Physica B: Condensed Matter
Volume 405, Issue 3, 1 February 2010, Pages 1022-1032




Nearly degenerate electron distributions and superluminal radiation densities

Roman TomaschitzCorresponding Author Contact Information, a, E-mail The Corresponding Author

a Department of Physics, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagami-yama, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8526, Japan

Received 17 June 2009; 
accepted 28 October 2009. 
Available online 3 November 2009.

Abstract

Polylogarithmic fugacity expansions of the partition function, the caloric and thermal equations of state, and the specific heat of fermionic power-law distributions are derived in the nearly degenerate low-temperature/high-density quantum regime. The spectral functions of an ultra-relativistic electron plasma are obtained by averaging the tachyonic radiation densities of inertial electrons with Fermi power-laws, whose entropy is shown to be extensive and stable. The averaged radiation densities are put to test by performing tachyonic cascade fits to the γ-ray spectrum of the TeV blazar Markarian 421 in a low and high emission state. Estimates of the thermal electron plasma in this active galactic nucleus are extracted from the spectral fits, such as temperature, number count, and internal energy. The tachyonic cascades reproduce the quiescent as well as a burst spectrum of the blazar obtained with imaging atmospheric Cherenkov detectors. Double-logarithmic plots of the differential tachyon flux exhibit intrinsic spectral curvature, caused by the Boltzmann factor of the electron gas.

Keywords: Fermi power-law ensembles; Nearly degenerate electron plasma; Superluminal radiation; Tachyonic cascade spectra; Spectral curvature; γ-Ray blazars; Negative mass-square; Transversal and longitudinal radiation modes; Polylogarithms

PACS classification codes: 52.25.Kn; 52.27.Ny; 71.10.Ca; 95.30.Tg

Article Outline

1. Introduction
2. Ultra-relativistic Fermi power laws
3. Thermodynamic variables of nearly degenerate power-law distributions
4. Tachyonic cascade spectra
5. Conclusion
Acknowledgements
Appendix A. Incomplete integrals of fermionic power-law densities
A.1. Fugacity expansion at low temperature and high density
A.2. Zero-temperature degeneracy
A.3. Number count, internal energy, and partition function in the nearly degenerate regime
Appendix B. Polylogarithms, Stirling numbers, and Gegenbauer polynomials
References

1. Introduction

Electronic power-law distributions are commonly used in electromagnetic spectral averages to model the synchrotron emission of astrophysical plasmas, such as the magnetospheric X-ray emission of planets [1]. In this article, we discuss spectral fitting based on fermionic power-law distributions, and develop the thermodynamic formalism of power-law ensembles quantized in Fermi–Dirac statistics. The quasiclassical fugacity expansion pertinent to fermionic power-law distributions in the high-temperature/low-density regime was derived in Ref. [2]. Here, we investigate the opposite asymptotic limit, nearly degenerate ultra-relativistic power-law ensembles in the low-temperature/high-density quantum regime. The efficiency of the spectral averages is demonstrated by applying tachyonic cascade fits to the TeV blazar Mkn 421 in a low emission state and in outburst. The cascade spectra are obtained by averaging the tachyonic radiation densities of individual electrons over ultra-relativistic electron populations in the galactic nucleus. The thermodynamic parameters of the electron plasma are extracted from the spectral fits.

The tachyonic radiation field is a real Proca field with negative mass-square, View the MathML source, subject to the Lorentz condition View the MathML source, where mt is the mass of the superluminal Proca field Aμ, and q the tachyonic charge carried by the subluminal electron current View the MathML source [3]. In the Proca equation, the mass term is added with a positive sign, and the sign convention for the d’Alembertian is νν=Δ-2/t2, so that View the MathML source is the negative mass-square of the radiation field. The negative mass-square refers to the radiation field rather than the current, in contrast to traditional theories based on superluminal source particles emitting electromagnetic radiation [4], [5], [6] and [7]. Estimates of the tachyon–electron mass ratio and the tachyonic fine structure constant are mt/m≈1/238 and q2/(4πplanck constant over two pic)≈1.0×10-13, obtained from hydrogenic Lamb shifts [8].

Tachyonic radiation implies superluminal signal transfer, the energy quanta propagating faster than light in vacuum, due to their negative mass-square, in contrast to rotating superluminal light sources emitting vacuum Cherenkov radiation [9], [10], [11], [12], [13] and [14]. This superluminal energy propagation by tachyonic vacuum modes is also to be distinguished from superluminal group velocities arising in photonic crystals, optical fibers, or metamaterials [15], [16], [17], [18] and [19]. In contrast to tachyonic quanta, the actual signal speed defined by the electromagnetic energy flow in these media is always subluminal and occasionally even opposite to the group velocity [20].

In Section 2, we derive the fugacity expansion of the internal energy and the partition function in the low-temperature/high-density regime. The thermodynamic variables of nearly degenerate power-law distributions are calculated in Section 3, such as the thermal equation of state, entropy, and free energy. We check the positivity of the isochoric heat capacity and the isothermal compressibility for arbitrary power-law index, demonstrating thermodynamic stability in the quantum regime. A generalization of non-relativistic Fermi–Dirac distributions by way of modified dispersion relations has also been suggested in Ref. [21]. Here, we consider ultra-relativistic multi-component plasmas in the collisionless regime [22], in stationary non-equilibrium described by power-law densities [1], [23] and [24].

In Section 4, we study tachyonic radiation densities averaged over electronic power-law distributions, calculate the spectral functions in the nearly degenerate quantum regime, and discuss the range of applicability of the fugacity expansion, including the crossover into the quasiclassical regime. We perform cascade fits to the γ-ray flux of the Markarian galaxy Mkn 421 (at redshift z≈0.031) in a quiescent state [25] and to a burst spectrum [26], and compare with the tachyonic spectral maps of other BL Lacertae objects. The spectral curvature is reproduced by the tachyonic cascades without resort to intergalactic attenuation mechanisms.

In Section 5, we present our conclusions. In Appendix A, the Sommerfeld asymptotics of incomplete Fermi integrals is derived, which is the basis of the fugacity expansion of the thermodynamic functions in Section 3 and the spectral functions in Section 4. This involves polylogarithms discussed in Appendix B.

2. Ultra-relativistic Fermi power laws

We start with the partition function

(2.1)
View the MathML source
of a fermionic power-law density [2]

(2.2)
View the MathML source
where the electronic Lorentz factors range in an interval γ1γ<∞. γ1 is the lower edge of Lorentz factors of the electron distribution, the threshold energy being mγ1, γ1≥1. The fugacity exponent α is related to the chemical potential by μ=-mα/β. δ is the electronic power-law exponent, and β=m/(kT) the cutoff parameter in the Boltzmann factor, so that the Fermi–Dirac equilibrium distribution is recovered with δ=0 and γ1=1. Here, we study non-thermal power-law ensembles of arbitrary real power-law index δ. The grand partition function (2.1) is obtained via a standard trace calculation in fermionic occupation number representation. Internal energy and particle number read

(2.3)
View the MathML source


(2.4)
View the MathML source
Integral representation (2.1) of the partition function Z(δ,β,α,V) is the starting point for the quasiclassical fugacity expansion of the thermodynamic functions, applicable at high temperature and low density [27]. The opposite asymptotic limit, the nearly degenerate quantum regime at low temperature and high density, is based on the representation

(2.5)
View the MathML source
obtained from Eq. (2.1) by partial integration. We replace α by the chemical potential μ=-mα/β, and consider U, N, and View the MathML source as functions of the independent variables μ and β. From now on, we put γ1=1. (The case γ1>1 will be studied in Section 4.)

The μ→∞ asymptotics of the above variables is assembled from the fugacity expansion of the Fermi integrals in Appendix A. The ascending 1/μ series of the particle number reads, cf. Eqs. (A.35) and (A.37),

(2.6)
View the MathML source
The fugacity expansion of the internal energy is obtained from Eqs. (A.36) and (A.37),

(2.7)
View the MathML source
and the expansion of the partition function follows from Eq. (A.38):

(2.8)
View the MathML source
For these asymptotics to be applicable, conditions m/μdouble less-than sign1 and m/(βμ)double less-than sign1 have to be met. The identities

(2.9)
View the MathML source
can be used to check the consistency of series expansions (2.6), (2.7) and (2.8).

3. Thermodynamic variables of nearly degenerate power-law distributions

The thermodynamic functions are obtained by iteratively solving (2.6) for the chemical potential μ, which is then substituted into the asymptotic series (2.7) and (2.8) of the internal energy and the partition function. Defining the Fermi momentum as pF:=(3π2N/V)1/3, we invert Eq. (2.6) in ascending powers of 1/pF:

(3.1)
View the MathML source
with expansion parameter x:=m/(βpF). This is valid for m/pFdouble less-than sign1 and xdouble less-than sign1. The Fermi temperature is defined as the β→∞ limit of μ(pF,β):

(3.2)
View the MathML source
We substitute μ(pF,β) into the internal energy (2.7) and partition function (2.8) to find

(3.3)
View the MathML source


(3.4)
View the MathML source
The mean energy per particle in the ultra-relativistic regime is thus U/Nnot, vert, similar3pF/4. The entropy is calculated via

(3.5)
View the MathML source
where we used View the MathML source. On substituting series (3.1), (3.3) and (3.4), we obtain

(3.6)
View the MathML source
The expansion parameter is x=m/(βpF) or

(3.7)
View the MathML source
The isochoric heat capacity reads

(3.8)
View the MathML source
Thermodynamic stability requires CV≥0, which is evidently satisfied. The Helmholtz free energy is assembled as

(3.9)
View the MathML source
where we substitute the fugacity expansions of the chemical potential (3.1) and the partition function (3.4) as well as View the MathML sourceto obtain

(3.10)
View the MathML source
with x=m/(βpF) as in Eq. (3.7). The thermal equation of state

(3.11)
View the MathML source
is thus found as

(3.12)
View the MathML source
We solve this equation iteratively for pF(β,P):

(3.13)
View the MathML source
where y:=(12π2P)1/4. The thermal equation (3.12) can thus be written as

(3.14)
View the MathML source
These expansions in ascending powers of 1/y are applicable if m/ydouble less-than sign1 as well as m/(βy)double less-than sign1. The isothermal compressibility reads

(3.15)
View the MathML source
where, cf. Eq. (3.13),

(3.16)
View the MathML source
so that we arrive at

(3.17)
View the MathML source
with y=(12π2P)1/4. Thermodynamic stability requires κT≥0, which is satisfied.

In the fully degenerate case, at zero temperature, the power-law exponent δ drops out in all thermodynamic variables, and at finite β it does not enter in leading order. The regime below βF:=m/(kTF) is not accessible with the fugacity expansions derived here, which require both βFdouble less-than sign1 and βF/βdouble less-than sign1. If βnot double greater-than sign1/βF, the first-order correction proportional to δ is overpowered by the second order, which is independent of δ in this limit. Therefore, the Chandrasekhar mass limit of white dwarfs is not affected by the power-law exponent, as it assumes total degeneracy [28]. Order-of-magnitude estimates of cooling times derived from homology relations are not affected either, as they are based on the leading-order temperature and density scaling of pressure and specific heat [29].

We have put planck constant over two pi=c=1. To restore the dimensions, we rescale β=mc2/(kT) and pF=planck constant over two pi(3π2N/V)1/3 so that kTFnot, vert, similarμnot, vert, similarcpF, and note View the MathML source. The expansion parameter x=mc/(βpF) is chosen to be dimensionless, and the dimension of y=(12π2planck constant over two pi3c3P)1/4 to be that of energy. The expansion parameter mc2/y in Eq. (3.13) is thus dimensionless as well, and pFnot, vert, similary/c. Hence

(3.18)
View the MathML source
which are the rescaled leading orders of expansions (3.3), (3.12) and (3.14).

4. Tachyonic cascade spectra

The spectral averaging of tachyonic radiation densities with electronic power-law distributions (2.2) has already been explained in Ref. [30], where we mainly focused on the quasiclassical regime, but also derived the general formalism applicable in the nearly degenerate case. In Eqs. (4.1), (4.2), (4.3), (4.4) and (4.5), we summarize the averaged radiation densities:

(4.1)
View the MathML source
where the fermionic spectral functions are

(4.2)
View the MathML source
The weight factors fk=1,2,3 denote the averages

(4.3)
View the MathML source
where AF:=m3V/π2 is the normalization factor of the power-law density dρF in Eq. (2.2). The superscripts T and L in Eq. (4.2) refer to the transversal and longitudinal polarization components defined by View the MathML source and ΔL=0 [31]. γ is the electronic Lorentz factor, αq the tachyonic fine structure constant, and mt the tachyon mass. The argument View the MathML source in the second spectral function in Eq. (4.1) is the minimal electronic Lorentz factor for radiation at this frequency:

(4.4)
View the MathML source
The threshold Lorentz factor γ1 enters as lower integration boundary in the weights (4.3), and γ1μt. In the thermodynamic variables, we can still put γ1=1, cf. Eqs. (2.3), (2.4) and (2.5), but electrons with Lorentz factors below μt cannot radiate tachyonic quanta [32]. γ1 determines the break frequency

(4.5)
View the MathML source
which enters in the step functions θ in Eq. (4.1), separating the spectrum into a low- and a high-frequency band. In particular, View the MathML source, and the smallest possible threshold, γ1=μt, corresponds to ω1=0. The threshold Lorentz factor μt depends on the tachyon–electron mass ratio, cf. Eq. (4.4), and is not to be confused with the chemical potential μ.

The units planck constant over two pi=c=1 can easily be restored. We use the Heaviside–Lorentz system, so that αq=q2/(4πplanck constant over two pic)≈1.0×10-13. The tachyon mass is View the MathML source, and the tachyon–electron mass ratio mt/m≈1/238. These estimates are obtained from hydrogenic Lamb shifts [8]. The particle number reads View the MathML source, where γ1 is the lower edge of Lorentz factors in the source population. The exponential cutoff in the spectral weights (4.3) is related to the electron temperature by β=mc2/(kT) and the chemical potential by μ=-mα/β. The normalization factor AF is dimensionless via mmc/planck constant over two pi; the volume factor in the thermodynamic functions in Section 3 is thus found as View the MathML source, where View the MathML source is the reduced electronic Compton wavelength.

The weight factors (4.3) are related to the Fermi integral F(a, b) in Eq. (A.1) (with a=k-1 and b=0) and the Sommerfeld decomposition (A.3) by

with normalization AF as in Eq. (4.3). We substitute F0(k-1,0)=(zk-1)/k, cf. Eq. (A.33), and assemble the temperature dependent contribution F1+F2 in Eq. (4.6) by making use of Eqs. (A.19), (A.20), (A.21) and (A.22) (with a=k-1 and b=0),

(4.7)
View the MathML source
The expansion parameter z is defined in Eq. (A.20):

(4.8)
View the MathML source
where μ is the chemical potential, cf. after Eq. (4.5). For the asymptotic series (4.7) to be applicable, conditions βγ1znot double greater-than sign1 as well as z>1 have to be satisfied. [Since b=0, we do not need to require γ1znot double greater-than sign1, even though series (4.7) is a systematic ascending 1/z expansion, cf. Eq. (A.23) and after Eq. (A.34). In fact, F0 is a polynomial in z, and the factor ρ(γ1z) in Eq. (A.21) drops out in F1+F2 at b=0, cf. Eqs. (A.13) and (A.15), so that an additional temperature independent expansion in inverse powers of γ1z is not needed if b=0 in the Fermi integral (A.1).]

The amplitude AF and the fugacity e-α are two independent fitting parameters in the source density dρF(γ), cf. Eqs. (2.2) and (4.3). This is in contrast to the classical limit, View the MathML source, where the factors of the amplitude AFe-α cannot independently be determined from the spectral fit. This amplitude differs from a classical Boltzmann power-law distribution due to the fermionic multiplicity factor, the Boltzmann normalization being AFe-α/2, cf. Eq. (3.7) in Ref. [24]. In the ultra-relativistic limit, γnot double greater-than sign1, the factor γ-δ can formally be generated by analytic continuation in the momentum space dimension, since pnot, vert, similarmγ [33]. In the case of a genuine fermionic power-law distribution in the nearly degenerate quantum regime, one can determine the volume as well as the particle number from the spectral fit, cf. after Eq. (4.5).

We parametrize the spectral weights fk(γ1) with the chemical potential via z(μ) in Eq. (4.8). The independent fitting parameters in fk(γ1) are thus temperature β, threshold Lorentz factor γ1, chemical potential μ, and the volume factor AF of the Fermi distribution in Eq. (4.3). We may fix γ1 at the lowest possible threshold, γ1=μt, cf. Eq. (4.4) (and put γ1=1 in the thermodynamic functions (2.3), (2.4) and (2.5)), so that the averaged spectral densities (4.1) simplify to

(4.9)
View the MathML source
The expansion parameter z(μ) in Eq. (4.8) becomes frequency dependent via the substitution View the MathML source, required in densities (4.9). The condition z>1 for the fugacity expansion (4.7) to apply is violated at sufficiently large ω, cf. Eq. (4.4). In this case, or if condition βγ1znot double greater-than sign1 is not met, the asymptotic series of F1+F2 in Eq. (4.7) breaks down, so that we have to switch to the exact integral representation (4.3) of the weight factors fk(γ1), and numerically integrate the crossover into the quasiclassical regime. The quasiclassical fugacity expansion [2] can be used if

(4.10)
View the MathML source
which allows to expand the denominator in Eq. (2.2) to arrive in leading order at the classical power-law density, cf. after Eq. (4.8),

(4.11)
View the MathML source
Here, we use the customary definition of the electronic power-law index, View the MathML source. (The electron index View the MathML source is denoted by a hat, to avoid confusion with the parameter α in Eq. (4.10) defining the fugacity e-α and the chemical potential.) The normalization factor View the MathML source is related to the particle number via View the MathML source to be identified with the renormalized electron count ne obtained from the spectral fit, cf. after Eq. (4.15). The cascades ρi=1,2 depicted in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 are generated with View the MathML source and γ1=1, that is, with Maxwell–Boltzmann distributions as specified in Table 1. Condition (4.10) can even be met at high temperature, at sufficiently high frequency, cf. Eq. (4.4), implying exponential decay of the spectral functions View the MathML source.



Full-size image
Fig. 1. Spectral map of the Markarian blazar Mkn 421 in a low emission state. MAGIC flux points from Ref. [25]. The solid line T+L depicts the unpolarized differential tachyon flux dNT+L/dE, obtained by adding the flux densities ρ1,2 of two ultra-relativistic electron populations, cf. Table 1, and rescaled with E2 for better visibility of the spectral curvature, cf. Eq. (4.13). The transversal and longitudinal flux densities dNT,L/dE add up to the total flux T+L=ρ1+ρ2. The exponential decay of the cascades ρ1,2 sets in at about Ecut≈(mt/m)kT, where mt/m≈1/238 is the tachyon–electron mass ratio [8], implying cutoff energies of 550 GeV for the ρ1 cascade and 100 GeV for ρ2. The spectral curvature resembles that of the TeV blazar W Comae in Fig. 2 of Ref. [27] at 450 Mpc, which suggests the curvature to be intrinsic rather than due to intergalactic absorption. One may also compare this cascade spectrum to the spectral maps of the BL Lacs 1ES 0347–212 at 830 Mpc, cf. Fig. 2 of Ref. [30], and 1ES 1218+304 at 800 Mpc, cf. Fig. 2 of Ref. [3]. There is no correlation of redshift and spectral curvature visible.

Full-size image
Fig. 2. Spectral map of Mkn 421 in a high state. Whipple data points from Ref. [26], notation as in Fig. 1. T and L stand for the transversal and longitudinal flux components, and T+L is the unpolarized cascade fit. Temperature and number count of the ultra-relativistic electron populations generating the cascades ρ1,2 are recorded in Table 1. The cutoff energy is 2.4 TeV for the ρ1 cascade and 220 GeV for ρ2. The spectral curvature of the rescaled flux density View the MathML source is generated by the Boltzmann factor of the thermal electron populations, cf. Table 1, and the spectral map differs from the quiescent state in Fig. 1 beyond a simple rescaling. This suggests that the curvature of the plotted flux density is intrinsic rather than depending on distance. The high-energy cascade is comparable to the HESS spectrum of the same outburst in April 2004, cf. Fig. 6 in Ref. [31]. One may also compare Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 to the spectral slope of BL Lac 1ES 2344+514 in Fig. 3 of Ref. [27], which has a similar redshift but a more pronounced spectral curvature. Conversely, the redshift of BL Lac PG 1553+113 in Fig. 4 of Ref. [27] is higher by almost a factor of 10, although this blazar has a spectral slope similar to that of the depicted high state. Even the cascade fit of the Galactic γ-ray binary LS 5039 in Fig. 3 of Ref. [30] is more strongly curved than of Mkn 421 in this figure. The spectral curvature is thus uncorrelated with distance. The tachyonic γ-ray cascades of Mkn 421 as well as of the BL Lacs mentioned in the captions are generated by thermal electron distributions, and the spectral fits extend into the lower GeV region as spectral plateaus. By contrast, non-thermal cascades generated by the shock-heated electron plasmas of supernova remnants [38] exhibit a slightly curved or straight power-law crossover (View the MathML source for electron indices View the MathML source, cf. Eqs. (4.11) and (4.13)) between the spectral plateau and the exponentially decaying slope, absent in the thermal spectra of active galactic nuclei.

Table 1.

Thermal electronic source distributions ρi generating the tachyonic γ-ray cascades of the Markarian galaxy Mkn 421.

Markarian 421 z≈0.031, 140 Mpc β View the MathML source ne kT (TeV) U (1060 erg)
MAGIC, November 2004–April 2005
 ρ1 3.91×10−9 3.3×10−3 3.5×1057 131 2.2
 ρ2 2.15×10−8 5.3×10−3 5.6×1057 23.8 0.64

Whipple, April 2004
 ρ1 8.96×10−10 8.5×10−3 9.0×1057 570 25
 ρ2 9.77×10−9 2.5×10−2 2.7×1058 52.3 6.7

Each ρi stands for a Maxwell–Boltzmann density View the MathML source as defined in Eq. (4.11) (with δ=0 and γ1=1). β is the cutoff parameter in the Boltzmann factor, and View the MathML source determines the amplitude of the tachyon flux generated by density ρi, from which the electron count View the MathML source is inferred at the indicated distance. kT is the temperature and U the internal energy of the electron populations, cf. after Eq. (4.15). Each cascade depends on two fitting parameters β and View the MathML source extracted from the χ2 fit T+L=ρ1+ρ2 in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. The tachyonic cascades labeled ρ1,2 in the figures are produced by the corresponding electron densities listed in this table.


The classical limit of the fermionic spectral functions FT,L(ω,γ1) is the Boltzmann average BT,L(ω,γ1), obtained by dropping all terms containing mt/m factors in Eq. (4.2), and replacing dρF in the spectral weights (4.3) by the classical density View the MathML source in Eq. (4.11). The classical spectral weights reduce to incomplete gamma functions. Terms containing mt/m factors in Eqs. (4.4) and (4.5) are dropped as well, and the polarization coefficients reduce to View the MathML source and View the MathML source, cf. after Eq. (4.3). The classical limit of the averaged spectral densities left angle bracketpT,L(ω)right-pointing angle bracketF in Eq. (4.1) thus reads

View the MathML source


(4.12)
View the MathML source
where the argument View the MathML source in the step functions is the classical limit of the break frequency (4.5).

The spectral fits of the BL Lacertae object (BL Lac) Markarian 421 in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 are based on the E2-rescaled flux densities [34]

(4.13)
View the MathML source
where d is the distance to the galaxy and View the MathML source the spectral average (4.12). The cascade fits are performed with the unpolarized flux density dNT+L=dNT+dNL of thermal electron populations (4.11) (View the MathML source, γ1=1). Each electron density generates a cascade ρi, and the spectral map is obtained by adding two cascade spectra labeled ρ1,2 in the figures. As for the electron count

(4.14)
View the MathML source
we use a rescaled parameter View the MathML source for the fit,

(4.15)
View the MathML source
which is independent of the distance estimate in Eq. (4.13). Here, View the MathML source implies the tachyon mass in keV units in the spectral functions (4.12). At γ-ray energies, only a tiny αq/αe fraction (the ratio of tachyonic and electric fine structure constants) of the tachyon flux is absorbed by the detector, which requires a rescaling of the electron count n1, so that the actual number of radiating electrons is ne:=n1αe/αq≈7.3×1010n1. We thus find the electron count as View the MathML source, where View the MathML source defines the tachyonic flux amplitude extracted from the spectral fit [3]. This renormalized count ne is to be identified with the particle number N in the thermodynamic variables. The electron temperature and cutoff parameter in the Boltzmann factor are related by View the MathML source, and the energy estimates in Table 1 are based on View the MathML source [35]. The distance in Eq. (4.13) is inferred from the redshift via dnot, vert, similarcz/H0, with View the MathML source, that is, h0≈0.68. Hence, View the MathML source, and View the MathML source. The distance estimate does not affect the spectral maps, but the electron number ne.

Fig. 1 shows the cascade fit of the Markarian galaxy Mkn 421 in a quiescent state [25], and Fig. 2 in a high emission state [26]. The redshift of Mkn 421 is z≈0.031, implying a distance of 140 Mpc. TeV γ-ray spectra of active galactic nuclei are usually assumed to be generated by inverse Compton scattering or pp scattering followed by pion decay. Both mechanisms result in a flux of TeV photons, assumed to be partially absorbed by interaction with background photons due to pair creation, so that the intrinsic spectrum has to be reconstructed on the basis of intergalactic absorption models depending on vaguely known cosmological input parameters. In contrast, the extragalactic tachyon flux is not attenuated by interaction with the background light, there is no absorption of tachyonic γ-rays. The curvature of the γ-ray spectra in double-logarithmic plots is caused by the Boltzmann factor of the electron densities generating the tachyon flux, so that the observed spectrum is already the intrinsic one, and no reconstruction is needed. The curvature present in the γ-ray spectra of BL Lacs is not correlated with distance; the spectral curvature does not increase with redshift if we compare the spectral fits in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 to the spectral maps of other active galactic nuclei, cf. the figure captions.

5. Conclusion

Tachyonic γ-ray spectra of active galactic nuclei are generated by ultra-relativistic electron populations. Tachyons are radiation modes, unrelated to electromagnetic radiation. Electrons radiate tachyons, and these tachyonic quanta produce the observed γ-ray cascades. The tachyonic radiation modes are coupled by minimal substitution to the electron current. This field theory, a real Proca field with negative mass-square, admits a static potential analogous to the Coulomb potential, but oscillating because of the negative mass-square, and much weaker due to the small tachyonic fine structure constant. In the spectral maps, the tachyon–electron mass ratio shows in the cutoff energy of the cascades. The negative mass-square of tachyons implies superluminal velocity and allows longitudinal polarization. The tachyonic radiation field does not couple to electromagnetic fields, nor is it affected by electric charge. Thus, interaction of tachyons with photons can only happen indirectly via matter fields. In contrast to electromagnetic γ-rays, there is no extinction of the extragalactic tachyon flux by the cosmic background light, as tachyons do not interact with infrared photons. The ultra-relativistic electron plasma in the active galactic nucleus produces tachyonic γ-rays propagating unattenuated over intergalactic distances.

The tachyonic radiation density averaged over the electron populations in the galactic nucleus is generated by electrons in uniform motion. In particular, there is no electromagnetic radiation damping, as photons can only be radiated by accelerated charges, in contrast to tachyonic quanta, where the emission rate primarily depends on the electronic Lorentz factor rather than on acceleration [3]. The high plasma temperature inferred from the spectral fits implies ultra-high energy electrons. Such high electron temperatures are also found in Galactic pulsar wind nebulae, production sites of ultra-high energy cosmic rays [36].

Specifically, we fitted a quiescent as well as a flare spectrum of the γ-ray blazar Mkn 421 with tachyonic cascades, and found that the spectral curvature is intrinsic and reproduced by the superluminal spectral densities (4.1) averaged with ultra-relativistic electron distributions. The curvature present in the γ-ray spectra of active galactic nuclei is not correlated with distance, so that absorption of electromagnetic radiation due to interaction with background photons is not a viable explanation for the spectral curvature. By contrast, there is no intergalactic attenuation of the tachyon flux, as tachyons cannot interact with photons. In Table 1, we have given estimates of the temperature, the source count, and the internal energy of the electron populations in the galactic nucleus generating the superluminal γ-ray cascades.

The fugacity expansion of the thermodynamic variables of a nearly degenerate electron plasma was derived in Sections 2 and 3, and fermionic power-law densities were shown to admit a stable and extensive entropy function in the quantum regime, cf. Eqs. (3.5) and (3.6). In Section 4, we averaged tachyonic spectral densities with electronic power-law distributions, and obtained the fugacity expansion of the quantized spectral functions in the nearly degenerate low-temperature/low-frequency/high-density regime. The integral representation (4.3) of the spectral weights covers the crossover into the quasiclassical high-temperature/high-frequency/low-density regime studied in Ref. [2].

Superluminal radiation from ultra-relativistic electrons orbiting in magnetic fields was investigated in Ref. [37]. In the zero-magnetic-field limit, the averaged tachyonic synchrotron densities converge to the spectral densities (4.12). Orbital curvature induces modulations in the spectral slopes, but these ripples are attenuated when performing a pitch-angle average, cf. Figs. 1–3 of Ref. [37]. Thus we can use uniform radiation densities even in the presence of magnetic fields in the galactic nuclei.

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges the support of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. The hospitality and stimulating atmosphere of the Centre for Nonlinear Dynamics, Bharathidasan University, Trichy, and the Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai, are likewise gratefully acknowledged.

References

[1] R.F. Elsner et al., Icarus 178 (2005), p. 417.

[2] R. Tomaschitz, Physica A 387 (2008), p. 3480. 

[3] R. Tomaschitz, Opt. Commun. 282 (2009), p. 1710. 

[4] S. Tanaka, Prog. Theor. Phys. 24 (1960), p. 171.

[5] R. Newton, Science 167 (1970), p. 1569. 

[6] G. Feinberg, Sci. Am. 222 (1970), p. 69.

[7] K. Kamoi and S. Kamefuchi, Prog. Theor. Phys. 45 (1971), p. 1646.

[8] R. Tomaschitz, Eur. Phys. J. B 17 (2000), p. 523. 

[9] B.M. Bolotovskii˘ and V.L. Ginzburg, Sov. Phys. Usp. 15 (1972), p. 184.

[10] B.M. Bolotovskii˘ and V.P. Bykov, Sov. Phys. Usp. 33 (1990), p. 477.

[11] A.V. Bessarab et al., IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 32 (2004), p. 1400.

[12] A.V. Bessarab et al., Radiat. Phys. Chem. 75 (2006), p. 825. 

[13] H. Ardavan et al., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 24 (2007), p. 2443. 

[14] H. Ardavan et al., J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25 (2008), p. 543. 

[15] M.S. Bigelow, N.N. Lepeshkin and R.W. Boyd, Science 301 (2003), p. 200. 

[16] T. Baba, Nature Photon. 2 (2008), p. 465. 

[17] G.M. Gehring et al., Science 312 (2006), p. 895. 

[18] L. Thévenaz, Nature Photon. 2 (2008), p. 474.

[19] G. Dolling et al., Science 312 (2006), p. 892. 

[20] L. Brillouin, Wave Propagation and Group Velocity, Academic Press, New York (1988).

[21] P.K. Chakraborty, S.K. Biswas and K.P. Ghatak, Physica B 352 (2004), p. 111.

[22] A. Minguzzi and M.P. Tosi, Physica B 300 (2001), p. 27. 

[23] G. Branduardi-Raymont et al., Planet. Space Sci. 55 (2007), p. 1126. 

[24] R. Tomaschitz, Physica A 385 (2007), p. 558. 

[25] J. Albert et al., Astrophys. J. 663 (2007), p. 125. 

[26] A. Konopelko et al., Astrophys. J. 679 (2008), p. L13. 

[27] R. Tomaschitz, EPL 85 (2009), p. 29001. 

[28] D.A. Howell et al., Nature 443 (2006), p. 308. 

[29] I. Iben Jr., Phys. Rep. 250 (1995), p. 1. 

[30] R. Tomaschitz, Phys. Lett. A 372 (2008), p. 4344. 

[31] R. Tomaschitz, Eur. Phys. J. C 49 (2007), p. 815. 

[32] R. Tomaschitz, Eur. Phys. J. D 32 (2005), p. 241. 

[33] K.A. Kazakov, Physica B 403 (2008), p. 2255.

[34] R. Tomaschitz, Ann. Phys. 322 (2007), p. 677. 

[35] R. Tomaschitz, EPL 84 (2008), p. 19001. 

[36] J. Belz et al., Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 190 (2009), p. 5. 

[37] R. Tomaschitz, Phys. Lett. A 366 (2007), p. 289.

[38] R. Tomaschitz, Physica B 404 (2009), p. 1383. 

[39] S. Chandrasekhar, An Introduction to the Study of Stellar Structure, Dover, New York (1967).

[40] E.T. Copson, Asymptotic Expansions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1965).

[41] C. Truesdell, Ann. Math. 46 (1945), p. 144. 

[42] L. Lewin, Polylogarithms and Associated Functions, North-Holland, Amsterdam (1981).

[43] K.S. Kölbig, J.A. Mignaco and E. Remiddi, BIT 10 (1970), p. 38. 

[44] R. Barbieri, J.A. Mignaco and E. Remiddi, Nuovo Cimento A 11 (1972), p. 824. 

[45] A. Devoto and D.W. Duke, Riv. Nuovo Cimento 7 (1984), p. 1. 

[46] K.S. Kölbig, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 17 (1986), p. 1232. 

[47] M.H. Lee, J. Math. Phys. 36 (1995), p. 1217. 

[48] W. Magnus, F. Oberhettinger and R.P. Soni, Formulas and Theorems for the Special Functions of Mathematical Physics, Springer, New York (1966).

[49] J. Riordan, Combinatorial Identities, Wiley, New York (1968).

Appendix A. Incomplete integrals of fermionic power-law densities

The thermodynamic variables in Eqs. (2.3), (2.4) and (2.5) are composed of integrals of type

(A.1)
View the MathML source
where Λ0:=e-α denotes the fugacity. We derive the Λ0→∞ asymptotics of this integral, with lower integration boundary γ1≥1 and real parameters Λ0>0, β>0. The exponents a and b are moderate real numbers, and so is the power-law exponent δ. If the integral is complete, γ1=1, we have to require b>-2 for convergence.

We perform the substitution γ=γ1(1+y) in Eq. (A.1),

View the MathML source


(A.2)
View the MathML source
and use the Sommerfeld decomposition [39]:

View the MathML source


View the MathML source


(A.3)
View the MathML source
The asymptotics of the temperature-dependent contribution F1+F2 is discussed below, and the zero-temperature degeneracy F0 in Section A.2.

A.1. Fugacity expansion at low temperature and high density

The ascending View the MathML source expansion of F1+F2 in Eq. (A.3) is found by means of the substitutions y=λ(1-t) in F1 and y=λ(1+t) in F2. Expanding the denominator in powers of View the MathML source, we obtain

(A.4)
View the MathML source


(A.5)
View the MathML source


where f(y) is defined in Eq. (A.2). In F1, we extend the upper integration boundary to infinity, which is justified by Watson's lemma, as the error is of order O(1/Λ), as compared to the expansion in powers of View the MathML source. We can replace the upper integration boundaries in Eqs. (A.4) and (A.5) by an arbitrary ε, since the asymptotic series is determined by the Taylor coefficients of gk(t,δ,λ) at t=0:

(A.7)
View the MathML source
and does not depend on the upper integration boundary if terms of O(1/Λ) are neglected [40]. For technical convenience, we extend the integration boundaries to infinity, even though series (A.7) may only have a small radius of convergence, cf. Eq. (B.17). (In this way, we avoid incomplete gamma functions in the term-by-term integrations in Eqs. (A.4) and (A.5), which would have to be expanded to arrive at series (A.8) and (A.9) below.) On substituting series (A.7) into Eqs. (A.4) and (A.5), and interchanging integration and summations, we find

(A.8)
View the MathML source


(A.9)
View the MathML source
To obtain the Taylor coefficients ak,n(δ,λ) in Eq. (A.7), we factorize gk(t,δ,λ)=h1h2, cf. Eqs. (A.2) and (A.6),

(A.10)
View the MathML source
and expand both factors. The Taylor series of h1 reads

(A.11)
View the MathML source
As for h2, we introduce the shortcuts

(A.12)
View the MathML source
and find, by means of the Gegenbauer expansion (B.17):

(A.13)
View the MathML source
We replace the binomial coefficient (kδ+a)m/m! in Eq. (A.11) by the Stirling expansion (B.14), and use the product of series (A.11) and (A.13) to find the Taylor coefficients of gk(t,δ,λ) in Eq. (A.7) as

(A.14)
View the MathML source


(A.15)
View the MathML source
The coefficients S(n,m;a) are calculated in Eqs. (B.15) and (B.16), and we put αn,m(λ)=0 for m>n. The Gegenbauer polynomials View the MathML source are listed in Eqs. (B.18), (B.19) and (B.20). We substitute the Taylor coefficients (A.14) into series F1,2 in Eqs. (A.8) and (A.9), and interchange the summations. In this way, the ascending series of the polylog (B.1) is recovered, so that

(A.16)
View the MathML source
The expansion of F2 is obtained from F1 by changing the sign of δ and inserting the factor (-1)n+1 into the n summation. The expansion of F1+F2 is thus

(A.17)
View the MathML source
where Δn are polynomials in View the MathML source as defined in Eqs. (B.11) and (B.12), and the coefficients αn,m(λ) are defined by the finite series (A.15). By making use of (B.16) and (B.19), we calculate αn,m(λ) for n=0,1,2:

View the MathML source


View the MathML source


View the MathML source


(A.18)
View the MathML source
The first three orders of the asymptotic expansion of F1+F2 in Eq. (A.17) thus read

(A.19)
View the MathML source
where Δk=1,2,3 stands for Δk((1+λ)δ), cf. Eqs. (B.11) and (B.12), and ρ is defined in Eq. (A.12). We introduce z=1+λ as expansion parameter (in ascending powers of 1/z):

(A.20)
View the MathML source
where Λ0 is the fugacity, cf. Eq. (A.1), and View the MathML source, cf. Eq. (A.2). λ is positive since Λ>1 is required in Eqs. (A.3), (A.4), (A.5) and (A.6). In Eq. (A.19), we substitute 1+λ=z as well as

(A.21)
View the MathML source
We also note, cf. Eq. (B.12), View the MathML source, and

(A.22)
View the MathML source
Expansion (A.19) is in ascending powers of 1/(βγ1z), and holds for arbitrary exponents a,b, and γ1≥1, provided that βγ1znot double greater-than sign1. If in addition γ1znot double greater-than sign1, we can also expand ρ in Eq. (A.21) to find

(A.23)
View the MathML source
For this expansion to be valid, βγ1znot double greater-than sign1 as well as γ1znot double greater-than sign1 is required. That is, both conditions have to be met in a systematic 1/z expansion, where z is related to the fugacity Λ0=e-α as stated in Eq. (A.20).

A.2. Zero-temperature degeneracy

In the zero-temperature limit, the contribution F1+F2 to the Fermi integral F(a,b) in Eq. (A.1) vanishes, cf. Eqs. (A.19) and (A.23), so that F reduces to the temperature-independent residual View the MathML source, cf. Eq. (A.3). We substitute View the MathML source into F0 in Eq. (A.3), and rescale t to find

(A.24)
View the MathML source


(A.25)
View the MathML source
We consider the limit λ→∞, and expand F0 in ascending powers of View the MathML source. To this end, we split the integral (A.24) into View the MathML source, and write View the MathML source, where I stands for the right-hand side of Eq. (A.24) with lower and upper integration boundaries as indicated. Apparently, View the MathML source scales out in View the MathML source:

(A.26)
View the MathML source
In the integrand of View the MathML source, we expand both factors in ascending powers of 1/t, and use term-by-term integration:

(A.27)
View the MathML source


(A.28)
View the MathML source
where (a)n denotes the falling factorial, a(a-1)…(a-n+1). The ascending View the MathML source expansion of F0 in Eq. (A.24) is thus obtained as View the MathML source, with series (A.26) and (A.27) substituted. In the case of integer exponents a and b, singularities can arise in the series coefficients of View the MathML source and View the MathML source, which cancel if ε expanded, cf. Eq. (A.30).

We consider the special case γ1=1, that is υ1=0 in Eq. (A.24). Here, b>-2 is necessary for integral (A.24) to converge,

(A.29)
View the MathML source
This can directly be obtained from Eq. (A.24) via the decomposition View the MathML sourceor from Eqs. (A.26), (A.27) and (A.28), the first term on the right-hand side in Eq. (A.29) being View the MathML source and the second View the MathML source. A singularity may occur in the first term due to a pole of the second gamma function in the nominator. A corresponding singularity arises in a series coefficient of the hypergeometric term, so that the singularities cancel if ε expanded [17]. The poles occur at a=2k-1-b, k=0,1,2,…, for arbitrary real b>-2; we find F0(γ1=1,a=2k-1-b) as

(A.30)
View the MathML source
where ψ is the logarithmic derivative of the gamma function. The asymptotic expansion of the Fermi integral View the MathML source in Eqs. (A.1) and (A.3) is assembled with F1+F2 in Eq. (A.17) and View the MathML source in Eqs. (A.26), (A.27) and (A.28). In the case that F is complete, with lower integration boundary γ1=1, we can use F0 in Eq. (A.29) or (A.30).

We list the integrals F0(a,b) (defined in Eq. (A.24)) occurring in the thermodynamic functions (2.3), (2.4) and (2.5). As in Eq. (A.20), we put z=1+λ, so that View the MathML source, cf. Eq. (A.25), and obtain by elementary integration of Eq. (A.24),

View the MathML source


View the MathML source


View the MathML source


(A.31)
View the MathML source
where 0<arcsin<π/2, z>1, and γ1≥1. The partition function (2.5) is assembled from

(A.32)
View the MathML source
and there is also a zero-temperature contribution from F1+F2 via βF(0,3), cf. Eq. (A.38). The spectral functions (4.10) are compiled at b=0, where

(A.33)
View the MathML source
which is independent of γ1, cf. Eq. (A.24).

We consider γ1=1 and expand Eqs. (A.31) and (A.32) in 1/z to find

View the MathML source


View the MathML source


View the MathML source


View the MathML source


View the MathML source


(A.34)
View the MathML source
Here, γ1=1 is implied, but γ1 can readily be scaled into these series according to Eqs. (A.31) and (A.32), so that the expansions are in ascending powers of 1/(γ1z). Eqs. (A.31), (A.32) and (A.33) give the fully degenerate contribution F0(a,b) to the Fermi integral (A.1), (A.2) and (A.3). The fugacity expansion (A.34) of F0 is needed even though the exact result (A.31) and (A.32) is known, since we have to iteratively solve for z when calculating the thermodynamic variables, cf. Section 3.

A.3. Number count, internal energy, and partition function in the nearly degenerate regime

The fugacity expansion of the Fermi integral F(a,b,γ1=1) in Eq. (A.1) is obtained by adding F1+F2 in Eq. (A.23) (with γ1=1) and F0 in Eq. (A.34). We find, for exponents a=b=1:

(A.35)
View the MathML source
where we have to put b=1 in the 1/z2 and 1/z3 terms. The expansion of F(-1,3) is likewise given by Eq. (A.35) with b=3, and

(A.36)
View the MathML source
with b=1. The latter is also the expansion of F(0,3), if we put b=3 in the third and fourth term. The ellipses in Eqs. (A.35) and (A.36) stand for terms of View the MathML source. Expansions (A.35) and (A.36) of the Fermi integral F(a,b,γ1=1) in Eq. (A.1) apply for View the MathML source and znot double greater-than sign1. The parameter Λ0 in Eq. (A.1) is identified with the fugacity e-α, which is related to the chemical potential by α=-βμ/m, where β=m/(kT). Hence, if γ1=1, we can identify z=μ/m, cf. Eq. (A.20).

The fugacity expansions of the particle number and the internal energy read, cf. Eqs. (2.3), (2.4) and (A.1),

(A.37)
View the MathML source
with series (A.35) and (A.36) substituted. The expansion of the partition function View the MathML source in Eq. (2.5) (γ1=1) is assembled as

(A.38)
View the MathML source
Here, F(0,3) is series (A.36), and F(-1,3) series (A.35), both with b=3. The ellipsis stands for terms of View the MathML source.

Appendix B. Polylogarithms, Stirling numbers, and Gegenbauer polynomials

To keep this article self-contained, we summarize some technical concepts as well as the notation used in the expansion of the Fermi integrals in Appendix A. We start with the series representation of the polylogarithm [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46] and [47]:

(B.1)
View the MathML source
which converges in the unit disk |z|<1 for arbitrary complex integer s, and admits analytic continuation by means of the integral representations [43] and [44]:

(B.2)
View the MathML source
The first integral converges in the half-plane Re(s)>1, the second and third require Re(s)>0; otherwise they are identical via partial integration and obvious substitutions. Series (B.1) is recovered by expansion in ascending powers and term-by-term integration. Fermi–Dirac integrals are defined by the third representation in Eq. (B.2), as -Γ(s)Lis(-z).

We note Lis(-1)=(21-s-1)ζ(s); in particular, View the MathML source and Li2(-1)=-π2/12. We will mainly consider real negative z or at least z<1. Lis(z) is analytic in the z plane with branch cut (1,∞) along the positive real axis, except for s=0 and at negative integer s, where the polylogs are rational functions, obtained by recursive differentiation of Li1(z)=-log(1-z) according to

(B.3)
View the MathML source
The asymptotic expansion for large negative z is obtained from Jonquière's inversion formula [48]:

(B.4)
View the MathML source
where

(B.5)
View the MathML source
is the Hurwitz zeta function, and r>0 is implied in Eq. (B.4). ζ(s,z) admits the integral representation [48]:

(B.6)
View the MathML source
from which the large-z asymptotics is obtained by substituting the generating series of the Bernoulli numbers:

(B.7)
View the MathML source
and using term-by-term integration (which amounts to applying Fourier asymptotics or Watson's lemma if the integration path is rotated into the imaginary axis [40]). The r→∞ asymptotics of the inversion formula (B.4) is thus found as [47]:

(B.8)
View the MathML source
where

(B.9)
View the MathML source


(B.10)
View the MathML source
Here, (s)n is the falling factorial s(s-1)…(s-n+1), not to be confused with the Pochhammer symbol or rising factorial (s)(n):=s(s+1)…(s+n-1), so that (s)n=(-1)n(-s)(n).

The second polylog on the left-hand side of Eq. (B.8) can be dropped, eiπsLis(-1/r)=O(1/r), as terms of this order have been discarded in the expansion procedure. However, the asymptotic series terminates for integer s≥0, and then Eq. (B.8) holds true as an identity even for small r. In the case of negative integer s, the right-hand side of Eq. (B.8) vanishes due to the poles of Γ(1+s) in the denominator. In Eq. (B.8), we put s=n=0,1,2,… to find [42]

(B.11)
View the MathML source
This can also directly be obtained from Eq. (B.4), since ζ(1-s,z) reduces to a Bernoulli polynomial for positive integer s [48]. We note View the MathML source as well as the inversion formulas of the di- and trilogarithm:

(B.12)
View the MathML source
Apparently Δn(1/r)=(-1)nΔn(r). Finally, multiple s differentiation of Γ(s)Lis(z) amounts to adding a factor of View the MathML source to the integrand of the third (Fermi–Dirac) integral in Eq. (B.2). The series expansions of these integrals are obtained via term-by-term differentiation of the ascending series (B.1) and the asymptotic expansion (B.8).

In Appendix A, we also need the polynomial expansion of the falling factorial:

(B.13)
View the MathML source
where k is real and Sn,m, 0≤mn, are Stirling numbers of the first kind [49]. In particular, Sn,0=0 for n>0, and Sn,n=1, as well as Sn,1=(-1)n-1(n-1)! and Sn,n-1=-n(n-1)/2. It is convenient to put Sn,m=0 for m>n, so that Sn,m is defined for all non-negative integers n and m, and the summation in Eq. (B.13) can be extended to infinity. In Eq. (A.15), we use an expansion slightly more general than (B.13):

(B.14)
View the MathML source


(B.15)
View the MathML source
where k, δ, and a are arbitrary real numbers. In particular, S(n,m;0)=Sn,m/n!, and we define S(n,m;a)=0 if m>n. For n=0,1,2, coefficients (B.15) read

View the MathML source


(B.16)
View the MathML source
In Eq. (A.13), we use an expansion in Gegenbauer polynomials, based on the generating series [48]:

(B.17)
View the MathML source
Splitting the left-hand side into two factors (1-t/ρ±)α, View the MathML source, we see that the expansion is absolutely convergent for |t|<min(|ρ±|) and arbitrary ρ. More explicitly

(B.18)
View the MathML source
where (λ)(n) is the Pochhammer symbol Γ(λ+n)/Γ(λ). We note

(B.19)
View the MathML source
Gegenbauer polynomials are a special class of hypergeometric polynomials,

View the MathML source


(B.20)
View the MathML source
At λ=1/2, they coincide with the Legendre polynomials Pn(x), and at λ=1 with the Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind Un(x) [48]. Finally, View the MathML source, View the MathML source, and View the MathML source.


Corresponding Author Contact InformationTel.: +81 824 247361; fax: +81 824 240717.