content_image/440218.jpg content_image/440219.jpg
for these modes as functions of time. ′ 

<img src='content_image/440218.jpg'>

<img src='content_image/440219.jpg'>

Starting with ℓ = 1, we project the dipole and octupole modes and their respective local power indices in Fig. 9. We encounter the same problem finding the decay rate for ℓ = 5 — i.e., find $_{1}$ψ$_{5}$ and $_{1}$n$_{5}$ — as we did when we we calculated $_{0}$ψ$_{4}$ and $_{0}$n$_{4}$ (Figs. 10 and 11). Again, the second–order “up”–excited mode requires high resolution simulations. 

Our proposal (3) naturally extends the Barack–Ori formula (2) to cases where the initial data do not include the monopole ( ℓ ′ = 0) mode. Recall that the Barack–Ori formula considers the case of generic initial data, which means a mixture of all multipole modes with arbitrary relative amplitudes and radial profiles. In particular, the monopole mode is generically present, so that the slowest decaying contribution of any “up”–excited ℓ mode is generated by the initial monopole. Our proposal degenerates to the Barack–Ori formula when ℓ ′ = 0. When the monopole is not present in the generic initial data set, our proposal will produce the decay rate of a mixture of modes when ℓ ′ is taken to be the smallest multipole present in the generic data set, and as a particular case will also produce the decay rate of the ℓ multipole when the initial data is a pure ℓ $^{′}$( < ℓ ) mode, the non–generic case, in the language of Barack and Ori. In summary, the Barack–Ori formula Eq. (2) is simply the particular case $_{0}$n$_{ℓ}$ of Eq. (3). 

Table I summarizes our results for the azimuthal, m = 0, case. It shows the power law indices for the late 

