:1994_analytic_halo; @Wangler:1998_particle_core_review]. This model assumes a uniform-in-space beam-core density called a Kapchinsky-Vladimirsky (KV) distribution due to its ease of theoretical treatment. Such an assumption is supported by the analysis presented here as we find that the distribution within the shock is nearly uniform. However, the particle-core models do not treat the initial distribution as having a large density on the periphery. It would be interesting to revisit such treatments with this new perspective although we would like to point out that the main effect the particle-core model attempts to capture, halos, occur even after aperturing the beam[@Gluckstern:1994_analytic_halo]. Specifically, it should be possible to examine the effect of radial-focussing fields on the evolution of the three-dimensional distributions we have investigated here.

The experimental work that motivated this analysis, [@Williams:2017_transverse_emittance], not only predicted a shock but also a correlated decrease in brightness near the periphery. We emphasize that the mean-field equations used here explain the density shock only and do not provide a quantitative theory of the emittance and the Coulomb cooling achieved by removing the electrons in the shock. Specifically, the true emittance in the analytic models presented here remains zero for all time as all particles at a radius $r$ have velocity $\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{r_0}{{\bar{\omega}}_{p,0}} \sqrt{1 - \frac{r_0}{r}}$ resulting in zero local spread in velocity space. This perfect relationship between velocity and position means that the true emittance is zero even if the relation is non-linear; however, in such a non-linear chirp case, the rms emittance will not remain zero despite the true emittance being zero. Moreover, the analytic model does capture some of the rms emittance growth as a change in the distribution has a corresponding change on the variance measures used to determine the rms emittance. Specifically, a Gaussian distribution should have especially large emittance growth due to its evolution to a bimodal distribution, a distribution that is specifically problematic for variance measures. Such a large change in the emittance of the transverse Gaussian profile has been seen by Luiten[@Luiten:2004_uniform_ellipsoidal] experimentally and us computationally[@Portman
: 1994_analytic_halo; @Wangler:1998_particle_core_review ]. This model assumes a uniform - in - space radio beam - effect density called a Kapchinsky - Vladimirsky (KV) distribution due to its ease of theoretical discussion. Such an assumption is supported by the analysis present here as we find that the distribution within the shock is about uniform. However, the particle - effect models do not treat the initial distribution as experience a large density on the periphery. It would be interesting to revisit such treatments with this fresh perspective although we would like to point out that the independent effect the particle - core model attempt to capture, halos, occur even after aperturing the beam[@Gluckstern:1994_analytic_halo ]. Specifically, it should be possible to examine the consequence of radial - focussing fields on the evolution of the three - dimensional distributions we have investigated here. 

 The experimental work that motivated this analysis, [ @Williams:2017_transverse_emittance ], not only predicted a shock but also a correlated decrease in brightness near the periphery. We emphasize that the mean - field equation used here explain the concentration jolt entirely and do not provide a quantitative theory of the emittance and the Coulomb cooling system achieved by murder the electrons in the shock. Specifically, the genuine emittance in the analytic models presented here remains zero for all time as all particles at a spoke $ r$ have velocity $ \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{r_0}{{\bar{\omega}}_{p,0 } } \sqrt{1 - \frac{r_0}{r}}$ resulting in zero local spread in velocity space. This perfect kinship between speed and stead means that the true emittance is zero even if the relation is non - analogue; however, in such a non - linear chirp case, the rms emittance will not remain zero despite the true emittance being zero. Moreover, the analytic model does capture some of the rms emittance growth as a change in the distribution have a comparable change on the variance measures used to determine the rms emittance. Specifically, a Gaussian distribution should suffer especially bombastic emittance growth due to its development to a bimodal distribution, a distribution that is specifically problematic for variance measures. Such a big change in the emittance of the cross Gaussian profile has been seen by Luiten[@Luiten:2004_uniform_ellipsoidal ] experimentally and us computationally[@Portman
:1994_anapytic_halo; @Wangler:1998_particlt_core_review]. This model avsumes a unifofm-in-space beam-core density cellee a Kqpchinsky-Vladimirsky (KX) distribltion due to mts ease of theocstical bxeatmskt. Sueh an assumption is supporded by the ananyrid presented here as we find that thq distrobktion within tre snjck js nearly uniform. However, the partjcle-cort models do not trrat the initial distributiln ad having a large dfnsity on tye pqeiphery. It wuuld be inuexesting to tevisit such treatments with thir new perspectice alhvough we wonld lihe to point out that the maon effect the iartirle-cire model attempts to capture, halos, occor even afdex aperturing the beam[@Tlyckstgrn:1994_andlytkx_hauo]. Apxciricallj, iv should be possible ti examine the effecu os radial-focussjng fiqlqs on the evolution of the three-dimensimnam distributions we have investigated here.

The experimegtal work that motivated this analysis, [@Williams:2017_trdnsvecsd_emnbbancd], nlt only predicted a shock but also a correlatqs cebrease in brightncss near the peripnegy. Re emphasize jhat thz msan-field equations used hgre explain the denxity shock only and do not provide a qucntutative theory of che emittancz and jhe Coilomb cooling achieved yy remkving the epectrons jv the shock. Speckfiballf, the true emittance in thq analytir modzls presdntec here remains zfro for all time as all oartieles dt a radiud $r$ have velocity $\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{r_0}{{\uer{\omega}}_{p,0}} \sqrt{1 - \xrab{r_0}{r}}$ resulcing ik zero local spwead in velocijy space. Chis pdrfect relztionshmp between vqlocity and pmdition means that thq trye enittancd is zero even of the relation is bon-linear; however, ln suzg a non-linear cknrk xase, the rms ekitganse wmll njd remain zerm derpigr the true emittcnze bring zero. Moreover, tve ahalytic model does cwpture sime of tre rms emittamce growth as a chwnge mn the disttibotion has a corresponding changs on the garlance measuref uscd tj determinz the rms emittance. Specifically, a Gaussman distribution should have especially latge emittance jrowth due to ids evolution to a binodal distributiok, a distribution that js spewificwlly problematic for variance measures. Such a large change in the emittanxe of vhq transverss Gaissiat 'royile haf bexn seen by Luiten[@Lliten:2004_uniform_ellipsoidal] experimeitally and uf computationally[@Portman
:1994_analytic_halo; @Wangler:1998_particle_core_review]. This model assumes a uniform-in-space called Kapchinsky-Vladimirsky (KV) due to its an is supported by analysis presented here we find that the distribution within shock is nearly uniform. However, the particle-core models do not treat the initial as having a large density on the periphery. It would be interesting to such with new although we would like to point out that the main effect the particle-core model attempts to halos, occur even after aperturing the beam[@Gluckstern:1994_analytic_halo]. Specifically, should be possible to the effect of radial-focussing fields the of the distributions have here. The experimental that motivated this analysis, [@Williams:2017_transverse_emittance], not only predicted a shock but also a correlated decrease in brightness the periphery. that the equations here the density shock do not provide a quantitative theory and the Coulomb cooling achieved by removing the in the Specifically, the true emittance in the models presented here remains zero for all time all particles at a radius $r$ have velocity $\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{r_0}{{\bar{\omega}}_{p,0}} \sqrt{1 - \frac{r_0}{r}}$ resulting in zero in velocity space. This relationship between velocity position that true is zero if the relation is non-linear; however, in such a non-linear chirp the rms emittance will not remain zero despite the true zero. the analytic model capture some of the emittance as a change in has corresponding variance used determine the rms emittance. a Gaussian distribution should have large emittance growth due bimodal distribution, a distribution that is specifically problematic variance measures. Such a large change in emittance of the transverse Gaussian profile has been seen by Luiten[@Luiten:2004_uniform_ellipsoidal] experimentally us computationally[@Portman
:1994_analytic_halo; @Wangler:1998_particLe_core_reviEw]. ThiS moDel AsSumeS a unIform-in-space beAM-corE density called a KapchinSky-VlAdIMirsKY (Kv) distRibutioN DuE TO itS eAsE of ThEOrEticaL trEatment. such an assuMptIoN is supported BY tHe analysis PreSented here as We fInd thaT tHe dIStribUtiOn witHin the SHock is Nearly uniFoRM. HowevER, the parTIClE-corE models do not treat THe INitial distribuTion as HaVInG A LarGe dEnsity on thE pEriphERy. It wouLD bE INTerESting to revisiT such treatmENts With thIs New PErspecTive aLtHOugH we would likE to pOint out thAt the mAIn effecT The partIcle-coRe mOdeL attEMpTs To cApTUre, HAlOs, oCCur Even afteR aPeRturiNg thE BEAM[@GluCksTern:1994_AnalyTic_halo]. SpecifIcaLly, iT ShoUld be PossiBle tO eXaminE the efFect oF rAdial-focussing fIeldS on the evoLutIoN of ThE threE-DimensIonAl dIstribuTions we HAve InVESTiGated here.

The experiMeNTAl Work that MotivaTEd ThIS analysiS, [@WIllIams:2017_TRAnsveRse_eMItTance], not Only prEDiCtEd a shocK bUt also A cOrrElaTed deCReasE in briGhtness nEar thE Periphery. We empHAsize that the mEAn-FIElD EquaTioNs used here eXplaIN the DensITy ShoCK only And do NoT PrOVide a quantitative thEoRy of thE emitTance and the CoUlomb cooliNG AChieved bY remOViNG the electrons iN the sHock. SpecifICally, the True eMittance In the analYTIc models PreSenTed HerE REmAins zero for alL TIme aS aLl partiCleS at a radIus $R$ haVe vEloCiTy $\sqrt{\fraC{2}{3}}\frac{r_0}{{\baR{\oMeGa}}_{P,0}} \sQrt{1 - \Frac{r_0}{R}}$ ResultinG iN zeRo LocAl sprEAd in veLocitY spaCe. thIS peRfect reLAtIONshiP bEtWeen VelOcIty anD posITioN means tHat the truE emITtanCe Is Zero eveN if the relatioN iS non-linear; HoWevEr, in suCH A non-lineAr chirp case, the rms emittaNCe will nOt rEmain Zero Despite thE trUe emitTanCE being Zero. MoReoveR, tHe aNALytic MODeL doEs Capture somE OF thE rms eMiTtanCe growtH as a change in the disTRibUtion has a corrEspOndiNG ChAngE On THe vArIAncE MEasures used to deTermine the RmS EmIttance. SpeCIfiCaLly, a GauSsian diStribUTion shoUld have esPecially lArGe emITTanCe growth duE to its evOlution to A BimodAL dIstriButIon, a diStRibUtion That is SPecIficaLly proBlEmatic For vaRiAnce measUres. Such a large change in tHe emitTance Of tHe transveRse gAusSian profiLe haS been seen bY LuIteN[@LuitEn:2004_uNIform_ElliPSoIdaL] ExperImenTAlly and us COmPutATIoNally[@PortmaN
:1994_analytic_halo; @Wang ler:1998_p artic le_ cor e_ revi ew].  This model as s umes  a uniform-in-space be am-co re dens i ty  call ed a Ka p ch i n sky -V la dim ir s ky  (KV)  di stribut ion due to  it sease of theo r et ical treat men t. Such an a ssu mption  i s s u pport edby th e anal y sis pr esented h er e  as we find th a t  t he d istribution withi n  t h e shock is nea rly un if o rm . How eve r, the par ti cle-c o re mode l sd o not treat the ini tial distri b uti on asha vin g  a lar ge de ns i tyon the peri pher y. It wou ld bei nterest i ng to r evisit  su chtrea t me nt s w it h  th i snew per spective  a lt hough  wew o u l d li keto p ointout that themai n ef f ect  theparti cle- co re mo del at tempt sto capture, hal os,occur eve n a ft erap ertur i ng the  be am[ @Glucks tern:19 9 4_a na l y t ic _halo]. Specifical ly , it  shouldbe pos s ib le to exami ne  th e ef f e ct of  rad i al -focussi ng fie l ds  o n the e vo lution  o f t hethree - dime nsiona l distri butio n s we have inve s tigated here. 
T h e  e x peri men tal work th at m o tiva tedt hi s a n alysi s, [@ Wi l li a ms:2017_transverse_ em ittanc e], n ot only predi cted a sho c k but also  a c o rr e lated decrease  in b rightnessn ear theperip hery. We  emphasiz e that the  me an- fie lde q ua tions used he r e  exp la in theden sity sh ock  on lyand  d o not pro vide a q ua nt it at ive  theo r y of the  e mit ta nce  andt he Cou lombcool in ga chi eved by re m o ving  t he  ele ctr on s inthes hoc k. Spec ifically,  th e  tru eem ittance  in the analy ti c models p re sen ted he r e  remains  zero for all time as a l l parti cle s ata ra dius $r$hav e velo cit y  $\sqr t{\fra c{2}{ 3} }\f r a c{r_0 } { {\ bar {\ omega}}_{p , 0 }}\sqrt {1  - \ frac{r_ 0}{r}}$ resultingi n z ero local spr ead  inv e lo cit y  s p ace .T his p erfect relation ship betwe en ve locity and pos it ion mea ns that  thet rue emi ttance is  zero eve nif t h e  re lation isnon-line ar; howev e r, in su ch anon -linea rchi rp ca se, th e  rm s emi ttance  w ill no t rem ai n zero d espite the true emittan ce bei ng ze ro.  Moreover , t h e a nalytic m odel  does capt ure  so me of  th e  rmsemit t an ceg rowth  asa  change i n  t hed i st ribution ha s a  co rresp ond i ng cha ngeon the variance m e asures used to  det e r min e t h e rm semittance. Spe cif ic a l ly, a Ga us sian distri bution s ho u ld ha ve esp eciall y large e mi t tancegrow thdue to it s e vo l ution t oab imodal  dis tr ibutio n, a d i stri b u tion that is spe cific a l ly pr o ble matic  f or vari a ncemeasures.Such a larg e chan ge i n the  emitta nc e of t hetr ansverse G a ussian pr ofile  has be en  see n b y Luit en[@ L u iten: 2004 _u nif orm_ellip s o id a l]  e x per imen tally  a nd u s computa t ionally[ @Po r tman
:1994_analytic_halo; @Wangler:1998_particle_core_review]._This model_assumes a uniform-in-space beam-core_density called_a_Kapchinsky-Vladimirsky (KV)_distribution_due to its_ease of theoretical_treatment. Such an assumption_is supported by_the_analysis presented here as we find that the distribution within the shock is nearly_uniform._However, the_particle-core_models_do not treat the initial_distribution as having a large_density on_the periphery. It would be interesting to revisit_such_treatments with this_new perspective although we would like to point out_that the main effect the particle-core_model attempts to_capture,_halos,_occur even after aperturing_the beam[@Gluckstern:1994_analytic_halo]. Specifically, it should be_possible to examine the effect of_radial-focussing fields on the evolution of the_three-dimensional distributions we have investigated here.

The_experimental work that motivated this_analysis, [@Williams:2017_transverse_emittance],_not only predicted a shock_but also a_correlated decrease_in brightness near_the periphery. We emphasize that the_mean-field equations used_here explain the density shock only_and_do not provide_a_quantitative_theory of_the emittance and_the_Coulomb cooling_achieved_by removing the electrons in the_shock._Specifically, the true emittance in the analytic_models presented here remains_zero_for all time as_all particles at a radius_$r$ have velocity $\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{r_0}{{\bar{\omega}}_{p,0}} \sqrt{1 -_\frac{r_0}{r}}$ resulting_in zero_local spread in velocity space. This perfect relationship between velocity and_position means that the true emittance_is zero even if_the relation_is_non-linear; however, in_such_a non-linear_chirp case, the rms emittance will not_remain zero_despite the true emittance being zero._Moreover, the analytic model_does_capture some of the rms emittance_growth as a change in the_distribution has a corresponding change_on_the_variance measures used to determine_the rms emittance. Specifically, a Gaussian_distribution should have_especially large emittance growth due to its_evolution_to a bimodal distribution, a distribution_that_is specifically problematic for variance measures._Such_a_large change in the emittance_of the transverse Gaussian profile has_been seen by Luiten[@Luiten:2004_uniform_ellipsoidal] experimentally and us computationally[@Portman