Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2017 / iii / Paper 343 / 2

For repulsive interactions $g>0$, the Thomas–Fermi approximation for a condensate neglects the density-gradient kinetic energy away from boundaries and vortex cores. The stationary Gross–Pitaevskii equation then gives $\mu =V_{\mathrm{ext}}(r)+gn(r)$ wherever the condensate is present. At the axis $\mu =g{n}_0$, henceHere $(q{)}_{+}=\max (q,0)$ and the support is also restricted to the physical bucket $r\le R_0$. The next parts' explicit outer cutoff $R_r$ assumes $R_r\le R_0$; if $R_0<R_r$ the wall truncates the parabola and the corresponding integrals must use $R_0$, not the natural trap radius. A hard-wall boundary layer or the smooth trap-edge healing region is beyond the Thomas–Fermi approximation for a condensate. For an untruncated radial profile, the total particle number is $N=\pi H_0{n}_0{R}_r^2/2$.

Take a singly quantized vortex of positive circulation. The superfluid velocity is $\mathbf{u}=(\hslash /m)\nabla S$, where $S$ is the complex argument of the condensate. Since $S=\theta$, quantized circulation gives $u_{\theta }=\hslash /(mr)$. Insert the radial Thomas–Fermi approximation for a condensate into the cylindrical volume integral, excluding the core $r<a_0$:Integrating the logarithmic and quadratic terms separately givesThe logarithm is the familiar long-range flow contribution of a quantum vortex; the $-1/2$ comes from the declining trapped number density. If the bucket truncates the cloud, put $R=R_0<R_r$ and the same integration gives $E_{\mathrm{kin}}=\pi H_0{\hslash }^2{n}_0[\log (R/a_0)-(R^2-a_0^2)/(2R_r^2)]/m$, provided $a_0<R$. A vortex of integer winding number $q$ has $u_{\theta }=q\hslash /(mr)$ and multiplies this flow energy by $q^2$. The core radius acts as a cutoff of order the local healing length; its internal gradient and interaction energies are not computed by this shell estimate.

The axial angular momentum per unit volume is $mn(r)r{u}_{\theta }(r)=\hslash n(r)$ for a singly quantized positive quantum vortex. Thus every particle in the prescribed shell contributes $\hslash$:This yieldsThis is $\hslash$ times the shell particle number. For a wall-truncated cloud with $R=R_0<R_r$, the corresponding result is $L_z=\pi H_0\hslash n_0[R^2-a_0^2-(R^4-a_0^4)/(2R_r^2)]$. Reversing the quantized circulation reverses $L_z$ without changing the flow kinetic energy. For winding number $q$, $L_z$ is multiplied by $q$.

In a rotating reference frame at angular frequency $\Omega$, the relevant energy difference is approximately $E_{\mathrm{kin}}-\Omega L_z$. The vortex-free state has zero circulation and zero corresponding angular momentum. For $a_0/R_r\ll 1$, the preceding shell estimates reduce toTherefore the thermodynamic vortex-nucleation frequency for the first positive quantum vortex isThe common factors $H_0,n_0$ cancel explicitly, although the trap radius and core scale still depend on number density. In the strict leading-logarithm limit, ${\Omega }_c\sim 2\hslash \log (R_r/a_0)/(m{R}_r^2)$. The finite constant $-1/2$ is the one obtained from the stated Thomas–Fermi shell integral; a resolved vortex core and readjustment of the number density at fixed particle number can change the nonlogarithmic constant. This is an energetic threshold, not a dynamical guarantee of nucleation: a surface barrier can delay entry. Higher positive winding numbers have flow energy proportional to $q^2$ and angular momentum proportional to $q$, so their analogous threshold is larger in this approximation.