Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: most mass in the universe is in the form of dark matter , and most dark matter is gravitationally clustered in the form of halos . dark matter halos are therefore the building blocks of the universe . knowledge of the formation and evolution history of dark matter halos is essential for an understanding of the halos structure and dynamics , as well as the environment that harbors galaxies and clusters . designs for dark matter search experiments also rely on the predicted spatial and velocity distributions of dark matter particles in our own galaxy .    according to the theory of structure formation in current cosmological models , dark matter halos arise from tiny primordial fluctuations seeded in the matter and radiation fields in the early universe at , for example , the end of an inflationary era . these small inhomogeneities grow via gravitational instability , with the slightly overdense regions becoming denser and the slightly underdense regions becoming emptier . at a given time , there exists a spectrum of density fluctuations over a wide range of length and mass scales , whose spatial distribution is characterized by the power density in fourier space @xmath0 , the power spectrum . dark matter halos therefore rarely form and evolve in isolation , growing instead by frequent accretion of smaller - mass halos and occasional major mergers with other halos of comparable mass . the earliest theoretical insight into cosmological halo formation came from the spherical radial infall model , which considers an isolated spherical overdense volume and describes the secondary infall of bound but initially expanding collisionless matter onto this region @xcite . if the initial density perturbation spectrum is scale - free and the velocity distribution follows the hubble law , the infall solution is found to approach a self - similar form in an einstein - de sitter universe . the resulting density profile asymptotically approaches @xmath1 with @xmath2 @xcite . the exact value of @xmath3 depends on the index of the initial perturbation spectrum @xmath4 : it is isothermal ( @xmath5 ) for @xmath6 and for @xmath7 steepens to @xmath8 @xcite or @xmath9 @xcite . the collapse of halos therefore retains memory of the initial conditions in the radial infall model . by contrast , modern cosmological n - body simulations find dark matter halos over a wide range of mass scales to follow a density profile that is nearly independent of the initial power spectrum and is shallower near the halo centers ( with @xmath10 ) than that predicted by the radial infall model @xcite . furthermore , the dark matter in the simulated halos is not entirely smoothly distributed spatially ; instead , at least 10% of the halo mass is in the form of hundreds to thousands of smaller , dense satellite halos of varying mass @xcite . thus even though the analytic similarity solutions derived from one - dimensional infall onto a smooth overdensity have provided valuable insight into the evolution of self - gravitating systems , realistic halo formation is clearly more complicated . numerical simulation has been the tool most frequently used in cosmology to study structure formation . it has provided powerful insight and occasionally surprising results ( e.g. universal density profile ) unexplainable by the simulations themselves . our understanding of structure formation can certainly be enhanced if a complementary tool is developed . complementary approaches are also especially needed at this time to help us better understand and perhaps resolve the `` cuspy halo '' and `` dwarf satellite '' problems of the cold dark matter model .    in this paper we offer a new perspective on the subject of dark matter halo formation by proposing an approach different from both the radial infall model and n - body simulations . we focus on the phase - space distribution of dark matter in galaxy halos instead of on the motion of a mass shell ( as in infall models ) or the orbit of a simulation particle ( as in n - body ) . we attempt to understand the evolution of the phase - space distribution with a statistical description based on kinetic theory . our method is to be contrasted with the standard method where the individual dark matter particles are described by the collisionless boltzmann equation ; n - body simulations are in essence a monte carlo method for solving this equation . instead , we consider the phase space of dark matter particles in an average halo and develop a cosmological kinetic theory for halo evolution in the presence of a spectrum of density fluctuations .    the essential features of our approach are represented by the fluctuation - dissipation theorem for time - dependent stochastic processes . to elaborate on this concept , we recall that stochastic modelling was first developed to explain the brownian motion of pollen particles suspended in a fluid . ( see   [ sec : brownian ] for a more detailed discussion . ) this phenomenon is now understood to arise from a fluctuating force on a brownian particle due to many rapid collisions with the molecules in the surrounding fluid . these fluctuations cause successive small changes in the particle velocity , hence to a random walk . the consequence of many such random walks is diffusion , a form of dissipation .    due to the large number of molecules , it is impossible to solve the coupled equations of motion for the trajectories of all molecules and the pollen particle in the fluid fortunately , a stochastic treatment suffices . one mathematical prescription is provided by the langevin equation @xcite , which models the forces arising from the fluctuations as a stochastic term that is added to all other deterministic forces in the equation of motion for a particle . an alternative prescription is given by the fokker - planck equation @xcite , which is an equation of motion for the probability density or distribution function of particles undergoing random walks . in this case , the collective changes in the velocities due to the fluctuations in the system are represented by a drift coefficient and a diffusion coefficient arising from the collision terms in the collisional boltzmann equation . stochastic phenomena occur beyond molecular scales . in astrophysics , the best studied example is the evolution of dense stellar systems such as globular clusters @xcite . a star in a globular cluster experiences a fluctuating force from many gravitational two - body encounters and suffers a succession of small velocity changes . the fluctuations in these systems arise from granularity in the mass distribution at the locations of the stars . the fokker - planck approximation is valid for these weak encounters . we explore this example in greater detail and contrast it with our model of galaxy halo evolution in   [ sec : globular ] . the key feature common to all of these systems is the presence of stochastic fluctuations that result in dissipation . in the cosmological setting addressed by this paper , the fluctuations arise from cosmological perturbations produced in the early universe . at early times , these perturbations are gaussian and fully characterized by their power spectrum ; at late times , the substructures in halos seen in recent simulations are the nonlinear counterparts of this spectrum of early ripples . these fluctuations scatter particles . if one considers an ensemble of halos , the masses and locations of the substructures ( or their gaussian predecessors ) are random variables . the substructures thereby introduce `` noise '' into the evolution of dark matter halos . as we show in this paper , the result is dissipation in the form of drift and velocity - space diffusion . recent work has explored the use of the fokker - planck equation in cosmological problems . @xcite , for example , searched for steady - state solutions of the fokker - planck equation assuming the fluctuations arise from two - body encounters . it also assumed a simple isotropic phase space distribution dependent only on the total energy and a radial power law form for the potential and density . under these assumptions , @xcite found that @xmath11 was a steady - state solution under the effects of encounters . there was no dynamics in this work , however : the system was assumed to be in collisionless equilibrium and the nature of the clumps producing the collisions was left arbitrary . it also remains to be determined whether galaxy halos , either dark matter or stellar , actually evolve to @xmath12 cusp . @xcite examined the dynamics of halos due to stochastic fluctuations from three different noise processes for the fokker - planck scattering term : the merging clumps were assumed to fly by with constant velocity , to follow decaying orbits due to dynamical friction , or to orbit inside halos . the results of this study were promising and supported the notion that the density profiles of halos were affected by mergers and substructures . the fluctuations in this work , however , were constructed by hand instead of being self - consistently calculated , and the results about a central cusp were inconclusive .    our objective here is to construct a kinetic equation in which the drift and diffusion terms are derived from realistic density fluctuations in current cosmological models . we will also retain the full phase space information by , in effect , using @xmath13 without averaging over the angular momentum or radial velocity . we also do not assume collisionless equilibrium ; instead we base our approach on exact dynamics . the organization of this paper is as follows :    in   2 , we derive the kinetic equation relevant for the evolution of an average halo , starting with the collisionless boltzmann equation for individual dark matter particles . this procedure gives rise to a collision term on the right - hand side of the kinetic equation . this term represents a correlated force density and arises from fluctuations in the ensemble averaged gravitational potential due to clustering of the matter distribution .    in , we introduce the concepts and physical variables needed to apply this equation to cosmological problems . the key step is in relating the phase space density @xmath14 to the probability densities of two standard variables in cosmology : the mass density @xmath15 and velocity @xmath16 . we then focus on the quasi - linear regime in which the fluctuations about the mean density and hubble flow of an isotropic and homogeneous universe are small . this focus allows us to relate @xmath15 and @xmath16 to the density and displacement fields @xmath17 and @xmath18 , which are gaussian random fields in standard cosmological models . we leave the most mathematical part of the paper to appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] , where we describe how to use the statistics of constrained gaussian random fields to express the probability densities of   3 in terms of the ( constrained ) means and covariances of the density and displacement fields . the idea of a constrained field is central to this study because our aim is to construct a kinetic theory for dark matter particles that will later reside in a collapsed halo rather than at any random location in the universe . the relevant perturbations are for a density field constrained to have certain properties , e.g. , a specified height or gradient at some point in space . the spectrum for such constrained fields is related but not identical to the familiar linear power spectrum @xmath19 for unconstrained gaussian density fluctuations .    in  [ sec : fpeq ] , we put the final expression for the correlated force derived in appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] back into the kinetic equation , and show that the resulting equation is of the fokker - planck form where one term represents a drift force and the other term represents diffusion in velocity - space . we work out these diffusion coefficients for the currently - favored cold dark matter plus a cosmological constant ( @xmath20cdm ) model , and provide explicit expressions for these coefficients in terms of the linear matter fluctuation power spectrum . we also present the results for the coefficients computed for this model .     [ sec : discuss ] discusses further the physical meaning of the results in   [ sec : fpeq ] . we interpret the diffusion terms by taking velocity moments of the kinetic equation . to place our cosmological kinetic equation in a broader perspective , we discuss in more detail the classical examples of brownian motion and globular clusters , and point out the similarities and differences among the three cases .   [ sec : conclu ] provides a summary and conclusions . in appendix [ sec : stationary ] we investigate the relaxation to stationary solutions of our cosmological fokker - planck equation . we derive the kinetic equation for galaxy halo evolution following the methods presented by @xcite for the derivation of the bbgky hierarchy . the starting point is the one - particle phase space density for dark matter particles in a single halo , the klimontovich ( or klimontovich - dupree ) density @xcite @xmath21      \delta_{\rm d}[\vec v-\vec v_i(t)]\ ] ] where @xmath22 is the dirac delta function and the subscript k denotes the use of the klimontovich density . we suppose that each halo is made of equal - mass particles of mass @xmath23 , for example , the elementary particles of non - baryonic dark matter models . for convenience , we use velocity rather than momentum and we choose units so that @xmath24 is a mass density . we use proper coordinates except for   [ sec : cosmovar ] and appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] , where we will switch to the appropriate cosmological ( comoving ) coordinates . the klimontovich density is simply a way of casting the exact trajectories of all @xmath25 particles in a system into the form of a phase space density . the number of particles in @xmath26 about @xmath27 is @xmath28 , which equals either 0 or 1 . the klimontovich density consists of delta functions because , when one is dealing with a single system ( as opposed to an ensemble ) , every particle has a well - defined position and velocity . the reason for introducing this quantity is that it gives a particularly clean way of going from exact n - body dynamics to a statistical description by taking expectation values of @xmath29 or products of more than one @xmath29 over an ensemble of n - body systems . this approach to kinetic theory is different from the usual method that begins with the n - particle distribution for an ensemble . the klimontovich density obeys the klimontovich - dupree equation @xmath30 where @xmath31 for notational convenience we have grouped together all 6 phase space coordinates into @xmath32 . ( [ klim ] ) is exact , as may be verified by substituting eq . ( [ phaseden ] ) and using the equations of motion for individual particles , @xmath33 in practice , the gravitational force may be softened by modifying eq . ( [ gravec ] ) to reduce artificial two - body relaxation , as is done in n - body simulations . ( [ phaseden ] ) and ( [ klim ] ) are entirely equivalent to eqs . ( [ newton ] ) for one system . the klimontovich phase space density retains _ all _ information about a particular halo because it specifies the trajectories of all particles . ( [ phaseden])([newton ] ) are formally equivalent to a perfect n - body simulation . that is not what we want . rather than giving a perfect description of a single halo , we average over halos to obtain a statistical description of halo evolution . while it is impossible to completely describe a single galactic halo of dark matter particles , by using statistical mechanics methods we _ can _ describe the average of infinitely many halos !    before proceeding further , we make one important modification to the usual procedure in kinetic theory . ( [ newton ] ) assume that we work in an inertial frame . this is satisfactory for an isolated halo but not for a halo formed in a cosmological context where neighbors cause it to orbit in the net gravitational field produced by all matter . the center of mass of a halo typically moves much farther in a hubble time than the size of the halo itself , even in an inertial frame in which the halo begins at rest . for example , for the cold dark matter family of models , the displacement of a mass element from its initial position ( in comoving coordinates ) is typically several mpc today . if we statistically average over an ensemble of halos each of which wanders this far in a hubble time , the phase space density will be artificially smeared out , making the resulting average `` halo '' much larger than any realistic halo . we avoid this by doing the same thing that simulators do when they construct halo profiles : we work in the center - of - mass frame of each halo .    indeed , at each moment the halo center - of - mass must be at rest in our reference frame . this frame is non - inertial because of the gravitational forces acting on the halo . thus we must modify the kinetic equation to apply to an accelerating frame . fortunately , the accelerations are small and the frame is extended only a few mpc , so we do not have to worry about relativistic effects . we simply include the inertial ( `` fictitious '' ) forces associated with working in an accelerating frame . we choose to define @xmath34 as the center - of - mass of each halo . transforming eqs . ( [ newton ] ) to the center - of - mass frame is very simple : we replace @xmath35 by the _ tidal _ gravitational field relative to the center of each halo , @xmath36 , and then subtract the center - of - mass velocity from the initial velocity of each particle . ( [ klim ] ) is unchanged except that @xmath35 is replaced by @xmath37 the subscript t is a reminder that this is the tidal gravitational field . now we return to the usual procedure for deriving a kinetic equation . the klimontovich density is the phase space density for a single realization of a halo . we might imagine performing many n - body simulations of different halos , each with slightly different initial conditions . if we average the klimontovich density over this ensemble of halos , the result ( at least , in the limit where the size of the ensemble becomes infinite ) is no longer a sum of delta functions but instead is a smooth _ one - particle distribution function _ : @xmath38 where angle brackets denote the ensemble average . recall that for notational convenience we have grouped all six phase space variables into @xmath39 . our goal is to derive a tractable kinetic equation for @xmath40 . the obvious next step is to take the ensemble average of eq . ( [ klim ] ) . to proceed , however , we will need the _ two - particle distribution function _ @xmath41 , which follows from averaging the product of klimontovich densities at two points : @xmath42 the delta - function term @xmath43 corresponds to the case in which the two points lie on top of one particle . two distinct particles give the @xmath44 term , which may always be written as a product term plus a two - particle correlation : @xmath45 this equation defines the two - point correlation function in phase space , @xmath46 . the averaging we perform is similar to the averaging used in defining ordinary clustering correlation functions in cosmology . the differences here are that we are not averaging over arbitrary systems but only over those that lead to formation of a halo at @xmath34 , and that we retain velocity information . had we averaged over all space and integrated over velocities , we would have gotten @xmath47 and @xmath48 where @xmath49 is the cosmic mean mass density and @xmath50 is the usual spatial two - point correlation function . now , by taking the ensemble average of eq . ( [ klim ] ) we arrive at a kinetic equation for the evolution of the average halo phase space density @xcite : @xmath51 where we define the ensemble - averaged tidal field @xmath52 and the correlated force density @xmath53=-g\int d^6w'\,f_{2c}(\vec w ,      \vec w^{\,\prime},t)\left(\frac{\vec r-\vec r^{\,\prime}}{\vert      \vec r-\vec r^{\,\prime}\vert^3}+\frac{\vec r^{\,\prime}}{\vert      \vec r^{\,\prime}\vert^3}\right)\ .\ ] ] the covariance of two random variables is denoted @xmath54\equiv \l ( a-\l a \r)(b-\l b \r)\r = \langle ab\rangle-\langle a\rangle\langle b\rangle$ ] . the product of @xmath55 and @xmath29 involves a product of two klimontovich densities , for which we have used eqs . ( [ f2 ] ) and ( [ f2c ] ) . the one - particle discreteness term in eq . ( [ f2 ] ) makes no contribution because the particle has no self - force . ( [ boltzeq ] ) is the first bbgky hierarchy equation @xcite . in cosmological applications this equation is usually derived starting from the liouville equation for the n - particle distribution function . in order to clarify the averaging that is done here , we have started instead from the one - particle klimontovich density . the result , eq .  ( [ boltzeq ] ) , is an evolution equation that looks very much like eq . ( [ klim ] ) . by averaging over halos , however , we have introduced a correlation integral term on the right - hand side . the _ average _ halo therefore does not evolve according to the vlasov equation ; instead , it evolves according to a kinetic equation with an effective collision term . ( [ boltzeq])([g2 ] ) are exact . no approximation has been made yet . ( [ boltzeq ] ) is a continuity equation for density in phase space . without the right - hand side , it says that phase space density is conserved along trajectories given by eq . ( [ newton ] ) modified for the tidal force . the right - hand side gives a correction due to the fact that fluctuations about the ensemble average lead to correlated forces . as we will see , the effects of these fluctuations lead to dissipation . because the correction term is a divergence , the mass density @xmath56 is not dissipated but instead is conserved .    in most applications of kinetic theory , the right - hand side of eq . ( [ boltzeq ] ) arises from particle collisions . in the usual treatment of a gas of particles with short - range forces , one assumes @xmath57 always except during particle collisions . this is the assumption of molecular chaos that boltzmann introduced to derive his celebrated kinetic equation . our situation , however , is different : we can not neglect @xmath46 , because it can be much larger than the single - particle term in eq . ( [ f2c ] ) due to strong gravitational clustering . heuristically , @xmath46 describes the substructure within a galaxy halo at the two - point level . ( higher order correlation functions would be needed for a complete description . ) current cosmological models and observations imply that the initial density field has fluctuations that cause the formation of many small halos which subsequently merge into present - day halos . the lumpiness of the matter distribution represents a fluctuation about the ensemble average density field . through the correlated force density @xmath58 , these fluctuations cause changes in the energy and angular momentum of individual particle orbits that are important for the evolution of the one - particle distribution function . ( [ boltzeq ] ) is useful only if we find an expression for @xmath46 . one way to proceed would be to derive a kinetic equation for @xmath46 by taking the ensemble average of eq . ( [ klim ] ) multiplied by the klimontovich density . this leads to the second bbgky equation , which depends on the three - point correlation in phase space , which obeys the third bbgky equation , and so on . thus we either have an infinite chain of coupled equations of increasing dimensionality , or we must close the system . @xcite handled this problem in their study of gravitational clustering by writing the three - point function in terms of products of two - point functions . we will proceed differently , by seeking to close the hierarchy at the first level , eq . ( [ boltzeq ] ) .    to summarize this section , we have derived a formally exact evolution equation for the average halo . the one - particle phase space density is conserved up to a fluctuating force term arising from the two - point correlation function in phase space . physically this term represents the effects of substructure within and around halos , which scatter particles to new orbits . in the next two sections , we will show that we can in fact express @xmath46 in terms of the one - particle phase space density @xmath40 using a relation that is exact to second order in cosmological perturbation theory . this relation will enable us to close the first bbgky hierarchy . solving our evolution equation in eqs . ( [ boltzeq])([g2 ] ) requires specifying the phase space density @xmath40 at an initial time and the two - particle correlation @xmath46 at all times . in this section we show how to compute these quantities from the probability distributions of mass density and velocity at one and two points in space . we wish to derive expressions that would relate @xmath59 and @xmath60 to probability distributions of mass density and velocity , because these latter quantities are naturally specified by a cosmological model for structure formation . the method is to examine the mass and momentum in a small volume of space and to construct ensemble averages of the klimontovich density using the probability distribution of density and velocity . we use the symbol @xmath61 to refer to the probability density with respect to its arguments , where the joint probability distribution for @xmath62 is @xmath63 . we assume that these probability distributions are always normalized to unit total probability . the variables relevant for this paper are the densities @xmath15 and velocities @xmath64 at two points @xmath65 and at one time @xmath66 : @xmath67 , @xmath68 , @xmath69 , and @xmath70 . initially we assume that the velocity field in a given realization is single - valued in space . we use the following probability distributions : @xmath71 where the different probability densities are related to one another by @xmath72 these probability distributions depend on time but we suppress the @xmath66-dependence for clarity .    for a small volume in phase space , @xmath73 equals the mean mass contained in @xmath74 . the same quantity can be calculated by averaging @xmath75 over density at fixed velocity using @xmath76 , i.e. , @xmath77 . equating the results gives @xmath78 we have used the conditional probability density @xmath79 to define the conditional mean @xmath80 . note that the probability densities depend on @xmath81 through @xmath82 and @xmath83 , so eq .  ( [ f1p ] ) yields the desired one - particle phase space dependence on @xmath84 . this argument is easily extended to the two - point phase space density , using the joint probability distribution of density and velocity at two points . as eq . ( [ g2 ] ) shows , we need @xmath85 , which depends on @xmath86 but not @xmath87 , i.e. , we need the velocity at only one point . recalling that @xmath88 , we obtain @xmath89\nonumber\\    & = & \int_0^\infty d\rho_1\,\rho_1\int_0^\infty d\rho_2\,\rho_2      \left[p(\rho_1,\rho_2\vert\vec v_1)-p(\rho_1\vert\vec v_1 )      p(\rho_2)\right]\,p(\vec v_1)\nonumber\\    & = & \left[\left\langle\rho_1\rho_2\vert\vec v_1\right\rangle      -\left\langle\rho_1\vert\vec v_1\right\rangle\left\langle      \rho_2\right\rangle\right]\,p(\vec v_1)\ .\end{aligned}\ ] ] although we have derived eqs . ( [ f1p ] ) and ( [ f2cp ] ) assuming a single - valued velocity field in each realization , they are also valid when there is a distribution of velocities at each point . one simply interprets @xmath90 as the total mass density while @xmath86 is a single particle velocity . therefore these equations are fully general .      at high redshift , before dark matter halos formed , the density and velocity fields were only slightly perturbed from a uniformly expanding cosmological model . it is thought that the fluctuations of density and velocity responsible for all cosmic structure were gaussian random fields produced during the inflationary era of the very early universe . these fluctuations provide us with both the initial conditions and the random element leading to a probabilistic description for halo formation . our goal now is to obtain expressions for eqs . ( [ f1p ] ) and ( [ f2cp ] ) at early times while the density fluctuations are small .    before proceeding further , we review the description of density and velocity fields at high redshift in an almost uniformly expanding cosmological model . first , the mean expansion is described by the cosmic expansion scale factor @xmath91 which is related to the redshift by @xmath92 . the hubble expansion rate is @xmath93 . the matter contributes a fraction @xmath94 to the closure density . we account for the mean expansion by defining new coordinates conventionally called comoving coordinates : @xmath95 .    adopting the standard cosmological model , we assume that the dark matter is cold . this assumption means that the velocity field is single - valued in space at early times before halos form . we can then write the density field @xmath15 and velocity field @xmath16 in terms of perturbations @xmath17 and @xmath18 around a uniformly expanding background : @xmath96\ , \quad    \vec v(\vec r , t)=h(t)\left[\vec r+b(t)\vec\psi(\vec x , t)\right]\ .\ ] ] here @xmath97^{0.6}$ ] is the growth rate for density fluctuations with time - dependence @xmath98 . we emphasize that eq . ( [ pertdv ] ) does not assume that the density fluctuations are small ; it only assumes that the velocity field is single - valued . we are implicitly assuming that all of the matter may be described as a single cold non - interacting fluid ( i.e. we assume that baryons move like cold dark matter over the length scales of interest ) . the computation of the functions @xmath91 , @xmath99 , @xmath100 , @xmath101 , and @xmath102 is standard in cosmology and will not be described here . at early times when @xmath103 , mass conservation relates the density and velocity perturbation fields by @xmath104 , or @xmath105    now we make a crucial step by changing variables from @xmath106 used previously to @xmath107 . the reason for doing so is that the description in comoving coordinates @xmath108 and perturbation variables @xmath18 and @xmath17 is much simpler in the small perturbation limit . following the notation in   3.1 , we write @xmath109 , @xmath110 , and @xmath111 . these variables have normalized joint probability densities @xmath112 , @xmath113 , and @xmath114 in analogy with eqs . ( [ probs ] ) and ( [ pdfs ] ) .    to change variables from @xmath115 to @xmath116 , we use @xmath117 , @xmath118 , and @xmath119 . ( [ f1p ] ) then becomes @xmath120 p(\vec\psi_1 ) \ , ( hb)^{-3}\ , \ ] ] where @xmath121 and @xmath122 is the conditional distribution of @xmath123 . similarly , eq .  ( [ f2cp ] ) becomes @xmath124p(\vec\psi_1)(hb)^{-3}\ .\ ] ]    although the derivation of eqs . ( [ f1p1a ] ) and ( [ f2cp1a ] ) assumed that the velocity field is single - valued , they are valid in general provided that one interprets @xmath123 and @xmath125 as total mass density perturbations ( not necessarily small ) while @xmath126 is proportional to the single particle velocity . ( [ f1p1a ] ) and ( [ f2cp1a ] ) are equivalent to eqs . ( [ f1p ] ) and ( [ f2cp ] ) expressed in different variables . their utility becomes evident in appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] where we evaluate the probability distributions of density and velocity in cosmological models . all that remains is to calculate the expectation values in eqs . ( [ f1p1a ] ) and ( [ f2cp1a ] ) and to substitute the latter into eq . ( [ g2 ] ) . this calculation is somewhat complicated and is presented in appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] . part of the complication arises because of an important detail we have so far neglected : halos form preferentially in regions that are initially overdense . our calculations assume that a halo forms at @xmath127 . consequently we should not evaluate the expectation values for arbitrary points in space but rather for those that satisfy appropriate constraints .    strictly speaking it is impossible to specify in advance the regions that will form halos in a cosmological model with random initial fluctuations because the dynamics of gravitational clustering is too complicated . a simple model , however , has been found to give reasonable agreement with numerical simulations : halos form at maxima of the smoothed initial density field @xcite . these constraints are found to modify the expectation values in eqs . ( [ f1p1a ] ) and ( [ f2cp1a ] ) . to emphasize the application of constraints , we rewrite these expectation values with a subscript @xmath128 : @xmath129 p(\vec\psi_1 ) \ , ( hb)^{-3}\ , \ ] ] and @xmath130p(\vec\psi_1)(hb)^{-3}\ .\ ] ] eqs . ( [ f1p1 ] ) and ( [ f2cp1 ] ) are the main results of this section . we will use them to specify the initial conditions on @xmath40 and to determine the correlated force density in eq . ( [ g2 ] ) . the next step is to evaluate the necessary constrained expectation values using the standard cosmological model . we present the details of this calculation in appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] , where we choose to err on the side of simplicity by following @xcite and using only the zeroth and first derivatives of the smoothed initial density field @xmath131 as constraints . detailed comparison has shown that this simple model does not predict perfectly all halo formation sites @xcite , and more complicated constraints work better , e.g. @xcite . the procedure of appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] can presumably be extended to incorporate more complicated constraints . after having devoted   [ sec : dfgauss ] and appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] to probability and statistics we are now ready to return to the kinetic equation in   [ sec : kinetic ] and write down an explicit expression for the correlated force density @xmath132 on the right - hand - side of the kinetic equation ( [ boltzeq ] ) . the approach we have followed is exact rather than phenomenological  our starting point was the first bbgky hierarchy equation , an exact kinetic equation . the only approximation we have made is to assume that the density and velocity fields are gaussian random fields . the resulting two - particle correlation function , eq . ( [ f2cexact ] ) , depends in a simple way on the one - particle distribution @xmath133 . as we will show next , this simple dependence leads to the fokker - planck equation . this is a remarkable and non - trivial result . the fokker - planck equation is a great simplification of the exact  and intractable  bbgky hierarchy . usually the fokker - planck equation is _ assumed _ to hold a priori , and then its diffusion coefficients are estimated . here , on the other hand , we have _ derived _ the fokker - planck equation . along with it we obtain the diffusion coefficients in the quasi - linear regime , as follows .      substituting eq . ( [ f2cexact ] ) into eq . ( [ g2 ] ) using eq . ( [ f2cp ] ) , converting to comoving coordinates , using eq . ( [ linpsi ] ) to relate @xmath18 to @xmath16 , and using eq . ( [ f1lin ] ) , to third order in @xmath17 we get @xmath134 \,f \right .        \nonumber\\       & &   + \left . ( hb ) \left [ c(\vec\psi,\vec\psi\,)-c(\vec\psi_0,\vec\psi\ , )         -\langle\vec\psi\,\rangle_c\otimes c(\delta,\vec\psi\ , )      \right ] \cdot\frac{\partial f}{\partial\vec v}\right\}+o(\delta^4)\ , \end{aligned}\ ] ] where the covariance matrices @xmath128 of variables @xmath17 and @xmath18 are given in eqs . ( [ covfun ] ) and ( [ c0 ] ) . here , @xmath135 and @xmath136 . note that all the terms with subscript 0 arise from our use of the tidal field rather than the total gravitational acceleration . substituting eq . ( [ g2lin ] ) into eq . ( [ boltzeq ] ) , in proper coordinates our kinetic equation in the quasilinear regime reduces to the fokker - planck equation @xmath137 specified by a vector field @xmath138 and a tensor field @xmath139 . together , @xmath138 and @xmath139 are called diffusion coefficients . heuristically , @xmath138 represents a drift force ( @xmath140 has units of acceleration ) while @xmath139 represents the diffusive effects of fluctuating forces . the flux density in velocity space is @xmath141 . keeping only terms up to second order in the density perturbations , these quantities are given by @xmath142      \nonumber\\    & = & - \hbox{cov}(\delta,\vec g_0\vert\vec\psi\ , )      =   \hbox{cov}(\delta,\vec g_{\rm t}\vert\vec v\,)\end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath143 in eqs . ( [ driftlin ] ) and ( [ difflin ] ) we have also used the fact that in the quasilinear regime the peculiar gravity and displacement are related by @xmath144 @xcite , and the tidal field is @xmath145 , where @xmath146 . in writing the second line of eq . ( [ driftlin ] ) we have used eq . ( [ covy ] ) with @xmath147 and @xmath148 . thus , @xmath149 should be understood to be subject to the same extremum or other constraints as e.g. the constrained covariance function @xmath150 . the displacement and velocity are related by the second of eqs . ( [ pertdv ] ) . thus , in linear theory @xmath151 so that conditioning on @xmath16 makes the fluctuation in @xmath35 vanish , allowing us to replace @xmath152 by @xmath153 in eq . ( [ driftlin ] ) . in all cases , the covariances are taken subject to the extremum constraints discussed in appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] . it is worth noting that had we used the total gravitational acceleration @xmath154 instead of the tidal field @xmath155 , the drift vector @xmath138 would have been zero and @xmath156 would have been larger . we conclude that tidal effects are crucial for a proper description of halo evolution @xcite . this is evident in the final expressions for @xmath138 and @xmath139 . after the lengthy derivations , these expressions are remarkably simple , suggesting that they may have greater validity than the case of small - amplitude gaussian fluctuations that we have analyzed here .    in going from eqs . ( [ f1lin ] ) and ( [ g2lin ] ) to eqs . ( [ driftlin ] ) and ( [ difflin ] ) we have dropped the contributions made by @xmath157 and @xmath158 because they do not contribute at second order in @xmath17 . at this order , @xmath138 and @xmath139 are independent of the value of the smoothed density @xmath159 used for the constraint . however , the constraint enters in third order . carrying out the derivation to one higher order in @xmath17 requires using the following result for gaussian random variables : @xmath160 . applying this with @xmath161 , after some algebra we find @xmath162 although these results are correct for gaussian fluctuations to third order in the density perturbations , nonlinear evolution will generate non - vanishing irreducible three - point correlations ( i.e. , non - gaussianity ) that have been neglected here . for example , nonlinear evolution generates corrections to the zeldovich approximation so that velocity and gravity are no longer proportional to each other as we have assumed . for this reason , eqs . ( [ diffuns ] ) should not be regarded as being more accurate than eqs . ( [ driftlin ] ) and ( [ difflin ] ) .    despite their limitations , eqs . ( [ diffuns ] ) are useful in showing the qualitative effect of applying an initial constraint . choosing the proto - halo to have @xmath163 means that typically @xmath164 in the proto - halo , which decreases @xmath138 and @xmath165 compared with eqs . ( [ driftlin ] ) and ( [ difflin ] ) . conversely , the diffusion coefficients are enhanced in void regions . note also that the constraint value appears explicitly in the initial conditions for @xmath40 in the linear regime through the term @xmath166 in eq . ( [ f1lin ] ) . ( [ driftlin ] ) and ( [ difflin ] ) imply that , in the quasilinear regime , the drift and diffusivity are independent of the velocity within the halo . ( although @xmath138 is equivalent to a covariance at fixed @xmath16 , it is independent of the particular value of @xmath16 . ) this follows because @xmath46 depends on @xmath167 only through @xmath133 and @xmath168 in eq . ( [ f2cexact ] ) . as noted above , at second order in perturbation theory the drift and diffusivity are also independent of the initial overdensity of the peak @xmath159 ( but they depend on the smoothing scale used to find extrema ) . thus , both the fokker - planck equation and the diffusion coefficients appear to be remarkably robust quantities .    to make further use of eqs . ( [ driftlin ] ) and ( [ difflin ] ) , we need to write out the coefficients explicitly . using eqs . ( [ covfun ] ) , ( [ driftlin ] ) , and ( [ difflin ] ) we first factor out the dependence on cosmology by writing    [ adscaled ] @xmath169 \,,\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath170 and @xmath171 are scaled radial and tangential diffusion coefficients . the scaled variables are    [ coeffs ] @xmath172\right\ }   \ , \label{scala}\\     d_r(r , t ) & = & c_r(r ) - \frac{d\gamma(r)}{dr}=       \sigma_\psi^2-\frac{d\gamma(r)}{dr}-\left[\frac{r\bar\eta(r ) }       { \sigma_0}\right]^2-\left[\frac{\bar\xi(r)-2\bar\eta(r)}{\sigma_1 }       \right]^2\ , \label{scaldr}\\     d_t(r , t ) & = & c_t(r ) - \frac{\gamma(r)}{r}=       \sigma_\psi^2-\frac{\gamma(r)}{r}-\left[\frac{\bar\eta(r)}{\sigma_1 }       \right]^2 \ . \label{scaldt}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    here , @xmath173 is the comoving distance from the center of the halo . the time dependence arises only because the functions appearing in eqs . ( [ coeffs ] ) depend on the time - dependent power spectrum of density fluctuations . these functions are summarized here for convenience :    [ sumfun ] @xmath174    where we recall that @xmath175 and @xmath176 are the covariances of the constraints @xmath159 and @xmath177 defined in eqs . ( [ varcon ] ) , and @xmath178 is a smoothing window defined in eqs .  ( [ smoothdel ] ) and ( [ window ] ) . we use the gaussian window @xmath179 .    to gain some insight into the significance of these results , let us consider a proto - halo at high redshift . if we suppose that the gravity field is dominated by its small - scale components , we may replace @xmath180 by @xmath35 . if we further ignore the effects of initial constraints , in linear theory @xmath181 where @xmath182 is the one - dimensional velocity dispersion . in one realization , the forces are deterministic , but taken across the ensemble they are random and fluctuating . a diffusivity @xmath183 implies that these fluctuations cause the typical particle to change its velocity by order itself in about a hubble time . there is also a net drift force @xmath138 with a dissipative timescale of about @xmath184 dynamical times , where @xmath17 is a typical magnitude of the density fluctuations . as a result , friction and diffusion will significantly alter halos within a hubble time of their collapse at high redshift . we conclude that it is not valid to model halos using the spherically symmetric vlasov equation . this conclusion has also been reached previously by @xcite .    to summarize , eqs . ( [ fplin])([difflin ] ) , and their more detailed version , eqs . ( [ adscaled])([sumfun ] ) , are the main results of this subsection . ( [ fplin ] ) has the standard form of a fokker - planck equation . the fokker - planck form arises naturally and eqs . ( [ driftlin])([difflin ] ) are exact for gaussian fluctuations up to second order in perturbation theory . the diffusion coefficients @xmath138 and @xmath139 are due to fluctuations in the gravitational field over the ensemble of halos . the drift vector @xmath140 represents a source of gravitational acceleration in addition to the acceleration @xmath180 produced by the mean matter distribution . the diffusion term @xmath185 causes the temperature ( i.e. velocity dispersion ) to increase ( for a positive definite @xmath139 ) . having derived analytic expressions for the diffusion coefficients in the previous subsection , we now evaluate them for the currently favored cosmological model at high redshift . figures  [ fig : friction ] and [ fig : diffusion ] show @xmath186 , @xmath170 , and @xmath171 as a function of radius @xmath173 ( measured from the halo center ) for a range of gaussian smoothing lengths @xmath187 in @xmath178 . we obtain these results by numerically integrating eqs . ( [ coeffs ] ) and ( [ sumfun ] ) with the linear power spectrum @xmath19 for a flat @xmath20cdm cosmological model with @xmath188 . the figures show a number of interesting features . first , the diffusion coefficients are negative over some regions of radius for some parameters . as we will show below , @xmath138 is the gravitational acceleration on particles in the halo caused by drift . if the friction were produced by the chandrasekhar mechanism of tidal wakes , one would expect @xmath189 ( see   [ sec : globular ] ) . however , here @xmath138 is independent of @xmath16 and the particle mass . the source of friction is not the tidal wake of a flow past a moving massive particle . instead it is the fluctuations of the gravitational field of a gaussian random process , and these fluctuations can lead to a radially outward or inward force . we discuss this further in  [ sec : discuss ] . more surprising at first is the fact that the diffusivities @xmath170 and @xmath171 can be negative . negative diffusivity causes the velocity dispersion ( or temperature ) to decrease , indicating an instability . such behavior is possible for gravitational systems . in fact , this result is to be expected in the quasilinear regime of gravitational instability because second - order perturbations enhance gravitational collapse of dark matter halos @xcite . in the strongly nonlinear regime , after halo virialization , we expect the diffusivities to become positive .    to elucidate the origin of the negative diffusivity , we show in figures  [ fig : fig3 ] and [ fig : fig4 ] that once the extremum constraint @xmath190 is removed ( by setting @xmath191 ) , we obtain @xmath192 and @xmath193 for all radii . the extremum constraint is therefore crucial to generating positive @xmath186 and negative diffusivity seen in figures  [ fig : friction ] and [ fig : diffusion ] . this effect is easy to understand : if one stands at a random place in a gaussian field , nonlinear effects can speed up or slow down gravitational collapse . gravitational instability , however , speeds up the evolution in the vicinity of a density extremum . another obvious systematic effect with the diffusion coefficients in figures  [ fig : friction ] and [ fig : diffusion ] is their dependence on the smoothing radius @xmath187 used to set the initial constraints . for the power spectrum assumed here , the maximum of @xmath186 occurs at about @xmath194 . in the limit @xmath195 , the variances @xmath175 and @xmath176 diverge , causing the constraint terms in the diffusion coefficients ( i.e. , those terms proportional to @xmath196 and @xmath197 ) to vanish . figure  [ fig : diffusion ] shows that the diffusivity is isotropic at the halo center but shows radial anisotropy outside the center . at small radii the tangential diffusivity is larger in absolute value than the radial diffusivity . tangential diffusion gives the infalling matter angular momentum . our treatment therefore provides a new statistical description of the growth of angular momentum by tidal torques @xcite and may enable in principle an explanation for the universal angular momentum profile found recently by @xcite . it is instructive to work out analytically the asymptotic behavior of the functions in eqs . ( [ coeffs ] ) for small and large @xmath173 . for small @xmath173 we find ,    [ difcosmallr ] @xmath198 \right\ }          + o(r^3 ) \\ d_r(r , t ) & = & -\left[\frac{\bar\eta(0)}{\sigma_1}\right]^2 + r^2 \left [          \frac{1}{10}\sigma_\delta^2 + \frac{3}{5}\alpha \bar\eta(0 )           -\left(\frac{\bar\eta(0)}{\sigma_0 } \right)^2 \right ]          + o(r^4 ) \ , \\    d_t(r , t ) & = & -\left[\frac{\bar\eta(0)}{\sigma_1}\right]^2 + r^2 \left [          \frac{1}{30}\sigma_\delta^2          + \frac{1}{5}\alpha \bar\eta(0 ) \right ]          + o(r^4 ) \ , \end{aligned}\ ] ]    where we have defined    @xmath199    eqs . ( [ difcosmallr ] ) show that if @xmath200 is finite , then as @xmath201 , @xmath186 drops to zero while @xmath170 and @xmath171 approach a negative constant as discussed above , @xmath202 . this central value is decreased as the smoothing scale is decreased ( i.e. higher @xmath203 and @xmath204 ) as shown in figure [ fig : diffusion ] . as @xmath195 , we have @xmath205 and @xmath206 as long as @xmath207 as @xmath208 . in the limit @xmath206 ( no extremum constraint ) , @xmath170 and @xmath171 are non - negative everywhere ( cf .  figs .  2 and 4 ) . thus , negative diffusivity ( instability ) is produced by constraining the slope of the density field . constraints have the opposite effect on @xmath186 : as the comparison of figures 1 and 3 confirms , the contributions to @xmath186 from constraint terms are positive .    for large @xmath173 , both @xmath209 and @xmath210 approach @xmath211 , and @xmath212 ( assuming @xmath213 as @xmath214 ) , so @xmath215 figure [ fig : diffusion ] shows that @xmath170 rises slightly above @xmath216 at a few hundred mpc ( for the standard model power spectrum ) before reaching @xmath216 . this is because @xmath217 and @xmath218 is negative for this range of @xmath173 . the drift @xmath219 approaches zero at large @xmath173 . in practice , the large-@xmath173 limit is unimportant because halo infall occurs only from within about 10 mpc . another way to gain insight into the diffusion coefficients is to examine their behavior for scale - free spectra @xmath4 . many of the integrals are analytic in this case . we define a set of functions @xmath220 the integral converges for @xmath221 . using properties of the spherical bessel functions @xmath222 , we obtain the following useful relations :    [ glrel ] @xmath223    we also use the following relation , valid for @xmath221 : @xmath224^{-1}\ .\ ] ]    for gaussian - tapered power - law spectrum @xmath225 and gaussian smoothing @xmath226 , eqs . ( [ sumfun ] ) give , for @xmath227 and @xmath228 ,    [ sumfunp ] @xmath229    here , @xmath230 is euler s constant . for a pure power - law spectrum with @xmath231 , @xmath232 and @xmath211 diverge at long wavelength . however , eqs . ( [ dr00 ] ) and ( [ dt00 ] ) are valid for @xmath228 . for @xmath231 , @xmath233 in eq . ( [ scala ] ) . for @xmath234 , @xmath211 converges at long wavelength but diverges at short wavelength with @xmath235 as @xmath227 . the limiting behavior of @xmath236 and @xmath237 are given by    [ limbarfun ] @xmath238\ , & r\ll r\ , \\ -ng_1(n+2)\,r^{-(n+3)}\ , & r\gg r\ ,      \end{cases }      \label{barxiap}\\    \bar\eta(r ) & \approx &      b\begin{cases }        \frac{1}{6}\gamma\left(\frac{n+3}{2}\right)\left(\frac{r }        { \sqrt{2}}\right)^{-(n+3)}\left[1-\frac{(n+3)}{10}\frac{r^2 }        { r^2}+o(r^4)\right]\ , & r\ll r\ , \\ g_1(n+2)\,r^{-(n+3)}\ , & r\gg r\ . \end{cases }      \label{baretaap}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    for all @xmath239 , these functions obey the relation @xmath240 . the drift coefficient is plotted in figure [ fig : a - power ] for @xmath241 . as expected from the previous section , constraints make @xmath186 more positive . for power - law spectra , however , @xmath200 diverges so one can not use eqs . ( [ difcosmallr ] ) to obtain the behavior as @xmath242 . the exact results here show that for @xmath243 , @xmath244 as @xmath242 . for @xmath245 , @xmath246 as @xmath247 . these results show that models with lots of small - scale power and substructure ( @xmath248 as @xmath208 ) have a strong inward drift force , while models that are smoother on small scales ( @xmath245 ) have negligible drift force as @xmath242 . this is easy to understand qualitatively in the context of halo formation . density fields with lots of substructure have a nonspherical mass distribution , with mass concentrated into subhalos . for a given halo , the mass between @xmath249 and @xmath173 , for example , is concentrated into overdense substructures whose gravity field on infalling particles is stronger , on average , than if this mass were uniformly distributed over a spherical shell as it is for the average halo . given a density correlation function that rises with decreasing @xmath173 , there is a greater concentration of such clumps interior to @xmath173 than outside of @xmath173 , leading to a net inward drift force . figure [ fig : d - power ] shows the radial and tangential diffusivity for power - law spectra with @xmath231 . for @xmath234 the diffusivity diverges because the velocity dispersion @xmath211 diverges as @xmath208 . for @xmath250 the divergence is logarithmic resulting in a logarithmic dependence of @xmath170 and @xmath171 on radius . figure [ fig : d - power ] shows that the effect of the constraints is to increase the diffusivity at radii within a few smoothing lengths of the peak . as we noted above , constraints on the density gradient make the diffusivities negative as @xmath242 . for @xmath231 the diffusivities continue to rise with increasing @xmath173 because @xmath211 diverges as @xmath214 . for the physical power spectrum used in figures [ fig : friction ] and [ fig : diffusion ] , @xmath211 converges at both small and large @xmath251 , so the asymptotic behavior is different . the use of the fokker - planck equation to describe dark matter clustering is novel . in order to gain insight into what this approach may reveal , in this section we examine the fokker - planck equation from several different perspectives . the fokker - planck equation describes relaxation processes in a weakly collisional fluid . in this regard it is similar to the boltzmann equation , in which the right - hand side of eq . ( [ boltzeq ] ) is replaced by a two - body collision integral that is bilinear in the one - particle distribution function . the present situation is physically very different however  `` collisions '' are not due to individual particles but rather to the gravity field of density fluctuations in a gaussian random field . nevertheless , we can borrow one of the techniques used to gain insight into the boltzmann equation , viz . velocity moments , to obtain a clear physical interpretation of the meaning of the fokker - planck equation and the diffusion coefficients @xmath138 and @xmath139 . moment equations are obtained by multiplying eq . ( [ fplin ] ) by powers of @xmath252 and integrating over velocity . the three lowest moments give the mass density @xmath15 , fluid velocity @xmath253 , and velocity dispersion tensor @xmath254 :    [ momdef ] @xmath255    here we are using physical ( proper ) spatial coordinates rather than comoving coordinates . the density , velocity , and velocity dispersion tensor obey the following equations :    [ momeqs ] @xmath256    the first equation is the usual fluid continuity equation . the second is the usual euler equation , except that the pressure is generalized to a matrix @xmath257 because the spatial stress need not be diagonal for a collisionless fluid . the right - hand side has two force terms : the gravitational tidal field @xmath180 produced by @xmath258 , and the drift acceleration @xmath259 caused by the correlated fluctuations of the mass density field . the third equation introduces a tensor @xmath260 , which is defined exactly like @xmath254 except the integrand in eq . ( [ thetadef ] ) acquires an additional factor @xmath261 . ( [ heat ] ) is a generalized heat equation , which requires a little more discussion . the velocity dispersion tensor @xmath254 generalizes the temperature of an isotropic gas to the case of an anisotropic velocity distribution . for an isotropic gas with @xmath262 ( here @xmath263 has units of @xmath264 ) and @xmath265 , this equation takes the more familiar form @xmath266 where @xmath267 is the heat flux . the velocity gradient terms in eq . ( [ heat ] ) generalize the @xmath268 term ( i.e. , the @xmath269 term ) of eq . ( [ isoheat ] ) to an anisotropic velocity distribution . for a perfect gas , the heat flux term is absent because the maxwellian velocity distribution has vanishing skewness . for an imperfect or collisionless gas , however , the third moment of the velocity distribution generates a generalized heat flux @xmath270 . notice that the heating rate is given not by the heat flux but instead by its divergence . for a weakly imperfect gas , the heat flux can be approximated ( e.g. in the chapman - enskog expansion approach ) by a conductive flux @xmath271 where @xmath272 is the conductivity , but for a collisionless gas , @xmath260 can not be obtained simply from @xmath15 , @xmath253 , and @xmath254 . thus , eqs . ( [ momeqs ] ) do not form a closed system . this is precisely why we must use a phase space description for a collisionless gas instead of trying to modify the fluid equations . ( [ momeqs ] ) and ( [ isoheat ] ) , however , are pedagogically useful in showing us how to interpret @xmath138 and @xmath139 . the velocity diffusivity tensor @xmath273 appears as a new term in the anisotropic heat equation , with no familiar counterpart in the dynamics of a collisional gas . although @xmath273 comes from a _ diffusion _ ( i.e. , gradient ) term in _ phase space _ , it appears as a direct _ local heating _ term in _ real space _ ( i.e. , coordinate space @xmath274 ) . diffusion in velocity space is equivalent to local heating : the temperature increases when particles spread out in velocity at a given point in space . the diffusion occurs in velocity space not in real space . the presence of this term begs the question : where does the energy come from ? from the exact kinetic equation ( [ boltzeq ] ) , it follows that the heating term is given by the symmetrized first velocity moment of the correlated force density @xmath58 produced by fluctuating gravitational fields . from this we see that the heating comes from gravitational energy . for this reason , it is possible for @xmath275 to be positive or negative : gravitational fluctuations can either locally heat or cool a gas . one should not try to draw conclusions about energy conservation from these results because our calculations are performed in the accelerating frame centered on a halo . however , the equations of motion used in deriving our kinetic theory imply local energy conservation . the fokker - planck equation describes the evolution of the probability distribution for particles undergoing random walks . instead of describing the system by a distribution function , we can specify equations of motion for individual particle trajectories using the langevin equation @xcite . although this is reversing the logic we used in deriving the fokker - planck equation , it is useful for providing both an understanding and a monte carlo method for numerically solving the fokker - planck equation .    the langevin equation is a stochastic differential equation for the individual particle trajectories . the langevin equation corresponding to eq . ( [ fplin ] ) is given by the pair of equations @xmath276 where @xmath277 is a force due to a zero - mean gaussian random process with covariance @xmath278 the velocity of a particle at time @xmath279 , @xmath280 , is therefore given by a deterministic term @xmath281 dt$ ] , plus a random term drawn from a gaussian distribution with variance @xmath282 . subtle differences exist between the cases where the variance @xmath275 is evaluated at @xmath283 ( `` ito calculus '' ) vs. at @xmath284 ( `` stratonovich calculus '' ) . details can be found in @xcite . note that the langevin equation requires @xmath285 . the interpretation of the langevin equation is given by the following result @xcite : if a sufficiently large sample of particles is drawn at random at time @xmath286 from the phase space distribution @xmath287 , and their orbits are integrated using eqs . ( [ langevin ] ) , then at any later time @xmath66 their positions and velocities are a sample from the phase space density @xmath14 obtained by integrating eq . ( [ fplin ] ) . ( [ langevin ] ) are similar to the exact equations of motion for individual particles given by eqs . ( [ newton ] ) , but there are several important differences . the gravity field @xmath288 of one realization is replaced by the spherically symmetric gravity field of the ensemble - average density profile . the effects of spatially - varying forces in @xmath289 are represented by the drift term @xmath138 and the stochastic acceleration @xmath277 . these additional terms have the effect that , at least in the quasilinear regime ( which we assumed in our derivation of the fokker - planck equation ) , the phase space evolution implied by the langevin dynamics is equivalent to a monte carlo sample from the phase space density . this does not mean we have come full circle . for individual realizations of the ensemble , the density field is clustered and not spherically symmetric and the phase space is six - dimensional . the langevin equations give orbits in a smooth , spherically symmetric matter distribution . the latter is far easier to model numerically , with much higher resolution possible , than the original dynamics . by taking advantage of the symmetries of the average halo we have reduced the phase space from six dimensions to three . the fokker - planck equation was first written almost a century ago to describe brownian motion @xcite . in this case , a small macroscopic particle ( a brownian particle ) undergoes a random walk due to its collisions with individual molecules in a liquid . instead of the phase space density of molecules , the relevant quantity is the probability density @xmath290 for the brownian particle to have velocity @xmath16 at time @xmath66 . assuming a spatially homogeneous and isotropic medium , this probability distribution obeys the fokker - planck equation @xmath291 where @xmath292 is a constant ( given , for a small spherical body of mass @xmath23 and radius @xmath293 immersed in a fluid of viscosity @xmath294 , by the stokes formula @xmath295 ) , @xmath263 is the temperature , and @xmath296 is the boltzmann constant . ( [ fpbrown ] ) has the same form as eq . ( [ fplin ] ) if we identify @xmath297 for the drag term and @xmath298 for the diffusion term . we note that the brownian motion can be equally described by the langevin equations in eqs . ( [ langevin ] ) and ( [ stofor ] ) with @xmath299 , @xmath297 , and @xmath300 . brownian motion describes a very different physical situation than dark matter halo formation . why are both described by a fokker - planck equation ? the reason is that both problems involve random walks . let us examine this more closely . in the case of brownian motion , the random walks arise from impulsive collisions that cause the brownian particle s velocity to change significantly on a timescale @xmath301 . during this time interval the particle moves a distance @xmath302 . after an elapsed time @xmath66 , the particle undergoes @xmath303 steps and therefore moves a distance @xmath304 . in thermal equilibrium , @xmath305 so the particle moves a typical distance @xmath306 where @xmath307 is the velocity diffusivity . a random walk in space leads naturally to a diffusion equation for the probability distribution @xcite . the dark matter case at first appears to be very different . instead of a large particle being buffeted by small ones , we are studying small particles being buffeted by large mass fluctuations ( i.e. large in mass compared with the dark matter particles themselves , whose mass never enters our discussion ) . moreover , our derivation of the fokker - planck equation has assumed that the motion is in the quasilinear regime described by eq . ( [ pertdv ] ) with a universal time - dependence for @xmath308 . therefore each particle has moved in a straight line with ( in appropriate units ) a constant velocity , which is not a random walk in space . however , _ the velocity _ of a given particle is a random walk since @xmath18 is obtained by adding up the gravitational accelerations produced by all the mass fluctuations in a gaussian random field . the net force on a particle is a random walk at fixed time . although cosmic gaussian random fields lead to a fokker - planck equation , the diffusion coefficients are very different from brownian motion . first , the drift acceleration @xmath138 is independent of velocity , in contrast with the viscous drag acceleration @xmath309 for brownian motion . in the quasilinear regime of gravitational clustering , the drift is not a friction at all . instead it is radially directed ( because of spherical symmetry for the average halo ) , either inward or outward depending on the density correlations of fluctuating substructure . second , the velocity diffusivity tensor @xmath273 is not proportional to the temperature ; the dark matter is treated as being completely cold with vanishing temperature . in both cases the diffusivity is proportional to the mean squared displacement . in the cosmological case this depends simply on the power spectrum of density fluctuations and not on the thermal velocity of the particles .    in the brownian case @xmath138 and @xmath139 are both proportional to the stokes drag coefficient @xmath292 . the proportionality between @xmath138 and @xmath139 is no accident but is a consequence of the fluctuation - dissipation theorem , which states that these coefficients have a proportionality given by the condition of thermal equilibrium . it is instructive to see this in a generalized case of eq . ( [ fpbrown ] ) . suppose that the brownian particle is moving in a time - independent potential @xmath310 . the fokker - planck equation then becomes @xmath311 the stationary solution ( for suitable boundary conditions ) is given by the boltzmann distribution @xmath312\ , \ \ e=\frac{1}{2}mv^2+m\phi(\vec r\,)\ .\ ] ] where @xmath25 is a normalization constant . with this solution not only does the left - hand side of eq . ( [ fpb ] ) vanish , but so does the velocity flux on the right - hand side . drag and diffusion balance each other in thermal equilibrium . note that the mean squared velocity at fixed @xmath313 equals @xmath314 . for a distribution of masses of brownian particles , thermal equilibrium results in an equipartition of energy with the heaviest particles moving most slowly . this is a natural consequence of having @xmath315 equal the thermal speed .    in thermodynamic systems , the fokker - planck equation governs the relaxation to thermal equilibrium . in the cosmological case of quasilinear clustering considered here , it is not thermal equilibrium but rather the statistics of gaussian random fields that relate @xmath138 and @xmath139 . in appendix [ sec : stationary ] we investigate our cosmological fokker - planck equation for the relaxation to stationary solutions . globular cluster evolution is the most studied application of the fokker - planck equation in astrophysics . unlike the brownian case , gravity plays the dominant role here . a star in a globular cluster can be approximated as experiencing two types of gravitational forces : a smoothly varying potential @xmath316 due to the smoothed matter distribution in the system , and a fluctuating force due to many two - body interactions with other stars . the phase space density of the stars obeys the fokker - planck equation @xcite @xmath317      + \frac{1}{2 } \frac{\partial^2}{\partial v_i \partial v_j }      \left [ d_{ij}(\vec v\,)f \right ] \,.\ ] ] this looks very similar to the cosmological kinetic equation ( [ fplin ] ) in the quasilinear regime , aside from a factor of two in the diffusivity that is purely a matter of differing conventions , and the velocity dependence of the diffusion coefficients . however , the physics of @xmath138 and @xmath273 is very different here . the relaxation process in globular cluster dynamics is _ two - body relaxation _ @xcite , i.e. the dissipation arising from the fluctuating forces of discrete newtonian gravitating point masses . examining this case will shed light on the relaxation processes that can affect galaxy halo evolution . the calculation of diffusion coefficients for two - body relaxation is described in   8.3 of @xcite . to understand the results it is helpful to consider the process of chandrasekhar dynamical friction acting on a test particle with mass @xmath318 and velocity @xmath319 moving through a spatially homogeneous sea of background particles of mass @xmath320 and velocity distribution @xmath321 with mass density @xmath322 . for an isotropic maxwellian distribution @xmath323 , the test body feels an acceleration @xmath324      \vec v_t\ , \ ] ] where @xmath325 . now treat each star within the globular cluster one at a time as a test particle , with all the other stars serving as background particles . if the velocity distribution is maxwellian and spatial gradients are ignored , dynamical friction will contribute @xmath326 given by eq . ( [ dynfric ] ) with @xmath319 replaced by @xmath16 . more generally , for a spatially homogeneous distribution on scales larger than the interparticle spacing , two - body relaxation gives @xcite    [ ad ] @xmath327    where @xmath328 is the coulomb logarithm , and the rosenbluth potentials @xmath329 and @xmath330 are given by @xcite    [ rosenbluth ] @xmath331    for the isotropic maxwellian distribution @xmath332 , @xmath333 is a drag force and the needed coefficients are    [ ad2 ] @xmath334      \ , \\    d_\parallel & = & 8\pi g^2 \rho_b m_b \frac{\sigma_b^2}{v^3 } \ln \lambda      \left [ { \rm erf}(x ) - \frac{2x}{\sqrt{\pi } } e^{-x^2 } \right ] \,,\\    d_\perp & = & 8\pi g^2 \rho_b m_b \frac{1}{v } \ln \lambda      \left [ \left ( 1- \frac{1}{2 x^2 } \right ) { \rm erf}(x )      + \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}x } e^{-x^2 } \right ] \ , , %   d_\parallel&=&\frac{2m_b}{m_t+m_b}\,\sigma_b^2\gamma\ , \\ %   d_\perp&=&\frac{8\pi g^2\rho_bm_b\ln\lambda}{v}{\rm erf}(x ) %     -d_\parallel\ , \end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath335 is defined as before ( with @xmath336 ) , and @xmath273 is decomposed into two components : @xmath337 we note that the drift @xmath138 contains two terms : the first term is proportional to the test particle mass @xmath318 while the second is independent of @xmath318 . the first term represents a `` polarization cloud '' effect , which arises from the fact that a test particle moving relative to a background deflects more upstream than downstream background particles @xcite . this process results in a density gradient and hence a drag force on the test particle , whose amplitude increases linearly with @xmath318 since the gravitational deflection is proportional to @xmath318 . in contrast , the second term in @xmath138 and the diffusivity tensor @xmath139 in eq . ( [ ad2 ] ) are both @xmath338 and independent of @xmath318 . these two terms are due to fluctuations in the gravitational potential caused by granularity in the background particle distribution . the derivation of the fokker - planck diffusion coefficients for two - body relaxation is completely different from our derivation based on quasilinear cosmological density fluctuations . in both cases , fluctuating forces lead to random walks in velocity space , hence to the fokker - planck equation . the nature of the fluctuating forces and their consequences , however , are very different in the two cases . our cosmological fokker - planck derivation is exact ( in second - order cosmological perturbation theory ) ; it yields no drag ; and the resulting drift and diffusion coefficients depend on position but are independent of velocity , as shown in eqs . ( [ adscaled])([sumfun ] ) . in contrast , the two - body relaxation calculation is based a taylor series expansion of the phenomenological ( not exact ) master equation ; it yields no radial drift ; and the drag and diffusion coefficients depend on velocity but are ( in the usual derivation ) independent of position @xcite . furthermore , the two - body relaxation rates are proportional to @xmath339 while the rates we compute are proportional to @xmath340 from eq . ( [ adscaled ] ) . in the cosmology case , the phase space correlations are built into the initial power spectrum of density fluctuations , whose amplitude is given independently of @xmath340 . with two - body relaxation , however , correlations are gravitationally induced by fluctuations instead of being present ab initio , hence the rates pick up another factor of @xmath340 . the differences in the @xmath138 term ( radial drift versus drag ) have an important consequence for equipartition of energy . as shown previously in the discussion of brownian motion , drag and diffusion work together to drive a system to thermal equilibrium in which the mean squared velocity is proportional to @xmath341 . binney and tremaine show ( p.  513 of binney & tremaine 1988 ) show that this also happens with two - body relaxation . because equilibrium systems with only gravitational forces generally have negative specific heat , there is no stable thermal equilibrium . nonetheless , two - body relaxation tends to drive the velocity distribution toward the maxwellian form , with equipartition of different mass species .    in the quasilinear cosmological case , the drift and diffusion coefficients are independent of both velocity and particle mass . therefore the equilibrium velocity distribution can not depend on particle mass  there is no equipartition of energy . this result is similar to violent relaxation , a process arising during the initial collapse and virialization of a dark matter halo when the gravitational potential is rapidly varying in time @xcite . our relaxation process , however , arises in the quasilinear regime and is present even if @xmath342 as it is ( at fixed comoving position ) if @xmath343 . moreover , violent relaxation ( and its partner , phase mixing ) are generally understood as arising from the collisionless dynamics represented by the left - hand side of eq . ( [ fp_globular ] ) , while both two - body relaxation and our cosmological relaxation process are represented by the `` collision '' terms on the right - hand side . why did our cosmological calculation not yield a drag term ( and a corresponding diffusion term linked to it by the fluctuation - dissipation theorem ) ? we suspect that it is because our calculation was limited to small - amplitude perturbations about a homogeneous and isotropic expanding cosmological model . the induced effects of substructure would only come in at higher order in perturbation theory . in the nonlinear regime we expect two types of drift terms to be present : @xmath344 , where @xmath3 is the radial drift and @xmath292 is the drag coefficient . the chandrasekhar calculation suggests that the drag and its accompanying diffusivity will depend on both position ( through @xmath345 ) and velocity . the radial drift is absent in the chandrasekhar calculation because the background there is assumed to be spatially homogeneous ; with an inhomogeneous distribution in a virialized halo there should be a radial drift ( and corresponding diffusivity ) that could depend on both position and velocity . in the nonlinear regime drag should arise from dynamical friction just as with the globular clusters , except that the `` background '' particles whose discreteness causes the @xmath320 terms in eqs . ( [ ad2 ] ) are now the subhalos and substructures that rain upon a halo . because we have not yet extended our derivation to the fully nonlinear regime , these expectations , while plausible , have yet to be demonstrated . in this paper we have developed a cosmological kinetic theory , valid to second - order in perturbation theory , to describe the evolution of the phase - space distribution of dark matter particles in galaxy halos . this theory introduces a new way to model the early phases of galaxy halo formation , which has traditionally been studied by analytic infall models or numerical n - body methods . the key physical ingredients behind our kinetic description are stochastic fluctuations and dissipation caused by substructures arising from a spectrum of cosmological density perturbations . the kinetic equation that we have obtained at the end of our derivation , eqs . ( [ fplin])([difflin ] ) , has the standard form of a fokker - planck equation . the diffusion coefficients @xmath346 and * d * represent acceleration due to a drift force and velocity - space diffusion , respectively . to second order in perturbation theory , these coefficients are related to various covariance matrices of the cosmological density and velocity fields given by eqs . ( [ driftlin])([difflin ] ) . these expressions can in turn be written in terms of the familiar linear power spectrum @xmath19 of matter fluctuations , as shown in eqs . ( [ coeffs ] ) and ( [ sumfun ] ) . the results for @xmath346 and * d * from second - order perturbation theory are shown in figures  14 for the currently favored @xmath20cdm model , and in figures  5 and 6 for various scale - free models with power - law @xmath4 . our results indicate that dissipative processes are important during the initial collapse of a dark matter halo , and it is not valid to model halos using the spherically symmetric vlasov ( collisionless boltzmann ) equation . furthermore , we find that the diffusivity is initially negative close to the center of a halo , indicating a thermodynamic instability . the source of this instability is gravity : perturbations enhance gravitational collapse of dark matter halos . we emphasize that our derivation leading to the fokker - planck equation given by eqs . ( [ fplin])([difflin ] ) is exact to second order in cosmological perturbation theory . we do not follow the frequently used approach ( e.g. binney & tremaine 1988 ) that begins by expanding the collisional terms of the non - exact master equation in an infinite series of changes in phase - space coordinates ( i.e. @xmath347 ) , and arrives at the fokker - planck equation by assuming weak encounters ( i.e. small @xmath348 ) and truncating the series after the second - order terms . instead , our starting point is eq . ( [ boltzeq ] ) , the first bbgky hierarchy equation for a smooth one - particle distribution function . this is an exact kinetic equation ; solving it requires specifying the one - particle distribution at an initial time and the two - particle correlation function at all times . we have shown in   [ sec : dfgauss ] and appendix  [ sec : pgauss ] that if the cosmological density field @xmath17 and displacement ( or velocity ) field @xmath349 are gaussian random fields , the resulting two - particle correlation function depends on the one - particle distribution in a simple way given by eq . ( [ f2cexact ] ) . ( [ f2cexact ] ) is exact to second order in perturbation theory and provides the closure relation for the bbgky hierarchy in eq . ( [ boltzeq ] ) . combining eq . ( [ f2cexact ] ) with eq . ( [ boltzeq ] ) results in eq . ( [ fplin ] ) , which is a fokker - planck equation . the cosmological dissipative processes identified in this paper are quite different from the standard two - body relaxation , which also leads to a fokker - planck equation . we find that there is no dynamical friction ( i.e. terms proportional to @xmath350 in the diffusion coefficients ) in second - order cosmological perturbation theory . instead , there is a radial drift toward ( or away from ) the center of a halo due to the clustering of matter within the halo . the usual treatment of two - body relaxation has no such drift term because it assumes the medium to be homogeneous . thus we have identified a new relaxation process that must affect the phase - space structure of dark matter halos . although our derivation is exact to second order in the density fluctuations , it is valid only when the fluctuations are small . we are therefore describing only the early stages of dark matter halo formation . the expressions we obtain for the diffusion coefficients are plainly invalid in the nonlinear regime , where we expect dynamical friction to be present as well as radial drift . in a later paper we will investigate the nonlinear generalizations of the exact second - order results derived in this paper . the fokker - planck description should still apply in the nonlinear regime provided that the fluctuating force on a particle can be modelled as a markov process consisting of a random walk of many steps . we conjecture that this description will be approximately valid when the matter distribution is modelled as a set of clumps ( i.e. , the halo model ) which scatter individual dark matter particles away from the orbits they would have in a smooth , spherical potential . the fokker - planck description should apply not only to the initial collapse and virialization of a dark matter halo containing substructure , but also to the subsequent evolution under minor mergers . our inability to solve exactly the nonlinear dynamics , however , means that the diffusion coefficients will have to be calibrated using the nonlinear halo model or numerical n - body simulations . calibrating the diffusion coefficients is not equivalent to reproducing the n - body simulations . n - body simulations provide a monte carlo solution of the bbgky hierarchy , which is much more general than the fokker - planck equation . if the simulation results are describable by fokker - planck evolution , this already represents a significant new result . moreover , even if functional forms for the radial dependence of the diffusion coefficients have to be calibrated with simulations , the solution of the fokker - planck equation contains far more information because it gives the complete phase - space density distribution , not simply radial profiles . another important step will therefore be to actually solve the fokker - planck equation . in deriving it we have identified and quantified the relaxation processes affecting halo formation and evolution , but this is only the first step . in appendix [ sec : stationary ] we presented solutions in unrealistically simple cases just to highlight the roles played by radial drift , drag , and diffusion . an outstanding question is whether these processes actually are rapid enough to erase the memory of cosmological initial conditions sufficiently so that dark matter halos relax to a universal profile . once we have a nonlinear model for the diffusion coefficients , we will address this important question . the work presented in this paper has a number of implications . first , we have highlighted the importance of the phase space density for understanding dark matter dynamics , and have developed a method for calculating its evolution during the early phases of structure formation . second , we have identified a dissipative process that may erase memories of initial conditions during the early phases of galaxy halo evolution . this erasure is necessary for universal halo density profiles , although further investigation is needed to quantify how this dissipative process affects the density profiles . third , the statistical description of the potential fluctuations caused by substructure that we have developed can also be added to investigate related problems such as the heating of galactic disks @xcite and the merging of central black holes when galaxy halos merge @xcite . we thank jon arons , avishai dekel , and martin weinberg for useful conversations . the aspen center for physics provided a stimulating environment where a portion of the research was carried out . m is partially supported by an alfred p. sloan fellowship , a cottrell scholars award from the research corporation , and nasa grant nag5 - 12173 . in this appendix we derive expressions for the probability distributions of displacement and density perturbation , @xmath133 and @xmath351 , that are needed in eqs . ( [ f1p1 ] ) and ( [ f2cp1 ] ) . we then use them to evaluate eqs . ( [ f1p1 ] ) and ( [ f2cp1 ] ) at high redshift when the matter distribution was described by a gaussian random field of small - amplitude density perturbations . we use comoving spatial coordinates @xmath352 .    in accordance with the standard cosmological model , we assume that @xmath353 is a gaussian random field with power spectrum @xmath0 , and that the displacement and density are related by eq . ( [ linpsi ] ) . these are the appropriate assumptions at high redshift in standard models of structure formation . strictly speaking , at high redshift , when linear theory applies , the evolution of the distribution function is trivial because the density and velocity fields evolve by spatially - homogeneous amplification . here we use the statistics of gaussian random fields to compute quantities driving the lowest - order corrections to linear evolution . we will find that the fluctuating force is formally second order in perturbation theory . a gaussian random field is described most simply by its fourier transform , which we define by @xmath354 we suppress the time dependence for convenience . before we apply a constraint , both @xmath355 and @xmath356 have zero mean . the covariance of @xmath357 gives the power spectrum , @xmath358 where @xmath22 is the dirac delta function . in the linear regime , @xmath359 is a linear functional of @xmath355 . the multivariate distribution of any linear functional of a gaussian random field is itself gaussian ( i.e. multivariate normal ) and is therefore described completely by its mean and covariance matrix . this remains true even for a constrained gaussian random field @xcite .    in our case , we wish to constrain the initial density field to represent a proto - halo . the constraints are applied to the smoothed density field @xmath360 where @xmath361 is a smoothing window with unit volume integral , @xmath362 . the subscript @xmath187 indicates the smoothing length . we assume that the smoothing window is spherically symmetric so that @xmath178 is real and depends only on the magnitude of the wavevector . throughout the paper we will use the gaussian window @xmath363 and @xmath226 . unfortunately there is no analytic theory to tell us where halos will form . however , there are a variety of plausible approaches . for example , following @xcite we might constrain @xmath364 to have a maximum of specified height , orientation , and shape at @xmath365 . this peak constraint involves ten variables ( @xmath364 and the components of its first and second derivatives with respect to each of the coordinates ) , presenting a formidable challenge to evaluating the covariance matrix of the four variables @xmath366 . the peak constraint is appealing but it is difficult to calculate and in practice it has not been found to predict well the actual formation sites of dark matter halos @xcite .    instead of trying to impose complicated constraints for halo formation ( e.g. monaco et al . 2002 ) , we err on the side of simplicity by choosing to use only the zeroth and first derivatives of the smoothed initial density field @xmath367 . we require that @xmath368 be an _ extremum _ of the smoothed density field by requiring @xmath369 . of course , an extremum may be a maximum , a minimum , or a saddle point . we therefore keep track also of the smoothed density @xmath370 . provided that @xmath159 is greater than 2 standard deviations , the extrema of @xmath371 are close to the peaks @xcite . how will we know if our results depend strongly on the choice of constraint ? we will do this in two ways . first , we will vary the height of the extremum , @xmath159 . second , we will drop the gradient constraint and use the single constraint @xmath159 . while these tests will not prove that we have a good model for the sites of halo formation , they do provide control cases for us to assess the sensitivity of our results to the details of the initial constraints . now we must calculate the mean and covariances of @xmath366 subject to constraints @xmath372 where @xmath373 the method for this calculation is based on the theorem presented in appendix d of @xcite , which states that if @xmath374 and @xmath375 are zero - mean gaussian variables ( more generally , vectors of any length ) , then the conditional distribution for @xmath375 given @xmath374 , @xmath376 , is gaussian with mean @xmath377 and covariance matrix @xmath378 where @xmath379 . the symbol @xmath380 denotes a tensor product and angle brackets denote mean values . thus , @xmath381 is the covariance matrix of the constraints while @xmath382 is the covariance matrix of @xmath375 subject to the constraints . ( the symbol @xmath128 , used either as a function or as a subscript , implies that a constraint is applied . ) the juxtaposition of two matrices implies matrix multiplication .      to apply these results , first we compute the covariance matrix of constraints @xmath383 . using eqs . ( [ fourier])([window ] ) , we get the covariances    [ varcon ] @xmath384    where @xmath385 is the unit tensor . next we consider the covariance matrix of the variables @xmath386 . since @xmath387 , the displacement field @xmath18 has an additional factor @xmath388 in the integrand of eq . ( [ fourier ] ) . for the off - diagonal elements of the covariance matrix of @xmath375 we obtain    [ covyb ] @xmath389    where the spherical bessel functions are @xmath390 and @xmath391 . the diagonal variances are    [ covybb ] @xmath392    note that in eqs . ( [ covyb ] ) ( and in the following ) we are using @xmath313 as a comoving displacement vector and not as the radius vector in proper coordinates . proper coordinates are not used in this appendix . finally , we have the cross - covariances between our primary variables and the constraints , i.e. the components of @xmath393 . these follow from eqs . ( [ fourier])([smoothdel ] ) :    [ covyab ] @xmath394    to arrive at the last expression above , we have used the identity @xmath395\hat r\otimes\hat r+\frac{j_1(kr)}{kr}\,{\bf i}\ , \ ] ] where @xmath396 , @xmath397 and @xmath385 is the unit tensor .      using eqs . ( [ meany ] ) and ( [ varcon])([covyab ] ) , we get the mean values subject to the extremum constraints @xmath398 ,    [ meanext ] @xmath399    the subscript @xmath128 denotes `` subject to constraints . '' ( [ meanext ] ) would be unchanged had we dropped the extremum condition and imposed instead the single constraint @xmath400 ; the constraint @xmath401 has no effect on the mean values . this follows because @xmath402 so that the only way that @xmath177 can enter the mean values is through terms proportional to @xmath403 which vanish when the extremum constraint is imposed . we now compute the covariance matrix of our variables @xmath386 subject to the extremum constraints @xmath383 . the covariances follow from eqs . ( [ covy])([covyab ] ) . recalling the definition @xmath404 , we obtain    [ covfun ] @xmath405\ ,      \label{c2i}\\   c(\delta_1,\vec\psi_1 ) & = & \frac{\bar\xi_1\bar\eta_1\vec x_1}{\sigma_0 ^ 2 }      + \frac{1}{\sigma_1 ^ 2}\frac{d\bar\xi}{dr_1}(\bar\xi_1 - 2\bar\eta_1 )      \hat x_1\ , \label{c1i}\\    c(\vec\psi_1,\vec\psi_1 ) & = & c_r\hat r_1\otimes\hat r_1      + c_t ( { \bf i}- \hat r_1\otimes\hat r_1 ) \ , \nonumber\\    c_r(r_1 ) & \equiv & \sigma_\psi^2-\left(\frac{r_1\bar\eta_1 }      { \sigma_0}\right)^2 - \left(\frac{\bar\xi_1 - 2\bar\eta_1}{\sigma_1 }      \right)^2\ , \label{cpar}\\    c_t(r_1)&\equiv&\sigma_\psi^2-\left(\frac{\bar\eta_1}{\sigma_1 }    \right)^2\ , \label{cper}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath406 and @xmath407 , and we have used the relation @xmath408 . note that @xmath409 is a vector and @xmath410 is a second - rank tensor . later we will need the tensor @xmath411 , which is the matrix inverse of @xmath410 . the role of constraints is easy to see in eqs . ( [ covfun ] ) . the constraint on @xmath159 is responsible for the terms proportional to @xmath196 while the constraint on @xmath177 gives rise to the terms proportional to @xmath197 . therefore , the constraints are easily removed by setting @xmath412 ( to eliminate the constraint on @xmath177 ) or @xmath196 ( to eliminate the constraint on @xmath159 ) . as expected , in the absence of any constraints , the covariance matrix recovers the same expressions as the unconstrained covariance in eqs . ( [ covyb ] ) and ( [ covybb ] ) . we will need one more covariance , @xmath413 subject to the extremum constraints where @xmath414 . using eqs . ( [ covy ] ) , ( [ covyab ] ) , and ( [ nntens ] ) , we get @xmath415      now we are ready to calculate the probability distribution functions and means of various quantities needed in   [ sec : dfgauss ] . specifically , we need @xmath133 , @xmath416 , @xmath417 , @xmath418 , and @xmath419 that appear in the key eqs . ( [ f1p1 ] ) and ( [ f2cp1 ] ) for @xmath420 and @xmath421 . ( [ m2c ] ) already gives @xmath422 but we need to calculate the other quantities . first , the probability density distribution for the displacement @xmath133 ( subject to the extremum constraints ) is a three - dimensional gaussian whose mean and covariance are given above , implying @xmath423\ .\ ] ] note that the argument of the exponential is a scalar  the dot denotes a contraction ( dot product ) . the joint distribution of displacement and density ( subject to the constraints ) is a little more complicated to work out since this requires inverting the @xmath424 covariance matrix of @xmath366 . the distribution factors into conditional and marginal distributions , @xmath425 . straightforward algebra gives the conditional distribution , @xmath426 ^ 2\right\}\ , \ ] ] where @xmath427 note that the second term in @xmath428 ( and the similar term in eq . [ f2cond ] ) is a scalar . writing it out with indices and using the summation convention , @xmath429 . ( [ f2cond ] ) and ( [ vardel2 ] ) could also have been derived by noting that @xmath430 for @xmath431 and @xmath432 . then using eq . ( [ meany ] ) and relations @xmath433 and @xmath434 , we obtain @xmath435 which is identical to the mean in eq . ( [ f2cond ] ) . the constrained mean @xmath436 follows simply by replacing @xmath422 with @xmath437 and @xmath438 with @xmath439 . the only remaining constrained mean that we need to evaluate is @xmath419 . direct evaluation of the conditional distribution would require inverting a @xmath440 matrix . it is much simpler to use eqs . ( [ meany ] ) and ( [ covy ] ) with @xmath441 and @xmath442 . from the off - diagonal element of @xmath443 , we get @xmath444    at last we are ready to evaluate the one- and two - particle distribution functions for small - amplitude gaussian fluctuations . substituting @xmath445 into eq . [ f1p1 ] ) , to second order in @xmath17 we obtain @xmath446 where @xmath166 is given by eq . ( [ m1c ] ) with @xmath447 and @xmath150 is a vector equal to the covariance of the constrained @xmath17 and @xmath18 given in eq . ( [ c1i ] ) . without an initial constraint we would have @xmath448 and @xmath449 . an initial constraint on the proto - halo shifts the mean density and causes the density and velocity to be correlated hence it changes the phase space density . note that eq . ( [ f1lin ] ) implies that in linear theory the spatial and velocity distributions decouple . as expected , the mean spatial density is @xmath450 . the velocity distribution at each point in the halo is simply the underlying gaussian of eq . ( [ fpsi1 ] ) with the mean shifted by @xmath150 . note that the value of the proto - halo smoothed density constraint @xmath159 affects the density profile , @xmath451 , but it does not affect the velocity distribution up to second order in perturbation theory . the imposition of the extremum constraint @xmath401 affects the phase space density only through the term in @xmath452 . setting @xmath412 everywhere removes the constraint on @xmath177 . the two - particle correlation is found by substituting eqs . ( [ d2psi1 ] ) and ( [ d1d2psi1 ] ) into eq . ( [ f2cp1 ] ) . the result is @xmath453     \cdot\frac{\partial}{\partial\vpsia } \log p(\vpsia ) \right\ }      p(\vpsia)(hb)^{-3}\ .\end{aligned}\ ] ] this equation is the main result of this appendix . it is exact for gaussian random fields . stationary solutions of the fokker - planck equation are relevant for systems that relax on a timescale faster than external changes take place . the stationary solution for classical brownian motion was given in  [ sec : brownian ] . stationary solutions may also exist for cosmological systems where the constant - temperature heat bath is replaced by small - scale structure that rains upon dark matter halos . stationary solutions have @xmath454 and @xmath455 so that the flux vanishes in velocity space . we consider spherically symmetric solutions as appropriate for the average halo . from jeans theorem , the distribution function is a function of the integrals of motion @xcite . for spherical systems it is often assumed that stationary solutions have the form @xmath456 where @xmath457 ( the particle masses are irrelevant , so we use the specific energy and angular momentum . ) the collisionless boltzmann equation gives no constraint on @xmath458 . the fokker - planck equation , however , constrains @xmath40 because stationarity requires that @xmath459 . assuming spherical symmetry , we write @xmath460 introducing the radial drift coefficient @xmath3 and drag coefficient @xmath292 . we assume isotropic diffusivity @xmath275 . for the globular cluster case with chandrasekhar s dynamical friction , @xmath461 . for the case of quasilinear cosmological fluctuations arising from gaussian random fields , we have seen that @xmath462 . ( the cosmological case also allows for different diffusivities in the radial and tangential directions , but that is an unnecessary complication here . )    requiring the phase space flux to vanish now gives the following constraints on the distribution function @xmath458 : @xmath463 it is interesting to see what conditions lead to thermal equilibrium with a maxwellian distribution of velocities , i.e. eq .  ( [ equilsol ] ) with @xmath464 . ( [ station0 ] ) shows that the conditions are @xmath461 and @xmath465 . thus , the drift must be velocity dependent and behave like a drag , @xmath466 . friction converts shear into heat in such a way as to drive the system towards thermal equilibrium . chandrasekhar dynamical friction satisfies these conditions ; therefore , two - body relaxation drives the velocity distribution towards the maxwell - boltzmann form . quasilinear cosmological fluctuations , however , are quite different , having @xmath462 and @xmath467 , implying @xmath468 . while these equations do not have simple general solutions , it is clear that cosmological fluctuations do not drive a system towards thermal equilibrium with equipartition of energies . our cosmological relaxation process is similar to violent relaxation in this respect @xcite . although the general cosmological case of relaxation in a dark matter halo with @xmath467 is complicated and can not be fully solved here , there is a special case worthy of closer examination , namely , the evolution of an unconstrained cosmological gaussian random field , where fluctuations generate peculiar velocities . that is , we drop the constraint of having a halo centered at @xmath469 and instead consider the velocity distribution of dark matter particles at a randomly selected point in space . to consider the cosmological case , we should use the appropriate comoving variables to factor out the hubble expansion . in place of @xmath313 and @xmath16 , we use the following variables : @xmath470 where @xmath91 is the cosmic scale factor and @xmath471 . with this change of variables , the fokker - planck equation ( [ fplin ] ) becomes @xmath472 if the velocities are measured in the comoving frame , @xmath473 is replaced by @xmath35 . when using comoving coordinates the gravitational field is reduced by the hubble acceleration , @xmath474 . if the mean density field is homogeneous , then all particles move with the unperturbed hubble expansion , @xmath475 , implying @xmath476 . thus , both the velocity and acceleration terms on the left - hand side vanish when @xmath477 . if we apply no initial constraint on the density field , then the one - point distribution function @xmath40 is a function only of time and peculiar velocity @xmath478 . we use the variable @xmath253 for the velocity because @xmath478 decreases in proportion to @xmath479 for a freely - falling body in an unperturbed homogeneous and isotropic expanding universe . if not for the right - hand side , the solution of eq . ( [ fpcomov ] ) for a homogeneous and isotropic model would be @xmath480 , i.e. the the initial peculiar velocity distribution would simply redshift with cosmic expansion and remain spatially homogeneous . the fokker - planck equation does not , however , describe an unperturbed homogeneous and isotropic universe . rather it describes the statistical average of an ensemble of universes with fluctuations . in the case of unconstrained initial conditions , @xmath481 and eq . ( [ fpcomov ] ) reduces to @xmath482\ , \ ] ] where @xmath483 and @xmath484 in general . we have used statistical isotropy to require @xmath485 where @xmath486 is a unit vector in the direction of @xmath253 . in second order perturbation theory (   [ sec : fpdiffco ] ) , @xmath487 ( no drag ) and @xmath488 ( assuming that we measure velocities in the comoving frame . ) the fokker - planck equation then takes the form of a diffusion equation with @xmath275 independent of @xmath489 , and the general solution is @xmath490 the effect of fluctuations is simply to spread the initial velocity distribution ( if @xmath285 ) while retaining the gaussian form . physically , the gravitational fluctuations of substructure cause local heating . contrary to eq . ( [ diffsol ] ) , cosmological simulations show that the distribution of peculiar velocities in the nonlinear regime is closer to exponential rather than gaussian , at least in the tails @xcite . it is interesting to ask whether the fokker - planck equation can explain such a result . with the drift term retained , eq . ( [ fpcomhom ] ) has the stationary solution @xmath491 if @xmath492 is positive and independent of @xmath489 , the result is indeed an exponential distribution of peculiar velocities @xmath489 . in second - order perturbation theory we found that @xmath487 and @xmath275 is independent of @xmath489 , however chandrasekhar s dynamical friction gives @xmath493 . evidently , a third case is needed to explain the exponential velocity distribution  there must be a drag such that @xmath492 is independent of @xmath489 , quite unlike dynamical friction from two - body relaxation . determining whether such a drag term arises from nonlinear gravitational clustering is a subject for further work . as one final example , we consider the effects of both drag and radial drift in a simplified model illustrating the effects of collisions on a system for which the relaxation time is much longer than the dynamical time ( e.g. the crossing - time for a particle in a halo ) . under these conditions , the system at all times is nearly in collisionless equilibrium with the phase space density being a function of the actions alone ( and not the angles , using action - angle variables ) . because the actions are conserved in the absence of collisions , for quasi - static evolution eq . ( [ fplin ] ) simplifies to @xmath494\ , \ ] ] where we have generalized the radial drift to an arbitrary vector field @xmath495 which we assume to be independent of @xmath16 . we can solve this equation exactly for the simple case where @xmath495 , @xmath292 , and @xmath139 are all constants . the general solution is the green s function solution @xmath496 with green s function @xmath497-\frac{1}{2\gamma}\vec s\cdot{\bf d}\cdot\vec s      \left(1-e^{-2\gamma t}\right)\right\}\ .\ ] ] the parameter @xmath301 is a relaxation time . ( [ fpqsgreen ] ) simplifies to a normalized gaussian in two limits , @xmath498 where @xmath499 is a multivariate normal with mean @xmath253 and covariance matrix @xmath500 . the solution for @xmath501 was given previously in eq . ( [ diffsol ] ) . now we have a more general solution showing that the equilibrium ( for constant diffusion coefficients ) is a maxwellian with velocity dispersion tensor @xmath502 just in eq . ( [ fpstat ] ) if @xmath503 , but now the drift vector @xmath495 produces an offset of the mean velocity @xmath504 . thus , velocity - independent drift @xmath3 and velocity - dependent drag @xmath309 play completely different roles in collisional relaxation . in later papers we will investigate these roles for more realistic models of nonlinear halo evolution . plotted as a function of halo radius @xmath173 for gaussian smoothing lengths @xmath505 0.5 , 0.25 , 0.1 , and 0.05 @xmath506 mpc . it is computed from eq . ( [ scala ] ) for the @xmath20cdm model with @xmath507 . for comparison , the dashed curve shows @xmath186 for an unconstrained field . the vertical axis shows the dimensionless @xmath508 , i.e. the drift normalized by the rms of the peculiar gravitational acceleration . ]     in the radial ( @xmath173 ) and tangential ( @xmath66 ) directions plotted as a function of halo radius @xmath173 for gaussian smoothing lengths @xmath509 , 0.5 , and 0.05 @xmath506 mpc . it is computed from eqs . ( [ scaldr ] ) and ( [ scaldt ] ) for the same cosmological model as fig .  1 . the dashed curve in each panel is for an unconstrained field . the vertical axis shows the dimensionless @xmath510 , i.e. the diffusivity normalized by the mean squared peculiar gravitational acceleration . ]           for power - law spectra , @xmath4 , plotted as a function of halo radius @xmath173 scaled to the gaussian smoothing radius @xmath187 . results are shown for four spectral indices , @xmath511 , and 1 , and for constrained and unconstrained fields . the amplitude of @xmath186 corresponds to @xmath512 normalized to @xmath513 . ]     in the radial ( @xmath173 ) and tangential ( @xmath66 ) directions for power - law spectra , @xmath4 , plotted as a function of halo radius @xmath173 scaled to the gaussian smoothing radius @xmath187 . results are shown for two spectral indices , @xmath250 and @xmath514 , and for constrained and unconstrained fields . for @xmath515 , constraints cause the diffusivity to approach a negative constant for @xmath516 . the amplitude of @xmath275 corresponds to @xmath512 normalized to @xmath513 . ] antonuccio - delogu , v. & colafrancesco , s. 1994 , , 427 , 72 bardeen , j. m. , bond , j. r. , kaiser , n. , & szalay , a. s. 1986 , , 304 , 15 benson , a. j. , lacey , c. g. , frenk , c. s. , baugh , c. m. , & cole , s. f 2003 , astro - ph/0307298 bertschinger , e. 1985 , , 58 , 39 bertschinger , e. 1993 , in statistical description of transport in plasma , astro- , and nuclear physics , ed . j. misguich , g. pelletier , & p. schuck , ( commack , ny : nova science ) , 193 bertschinger , e. 1996 , in cosmology and large scale structure , proc . les houches summer school , session lx , ed . r. schaeffer , j. silk , m. spiro , and j. zinn - justin ( amsterdam : elsevier science ) , 273 binney , j. j. & tremaine , s. 1988 , galactic dynamics ( princeton : princeton university press ) bullock , j. s. , dekel , a. , kolatt , t. s. , kravtsov , a. v. klypin , a. a. porciani , c. , & primack , j. r. 2001 , , 555 , 240 chandrasekhar , s. 1943 , , 97 , 255 davis , m. & peebles , p. j. e. , 34 , 425 dekel , a. , devor , j. , & hetzroni , g. 2003 , , 341 , 326 dupree , t. h. 1967 , phys . fluids 10 , 1049 evans , n. w. & collett , j. l. 1997 , , 480 , l103 fillmore , j. a. & goldreich , p. 1984 , , 281 , 1 fokker , a. d. 1914 , ann . physik 43 , 810 gardiner , c. w. 2002 , handbook of stochastic methods ( berlin : springer ) ghigna , s. , moore , b. , governato , f. , lake , g. , quinn , t. , stadel , j. 1998 , mnras , 300 , 146 gilbert , i. h. 1968 , , 152 , 1043 gunn , j. e. & gott , j. r. 1972 , , 176 , 1 haehnelt , m. , & kauffmann , g. 2002 , , 336 , l61 hoffman , y. , & shaham , j. 1985 , , 297 , 16 hughes , s. a. , & blandford , r. d. 2003 , 585 , l101 ichimaru , s. 1973 , basic principles of plasma physics : a statistical approach ( reading : addison - wesley ) jain , b. , & bertschinger , e. 1994 , , 431 , 495 kauffmann , g. , & haehnelt , m. 2000 , , 311 , 576 katz , n. , quinn , t. , & gelb , j. 1993 , , 265 , 689 klimontovich , yu . l. 1967 , the statistical theory of non - equilibrium processes in a plasma ( cambridge , mass . : mit press ) klypin a. , kravtsov a. v. , valenzuela 0 . , prada f. 1999 , apj , 522 , 82 langevin , p. 1908 , comptes rendus , 146 , 530 lynden - bell , d. 1967 , , 136 , 101 monaco , p. , theuns , t. , taffoni , g. , governato , f. , quinn , t. , & stadel , j. 2002 , , 564 , 8 moore , b. , governato , f. , quinn , t. , stadel , j. , & lake , g. 1998 , , 499 , l5 moore , b. , ghigna , s. , governato , f. , lake , g. , quinn , t. , stadel , j. , tozzi , p. 1999 , apj , 524 , 19l mulder , w. a. 1983 , a&a , 117 , 9 navarro , j. f. , frenk , c. s. , & white , s. d. m. 1996 , , 462 , 563 navarro , j. f. , frenk , c. s. , & white , s. d. m. 1997 , , 490 , 493 nusser , a. & sheth , r. k. 1999 , , 303 , 685 peebles , p. j. e. 1980 , the large scale structure of the universe ( princeton : princeton university press ) planck , m. 1917 , sitzber . p. 324 risken , h. 1989 , the fokker - planck equation ( berlin : springer ) rosenbluth , m. n. , macdonald , w. m. , & judd , d. l. 1957 , phys . 107 , 1 sheth , r. k. , & diaferio , a. 2001 , , 322 , 901 spitzer , l. 1987 , dynamical evolution of globular clusters ( princeton : princeton university press ) syer , d. , & white , s. d. m. 1998 , , 293 , 337 weinberg , m. d. 2001 , , 328 , 311 ; 328 , 321 white , s. d. m. 1984 , , 286 , 38 zeldovich , ya . b. 1970 , a & a , 5 , 84
Abstract:

Answer: we present a kinetic theory for the evolution of the phase - space distribution of dark matter particles in galaxy halos in the presence of a cosmological spectrum of fluctuations . this theory introduces a new way to model the formation and evolution of halos , which traditionally have been investigated by analytic gravitational infall models or numerical n - body methods . unlike the collisionless boltzmann equation , our kinetic equation contains nonzero terms on the right - hand side arising from stochastic fluctuations in the gravitational potential due to substructures in the dark matter mass distribution . using statistics for constrained gaussian random fields in standard cosmological models , we show that our kinetic equation to second - order in perturbation theory is of the fokker - planck form , with one scattering term representing drift and the other representing diffusion in velocity - space . the drift is radial , and the drift and diffusion coefficients depend only on positions and not velocities ; our relaxation process in the quasilinear regime is therefore different from the standard two - body relaxation . we provide explicit expressions relating these coefficients to the linear power spectrum of mass fluctuations and present results for the currently favored cold dark matter model with a nonzero cosmological constant . solutions to this kinetic equation will provide a complete description of the cold dark matter spatial and velocity distributions for the average halo during the early phases of galaxy halo formation .