Nonlinear Dispersive and Dissipative Electrostatic Structures in Two-Dimensional Electron-Positron-Ion Quantum Plasma
Ghosh Nabakumar1, Sahu Biswajit2, *
1Department of Mathematics, Mugberia Gangadhar Mahavidyalaya, Bhupatinagar, Purba Medinipur-721425, India
2Department of Mathematics, West Bengal State University, Barasat, Kolkata-700126, India

 

† Corresponding author. E-mail: biswajit_sahu@yahoo.co.in

Abstract
Abstract

The nonlinear features of two-dimensional ion acoustic (IA) solitary and shock structures in a dissipative electron-positron-ion (EPI) quantum plasma are investigated. The dissipation in the system is taken into account by incorporating the kinematic viscosity of ions in plasmas. A quantum hydrodynamic (QHD) model is used to describe the quantum plasma system. The propagation of small but finite amplitude solitons and shocks is governed by the Kadomtsev-Petviashvili-Burger (KPB) equation. It is observed that depending on the values of plasma parameters (viz. quantum diffraction, positron concentration, viscosity), both compressive and rarefactive solitons and shocks are found to exist. Furthermore, the energy of the soliton is computed and possible solutions of the KPB equation are presented numerically in terms of the monotonic and oscillatory shock profiles

1 Introduction

Nowadays, studies in quantum plasmas have become important due to their potential applications to quantum wells,[1] to spintronics,[2] plasmonics,[34] to microelectronics,[5] to nonlinear optics,[6] to astro-physics,[7] and to solid density target experiments.[89] The quantum plasmas were first studied by Pines[10] in regimes where we have a high density and a low temperature as compared to classical plasmas. At such high densities, the plasma behaves like a degenerate fluid and quantum mechanical effects play a pivot role in the dynamics. Generally, the quantum effects associated with the strong density correlation play a significant role in the plasma system when the de Broglie wavelength of the charged particles is larger than the Debye wavelength and is near to the Fermi wavelength. Under these conditions, the quantum hydrodynamic (QHD) model is a suitable method to describe the charged particle systems.[1112] The QHD model consists of a set of equations that describe the transport of momentum and energy of the charged particles and includes quantum statistical pressure via the Fermi pressure and the quantum tunneling effect via the Bohm potential.[13] Numerous collective effects have been studied by a number of authors in the field of quantum plasmas.[1419] Misra et al.[20] have studied the nonlinear propagation of two-dimensional quantum ion acoustic waves (QIAWs) in an electron-ion (EI) quantum plasma.

Most of the aforementioned works focus on the electron-ion plasma instead of the electron-positron-ion (EPI) plasma. Recently, there has been much attention in EPI plasmas for its potential application point of view to investigate new collective modes and instabilities. The EP plasma exists in active galactic nuclei,[21] in Van Allen radiation belts and near the polar cap of fast rotating neutron stars,[2223] in semiconductor plasmas,[24] intense laser fields.[25] The EP plasmas that include an additional ion species, exhibiting a collective behavior and holding quasi-neutrality condition, will constitute an EPI plasma. In contrast to usual EI plasmas, it has been well established fact that the nonlinear propagation of acoustic modes behaves quite differently in EPI plasmas.[2627] Nejoh[28] investigated the effect of ion temperature on the large amplitude IA waves in EPI plasma. Mushtaq and Shah[29] studied the effect of positron concentration on the nonlinear propagation of magnetosonic waves and found that the solitary waves in EPI plasma behaved quite differently than that of ordinary EI plasma. Out of several mechanisms, such as the effects of turbulence, collisions between charged and neutrals particles, Landau damping, wave particle interaction, etc., one possible dissipative mechanism, which is peculiar to plasmas, may be due to the kinematic viscosity, the effects of which were previously examined by many authors.[3033] Rouhani et al.[34] studied the characteristic of IA shock waves in a dissipative quantum pair plasma with dust particulates. Hanif et al.[35] investigated the propagation characteristics of IA shock waves in an unmagnetized dense quantum plasma. Hossen and Mamun[36] investigated theoretically the basic features of the quantum IA solitary and shock structures in a strongly coupled cryogenic quantum plasma.

However, most of the above metioned investigations are limited to one-dimensional (1D) planar geometry, which may not be a realistic situation in laboratory devices, since the waves observed in laboratory devices are certainly not bounded in one dimension. The objective of the present investigation is to study the nonlinear propagation of solitary and shock waves in dissipative EPI quantum plasma in a two-dimensional planar geometry. The kinematic viscosities amongst the constituent plasma particles give rise to the dissipative term in the nonlinear evolution equation. The paper is organized in the following way. In Sec. 2, the basic set of dynamic equations of our theoretical model for QIAWs are presented by using QHD model. In Sec. 3, the derivation of KPB equation is given to study the small amplitude solitary and shock structures. Section 4 deals with the discussion and solution of KPB equation, while Sec. 5 is kept for conclusion.

2 Theoretical Model

We consider a three component unmagnetized quantum plasma which is an admixture of degenerate electrons, degenerate positrons and singly charged non degenerate ions. The phase velocity of the wave is assumed to be vFiω/kvFe, vFp (vFi, vFe, and vFp are the ion, electron, and positron Fermi velocities, respectively). We, therefore, ignore the quantum pressure and Bohm potential contributions of ions. Also, we have assumed that the positron annihilation time is larger than the inverse of the characteristic frequency of the IAWs. The basic equations governing the nonlinear dynamics of the IAWs in quantum plasma are given in dimensionless variables as follows[33,37]





In Eqs. (1)–(6), ne(i) is the electron (ion) number density normalized by their equilibrium value ne0(i0), (u, v) are the ion velocity components normalized by the ion acoustic speed cs = (kBTFe/mi)1/2, with kB denoting the Boltzmann constant, mi is the ion mass, TFe = 2(3π2 n0)2/3/2 kB me is the electron Fermi temperature and is the scaled Planck’s constant. Also, the nondimensional quantum parameter H = ℏωpe/kBTFe is denoting the ratio between the electron plasmon energy and the electron Fermi energy, where ωpj = (n0e2/ε0 mj)1/2 is the plasma frequency for the j-th particle. Moreover, ϕ is the electrostatic potential normalized by kB TFe/e. The space and time variables are respectively normalized by cs/ωpi and the inverse of ωpi. , in which μ is the ion kinematic viscosity. At equilibrium the charge neutrality condition reads μ = ne0/ni0 = 1 + p, p = np0/ni0, and δ = TFp/TFe = (1 − 1/μ)2/3. We assume that the ions are cold, and electrons and positrons obey the following pressure law:[38]
where with j = e, p is the particle Fermi thermal speed.

3 Derivation of KPB Equation

To investigate the nonlinear propagation of the IAWs in quantum plasma, we shall employ the reductive perturbation method.[37,39] According to this method, we choose the stretching space time coordinates as
where ϵ is a small parameter measuring the weakness of perturbations of the wave amplitude (0 < ϵ < 1) and V is the normalized (by cs) wave phase speed. We can expand the dynamical variables as



where we have considered the perturbations for the transverse velocity component v as higher-order effects, i.e., weaker than those of the longitudinal component u. This is due to the fact that since the wave propagation is assumed to propagate along the x-axis or ξ direction in the moving frame of reference, the effects of dispersion due to separation of electron and ion charges and the quantum tunneling associated with the Bohm potential on QIAWs will appear only in the ξ direction, i.e., along the direction of the ion velocity component u. Also, we assume that the effect of the viscosity is small and the constant η is the same for both the velocity components u and v, so we may set η = ϵ1/2η0, η0 is O(1). Now substituting the expansions into the basic equations and collecting the terms in different powers of ϵ, we obtain in the lowest order , , , u(1) = (1/V) ϕ(1), v(1) = (1/V) ϕ(1), and .

From the next order of ϵ, we obtain the following equations





Finally, eliminating the second order quantities from Eqs. (13)–(18) and substituting the expressions for the first-order quantities we obtain the KPB equation as
where ϕ = ϕ(1), and

4 Solutions of the KPB Equation and Discussion
4.1 Shock Solution

Equation (19) may be solved using the travelling-wave transformation , with k and Ω denoting, respectively, the nondimensional constant wave number and wave frequency. Using this transformation, Eq. (19) reduces to an ordinary differential equation with respect to χ, that can be solved by tanh method. Using this method, a solution of Eq. (19) can be written as[37,40]
where ϕ0 = 3 C2/25 A B, Ω = D + (6/5)η0 k, and k = C/10B.

In the absence of weak transverse perturbation, the KPB equation (19) reduces to the Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers (KdVB) equation
Equation (22) admits the shock solution given by[37]
where χ′ = kχ − Ω′τ and Ω′ = (6/5)η0 k′. Again the other form of shock solution of Eq. (22) can be obtained as[41]
with
where D1 and D2 are arbitrary constants. We observe that the two travelling wave shock solutions (23) and (24) are obtained in two different methods, however, their qualitative features will remain the same.

We now discuss the effects of the parametric dependence of the electrostatic shocks and solitons. The shock solution appears because of the dissipative term, which is proportional to the viscosity coefficient. In the above shock solution 21), mainly the factor (k = C/10B) determines the steepness of the shock. It is clear that the nonlinear coefficient A does not affect the shock steepness, whereas the weak transverse dispersion coefficient D affects neither the shock height nor its steepness. It only plays a role in shifting the shock from its initial position with the passage of time. Figures 1 and 2 show the shock structures with the variation of the quantum diffraction parameter H and the viscosity parameter η0, respectively. It is seen that our plasma system supports both compressive as well as rarefactive shock waves. Also, it is found that the shock height increases as the value of quantum parameter H is increased in the case of compressive shocks, while the shock height decreases as the value of quantum parameter H is increased in case of rarefactive shocks. Kinematic viscosities of ions play an important role on the propagation of shock waves. From Fig. 2, it is clear that as the value of viscosity parameter increases (i.e., increasing in dissipation of the system), the height and strength of shocks increases. Physically, increasing the kinematic viscosity is equivalent to increasing the dissipation in the system and, consequently an increase in the shock strength. Figure 3 represents the effect of positron concentration p on the compressive shock wave profile. It is seen that the increase in the positron concentration enhances the shock height and strength. This behavior is attributed to the fact that increasing the positron concentration increases the nonlinearity and dissipation coefficients, and decreases the dispersive coefficient.

Fig. 1 Plot of profiles ϕ for both the compressive and rarefactive ion-acoustic shocks given by Eq. (21) against χ and H, where p = 0.1 and η0 = 0.1.
Fig. 2 Plot of profiles ϕ for ion-acoustic shocks given by Eq. (21) against χ and η0, where H = 0.1 and p = 0.1.
Fig. 3 Plot of profiles ϕ for ion-acoustic shocks given by Eq. (21) against χ and p, where H = 0.1 and η0 = 0.1.
4.2 Soliton Solution and Energy of Soliton

If we ignore the dissipative coefficient (viscosity effect) in Eq. (19) i.e., C = 0, then KPB equation reduces to the KP equation
which yields the following soliton solution obtained by the tanh method[40, 42]
where k = 1 and . Again, if we ignore the perturbation along ζ direction (D = 0) as well as the dissipation (C = 0), Eq. (19) reduces to the usual KdV equation that describes the nonlinear propagation characteristics of a soliton in one dimension, with the following solution

Figure 4 depicts the variation of hump and dip type soliton structures with increasing positron concentration relative to the ions. It is found that the amplitude of both the hump and dip type solitary wave depreciate with increasing positron concentration. The increase in the positron concentration can be interpreted as depopulation of ions from the plasma system as a result of which the driving force (provided by ions inertia) of IAW decreases, consequently the soliton amplitude is diminished.

Fig. 4 Plot of profiles ϕ for both the compressive and rarefactive ion-acoustic solitons given by Eq. (26) against χ and p, where H = 0.35 and η0 = 0.02.

The energy of soliton can be obtained as[43]
where u(1) is the first order perturbed velocity of the ion fluid. Performing the integration, we find

Based on the obtained results, we shall investigate the effects of the of the relevant physical quantities H and p on energy of soliton. Figure 5 displays the soliton energy with increasing positron concentration at several H. It is seen that soliton energy decreases with increase in positron concentration.

Fig. 5 Profiles of soliton energy as a function of p for several values of H.
4.3 Numerical Solution

To examine the impact of the kinematic viscosity (η0), we numerically solve the KPB Eq. (19) and plot the nonlinear structures in Fig. 6. Numerical study shows that the wave has an oscillatory shock like behavior, in which the first few oscillations at the wave front will be close to the solitons.[44] We find that when η0 is extremely small, the shock wave will have an oscillatory profile. Oscillations at the front of a shock occur only when the dispersion parameter dominates over the dissipative term. It is observed that as the viscosity η0 increases, the dissipation effect becomes strong and the oscillatory shock structures become more and more monotonic. Also, it is mentioned that the shock preserves its monotonicity as long as the dissipation is dominant compared to the dispersion one.

Fig. 6 The profiles of shock wave for several values of η0 for the numerical solution of Eq. (19), where H = 0.1 and p = 0.1.
5 Conclusions

In conclusion, we have investigated the existence of compressive and rarefactive IASWs in a dense quantum plasma consisting of the electrons, positrons, and ions. It is shown that the evolution of two-dimensional nonlinear waves is governed by the KPB equation. Both the dissipative (due to kinematic viscosity) and dispersive (due to Bohm potential) effects are taken into consideration for the formation of QIA shock and soliton structures. The small amplitude compressive and rarefactive QIA shock and solitonic structures are obtained analytically and numerically from the KPB equation. It is observed that the kinematic viscosity, positron concentration, and Bohm potential affect the propagation characteristics of nonlinear QIA waves. Numerical simulation reveals that the transition from oscillatory to monotonic shocks occurs when the value of kinematic viscosity parameter increases. It is found that the energy of solitons is decreased when the positron concentrations are increased. The present investigation may be beneficial to understand the propagation of the nonlinear IA solitary waves and shocks in degenerate plasmas such as those in compact astrophysical objects and in laboratory plasmas.

Reference
[1] Manfredi G. Hervieux P. A. Appl. Phys. Lett. 91 2007 061108
[2] Wolf S. A. Awschalom D. D. Buhrman R. A. et al. Science 294 2001 1488
[3] Marklund M. Brodin G. Stenflo L. Liu C. S. Eu- rophys. Lett. 84 2008 17006
[4] Atwater H. A. Sci. Am. 296 2007 56
[5] Markowich A. Ringhofer C. Schmeiser C. Semiconductor Equations Springer Vienna 1990
[6] Leontovich M. Izv. Akad. Nauk Arm. SSR Fiz. 8 1994 16
[7] Harding A. K. Lai D. Rep. Prog. Phys. 69 2006 2631
[8] Glenzer S. H. et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 2007 065002
[9] Glenzer S. H. Redmer R. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81 2009 1625
[10] Pines D. J. Nucl. Energy Part C 2 1961 5
[11] Haas F. Garcia L. G. Goedert J. Manfredi G. Phys. Plasmas 10 2003 3858
[12] Manfredi G. Fields Inst. Commun. 46 2005 263
[13] Bohm D. Phys. Rev. 85 1952 166
[14] Ali S. Moslem W. M. Shukla P. K. Schlickeiser R. Phys. Plasmas 14 2007 082307
[15] Mahmood S. Haque Q. Phys. Lett. A 374 2010 872
[16] Shukla P. K. Eliasson B. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 2006 245001
[17] Hua W. C. Xia S. X. Qun W. C. Commun. Theor. Phys. 53 2010 771
[18] Haider M. M. Mamun A. A. Phys. Plasmas 19 2012 102105
[19] Mebrouk K. Gougam L. A. Tribeche M. Commun. Theor. Phys. 65 2016 73
[20] Misra A. P. Marklund M. Brodin G. Shukla P. K. Phys. Plasmas 18 2011 042102
[21] Miller H. R. Witta P. J. Active Galactic Nuclei Springer Verlag, Berlin 1987 202
[22] Burns M. L. Lovelace R. V. E. Astrophys. J. 262 1982 87
[23] Lightman A. P. Zdziarski A. A. Astrophys. J. 319 1987 643
[24] Shukla P. K. Rao N. N. Yu M. Y. Tsintsadze N. L. Phys. Rep. 138 1986 1
[25] Berezhiani V. Tskhakaya D. D. Shukla P. K. Phys. Rev. A 46 1992 6608
[26] Mahmood S. Mushtaq A. Saleem H. New J. Phys. 5 2003 28.1
[27] Saha A. Pal N. Chatterjee P. Phys. Plasmas 21 2014 102101
[28] Nejoh Y. N. Phys. Plasmas 3 1996 1447
[29] Mushtaq A. Shah H. A. Phys. Plasmas 12 2005 072306
[30] Roy K. Misra A. P. Chatterjee P. Phys. Plasmas 15 2008 032310
[31] Akhtar N. Hussain S. Phys. Plasmas 18 2011 072103
[32] Bains A. S. Tribeche M. Astrophys. Space Sci. 351 2014 191
[33] Chatterjee P. Ghosh D. K. Sahu B. Astrophys. Space Sci. 339 2012 261
[34] Rouhani M. R. Mohammadi Z. Akbarian A. Astro- phys. Space Sci. 349 2014 265
[35] Hanif M. Ali S. Mukhtar Q. Mirza A. M. Phys. Plasmas 21 2014 032705
[36] Hossen M. A. Mamun A. A. Phys. Plasmas 22 2015 073505
[37] Misra A. P. Sahu B. Physica A 421 2015 269
[38] Landau L. D. Lifshitz E. M. Statistical Physics Oxford University Press Oxford 1998
[39] Washimi H. Taniuti T. Phys. Rev. Lett. 17 1966 996
[40] Masood W. Phys. Plasmas 16 2009 042314
[41] Polyanin A. D. Zaitsev V. F. Handbook of Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations 2 CRC Press Boca Raton, FL 2012 885
[42] Malfliet W. Amer. J. Phys. 60 1992 650
[43] Singh S. Honzawa T. Phys. Fluids B 5 1993 2093
[44] Karpman V.I. Nonlinear Waves in Dispersive Media Pergamon London 1975