nuclear resonances and excited states can be very complicated many - body structures with a number of different decay modes . the simplest decay , perhaps beside @xmath2-emission , is breakup into two particles as exemplified by nucleon- and @xmath3-emission , and binary fission @xcite .
the deceivingly simple breakup into three particles is much less studied and far from understood .
this is in contrast to bound three - body cluster structures where a variety of techniques are available and able to predict the properties , even of the exotic quantum halo states @xcite .
the three - body continuum properties are less established although rather well studied over many years @xcite .
experimental information is obtained by measuring the properties of the particles in the final state .
the experimental techniques are now advanced to a level where accurate and kinematically complete measurements are available on a number of different systems @xcite , and many more are expected to follow .
reliable theoretical descriptions are needed to interpret existing data , to predict unknown decay results and to help in the design of new interesting experiments .
both the structure of the initial state and the decay mechanism are essential and both must therefore be properly described simultaneously . clearly for a genuine many - body state
only the intermediate and large - distance structure is decisive .
the small distance behavior is artificial and only serving to provide the proper continuous boundary conditions .    for two - body decay , like @xmath3-emission
, the relative potential determines all properties . in the example of @xmath3-emission ,
the two - body potential can be divided into short- , intermediate- and long - distance .
the short - distance part is artificially adjusted to allow the correct resonance energy and the barrier region then determines the width . at large distances where the potential has vanished the energy of the @xmath3-particle
is determined by energy conservation . in two - body decay
the energy distribution then only reflects the width of the initial resonance .
these properties are very different for decays with more than two particles in the final state .    for three - body bound states and resonances `` large distance ''
is less well defined .
however , the corresponding structure can efficiently be computed by use of the hyperspherical adiabatic expansion method @xcite .
the wave functions are in this technique expanded on basis states related to adiabatic potentials calculated as functions of the hyperradius @xmath4
. then @xmath4 provides a measure of distances for the three - body problem .
the wave function is usually dominated by the component related to the lowest adiabatic potential . the small - distance part
( @xmath4 small ) of both wave function and potential are only directly meaningful if the particles appearing in the final state form a genuine three - body system .
otherwise this part of the effective potential is constructed to produce the correct resonance energy and provide an appropriate boundary condition for the wave function . at intermediate distances
the potential has a barrier which is decisive for the width of the resonance . at large distances the resonance wave function
is characterized by outgoing waves which contain information about distributions of relative energies and possibly other quantities like spin distributions .    for three - body decay
the two most obvious decay mechanisms , direct and sequential , were recently studied in a schematic model in @xcite .
another schematic model is also formulated in the limit where only the coulomb interaction is important at intermediate and large distances @xcite .
the detailed resonance structure at small and intermediate distances were investigated in realistic models in @xcite .
the large - distance properties are much more difficult to calculate accurately , because either the correct continuum three - body coulomb wave functions are unknown , or the short - range potentials may produce an almost long - range ( inverse square ) effective potential at large distance . in the latter case
the origin is precisely as for the efimov effect @xcite .
the corresponding potential is most likely the lowest at large distance but not necessarily also at small distances .
thus , the resonance wave function may change structure from small to large distance .
the relative energy distribution arises as the result appearing at large distance .
the numerical computations are then sometimes rather tricky .
the purpose of the present paper is to establish a general method to compute relative energy distributions after decay into three particles .
the short- and intermediate - distance resonance structure from @xcite is a good starting point but we need in addition to calculate the asymptotic behavior in momentum space .
the asymptotics vary for the different decay mechanisms , and the related numerical treatment is difficult when all the possibilities simultaneously have to be accounted for .
we assume that formation and decay of the resonances are independent processes .
the resonance could be formed by beta - decay from a neighbouring nucleus , or a window with the relevant energies can be selected in an experimental setup where contributions from other processes also are eliminated . in section 2
we develop the theoretical formalism for resonance decay .
this was previously sketched by use of the saddle point approximation @xcite , while we here shall instead use the zeldovich regularization of the divergent fourier integrals @xcite . in section 3
we discuss some of the important features arising from calculation of resonance wave functions by use of the hyperspherical adiabatic expansion method combined with the complex scaling method . in section 4
we illustrate in details with realistic computations for the @xmath0-resonance in @xmath1he .
finally , section 5 contains a brief summary and the conclusions .
we assume that the system of particles has been generated in a meta - stable quantum state ( a resonance ) that is a generalized eigen - state of the hamiltonian with complex energy .
this is a decaying state  it describes a constant flux of particles towards infinity .
suppose we have a system of detectors at large distances which measure the momenta of the particles emerging from this decaying state .
clearly these detectors will measure the probability distribution of particle momenta in the meta - stable state , that is the absolute square of the momentum space wave - function .
the theoretical derivation is most easily understood if we first explain the idea for simple resonance decay into a two - body system .
we need resonance inventions in coordinate and momentum - space and transformations between these non - square integrable functions .
the momentum space wave - function of a resonant state with the complex energy @xmath5 has the form @xcite @xmath6 where @xmath7 is the relative momentum and @xmath8 indicates the two angles defining the direction of the vector @xmath7 .
we assume that the wave function @xmath9 only has the pole at @xmath10 and @xmath11 is then a continuous function of the momentum @xmath7 with no poles .
the distribution @xmath12 of the relative momentum @xmath7 of the two particles in the resonant state @xmath13 is given by the absolute square of the momentum - space wave function , i.e. @xmath14 where the real observable energy @xmath15 is @xmath16 .
the approximation that the system is generated in a pure resonant state @xmath13 is most likely only valid in the neighborhood of the resonant energy , i.e. @xmath17 .
furthermore , the function @xmath18 is smooth and varies by definition much less than the denominator in eq.([psi_k ] ) . in any case
we shall only consider energies where @xmath19 is less than a few times @xmath20 .
we can then confidently substitute the momentum @xmath21 with the resonant momentum @xmath22 in @xmath18 and thus arrive at the expression of the famous breit - wigner type @xmath23 where the energy dependence is given by the factor @xmath24 ^{-1}$ ] while the angular dependence is given by the ( absolute square of the ) function @xmath25 .
thus , the momentum - space wave - function eq.([psi_k ] ) of the resonance allows direct calculation of the momentum distributions of the decay fragments through eq.([p_k ] ) .
clearly improvements are possible by use of different approximations of @xmath18 .    instead of momentum - space , the wave - function of the resonance may be available in coordinate - space where the large - distance asymptotic form is given by @xmath26 where @xmath27 denotes the two angles defining the direction of the relative coordinate @xmath28 .
the structure is an outgoing spherical wave potentially modified by an angular dependence contained in @xmath29 .
generally the resonance wave function can be written as a partial - wave expansion in the spherical harmonics @xmath30 , i.e. @xmath31 where @xmath32 are constants depending on angular momentum and projection quantum numbers @xmath33 and @xmath34 .
the radial functions @xmath35 are those solutions of the radial schrdinger equation that asymptotically approach the outgoing spherical wave in eq.([e60 ] ) , i.e. @xmath36    this defines the asymptotic behavior of the decaying resonance wave function which in turn determines the energy distribution in the observable final state .
the coordinate- , @xmath37 , and momentum - space , @xmath38 , wave - functions are connected via a fourier transform @xmath39 expansion of the plane - wave in terms of spherical harmonics @xmath40 reduces the fourier integral in eq.([e70 ] ) to a one - dimensional radial integral @xmath41 because of the asymptotics in eq.([chi- ] ) the radial integral is seen to diverge .
the large - distance behavior is responsible for the divergence .
the physics content , expressed by a finite value , then has to be extracted by a suitable regularization .
we use the prescription proposed by zeldovich @xcite , i.e. multiplication of the integrand by a gaussian where the range after integration is increased to infinity . for an exponential
this gives @xmath42 where @xmath43 can be complex and @xmath44 is the error function of complex argument . in the present context
the radial integral in eq.([e75 ] ) is first rewritten by adding and subtracting the asymptotic expression of the diverging integrand .
the difference between the true and the asymptotic expression then remains finite even without multiplication by the gaussian function .
only the asymptotic expression then diverges when the gaussian smoothly converges to an overall factor of one .
the physics content is extracted by dividing with a similarly diverging normalization integral of the square of the wave function @xmath45 .
also this integral , now in the denominator , is rewritten by addition and subtraction of its asymptotic expression .
again only the asymptotic expression diverges .
the zeldovich prescription now leaves the ratio of these two diverging integrals of the asymptotic expressions .
however , this ratio does not diverge but converge towards the physically meaningful result .
apart from a normalization we therefore have to regularize only the asymptotic expression obtained by use of eq.([chi- ] ) and the asymptotic approximation of @xmath46 , i.e. @xmath47 the radial integral is then by use of eq.([e77 ] ) evaluated to be @xmath48 \nonumber\\ = \frac{i^{l}}{2}\frac{k+k_{0}-(-1)^{l}(k - k_{0})}{k^{2}-k_{0}^{2 } } =   i^{l } \frac{k_{0}}{k^{2}-k_{0}^{2 } } \;\ ; \;\ ; { \rm or } \;\;\;\ ;   i^{l } \frac{k}{k^{2}-k_{0}^{2 } } \ ; \end{aligned}\ ] ] for even or odd @xmath33 , respectively .
the summation in eq.([e85 ] ) is proportional to the angular amplitude @xmath49 from eq.([chi- ] ) , but now as a function of the momentum @xmath7 .
in any case we assumed earlier that @xmath50 in the smooth functions .
we therefore arrive at the final expression for the fourier - transform of the resonance wave - function , i.e. @xmath51 thus the function @xmath52 from eq.([psi_k ] ) is then related to @xmath49 from eq.([e60 ] ) by @xmath53 the convenient fact that only the asymptotic limit of the resonance wave function enters after the regularization procedure is perhaps more surprising in mathematics than in physics where the observable energy distributions always are obtained from the properties at large distances .    the observable distribution in momentum - space is determined by the angular wave function in coordinate - space evaluated for angles describing the direction of the momentum .
this peculiar fact can intuitively be understood by the geometry of particles moving towards the detectors at infinitely large distances . coordinates and momenta
then must point in the same direction .
a mathematical formulation is available from ionization cross sections calculated for atomic physics processes @xcite .
the generalization to three particles first requires a convenient set of coordinates .
we choose the scaled jacobi coordinates @xcite @xmath54 where @xmath34 is a mass scale , and @xmath55 and @xmath56 are the coordinate and mass of the particle number @xmath57 .
the hyper - spherical coordinates are then the hyper - radius @xmath58 , the hyper - angle @xmath59 , and the directional angles @xmath60 and @xmath61 of the vectors @xmath62 and @xmath63 * * d**efined by @xmath64 the jacobi coordinates depend on the sequence chosen for the particles , and the three different pairs of @xmath62 and @xmath63 could be labeled to distinguish .
we omit these labels when the meaning is clear .
the corresponding momentum - space variables are @xmath65 where @xmath66 and @xmath67 are the conjugate momenta related to the coordinates @xmath62 and @xmath63 .
the generalization of the two - body spherical harmonics are the so - called hyper - spherical harmonics @xcite @xmath68 where @xmath69 , @xmath70 , and @xmath71 are the angular quantum numbers related to coordinates @xmath72 and @xmath73 , and @xmath74 is a normalization factor .
these functions are the eigen - functions of the angular part @xmath75 of the three - body kinetic energy operator @xmath76 @xmath77\ ] ] with the eigenvalues @xmath78 , i.e. @xmath79 where @xmath80 is a non - negative integer . without coulomb and without bound two - body subsystems the three - body resonance wave - function @xmath81 with the complex energy @xmath82 can be expanded in terms of the hyper - spherical harmonics @xmath83 where the hyper - radial functions @xmath84 have the usual resonance asymptotic behavior of an out - going hyper - spherical wave @xmath85 the three - body wave - function asymptotically has the form of the hyper - spherical wave with an angular amplitude @xmath86 determined by the expansion coefficients @xmath87 , i.e. @xmath88 the momentum - space wave - function is the fourier transform @xmath89 the three - body plane - wave can be expanded in hyper - spherical harmonics as @xmath90 due to orthogonality of the hyper - spherical harmonics the angular part of the integral in eq.([e90 ] ) is trivial and we are only left with the hyper - radial integral @xmath91 precisely as in the two - body case , in the vicinity of the resonance the integrand can be made ready for regularization by substitution of eq.([e115 ] ) and the asymptotic form @xmath92 this results in a diverging integral similar to that of the two - body case @xmath93 using the zeldovich regularization leads to @xmath94 that is , in the vicinity of the resonance , the angular wave function in momentum - space is proportional to that in coordinate - space but evaluated for the momentum variables .
the energy distribution is determined by the breit - wigner factor where the width is obtained from the three - body resonance .
the function @xmath95 now contains information about the non - trivial energy distribution between the three particles .
this is in contrast to the two - body decay where all the energy is in the only existing relative degree of freedom .
sometimes a bound two - body subsystem can be emitted from a three - body resonance .
such a final state configuration can not be described by hyper - spherical harmonics . however
if this is the only open channel , the description of such a decay reduces to the two - body case .
indeed the asymptotics of the resonance wave - function is then @xmath96 where @xmath97 describes a bound system of particles 2 and 3 with binding energy @xmath98 , @xmath99 , @xmath100 is the angular amplitude and @xmath101 is the complex three - body energy .
if both three - body and two - body decays are possible the wave - function contains asymptotics of both two- and three - body types , @xmath102 where @xmath103 and @xmath104 are the asymptotic coefficients determining the relative weights of the two decay channels .
both @xmath105 and @xmath49 are dimensionless and the dimension ( length to @xmath106 ) of @xmath107 compensate for the one length in the denominator of the last term .
the fourier transform and the corresponding regularization then give the momentum - space wave function , i.e. @xmath108 where @xmath109 , @xmath110 is the momentum - space wave function of the two - body bound state @xmath107 .
these two channels correspond , respectively , to two close - lying particles in a bound state far away from the third one , and three particles all far away from each other .
thus , in the of large distances they do not interfere , and the resulting momentum distribution is simply a weighted sum of the corresponding distributions .
the relative contributions of the two channels are given by @xmath111 and @xmath112 correspondingly .
generalization to describe decays into more than one two - body bound state is formally straightforward , i.e. the corresponding non - interfering asymptotic terms should simply be added .
this holds for more than one bound state in the same two - body system as well as for bound states in different two - body systems .      instead of a bound state the decay via a two - body resonance
is often considered in interpretation and analysis of experiments .
clearly the narrower the resonance the more similarity to the case of two - body bound states . in any case
the hyper - spherical expansion must eventually converge , although the convergence can be too slow for a reliable extraction of the asymptotic coefficients in eq.([asy ] ) from a numerical solution of the three - body problem .
however , in this case the ( slowly convergent ) two - body resonance configuration can then be explicitly included into the asymptotics while only the remaining ( hopefully fast convergent ) part is expanded , i.e. @xmath113 where @xmath114 is the complex three - body energy , @xmath115 is the ( complex ) energy of the two - body resonance and the remaining part is described by the complex momentum @xmath116 .
the precise definition of @xmath117 arises from a constraint to be seen below .    the corresponding momentum - space wave - function is again given by the regularized fourier transform , i.e. @xmath118 the momentum distribution is given by the absolute square of this momentum - space wave - function . in the center of mass system we can directly find the distribution of particle 3 arising from the sequential emission via the two - body resonance .
absolute square of the last term in eq.([e95 ] ) and use of the energy conservation @xmath119 ( or @xmath120 ) immediately gives the energy distribution for particle @xmath121 @xmath122 }   \frac{1}{[(e_{23}+e_1 - e_{0})^2 + \gamma_{0}^2/4 ] }   \nonumber \\
\propto    \frac{1}{(e_1 - ( e_{0}-e_{23}^{(0)})^2 + ( \gamma_{0}+\gamma_{23})^2/4 } \ ; ,   \label{e100}\end{aligned}\ ] ] which states that the most probable energy of particle @xmath121 is @xmath123 and the width of the distribution is the sum of the two and the three - body widths .
precisely this breit - wigner distribution only arises when the @xmath124 in eq.([e95 ] ) is proportional to @xmath125 , i.e. given by the probability distribution in the initial three - body state , which also is of breit - wigner form .
thus the definition of @xmath117 must involve @xmath126 and not @xmath127 .
the same integration could of course be performed on the energy of particle 1 , but this would only give the two - body breit - wigner distribution for @xmath128 whereas the measurements provide individual energies , @xmath129 and @xmath130 , for particles 2 and 3 in the center of mass system . to get the distributions of @xmath129 and @xmath130 involve trivial but tedious kinematical transformations where also energies and directions of particle 1 are required .
the relative energy distributions can be obtained from the angular resonance wave function calculated without complex scaling .
we assume that the system of particles is produced in an initial state for example by a beta - decay process .
we can then imagine the subsequent decay as the time evolution of the initial non - stationary state .
this can be formulated as a time dependent coupled channels problem .
it can also be viewed intuitively as a particle described by time dependent coordinates determined by classical equations of motion .
this should be done with the appropriate initial amplitudes for all parts of the initial wave function .
the hyperradius must vary from being very small to infinitely large .
we increase @xmath4 until all particles are outside the interaction ranges of all other particles . from then on all distances
scale as @xmath4 and all other coordinates remain unchanged with time until @xmath131 .
energy conservation is maintained at large distances by converting the potential energy into kinetic energy in the scaling degree of freedom , i.e. by increasing the velocity @xmath132 of the @xmath4-coordinate .
the wave function then evolves with all angular degrees of freedom frozen eventually reaching the detectors placed far away .
the absolute square of the angular wave function as function of @xmath133 then provide the energy distributions simply because the kinetic energy of particle 1 is given by the velocity of @xmath134 , i.e. @xmath135 . then the energy distribution as function of the kinetic energy , proportional to @xmath136 , is the probability coordinate - space distribution as function of @xmath133 , apart from the phase space conversion from @xmath3 to energy , i.e. division by a factor proportional to @xmath137 .
this procedure is tempting since we only need to increase the maximum value of @xmath4 in all the numerical implementations and plot the wave function at that large distance . for this to be accurate the asymptotics has to be well described by the hyperspherical expansion or the basis has to be very large and able to describe the necessary large @xmath4-behavior
however , when the basis functions have asymptotics different from one of the intermediate structures the size of the basis needed to reach convergenge can easily become huge , making the procedure impractical .
this is not necessarily easy to see in the numerical results where an increase of basis size usually is rather expensive while the convergence could be extremely slow .
the procedure is probably only directly useful for direct decay or for sequential decay via broad resonances .
otherwise the different intermediate structure should be computed somehow and extrapolations to large distances applied to each component individually .
an example to illustrate the present alternative formulation is available in the schematic model discussed in details in @xcite where the widths but not the energy distribution were computed .
assume that only the coulomb potential is important and the most probable path ( ridge in the wave function ) from small to large distances can be described by scaling the hyperradius .
the corresponding optimum path is defined by minimizing the wkb - tunneling expression as function of different relative scaling parameters @xmath138 , where @xmath139 is the distance between particles @xmath57 and @xmath21 .
the path is given by @xmath140 ( see also @xcite ) , where @xmath141 is the charge of particle @xmath57 .
we then arrive at the most probable value for the energy division , i.e. @xmath142 where @xmath143 is the total energy distributed among all the three particles .
this expression is simple but not very accurate .
it also only provides an estimate of the peak value . to compute the distribution other paths
must also be considered .
this is possible but we shall leave this for a later discussion in connection with a detailed treatment of the coulomb interaction .
the resonance wave function contains all information including that of the relative energy distribution after the decay .
the calculations must then first provide the corresponding three - body resonance states .
second the large - distance behavior must be accurately extracted . due to the different structures , these steps are not trivially completed by use of only one method .
we briefly describe first the main ingredients in our computations and the features of the wave function .
second we explain how the asymptotic behavior is obtained in practice .
we use the hyperspherical adiabatic expansion method combined with complex scaling to obtain resonance wave functions .
the coordinates are defined in section 2 along with our basis functions in angular space , i.e. the hyperspherical harmonics in each of the three jacobi systems .
we solve the complex scaled faddeev equations as function of hyperradius @xcite .
the complex scaled coupled set of radial equations are subsequently solved with the appropriate boundary conditions , i.e. exponentially vanishing with increasing @xmath4 for both bound states and resonances . thus here
we assume that we do not need to treat the coulomb interaction explicitly at asymptotic large distances .
as shown in @xcite , the results obtained with this method agree well with some of the most common procedures , as for instance the complex energy method .
the energies are usually accurately determined in this method .
the same applies to the wave functions at small and intermediate distances where the exponential fall - off still is not too restrictive .
however , we need the information at distances where the asymptotic limit is reached , i.e. possibly at very large @xmath4 where the complex scaled wave functions are very small
. furthermore , more than one geometric structure can be important at the same time , e.g. two different spatially confined two - body configurations with the ( different ) third particle far away .
this happens frequently with two identical particles like neutrons and protons as constituent particles , because the nucleon - core interaction must be sufficiently attractive to produce a bound or resonating three - body system , and this implies that such two - body configurations are favored . to account simultaneously for different two - body substructures ,
it is essential to use three components as in the faddeev decomposition adopted by us .
the same efficiency can be achieved in a variational approach by allowing faddeev - like components in the trial wave function @xcite .
it is much more difficult , if not impossible , to reach convergence with only one component as in the hyperharmonic expansion method @xcite .    even with three faddeev components a large basis has to be employed . to describe substructures inside one of the two - body potentials ( range @xmath144 ) for large @xmath4
we need values of the hyperpsherical quantum number @xmath80 up to a few times @xmath145 where @xmath146 is the reduced mass of the two particles .
this is because @xmath147 is the number of nodes in the basis , and details can only be described if a few nodes can be placed inside the structure in question .
thus , for nuclear systems , where @xmath148  fm , we need @xmath149 of at least @xmath150 to describe such structures for @xmath151  fm . employing complex scaling transforms resonances into states obeying the numerically easier bound state boundary conditions .
the required basis size is larger , essentially because the exponential fall - off moves to larger distances with increasing scaling angle .
these estimates provide necessary conditions for a reasonable description of two - body substructures which in turn are necessary to describe the sequential decay mechanism .
the requirement of large @xmath80 to describe substructures must be reconciled with the fact that an increase of @xmath4 towards infinity results in convergence of the angular eigenvalues to the hyperharmonic spectrum for free particles .
we show an example in fig .
[ fig1 ] where the imaginary parts are omitted as they both oscillate around zero and approach zero at large @xmath4 .
the real parts of the angular eigenvalues approach @xmath78 as @xmath4 increases while the corresponding potentials all approach zero faster than @xmath152 .
the attractive pockets in the eigenvalues at short distance disappear in the potentials except for the two lowest where the negative values remain as a prominent feature .
the approach to the asymptotic values is very fast except for the levels where @xmath153-waves contribute significantly .
the low energies favor these levels at large distances .
the related adiabatic wave functions approach the hyperspherical harmonics .
the reason is that the regions in space , where the short - range interactions are significant , are shrinking in size with increasing @xmath4 relative to the total space available .
the radial extension of these regions , responsible for two - body correlations , decrease with @xmath4 as @xmath154 .
the interactions are non - vanishing in smaller and smaller regions .
consequently they become less and less important for both energies and wave functions .
thus , the basis size has to increase with @xmath4 in order to allow a description of the two - body substructures or equivalently of sequential decay , but the lowest adiabatic potentials approach the free solutions .
the basis size in practice always has to remain finite and the substructures eventually become impossible to describe in this way .
the interactions have to be chosen to reproduce the pairwise low - energy scattering properties of the three particles appearing in the final state .
clearly we must accurately include all the partial waves necessary to describe the quantum numbers of the decaying resonance .
however , even with a sufficiently large basis the three - body system does not necessarily appear with the correct energy and width .
in fact , there may not even be an attractive region at small distances as required to produce a resonance of finite width .
this could occur when we are dealing with a many - body resonance without traces of any three - body cluster structure .
nevertheless , a meaningful computation can be carried out of the energy distributions emerging after a three - body decay .
the philosophy is the same as for @xmath3-emission where the inner part of the effective potential is replaced by an attractive square well with a depth adjusted to reproduce the resonance energy .
the resulting barrier is then used to derive the width , usually in the wkb approximation .
we generalize this concept to the adiabatic potentials , i.e. we add a three - body potential of short range in the hyperradius .
it is intended to describe interactions beyond the two - body level such that the three - body system has a resonance at the desired energy . by doing this
we have substituted the possibly complicated many - body structure at small distance with the three - body cluster structure resulting from an effective potential , which in turn also provides the correct boundary conditions for a three - body decaying resonance .
this principle was introduced for fine - tuning in the first calculation with the correct boundary conditions of the three-@xmath3 decay of the second @xmath155-state in @xmath156c @xcite .
it has later become the standard procedure to adjust three - body energies without significant changes of the underlying substructure @xcite .
the radial solution is often strongly dominated by one or two of the lowest adiabatic components at small distance where the relative probability is large .
this is because all three short - range two - body interactions contribute simultaneously and the result is the energetically most favored three - body resonance structure consistent with the boundary conditions .
as @xmath4 increases , at least one particle has to move away from the other leaving at most one non - vanishing two - body interaction .
coherent contributions from different of these configurations are possible and sometimes even favored . at large distance , where the energy distribution is determined , several more adiabatic potentials are often needed .
the couplings due to the coulomb interaction would normally increase the necessary number of potentials .
it is established @xcite that the adiabatic potentials of lowest energy at large @xmath4 are related to configurations with relative @xmath153-waves between the two closest particles .
this is the basis for the efimov effect @xcite .
if these large - distance configurations differ from the resonance structure at small @xmath4 , possibly with higher partial waves , the lowest angular wave function must change its structure accordingly as @xmath4 increases .
in @xcite we showed the structure for @xmath1he(2@xmath157 ) for the lowest eigenvalue which approach the @xmath158 value at large @xmath4 . in fig .
[ fig2 ] we show the results for the similar eigenvalue approaching the @xmath159 level for large @xmath4 .
the pronounced and rapidly changing structure is qualitatively similar to the lower - lying @xmath158 level , i.e. dominated by @xmath160 neutron - core structure at small @xmath4 and by @xmath153-waves between the two neutrons at large @xmath4 . essentially all other allowed components contribute with equally small amounts .
these rather dramatic changes imply that it is crucial to include all adiabatic potentials with significant couplings to those dominating the structure at small hyperradii .
this is simply because the couplings are responsible for changing the radial weights of the different adiabatic components as function of @xmath4 , e.g. no couplings imply the same occupation independent of @xmath4 . on the other hand ,
each of the angular wave functions related to the adiabatic potentials are themselves functions of @xmath4 , sometimes rapidly varying as seen in fig .
[ fig2 ] . in principle
the non - diagonal couplings could be vanishingly small and all change of structure would be described by the lowest adiabatic wave function . however ,
this is rather unlikely because the couplings are defined as matrix elements of first and second radial derivatives of the angular wave functions .
thus , radial couplings between rapidly changing angular structures are inevitable .    in fig .
[ fig3 ] we show how the strongly varying coupling potentials can be related to the changing angular structure seen in fig .  [ fig2 ] .
the peaks are most pronounced when a crossing is avoided and the two levels switch characteristics @xcite .
the rather confusing coupling picture is crucial for the asymptotic behavior of the wave function at large distance where the energy distribution is determined .
the second order terms are substantially larger than the first order couplings but all vanish at large @xmath4 . thus the numerical computations in the present case must extend at least beyond @xmath161  fm where the couplings have reached very small values .
this is about two times the largest scattering length which defines the distance of convergence towards asymptotic values .
we have now established two important but competing effects , which determine the three - body resonance structure from small to large values of @xmath4 . in the extreme
, the structure can either remain unchanged by climbing correspondingly up on the adiabatic potentials , or the structure can change to follow that of the lowest - lying adiabatic wave function .
a compromise between following the energetically most favored configuration and the resistance to a change of structure therefore must be reached .
the combination of these effects determine the relative population of the different components in the radial solution , which in turn determines the observable energy distribution .
the couplings are more important here than for widths , energies and small - distance wave functions .
they must be accurately computed to provide the energy distribution .
the structure of the resonance wave function at large @xmath4 could remain unchanged and only exhibit a simple scaling behavior proportional to @xmath4 .
this is typical of direct decay .
the wave function could also have large probability for finding two close - lying particles where the hyperradius mainly changes by moving the third particle as @xmath4 increases .
this is typical of sequential decay via more or less stable two - body configuration , e.g. sequential decay through two - body resonances .
the intermediate configuration does not necessarily need a confining barrier , but could be provided by low - lying two - body virtual @xmath153-states @xcite .
mixtures of all types can occur giving rise to the description of decay properties as fractions proceeding via individual two - body configurations .
all these structures can be computed by use of our method , although convergence for the coulomb interaction is more difficult .
the best strategy to get reliable results is not obvious , because the brute force method of increasing basis size and hyperradius until convergence is reached may be beyond any reasonable computer effort .
the indecision is related to the requirement of an increasing basis with increasing @xmath4 , which means that a smaller @xmath4 and a smaller basis could provide a better description with much less effort . in other words a convergence may be reached in a region of @xmath4-values for a moderate basis size .
this convergence would be destroyed as @xmath4 is allowed to increase because the basis size can not follow .
the convergence can possibly be reached faster by extrapolation of the observable distribution by use of a known or anticipated dependence of @xmath4 and basis size @xcite .
different parts of the wave function may extrapolate differently .
the most efficient choice depends on the ( mixtures of ) decay mechanisms which therefore has to be determined first .
therefore the first step is to compute the structure of the resonance wave functions as discussed in @xcite .
nuclear three - body decay without complications of the coulomb interaction must involve emission of two neutrons .
the decaying states do not have to be three - body structures although such two - neutron halos are available and rather well studied .
the most obvious case is the established @xmath0 resonance in @xmath1he which is formed by the same neutron - core components as in the ground state .    without coulomb interactions the computations
should quickly lead to the desired energy distributions . however , even short - range interactions can present difficulties as highlighted by the intricate description needed for the efimov effect @xcite . both the @xmath3-neutron and the neutron - neutron interactions
are previously employed in ground state computations @xcite .
we follow the procedure outlined in the preceding sections .
different prescriptions are possible to implement the pauli principle @xcite , all of them providing indistiguishable angular wave functions at large distances .
we adjust the three - body potential to give the correct resonance energy .
this only requires marginal fine - tuning . in total 1132 hyper - spherical harmonics
are used in the expansion ( [ eq21 ] ) , and the maximum value of @xmath80 is 200 for the most relevant partial wave components and never smaller than 40 .
the resonance wave function is then available as function of the hyperspherical coordinates .
a complex scaling angle of 0.10 rads is enough to produce an exponentially vanishing with increasing @xmath4 wave function for the resonance .
a different scaling angle , where the numerical calculations have converged , produce the same results .
we already showed the angular eigenvalues and the adiabatic potentials in fig .
the probability distribution arising from only the lowest potential was shown in @xcite .
the structure changes from peaks at small @xmath4 corresponding to @xmath3-neutron @xmath162-structure to a probability with one broad peak corresponding to comparable distances between all three particles .
this reflects the change of structure of this angular wave function from small to large @xmath4 as seen in details in fig .
eventually the lowest hyperharmonic function with @xmath158 is approached .
this indicates in itself a direct decay mechanism .
however , in this case the lowest potential provides rather misleading results .
the rapidly changing structure seen in fig .
[ fig2 ] at around @xmath163  fm could easily lead to occupation of higher - lying levels .
these occupation probabilities are functions of @xmath4 and simply found as squares of the radial wave function obtained by solving the coupled set of radial equations .
the results are shown in fig .
[ fig4 ] for the lowest adiabatic components . at small @xmath4
the lowest potential is totally dominating but as @xmath4 increases the lowest three components contribute with comparable amplitudes .
all radial wave functions vanish by oscillating around zero with decreasing amplitudes .
the relative sizes are more clearly seen in the right hand side of fig .
[ fig4 ] . after the transition around 20
fm the individually very small radial amplitudes stabilize on relatively constant finite ratios .
the square of these give the relative weights , i.e. reduced compared to the first component by about 0.6 , 0.25 , 0.01 for the second , third and fourth potential , respectively .
the transition to stable ratios is consistent with the disappearance of the coupling terms shown in fig .
[ fig3 ] .    the total probability distribution in fig .  [ fig5 ]
are quite different from that of the lowest eigenvalue . at large @xmath4
the probability now peaks at a smaller distance between the two neutrons and correspondingly the @xmath3-neutron distance is increased .
still fairly broad distributions remain .
the decay mechanism indicated by this structure is now instead of direct rather a mixture between the preferred sequential decay via a neutron - neutron intermediate configuration and a smaller direct component .
reliable computation of the energy distribution requires numerically converged results in an appropriate region of @xmath4-values .
the energy distributions are shown in fig .
[ fig6 ] as functions of @xmath4 for a sufficiently large number of adiabatic potentials .
the resemblance with the probability distribution is not surprising since only the volume element has been changed .
the observable distribution is the cut for constant , and sufficiently large , @xmath4 where convergence has been reached as function of basis size .
the neutron energy distribution has two peaks for small @xmath4 corresponding to the geometric configurations of one neutron close to the @xmath3-particle and the other neutron further away .
this is reflected in the peak in the @xmath3-spectrum at intermediate energies corresponding to the same geometric configurations .
the structure changes with @xmath4 into a broad peak at intermediate energies for the neutron spectrum , and one peak very close to the maximum energy for the @xmath3-spectrum .
this is the fingerprint of sequential decay via emission of the @xmath3-particle followed by decay of an intermediate two - neutron structure .
this is easily visualized as the two - body decay process where the @xmath3-particle receives maximum energy when the two neutrons move together in the opposite direction . in the subsequent decay
each neutron then must share the remaining energy which leads to an intermediate energy between zero and the maximum value .
this inferred decay mechanism is perhaps counter - intuitive because stable intermediate configuration of two neutrons do not exist neither as bound states nor as resonances
. it would be much more acceptable with the @xmath3-neutron @xmath162-resonance as the intermediate structure . however , one characteristic feature of the neutron - neutron interaction is the low - lying virtual @xmath153-state which simply means that there is a substantial @xmath153-wave attraction .
apparently this is decisive for the decay process where the two neutrons end up by moving essentially in the same direction , and then necessarily guided by the attraction .
the interesting point is maybe that this is not the way they started out at small distance in the spatially confined part of the wave function .
this change of structure with hyperradius is in a sense reflecting the dynamic character of the decay process . at distances larger than the scattering length
the short - range interactions are negligibly small , the wave function changes are completed and the asymptotics are established .
the microscopic structure of the energy distributions can be studied by dividing into contributions from the individual adiabatic potentials as seen in fig .
[ fig7 ] for the emitted @xmath3-particle .
the total distribution remains essentially unchanged if more than the four dominating potentials are included .
each contribution has its own characteristic feature .
the first has a peak close to the maximum energy , i.e. resembling @xmath3-emission from a neutron - neutron @xmath155-state .
the second has a peak at intermediate energy , i.e. resembling sequential decay by the @xmath3-neutron resonance .
the third has a peak at small energy , i.e. resembling @xmath3-emission from an excited neutron - neutron @xmath0-state .
in addition the fourth potential also gives a small contribution with maxima at intermediate and maximum energy .
the size of about 1% can not be seen in the total distribution .
however , this eigenvalue has the same angular momentum quantum numbers as the first level .
therefore the non - diagonal interference term would be about 10% of the total contribution .
it turns out that the interference essentially is destructive and responsible for the almost flat region at intermediate energies .
the decay mechanism is then not simple although understandable in terms of our formulation .
the main contribution is decay via the virtual @xmath153-state and the second is from direct decay .
the third mechanism is produced by the coupling to the higher - lying state taking place at relatively small @xmath4 .
this populates the level eventually approaching the @xmath159 hyperspherical level at large @xmath4 .
the interference with the dominating contribution then leads to the total distribution .
the division into these different contributions of direct and sequential is to some extent artificial but perhaps useful in connection with the experimental analysis .
the mixture of all these contributions leads to the total distribution which has the right features but without precise reproduction of the high - energy peak , see fig .
[ fig7 ] . experimental resolution would not improve very much because either the peak gets broader and lower , or it gets higher and narrower .
the discrepancies can originate from the presence of the target and the reaction mechanism itself as well as from contributions to the experimental points from other than resonance decays .
the experiment selects the window of energies around the @xmath0 resonance position in the reaction @xmath164li(@xmath165h,@xmath166he)@xmath167he@xmath168 .
this necessarily includes some background which perhaps has a different energy distribution than the @xmath0 resonance we investigated in the present calculations .
we find a distribution where the two - neutron virtual @xmath153-state dominates whereas the measurements are broader as expected from non - resonance decays .
in this work we focus on the decay of `` populated '' resonances , and an appropriate description of this reaction goes beyond the scope of the paper .    an attempt to understand the distribution was published soon after the experiment in @xcite .
the measured distribution was fitted by a linear combination of the lowest hyperharmonic functions of @xmath158 and 4 .
the conclusion was that a substantial @xmath159 component is needed to reproduce the experiment .
the decay mechanism dominated by the neutron - neutron virtual @xmath153-state was abandoned in favor of the @xmath159 component .
this phenomenological analysis provides a good fit even for energies above the maximum allowed by the resonance energy .
the decaying resonance wave function does not enter anywhere .
the significance is not easy to interpret in terms of decay mechanisms as attempted in the present work .
the neutron energy distribution is not measured but for future comparison we show our prediction in fig .
the division into different adiabatic components show that the broad total distribution centered around an intermediate energy is obtained by adding several qualitatively similar contributions .
the different mechanisms would all produce most likely energies around half the maximum value .
to distinguish it is therefore necessary to measure both @xmath3-particles and neutrons after the decay .
it is instructive to investigate the dependence of the distributions on the choices of @xmath4 , @xmath169 and basis size .
the @xmath4-dependence is already indicated in fig .
[ fig6 ] where the distributions are very stable as soon as @xmath4 is larger than about @xmath150  fm .
however , this stability does require a sufficiently large basis which at least up to @xmath170  fm still can be handled in modest - size computers .
it is also clear that a finite basis can not accurately describe the solutions when @xmath4 increases towards @xmath171 .
then the angular solutions approach the hyperharmonics but a large basis is still required to reproduce the structures at small distances between pairs of particles .
eventually this becomes impossible .
the many basis functions cancel each other at larger distances .    at intermediate distances , where the basis is sufficiently large , the resonance wave functions are independent of @xmath4 . for the radial solution
this is seen in the right part of fig .
[ fig4 ] , where for @xmath4 larger than about 50  fm , the ratio between the different radial components is approximately constant .
the energy distributions are mainly dominated by the absolute squares of these ratios , although when different adiabatic components interfere also the real parts of these complex ratios may contribute individually .
this behavior of the radial ratios is responsible for the stable behaviour of the energy distributions for sufficiently large values of rho .
the constant behavior of the radial ratios also implies that the radial wave functions have already reached asymptotics as given in eq.([eq22 ] ) for all the channels , and therefore the distributions are independent of the scaling angle .
however , the latter conclusion is based on an assumption of analyticity of the angular solutions as function of @xmath169 . when this scaling angle is changed corresponding to a rotation across a singularity like a two- or three - body resonance the continuity is broken and the solutions change as well .
this is especially clear when we compare two solutions with @xmath169 smaller and larger than the angle corresponding to a two - body resonance .
for the large @xmath169 one angular eigenvalue changes character and increases towards infinity as @xmath172 , see @xcite .
this qualitative change of behavior necessarily causes a change of the angular wave functions because the upgoing eigenvalue at large distances fully describes the properties of the two - body resonance .
these features were distributed over several wave functions for the small @xmath169-value .    in between singularities the individual angular solutions are independent of both @xmath4 and @xmath169 .
this may not be an apparent feature of the numerical solutions because the basis has to be sufficiently large for a complete description . as @xmath169 increases the effective ranges of the two - body interactions also increase and the stable region is pushed to larger @xmath4-values .
this means that the minimum basis size has to increase with @xmath169 .
we formulate a method to compute the energy distribution of three particles emerging after three - body decay of a many - body resonance .
the complex energy of a resonance corresponds to a pole in the momentum - space wave function which has an absolute square of the form as breit - wigner shape multiplied by a smoothly varying function . in coordinate - space
this form corresponds to a large - distance asymptotic wave function consisting of only outgoing waves .
we show formally by fourier transformation that the coordinate - space asymptotic angular dependence determines the energy distribution by substituting momentum directions for the conjugate coordinate directions . for this
the divergent fourier integral is regularized by the zeldovich prescription .    for two - body decay
the energy distribution is trivially given by the breit - wigner distribution of the initial resonance .
energy conservation is taking care of everything else . for three - body decay
the total energy can be distributed continuously among the three particles .
we show that the resonance decay results in distributions obtained from the large - distance angular behavior of the coordinate wave function .
the asymptotic behavior can correspond to either genuine three - body structures or two - body substructures for example corresponding to two - body resonances or configurations favored by substantial attraction as for virtual states .
also virtual population of two - body intermediate substructures is allowed as an appropriate asymptotic behavior with a resulting special energy distribution .
the different asymptotics characterize the different decay modes used in analyses of experimental data .
different modes can co - exist .
we illustrate by the decay of the @xmath0-state in @xmath1he .
the practical computations employ the hyperspherical adiabatic expansion combined with the complex scaling method .
we discuss how a large hyperradius necessarily must be accompanied by a large basis .
convergent results may then be obtained with less efforts at moderate hyperradii and moderate basis sizes . for convergence
it is crucial to have all three faddeev components , and especially if all decay mechanisms simultaneously should be included in the theoretical formulation .
the wave function undergoes dramatic changes from small distances , where the resonance properties usually are determined , and large distances from which the energy distributions emerge .
the reasons for these structural changes are that the small distance behavior is determined by the two - body resonance substructures , whereas the large - distance behavior is determined as a competition between two effects , i.e. the energetically favored configuration of smallest two - body angular momentum with attractive two - body potentials and maintaining the same structure as at small distances in higher - lying levels .    in conclusion , theoretical interpretation of the simplest nuclear three - body decay without coulomb interactions
is already rather complicated .
it is then advisable to test any given method on these systems .
the accuracy of computations of the more complicated decaying charged systems can then be judged .
this is important since almost all nuclear three - body resonance decays involve charged systems .
the goal is to interpret the soon - to - come accurate experimental correlation data for three - body decays of charged systems .


recently , interests have been generated on cooling techniques for mechanical systems at nano- and micron - scales @xcite . among them ,
the typically employed is the feedback cooling technique where an external feedback circuit is responsible for detecting the motion of the target and feeding a counteracting force against this motion ; through a general decrease of magnitude in the density noise spectrum , it was shown that the feedback can effectively reduce the fluctuation of the target and provide a cooling mechanism @xcite .
some experiments based on the models that contain the feedback loops have been carried out in the past few years .
a few are directed towards the cooling of micron- to nanometer - size mechanical resonators , aiming to reach a macroscopic quantum mechanical ground state and serving as a powerful manifestation of quantum mechanical effects @xcite .
other experiments succeed in slowing down the motion of micron - size mirrors through the radiation pressure of an optical field in a fabry - prot ( fp ) cavity , aiming to reach a noise level and equivalently an effective temperature that are pertinent to the employment of high - precision detection of gravity waves @xcite .
the forementioned implementations of feedback cooling through reduction of noise fluctuations invariably rely on an electrical circuitry external to the target system to be cooled .
the controller here is usually fixed and attracts or repels the resonator through either electrostatic coulomb force or lorentzian force .
if such an external detection - control unit could be eliminated in favor of a mechanism with self - detection of and self - adjustment to the target s thermal motion , we call the mechanism `` self - cooling '' @xcite . devices implementing this self - cooling use less components and are free from the reliance on an external circuitry and hence prone to less noise sources .    in one case @xcite , an augmented cavity along with an extra optical cavity field is established on the other side of the mirror , in addition to the regular fp cavity , so as to counteract the radiation pressure from the original cavity field .
this extra field cushions the motion of the pressure mirror and plays the role of feedback . in another case
@xcite , a set of josephson junctions behaving as a qubit , serially connected to a mechanical resonating beam , serves delayed supercurrent into the circuit according to the magnetic flux through the circuit loop .
the magnetic flux is controlled by the vibrating motion of the beam , which in turn is controlled by the magnetic field generated by the current feed .
such a mutual dependence furnishes a self - feedback mechanism .
it should be pointed out that both of the self - feedback setups require delayed feedback , which assumed _ a priori _ a non - markovian approximation that explicitly depends on the history of the target s motion . in these phenomenological treatments , the cooling target either couples itself to a static controller and makes itself prone to the noise stemmed from the feedback , or couples to a mechanically static detection construct and receives manually delayed feedback .    hereby , we present a dynamic model based on an intrinsic mechanism with non - markovian feedback , which is obviously free from an external feedback loop and does not rely on a presupposition of historical dependence .
this mechanism is illustrated by a simple mechanical system in which the target is modeled by a harmonic oscillator and attached to a dynamic controller , which is a relatively heavier resonator , through a spring .
the target is controlled by an intrinsic feedback through the dynamics of coupling : earlier positions and velocities of the target affects the motion of the controller and this influence is subsequently fed back to the target .
consequently , the accumulation of earlier states of the target will affect the state of itself later . with proper parameter setup
, the target essentially experiences a resistance and decelerates its motion ; its displacement variance is shrunk , noise suppressed and effective temperature cooled down . the lack of a specific detection device for the motion of the target resonator and an external feedback circuit characterizes the intrinsic nature of the mechanical feedback .
our numerical analysis shows the existence of a noise suppression capability of our scheme , e.g. the variance of displacement can be reduced to @xmath0 , and therefrom a cooling capability under a practical setting accessible in current experiments .
we note that the scheme is theoretically illustrative through its simple model setup yet widely applicable because the general oscillator systems can be extended to quantum bosonic systems and other cases .
in fact , a similar model and mechanism has been proposed to actively cool down the torsional vibration of a nanomechanical resonator through spin - orbit interactions @xcite .
the model will be explained in sec.[sec : model ] and its delay function then derived _ a posteriori _ to examine its non - markovian dependence .
the complete solution of the system dynamics is given in sec.[sec : exact_soln ] , with which we will derive the density noise spectrum and calculate the theoretical noise suppression rate .
the associated numerical results will be presented in sec.[sec : num_analysis ] , given various parameter setups .
the analysis is extended to the domain of momentum noise in sec.[sec : momentum - noise ] .    , the target mass @xmath1 , the spring of constant @xmath2 , the ancillary mass @xmath3 , and the spring of constant @xmath4 .
@xmath5 is the harmonic driving force.,width=288 ]
our model setup ( see fig.[fig : model ] ) comprises two masses and three springs .
the two masses are denoted by @xmath1 and @xmath3 , respectively .
the mass @xmath1 is the target and typically lighter whereas the mass @xmath3 serves as an ancillary controller and is relatively heavier .
the three springs are denoted by their hooke s constants @xmath6 , @xmath2 and @xmath4 , respectively .
the spring of constant @xmath6 attaches the lighter mass @xmath1 to the fixed wall on the left and the spring of constant @xmath4 attaches the heavier mass @xmath3 to the fixed wall on the right .
the spring of constant @xmath2 strings the two masses together .
such a setup , intuitively , grants the heavier mass @xmath3 the function of a suspension system and a medium for the feedback .
the symbol @xmath5 represents an external driving force which is necessary for the discussion of cooling but can be deemed zero for the present .
the connected springs will give rise to mechanical vibrations of the masses .
we let @xmath7 denote the effective mechanical resonance frequency for the mass @xmath1 , assuming the other mass @xmath3 is fixed , and @xmath8 the equivalent for the mass @xmath3 , assuming the mass @xmath1 is fixed .
besides these mechanical vibrations , we assume each of the masses experience a frictional damping and we let @xmath9 denote the damping coefficient for the mass @xmath1 and @xmath10 that for mass @xmath3 .    then according to the setup above ,
the coordinates of the two masses obey a coupled system of classical langevin equations @xmath11 where @xmath12 is the coordinate of the mass @xmath1 and @xmath13 that of the mass @xmath3 . @xmath14 and @xmath15 on the right hand side of the equations denote the random thermal noise generated by the mass @xmath1 and @xmath3 , respectively , due to their frictional damping .
the frictional damping terms as dissipation and the random noise terms as fluctuations constitute the total brownian thermal force in the classical langevin formalism .
this thermal force induces an thermal environment , the effect of which is divided among the two terms @xmath16 and @xmath17 according to the fluctuation - dissipation relations @xcite @xmath18 for now we assume the two masses are independently interacting with two thermal environments .
that is , there are no correlations between the fluctuations of the two masses    actually , we can realize from eq.([eq : langevin_x ] ) and eq.([eq : fd - relation ] ) that the motion of the mass @xmath1 is resisted by a frictional force @xmath9 , which in turn is transduced into thermal energy and heats up itself .
this process , however , is mediated by the mass @xmath3 that stands between @xmath1 and the fixed wall through the term @xmath19 .
if there were not the mass @xmath3 , the kinetic oscillation of @xmath1 would be instantly reacted by the surrounding springs of hooke s constant @xmath6 and @xmath4 . with the presence of the mass @xmath3 and the extra spring of constant @xmath2
, the oscillation of the mass @xmath1 will first squeeze the spring of constant @xmath2 , and then the squeezed spring will release and push the mass @xmath3 to the right .
it follows that the spring of constant @xmath4 will be squeezed successively .
the mediating mass @xmath3 breaks the original single spring into two and permits these two springs to stay in different states , squeezed and released , and hence essentially delays the reaction of the springs .
this cascaded process is then reflected by the wall and executed in a reversed order to the left ; the delayed reaction of the springs of constant @xmath2 and @xmath4 acts back onto the oscillating mass @xmath1 .
the delayed reaction depends on the oscillating velocity of the target mass @xmath1 and can thus be considered a feedback onto itself .
the entire process can be regarded as a feedback loop from the view of control theory through the flow diagram shown in fig.[fig : feedback_flow ] .
the target resonator @xmath1 is the system to be controlled and the ancillary resonator @xmath3 becomes the controller which detects the signal @xmath20 as its input and feeds the signal @xmath21 as its output .
the cycle time of the loop corresponds to the delay of the controller - to - system reaction .
the dependence of this delayed reaction on the tunable parameters , mainly those spring constants , allows us to control this self - feedback precisely to counteract the oscillating motion of the target mass
.     receives signal @xmath20 and outputs signal @xmath21 according to the motion of the target @xmath1.,width=302 ]    the weakened motion is converted to a reduction of effective temperature of the target mass through an equivalent relation between the autocorrelation of the target s displacement and temperature , derived from the fluctuation - dissipation relation eq.([eq : fd - relation ] ) . under normal circumstances , that is , when the coupling mass @xmath3 were not present , this equivalent relation can be written as @xmath22 where @xmath9 is defined as in eq.([eq : langevin_x ] ) and @xmath23 is a function to be given explicitly .
experimentally , the statistical variance of the coordinate is measured and the above relation is used to compute an effective temperature .    increasing the damping coefficient @xmath9 will certainly increase the enveloping rate of the oscillating motion of @xmath20 .
however , this reduction of motion can not lead to an equivalent noise suppression effect upon the target mass @xmath1 because of the constraint imposed by the friction - induced fluctuation relation described above .
in fact , according to this relation , increasing damping rate leads to more thermal dissipation of the system .
that is to say , simply enlarging frictional force merely results in a heating effect upon the target system .
our aim , therefore , is to reduce the temperature of the target mass by reducing its coordinate variance through the feedback that does not simultaneously increase the damping coefficient .
after we derive the explicit feedback response below , we will show the feedback is actually shrinking the variance in sec.[sec : exact_soln ] .
generally , a feedback external to an oscillating system has the effect of adding an extra driving force term on the right hand side of the equation of motion , i.e. @xmath24 where we have let @xmath25 denote the coordinate of a general dynamic system , @xmath26 the feedback force , and @xmath9 , @xmath27 , @xmath14 terms of similar meanings to those defined in eq.([eq : langevin_x ] ) .
if the target were to be cooled , the motion of the system should be slowed down .
in other words , behaving as a function of the target s velocity , the force @xmath26 should have an equivalent effect of increasing the damping coefficient , but do not increase the fluctuations .
besides , the feedback force should be dependent on the target s position and the noise source .    summing up these requirements , we expect @xmath26 to be a function of @xmath28 , @xmath29 and @xmath14 . to overcome the generic fluctuation - dissipation relations and hence accomplish an efficient noise suppression , we shall use a non - markovian type feedback : @xmath26 not only depends on the current value of the velocity and the position of the target , but also their historical values at past times .
if we represent the historical dependence by a time - derivative @xmath30 and weigh the contribution of the histories by a delay function @xmath31 , where @xmath32 stands for the current time and @xmath33 for the time in the past , the feedback force can be written as an integral with respect to @xmath33 , @xmath34    the above formula shows the mathematical character of a general feedback force .
inversely , any function that can express the same character should be considered a feedback force .
therefore , we can verify the dynamic response of the coupling mass @xmath3 in our model as an effective feedback mechanism by finding the corresponding specific expression for @xmath35 and @xmath31 .
to do so , we solve eq.([eq : langevin_q ] ) by using fourier transforms and integration by parts ( the detailed derivation is given in appendix [ sec : derv_delay ] ) @xmath36 where @xmath37 denotes the inhomogeneous part of the equation , i.e. the external driving force to @xmath3 .
in the solution , @xmath38\left\ { \sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}\times\right.\label{eq : delay}\\   &   & \left.\cos\left[\frac{\xi}{2}\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}\right]+\gamma\sin\left[\frac{\xi}{2}\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}\right]\right\ } \nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ] is the delay function that we look for and @xmath39 correspondingly shows the historical dependence .
if we plug the solution ( [ eq : soln_q ] ) into eq.([eq : langevin_x ] ) , i.e. reduce the degree of freedom of the variable @xmath21 in the equation by substituting with its formal solution , we arrive at an integro - differential equation of only a single variable @xmath20 , which is comparable to the feedback - containing equation of motion that appears in previous literature @xcite .
however , in the latter case the delay function is assume to be a non - markovian approximation @xmath40 and @xmath41 is left unknown . here
, we have explicitly implemented a self - feedback mechanism that exerts force back onto the mass @xmath1 after certain delay through the use of the coupling mass @xmath3 . the sinusoidal factor in the delay eq.([eq : delay ] ) illustrates the damped oscillating motion of the mass @xmath3 .
the implicit time derivative of @xmath20 within the integrand implies up to an equivalent effect an additional friction to the motion of the mass @xmath1 , which damps the oscillation without increasing the target s fluctuation .
the non - integral term is markovian and has the same order as @xmath42 . though it does not appear in eq.([eq : feedback_form ] ) , this term effectively reduces the oscillating frequency and shall not counteract the feedback effect .
therefore , both terms impose noise suppression effect to our target .
the only limitation , however , is the thermal fluctuation @xmath17 from the coupling mass @xmath3 itself and it will result in a limit for the suppression because of the competition between this fluctuation and the effective feedback .
in order to examine the validity of the above proposed mechanism and verify the efficacy of the cooling rate , we find the analytic solutions of the langevin equations ( [ eq : langevin_x ] ) and ( [ eq : langevin_q ] ) to reflect the displacement of the target @xmath1 as a response to its own thermal noise , the motion of the ancillary mass @xmath3 and the thermal noise of mass @xmath3 . from the response function
, we shall derive the effective damping coefficient and vibrating frequency of the target mass @xmath1 as well as the autocorrelation function of its coordinate . the noise spectrum and the total noise fluctuation
are then defined upon these derived quantities .
the displacement spectrum can be written as the sum of responses of the noise terms ( the derivation is given in appendix [ sec : derv_soln ] ) @xmath43 note that the two different susceptibilities @xmath44 and @xmath45\left[\bar{\omega}_{e}^{2}-\omega^{2}+i\omega\gamma_{e}\right]}\label{eq : response_f}\ ] ] reflect the system s different responses to thermal fluctuations from the mass @xmath1 and the mass @xmath3 . here , we have defined the effective vibrating frequency of the mass @xmath1 to be @xmath46 and the effective damping coefficient of the mass @xmath1 to be @xmath47 eq.([eq : fourier_x ] ) means that the mechanical susceptibility or response function of the target @xmath1 is adjusted because of the dynamic coupling of the target mass @xmath1 to the ancillary mass @xmath3 .
the first term represents the direct effect of the thermal bath acting on the target mass @xmath1 ; whereas the second term represents the indirect effect of the thermal bath onto the mass @xmath1 through the mediating mass @xmath3 and the coupling between the two masses .
the positivity of the second term in eq.([eq : damp_eff ] ) has asserted our expectation of increasing the damping rate without increasing thermal force .
we shall also note that an additional noise source @xmath48 is imposed onto the adjusted susceptibility eq.([eq : response ] ) due to the dynamic coupling . but seeing that it is divided by a frequency - squared term , we expect it to be negligible when the target mass @xmath1 is not resonating at a frequency close to that of the mass @xmath3 .
the density noise spectrum ( dns ) , which is defined by the equation@xmath49 can thus be computed from eq.([eq : fourier_x ] ) @xmath50 comparing the above equation with the case when @xmath3 is absent , i.e. when @xmath51 is degenerated to @xmath9 , we observe a general suppression at the noise peak and spreading of the noise spectrum .
the observable effect of the noise sources on the motion of the mass @xmath1 is equivalent to the variance of the displacement of the mass @xmath1 in time domain , which is defined as the average of the entire noise spectrum , i.e. the integral of the dns of @xmath12 , @xmath52 the integral is computable after we approximate the effective damping rate and vibrating frequency by truncating their expansions shown in appendix [ sec : derv_var ] . as a result ,
the variance is a variable of temperature and the spring constants @xmath53    the noise fluctuation depends on the three spring constants @xmath6 , @xmath4 and @xmath2 as its parameters , and is independent of the masses @xmath1 and @xmath3 and the damping rate @xmath9 and @xmath10 of the resonators . we shall notice that the noise suppression effect for the target resonator is always present for all values the spring constant @xmath2 takes .
this ideal result is due to the non - markovian feedback we derived in sec.[sec : model ] , which always increases the effective damping while retaining the same fluctuations .
eq.([eq : supp_noise ] ) shows a complex relation between itself and its three parameters of spring constants . to illustrate its behavior ,
we focus on its relation with the spring constant @xmath2 .
it is a monotonic decreasing function of @xmath2 and its two limiting values are @xmath54 which coincides with our expectation that enlarging the constant @xmath2 will render the feedback more effective due to the enlarged feedback amplitude eq.([eq : phi(x , t ) ] ) .
the symmetry between the target mass and the ancillary mass in the model setup allows us to compute the variance of the ancillary mass following the same methodology @xmath55 the limiting value of @xmath56 at @xmath57 is identical to that of @xmath58 , which shows that under the extremal case where the two oscillating masses combines into one by a rigid body the limiting behaviors of the two bodies become the same .
to show completely the noise suppression behavior of the two oscillating masses , the numerical analysis is separated into two parts with each part for each extremal end of the values of the spring constants whereas the other parameters are set to laboratory accessible values for common micromechanical resonators .
the first case , the identical case , is where the springs attaching the two masses to the walls share the same hooke s constant , i.e. @xmath59 .
we examine how the noise suppression behavior is affected by varying the value of the constant @xmath2 of the middle spring .
the second case , the large detuning case , occurs when the springs attaching the two masses to the walls take vastly different values of their hooke s constant .
again we examine the noise suppression limit for different values taken for the constant @xmath2 of the middle spring .
we assume the springs with one end fixed to walls have @xmath60 .
the lighter target mass has @xmath61 and its frictional damping rate @xmath62 .
the heavier ancillary mass has @xmath63 and its frictional damping rate @xmath64 .
when free from the stringing spring @xmath2 , the target mass will oscillate at a natural frequency of @xmath65 and the ancillary mass at @xmath66 .
the system s initial temperature is set to room temperature @xmath67 .
we first look at the density noise spectrum of the ancillary resonator when the middle spring is set to have its constant @xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 , @xmath71 and @xmath72 as shown in fig.[fig : dns_of_q_case1 ] .
the noise peaks at the frequencies @xmath73 , @xmath74 , @xmath75 , @xmath76 and @xmath77 .     with parameters : @xmath60 , @xmath63 , @xmath61 , @xmath64 , @xmath62 , @xmath67 .
curves from top to bottom are plotted from @xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 , @xmath71 , @xmath72.,width=288 ]    we notice that when tuning the spring constant @xmath2 , not only the peaking frequency is shifted to the right , the peak amplitude is reduced along with the increased value of @xmath2 .
this proves a general suppression in noise and an equivalent cooling effect to the system .
the details of the spectrum and the spread width can be shown more apparently when we cluster the peaks together with a common frequency @xmath78 for their corresponding peaking frequencies , which is shown in fig.[fig : dns_of_q_case1_shift ] .
the total noise fluctuation reached after suppression can be computed from the area under each curve in the figure , using eq.([eq : var_x ] ) .
the attenuated noise levels corresponding to the 5 values of the spring @xmath2 are , respectively , @xmath79 , @xmath80 , @xmath81 , @xmath82 and @xmath83 times a common factor of @xmath84 .     with parameters : @xmath60 , @xmath63 , @xmath61 , @xmath64 , @xmath62 , @xmath67 and peaking frequencies shifted to the center of the plot .
curves from top to bottom are plotted from @xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 , @xmath71 , @xmath72.,width=268 ]    the cooling effect for the target mass @xmath1 is more obvious if we examine the clustered peak plot of the target mass density noise spectrum shown in fig.[fig : dns_of_x_case1 ] . however
, differing from the behavior of the ancillary mass shown in fig.[fig : dns_of_q_case1 ] , the target mass is resonant at two peak frequencies for each of the 5 values of the spring constant @xmath2 . among the pairs of peaking frequencies , one group clusters in the low frequencies and the other spreads out in the high frequencies .
the low frequency group , the rescaled along peak center plot shown on the left of fig.[fig : dns_of_x_case1 ] , shares exactly the same peaking frequencies as those of the ancillary mass and we expect this behavior takes place when the target mass is resonating with the ancillary mass .
this harmonic driven noise associates with the noise source @xmath85 in eq.([eq : fourier_x ] ) and , as we argue before , does not contribute much to the overall thermal noise .
the high frequency group spreads out to peak frequencies @xmath86 , @xmath87 , @xmath88 , @xmath89 and @xmath90 for the varying spring constant @xmath2 . the anharmonic noise with respect to the ancillary mass associates with the noise source @xmath91 in eq.([eq : fourier_x ] ) .
our cooling mechanism in this identical case is fairly effective , with the noise level reached down to @xmath79 , @xmath80 , @xmath81 , @xmath82 and @xmath83 times a common factor of @xmath84 , respectively , identical to the values of the ancillary mass .     with parameters : @xmath60 , @xmath63 , @xmath61 , @xmath64 , @xmath62 , @xmath67 and peaking frequencies shifted to the center of the plot .
the left and the right subplots corresponds to the low and the high peak frequency groups .
curves from top to bottom are plotted from @xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 , @xmath71 , @xmath72.,width=288 ]      we assume , in this case , the spring constants @xmath92 and @xmath93 ; the masses @xmath94 and @xmath61 ; thus the natural oscillating frequencies for the two masses are retained .
the damping coefficients and the initial temperature are left unchanged .
varying the spring constant of the middle spring @xmath2 over the same five values gives the noise spectrum plot of the target mass @xmath1 shown in fig.[fig : dns_of_x_case2 ] .
the plot is again rescaled to the center along the peaking frequencies @xmath86 , @xmath87 , @xmath95 , @xmath96 and @xmath97 .
we note that the noise peaks at one frequency for each value of the spring @xmath2 .
these peaking frequencies are close to those in the identical case above but the noise suppression rate , as we have expected , is much better .
that means the large detuning not only helps suppress the noise source stemmed from the coupling mass @xmath3 to negligible amplitude but also makes the feedback more effective for countering the target s noise .
the 5 values of the spring constant @xmath2 corresponds to noise fluctuations of @xmath79 , @xmath98 , @xmath99 , @xmath100 and @xmath101 times a common factor of @xmath84 .     with parameters : @xmath92 , @xmath93 , @xmath94 , @xmath61 , @xmath64 , @xmath62 , @xmath67 and peaking frequencies shifted to the center of the plot .
curves from top to bottom are plotted from @xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 , @xmath71 , @xmath72.,width=288 ]    fig.[fig : dns_of_q_case2 ] shows the plot of the ancillary resonator s noise spectrum , again rescaled to the center along the peaking frequencies .
these peaking frequencies are very close to those of the target mass .
we predict that the large detuning between the springs @xmath4 and @xmath6 puts the ancillary mass @xmath3 into a particularly passive role that reflects the minute motion of the target .
this also helps explain why the noise suppression is especially effective in this case by the fact that the mass @xmath3 has its speed comparable to the target @xmath1 but in an opposite direction such that the force it exerts through the spring @xmath2 can favorably counteract the motion of the target @xmath1 .
nonetheless , the reinforced role that the ancillary mass @xmath3 plays means that itself does not belong to the target system .
as shown in the figure , the ancillary mass almost retains its original noise level throughout the varying values of the spring @xmath2 .     with parameters : @xmath92 , @xmath93 , @xmath94 , @xmath61 , @xmath64 , @xmath62 , @xmath67 and peaking frequencies shifted to the center of the plot .
curves from left to right are plotted from @xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 , @xmath71 , @xmath72.,width=288 ]
the effective temperature is usually defined according to the equipartition theorem through the equality between the thermal energy and the mechanical potential energy .
the intrinsic nature of our model renders the stored potential energy of the target and of the environment in their shared link , the middle spring @xmath2 , inseparable and thus forbids our discussion of the effective temperature in the coordinate space . to make our model relevant to the discussion of cooling
, we examine the system dynamics in its momentum space and define the effective temperature according to the kinetic energy , i.e. the momentum fluctuation , of the target .
in addition , to follow the convention along previous literature , a harmonic driving force term @xmath102 where @xmath103 is the driving frequency , should be added to the feedback loop ( cf .
fig.[fig : model ] ) . in our case
, this harmonic force appears as an extra term in the equation of motion of the ancillary resonator @xmath3 .    following the above arguments , we rewrite the coupled system of classical langevin equations eq.([eq : langevin_x ] ) and eq.([eq : langevin_q ] ) as@xmath104 where @xmath105 and @xmath106 denote , respectively , the momenta of the target resonator and the ancillary resonator .
the thermal fluctuations @xmath14 and @xmath15 still obey the same set of relations eq.([eq : fd - relation ] ) and eq.([eq : fd - relation_f ] ) .
consequently , we have a modified linear response ( cf .
eq.([eq : fourier_x ] ) , eq.([eq : response ] ) and eq.([eq : response_f ] ) ) after combining the system of equations in the frequency domain ( see appendix [ sec : derv_eff_temp])@xmath107\bigr]\label{eq : fourier_p}\end{gathered}\ ] ] where @xmath108 and @xmath109 are the susceptibilities eq.([eq : response ] ) and eq.([eq : response_f ] ) .
we can thus arrive at the noise spectrum in momentum , after following the same routine of computations,@xmath110      the square of momentum of the target is defined similarly as in eq.([eq : var_x])@xmath111 which can be separated into two parts : the variance of momentum , i.e. the fluctuation or noise in momentum space,@xmath112 and the mean squared , i.e. , the square of the steady state value of momentum , @xmath113 note that the harmonic force term only contributes to the first moment of the momentum .
since thermal dissipation only induces variance of the target s momentum , the effective temperature of the target can inversely be determine by the variance of the kinetic energy through the energy equipartition theorem @xmath114 eq.([eq : dns_mo ] ) is independent of the two parameters @xmath115 and @xmath103 of the harmonic driving force .
we conclude that the harmonic force bears no effect in reducing the system s effective temperature and hence in cooling .
eq.([eq : dns_mo ] ) is also not analytically integrable , numerical integration shows the integral takes value similar to the case when the spring constant @xmath116 .
that means the feedback is only effective in the displacement domain but not in the momentum domain .
in summary , we have proposed a theoretical model to demonstrate the general self - feedback type noise suppression technique through the coupling between the target resonator and an adjuvant system . in particular ,
such a self - feedback is achieved through the dynamics of the adjuvant system .
the explicit delay function has been given and its efficacy in reducing the noise spectrum verified .
we have also used numeral results to confirm our observations .    before concluding this paper , we add some remarks as follows :    first , the theory of thermal equilibrium state can be used to explain why the system comprising two resonating masses has its noise reduced to a limit when the spring constant @xmath2 tends from zero to infinity .
if @xmath2 were zero , the stringing spring between the two masses would disappear and the system would comprise two independent resonators , each of which will attain its thermal equilibrium over time . in this case
, the system has two degrees of freedom . according to the energy equipartition theorem
, the system must contain twice as much energy as @xmath117 .
for the other limit , when @xmath2 tends to infinity , the two resonators become a rigid body and possess only one degree of freedom , which means the system would contain only @xmath117 of energy .
this explicit picture clarifies how the combined system reduces its energy over the increasing value of @xmath2 .
however , how each resonator in the combined system reduces its own energy is an open question though we can intuitively think the heat bath may play crucial role in the asymmetric thermalization of the two resonators as tow open system .
another remark is that the energy equipartition theorem is applicable only after the system enters thermal equilibrium state . when interaction occurs between the two degrees of freedom contributed by the two masses ,
such an illustration is not appropriate .
this is the reason why the nonlinear character of the noise suppression rate can not be explained by the energy equipartition theorem alone .
in addition , we have assumed there does not exist correlation between the two noise sources for the two masses , i.e. @xmath118 .
however , when the two masses oscillate very closely with each other , the above assumption based on independent thermal environments will not hold and we need to consider the case where @xmath119    another setting we shall consider is when the motions of the two masses are quantized : we need to change the fluctuation - dissipation relations eq.([eq : fd - relation ] ) and eq.([eq : fd - relation_f ] ) to @xmath120 where @xmath121 and @xmath122 are not simply @xmath123-functions and depends on the planck constant @xmath124 .
we will present the general investigation on the case with quantum fluctuations and thermal bath correlations , but here we have concentrated on the simple case .
the authors thank yong li of university of basel and ying dan wang of ntt basic research laboratories for helpful discussions .
this work is supported by the nsfc with grants no.90203018 , no.10474104 , and no.60433050 .
it is also funded by the national fundamental research program of china with grants no.2001cb309310 and no.2005cb724508 .
fourier transforming eq.([eq : langevin_q ] ) gives @xmath125 where we use @xmath126 , @xmath127 and @xmath128 to denote the fourier transforms of @xmath12 , @xmath13 and @xmath15 , respectively , @xmath129 substituting the first two transform of the above into eq.([eq : q_tfm ] ) and taking the inverse fourier transform of @xmath127 , we get @xmath130 the linear integral with respect to @xmath131 can be viewed as a contour integral along a semicircle in the upper half - plane with two poles at @xmath132/2 $ ] .
assuming @xmath133 , the corresponding residues are , @xmath134\nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath135 denotes the unit step function originated from the positive locus of the integration path . using cauchy s theorem , @xmath21 is reduced to a single - integral form @xmath136\sin\left[\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}(t-\tau)\right]\nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have used the shorthand @xmath137 as defined in eq.([eq : phi(x , t ) ] ) .
to write @xmath21 in our desired form , we further integrate by parts with respect to @xmath138 @xmath139\sin\left[\frac{t-\tau}{2}\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}\right]\nonumber \\   & = & \frac{1}{\bar{\omega}^{2}}\phi(x , t)+\frac{2}{\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}}\times\\   &   & \int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{d}(t-\tau)\frac{\mathrm{d}\phi(x,\tau)}{\mathrm{d}(t-\tau)}2\exp\left[-\frac{1}{2}\gamma(t-\tau)\right]\times\nonumber \\   &   & \left\ { \frac{\exp\left[\frac{1}{2}i\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}(t-\tau)\right]}{\gamma - i\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}}\right.+\nonumber \\   &   & \left.\frac{\exp\left[-\frac{1}{2}i\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}(t-\tau)\right]}{\gamma+i\sqrt{4\bar{\omega}^{2}-\gamma^{2}}}\right\ } \nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ] where the factor in the last two lines constitute the function @xmath31 as defined in eq.([eq : delay ] ) .
to find the response function , we first take the fourier transform of eq.([eq : langevin_q ] ) and eq.([eq : langevin_x ] ) to get , respectively , eq.([eq : q_tfm ] ) and @xmath140 where we let @xmath126 , @xmath127 and @xmath141 denote the fourier transforms of @xmath12 , @xmath13 and @xmath14 as we did in appendix [ sec : derv_delay ] . substituting eq.([eq : q_tfm ] ) into eq.([eq : x_tfm ] ) , we have@xmath142 reshuffling the terms and putting again @xmath143 on one hand side , the equation becomes @xmath144}{\bar{\omega}^{2}-\omega^{2}+i\omega\gamma - g^{2}/[mm(\bar{\omega}^{2}-\omega^{2}+i\omega\gamma)]}.\ ] ] to find explicitly the response function , we group together the real terms and the imaginary terms in the denominator to write @xmath143 in a familiar form similar to the case where the coupling mass @xmath3 were not present ; whence the denominator becomes@xmath145-\omega^{2}\\ + i\omega\left[\gamma+\frac{g^{2}}{mm}\frac{\gamma}{(\bar{\omega}^{2}-\omega^{2})^{2}+\omega^{2}\gamma^{2}}\right]\end{gathered}\ ] ] and we can define the terms in the two brackets as in eq.([eq : freq_eff ] ) and eq.([eq : damp_eff ] ) .
using eq.([eq : fourier_x ] ) , the associated fluctuation - dissipation relations of eq.([eq : fd - relation ] ) and eq.([eq : fd - relation_f ] ) in the frequency domain @xmath146 and the independence between the two noise sources , we find by using definition eq.([eq : dns_defn ] ) @xmath147\label{eq : dns_ll}\ ] ] where @xmath108 and @xmath109 are defined in eq.([eq : response ] ) and eq.([eq : response_f ] ) . seeing that @xmath148 we can factor out @xmath149 from the bracket in eq.([eq : dns_ll ] )
@xmath150\nonumber \\   & = & \frac{2k_{b}t}{m}\left[\frac{1}{(\bar{\omega}_{e}^{2}-\omega^{2})^{2}+\omega^{2}\gamma_{e}^{2}}\right]\times\\   &   & \left[\gamma+\frac{g^{2}}{mm}\frac{\gamma}{(\bar{\omega}^{2}-\omega^{2})^{2}+\omega^{2}\gamma^{2}}\right]\nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ] which equals to eq.([eq : dns ] ) .
the integrand of eq.([eq : var_x ] ) has highest order of @xmath151 in the denominator and can not be integrated analytically . to make the integrand integrable
, we introduce a parameter @xmath152 as a variable of the spring constant @xmath4 and approximate the integrand by expanding @xmath153 with respect to @xmath154 up to 2nd order in the vicinity of @xmath155 , in other words , when @xmath156 .
that is , we let @xmath157 to calculate the three terms in the expansion , we first substitute @xmath4 with @xmath158 in eq.([eq : freq_eff ] ) , @xmath159 since the lowest - order term in the numerator and the denominator is , respectively , @xmath160 and @xmath161 , the second term of the above formula goes to 0 when @xmath162 .
thus we find the first term in the expansion @xmath163 .
the first - order derivative of @xmath164 reads @xmath165}{\left[(gm^{-1}\mu^{-1}-\omega^{2})^{2}+\omega^{2}\gamma^{2}\right]^{2}}.\ ] ] again by comparing the coefficients of the lowest - order terms in the numerator and the denominator , we shall see the second term in the expansion @xmath166 .
the third term in the expansion can be obtained similarly by observing the limiting behavior of the numerator and the denominator of the second - order derivative of @xmath164 @xmath167^{3}},\ ] ] which reads @xmath168 after taking the limit . combining the results , we have @xmath169    the truncation error rate introduced in this approximation , by comparing eq .
( [ eq : exact_omega ] ) and eq.([eq : appr_omega ] ) , is @xmath170}{\bar{\omega}_{e}^{2}}.\ ] ] expanding @xmath153 and @xmath154 gives @xmath171(f^{2}+m^{2}\omega^{2}\gamma^{2})-g^{2}f\right\ } \nonumber \\   &   & \times\left[(g+k)(f^{2}+m^{2}\omega^{2}\gamma^{2})-g^{2}f\right]^{-1}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have used the shorthand @xmath172 .
since we only consider the usual cases with @xmath173 , the terms containing the damping coefficient can be omitted@xmath174f - g^{2}}{(g+k)f - g^{2}}.\ ] ] expanding @xmath15 and multiplying the numerator and denominator by @xmath175 , we find @xmath176}\ ] ] and at the other extreme of the expansion @xmath177 whence @xmath178 and @xmath2 can take any value @xmath179 therefore , the error can be sufficiently suppressed if we let @xmath57 and the expansion of @xmath153around @xmath177 is validated .
following the same reasoning and procedure , we can approximate the effective damping coefficient eq.([eq : damp_eff ] ) , @xmath180 which becomes @xmath131-independent .
substituting eq.([eq : appr_omega ] ) and eq.([eq : appr_gamma ] ) into eq.([eq : var_x ] ) , we get , after minor algebra , @xmath181 where @xmath182 can be considered the effective damping coefficient and vibrating frequency of the mass @xmath1 after the approximation .
we can apply a limiting process to eq.([eq : appr_var ] ) @xmath183 and compute the integral using the theorem of residues as we did in appendix [ sec : derv_delay ] @xmath184
fourier transforming the langevin equations in the momentum space eq.([eq : langevin_mo_x ] ) and eq.([eq : langevin_mo_q ] ) and recognizing @xmath185 we have@xmath186    we can follow the lines in appendix [ sec : derv_soln ] at this point to get the fourier transform of the momentum of the target resonator@xmath187\\ \times\left[\bar{\omega}^{2}-\omega^{2}+i\omega\gamma-\frac{g}{mm}\frac{1}{\bar{\omega}-\omega^{2}+i\omega\gamma}\right]^{-1}\end{gathered}\ ] ] which can be written in a compact form as in eq.([eq : fourier_p ] ) after grouping the terms .
the density noise spectrum in momentum can then be computed@xmath188\\   & + 2\pi f_{0}^{2}\omega^{2}m^{2}\delta(\omega+\omega_{0})l_{f}(\omega)l_{f}(-\omega_{0})\nonumber \\   & = 2k_{b}tm\frac{\omega^{2}\gamma_{e}}{(\bar{\omega}_{e}^{2}-\omega^{2})^{2}+\omega^{2}\gamma_{e}^{2}}+\\   & + 2\pi f_{0}^{2}\omega_{0}^{2}m^{2}\delta(\omega+\omega_{0})l_{f}(\omega_{0})l_{f}(-\omega_{0})\nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ]