The peaks of the correlation function in acoustic black holes

Paul R. Anderson [email protected] Department of Physics, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27109, USA    Roberto Balbinot [email protected] Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università di Bologna and INFN sezione di Bologna, Via Irnerio 46, 40126 Bologna, Italy    Richard A. Dudley [email protected] Department of Physics and Optical Sciences, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, North Carolina 28223, USA    Alessandro Fabbri [email protected] Departamento de Física Teórica and IFIC, Universidad de Valencia-CSIC, C. Dr. Moliner 50, 46100 Burjassot, Spain
Abstract

Renaud Parentani was one of the leading figures in Quantum Field Theory in curved spacetime, in particular concerning its applications to Hawking-like radiation in analogue models. In this paper dedicated to him, we discus the features of the characteristic peaks appearing in the correlation functions in an acoustic black hole formed by a Bose-Einstein condensate, considered as signature of the presence of Hawking radiation in this system.

I Introduction

In 1981 Unruh unruh81 suggested that Hawking’s black hole (hereafter BH) radiation can have an analogue in a fluid whose flow undergoes a transition from a subsonic regime to a supersonic one. The locus where this happens is the so called ”sonic horizon””, since sound waves are trapped inside the supersonic region and cannot propagate upstream; they are trapped by the flow and dragged downstream. Unruh showed that in this situation one should expect an emission in the subsonic region of thermal phonons at a temperature proportional to the surface gravity of the sonic horizon exactly as predicted by Hawking for gravitational BHs hawking74 ; hawking75 .

In the following years many systems were proposed to experimentally detect this analogue Hawking radiation Barcelo:2005fc . The most promising appeared to be the ones constructed by Bose-Einstein condensates (BECs), since in this case one can arrange the experimental setup so that the associated Hawking temperature is expected to be just one order of magnitude smaller than the BEC background temperature (100nK100𝑛𝐾100\ nK100 italic_n italic_K). Nevertheless even this difference has so far prevented any direct detection of these thermal phonons.

In 2008 it was shown that a characteristic peak in the in-out density-density correlation function should appear paper1 ; cfrbf . The reason is that the Hawking effect involves a genuine pair creation process in which for each thermal phonon in the subsonic region there is a corresponding negative energy partner inside the horizon. This is the smoking gun of the Hawking effect. This peak was observed in a series of experiments performed by Steinhauer and his group jeff2016 ; jeff2019 ; jeff2021 . This represents up to today the best evidence of the presence of Hawking radiation in sonic BHs.

Renaud Parentani suggested that besides this main peak, two other minor peaks should appear in the density-density correlation function because of backscattering effects on the modes mp . While there is as yet no experimental evidence for these peaks, numerical calculations have confirmed their presence paper2 ; rpc ; paper2011 .

In this paper, dedicated to Renaud Parentani for his invaluable contributions to this field, we shall investigate, using the framework of Quantum Field Theory in curved space (see for example bd ; fu ; pt ), the features of the main and secondary peaks of the density-density correlation function for two flow profiles having the same asymptotic sound speed limits and horizon surface gravity, outlining similarities and differences.

II The setting

In a BEC the phase fluctuation θ^^𝜃\hat{\theta}over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG on top of the condensate under the hydrodynamical approximation obeys an equation which is formally identical to a wave equation for a massless scalar field propagating in a fictitious curved space-time111More details of the review in this section can be obtained in Barcelo:2005fc . described by the line element

ds2=nmc[c2dT2+(dxvdT)(dxvdT)],𝑑superscript𝑠2𝑛𝑚𝑐delimited-[]superscript𝑐2𝑑superscript𝑇2𝑑𝑥𝑣𝑑𝑇𝑑𝑥𝑣𝑑𝑇ds^{2}=\frac{n}{mc}[-c^{2}dT^{2}+(d\vec{x}-\vec{v}dT)(d\vec{x}-\vec{v}dT)]\ ,italic_d italic_s start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_m italic_c end_ARG [ - italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + ( italic_d over→ start_ARG italic_x end_ARG - over→ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG italic_d italic_T ) ( italic_d over→ start_ARG italic_x end_ARG - over→ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG italic_d italic_T ) ] , (1)

where n𝑛nitalic_n is the condensate density, c𝑐citalic_c the local speed of sound, v𝑣\vec{v}over→ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG the velocity field and m𝑚mitalic_m the mass of a single atom. The wave equation reads

θ^=0,^𝜃0\Box\hat{\theta}=0\ ,□ over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG = 0 , (2)

where μμsubscript𝜇superscript𝜇\Box\equiv\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\mu}□ ≡ ∇ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the covariant d’Alembertian calculated with the metric (1).

This system can be treated by using the methods of Quantum Field Theory in curved space-time. This has been done in a paper written in collaboration with R. Parentani paper2013 . Here we just outline the main points.

We shall consider for simplicity a stationary unidimensional flow directed along the x^^𝑥\hat{x}over^ start_ARG italic_x end_ARG axis with a constant velocity v𝑣\vec{v}over→ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG, the density n𝑛nitalic_n is also constant. By an appropriate rescaling of the phase operator θ^=mcnL2θ^(2)^𝜃𝑚𝑐𝑛Planck-constant-over-2-pisuperscriptsubscript𝐿perpendicular-to2superscript^𝜃2\hat{\theta}=\sqrt{\frac{mc}{n\hbar L_{\perp}^{2}}}\ {\hat{\theta}^{(2)}}over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG = square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_m italic_c end_ARG start_ARG italic_n roman_ℏ italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, where Lsubscript𝐿perpendicular-toL_{\perp}italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the size of the transverse direction with Lmcmuch-less-thansubscript𝐿perpendicular-toPlanck-constant-over-2-pi𝑚𝑐L_{\perp}\ll\frac{\hbar}{mc}italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≪ divide start_ARG roman_ℏ end_ARG start_ARG italic_m italic_c end_ARG so that excitations with transverse momenta are frozen, eq. (2) can be rewritten as

((2)V)θ^(2)=0,superscript2𝑉superscript^𝜃20\left(\Box^{(2)}-V\right)\hat{\theta}^{(2)}=0\ ,( □ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_V ) over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0 , (3)

where V𝑉Vitalic_V is given by

V=12(1v2c2)d2cdx2+(14c5v24c3)(dcdx)2𝑉121superscript𝑣2superscript𝑐2superscript𝑑2𝑐𝑑superscript𝑥214𝑐5superscript𝑣24superscript𝑐3superscript𝑑𝑐𝑑𝑥2V=-\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}\right)\frac{d^{2}c}{dx^{2}}+\left(% \frac{1}{4c}-\frac{5v^{2}}{4c^{3}}\right)\left(\frac{dc}{dx}\right)^{2}\;italic_V = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( 1 - divide start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG + ( divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_c end_ARG - divide start_ARG 5 italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) ( divide start_ARG italic_d italic_c end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_x end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (4)

and (2)superscript2\Box^{(2)}□ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the two dimensional (2D) d’Alembertian associated with the 2D section of the line element (1), namely

ds2=nm[c(x)2v2c(x)dt2+c(x)c(x)2v2dx2].𝑑superscript𝑠2𝑛𝑚delimited-[]𝑐superscript𝑥2superscript𝑣2𝑐𝑥𝑑superscript𝑡2𝑐𝑥𝑐superscript𝑥2superscript𝑣2𝑑superscript𝑥2ds^{2}=\frac{n}{m}\left[-\frac{c(x)^{2}-v^{2}}{c(x)}dt^{2}+\frac{c(x)}{c(x)^{2% }-v^{2}}dx^{2}\right]\;.italic_d italic_s start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_m end_ARG [ - divide start_ARG italic_c ( italic_x ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_c ( italic_x ) end_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG italic_c ( italic_x ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_c ( italic_x ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_d italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] . (5)

Here we have introduced a “Schwarzschild” time t𝑡titalic_t such that

t=Tx𝑑yvc(y)2v2.𝑡𝑇superscript𝑥differential-d𝑦𝑣𝑐superscript𝑦2superscript𝑣2t=T-\int^{x}dy\frac{v}{c(y)^{2}-v^{2}}\;.italic_t = italic_T - ∫ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_y divide start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_ARG italic_c ( italic_y ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG . (6)

By considering the coordinate xsuperscript𝑥x^{*}italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , given by

x=xc(y)dyc(y)2v2,superscript𝑥superscript𝑥𝑐𝑦𝑑𝑦𝑐superscript𝑦2superscript𝑣2x^{*}=\int^{x}\frac{c(y)dy}{c(y)^{2}-v^{2}}\ ,italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∫ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_c ( italic_y ) italic_d italic_y end_ARG start_ARG italic_c ( italic_y ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (7)

we can rewrite (3) in the form

(2t2+x2+Veff)θ(2)=0,superscript2superscript𝑡2superscript𝑥absent2subscript𝑉effsuperscript𝜃20\left(\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial t^{2}}+\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{*2}}+V_{% \rm eff}\right)\theta^{(2)}=0\ ,( divide start_ARG ∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG + divide start_ARG ∂ end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG + italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_θ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0 , (8)

with effective potential

Veff=c2v2cV.subscript𝑉effsuperscript𝑐2superscript𝑣2𝑐𝑉V_{\rm eff}=\frac{c^{2}-v^{2}}{c}V.italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_c end_ARG italic_V . (9)

The BEC flows along the x^^𝑥\hat{x}over^ start_ARG italic_x end_ARG direction from right to left (i.e. v=v0x^𝑣subscript𝑣0^𝑥\vec{v}=-v_{0}\hat{x}over→ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG = - italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_x end_ARG, with v0>0subscript𝑣00v_{0}>0italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0). By varying c(x)𝑐𝑥c(x)italic_c ( italic_x ) one can engineer the flow so that it is subsonic for x>0𝑥0x>0italic_x > 0 (R𝑅Ritalic_R region) and supersonic for x<0𝑥0x<0italic_x < 0 (L𝐿Litalic_L region). x=0𝑥0x=0italic_x = 0 is the sonic horizon. c(x)𝑐𝑥c(x)italic_c ( italic_x ) can be further assumed to approach constant values asymptotically; namely limx+c(x)=cR>v0subscript𝑥𝑐𝑥subscript𝑐𝑅subscript𝑣0\lim_{x\to+\infty}c(x)=c_{R}>v_{0}roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x → + ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c ( italic_x ) = italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and limxc(x)=cL<v0subscript𝑥𝑐𝑥subscript𝑐𝐿subscript𝑣0\lim_{x\to-\infty}c(x)=c_{L}<v_{0}roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x → - ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c ( italic_x ) = italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Note that the effective potential Veffsubscript𝑉effV_{\rm eff}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (9) vanishes asymptotically and on the horizon. The Penrose diagram of the spacetime is depicted in Fig. (1).

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Penrose diagram of the spacetime of eq. (5). H+superscript𝐻H^{+}italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the future horizon, Hsuperscript𝐻H^{-}italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT the past one, IR,L±subscriptsuperscript𝐼plus-or-minus𝑅𝐿I^{\pm}_{R,L}italic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R , italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are null infinities. R𝑅Ritalic_R is the region outside the horizon, L𝐿Litalic_L is the one inside.

For further use we introduce the retarded (u𝑢uitalic_u) and advanced (v𝑣vitalic_v) null Eddington-Finkelstein like coordinates as

u𝑢\displaystyle uitalic_u =\displaystyle== tx,𝑡superscript𝑥\displaystyle t-x^{*}\ ,italic_t - italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (10)
v𝑣\displaystyle vitalic_v =\displaystyle== t+x,𝑡superscript𝑥\displaystyle t+x^{*}\ ,italic_t + italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (11)

and the Kruskal one

U=±1κeκu,𝑈plus-or-minus1𝜅superscript𝑒𝜅𝑢U=\pm\frac{1}{\kappa}e^{-\kappa u}\ ,italic_U = ± divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_κ italic_u end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (12)

where κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ is the surface gravity of the horizon

κ=dcdx|x=0𝜅evaluated-at𝑑𝑐𝑑𝑥𝑥0\kappa=\left.\frac{dc}{dx}\right|_{x=0}italic_κ = divide start_ARG italic_d italic_c end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_x end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (13)

and in eq. (12) the plus sign is for the L𝐿Litalic_L region and the minus sign is for the R𝑅Ritalic_R region.

The quantum state of our field θ^(2)superscript^𝜃2\hat{\theta}^{(2)}over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, as is well known, can be approximated at late times after the formation of the BH by the Unruh state |Uket𝑈|U\rangle| italic_U ⟩ unruh76 . This corresponds to an expansion of the quantum operator as

θ^(2)=0dωK[a^K(ωK)uHK+h.c.]+0dω[a^I(ω)uIR+h.c.],\hat{\theta}^{(2)}=\int_{0}^{\infty}d\omega_{K}\left[\hat{a}_{K}(\omega_{K})u_% {H}^{K}+h.c.\right]+\int_{0}^{\infty}d\omega\left[\hat{a}_{I}(\omega)u_{I}^{R}% +h.c.\right]\ ,over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ over^ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_h . italic_c . ] + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_ω [ over^ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω ) italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_h . italic_c . ] , (14)

where the form of the mode uIRsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐼𝑅u_{I}^{R}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT on IRsuperscriptsubscript𝐼𝑅I_{R}^{-}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is

uIR(ω,x)=eiωv4πω,superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐼𝑅𝜔𝑥superscript𝑒𝑖𝜔𝑣4𝜋𝜔u_{I}^{R}(\omega,x)=\frac{e^{-i\omega v}}{\sqrt{4\pi\omega}}\ ,italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_x ) = divide start_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_ω italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_ω end_ARG end_ARG , (15)

while that for the mode uHKsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐾u_{H}^{K}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT on Hsuperscript𝐻H^{-}italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is

uHK(ωK,x)=eiωKU4πωK.superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐾subscript𝜔𝐾𝑥superscript𝑒𝑖subscript𝜔𝐾𝑈4𝜋subscript𝜔𝐾u_{H}^{K}(\omega_{K},x)=\frac{e^{-i\omega_{K}U}}{\sqrt{4\pi\omega_{K}}}\ .italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_x ) = divide start_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG . (16)

The Unruh state |Uket𝑈|U\rangle| italic_U ⟩ is defined as

a^K(ωK)|U=0=a^I(w)|Usubscript^𝑎𝐾subscript𝜔𝐾ket𝑈0subscript^𝑎𝐼𝑤ket𝑈\hat{a}_{K}(\omega_{K})|U\rangle=0=\hat{a}_{I}(w)|U\rangle\ over^ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | italic_U ⟩ = 0 = over^ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_w ) | italic_U ⟩ (17)

for every ω,ωK𝜔subscript𝜔𝐾\omega,\omega_{K}italic_ω , italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. In Fig. (2) we illustrate these modes on the Cauchy surface HIRsuperscript𝐻superscriptsubscript𝐼𝑅H^{-}\cup I_{R}^{-}italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∪ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Modes for the Unruh state.

Note that while uIRsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐼𝑅u_{I}^{R}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a positive frequency mode with respect to Schwarzschild time, uHKsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐾u_{H}^{K}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is positive frequency with respect to Kruskal time. The Unruh state describes a situation in which one has no incoming radiation on HIRsuperscript𝐻superscriptsubscript𝐼𝑅H^{-}\cup I_{R}^{-}italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∪ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , while at IR+superscriptsubscript𝐼𝑅I_{R}^{+}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT one has a thermal flux at the Hawking temperature TH=κ2πkBsubscript𝑇𝐻Planck-constant-over-2-pi𝜅2𝜋subscript𝑘𝐵\displaystyle{T_{H}=\frac{\hbar\kappa}{2\pi k_{B}}}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG roman_ℏ italic_κ end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_π italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG, where kBsubscript𝑘𝐵k_{B}italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is Boltzmann’s constant.

It is convenient for the calculations of the 2-point function to express the modes uHKsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐾u_{H}^{K}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in terms of modes (Boulware modes bo ) that on Hsuperscript𝐻H^{-}italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT behave as

uHRsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝑅\displaystyle u_{H}^{R}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT =\displaystyle== eiωu4πω,x>0,superscript𝑒𝑖𝜔𝑢4𝜋𝜔𝑥0\displaystyle\frac{e^{-i\omega u}}{\sqrt{4\pi\omega}}\ ,x>0,divide start_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_ω italic_u end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_ω end_ARG end_ARG , italic_x > 0 , (18)
uHLsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐿\displaystyle u_{H}^{L}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT =\displaystyle== eiωu4πω,x<0.superscript𝑒𝑖𝜔𝑢4𝜋𝜔𝑥0\displaystyle\frac{e^{i\omega u}}{\sqrt{4\pi\omega}}\ ,x<0\ .divide start_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_ω italic_u end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_ω end_ARG end_ARG , italic_x < 0 . (19)

Note the +++ sign in front of the exponential in eq. (19). uHLsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐿u_{H}^{L}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT has negative frequency (while having positive norm), it is associated with the negative (Killing) energy partners. We have

uHK(ωK,x)=0𝑑ω[αωKωRuHR+βωKωRuHR]+RL.superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐾subscript𝜔𝐾𝑥superscriptsubscript0differential-d𝜔delimited-[]superscriptsubscript𝛼subscript𝜔𝐾𝜔𝑅superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝑅subscriptsuperscript𝛽𝑅subscript𝜔𝐾𝜔superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝑅𝑅𝐿u_{H}^{K}(\omega_{K},x)=\int_{0}^{\infty}d\omega\left[\alpha_{\omega_{K}\omega% }^{R}u_{H}^{R}+\beta^{R}_{\omega_{K}\omega}u_{H}^{R*}\right]+R\leftrightarrow L\ .italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_x ) = ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_ω [ italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_β start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] + italic_R ↔ italic_L . (20)

The Bogoliubov coefficients are given in Ref. paper2013 222In Ref. paper2013 there is a misprint in eqs. (4.14b)-(4.14e). ωKsubscript𝜔𝐾\omega_{K}italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT should be replaced by ωKκsubscript𝜔𝐾𝜅\frac{\omega_{K}}{\kappa}divide start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG. and are summarised in Appendix A. Because of the presence of the effective potential Veffsubscript𝑉effV_{\rm eff}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (9), the incoming modes will be modified from their asymptotic form Eqs. (15), (18), (19) and backscattered. In Ref. paper1 , V𝑉Vitalic_V was neglected and the modes maintained their expression (15), (18), (19) throughout the space-time. In Figs. (3) - (5) we schematically describe the backscattering of each mode.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: Backscattering of the uIRsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐼𝑅u_{I}^{R}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT modes.
Refer to caption
Figure 4: Backscattering of the uHRsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝑅u_{H}^{R}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT modes.
Refer to caption
Figure 5: Backscattering of the uHLsuperscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐿u_{H}^{L}italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT modes.

In any case, since Veffsubscript𝑉effV_{\rm eff}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT vanishes asymptotically, at future null infinity each incoming mode will be a linear combination of eiωvsuperscript𝑒𝑖𝜔𝑣e^{-i\omega v}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_ω italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and e±iωusuperscript𝑒plus-or-minus𝑖𝜔𝑢e^{\pm i\omega u}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± italic_i italic_ω italic_u end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

We will consider two profiles of the sound velocity. The first one has been proposed in a numerical simulation fully based on the Bogoliubov theory of a BEC cfrbf which confirmed the presence of a peak in the in-out correlation function as predicted by paper1 using only QFT in curved space methods. It is

c(x)𝑐𝑥\displaystyle c(x)italic_c ( italic_x ) =\displaystyle== cL2+12(cR2cL2)[1+2πtan1(x+bσv)],superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿212superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿2delimited-[]12𝜋superscript1𝑥𝑏subscript𝜎𝑣\displaystyle\sqrt{c_{L}^{2}+\frac{1}{2}(c_{R}^{2}-c_{L}^{2})\left[1+\frac{2}{% \pi}\tan^{-1}\left(\frac{x+b}{\sigma_{v}}\right)\right]}\;,square-root start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) [ 1 + divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG italic_π end_ARG roman_tan start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG italic_x + italic_b end_ARG start_ARG italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) ] end_ARG , (21)
b𝑏\displaystyle bitalic_b =\displaystyle== σvtan[πcR2cL2(v0212(cR2+cL2))],subscript𝜎𝑣𝜋superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿2superscriptsubscript𝑣0212superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿2\displaystyle\sigma_{v}\tan\left[\frac{\pi}{c_{R}^{2}-c_{L}^{2}}\left(v_{0}^{2% }-\frac{1}{2}(c_{R}^{2}+c_{L}^{2})\right)\right]\;,italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_tan [ divide start_ARG italic_π end_ARG start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ) ] , (22)

where σvsubscript𝜎𝑣\sigma_{v}italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an arbitrary positive constant. The horizon is at x=0𝑥0x=0italic_x = 0. The surface gravity for this profile is

κ=dcdx|x=0=12πv0σv(cR2cL2)sin2[π(cR2v02)cR2cL2].𝜅evaluated-at𝑑𝑐𝑑𝑥𝑥012𝜋subscript𝑣0subscript𝜎𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿2superscript2𝜋superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑣02superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿2\kappa=\left.\frac{dc}{dx}\right|_{x=0}=\frac{1}{2\pi v_{0}\sigma_{v}}(c_{R}^{% 2}-c_{L}^{2})\sin^{2}\left[\frac{\pi(c_{R}^{2}-v_{0}^{2})}{c_{R}^{2}-c_{L}^{2}% }\right]\ .italic_κ = divide start_ARG italic_d italic_c end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_x end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_π italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ divide start_ARG italic_π ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ] . (23)

We call this the “original” profile. In this case the equation for the modes eq. (3) has to be solved numerically. The explicit construction of the modes has been given in Ref. paper2013 , written in collaboration with Renaud Parentani, where all the details can be found. The second profile, which we call “analytical”, is

c(x)=cR1+(cR2v021)exp[2cR2v02kx(cR2v021)]θ(x)+cL1(1cL2v02)exp[2kcL2v02x(cL2v021)]θ(x),𝑐𝑥subscript𝑐𝑅1superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑣0212superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑣02𝑘𝑥superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑅2superscriptsubscript𝑣021𝜃𝑥subscript𝑐𝐿11superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿2superscriptsubscript𝑣022𝑘superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿2superscriptsubscript𝑣02𝑥superscriptsubscript𝑐𝐿2superscriptsubscript𝑣021𝜃𝑥c(x)=\frac{c_{R}}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{c_{R}^{2}}{v_{0}^{2}}-1\right)\exp\left[% -\frac{2\frac{c_{R}^{2}}{v_{0}^{2}}kx}{(\frac{c_{R}^{2}}{v_{0}^{2}}-1)}\right]% }}\theta(x)+\frac{c_{L}}{\sqrt{1-\left(1-\frac{c_{L}^{2}}{v_{0}^{2}}\right)% \exp\left[-\frac{2k\frac{c_{L}^{2}}{v_{0}^{2}}x}{\left(\frac{c_{L}^{2}}{v_{0}^% {2}}-1\right)}\right]}}\theta(-x)\;,italic_c ( italic_x ) = divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 1 + ( divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG - 1 ) roman_exp [ - divide start_ARG 2 divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_k italic_x end_ARG start_ARG ( divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG - 1 ) end_ARG ] end_ARG end_ARG italic_θ ( italic_x ) + divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 1 - ( 1 - divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) roman_exp [ - divide start_ARG 2 italic_k divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_x end_ARG start_ARG ( divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG - 1 ) end_ARG ] end_ARG end_ARG italic_θ ( - italic_x ) , (24)

where x=0𝑥0x=0italic_x = 0 is the horizon and k𝑘kitalic_k is a positive constant of dimension L1superscript𝐿1L^{-1}italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and the corresponding surface gravity is

κ=dcdx|x=0=kv0.𝜅evaluated-at𝑑𝑐𝑑𝑥𝑥0𝑘subscript𝑣0\kappa=\left.\frac{dc}{dx}\right|_{x=0}=k\,v_{0}\ .italic_κ = divide start_ARG italic_d italic_c end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_x end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_k italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (25)

The profile has been introduced in Ref. fba2016 . The advantage of this profile is that the modes can be computed analytically in terms of hypergeometric functions.

III Correlation functions

As mentioned in the Introduction, the only experimental support for the existence of Hawking-like radiation in an acoustic BH formed by a BEC comes from the observation of a peak appearing in the in-out (one point inside the horizon and the other outside) equal time density-density correlation function, in agreement with the theoretical prediction paper1 .

Defining the operator n^^𝑛\hat{n}over^ start_ARG italic_n end_ARG as the quantum density fluctuation on top of the condensate, the density-density correlation function is

G2(T,x;T,x)=U|n^(T,x)n^(T,x)|U.subscript𝐺2𝑇𝑥superscript𝑇superscript𝑥quantum-operator-product𝑈^𝑛𝑇𝑥^𝑛superscript𝑇superscript𝑥𝑈G_{2}\left(T,x;T^{\prime},x^{\prime}\right)=\langle U|\hat{n}(T,x)\hat{n}(T^{% \prime},x^{\prime})|U\rangle\ .italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T , italic_x ; italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ⟨ italic_U | over^ start_ARG italic_n end_ARG ( italic_T , italic_x ) over^ start_ARG italic_n end_ARG ( italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) | italic_U ⟩ . (26)

In the hydrodynamical approximation we have Barcelo:2005fc

n^=nmc2[v0xθ^Tθ^]^𝑛Planck-constant-over-2-pi𝑛𝑚superscript𝑐2delimited-[]subscript𝑣0subscript𝑥^𝜃subscript𝑇^𝜃\hat{n}=\frac{\hbar n}{mc^{2}}\left[v_{0}\partial_{x}\hat{\theta}-\partial_{T}% \hat{\theta}\right]over^ start_ARG italic_n end_ARG = divide start_ARG roman_ℏ italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_m italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG [ italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG - ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG ] (27)

and one gets, in our setting,

G2(T,x;T,x)=n2mL2c2(x)c2(x)Dc(x)c(x)U|{{θ(2)^(t,x),θ(2)^(t,x)}|U,G_{2}\left(T,x;T,x^{\prime}\right)=\frac{\hbar n}{2mL_{\perp}^{2}c^{2}(x)c^{2}% (x^{\prime})}D\sqrt{c(x)c(x^{\prime})}\langle U|\left\{\{\hat{\theta^{(2)}}(t,% x),\hat{\theta^{(2)}}(t^{\prime},x^{\prime})\right\}|U\rangle\ ,italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T , italic_x ; italic_T , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = divide start_ARG roman_ℏ italic_n end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_m italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG italic_D square-root start_ARG italic_c ( italic_x ) italic_c ( italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG ⟨ italic_U | { { over^ start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ( italic_t , italic_x ) , over^ start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ( italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) } | italic_U ⟩ , (28)

where

DTTv0xTv0Tx+v02xx.𝐷subscript𝑇subscriptsuperscript𝑇subscript𝑣0subscript𝑥subscriptsuperscript𝑇subscript𝑣0subscript𝑇subscriptsuperscript𝑥superscriptsubscript𝑣02subscript𝑥subscriptsuperscript𝑥D\equiv\partial_{T}\partial_{T^{\prime}}-v_{0}\partial_{x}\partial_{T^{\prime}% }-v_{0}\partial_{T}\partial_{x^{\prime}}+v_{0}^{2}\partial_{x}\partial_{x^{% \prime}}\ .italic_D ≡ ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (29)

Using eqs. (15) and (20) and integrating over ωKsubscript𝜔𝐾\omega_{K}italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (see paper2013 ) the two-point function entering (28) can be written as paper1

U|{θ^(2)(t,x),θ^(2)(t,x)}|U=I+J,quantum-operator-product𝑈superscript^𝜃2𝑡𝑥superscript^𝜃2superscript𝑡superscript𝑥𝑈𝐼𝐽\langle U|\left\{\hat{\theta}^{(2)}(t,x),\hat{\theta}^{(2)}(t^{\prime},x^{% \prime})\right\}|U\rangle=I+J\ ,⟨ italic_U | { over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t , italic_x ) , over^ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) } | italic_U ⟩ = italic_I + italic_J , (30)

where

I𝐼\displaystyle Iitalic_I =\displaystyle== 0dω1sinh(πωκ){uHL(ω,t,x)uHR(ω,t,x)+uHL(ω,t,x)uHR(ω,t,x)\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty}d\omega\frac{1}{\sinh\left(\frac{\pi\omega}{% \kappa}\right)}\left\{u^{L}_{H}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{R}_{H}(\omega,t^{\prime},x^{% \prime})+u^{L*}_{H}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{R*}_{H}(\omega,t^{\prime},x^{\prime})\right.∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_ω divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_sinh ( divide start_ARG italic_π italic_ω end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG ) end_ARG { italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) + italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) (31)
+uHR(ω,t,x)uHL(ω,t,x)+uHR(ω,t,x)uHL(ω,t,x)subscriptsuperscript𝑢𝑅𝐻𝜔𝑡𝑥subscriptsuperscript𝑢𝐿𝐻𝜔superscript𝑡superscript𝑥subscriptsuperscript𝑢𝑅𝐻𝜔𝑡𝑥subscriptsuperscript𝑢𝐿𝐻𝜔superscript𝑡superscript𝑥\displaystyle\;\;\;\left.+u^{R}_{H}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{L}_{H}(\omega,t^{\prime},x% ^{\prime})+u^{R*}_{H}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{L*}_{H}(\omega,t^{\prime},x^{\prime})\right.+ italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) + italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
+cosh(πωκ)[uHL(ω,t,x)uHL(ω,t,x)+uHL(ω,t,x)uHL(ω,t,x)\displaystyle\;\;\left.+\cosh\left(\frac{\pi\omega}{\kappa}\right)\left[u^{L}_% {H}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{L*}_{H}(\omega,t^{\prime},x^{\prime})+u^{L*}_{H}(\omega,t,% x)\,u^{L}_{H}(\omega,t^{\prime},x^{\prime})\right.\right.+ roman_cosh ( divide start_ARG italic_π italic_ω end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG ) [ italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) + italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
+uHR(ω,t,x)uHR(ω,t,x)+uHR(ω,t,x)uHR(ω,t,x)]},\displaystyle\;\;\;\left.\left.+u^{R}_{H}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{R*}_{H}(\omega,t^{% \prime},x^{\prime})+u^{R*}_{H}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{R}_{H}(\omega,t^{\prime},x^{% \prime})\right]\right\}\;,+ italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) + italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ] } ,
J𝐽\displaystyle Jitalic_J =\displaystyle== 0𝑑ω[uIR(ω,t,x)uIR(ω,t,x)+uIR(ω,t,x)uIR(ω,t,x)]superscriptsubscript0differential-d𝜔delimited-[]subscriptsuperscript𝑢𝑅𝐼𝜔𝑡𝑥subscriptsuperscript𝑢𝑅𝐼𝜔superscript𝑡superscript𝑥subscriptsuperscript𝑢𝑅𝐼𝜔𝑡𝑥subscriptsuperscript𝑢𝑅𝐼𝜔superscript𝑡superscript𝑥\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty}d\omega\,\left[u^{R}_{I}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{{R}\,*}% _{I}(\omega,t^{\prime},x^{\prime})+u^{{R}\,*}_{I}(\omega,t,x)\,u^{R}_{I}(% \omega,t^{\prime},x^{\prime})\right]\;∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_ω [ italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) + italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t , italic_x ) italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ] (32)

and the relation between Schwarzschild time t𝑡titalic_t and T𝑇Titalic_T is given by eq. (6).

If one neglects the effective potential in eq. (8), the modes maintain the form given by eqs. (15), (18), (19) throughout the entire space-time. In this case one can obtain an analytical expression for G2(T,x;T,x)subscript𝐺2𝑇𝑥superscript𝑇superscript𝑥G_{2}(T,x;T^{\prime},x^{\prime})italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T , italic_x ; italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) which, taking the point x𝑥xitalic_x in the asymptotic R𝑅Ritalic_R region where c(x)cRsimilar-to𝑐𝑥subscript𝑐𝑅c(x)\sim c_{R}italic_c ( italic_x ) ∼ italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and the point xsuperscript𝑥x^{\prime}italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the asymptotic L𝐿Litalic_L region where c(x)cLsimilar-to𝑐𝑥subscript𝑐𝐿c(x)\sim c_{L}italic_c ( italic_x ) ∼ italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, can be written as

G2(T,x;T,x)subscript𝐺2𝑇𝑥𝑇superscript𝑥\displaystyle G_{2}(T,x;T,x^{\prime})italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T , italic_x ; italic_T , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) =\displaystyle== n2mL2cR3/2cL3/2{1(cRv0)(v0cL)κ2cosh2κ2(uu)\displaystyle\frac{\hbar n}{2mL_{\perp}^{2}c_{R}^{3/2}c_{L}^{3/2}}\Big{\{}-% \frac{1}{(c_{R}-v_{0})(v_{0}-c_{L})}\frac{\kappa^{2}}{\cosh^{2}\frac{\kappa}{2% }(u-u^{\prime})}divide start_ARG roman_ℏ italic_n end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_m italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG { - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG divide start_ARG italic_κ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG roman_cosh start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( italic_u - italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG (33)
+\displaystyle++ 1(cR+v0)(cL+v0)1(vv)2}.\displaystyle\frac{1}{(c_{R}+v_{0})(c_{L}+v_{0})}\frac{1}{(v-v^{\prime})^{2}}% \Big{\}}\ .divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_v - italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG } .

We see that this function has a negative peak at u=u𝑢superscript𝑢u=u^{\prime}italic_u = italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT which corresponds (in the geometrical optics approximation) to the trajectory of the Hawking quanta (u=const𝑢𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡u=constitalic_u = italic_c italic_o italic_n italic_s italic_t) and its partner (u=constsuperscript𝑢𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡u^{\prime}=constitalic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_c italic_o italic_n italic_s italic_t). Beside this no other structure is present. The peak is the one observed by Steinhauer’s group jeff2016 ; jeff2019 ; jeff2021 .

We see that the no-backscattering asymptotic correlation function (33) has the same form for all profiles having the same cR,cL,v0subscript𝑐𝑅subscript𝑐𝐿subscript𝑣0c_{R},c_{L},v_{0}italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and surface gravity κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ; in particular the height, width, and location of the peak are identical. We shall impose this to be the case for our two profiles introduced in the previous section. In Fig. (6) we have plotted the two profiles for v0=34,cL=12,cR=1,σv=8formulae-sequencesubscript𝑣034formulae-sequencesubscript𝑐𝐿12formulae-sequencesubscript𝑐𝑅1subscript𝜎𝑣8v_{0}=\frac{3}{4},c_{L}=\frac{1}{2},c_{R}=1,\sigma_{v}=8italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 3 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG , italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG , italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 , italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 8 and numerically matched the two surface gravities.

Refer to caption
Figure 6: Plot for the profiles of Eqs. (21) (blue curve), (24) (orange curve) arranging them to have the same surface gravity and asymptotic behaviour.

Even with all these parameters matched, there are noticeable differences in the comparison of the sound profiles. This leads to differences in the scattering of the modes as can be seen in Fig. (7), where the effective potential for the two profiles is plotted. The peaks of the potential appear to be higher and narrower for the original profile. All this has a significant signature in the correlation functions as we shall see.

Refer to caption
Figure 7: Plot of the effective potential (9), (4) for the profiles of eqs. (21) (blue curve), (24) (orange curve) with the same asymptotic behaviour and surface gravity..

In Fig. (8) we have represented the correlation function Eq. (28) at equal time T=T𝑇superscript𝑇T=T^{\prime}italic_T = italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for the original and the analytical profile respectively.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 8: Density-density correlation function for the two sound speed profiles. Left: Original profile (21). Right: Result using the analytical profile (24). Each figure is oriented so that the bottom left quadrant where both points are in the interior and the upper right quadrant where both points are in the exterior of the analog black hole.

This function is diverging when the points come together and thus the region x=x𝑥superscript𝑥x=x^{\prime}italic_x = italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is cutoff for this reason. In each figure one can clearly see the large negative peak when one point is in the interior and the other point is in the exterior region. This is the one predicted by the no-backscattering asymptotic expression (33). One can also see two much smaller peaks predicted by R. Parentani: a negative one when both points are inside the horizon and a positive one, when one point is inside the horizon and the other outside. These two secondary peaks exist because of the backscattering of the modes.

To see the differences between the two profiles, we have taken in Fig. (9) a slice at x=250superscript𝑥250x^{\prime}=-250italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - 250 of the in-out region (x<0,x>0formulae-sequencesuperscript𝑥0𝑥0x^{\prime}<0,x>0italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT < 0 , italic_x > 0) of Fig. (8).

Refer to caption
Figure 9: The density-density correlation function at x=250superscript𝑥250x^{\prime}=-250italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - 250 when one point is in the interior and one point in in the exterior of the analog black hole. Blue dot: Original profile (21). Orange diamond: Analytic profile (24).

The large main peak is clearly visible but the peak height and location are offset for the two profiles. The main negative peak for the analytic profile appears slightly smaller and shifted to the left as compared to that of the original one. The opposite occurs for the smaller secondary peak as seen in Fig. (10), where we have magnified the scale to better appreciate this point.

Refer to caption
Figure 10: A comparison of the secondary peak at x=250superscript𝑥250x^{\prime}=-250italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - 250 when one point is in the interior and one point in in the exterior of the analog black hole. Blue dot: Original profile (21). Orange diamond: Analytic profile (24).
Refer to caption
Figure 11: Density-density correlation function for both points in the interior at a fixed x=400superscript𝑥400{x^{\prime}=400}italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 400. Blue dot: Original profile (21). Orange diamond: Analytic profile (24).

More striking is the relative difference appearing in the negative peak in the in-in region, see Fig. (11).

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 12: A comparison of the main peak at x=250superscript𝑥250x^{\prime}=-250italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - 250 when one point is in the interior and one point in in the exterior of the analog black hole. Left: Blue(Solid): Curve for the analytic expression (33). Blue dot: Numeric data for original profile (21). Right: Orange (solid): Curve for the analytic expression (33). Orange diamond: Numeric result for analytic profile (24).

The backscattering also affects the main peak. In Fig. (12) a comparison is made for the two profiles with the no-backscattering approximation eq. (33). The differences are more significant for the original profile.

Finally, it is interesting to compare the ratios of the heights of each of the two minor peaks to that of the main peak. The ratio of the height of the positive minor peak with one point inside and one point outside the horizon to that of the main peak for the original profile is 0.02930.02930.02930.0293. For the analytical profile it is 0.03020.03020.03020.0302. The ratio of the height of the negative peak when both points are inside the horizon to the main peak for the original profile is 0.2610.2610.2610.261. For the analytical profile it is 0.1910.1910.1910.191. In both cases there is agreement in the first digit only, so differences in the profiles lead to relatively significant differences between the two profiles.

IV Scaling

There is a scaling related to the surface gravity κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ that works for both sound speed profiles used in this paper, (21) and (24). It is

ω¯¯𝜔\displaystyle\bar{\omega}over¯ start_ARG italic_ω end_ARG =\displaystyle== ωκ,𝜔𝜅\displaystyle\frac{\omega}{\kappa}\;,divide start_ARG italic_ω end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG , (34a)
τ𝜏\displaystyle\tauitalic_τ =\displaystyle== κt,𝜅𝑡\displaystyle\kappa t\;,italic_κ italic_t , (34b)
ξ𝜉\displaystyle\xiitalic_ξ =\displaystyle== κx.𝜅𝑥\displaystyle\kappa x\;.italic_κ italic_x . (34c)

It is easy to see that for this scaling both sound speed profiles, written in terms of ξ𝜉\xiitalic_ξ, are independent of κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ.

In general, for any sound speed profile that, when written in terms of ξ𝜉\xiitalic_ξ, is independent of κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ one can substitute  (34) into the Boulware and Kruskal modes of (14) and show that they both scale as κ1/2superscript𝜅12\kappa^{-1/2}italic_κ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Using these results, one can show that the two-point function (30) is independent of κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ. Then one finally has from (28) that

G2(T,x;T,x)=κ2G2(T¯,ξ;T¯,ξ).subscript𝐺2𝑇𝑥superscript𝑇superscript𝑥superscript𝜅2subscript𝐺2¯𝑇𝜉superscript¯𝑇superscript𝜉G_{2}(T,x;T^{\prime},x^{\prime})=\kappa^{2}\;G_{2}(\bar{T},\xi;\bar{T}^{\prime% },\xi^{\prime})\;.italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T , italic_x ; italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_κ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( over¯ start_ARG italic_T end_ARG , italic_ξ ; over¯ start_ARG italic_T end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_ξ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) . (35)

This means that the heights and depths of the correlation peaks are larger for larger values of κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ. Since x=ξκ𝑥𝜉𝜅x=\frac{\xi}{\kappa}italic_x = divide start_ARG italic_ξ end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG, the widths of the correlation peaks in terms of the space coordinate x𝑥xitalic_x are narrower for larger values of κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ. See Figs. (13, 14).

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 13: Scaling preset in the density-density correlation function: Left: Result using the original profile (21) with σv=8subscript𝜎𝑣8\sigma_{v}=8italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 8 with axis limits at 400x400400𝑥400-400\leq x\leq 400- 400 ≤ italic_x ≤ 400. Right: Result using the Original profile 21 with σv=4subscript𝜎𝑣4\sigma_{v}=4italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4 with axis limits at 200x200200𝑥200-200\leq x\leq 200- 200 ≤ italic_x ≤ 200.
Refer to caption
Figure 14: Comparison of the main peak in analytic and numerical results for with σv=8subscript𝜎𝑣8\sigma_{v}=8italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 8 and σv=4subscript𝜎𝑣4\sigma_{v}=4italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4 along a slice at x=100𝑥100x=-100italic_x = - 100. Blue (solid ): Theoretical curve (33) for the original profile (21) with σv=8subscript𝜎𝑣8\sigma_{v}=8italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 8. Blue diamond: Numerical result for the original profile (21) with σv=8subscript𝜎𝑣8\sigma_{v}=8italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 8. Red (solid): Theoretical curve for original profile (21 with σv=4subscript𝜎𝑣4\sigma_{v}=4italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4. Red square: Numerical result for the original profile (21) with σv=4subscript𝜎𝑣4\sigma_{v}=4italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4.

V Conclusions

While awaiting the direct detection of the thermal phonons, the peaks in the density-density correlation function are the major tool to experimentally investigate the analogue of Hawking radiation in a sonic BH formed by a BEC. Of the three characteristic peaks only one, the main one predicted in paper1 , has being observed so far. The detection of the other much smaller peaks, whose existence was predicted by R. Parentani, represents the next challenge for the experimentalists in this field. In this paper we have shown how sensitive the peaks are to the different sound velocity profiles used, exhibiting significant differences even when the profiles have the same asymptotic and horizon limits.

Acknowledgements.
P. R. A. was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant No. PHY-2309186. Some of the numerical work was done using the WFU DEAC Cluster; we thank the WFU Provost’s Office and Information Systems Department for their generous support. A.F. acknowledges partial financial support by the Spanish Grants PID2020-116567GB-C21, PID2023-149560NB-C21 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, and by the Severo Ochoa Excellence Grant CEX2023-001292- S.

Appendix A Bogoliubov coefficients relating the Kruskal and Boulware modes

We report here the Bogoliubov coefficients appaearing in eq. (20),

uHK(ωK,x)=0𝑑ω[αωKωRuHR+βωKωRuHR+αωkωLuHL+βωkωLuHL],superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐾subscript𝜔𝐾𝑥superscriptsubscript0differential-d𝜔delimited-[]superscriptsubscript𝛼subscript𝜔𝐾𝜔𝑅superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝑅subscriptsuperscript𝛽𝑅subscript𝜔𝐾𝜔superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝑅superscriptsubscript𝛼subscript𝜔𝑘𝜔𝐿superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐿subscriptsuperscript𝛽𝐿subscript𝜔𝑘𝜔superscriptsubscript𝑢𝐻𝐿u_{H}^{K}(\omega_{K},x)=\int_{0}^{\infty}d\omega\left[\alpha_{\omega_{K}\omega% }^{R}u_{H}^{R}+\beta^{R}_{\omega_{K}\omega}u_{H}^{R*}+\alpha_{\omega_{k}\omega% }^{L}u_{H}^{L}+\beta^{L}_{\omega_{k}\omega}u_{H}^{L*}\right]\ ,italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_x ) = ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_ω [ italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_β start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_β start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] , (36)
αωkωRsubscriptsuperscript𝛼𝑅subscript𝜔𝑘𝜔\displaystyle\alpha^{R}_{\omega_{k}\omega}italic_α start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== 12πκωωKΓ(iω/κ)(iωKκ)iω/κ,12𝜋𝜅𝜔subscript𝜔𝐾Γ𝑖𝜔𝜅superscript𝑖subscript𝜔𝐾𝜅𝑖𝜔𝜅\displaystyle\frac{1}{2\pi\kappa}\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{\omega_{K}}}\Gamma(-i% \omega/\kappa)\;\left(-i\frac{\omega_{K}}{\kappa}\right)^{i\omega/\kappa}\ ,divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_π italic_κ end_ARG square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_ω end_ARG start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG roman_Γ ( - italic_i italic_ω / italic_κ ) ( - italic_i divide start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_ω / italic_κ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,
βωkωRsubscriptsuperscript𝛽𝑅subscript𝜔𝑘𝜔\displaystyle\beta^{R}_{\omega_{k}\omega}italic_β start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_R end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== 12πκωωKΓ(iω/κ)(iωKκ)iω/κ,12𝜋𝜅𝜔subscript𝜔𝐾Γ𝑖𝜔𝜅superscript𝑖subscript𝜔𝐾𝜅𝑖𝜔𝜅\displaystyle\frac{1}{2\pi\kappa}\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{\omega_{K}}}\Gamma(i% \omega/\kappa)\;\left(-i\frac{\omega_{K}}{\kappa}\right)^{-i\omega/\kappa}\ ,divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_π italic_κ end_ARG square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_ω end_ARG start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG roman_Γ ( italic_i italic_ω / italic_κ ) ( - italic_i divide start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_ω / italic_κ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,
αωkωLsubscriptsuperscript𝛼𝐿subscript𝜔𝑘𝜔\displaystyle\alpha^{L}_{\omega_{k}\omega}italic_α start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== 12πκωωKΓ(iω/κ)(iωKκ)iω/κ,12𝜋𝜅𝜔subscript𝜔𝐾Γ𝑖𝜔𝜅superscript𝑖subscript𝜔𝐾𝜅𝑖𝜔𝜅\displaystyle\frac{1}{2\pi\kappa}\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{\omega_{K}}}\Gamma(i% \omega/\kappa)\;\left(i\frac{\omega_{K}}{\kappa}\right)^{-i\omega/\kappa}\ ,divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_π italic_κ end_ARG square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_ω end_ARG start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG roman_Γ ( italic_i italic_ω / italic_κ ) ( italic_i divide start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_ω / italic_κ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,
βωkωLsubscriptsuperscript𝛽𝐿subscript𝜔𝑘𝜔\displaystyle\beta^{L}_{\omega_{k}\omega}italic_β start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== 12πκωωKΓ(iω/κ)(iωKκ)iω/κ.12𝜋𝜅𝜔subscript𝜔𝐾Γ𝑖𝜔𝜅superscript𝑖subscript𝜔𝐾𝜅𝑖𝜔𝜅\displaystyle\frac{1}{2\pi\kappa}\sqrt{\frac{\omega}{\omega_{K}}}\Gamma(-i% \omega/\kappa)\;\left(i\frac{\omega_{K}}{\kappa}\right)^{i\omega/\kappa}\;.divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_π italic_κ end_ARG square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_ω end_ARG start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG roman_Γ ( - italic_i italic_ω / italic_κ ) ( italic_i divide start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_κ end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_ω / italic_κ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . (37)

References

  • (1) W. Unruh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46, 1351 (1981)
  • (2) S.W. Hawking, Nature 248, 30 (1974)
  • (3) S.W. Hawking, Comm. Math. Phys. 43 199 (1975)
  • (4) C. Barcelo, S. Liberati and M. Visser, Living Rev. Relativity  8, 12 (2005)
  • (5) R. Balbinot, A. Fabbri, S. Fagnocchi, A. Recati, and I. Carusotto, Phys. Rev. A 78, 021603 (2008)
  • (6) I. Carusotto, S. Fagnocchi, A. Recati, R. Balbinot and A. Fabbri, New J. Phys. 10, 103001 (2008)
  • (7) J. Steinhauer, Nat. Phys. 12, 959 (2016)
  • (8) J.R.M. de Nova, K. Golubkov, V.I. Kolobov and J. Steinhauer, Nature 569, 688 (2019)
  • (9) V.I. Kolobov, K. Golubkov, J.R.M. de Nova and J. Steinhauer, Nat. Phys. 17 (2021), 362
  • (10) J. Macher and R. Parentani, Phys. Rev. A80, 043601 (2009)
  • (11) I. Carusotto, S. Fagnocchi, A. Recati, R. Balbinot and A. Fabbri, New J. Phys. 10, 103001 (2008)
  • (12) A. Recati, N. Pavloff, I. Carusotto, Phys. Rev. A 80, 043603 (2009)
  • (13) C. Mayoral, A. Recati, A. Fabbri, R. Parentani, R. Balbinot and I. Carusotto, New J. Phys. 13, 025007 (2011)
  • (14) N.D. Birrell and P.C.W. Davies, Quantum fields in curved space, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)
  • (15) S.A. Fulling, Aspects of Quantum Field Theory in Curved Space-Time, London Math. Soc. Student Text 17, 1-315 (1989)
  • (16) L.E. Parker and D. Toms, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime: Quantized Field and Gravity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009)
  • (17) P.R. Anderson, R. Balbinot, A. Fabbri and R. Parentani, Phys. Rev. D 87, 124018 (2013)
  • (18) W.G. Unruh, Phys. Rev. Rev. D 14 870 (1976)
  • (19) D. G. Boulware, Phys. Rev. D11, 1404 (1975)
  • (20) A. Fabbri and R. Balbinot and P.R. Anderson, Phys. Rev. D 93, 064046 (2016)