo work of other authors , although the parametrisation obtained in this paper is different . only for larger opening angles @xmath511
the prediction of the ms contribution obtained here is a bit larger , what would have some implications for a reconstruction of very close showers .
+ summarising we conclude that the ms effect is not to be neglected while reconstructing parameters of the extensive air showers .
to be properly allowed for a good knowledge of the atmospheric conditions is necessary @xcite for determining values of @xmath317 , as the shower traverses the atmosphere .
+    [ [ acknowledgements ] ] acknowledgements + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    this work has been financially supported by polish ministry of science and higher education , grant no n n202 200239 .
it was stimulated by our participation in the pierre auger collaboration .
we thank the collaboration for fruitful discussions .    00 t. abu - zayyad et .
al , astroparticle physics 12 ( 1999 ) 121 - 134 the pierre auger collaboration : j. abraham et al , nucl .
instrum . meth . a 620 ( 2010 )
227 - 251 t. nonaka et al , nuclear physics b proc .
suppl . 190
( 2009 ) 26 - 31 the macfly collaboration : p. colin et al , astroparticle physics 30 ( 2009 ) 312 - 317 m. giller et al , j. phys .
( 2004 ) 97 - 105 m. giller et al , j. phys .
g : nucl . part .
( 2005 ) 947 - 958 f. nerling at al , astroparticle physics 24 ( 2006 ) 421 m. giller and g. wieczorek , astroparticle physics 31 ( 2009 ) 212 - 219 m. d. roberts , j. phys .
g : nucl . part .
( 2005 ) 1291 - 1301 a ) m. giller and a. miakowski , ( 2005 ) proceedings of the 29th int . cosmic ray conference , pune , india + b ) m. giller and a. miakowski , ( 2007 ) proceedings of the 30th int . cosmic ray conference , merida , mexico + c ) m. giller and a. miakowski , ( 2011 ) proceedings of the 32nd int .
cosmic ray conference , beijing , china    j. pkala et al , nucl .
a605 ( 2009 ) 388 - 398 p. sommers , astroparticle physics 3 ( 1995 ) 349 - 360 the pierre auger collaboration : j. abraham et al , astroparticle physics 33 ( 2010 ) 108 - 129
it may be of some value to know how much the fluxes @xmath512 for the rayleigh scattering differ from those when the scattering function @xmath513 , so when the scattering is isotropic . to calculate it we proceed as in section 2 putting @xmath514 in eq .
we obtain @xmath515 and @xmath516 \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] the second generation can be obtained by proceeding as in section 2.2 , giving the result @xmath517 where @xmath518 ; @xmath519 and @xmath520 . to find @xmath521
one must integrate the flux over @xmath36 numerically .
how does the ratio of the two generations depend on the distance ?
we can represent the first generation ( a.2 ) in the form @xmath522 where @xmath523 depends on @xmath87 and @xmath4 only .
+ the flux of the second generation equals @xmath524 where @xmath525 , @xmath526 , @xmath527 . + we see that the integral depends on @xmath37 and @xmath36 only so that @xmath528 thus @xmath529 so that for a given time the ratio is proportional to the distance @xmath6 measured in units of @xmath22 .
it can be verified that this relation holds for any scattering process in a uniform medium , not only for isotropy .
the formula for the angular distribution of the first generation integrated over time , can be rewritten in the following form @xmath531f(\beta+\theta)d\beta \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath532 is the angular distribution of the scattering angle @xmath19 , normalised to @xmath261 when integrated over the full solid angle .
+ for the rayleigh scattering we obtain @xmath533\big[1+cos^2(\beta+\theta)\big ] d\beta \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] to find the above integral for @xmath60 we divide the integration region into two parts : @xmath534= } \nonumber \\ & & = c(i_1+i_2)\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath535 . + choosing @xmath536 it will be possible to find analytically the integrals @xmath537 and @xmath538 .
each of them is a sum of the two integrals : @xmath539d\beta+ \\
\displaystyle + \int_{\beta_{i1}}^{\beta_{i2 } } exp\big[-k\frac{sin\beta+sin\theta}{sin(\beta+\theta)}\big]cos^2(\beta+\theta)d\beta=\\ \displaystyle = i_{i1}+i_{i2 } \end{array}\ ] ] for @xmath540 and @xmath541 , @xmath542 , @xmath543 .
+ using @xmath60 we have @xmath544d\beta\simeq \nonumber \\ & \simeq & \int_0^{\pi-\theta-\epsilon } exp\big[-k(1+\frac{\theta}{sin\beta}-\theta\ , ctg\beta)\big]d\beta = \nonumber \\ & = & e^{-k}\int_0^{\pi-\theta-\epsilon } exp\big(-k\,\theta \,tg\frac{\beta}{2}\big)d\beta\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have neglected all terms @xmath545 .
note that in the integration region @xmath546 so that our approximation @xmath547 is justified .
for the same reason the exponential index @xmath548 so that @xmath549\simeq \nonumber \\ & & \simeq   e^{-k}(\pi-\theta-\epsilon+2k\theta\,ln\frac{\epsilon}{2 } ) \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] the integral @xmath550 can be found easily : @xmath551\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] thus @xmath552\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] when calculating @xmath538 we introduce an angle @xmath553 to take advantage of @xmath554 being small in the integration region of @xmath538 .
+ we have @xmath555 } { \chi(1-\frac{\chi^2}{6 } ) }    \big\}d\chi\simeq \nonumber \\ & \simeq & e^{-k}\int_0^{\epsilon}exp\bigg(-\frac{2k\theta}{x}\bigg)dx = e^{-k}2k\theta\int_{\frac{2k\theta}{\epsilon}}^{\infty}\frac{e^{-y}dy}{y^2 } \nonumber \\ & \simeq & e^{-k}\big[2k\theta\big(c_{eu}-ln\frac{\epsilon}{2}+ln\,k\theta -1\big)+\epsilon\big]\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath556 is the euler constant .
+ the last integral , @xmath557 , equals @xmath558\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] the second integral is of the order of @xmath559 , so that @xmath560 and @xmath561 + 2\epsilon\big\}\nonumber \\ \,\end{aligned}\ ] ] thus @xmath562\big\}\nonumber \\ \,\end{aligned}\ ] ] and finally @xmath563\nonumber \\ \,\end{aligned}\ ] ] as should be expected , the terms depending on @xmath193 have cancelled in the final result . + the ratio of the scattered light arriving within a certain angle @xmath4 to the point source direction to that non - scattered ( direct ) equals @xmath564\big\}\nonumber\\ \,\end{aligned}\ ] ]
here we present results of some analytical integrations of functions @xmath565 and @xmath566 defined in section 2.2 . for the rayleigh scattering we have @xmath567 since @xmath568 , @xmath569 ( eq .
25 ) can be easily found analytically @xmath570 \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] the calculation of a corresponding function @xmath571 for the mie scattering is a little more complicated .
the adopted here form of @xmath572 has been chosen in such a way as to make the integration over @xmath70 analytically possible .
we have ( eq .
16 ) @xmath573 the angle of the second scattering @xmath103 changes within limits @xmath574 where @xmath575 since @xmath576 separates the two regions of @xmath103 where @xmath572 has different shapes , the solution of ( c.3 ) depends on the positions of @xmath577 on the @xmath103 axis with respect to the point @xmath576 .
there are three cases to be considered +      then , of course , @xmath579 as well and the function @xmath580 applies to the whole region of @xmath70 ( @xmath581 ) .
thus we have @xmath582 \nonumber \\ & = & 2\big[a_1\sum_{k=0}^8c_k\int_0^{\pi } cos^k\phi'\,d\phi'+\pi b\big]\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath583 , @xmath584 and @xmath585 .
+ for odd @xmath158 the integrals in ( c.5 ) vanish . for
even @xmath586 we have @xmath587 hence @xmath588\ ] ]      this case is a bit more complicated since there are both parts @xmath590 and @xmath591 involved . the value @xmath592 corresponding to @xmath576 equals @xmath593 .
+ we have @xmath594=   \nonumber\\ & = & 2\sum_{k=0}^8c_k\big[a_1\int_0^{\phi'_*}cos^k\phi'd\phi'+\nonumber \\ & + & a_2\int_{\phi'_*}^{\pi}cos^k\phi'd\phi'\big]+2\pi b\end{aligned}\ ] ] solving the integrals we finally obtain @xmath595+\nonumber \\ & & + \frac{a_2}{2^{2n}}{2n \choose n}\pi\big\ } \sum_{n=0}^3 c_{2n+1}(a_1-a_2)g'_n(\phi'_*)+b\pi\bigg]\nonumber\\ & & \quad\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath596}{2n-2i }   \\ g'_n(\phi ' _ * ) & = & \frac{1}{2^{2n}}\sum_{i=0}^{n}{2n+1 \choose i}\frac{sin[(2n-2i+1)\phi'_*]}{2n-2i+1}\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]      then , of course @xmath597 as well and for all values of @xmath70 we have that @xmath598 , so that @xmath599 .
the calculation of @xmath600 is the same as in case a ) but @xmath601 .
thus @xmath602\ ] ] the next integration over @xmath71 ( eq .
26 ) defining @xmath117 can be found analytically only , @xmath603 and @xmath604 the result could also be found analytically but due to the high power of @xmath605 ( index = 8) there would be very many terms making such an effort worthless . ] for @xmath606 .
the calculation is lengthily so that we will present here only the final result for the flux of the second generation @xmath607 where    @xmath608\cdot\big(\sum^2_{i=-2 \atop i\neq 0 } a_i\frac{x_2^i - x_1^i}{i}+\nonumber \\ & + & a_0\ , ln\frac{x_2}{x_1}+ \frac{b}{4\tau'^2}\bigg[\sum_{i=1}^4 a_{i-2}\cdot\frac{x_2^i - x_1^i}{i}+a_{-2}ln\frac{x_2}{x_1}+\nonumber\\ & -&2(\tau'^2 + 1)\cdot   \big(\sum^3_{i=-1 \atop i \neq 0}a_{i-1}\frac{x_2^i - x_1^i}{i}+a_{-1}ln\frac{x_2}{x_1 }   \big ) \bigg]\bigg\ } \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]