Issue |
A&A
Volume 552, April 2013
|
|
---|---|---|
Article Number | A72 | |
Number of page(s) | 14 | |
Section | Astrophysical processes | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201220588 | |
Published online | 28 March 2013 |
Theoretical formulation of Doppler redistribution in scattering polarization within the framework of the velocity-space density matrix formalism
1
Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias,
C. Vía Láctea s/n, 38205
La Laguna Tenerife,
Spain
e-mail:
belluzzi@iac.es
2
Departamento de Astrofísica, Facultad de Física, Universidad de La
Laguna, 38206, La
Laguna Tenerife,
Spain
3
Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia, Università di
Firenze, Largo E. Fermi
2, 50125
Firenze,
Italy
4 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Spain
Received:
18
October
2012
Accepted:
25
January
2013
Within the framework of the density matrix theory for the generation and transfer of polarized radiation, velocity density matrix correlations represent an important physical aspect that, however, is often neglected in practical applications when adopting the simplifying approximation of complete redistribution on velocity. In this paper, we present an application of the non-LTE problem for polarized radiation taking such correlations into account through the velocity-space density matrix formalism. We consider a two-level atom with infinitely sharp upper and lower levels, and we derive the corresponding statistical equilibrium equations, neglecting the contribution of velocity-changing collisions. Coupling such equations with the radiative transfer equations for polarized radiation, we derive a set of coupled equations for the velocity-dependent source function. This set of equations is then particularized to the case of a plane-parallel atmosphere. The equations presented in this paper provide a complete and solid description of the physics of pure Doppler redistribution, a phenomenon generally described within the framework of the redistribution matrix formalism. The redistribution matrix corresponding to this problem (generally referred to as RI) is derived starting from the statistical equilibrium equations for the velocity-space density matrix and from the radiative transfer equations for polarized radiation, thus showing the equivalence of the two approaches.
Key words: atomic processes / line: formation / polarization / radiative transfer / scattering / stars: atmospheres
© ESO, 2013
1. Introduction
When polarization phenomena are considered, the usual description of the excitation state of an atomic system in terms of the population of its energy levels is not adequate, and it is necessary to specify the population of each magnetic sublevel, as well as the quantum interference (or coherence) that might be present between pairs of them. Whenever the magnetic sublevels of a given energy level are unevenly populated and/or quantum interference between pairs of them are present, the atomic system is said to be polarized. Atomic polarization is generally induced whenever an atomic system is excited by means of a physical process which is not spatially isotropic.
A powerful theoretical tool that allows the description of the full excitation state of an
atomic system in a very compact way is the so-called density operator (see Fano 1957). The most natural basis for defining the matrix
elements of the density operator is the basis of the eigenvectors of the total angular
momentum | αJM ⟩, with J the total angular momentum,
M its projection along the quantization axis, and α a
set of inner quantum numbers. On this basis, the elements of the density matrix are given by
(1)with
the density operator. The diagonal elements represent the populations of the magnetic
sublevels, the off-diagonal elements the quantum interference (or coherence) between
different magnetic sublevels (see Landi Degl’Innocenti
& Landolfi 2004, hereafter LL04). For the sake of simplicity, in this paper
we only consider interference between pairs of magnetic sublevels pertaining to the same
J-level, which is a good approximation for the investigation of many
solar spectral lines (see LL04 and Belluzzi &
Trujillo Bueno 2011, for a detailed discussion of the importance of interference
between different J-levels in determining the wing polarization of
multiplet lines). We thus consider only the density matrix elements of the form
ρ(αJM,αJM′). In general it
is convenient to work in terms of the multipole moments of the density matrix (or spherical
statistical tensors)
(2)which transform as
irreducible tensors under a rotation of the reference system.
Since the radiation field experienced by an atom depends on its velocity because of the
Doppler effect, the density matrix will also depend on the velocity ν of the atom.
Indicating with the
ν-dependent spherical statistical tensor of the atomic system, and with
f(ν) the velocity distribution function of the atoms in a given point of
the plasma, a complete statistical description of the atom is given by the product
,
generally referred to as velocity-space density matrix. The need for introducing this
quantity was put forward by Landi Degl’Innocenti
(1996), who pointed out the importance of velocity density matrix correlations in
polarized radiative transfer. The statistical equilibrium equations for the velocity-space
density matrix can be written in the form (see Sect. 13.2 of LL04)
(3)The first term on the
righthand side is due to processes that, as a first approximation, are not effective in
changing the velocity of the atom: these include radiative processes (absorption and
emission of photons), inelastic and superelastic collisions with electrons, and depolarizing
collisions with neutral hydrogen atoms1. The second
term, which can be regarded as a generalization of the Boltzmann term which is met in the
kinetic theory of gases, is due to collisions that are able to modify the velocity of the
atom (velocity-changing collisions). Such collisions, which are characterized by very small
impact parameters and by rather large exchange of kinetic energy, generally induce
transitions between different energy levels, and thus affect the atomic density matrix.
Because of the generalized Boltzmann term, Eq. (3) is extremely complicated, and two different approximations are generally
introduced.
The first one consists in neglecting the generalized Boltzmann term (velocity-coherence approximation). As discussed in Sect. 13.2 of LL04, this is a good approximation in the outer layers of a stellar atmosphere, where the number density of perturbers responsible for velocity-changing collisions (typically short-range collisions with hydrogen atoms or ions) is sufficiently low, and this kind of collisions are indeed negligible. Under this approximation, the ν-dependence of the density matrix is only due to the fact that atoms moving with different velocities may experience, because of the Doppler effect, different radiation fields.
The second approximation is to assume that velocity-changing collisions are so efficient in
reshuffling the atomic velocities that any velocity density matrix correlation is lost
(complete redistribution on velocity approximation). In this case, the velocity-space
density matrix is given by , the density matrix being
independent of ν. Since velocity-changing collisions also contribute to depolarize the
atomic system, when the complete redistribution on velocity approximation is justified,
polarization phenomena are generally negligible. For this reason, it is customary to
consider an intermediate approach which consists in neglecting the generalized Boltzmann
term, still assuming a velocity-independent density matrix.
The general problem of interpreting the spectropolarimetric profiles of lines formed in an optically thick plasma, such as a stellar atmosphere, requires the self-consistent solution of the statistical equilibrium equations and of the radiative transfer equations, taking into account polarization phenomena, both in the atomic system and in the radiation field (see Trujillo Bueno 2003). This problem has been referred to as the non-LTE problem of the second kind (see LL04), so to distinguish it from the usual non-LTE problem where polarization phenomena are neglected. A detailed discussion of the general non-LTE problem of the second kind, under the approximation of complete redistribution on velocity, is presented in Chapter 14 of LL04.
In this paper, we present an application of the non-LTE problem of the second kind under the velocity-coherence approximation previously discussed. We consider the basic case of a two-level atom with infinitely sharp upper and lower levels. Starting from the statistical equilibrium equations for the velocity-space density matrix (Sect. 3), and from the radiative transfer equations for polarized radiation (Sect. 4), we derive a set of coupled equations for the velocity-dependent source function (Sect. 5). This set of coupled equations is then specified to the particular case of a Maxwellian distribution of velocities, and it is finally applied to the particular case of a plane-parallel atmosphere (Sect. 6). From the same equations we also derive the redistribution phase-matrix corresponding to this physical problem (generally referred to as RI), thus showing the equivalence of this widely applied approach to the one described in this paper (Sect. 7).
The more realistic case of partial frequency redistribution, assuming a two-level model atom with infinitely-sharp and unpolarized lower level, and with a naturally and/or collisionally broadened upper level, has been considered by several authors (e.g., Omont et al. 1972, 1973; Domke & Hubeny 1988; Bommier 1997a,b; Sampoorna 2012), providing expressions for the ensuing redistribution matrix. In this paper we show, for the academic case of a two-level atom with infinitely-sharp upper and lower levels, how the phenomenon of pure Doppler redistribution can be rigorously described through the velocity-space density matrix formalism. This formalism allows us to describe the physics of the atom-photon interaction in a very transparent way (e.g., it allows us to clearly identify correlations between atoms located at different points of the plasma), and it highlights the underlying approximations (e.g., the neglect of velocity-changing collisions). The equations that are obtained are very general, and can be applied to arbitrary velocity distributions. Moreover, they are able to account for the presence of atomic polarization in the lower level of the considered transition, and they are suitable for a generalization to the multilevel case. The application of the velocity-space density matrix formalism for the description of a two-level atom with broadened upper level is presently under investigation, and is not discussed in this paper.
2. Formulation of the problem: hypotheses and approximations
We consider a two-level atom with an unpolarized lower level and we suppose that the
radiation field incident on the atom is weak, in the sense that the average number of
photons per mode, ,
is much smaller than unity, which justifies to neglect stimulated emission.
We suppose that a collection of such atoms is distributed within a static medium of arbitrary shape. In this medium the atoms interact with a magnetic field, B, and with a population of colliding particles having a Maxwellian distribution of velocities characterized by the temperature T. No restriction is made on the spatial variation within the medium of the temperature T of the colliders, of the densities of the atoms and colliders, and of the magnetic field vector B. We suppose that the magnetic field is weak (in the sense that the associated Larmor frequency νL is much lower than the frequency width ΔνP of the absorption profile) and that the broadening of both the upper and lower levels is much smaller than ΔνP, so that they can be considered as infinitely sharp, and the flat-spectrum approximation is satisfied2.
The atoms are characterized by an arbitrary velocity distribution f(ν)
that, for the sake of simplicity, we assume to be constant throughout the medium. Taking
velocity density matrix correlations into account, at any point P of the medium, of
coordinate x, the atom is thus described by the velocity-space
density matrix ,
where
(αJ) = (αuJu)
for the upper level and
(αJ) = (αℓJℓ)
for the lower level. Neglecting velocity-changing collisions (i.e. assuming the
velocity-coherence approximation described in Sect. 1), the velocity-space density matrix
evolves with time according to the equation
(4)which is solved by
As
previously pointed out, the term on the righthand side of Eq. (5) contains the “ordinary” processes due to the atom-radiation
interaction and to collisions. The value of
can
thus be found by solving the statistical equilibrium equations presented in LL04, taking
properly into account the explicit dependence of the radiative and collisional rates on the
velocity of the atom. The velocity distribution f(ν), on the other hand,
remains undetermined, and can only be established by means of different physical
considerations. In many cases, it can simply be assumed to be a Maxwellian, possibly
centered at a non-zero velocity, like in the case of the solar wind. In the next Sections,
if not explicitly specified, we consider an arbitrary velocity distribution
f(ν).
In terms of scattering processes, our model allows us to describe coherent scattering in the atom rest frame, with purely Doppler redistribution in the observer frame. Within the framework of the redistribution matrix formalism, following the terminology introduced by Hummer (1962), this kind of process, in the case of a Maxwellian velocity distribution, is described by the RI redistribution function.
3. The statistical equilibrium equations
Referring to the geometry of Fig. 1, in the “fixed” (or laboratory) reference system Σ, the
statistical equilibrium equation for the multipole moments of the upper level is the same as
Eq. (14.2) of LL04, with the only difference that the radiative and collisional rates now
depend explicitly on the velocity ν of the atom. We thus have (7)where
all the rates are evaluated at point x,
νL is the Larmor frequency at the same point, and
gαuJu
is the Landé factor of the upper level.
![]() |
Fig. 1 Geometry of the problem. At each point P of the medium, the magnetic field vector B is specified by the angles θB and χB, defined in the fixed reference system Σ ≡ (xyz). The polarization unit vector ea(Ω) specifies the reference direction for positive Q of the radiation flowing through P in the direction Ω, specified by the angles θ and χ in the fixed reference system. |
The kernel is given by (see Eq.
(7.79) of LL04)
(8)where
are rotation matrices, and
RB is the rotation that carries the local
“magnetic” reference system (having the z-axis aligned with the magnetic
field) into the “fixed” reference system Σ. In terms of Euler angles one simply has (see
Fig. 1 for the definition of the angles)
where
γB is an arbitrary angle that can be set to
zero. The main properties and the explicit expressions of the components of
are given in Appendix
19 of LL04. The assumptions that we have introduced yield two basic simplifications in Eq.
(7):
-
because stimulation effects are neglected, the relaxation rate RS iszero;
-
because lower-level polarization is neglected, the statistical tensors of the lower level reduce to
.
This implies that the only radiative rate needed in Eq. (7) is the absorption rate,
TA(αuJuKQ,αℓJℓ 0 0).
Taking into account that the upper and lower levels of the atom are infinitely sharp, such
rate, in the fixed reference frame, is given by (cf. Eq. (10.9) of LL04)
(9)where
is the
radiation field tensor calculated in the atom rest frame, or comoving frame (it describes
the radiation field as “seen” by the atom, and it actually depends on its velocity ν in the
fixed reference frame), and where ν0 is the frequency of the
transition between the upper and lower level of the atom. In the comoving frame, the
radiation field tensor is given by (see Eq. (5.157) of LL04)
(10)where
[Si(ν0,Ω)]c.f.
are the Stokes parameters of the radiation propagating along the direction Ω at
the frequency ν0, as defined in the comoving frame. In the limit
ν/ c ≪ 1 aberration and further relativistic effects can
be neglected and the radiation field tensor in the comoving frame can be calculated from the
Stokes parameters in the fixed reference frame just taking into account the Doppler effect
evaluated to first order in ν/ c. This brings to the
following expression
(11)where now
Si are the Stokes parameters measured in the
fixed frame.
As far as the inelastic and superelastic collisional rates,
, and
are concerned, we suppose that
they do not depend on the velocity ν of the atom undergoing the collision. This is a very
good approximation, since such collisions are due to electrons, which travel with velocities
much higher (typically by two orders of magnitude) than the velocity of the atom. Concerning
depolarizing collisions (elastic collisions), basically due to neutral perturbers such as
hydrogen atoms, the approximation can be more questionable. For this reason, from now on we
denote such rates with the symbol
D(K)(αuJu;ν).
Taking into account these remarks, and recalling the expression of the radiative rate
RE (cf. Eq. (7.14e) of LL04), which obviously does not depend on the velocity
of the atom, being due to spontaneous de-excitation processes, we can rewrite Eq. (7) in the form
(12)where
the symbol
is given by Eq. (10.11) of LL04.
Since the colliding particles have a Maxwellian distribution of velocities, we can apply
the Einstein-Milne relation to connect the collisional rates due to inelastic and
superelastic collisions (cf. Eq. (10.49) of LL04). Next we divide both members by
A(αuJu → αℓJℓ)
and introduce the usual notations (cf. Eqs. (10.51) and (10.28) of LL04)
(13)Recalling the
relations between the Einstein coefficients (Eqs. (7.8) of LL04), we obtain, for stationary
situations
(14)where
(15)is
the Planck function in the Wien limit (consistently with the fact that stimulated emission
is neglected).
In view of the following applications, it is convenient to rewrite the previous equation
for the time evolution of the density matrix in a more compact form, by introducing suitable
“source functions” for the different statistical tensors. Defining
(16)such equation becomes
(17)The quantities
are the obvious generalization
of the irreducible components of the two-level atom source function, introduced in LL04. Now
we also have an explicit dependence on ν. This is because atoms having different velocities
may have, in general, different source functions since, even at the same point in the
medium, they experience, due to the Doppler effect, different radiation fields.
4. The radiative transfer equation
We consider now the radiative transfer equation. From Eq. (6.83) of LL04 we have,
neglecting stimulated emission (18)where
Si(ν,Ω) are
the Stokes parameters of the radiation flowing through point x
in the direction Ω, defined with respect to the unit vectors
ea(Ω),
eb(Ω) of Fig. 1,
is the
absorption matrix, and εi are the emission
coefficients in the four Stokes parameters. The explicit expressions of the radiative
transfer coefficients for the case we are concerned with can be derived by a simple
generalization of the results contained in Sect. 14.2 of LL04. Since we have assumed that
the lower level is unpolarized, and that the Zeeman splitting is negligible with respect to
ΔνD, the absorption matrix
is proportional
to the identity matrix, i.e., it is of the form
(19)Due to the Doppler effect,
an atom with velocity ν absorbs radiation propagating in direction Ω only at
the frequency
ν0(1 + ν·Ω/c)
(we assumed that the upper and lower levels are infinitely sharp). The absorption
coefficient
is thus given by
(20)with
(21)where
δ is the Dirac-delta. The quantity
is the
frequency-integrated absorption coefficient of the line, given by
(22)with
the number density of atoms in the lower level at point x.
The expression for the emission coefficient in the four Stokes parameters is obtained from
Eq. (7.16e) of LL04 (where the velocity-independent density matrix has now to be substituted
with the velocity-space density matrix, and where, consistently with our assumptions, the
profile φ(ν0 − ν) is now a
Dirac-delta). Considering that, due to the Doppler effect, the atoms having velocity ν emit,
along the direction Ω, at the frequency
ν0(1 + ν·Ω/c),
we have (23)Obviously, the preceding
expressions imply that the only contribution to the opacity and emissivity of the medium
comes from transitions between the two levels of the model atom. The case where a source of
continuum opacity (and emissivity) is also present is formally more complicated and is not
treated here.
The radiative transfer equation can be formally solved.
![]() |
Fig. 2 Geometry of the transfer process. A ray with direction Ω enters the
medium at point x0 , where its Stokes
parameters are |
Referring to Fig. 2, and using Eq. (8.18) of LL04, the Stokes parameters at point
x of the radiation at frequency ν,
flowing along the direction Ω can be expressed in the form (24)where
is the Stokes vector of the
radiation entering the medium at point x0 along the
direction Ω, s′ is the coordinate of
x′ reckoned along Ω
(s′ = |x′ − x0 |),
and
τν(x,x′)
is the optical depth at frequency ν between points
x and x′,
(25)It is now possible to
find the expression for the radiation field tensor at point x.
Substituting Eq. (24) into Eq. (11), we obtain two contributions and we can thus
write
(26)where the “internal”
part
is given by
(27)where
(28)and the “external”
part
, originating from
the boundary conditions, by
(29)Equation (27) can be cast in a simpler form by changing
the double integral in dΩ and ds′ into a volume integral. Since
(30)we get
(31)
5. Coupled equations for the velocity dependent irreducible components of the source function
We can now substitute the expression of the radiation field tensor at point
x into the statistical equilibrium equation. From Eqs.
(17), (26), and (31) we obtain
(32)where
(33)The quantities
GKQ,K′Q′(ν,x ;ν′,x′)
appearing in this equation represent a factor (having the dimension of the inverse of a
frequency) which weights the amount of coupling between the statistical tensor
of the atoms
having velocity ν at point x and the statistical tensor
of the
atoms having velocity ν′ at point
x′. They are a generalization of similar
quantities introduced in LL04 and can be referred to as velocity dependent multipole
coupling coefficients. The Dirac-delta appearing in their expression is responsible for the
fact that two such multipoles can be coupled only if the velocity difference,
ν− ν′ is perpendicular to the unit vector Ω which specifies the
direction x − x′.
Equation (32) is a system of linear,
non-homogeneous, integral equations in the unknowns , the velocity dependent
irreducible components of the source function, which can in principle be solved once the
properties of the medium and the boundary conditions are specified. When the values of these
components are known at each point, the Stokes parameters of the radiation emerging from the
medium can be computed by applying Eq. (24).
It should be remarked that, owing to a property of the tensor
, whose proof
can be found in Appendix 20 of LL04, it can be shown that Eq. (32) decouples in two different sets of equations involving,
respectively, the components with K = 0,2 and those with
K = 1. In the latter set, the only source term is
, which vanishes unless
the boundary radiation field has some contribution arising from circular polarization.
Excluding this case of limited interest, all the components
are everywhere zero in the
medium.
For further developments it is however more practical to rewrite Eq. (32) in an alternative form by substitution of
Eq. (33) and by introducing the compact
symbol
ΓKQ,K′Q′(Ω),
whose main properties are collected in Appendix 20 of LL04. Its definition, that we recall
here for completeness, is the following
(34)With these transformations
we obtain
(35)This
is a very general set of coupled equations for the velocity-dependent source function that
in principle can be solved numerically by suitable discretization of
over the velocity-space and the
physical-space.
We now assume that the velocity distribution f(ν) is a Maxwellian
characterized by the thermal velocity νt (possibly containing
the contribution of microturbulent velocities)
(36)For fixed
x and x′ (which
implies a fixed direction Ω joining x′
with x), and for a fixed velocity ν, we introduce a
right-handed, Cartesian coordinate system
(ea,eb,ec)
in the velocity space. The unit vector ec is
directed along Ω (coinciding with it), while the other two vectors are
perpendicular to Ω and for the rest arbitrary. In this system we obviously have
(37)With these positions,
we can perform the following formal substitution in the integral in
d3ν′
(38)Due to the presence of the
Dirac’s delta, the integral in
is immediately
performed, and the last term on the righthand side of Eq. (35) acquires the form
(39)where the vector
in the
argument of
has
components
, and where the Doppler width
ΔνD is given by
(40)We also observe that
under the assumption that the velocity distribution is a Maxwellian characterized by the
thermal velocity νt, the absorption coefficient (see Eq. (20)) does not depend any longer on the
propagation direction of the radiation (Ω), and it is given by
(41)with
(42)Under the same
assumption, the optical depth
τν(x,x′)
(see Eq. (25)) is given by
(43)
6. Equations for a plane-parallel semi-infinite stellar atmosphere
We now consider the particular case of a plane-parallel, semi-infinite stellar atmosphere.
In this case all the physical quantities of the medium depend on a single coordinate, the
height in the atmosphere, that we assume as the z-axis of our fixed
reference system of Fig. 1. As a consequence, the irreducible components of the
velocity-dependent source function only vary with the height z. We keep
assuming that the velocity distribution is Maxwellian and we introduce the line optical
depth tL through the equation
(44)Assuming that the stellar
atmosphere is not illuminated by external sources of radiation, Eq. (35) takes the form
(45)where
the indices K and K′ are restricted to the
values 0 and 2.
![]() |
Fig. 3 Geometry for the plane-parallel atmosphere. In the reference system Σ we consider a
fixed point P located at height z corresponding to line optical depth
tL. The point P′ lies on the plane Γ parallel
to the x–yplane; its height is
z′ corresponding to line optical depth
|
The integral over x′ and y′ can be
performed by introducing cylindrical coordinates and following a procedure similar to the
one developed in Appendix 21 of LL04. Referring to the geometry of Fig. 3 (which represents
the case or
z′ < z), and
introducing the cylindrical coordinates r and α of the
point P′, one has
(46)On the other hand
(47)and
(48)From these relations we get
(49)and since
χ = α + π, the double integral over
x′ and y′ can be transformed into
an integral over the angles θ and χ specifying the
direction Ω. In Eq. (45) one
can then perform the formal substitution
(50)Moreover, introducing the
reduced frequency distance from line center through the usual expression
(51)and the normalized profile
(52)one has
(53)with (recalling Eq.
(28))
(54)Taking into account
these transformations, and performing a similar analysis for the case
, Eq. (45) becomes
(55)the
interval (θ1,θ2)
being (0,π/2) if
and
(π/2,π) if
.
It is now necessary to specify the unit vectors ea
and eb that have been left undefined. For a given
direction Ω we set (56)Given
the velocity components
and
, the velocity
is thus
given by
This
equation allows us to find the modulus,
, polar angle,
θ∗, and azimuth, χ∗, of the
velocity
in terms
of
,
, and νc.
One gets
(57)the
combination of the last two equations giving
(58)or
(59)The previous equations can
also be inverted to give
(60)We
now consider the simplified case of cylindrical symmetry. This implies the absence of a
deterministic magnetic field (the case of a turbulent magnetic feld can be handled with a
slight modification of the formalism; see Sect. 14.2 of LL04, and Appendix A of Trujillo Bueno & Manso Sainz 1999). In a
cylindrically symmetric environment the velocity-dependent irreducible components of the
source function,
, have a
dependence on the azimuth χν of the velocity of the form
(61)where
is the value of the source
function corresponding to χν = 0. Taking into account this
property, we can limit ourselves to find the coupled equations for the quantities
, thus finding
(62)where,
according to Eq. (59),
(63)We remind that the quantity
νc appearing in this equation is defined by
(64)From Eq. (63), one can notice that the integrand in Eq.
(62) is an odd function of
. When integrating
over
from − ∞ to ∞, one
can thus perform the following substitutions
(65)Finally,
one can notice that the structure of Eq. (62) is such to be consistent with our hypothesis on the behavior of the source
function with the azimuth of the velocity. This is easily proven by considering the fact
that the quantity
ΓKQ,K′Q′(Ω)
depends on the angle χ through an exponential of the form
exp [i(Q′ − Q)χ].
It is convenient to perform a change of variables in the integral appearing in Eq. (62). Once the values of ν and
θν (the velocity vector appearing as the argument of the
density matrix element for which we write the statistical equilibrium equation) and the
direction Ω (through the angles θ and χ) are
specified, the velocity component νc is fixed. We can then transform the double
integral in the variables in a double integral over the
variables
. For this
we have to consider the formal transformation
(66)where
is the determinant of the Jacobian of the transformation, namely
(67)On the other hand, from the
equations relating
and
θ∗ with
and
, we have
(68)so that we obtain
(69)This equation,
together with the relationships previously developed among the components of the velocity,
allows us to rewrite Eq. (66) in the form
(70)where
(71)Substituting this result
into Eq. (62), and inverting the order of
the integrals, it is possible to rewrite the same equation in a different form. Performing
the following change of notations on the integration variables:
,
, one gets
(72)where the kernel,
is given by
(73)and
can be more conveniently expressed in the form
(74)The quantities
cos(χ∗ − χ) and
sin(χ∗ − χ) appearing (implicitly or
explicitly) in this equation are related to the other variables through the equations
Concerning
the ± sign appearing in this last expression, it is important to note that it is connected
with the sign of the velocity component,
, that has now
disappeared from the equations, due to change of variables that we have performed. Equation
(74) has then, more properly, to be
written as
(77)where
and
are the values of χ∗ corresponding, respectively, to negative or
positive
. With easy algebra
we find
(78)We
conclude observing that the equations for the velocity-independent source function derived
in Chapter 14 of LL04 under the approximation of complete redistribution on velocity can be
recovered, as a particular case, from the equations presented in this work. Indeed, they can
be obtained starting from Eq. (35), assuming
that the source function
and the
depolarizing rate
do not depend on the velocity, performing the integral in d3ν′
appearing in the last term, and averaging over the velocity distribution
f(ν).
7. The RI redistribution phase-matrix
We now analyze the basic equations that underly this physical problem, following an alternative approach. Instead of eliminating the “radiation field variables” in order to obtain a set of coupled equations for the velocity-dependent density matrix elements, we can eliminate the “density matrix variables” in order to obtain equations which directly involve the Stokes parameters of the radiation field. This brings us to the definition of a suitable redistribution phase-matrix, referred to in the literature as RI in the case of a Maxwellian distribution of velocities.
Neglecting the magnetic field contribution, Eq. (17) can be easily solved for . One gets
(79)We can now substitute this
expression for the velocity-dependent source function into Eq. (23), giving the emission coefficient for the
Stokes parameters at frequency ν into the direction Ω. Taking
also into account Eqs. (11) and (21), the expression of the emission coefficient
can be cast in the form
(80)where
is the
scattering phase matrix (corrected for depolarizing collisions) which is given by
(81)with
. We now assume that the
velocity distribution is Maxwellian, and we perform the integral in d3ν,
neglecting the velocity dependence of the depolarizing collisions3. Under this hypothesis, the scattering phase matrix does not depend any
longer on ν and can thus be simply written as
. It is
convenient to perform an inversion of the two integrals (first we perform the integral in
d3ν and then the one in dΩ′) and to introduce a
right-handed triplet of unit vectors,
(u1,u2,u3),
defined in the following way: u1 is the unit vector
along the direction that bisects the angle Θ (0 ≤ Θ ≤ π) formed by
Ω and Ω′; u2
is perpendicular to u1, lying, as
u1, in the plane defined by Ω and
Ω′, and being directed in such a way that it has a positive
component along Ω . Finally, u3 is
defined accordingly. The unit vectors u1 and
u2 are given by
(82)with the inverse formulae
(83)Writing
ν= ν1 u1 + ν2 u2 + ν3 u3,
the delta function appearing in Eq. (80) is
satisfied when
(84)Taking into account
this relation between ν1 and ν2, the Stokes parameter
Sj(ν0 + ν0 ν·Ω′/c,Ω′),
also appearing in Eq. (80), can be written
as
Sj(ν′,Ω′),
where the frequency ν′ only depends on ν2, being
given by
(85)Integrating first
in dν3 and then in dν1 (this latter integral being performed taking
into account the Dirac-delta), one is left with the expression
(86)where ν1
follows from Eq. (84), being given by
(87)This equation can be
written in an alternative form by a change of variable in the second integral, passing from
the variable ν2 to the variable ν′. This can be done
by taking into account that (see Eq. (85))
(88)and that, starting from
Eqs. (85) and (87), the quantity
can be written,
after some algebra, in the form
(89)Moreover, by introducing
the reduced variables ξ and ξ′, defined by
(90)taking into account that
εi(ξ,Ω) = εi(ν,Ω) dν/dξ = εi(ν,Ω) ΔνD,
and recalling the definition of the absorption profile
ϕ(ξ) (see Eq. (52)), Eq. (86) can be written in
the following form
(91)or,
using the lexicon of “redistribution functions”,
(92)where
(93)This redistribution
matrix was first proposed heuristically by Dumont et al.
(1977). We also observe that for a 0 → 1 transition (for which
W0 = W2 = 1), and in the absence
of depolarizing collisions (
), the redistribution matrix element
[RI] 00 corresponds to the redistribution
function RI derived by Hummer
(1962) for the unpolarized case (see his Eqs. (2.21.2) and (2.21.4))4.
8. Conclusions
In this paper we have derived the equations for the non-LTE problem of the second kind, taking velocity density matrix correlations into account. We considered the basic case of a two-level atom with infinitely sharp upper and lower levels, and we derived the statistical equilibrium equations for the velocity-space density matrix, neglecting the generalized Boltzmann term (which is a good approximation in the outer layers of a stellar atmosphere). Taking the Doppler effect into account, we derived a set of coupled equations for the velocity-dependent multipole components of the source function. Such equations show a coupling between the atoms at point x, moving with velocity ν, and the atoms at point x′, moving with velocity ν′, such that the difference ν− ν′ (the relative velocity) is perpendicular to the direction x − x′. This is a clear consequence of the Doppler effect and of the fact that we considered a resonant transition between two infinitely sharp atomic levels, an academic case that nevertheless allows us to investigate in detail the physics of pure Doppler redistribution in scattering polarization.
Starting from the statistical equilibrium equations for the velocity-space density matrix,
and from the radiative transfer equations for polarized radiation, we derived the
redistribution matrix corresponding to this physical problem. This redistribution matrix
(heuristically proposed by Dumont et al. 1977)
provides an alternative, equivalent description of the problem, and represents the
generalization to the polarized case of the (angle-dependent) RI
redistribution function derived by Hummer (1962). If,
on the one hand, the redistribution matrix formalism allows a very simple and intuitive
description of redistribution phenomena, on the other hand, the velocity-space density
matrix formalism provides a very transparent picture of the physics of the atom-photon
interaction. The above-mentioned correlations between atoms located at different points of
the plasma remain actually “hidden” in the redistribution matrix formalism. It should also
be observed that only the average effect of such correlations is taken into account if the
approximate “angle-averaged” redistribution
matrix is considered. The velocity-space density matrix formalism has also the advantage of
being suitable for taking lower-level polarization into account, and for describing
multilevel atomic systems. An important point to remark is the appearance, in the
statistical equilibrium equations for the velocity-space density matrix, of the generalized
Boltzmann term. This term allows the inclusion of the effect of velocity-changing collisions
into the problem, and points out the limits of applicability of any theoretical approach in
which it is neglected. Velocity-changing collisions are a complex and not yet deeply
investigated physical aspect that, however, may play an important role in the lower layers
of stellar atmospheres. We point out that the equations that have been derived in Sect. 5
(in particular Eq. (35)) are very general,
and can be applied to arbitrary velocity distributions and to plasma structures of any
geometry.
The applicability of the flat-spectrum approximation follows from the two inequalities γu,γℓ ≪ ΔνP, with γu and γℓ the inverse lifetimes of the upper and lower level, respectively, and νL ≪ ΔνP. The latter obviously implies an upper limit on the magnetic field intensities that can be handled by this formalism.
This is a non-trivial approximation. Indeed, if the colliding hydrogen atoms have a root
mean square velocity w, an atom that is moving with velocity ν “sees”, in
his rest frame, that the hydrogen atoms have a root mean square velocity
.
This can lead to an important dependence of the quantities
δ(K) on ν.
Acknowledgments
Financial support by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness and the European FEDER Fund through project AYA2010-18029 (Solar Magnetism and Astrophysical Spectropolarimetry) is gratefully acknowledged. One of the authors (ELD) wishes to acknowledge the Research Area of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias (IAC) for helping to finance a six months sabbatical leave at the IAC, during which part of this work was carried out.
References
- Belluzzi, L., & Trujillo Bueno, J. 2011, ApJ, 743, 3 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Bommier, V. 1997a, A&A, 328, 706 [NASA ADS] [Google Scholar]
- Bommier, V. 1997b, A&A, 328, 726 [NASA ADS] [Google Scholar]
- Domke, H., & Hubeny, I. 1988, ApJ, 334, 527 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Dumont, S., Omont, A., Pecker, J. C., & Rees, D. E. 1977, A&A, 54, 675 [NASA ADS] [Google Scholar]
- Fano, U. 1957, Rev. Mod. Phys., 29, 74 [Google Scholar]
- Hummer, D. G. 1962, MNRAS, 125, 21 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Landi Degl’ Innocenti, E. 1996, Sol. Phys., 164, 21 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Landi Degl’Innocenti, E., & Landolfi, M. 2004, Polarization in Spectral Lines (Dordrecht: Kluwer) (LL04) [Google Scholar]
- Omont, A., Smith, E. W., & Cooper, J. 1972, ApJ, 175, 185 [Google Scholar]
- Omont, A., Smith, E. W., & Cooper, J. 1973, ApJ, 182, 283 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Sampoorna, M. 2012, ApJ, 745, 189 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Trujillo Bueno, J. 2003, in Stellar Atmosphere Modeling, eds. I. Hubeny, D. Mihalas, & K. Werner, ASP Conf. Ser., 288, 551 [Google Scholar]
- Trujillo Bueno, J., & Manso Sainz, R. 1999, ApJ, 516, 436 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
All Figures
![]() |
Fig. 1 Geometry of the problem. At each point P of the medium, the magnetic field vector B is specified by the angles θB and χB, defined in the fixed reference system Σ ≡ (xyz). The polarization unit vector ea(Ω) specifies the reference direction for positive Q of the radiation flowing through P in the direction Ω, specified by the angles θ and χ in the fixed reference system. |
In the text |
![]() |
Fig. 2 Geometry of the transfer process. A ray with direction Ω enters the
medium at point x0 , where its Stokes
parameters are |
In the text |
![]() |
Fig. 3 Geometry for the plane-parallel atmosphere. In the reference system Σ we consider a
fixed point P located at height z corresponding to line optical depth
tL. The point P′ lies on the plane Γ parallel
to the x–yplane; its height is
z′ corresponding to line optical depth
|
In the text |
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.