Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Large amplitude electromagnetic solitons in a fully relativistic magnetized electron-positron-pair plasma

Large amplitude electromagnetic solitons in a fully relativistic magnetized... Nonlinear propagation of purely stationary large amplitude electromagnetic (EM) solitary waves in a magne- tized electron-positron (EP) plasma is studied using a fully relativistic two- uid hydrodynamic model which 2 2 accounts for physical regimes of both weakly relativistic (P  nmc ) and ultrarelativistic (P  nmc ) random thermal energies. Here, P is the thermal pressure, n the number density and m the mass of a particle, and c is the speed of light in vacuum. While both the sub-Alfv enic and super-Alfv enic solitons coexist in the weakly relativistic regime, the ultrarelativistic EP plasmas in contrast support only the sub- Alfv enic solitons. Di erent limits of the Mach numbers and soliton amplitudes are also examined in these two physical regimes. Keywords: Electron-positron plasma, Relativistic plasma, Alfv enic soliton, pseudopotential 1. Introduction Linear and nonlinear waves in EP-pair plas- mas di er fundamentally from those in ordinary Electron-positron (EP) plasmas have been known electron-ion plasmas or from a purely electronic to play important roles in many physical situations, beam due to their intrinsic and complete symme- such as active galactic nuclei (Begelman et al., try with equal charge (but opposite in sign) and 1984; Miler and Witta, 1987), pulsars (Goldreich mass. The Sagdeev or pseudopotential approach and Julian, 1969), quasars (Wardle et al., 1998), has been the most suitable technique for the desrip- black holes (Blandford and Znajek, 1977), accre- tion of nonlinear large amplitude waves (Misra and tion disks (Orosz et al., 1997), the early universe Adhikary, 2011, 2013; Sagdeev, 1966; Sagdeev and (Misner et al., 1973; Gibbons et al., 1983), near Galeev, 1969; Baboolal et al., 1990; Mace et al., the polar cap of fast rotating neutron stars (Light- 1991; Banerjee and Maitra, 2015, 2016; Saini et al., man, 1982; Burns and Lovelace, 1982; Lightman 2011; Das et al., 2010) which also works well in pair and Zdziarski, 1987; Yu et al., 1986), as well as plasmas (Verheest et al., 1996). However, when rel- in laboratories (Sarri et al., 2015). In the latter, ativistic dynamics is included together with thermal it has been shown that the production of the ion- pressure of plasma particles for the description of free high-density neutral EP-pair plasmas and their large amplitude EM waves, the Sagdeev's approach identi cation as collective modes can be possible in may not be suitable. In this context, an alternative a controlled laboratory environment. procedure has also been developed by McKenzie et al. (McKenzie and Doyle, 2003) to study the prop- On leave from Department of Basic Science and Hu- erties of nonlinear waves in its own frame of ref- manities, University of Engineering & Management (UEM), erence. Although both approaches are analogous Kolkata-700 160. to each other especially for electrostatic waves, the Corresponding author McKenzie approach provides a better perception Email addresses: gban.iitkgp@gmail.com (Gadadhar Banerjee), dutta@irsamc.ups-tlse.fr; and usefulness than the Sagdeev's approach espe- sayantan.dutta110@gmail.com (Sayantan Dutta), cially when one is concerned with the propagation apmisra@visva-bharati.ac.in; apmisra@gmail.com (A. P. of electromagnetic (EM) solitary waves in plasmas Misra) Preprint submitted to Elsevier June 5, 2020 arXiv:2005.06288v2 [physics.plasm-ph] 4 Jun 2020 2 (Verheest and Cattaert, 2004, 2005). In the latter, H = E + P and E = n m c +  . We consider j j j j j j j Verheest and Cattaert have studied the propagation the ploytropic pressure law as (Gratton et al., 1997; of large amplitude EM waves in nonrelativistic and Gombero and Galv~ ao, 1997) P = ( 1) = j j relativistic EP-pair plasmas without any thermal n k T , where k is the Boltzmann constant, so j B j B ow of electrons and positrons using the McKenzie that  = n k T =( 1) and H  n = j j B j j j j 2 2 approach. n m c + P =( 1) = n m c [1 + =( 1)] j j j j j j In this work, our aim is to advance and generalize with the energy ratio = k T =m c and the j B j j the theory of Verheest and Cattaert (Verheest and polytropic index 4=3   5=3. In particu- Cattaert, 2004) by considering the fully relativis- lar, = 5=3 and 4=3, respectively, correspond to tic uid models for electrons and positrons which the weakly relativistic (classical) and ultrarelativis- account for physical regimes of both weakly rela- tic regimes. So, in the weakly relativistic limit tivistic and ultrarelativistic random thermal ener- P  n m c (applicable for low-energy plasmas) j j j gies. We show that in contrast to the weakly re- we have for = 5=3, H = n m c +(5=2)n k T j j j j B j altivistic plasmas which support both sub-Alfv enic n m c , and in the regime of ultrarelativistic ener- j j and super-Alfv enic solitons, only the sub-Alfv enic gies where P  n m c , we have instead H = j j j j solitons can be formed in EP-pair plasmas with ul- n m c + 4n k T  4n k T . j j j B j j B j trarelativistic energies. The system is then closed by the following Maxwells equations. 2. Relativistic uid model and multispecies r E = 4 q n ; (4) integrals j j j We consider the nonlinear propagation of EM solitary waves along the constant magnetic eld r B = 0; (5) B x ^ in an EP-pair plasma with relativistic ow 1 @B of thermal electrons and positrons. We assume r E = ; (6) c @t that the e ective collision frequency in an EP-pair plasma, which includes the recombination and pho- 4 1 @E r B = q n v + : (7) ton annihilation e ects, is assumed to be much j j j j c c @t smaller than the plasma oscillation frequency of electrons and positrons. From the energy momen- In order to derive an evolution equation for tum tensor, the basic equations for the relativistic purely stationary nonlinear solitary EM waves and dynamics of a j-th species particle can be written as their properties from Eqs. (1) to (7) we follow the (Gratton et al., 1997; Gombero and Galv~ ao, 1997) McKenzie approach as used in, e.g., Ref. (Verheest @ and Cattaert, 2004, 2005). First, we derive various ( n ) +r ( n v ) = 0; (1) j j j j j conserved quantities for a general species j before @t we apply it for an EP plasma. We look for the ex- H @ 1 + v r ( v ) = n q E + v  B citation of solitary waves that propagate along the j j j j j j c @t c constant magnetic eld B , i.e., the x-axis. In a 1 v dP j j j frame moving with the constant speed V along the rP ; c dt j x-axis, all plasma species have the same constant (2) velocity V along the direction. Since in the wave frame there is no time derivative, Eqs. (1) and (2) 1 dP d H j j = ; (3) reduce to n dt dt n j j where d=dt  @ + v  r, n , q , m , v , , t j j j j j j ( n v ) = 0; (8) j j jx P and H are, respectively, the number density, j j dx charge, mass, uid velocity, relativistic factor, ther- d 1 mal pressure and enthalpy per unit volume of j- j n v ( v ) = n q E + v  B j j jx j j j j j j species particle. Also, E and B are the electric c dx c and magnetic (total) elds respectively. Introduc- dP x: ^ ing E as the total energy density and  the inter- j j dx nal energy density of the j-species uid, we have (9) 2 Also, from Eqs. (4) to (7) we successively obtain Multiplying Eq. (18) by n =q , summing over j0 j j0 j the following equations. all the species and integrating we obtain 2 2 dE x j0 j0 j j = 4 q n ; (10) v = 0; (19) j j j j? dx dB where we have used Eq. (17). We can also project = 0; (11) Eq. (9) on v to yield dx j dE d d x ^ = 0; (12) j 2 2 v = q E K T [log (n )] : dx j j x B j j j j 2c dx dx (20) dB 4 x ^ = q n v (13) j j j j dx c 3. Relativistic EP plasmas: Energy integral Now, Eq. (11) gives on integration B = B , a x 0 constant. Also, from Eq. (12) it follows that E = ? We focus our attention to an EP-pair plasma. 0 under the boundary condition E ! 0 as x ! 1, The results obtained in Sec. 2 will be modi ed with and so only E = d=dx ( is the scalar potential) q = e, q = e, m = m = m, n = n = n , e p e p e0 p0 0 and B are the variables, which also tend to zero as T = T = T , = = and = = e p e0 p0 0 e p x ! 1, i.e., in the undisturbed plasma far away , = = , where the subscripts j = e and e p from the region of the nonlinear structure. Next, p, respectively, stand for electrons and positrons. from the equation of continuity (8), we obtain the Thus, for EP plasmas the invariants (14), (16), (17) following conservation of mass (parallel ux). and (19), respectively, reduce to n v = n V (14) n v = n v = V n ; (21) j j jx j0 j0 e e ex p p px 0 0 V 1 From Eq. (9), after summing over all the species 2 2 n ( v + v 2 V ) = (E B ) 0 0 e ex p px 0 x ? and using Eqs. (10), (13) and (14), we obtain c 8 (P + P 2P ) ; e p 0 V d 1 dE dB x ? (22) n ( v ) = E + x ^ j0 j0 j j j x c dx 4 dx dx V B n ( v + v ) = B ; (23) X 0 0 e e? p p? ? dP 2 c 4 B] x: ^ dx 2 2 2 2 v = v : (24) e e? p p? (15) Using Eq. (24), we obtain from Eq. (23) the fol- lowing two results Integrating Eq. (15) with respect to x we obtain the following two distinct integrals of motion. ( v v ) B = 0 (25) p p? e e? ? V 1 2 2 ( v + v ) B = 0: (26) p p? e e? ? n ( v V ) = E B j0 j0 j j jx j0 x ? c 8 Thus, it follows from Eqs. (25) and (26) that while the component of ( v v ) is orthogonal (P P ) ; p p? e e? j j0 to B , the other component of ( v + v ) is j ? p i? e e? parallel to B . (16) ? In the weakly nonlinear theory, the truly station- V B 0 ary solutions are only possible at linear polarization n v = B : (17) j0 j0 j j j? ? c 4 of EM elds. So, we can assume without loss of gen- erality that B is along the y-axis. Then Eqs. (25) Furthermore, the projection of Eq. (9) on v gives j? and (26) give v = v and v = v , e ey p py p pz e ez and so the y-component of Eq. (13) gives n d q n j j j j j j v  ( v ) = v (e  B ) : X j? j j? j? x ? c dx c q n v = 0; (27) j j j jy (18) j=e;p 3 from which one obtains n = n = n, say. So, form (33) the following equation. e p Eq. (21) we have v = v , and using the e ex p px 1 db charge neutrality condition, n = n we have e e p p + (b) = 0; (34) 2 d = = , say. Thus, we have v = v = v , e p ex px x 2 2 2 v = v = v , v = v = v and v = v = v . ey py y ez pz z p e where is the Sagdeev potential or pseudopoten- Using the charge neutrality condition, the Amp ere tial, given by, law (13) reduces to M f dB 4en (b) = 1 (35) e  = (v v ) ; (28) x i? e? 2 g dx c and 2 2 where = 1= 1 v =c . Furthermore, a scalar 2 4 2 multiplication of dB =dx with B gives m c 2c K T ? ? B f = 1 b + log (g) ; (36) 4 2 4 2 2 M V 0 0 dB B  = 0; (29) 2 2 dx 1 mc c K T g = 1 b + 2 2 2 2 2 2 M V 0 0 meaning that the wave magnetic eld B is linearly polarized. Thus, our assumption of linear polariza- 2 2 2 mc c K T 4c K T B B tion of EM elds and quasineutrality condition are + 1 b + : 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 M V V 0 0 0 valid. Next, from Eqs. (22) and (23), we obtain (37) 2 2 2 1 mc V c K T A 2 v = V b + x 0 Equation (34) represents an energy integral for a 2 2V V 0 0 pseudo particle of unit mass at pseudo time  mov- s 3 2 2 2 2 ing with the pseudo velocity db=d with a pseu- mc V c K T 4c K T B B 2 5 + V b + ; dopotential energy (b). In particular, in absence 2V V 0 0 of the e ects of relativistic ow (  1) and ther- (30) mal pressures of electrons and positrons (  0), the pseudopotential [Eq. (35)] reduces to 2 2 mc V " # v = b (31) 2 2 4 V 4 b M 0 M (b) = 1 + (38) 2 2 where b = B =B is the dimensionless wave mag- (b 2M ) y 0 2 2 netic eld, = 1= 1 V =c and V is the 0 A 2 which is exactly the same as in Ref. (Verheest and Alfv en velocity in an EP plasma, de ned by, V = 2 Cattaert, 2004). Introducing the parameter v = B =(8n m). Next, rearranging the y-component V=c and noting that  K T=mc  1 de nes of Eq. (9), we obtain another velocity component the regimes of weakly relativistic (classical) plasmas and  1 that of ultra-relativistic plasmas, we v d v = ( v ) (32) z y recast f and g as ceB dx 2 2 2 b (1 v ) Note that Eq. (21) results into n = (V n )=( v ) 0 0 x f = 1 + 2S log g; (39) which when applied to Eq. (20) gives, after inte- M [1 + =( 1)] gration and summation over electron and positron 2 2 1 b (1 v ) species, the following conservation of kinetic energy. 0 g = 1 + S+ 2 2M [1 + =( 1)] s 3 2c K T V B 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 v + v + v = V log : 2 2 x y z 0 b (1 v ) 1 + S 4S ; 2M [1 + =( 1)] (33) We de ne the Mach number as M = V=V and a (40) dimensionless coordinate  = x! =c, where ! 2 2 2 2 2 ! + ! = 8n e =m is the squared total plasma where S = (1 v ) =v [1 + =( 1)]. pe pp 0 0 oscillation frequency of electrons and positrons. Fi- A general discussion of Eq. (34) is almost sim- nally, using Eqs. (30) to (32), we obtain from Eq. ilar to the Sagdeev's approach for large amplitude 4 nonlinear waves. The necessary conditions for the two particular physical regimes of weakly relativis- existence of solitary waves are (i) (b) = 0 and tic (  1) and ultrarelativistic (  1) plasmas. 2 2 d =db = 0 at b = 0, (ii) d =db < 0 at b = 0 (iii) These are demonstrated in the two subsections 3.1 (b 6= 0) = 0, (b) < 0 for 0 < jbj < jb j and and 3.2. Note that one can, in principle, consider m m ? 0 according to when the solitary (d =db)j some other nite values of , which may be neither b=b waves are compressive (with b > 0) or rarefactive much smaller nor much larger than unity, however, (with b < 0). Here, b corresponds to the ampli- a corresponding choice of the polytropic index in tude of the solitary waves. It is straightforward to between 4=3   5=3 may not be appropriate, verify that the condition (i) is satis ed. However, and can lead to some incorrect results. the condition (ii) is satis ed for M > M , where M is the critical value of M , given by, c 3.1. Weakly relativistic regime (  1) We consider = 5=3. Since 0 < S < 1 and 1 v M = : (41) 0 <  1, we have two cases of interest (i) 1 + =( 1) 2 2 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2), i.e., 0 0 when the upper limits of depend on v and (ii) Later, we will verify the condition (iii) numerically p 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1, i.e., when the upper in two di erent regimes, i.e., weakly relativistic and limit of is independent of v . Figure 1 is the con- ultrarelativic regimes. Furthermore, since the pseu- tour plot of A(v ; ) = 0 showing the possible exis- dopotential (b) is to be a real valued function, the tence region of solitary waves in the (v ; )-plane. expression under the square root in g must be either p Within the domain 0 < v < 2=9, the ranges zero or positive, yielding jbj < jb j  b where m c of values of change according to case (i). For p p example, the admissible range of at v = 0:3 is 1 + =( 1) b = 2M 1 S : (42) 0 < < 0:13 and at v = 0:4 it is 0 < < 0:36. So, 2 0 1 v smaller the values of v , lower is the upper limit of It follows that for some given values of M , and v , . On the other hand, when 2=9  v < 1 and is independen on v , there is a wide range of values the wave amplitude will not exceed the critical value of : 0 <  1 for which the solitary waves ex- b . The upper limit of the Mach number M can be c u ist. However, in all the domains the solitary waves obtained in terms of and v from the condition must have a maximum amplitude b , provided the (b )  0 as admissible Mach number lies in M < M < M . c u 2(1 v ) 1 S M = p : (43) A(v ,β )=0 u 0 [1 + =( 1)] [1 + S(log S 1)] 0.9 Thus, in order that the EP plasmas support large 0.8 A(v ,β)<0 0.7 amplitude solitary waves, we must have M < M < A(v ,β)>0 0.6 M . In particular, for ! 0 (cold plasmas) and 0.5 1, i.e., v  1 (nonrelativistic plasmas) we 0 0 0.4 have M  1 and M  2, i.e., super-Alfv enic Soliton c u No Soliton 0.3 solitons may exist with the Mach number satisfying 0.2 1 < M < 2. This is in agreement with the results 0.1 of Verheest and Cattaert (Verheest and Cattaert, 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 2004), who reported in nonrelativistic cold electron- positron plasmas. Next, in order that M < M c u holds, the function A(v ; ) must be positive, where Figure 1: A(v ; ) = 0 [Eq. (44)] is contour plotted to show the existence and non-existence regions of EM solitary waves A(v ; ) = 2(1 S) 1 S(log S 1); (44) in weakly relativistic (  1) plasmas. together with 0 < S < 1. In what follows, we examine numerically the conditions and di erent Figure 2 displays the plots of the lower (solid limits of the wave amplitude and the Mach num- line) and upper (dashed line) limits of the Mach ber stated above for the existence of large am- number within the domain 0  < 1 for di er- plitude EM solitons. We focus our discussion on ent values of v in two cases discussed before [cf. β Fig. 1]. The subplots (a) and (b) correspond to (a) (b) 1.4 1.4 the case (i) where depends on v , while (c) and v =0.4 v =0.3 (d) that for the case (ii) where does not depend 0 1.2 1.2 on v . We note that the values of M are always 0 c less than unity, while those of M can be less than 0.8 or greater than unity depending on the values of and v within the regimes. Here, the values of 0 0.8 0.6 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.2 0.4 at which both M and M coincide are not ad- c u M M c u (c) (d) missible, because otherwise M = M = M would c u 1.5 1 violate the condition for the existence of solitary v =0.6 0.8 v =0.8 0 0 waves. If we scale . 0:05 to interpret its small- ness in the weakly relativistic regime, then from the 0.6 subplots (a) and (b) of Fig. 2 we nd that there are, 0.5 0.4 in fact, two subregimes of , namely 0 < < 0 0.2 and < . 0:05. In the former regime, we 0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1 have 1 < M < 1:4, while in the other one has 0 < M < 1. The threshold value shifts to- u 1 Figure 2: Plots of the lower (M ) and upper (M ) limits of wards lower values as the value of v is increased c u the Mach number, given by Eqs. (41) and (43), are shown within the admissible domain. In fact, for values of for di erent values of v in weakly relativistic (0 <  1) v & 0:7, the threshold value disappears and only plasmas . The subplots (a) and (b) correspond to the regimes 2 2 we have 0 < M < 1 in 0 < . 0:05. Thus, 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2), while the subplots 0 0 it follows that the EP plasmas with weakly reala- (c) and (d) for 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1. Note that M ; M  1 for 0:7 < v < 1. tivistic (0 < . 0:05) energies can support both c u 0 the sub-Alfv enic (0 < M < 1) and super-Alfv enic (1 < M < 1:4) solitons in the regime 0 < v < 0:7, until 1:06 . M < M . However, as M decreases while only the sub-Alfv enic solitons may exist for from M = 1:06 to lower values within the domain 0:7 . v < 1. From Fig. 2, it is also noticed M < M < 1:06, the values of b increase in a that the values of both M and M decrease with c m c u subinterval 0  . , while those decrease in an increasing values of v , and they tend to become 2 other subinterval < < 0:06. Here, is some smaller than unity as v approaches 1, implying 2 2 threshold value of which shifts to higher values as that as the phase velocity of EM solitary waves ap- M decreases from 1:06 to M . On the other hand, proaches the speed of light in vacuum, it is more c for a xed value v = 0:6 in 2=9 < v < 1 [sub- likely that the sub-Alfv enic solitons can exist in rel- 0 0 plot (b)], the wave amplitude always increases with ativistic EP-pair plasmas. increasing values of both (0 . < 0:05) and M In what follows, we numerically examine the vari- (M < M < M ). From the subplots (a) and (b) it ations of the wave amplitude b [at which (b) = 0] c u is also seen that the ranges of values of where b against the parameter (0   1) for di erent m is de ned di er and increase with decreasing values values of the Mach number, M < M < M and c u of M . with two di erent values of v , taking one from each p p of the regimes 0 < v < 2=9 and 2=9 < v < 1. Having obtained various parameter regimes for 0 0 In these regimes of M and , the values of b the existence of EM solitary waves as discussed are always found to be . b . We consider (a) before, we now plot the pro les of the pseudopo- v = 0:3 when the upper limit of depends on v , tential (b) and the corresponding solitary struc- 0 0 2 2 i.e., 0 < < v =(1 7v =2) and (b) v = 0:6 when tures as in Fig. 4 for di erent values of v , 0 0 0 0 does not depend on v . The results are shown and the Mach number M in two di erent regimes 2 2 in Fig. 3. It mainly displays the contour plots of (i) 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2), 0 0 (b 6= 0) = 0 in the ( ; b)-plane. It is interesting M < M < M [subplots (a) and (b)] and (ii) m c u to note from subplot (a) that within the domain 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1, M < M < M [sub- 0 c u 0 . < 0:06 and for a xed value of v = 0:3 in plots (c) and (d)]. As expected, the amplitudes of 0 < v < 2=9, the amplitude b increases with the solitons exactly correspond to the cut-o values 0 m increasing values of M in M < M < M . How- of at b = b 6= 0 (i.e., the points where crosses c u m ever, the same decrease with increasing values of the b-axis). From the pro les of and b, the soliton Mach Number (M) 3.2. Ultra-relativistic regime (  1) (a) We consider the polytropic index = 4=3. In this 1.1 case, since 0 < S < 1 and  1, we can have also M=1.08 two possible regimes similar to the weakly relativis- M=1.06 p p 0.9 tic case, namely (i) 1=6 < v < 1=5, 1  < 0.8 2 2 M=1.02 v =(15v ), i.e., when the upper limits of depend 0 0 M=1.0 0.7 on the values of v and (ii) 1=5 < v < 1,  1, 0 0 M=0.98 0.6 i.e., when the upper limits of do not depend on v . 0.5 However, looking at the expressions of M and M , c u p p M=0.95 0.4 we nd that within the regime 1=6 < v < 1=5, p p p 0.3 the ratio M =M = 2(1 S)= 1 + S(log S 1) u c 0.2 varies from 0:9814 to 0:9996, i.e., M =M  1 for u c 0.1 1. A numerical estimation also reveals that in this regime of v , j (b)j . 10 and the soliton 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 β amplitude jb j . 0:01. So, we are not interested in this short regime of v , and only the regime to be (b) 1.7 considered for analysis is 1=5 < v < 1,  1. 1.65 Figure 5 shows the plots of M (the lower limit M=1.03 of the Mach number, solid line) and M (the up- 1.6 M=1.02 per limit of the Mach number, dashed line) within 1.55 M=1.0 the domain 1=5 < v < 1 for di erent values of 1.5 v . We nd that both M and M decrease with 0 c u M=0.98 1.45 increasing values of and they remain less than unity even for  1. Furthermore, it is noticed 1.4 M=0.95 that the values of both M and M decrease with c u 1.35 M=0.94 increasing values of v . Thus, it follows that in 1.3 contrast to the weakly relativistic regime, the EP 1.25 plasmas with ultrarelativistic energies may support only sub-Alfv enic solitons. Such a feature in rela- 1.2 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 tivistic EP plasmas has not been reported before. Similar to the case of weakly relativistic plasmas, we also show the variation of the soliton ampli- Figure 3: The soliton amplitude b is shown against with the variations of the Mach number M in two di erent regimes tude b for di erent values of the Mach number of v and : (a) v = 0:3 within 0 < v < 2=9; 0 < < 0 0 0 M within M < M < M and with a xed value of p c u 2 2 v =(1 7v =2), and (b) v = 0:6 within 2=9  v < 1; 0 0 0 0 v in 1=5 < v < 1 as shown in Fig. 6. It is found 0 0 0 <  1. Note that the range of where b is de ned that the values of b increase with increasing val- di ers and increases with decreasing values of M . ues of , however, the threshold values of shift to lower ones as the values of M are increased. Since 1, relatively lower values of M would favor the existence of EM solitary waves in ultrarelativistic regimes. widths can also be veri ed by the formula: width The pseudopotential (b) and the corresponding W = jb = j. An enhancement of the ampli- m min soliton pro les of the magnetic eld b are also shown tude and broadening of the soliton pro le (width) in Fig. 7 for di erent values of v , and the Mach are seen to occur with an increase of the Mach num- number M . It is seen that with increasing values ber, however, the amplitude increases but the width of these parameters, the soliton amplitude increases decreases with increasing value of v and within and the width decreases. the admissible regimes [subplots (a) and (b)]. On the other hand, subplots (c) and (d) show the same 4. Conclusion qualitative behaviors, i.e., with an increase of any one of v , and M , the amplitude increases and We have studied the nonlinear propagation of the width decreases. purely stationary large amplitude electromagnetic Amplitude (b ) Amplitude (b ) m (a) (b) 0.04 v =0.3, β=0.01, M=0.98 v =0.3, β=0.01, M=0.98 0 0 0.03 v =0.4, β=0.01, M=0.98 v =0.4, β=0.01, M=0.98 v =0.4, β=0.02, M=0.98 v =0.4, β=0.02, M=0.98 0.02 v =0.4, β=0.02, M=1.02 v =0.4, β=0.02, M=1.02 0.8 0.01 0.6 -0.01 0.4 -0.02 -0.03 0.2 -0.04 -0.05 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 (c) (d) 1.6 0.1 v =0.5, β=0.01, M=0.9 0.05 1.4 v =0.5, β=0.02, M=0.9 v =0.5, β=0.02, M=1.02 1.2 v =0.71, β=0.01, M=0.9 -0.05 -0.1 -0.15 0.8 -0.2 0.6 -0.25 v =0.5, β=0.01, M=0.9 0.4 v =0.5, β=0.02, M=0.9 -0.3 0 v =0.5, β=0.02, M=1.02 0 0.2 -0.35 v =0.71, β=0.01, M=0.9 -0.4 0 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 Figure 4: Plots of the pseudopotential (b) [subplots (a) and (c)] and the corresponding soliton pro le [(b) and (d)] for di erent 2 2 values of v , and M as in the legends in two di erent regimes: (i) 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2), M < M < M 0 0 c u 0 0 [subplots (a) and (b)] and (ii) 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1, M < M < M [subplots (c) and (d)]. 0 c u (a) (b) 0.45 0.45 v =0.6 v =0.7 0 0 0.4 0.4 0.35 0.35 0.3 0.3 0.25 0.25 0.2 0.2 0.15 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.05 0 0 1 5 10 15 20 1 5 10 15 20 β β Figure 5: Plots of the lower (M ) and upper (M ) limits of the Mach number, given by Eqs. (41) and (43), are shown for c u di erent values of v ( 1=5 < v < 1) in ultrarelativistic plasmas (  1): (a) v = 0:6 and (b) v = 0:7. 0 0 0 0 ψ(b) ψ(b) Mach Number (M) Mach Number (M) b wave magnetic eld b  B =B > 0 or < 0 ow- y 0 0.8 ing to the obvious symmetry of EP-pair plasmas 0.7 with equal mass and opposite charges. This means 0.6 that the EM solitary waves can propagate as com- pressive or rarefactive type solitons. The energy 0.5 integral is expressed in terms of the magnetic eld 0.4 instead of the electrostatic potential as the latter M=0.09 0.3 may be relevant for electrostatic solitary waves not M=0.10 0.2 M=0.11 for EM waves. Furthermore, we have considered M=0.12 the isothermal pressure law for mathematical sim- 0.1 plicity. Instead, one can use the adiabatic pressure 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 law, i.e., P=P = (n=n ) with polytropic index , 0 0 however, in this case, the relativistic uid equations may not be reducible to the energy integral form Figure 6: The soliton amplitude b is shown against in (34) either by the McKenzie approach or Sagdeev the ultrarealtivistic regime (  1) for di erent values of the Mach number M and for a xed value of v = 0:7 in 0 approach. 1=5  v < 1. To conclude, the nonlinear excitation of EM waves and the formation of solitary structures in pair plasmas are known to have signi cant relevance solitary waves in a magnetized relativistic electron- not only in space and astrophysical environments positron-pair plasma. A fully relativistic two- uid but also in laboratory experiments (Sarri et al., model is considered which accounts for both the 2015). Furthermore, in pulsars and active galac- weakly relativistic (  1) and ultrarelativistic tic nuclei with violent surroundings, these nonlin- (  1) thermal motions of electrons and positrons ear phenomena would not occur with small ampli- where  k T=mc . Thus, previous theory in tude only. In this context, the present theory in the literature (Verheest and Cattaert, 2004) is ad- magnetized electron-positron plasmas can help un- vanced and generalized. Using the McKenzie ap- derstand certain aspects of these stronger nonlinear proach, the system of uid equations is reduced to phenomena with large wave amplitude. an energy-like equation which describes the evolu- tion of EM solitary waves in its own reference frame. Acknowledgments Di erent parameter regimes of the wave phase ve- locity v  V=c and the energy ratio for the exis- This work was initiated when Sayantan Dutta tence of solitary waves, as well as di erent limits of was pursuing his Master's degree nal project in the soliton amplitude (b ) and the Mach number the Department of Mathematics of Visva-Bharati. M  V=V are demonstrated both in the limits of One of us, GB acknowledges nancial support from weakly relativistic and ultrarealtivistic energies. It University Grants Commission (UGC), Govt. of is found that India, under the Dr. D. S. Kothari Post Doc- toral Fellowship Scheme with Ref. no. F.4- In the weakly relativistic limit, EM solitary 2/2006(BSR)/MA/18-19/0096). APM is supported waves may exist in two di erent regimes (i) by the Science and Engineering Research Board 2 2 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2) 0 0 (SERB), Govt. of India with Sanction order no. and (ii) 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1. The CRG/2018/004475 dated 26 March 2019. solitary waves can appear as the sub-Alfv enic (0 < M < 1) or super-Alfv enic (1 < M < 2) References solitons with amplitude 0 < b < 2. Baboolal, S., Bharuthram, R., Hellberg, M.A., 1990. Cut- In the ultrarelativistic limit, EM solitary waves o conditions and existence domains for large-amplitude exist in the regime 1=5 < v < 1,  1. In ion-acoustic solitons and double layers in uid plasmas. Journal of Plasma Physics 44, 1{23. this case, only sub-Alfv enic (0 < M < 0:4) Banerjee, G., Maitra, S., 2015. Pseudopotential approach solitons may exist with amplitude 0 < b < 1. for dust acoustic solitary waves in dusty plasmas with kappa-distributed ions and electrons and dust grains hav- It is to be noted that both the sub-Alfv enic and ing power law size distribution. Physics of Plasmas 22, super-Alfv enic solitons exist symmetrically for the 043708. Amplitude (b ) m -4 (a) (b) ×10 0.9 1 v =0.70, β=10.0, M=0.120 v =0.70, β=10.5, M=0.120 0.8 0 v =0.70, β=10.5, M=0.114 0.7 v =0.75, β=10.5, M=0.114 0.6 -1 0.5 -2 0.4 0.3 -3 v =0.70, β=10.0, M=0.120 0.2 v =0.70, β=10.5, M=0.120 -4 v =0.70, β=10.5, M=0.114 0 0.1 v =0.75, β=10.5, M=0.114 -5 0 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 b ζ Figure 7: Pro les of the pseudopotential (b) [subplot (a)] and the corresponding soliton [subplot (b)] are shown in ultrarela- tivistic (  1) regime for di erent values of v , and M as in the legends with 1=5  v < 1 and M < M < M . 0 0 c u Banerjee, G., Maitra, S., 2016. Arbitrary amplitude dust a two-electron-component plasma. Journal of plasma ion acoustic solitons and double layers in the presence of physics 45, 323{338. nonthermal positrons and electrons. Physics of Plasmas McKenzie, J.F., Doyle, T.B., 2003. A uni ed view of 23, 123701. acoustic-electrostatic solitons in complex plasmas. New Begelman, M.C., Blandford, R.D., Rees, M.J., 1984. Theory Journal of Physics 5, 26. of extragalactic radio sources. Reviews of Modern Physics Miler, H.R., Witta, P.J., 1987. Active galetic nuclei. 56, 255. Springger-Verlag, Berlin , 202. Blandford, R.D., Znajek, R.L., 1977. Electromagnetic ex- Misner, W., Thorne, K.S., Wheeler, J.A., 1973. Gravitation. traction of energy from kerr black holes. Monthly Notices Freeman, San Francisco. p. 763. of the Royal Astronomical Society 179, 433{456. Misra, A.P., Adhikary, N.C., 2011. Large amplitude solitary Burns, M.L., Lovelace, R.V.E., 1982. Theory of electron- waves in ion-beam plasmas with charged dust impurities. positron showers in double radio sources. The Astrophys- Physics of Plasmas 18, 122112. ical Journal 262, 87{99. Misra, A.P., Adhikary, N.C., 2013. Electrostatic solitary Das, A., Bandyopadhyay, A., Das, K.P., 2010. Large am- waves in dusty pair-ion plasmas. Physics of Plasmas 20, plitude dust acoustic solitary waves and double layers in 102309. positively charged warm dusty plasma with nonthermal Orosz, J.A., Remillard, R.A., Bailyn, C.D., McClintock, electrons. Physics of Plasmas 17, 014503. J.E., 1997. An optical precursor to the recent x-ray out- Gibbons, G.W., Hawking, S.W., Siklos, S., 1983. The very burst of the black hole binary gro j1655{40. The Astro- early universe cambridge university press, in: Nueld physical Journal Letters 478, L83. Workshop)[21 June 1982]. Sagdeev, R.Z., 1966. Cooperative phenomena and shock Goldreich, P., Julian, W.H., 1969. Pulsar electrodynamics. waves in collisionless plasmas. Reviews of plasma physics The Astrophysical Journal 157, 869{880. 4, 23. Gombero , L., Galv~ ao, R.M.O., 1997. Modulational instabil- Sagdeev, R.Z., Galeev, A.A., 1969. Nonlinear plasma theory. ity of a circularly polarized wave in a magnetized electron- New York: Benjamin. positron plasma with relativistic thermal energies. Phys- Saini, N.S., Danehkar, A., Hellberg, M.A., Kourakis, I., ical Review E 56, 4574. 2011. Large-amplitude electron-acoustic solitons in a Gratton, F.T., Gnavi, G., Galvao, R.M.O., Gombero , L., dusty plasma with kappa-distributed electrons, in: AIP 1997. Self-modulation of a strong electromagnetic wave Conference Proceedings, American Institute of Physics. in a positron-electron plasma induced by relativistic tem- pp. 357{358. peratures and phonon damping. Physical Review E 55, Sarri, G., Poder, K., Cole, J.M., Schumaker, W., Di Pi- 3381. azza, A., Reville, B., Dzelzainis, T., Doria, D., Gizzi, Lightman, A.P., 1982. Relativistic thermal plasmas-pair pro- L.A., Grittani, G., Kar, S., Keitel, C.H., Krushelnick, cesses and equilibria. The Astrophysical Journal 253, 842{ K., Kuschel, S., Mangles, S.P.D., Najmudin, Z., Shukla, 858. N., Silva, L.O., Symes, D., Thomas, A.G.R., Vargas, M., Lightman, A.P., Zdziarski, A.A., 1987. Pair production and Vieira, J., Zepf, M., 2015. Generation of neutral and high- compton scattering in compact sources and comparison to density electron{positron pair plasmas in the laboratory. observations of active galactic nuclei. The Astrophysical Nature communications 6, 6747. Journal 319, 643{661. Verheest, F., Cattaert, T., 2004. Large amplitude soli- Mace, R.L., Baboolal, S., Bharuthram, R., Hellberg, M.A., tary electromagnetic waves in electron-positron plasmas. 1991. Arbitrary-amplitude electron-acoustic solitons in Physics of Plasmas 11, 3078{3082. ψ(b) b Verheest, F., Cattaert, T., 2005. Parallel propagating elec- tromagnetic solitons and oscillitons in space plasmas and in relativistic electron-positron plasmas. Physica Scripta 2005, 62. Verheest, F., Hellberg, M.A., Gray, G.J., Mace, R.L., 1996. Electrostatic solitons in multispecies electron-positron plasmas. Astrophysics and Space Science 239, 125{139. Wardle, J.F.C., Homan, D.C., Ojha, R., Roberts, D.H., 1998. Electron{positron jets associated with the quasar 3c279. Nature 395, 457{461. Yu, M.Y., Shukla, P.K., Sten o, L., 1986. Alfven vortices in a strongly magnetized electron-position plasma. The Astrophysical Journal 309, L63{L65. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Physics arXiv (Cornell University)

Large amplitude electromagnetic solitons in a fully relativistic magnetized electron-positron-pair plasma

Physics , Volume 2020 (2005) – May 13, 2020

Loading next page...
 
/lp/arxiv-cornell-university/large-amplitude-electromagnetic-solitons-in-a-fully-relativistic-fBjHRf5nhJ
ISSN
0273-1177
eISSN
ARCH-3341
DOI
10.1016/j.asr.2020.07.040
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Nonlinear propagation of purely stationary large amplitude electromagnetic (EM) solitary waves in a magne- tized electron-positron (EP) plasma is studied using a fully relativistic two- uid hydrodynamic model which 2 2 accounts for physical regimes of both weakly relativistic (P  nmc ) and ultrarelativistic (P  nmc ) random thermal energies. Here, P is the thermal pressure, n the number density and m the mass of a particle, and c is the speed of light in vacuum. While both the sub-Alfv enic and super-Alfv enic solitons coexist in the weakly relativistic regime, the ultrarelativistic EP plasmas in contrast support only the sub- Alfv enic solitons. Di erent limits of the Mach numbers and soliton amplitudes are also examined in these two physical regimes. Keywords: Electron-positron plasma, Relativistic plasma, Alfv enic soliton, pseudopotential 1. Introduction Linear and nonlinear waves in EP-pair plas- mas di er fundamentally from those in ordinary Electron-positron (EP) plasmas have been known electron-ion plasmas or from a purely electronic to play important roles in many physical situations, beam due to their intrinsic and complete symme- such as active galactic nuclei (Begelman et al., try with equal charge (but opposite in sign) and 1984; Miler and Witta, 1987), pulsars (Goldreich mass. The Sagdeev or pseudopotential approach and Julian, 1969), quasars (Wardle et al., 1998), has been the most suitable technique for the desrip- black holes (Blandford and Znajek, 1977), accre- tion of nonlinear large amplitude waves (Misra and tion disks (Orosz et al., 1997), the early universe Adhikary, 2011, 2013; Sagdeev, 1966; Sagdeev and (Misner et al., 1973; Gibbons et al., 1983), near Galeev, 1969; Baboolal et al., 1990; Mace et al., the polar cap of fast rotating neutron stars (Light- 1991; Banerjee and Maitra, 2015, 2016; Saini et al., man, 1982; Burns and Lovelace, 1982; Lightman 2011; Das et al., 2010) which also works well in pair and Zdziarski, 1987; Yu et al., 1986), as well as plasmas (Verheest et al., 1996). However, when rel- in laboratories (Sarri et al., 2015). In the latter, ativistic dynamics is included together with thermal it has been shown that the production of the ion- pressure of plasma particles for the description of free high-density neutral EP-pair plasmas and their large amplitude EM waves, the Sagdeev's approach identi cation as collective modes can be possible in may not be suitable. In this context, an alternative a controlled laboratory environment. procedure has also been developed by McKenzie et al. (McKenzie and Doyle, 2003) to study the prop- On leave from Department of Basic Science and Hu- erties of nonlinear waves in its own frame of ref- manities, University of Engineering & Management (UEM), erence. Although both approaches are analogous Kolkata-700 160. to each other especially for electrostatic waves, the Corresponding author McKenzie approach provides a better perception Email addresses: gban.iitkgp@gmail.com (Gadadhar Banerjee), dutta@irsamc.ups-tlse.fr; and usefulness than the Sagdeev's approach espe- sayantan.dutta110@gmail.com (Sayantan Dutta), cially when one is concerned with the propagation apmisra@visva-bharati.ac.in; apmisra@gmail.com (A. P. of electromagnetic (EM) solitary waves in plasmas Misra) Preprint submitted to Elsevier June 5, 2020 arXiv:2005.06288v2 [physics.plasm-ph] 4 Jun 2020 2 (Verheest and Cattaert, 2004, 2005). In the latter, H = E + P and E = n m c +  . We consider j j j j j j j Verheest and Cattaert have studied the propagation the ploytropic pressure law as (Gratton et al., 1997; of large amplitude EM waves in nonrelativistic and Gombero and Galv~ ao, 1997) P = ( 1) = j j relativistic EP-pair plasmas without any thermal n k T , where k is the Boltzmann constant, so j B j B ow of electrons and positrons using the McKenzie that  = n k T =( 1) and H  n = j j B j j j j 2 2 approach. n m c + P =( 1) = n m c [1 + =( 1)] j j j j j j In this work, our aim is to advance and generalize with the energy ratio = k T =m c and the j B j j the theory of Verheest and Cattaert (Verheest and polytropic index 4=3   5=3. In particu- Cattaert, 2004) by considering the fully relativis- lar, = 5=3 and 4=3, respectively, correspond to tic uid models for electrons and positrons which the weakly relativistic (classical) and ultrarelativis- account for physical regimes of both weakly rela- tic regimes. So, in the weakly relativistic limit tivistic and ultrarelativistic random thermal ener- P  n m c (applicable for low-energy plasmas) j j j gies. We show that in contrast to the weakly re- we have for = 5=3, H = n m c +(5=2)n k T j j j j B j altivistic plasmas which support both sub-Alfv enic n m c , and in the regime of ultrarelativistic ener- j j and super-Alfv enic solitons, only the sub-Alfv enic gies where P  n m c , we have instead H = j j j j solitons can be formed in EP-pair plasmas with ul- n m c + 4n k T  4n k T . j j j B j j B j trarelativistic energies. The system is then closed by the following Maxwells equations. 2. Relativistic uid model and multispecies r E = 4 q n ; (4) integrals j j j We consider the nonlinear propagation of EM solitary waves along the constant magnetic eld r B = 0; (5) B x ^ in an EP-pair plasma with relativistic ow 1 @B of thermal electrons and positrons. We assume r E = ; (6) c @t that the e ective collision frequency in an EP-pair plasma, which includes the recombination and pho- 4 1 @E r B = q n v + : (7) ton annihilation e ects, is assumed to be much j j j j c c @t smaller than the plasma oscillation frequency of electrons and positrons. From the energy momen- In order to derive an evolution equation for tum tensor, the basic equations for the relativistic purely stationary nonlinear solitary EM waves and dynamics of a j-th species particle can be written as their properties from Eqs. (1) to (7) we follow the (Gratton et al., 1997; Gombero and Galv~ ao, 1997) McKenzie approach as used in, e.g., Ref. (Verheest @ and Cattaert, 2004, 2005). First, we derive various ( n ) +r ( n v ) = 0; (1) j j j j j conserved quantities for a general species j before @t we apply it for an EP plasma. We look for the ex- H @ 1 + v r ( v ) = n q E + v  B citation of solitary waves that propagate along the j j j j j j c @t c constant magnetic eld B , i.e., the x-axis. In a 1 v dP j j j frame moving with the constant speed V along the rP ; c dt j x-axis, all plasma species have the same constant (2) velocity V along the direction. Since in the wave frame there is no time derivative, Eqs. (1) and (2) 1 dP d H j j = ; (3) reduce to n dt dt n j j where d=dt  @ + v  r, n , q , m , v , , t j j j j j j ( n v ) = 0; (8) j j jx P and H are, respectively, the number density, j j dx charge, mass, uid velocity, relativistic factor, ther- d 1 mal pressure and enthalpy per unit volume of j- j n v ( v ) = n q E + v  B j j jx j j j j j j species particle. Also, E and B are the electric c dx c and magnetic (total) elds respectively. Introduc- dP x: ^ ing E as the total energy density and  the inter- j j dx nal energy density of the j-species uid, we have (9) 2 Also, from Eqs. (4) to (7) we successively obtain Multiplying Eq. (18) by n =q , summing over j0 j j0 j the following equations. all the species and integrating we obtain 2 2 dE x j0 j0 j j = 4 q n ; (10) v = 0; (19) j j j j? dx dB where we have used Eq. (17). We can also project = 0; (11) Eq. (9) on v to yield dx j dE d d x ^ = 0; (12) j 2 2 v = q E K T [log (n )] : dx j j x B j j j j 2c dx dx (20) dB 4 x ^ = q n v (13) j j j j dx c 3. Relativistic EP plasmas: Energy integral Now, Eq. (11) gives on integration B = B , a x 0 constant. Also, from Eq. (12) it follows that E = ? We focus our attention to an EP-pair plasma. 0 under the boundary condition E ! 0 as x ! 1, The results obtained in Sec. 2 will be modi ed with and so only E = d=dx ( is the scalar potential) q = e, q = e, m = m = m, n = n = n , e p e p e0 p0 0 and B are the variables, which also tend to zero as T = T = T , = = and = = e p e0 p0 0 e p x ! 1, i.e., in the undisturbed plasma far away , = = , where the subscripts j = e and e p from the region of the nonlinear structure. Next, p, respectively, stand for electrons and positrons. from the equation of continuity (8), we obtain the Thus, for EP plasmas the invariants (14), (16), (17) following conservation of mass (parallel ux). and (19), respectively, reduce to n v = n V (14) n v = n v = V n ; (21) j j jx j0 j0 e e ex p p px 0 0 V 1 From Eq. (9), after summing over all the species 2 2 n ( v + v 2 V ) = (E B ) 0 0 e ex p px 0 x ? and using Eqs. (10), (13) and (14), we obtain c 8 (P + P 2P ) ; e p 0 V d 1 dE dB x ? (22) n ( v ) = E + x ^ j0 j0 j j j x c dx 4 dx dx V B n ( v + v ) = B ; (23) X 0 0 e e? p p? ? dP 2 c 4 B] x: ^ dx 2 2 2 2 v = v : (24) e e? p p? (15) Using Eq. (24), we obtain from Eq. (23) the fol- lowing two results Integrating Eq. (15) with respect to x we obtain the following two distinct integrals of motion. ( v v ) B = 0 (25) p p? e e? ? V 1 2 2 ( v + v ) B = 0: (26) p p? e e? ? n ( v V ) = E B j0 j0 j j jx j0 x ? c 8 Thus, it follows from Eqs. (25) and (26) that while the component of ( v v ) is orthogonal (P P ) ; p p? e e? j j0 to B , the other component of ( v + v ) is j ? p i? e e? parallel to B . (16) ? In the weakly nonlinear theory, the truly station- V B 0 ary solutions are only possible at linear polarization n v = B : (17) j0 j0 j j j? ? c 4 of EM elds. So, we can assume without loss of gen- erality that B is along the y-axis. Then Eqs. (25) Furthermore, the projection of Eq. (9) on v gives j? and (26) give v = v and v = v , e ey p py p pz e ez and so the y-component of Eq. (13) gives n d q n j j j j j j v  ( v ) = v (e  B ) : X j? j j? j? x ? c dx c q n v = 0; (27) j j j jy (18) j=e;p 3 from which one obtains n = n = n, say. So, form (33) the following equation. e p Eq. (21) we have v = v , and using the e ex p px 1 db charge neutrality condition, n = n we have e e p p + (b) = 0; (34) 2 d = = , say. Thus, we have v = v = v , e p ex px x 2 2 2 v = v = v , v = v = v and v = v = v . ey py y ez pz z p e where is the Sagdeev potential or pseudopoten- Using the charge neutrality condition, the Amp ere tial, given by, law (13) reduces to M f dB 4en (b) = 1 (35) e  = (v v ) ; (28) x i? e? 2 g dx c and 2 2 where = 1= 1 v =c . Furthermore, a scalar 2 4 2 multiplication of dB =dx with B gives m c 2c K T ? ? B f = 1 b + log (g) ; (36) 4 2 4 2 2 M V 0 0 dB B  = 0; (29) 2 2 dx 1 mc c K T g = 1 b + 2 2 2 2 2 2 M V 0 0 meaning that the wave magnetic eld B is linearly polarized. Thus, our assumption of linear polariza- 2 2 2 mc c K T 4c K T B B tion of EM elds and quasineutrality condition are + 1 b + : 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 M V V 0 0 0 valid. Next, from Eqs. (22) and (23), we obtain (37) 2 2 2 1 mc V c K T A 2 v = V b + x 0 Equation (34) represents an energy integral for a 2 2V V 0 0 pseudo particle of unit mass at pseudo time  mov- s 3 2 2 2 2 ing with the pseudo velocity db=d with a pseu- mc V c K T 4c K T B B 2 5 + V b + ; dopotential energy (b). In particular, in absence 2V V 0 0 of the e ects of relativistic ow (  1) and ther- (30) mal pressures of electrons and positrons (  0), the pseudopotential [Eq. (35)] reduces to 2 2 mc V " # v = b (31) 2 2 4 V 4 b M 0 M (b) = 1 + (38) 2 2 where b = B =B is the dimensionless wave mag- (b 2M ) y 0 2 2 netic eld, = 1= 1 V =c and V is the 0 A 2 which is exactly the same as in Ref. (Verheest and Alfv en velocity in an EP plasma, de ned by, V = 2 Cattaert, 2004). Introducing the parameter v = B =(8n m). Next, rearranging the y-component V=c and noting that  K T=mc  1 de nes of Eq. (9), we obtain another velocity component the regimes of weakly relativistic (classical) plasmas and  1 that of ultra-relativistic plasmas, we v d v = ( v ) (32) z y recast f and g as ceB dx 2 2 2 b (1 v ) Note that Eq. (21) results into n = (V n )=( v ) 0 0 x f = 1 + 2S log g; (39) which when applied to Eq. (20) gives, after inte- M [1 + =( 1)] gration and summation over electron and positron 2 2 1 b (1 v ) species, the following conservation of kinetic energy. 0 g = 1 + S+ 2 2M [1 + =( 1)] s 3 2c K T V B 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 v + v + v = V log : 2 2 x y z 0 b (1 v ) 1 + S 4S ; 2M [1 + =( 1)] (33) We de ne the Mach number as M = V=V and a (40) dimensionless coordinate  = x! =c, where ! 2 2 2 2 2 ! + ! = 8n e =m is the squared total plasma where S = (1 v ) =v [1 + =( 1)]. pe pp 0 0 oscillation frequency of electrons and positrons. Fi- A general discussion of Eq. (34) is almost sim- nally, using Eqs. (30) to (32), we obtain from Eq. ilar to the Sagdeev's approach for large amplitude 4 nonlinear waves. The necessary conditions for the two particular physical regimes of weakly relativis- existence of solitary waves are (i) (b) = 0 and tic (  1) and ultrarelativistic (  1) plasmas. 2 2 d =db = 0 at b = 0, (ii) d =db < 0 at b = 0 (iii) These are demonstrated in the two subsections 3.1 (b 6= 0) = 0, (b) < 0 for 0 < jbj < jb j and and 3.2. Note that one can, in principle, consider m m ? 0 according to when the solitary (d =db)j some other nite values of , which may be neither b=b waves are compressive (with b > 0) or rarefactive much smaller nor much larger than unity, however, (with b < 0). Here, b corresponds to the ampli- a corresponding choice of the polytropic index in tude of the solitary waves. It is straightforward to between 4=3   5=3 may not be appropriate, verify that the condition (i) is satis ed. However, and can lead to some incorrect results. the condition (ii) is satis ed for M > M , where M is the critical value of M , given by, c 3.1. Weakly relativistic regime (  1) We consider = 5=3. Since 0 < S < 1 and 1 v M = : (41) 0 <  1, we have two cases of interest (i) 1 + =( 1) 2 2 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2), i.e., 0 0 when the upper limits of depend on v and (ii) Later, we will verify the condition (iii) numerically p 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1, i.e., when the upper in two di erent regimes, i.e., weakly relativistic and limit of is independent of v . Figure 1 is the con- ultrarelativic regimes. Furthermore, since the pseu- tour plot of A(v ; ) = 0 showing the possible exis- dopotential (b) is to be a real valued function, the tence region of solitary waves in the (v ; )-plane. expression under the square root in g must be either p Within the domain 0 < v < 2=9, the ranges zero or positive, yielding jbj < jb j  b where m c of values of change according to case (i). For p p example, the admissible range of at v = 0:3 is 1 + =( 1) b = 2M 1 S : (42) 0 < < 0:13 and at v = 0:4 it is 0 < < 0:36. So, 2 0 1 v smaller the values of v , lower is the upper limit of It follows that for some given values of M , and v , . On the other hand, when 2=9  v < 1 and is independen on v , there is a wide range of values the wave amplitude will not exceed the critical value of : 0 <  1 for which the solitary waves ex- b . The upper limit of the Mach number M can be c u ist. However, in all the domains the solitary waves obtained in terms of and v from the condition must have a maximum amplitude b , provided the (b )  0 as admissible Mach number lies in M < M < M . c u 2(1 v ) 1 S M = p : (43) A(v ,β )=0 u 0 [1 + =( 1)] [1 + S(log S 1)] 0.9 Thus, in order that the EP plasmas support large 0.8 A(v ,β)<0 0.7 amplitude solitary waves, we must have M < M < A(v ,β)>0 0.6 M . In particular, for ! 0 (cold plasmas) and 0.5 1, i.e., v  1 (nonrelativistic plasmas) we 0 0 0.4 have M  1 and M  2, i.e., super-Alfv enic Soliton c u No Soliton 0.3 solitons may exist with the Mach number satisfying 0.2 1 < M < 2. This is in agreement with the results 0.1 of Verheest and Cattaert (Verheest and Cattaert, 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 2004), who reported in nonrelativistic cold electron- positron plasmas. Next, in order that M < M c u holds, the function A(v ; ) must be positive, where Figure 1: A(v ; ) = 0 [Eq. (44)] is contour plotted to show the existence and non-existence regions of EM solitary waves A(v ; ) = 2(1 S) 1 S(log S 1); (44) in weakly relativistic (  1) plasmas. together with 0 < S < 1. In what follows, we examine numerically the conditions and di erent Figure 2 displays the plots of the lower (solid limits of the wave amplitude and the Mach num- line) and upper (dashed line) limits of the Mach ber stated above for the existence of large am- number within the domain 0  < 1 for di er- plitude EM solitons. We focus our discussion on ent values of v in two cases discussed before [cf. β Fig. 1]. The subplots (a) and (b) correspond to (a) (b) 1.4 1.4 the case (i) where depends on v , while (c) and v =0.4 v =0.3 (d) that for the case (ii) where does not depend 0 1.2 1.2 on v . We note that the values of M are always 0 c less than unity, while those of M can be less than 0.8 or greater than unity depending on the values of and v within the regimes. Here, the values of 0 0.8 0.6 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.2 0.4 at which both M and M coincide are not ad- c u M M c u (c) (d) missible, because otherwise M = M = M would c u 1.5 1 violate the condition for the existence of solitary v =0.6 0.8 v =0.8 0 0 waves. If we scale . 0:05 to interpret its small- ness in the weakly relativistic regime, then from the 0.6 subplots (a) and (b) of Fig. 2 we nd that there are, 0.5 0.4 in fact, two subregimes of , namely 0 < < 0 0.2 and < . 0:05. In the former regime, we 0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1 have 1 < M < 1:4, while in the other one has 0 < M < 1. The threshold value shifts to- u 1 Figure 2: Plots of the lower (M ) and upper (M ) limits of wards lower values as the value of v is increased c u the Mach number, given by Eqs. (41) and (43), are shown within the admissible domain. In fact, for values of for di erent values of v in weakly relativistic (0 <  1) v & 0:7, the threshold value disappears and only plasmas . The subplots (a) and (b) correspond to the regimes 2 2 we have 0 < M < 1 in 0 < . 0:05. Thus, 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2), while the subplots 0 0 it follows that the EP plasmas with weakly reala- (c) and (d) for 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1. Note that M ; M  1 for 0:7 < v < 1. tivistic (0 < . 0:05) energies can support both c u 0 the sub-Alfv enic (0 < M < 1) and super-Alfv enic (1 < M < 1:4) solitons in the regime 0 < v < 0:7, until 1:06 . M < M . However, as M decreases while only the sub-Alfv enic solitons may exist for from M = 1:06 to lower values within the domain 0:7 . v < 1. From Fig. 2, it is also noticed M < M < 1:06, the values of b increase in a that the values of both M and M decrease with c m c u subinterval 0  . , while those decrease in an increasing values of v , and they tend to become 2 other subinterval < < 0:06. Here, is some smaller than unity as v approaches 1, implying 2 2 threshold value of which shifts to higher values as that as the phase velocity of EM solitary waves ap- M decreases from 1:06 to M . On the other hand, proaches the speed of light in vacuum, it is more c for a xed value v = 0:6 in 2=9 < v < 1 [sub- likely that the sub-Alfv enic solitons can exist in rel- 0 0 plot (b)], the wave amplitude always increases with ativistic EP-pair plasmas. increasing values of both (0 . < 0:05) and M In what follows, we numerically examine the vari- (M < M < M ). From the subplots (a) and (b) it ations of the wave amplitude b [at which (b) = 0] c u is also seen that the ranges of values of where b against the parameter (0   1) for di erent m is de ned di er and increase with decreasing values values of the Mach number, M < M < M and c u of M . with two di erent values of v , taking one from each p p of the regimes 0 < v < 2=9 and 2=9 < v < 1. Having obtained various parameter regimes for 0 0 In these regimes of M and , the values of b the existence of EM solitary waves as discussed are always found to be . b . We consider (a) before, we now plot the pro les of the pseudopo- v = 0:3 when the upper limit of depends on v , tential (b) and the corresponding solitary struc- 0 0 2 2 i.e., 0 < < v =(1 7v =2) and (b) v = 0:6 when tures as in Fig. 4 for di erent values of v , 0 0 0 0 does not depend on v . The results are shown and the Mach number M in two di erent regimes 2 2 in Fig. 3. It mainly displays the contour plots of (i) 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2), 0 0 (b 6= 0) = 0 in the ( ; b)-plane. It is interesting M < M < M [subplots (a) and (b)] and (ii) m c u to note from subplot (a) that within the domain 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1, M < M < M [sub- 0 c u 0 . < 0:06 and for a xed value of v = 0:3 in plots (c) and (d)]. As expected, the amplitudes of 0 < v < 2=9, the amplitude b increases with the solitons exactly correspond to the cut-o values 0 m increasing values of M in M < M < M . How- of at b = b 6= 0 (i.e., the points where crosses c u m ever, the same decrease with increasing values of the b-axis). From the pro les of and b, the soliton Mach Number (M) 3.2. Ultra-relativistic regime (  1) (a) We consider the polytropic index = 4=3. In this 1.1 case, since 0 < S < 1 and  1, we can have also M=1.08 two possible regimes similar to the weakly relativis- M=1.06 p p 0.9 tic case, namely (i) 1=6 < v < 1=5, 1  < 0.8 2 2 M=1.02 v =(15v ), i.e., when the upper limits of depend 0 0 M=1.0 0.7 on the values of v and (ii) 1=5 < v < 1,  1, 0 0 M=0.98 0.6 i.e., when the upper limits of do not depend on v . 0.5 However, looking at the expressions of M and M , c u p p M=0.95 0.4 we nd that within the regime 1=6 < v < 1=5, p p p 0.3 the ratio M =M = 2(1 S)= 1 + S(log S 1) u c 0.2 varies from 0:9814 to 0:9996, i.e., M =M  1 for u c 0.1 1. A numerical estimation also reveals that in this regime of v , j (b)j . 10 and the soliton 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 β amplitude jb j . 0:01. So, we are not interested in this short regime of v , and only the regime to be (b) 1.7 considered for analysis is 1=5 < v < 1,  1. 1.65 Figure 5 shows the plots of M (the lower limit M=1.03 of the Mach number, solid line) and M (the up- 1.6 M=1.02 per limit of the Mach number, dashed line) within 1.55 M=1.0 the domain 1=5 < v < 1 for di erent values of 1.5 v . We nd that both M and M decrease with 0 c u M=0.98 1.45 increasing values of and they remain less than unity even for  1. Furthermore, it is noticed 1.4 M=0.95 that the values of both M and M decrease with c u 1.35 M=0.94 increasing values of v . Thus, it follows that in 1.3 contrast to the weakly relativistic regime, the EP 1.25 plasmas with ultrarelativistic energies may support only sub-Alfv enic solitons. Such a feature in rela- 1.2 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 tivistic EP plasmas has not been reported before. Similar to the case of weakly relativistic plasmas, we also show the variation of the soliton ampli- Figure 3: The soliton amplitude b is shown against with the variations of the Mach number M in two di erent regimes tude b for di erent values of the Mach number of v and : (a) v = 0:3 within 0 < v < 2=9; 0 < < 0 0 0 M within M < M < M and with a xed value of p c u 2 2 v =(1 7v =2), and (b) v = 0:6 within 2=9  v < 1; 0 0 0 0 v in 1=5 < v < 1 as shown in Fig. 6. It is found 0 0 0 <  1. Note that the range of where b is de ned that the values of b increase with increasing val- di ers and increases with decreasing values of M . ues of , however, the threshold values of shift to lower ones as the values of M are increased. Since 1, relatively lower values of M would favor the existence of EM solitary waves in ultrarelativistic regimes. widths can also be veri ed by the formula: width The pseudopotential (b) and the corresponding W = jb = j. An enhancement of the ampli- m min soliton pro les of the magnetic eld b are also shown tude and broadening of the soliton pro le (width) in Fig. 7 for di erent values of v , and the Mach are seen to occur with an increase of the Mach num- number M . It is seen that with increasing values ber, however, the amplitude increases but the width of these parameters, the soliton amplitude increases decreases with increasing value of v and within and the width decreases. the admissible regimes [subplots (a) and (b)]. On the other hand, subplots (c) and (d) show the same 4. Conclusion qualitative behaviors, i.e., with an increase of any one of v , and M , the amplitude increases and We have studied the nonlinear propagation of the width decreases. purely stationary large amplitude electromagnetic Amplitude (b ) Amplitude (b ) m (a) (b) 0.04 v =0.3, β=0.01, M=0.98 v =0.3, β=0.01, M=0.98 0 0 0.03 v =0.4, β=0.01, M=0.98 v =0.4, β=0.01, M=0.98 v =0.4, β=0.02, M=0.98 v =0.4, β=0.02, M=0.98 0.02 v =0.4, β=0.02, M=1.02 v =0.4, β=0.02, M=1.02 0.8 0.01 0.6 -0.01 0.4 -0.02 -0.03 0.2 -0.04 -0.05 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 (c) (d) 1.6 0.1 v =0.5, β=0.01, M=0.9 0.05 1.4 v =0.5, β=0.02, M=0.9 v =0.5, β=0.02, M=1.02 1.2 v =0.71, β=0.01, M=0.9 -0.05 -0.1 -0.15 0.8 -0.2 0.6 -0.25 v =0.5, β=0.01, M=0.9 0.4 v =0.5, β=0.02, M=0.9 -0.3 0 v =0.5, β=0.02, M=1.02 0 0.2 -0.35 v =0.71, β=0.01, M=0.9 -0.4 0 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 Figure 4: Plots of the pseudopotential (b) [subplots (a) and (c)] and the corresponding soliton pro le [(b) and (d)] for di erent 2 2 values of v , and M as in the legends in two di erent regimes: (i) 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2), M < M < M 0 0 c u 0 0 [subplots (a) and (b)] and (ii) 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1, M < M < M [subplots (c) and (d)]. 0 c u (a) (b) 0.45 0.45 v =0.6 v =0.7 0 0 0.4 0.4 0.35 0.35 0.3 0.3 0.25 0.25 0.2 0.2 0.15 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.05 0 0 1 5 10 15 20 1 5 10 15 20 β β Figure 5: Plots of the lower (M ) and upper (M ) limits of the Mach number, given by Eqs. (41) and (43), are shown for c u di erent values of v ( 1=5 < v < 1) in ultrarelativistic plasmas (  1): (a) v = 0:6 and (b) v = 0:7. 0 0 0 0 ψ(b) ψ(b) Mach Number (M) Mach Number (M) b wave magnetic eld b  B =B > 0 or < 0 ow- y 0 0.8 ing to the obvious symmetry of EP-pair plasmas 0.7 with equal mass and opposite charges. This means 0.6 that the EM solitary waves can propagate as com- pressive or rarefactive type solitons. The energy 0.5 integral is expressed in terms of the magnetic eld 0.4 instead of the electrostatic potential as the latter M=0.09 0.3 may be relevant for electrostatic solitary waves not M=0.10 0.2 M=0.11 for EM waves. Furthermore, we have considered M=0.12 the isothermal pressure law for mathematical sim- 0.1 plicity. Instead, one can use the adiabatic pressure 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 law, i.e., P=P = (n=n ) with polytropic index , 0 0 however, in this case, the relativistic uid equations may not be reducible to the energy integral form Figure 6: The soliton amplitude b is shown against in (34) either by the McKenzie approach or Sagdeev the ultrarealtivistic regime (  1) for di erent values of the Mach number M and for a xed value of v = 0:7 in 0 approach. 1=5  v < 1. To conclude, the nonlinear excitation of EM waves and the formation of solitary structures in pair plasmas are known to have signi cant relevance solitary waves in a magnetized relativistic electron- not only in space and astrophysical environments positron-pair plasma. A fully relativistic two- uid but also in laboratory experiments (Sarri et al., model is considered which accounts for both the 2015). Furthermore, in pulsars and active galac- weakly relativistic (  1) and ultrarelativistic tic nuclei with violent surroundings, these nonlin- (  1) thermal motions of electrons and positrons ear phenomena would not occur with small ampli- where  k T=mc . Thus, previous theory in tude only. In this context, the present theory in the literature (Verheest and Cattaert, 2004) is ad- magnetized electron-positron plasmas can help un- vanced and generalized. Using the McKenzie ap- derstand certain aspects of these stronger nonlinear proach, the system of uid equations is reduced to phenomena with large wave amplitude. an energy-like equation which describes the evolu- tion of EM solitary waves in its own reference frame. Acknowledgments Di erent parameter regimes of the wave phase ve- locity v  V=c and the energy ratio for the exis- This work was initiated when Sayantan Dutta tence of solitary waves, as well as di erent limits of was pursuing his Master's degree nal project in the soliton amplitude (b ) and the Mach number the Department of Mathematics of Visva-Bharati. M  V=V are demonstrated both in the limits of One of us, GB acknowledges nancial support from weakly relativistic and ultrarealtivistic energies. It University Grants Commission (UGC), Govt. of is found that India, under the Dr. D. S. Kothari Post Doc- toral Fellowship Scheme with Ref. no. F.4- In the weakly relativistic limit, EM solitary 2/2006(BSR)/MA/18-19/0096). APM is supported waves may exist in two di erent regimes (i) by the Science and Engineering Research Board 2 2 0 < v < 2=9, 0 < < v =(1 7v =2) 0 0 (SERB), Govt. of India with Sanction order no. and (ii) 2=9  v < 1, 0 <  1. The CRG/2018/004475 dated 26 March 2019. solitary waves can appear as the sub-Alfv enic (0 < M < 1) or super-Alfv enic (1 < M < 2) References solitons with amplitude 0 < b < 2. Baboolal, S., Bharuthram, R., Hellberg, M.A., 1990. Cut- In the ultrarelativistic limit, EM solitary waves o conditions and existence domains for large-amplitude exist in the regime 1=5 < v < 1,  1. In ion-acoustic solitons and double layers in uid plasmas. Journal of Plasma Physics 44, 1{23. this case, only sub-Alfv enic (0 < M < 0:4) Banerjee, G., Maitra, S., 2015. Pseudopotential approach solitons may exist with amplitude 0 < b < 1. for dust acoustic solitary waves in dusty plasmas with kappa-distributed ions and electrons and dust grains hav- It is to be noted that both the sub-Alfv enic and ing power law size distribution. Physics of Plasmas 22, super-Alfv enic solitons exist symmetrically for the 043708. Amplitude (b ) m -4 (a) (b) ×10 0.9 1 v =0.70, β=10.0, M=0.120 v =0.70, β=10.5, M=0.120 0.8 0 v =0.70, β=10.5, M=0.114 0.7 v =0.75, β=10.5, M=0.114 0.6 -1 0.5 -2 0.4 0.3 -3 v =0.70, β=10.0, M=0.120 0.2 v =0.70, β=10.5, M=0.120 -4 v =0.70, β=10.5, M=0.114 0 0.1 v =0.75, β=10.5, M=0.114 -5 0 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 b ζ Figure 7: Pro les of the pseudopotential (b) [subplot (a)] and the corresponding soliton [subplot (b)] are shown in ultrarela- tivistic (  1) regime for di erent values of v , and M as in the legends with 1=5  v < 1 and M < M < M . 0 0 c u Banerjee, G., Maitra, S., 2016. Arbitrary amplitude dust a two-electron-component plasma. Journal of plasma ion acoustic solitons and double layers in the presence of physics 45, 323{338. nonthermal positrons and electrons. Physics of Plasmas McKenzie, J.F., Doyle, T.B., 2003. A uni ed view of 23, 123701. acoustic-electrostatic solitons in complex plasmas. New Begelman, M.C., Blandford, R.D., Rees, M.J., 1984. Theory Journal of Physics 5, 26. of extragalactic radio sources. Reviews of Modern Physics Miler, H.R., Witta, P.J., 1987. Active galetic nuclei. 56, 255. Springger-Verlag, Berlin , 202. Blandford, R.D., Znajek, R.L., 1977. Electromagnetic ex- Misner, W., Thorne, K.S., Wheeler, J.A., 1973. Gravitation. traction of energy from kerr black holes. Monthly Notices Freeman, San Francisco. p. 763. of the Royal Astronomical Society 179, 433{456. Misra, A.P., Adhikary, N.C., 2011. Large amplitude solitary Burns, M.L., Lovelace, R.V.E., 1982. Theory of electron- waves in ion-beam plasmas with charged dust impurities. positron showers in double radio sources. The Astrophys- Physics of Plasmas 18, 122112. ical Journal 262, 87{99. Misra, A.P., Adhikary, N.C., 2013. Electrostatic solitary Das, A., Bandyopadhyay, A., Das, K.P., 2010. Large am- waves in dusty pair-ion plasmas. Physics of Plasmas 20, plitude dust acoustic solitary waves and double layers in 102309. positively charged warm dusty plasma with nonthermal Orosz, J.A., Remillard, R.A., Bailyn, C.D., McClintock, electrons. Physics of Plasmas 17, 014503. J.E., 1997. An optical precursor to the recent x-ray out- Gibbons, G.W., Hawking, S.W., Siklos, S., 1983. The very burst of the black hole binary gro j1655{40. The Astro- early universe cambridge university press, in: Nueld physical Journal Letters 478, L83. Workshop)[21 June 1982]. Sagdeev, R.Z., 1966. Cooperative phenomena and shock Goldreich, P., Julian, W.H., 1969. Pulsar electrodynamics. waves in collisionless plasmas. Reviews of plasma physics The Astrophysical Journal 157, 869{880. 4, 23. Gombero , L., Galv~ ao, R.M.O., 1997. Modulational instabil- Sagdeev, R.Z., Galeev, A.A., 1969. Nonlinear plasma theory. ity of a circularly polarized wave in a magnetized electron- New York: Benjamin. positron plasma with relativistic thermal energies. Phys- Saini, N.S., Danehkar, A., Hellberg, M.A., Kourakis, I., ical Review E 56, 4574. 2011. Large-amplitude electron-acoustic solitons in a Gratton, F.T., Gnavi, G., Galvao, R.M.O., Gombero , L., dusty plasma with kappa-distributed electrons, in: AIP 1997. Self-modulation of a strong electromagnetic wave Conference Proceedings, American Institute of Physics. in a positron-electron plasma induced by relativistic tem- pp. 357{358. peratures and phonon damping. Physical Review E 55, Sarri, G., Poder, K., Cole, J.M., Schumaker, W., Di Pi- 3381. azza, A., Reville, B., Dzelzainis, T., Doria, D., Gizzi, Lightman, A.P., 1982. Relativistic thermal plasmas-pair pro- L.A., Grittani, G., Kar, S., Keitel, C.H., Krushelnick, cesses and equilibria. The Astrophysical Journal 253, 842{ K., Kuschel, S., Mangles, S.P.D., Najmudin, Z., Shukla, 858. N., Silva, L.O., Symes, D., Thomas, A.G.R., Vargas, M., Lightman, A.P., Zdziarski, A.A., 1987. Pair production and Vieira, J., Zepf, M., 2015. Generation of neutral and high- compton scattering in compact sources and comparison to density electron{positron pair plasmas in the laboratory. observations of active galactic nuclei. The Astrophysical Nature communications 6, 6747. Journal 319, 643{661. Verheest, F., Cattaert, T., 2004. Large amplitude soli- Mace, R.L., Baboolal, S., Bharuthram, R., Hellberg, M.A., tary electromagnetic waves in electron-positron plasmas. 1991. Arbitrary-amplitude electron-acoustic solitons in Physics of Plasmas 11, 3078{3082. ψ(b) b Verheest, F., Cattaert, T., 2005. Parallel propagating elec- tromagnetic solitons and oscillitons in space plasmas and in relativistic electron-positron plasmas. Physica Scripta 2005, 62. Verheest, F., Hellberg, M.A., Gray, G.J., Mace, R.L., 1996. Electrostatic solitons in multispecies electron-positron plasmas. Astrophysics and Space Science 239, 125{139. Wardle, J.F.C., Homan, D.C., Ojha, R., Roberts, D.H., 1998. Electron{positron jets associated with the quasar 3c279. Nature 395, 457{461. Yu, M.Y., Shukla, P.K., Sten o, L., 1986. Alfven vortices in a strongly magnetized electron-position plasma. The Astrophysical Journal 309, L63{L65.

Journal

PhysicsarXiv (Cornell University)

Published: May 13, 2020

References