text:
# Discrete Spectrum in Bose Condensation

## Abstract

A quantitative description of the whole process of condensation of bosons in an harmonic trap is given resorting only to Gibbs and Bose postulates, without assuming equipartition nor continuum statistics. Below $`T_c`$ discrete spectrum theory predicts for the thermo-dynamical variables a behavior different from the continuum case. In particular a new critical temperature $`T_d`$ is found where the specific heat exhibits a $`\lambda `$-like spike. Numerical values of the relevant quantities depend on the experimental set-up. The theory does not take into account collective effects in the ground state.

Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) was discovered (or, better, predicted) by Bose  and Einstein  in 1924-25 studying the properties of a gas of non interacting bosons in a (infinite) box. BEC has been experimentally observed only in 1995, in vapors of rubidium  and sodium  confined in magnetic traps and cooled. Present research on BEC follows similar experimental lines, where the potential makes the spectrum discrete , . Theoretical research on BEC in traps is also in tumultuous progress , focusing essentially on the role of interactions among the atoms. Here we shall instead pay attention more to the relation between the discreteness and multiplicity of the quantum mechanical spectrum, and the features induced by quantum statistics.

BEC in a box (where the walls do not essentially affect the continuity of the spectrum) and BEC in an harmonic trap (whose effect is to make the spectrum definitely discrete), coincide only in some approximate way. First of all, in a magnetic trap the number $`N`$ of confined particles as well as the volume $`V`$ in which they are confined are finite, namely we are not in the thermodynamic limit. This effect has been discussed in different papers , , ,  and shown to have limited phenomenological relevance, as in the experiments the number of particles is $`10^5÷10^7`$. There is however another reason why the thermodynamic limit is not reached – and cannot be reached – in magnetic traps, on which we focus our attention here: the energy spectrum. Quantizing in a box, the difference between contiguous energy levels goes to zero at least as $`V^{1/3}`$ as volume increases. On the other hand, in order to obtain the thermodynamic limit in an harmonic potential we should have to require that the oscillator frequency – i.e. the spacing of the spectrum – goes to zero as $`N^{1/3}`$. One needs, in other words, that the spectrum may be considered continuous. This is far from the experimental situation, where typically $`h\nu /k_B10nK`$ (for $`\nu 10^2Hz`$), to be compared with the estimated temperature $`T_c\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^2nK`$.

We shall attempt here to propose a better framework within which experimental results are consistently described, trying to represent more properly BEC experimental situation ($`N`$ finite, energy discrete). Even though keeping spectral structure into account may be an important step forward with respect to the continuum theory, many body effects are still not considered. The results are thus correct up to the detailed structure e.g. of the ground state, as it could be described by a collective perturbation in the space of free bosons, as in Gross-Pitaevsky approach , .

Ever since 1907 Einstein himself  had pointed out how classical results on equipartition of energy are no longer valid for $`T<h\nu /k_B`$ for the quantized harmonic oscillator in the frame of Boltzmann statistics. This has been so far disregarded, in spite also of the change in statistics, as $`T<h\nu /k_B`$ is below the range of experiments. Several other authors have on the other hand discussed BEC in the context of the present experimental situation using equipartition together with the continuum statistics (eq. (3) below) , , , finding that the temperature scale of the process is $`N^{1/3}`$. Within the approach presented here this scaling law, essential for the coherence of the scheme, is recovered, among other novel results. The crucial difference is however that it is obtained by re-deriving the entire theory of bosons with discrete spectrum, based only on the Gibbs and Bose postulates. The central results are that a new equation (eq. (7) below) replaces the continuum distribution function, equipartition is valid only for $`T>T_c`$, and a new critical temperature is found.

Our motivation for this construction is the recent definition of bosons as coherent states of the algebra $`su(1,1)`$, given in . In that paper a possible generalization of the Bose definition of bosons has been considered. Here this is used only to define the undegenerate states of the harmonic oscillator as the limit for $`g1`$ of the general formula ( eq. (2) below).

We begin by summarizing the most relevant results that a thorough numerical analysis performed within this conceptual scheme leads to, leaving for the second part of the paper some clarifying details. There turn out to be seven essential features when comparing the continuum and discrete cases:

1) The formula (eq. (7) below) for the occupation number $`n(ϵ_i)`$ as a function of the single particle discrete energy $`ϵ_i`$ is the same as in the thermodynamic limit at zero energy, moreover for discrete spectrum it does not decrease exponentially as $`ϵ\mathrm{}`$ but rather it becomes identically zero for $`ϵ>ϵ_{max}`$ (where $`ϵ_{max}`$ has a well defined value much less than the total energy $`E`$ and goes to infinity only in the continuum limit). Measurable effects are related with the product of $`n(ϵ_i)`$ with the multiplicity of energy levels $`m(ϵ_i)`$. Fig. 1 displays the product $`n(ϵ_i)m(ϵ_i)`$ vs. $`i`$.

FIG. 1. $`n(ϵ_i)m(ϵ_i)`$ vs. $`i`$ for $`N=10^2`$ bosons in an isotropic harmonic trap for different values of $`T`$ ($`T_{\mathrm{}}<T_{\mathrm{}}<T_{\mathrm{}}`$) in proximity of $`T_c`$, showing the appearance of $`n_00`$.

2) The Lagrange multiplier $`\beta ^{}`$, that in the continuum is identically equal to $`1/(k_BT)`$ – and $`(E/N)^1`$ due to equipartition – is now for $`T>T_c`$ $`\beta ^{}(E/N)^4`$, yet the equipartition theorem is still satisfied (constant specific heat). In other words, the Lagrange multiplier turns out to be a more complicated function of $`T`$ than $`T^1`$.

3) Temperature, defined – without resorting to equipartition – as the derivative of energy with respect to entropy, allows us to describe entirely the thermodynamics of the system, assumed in global thermal equilibrium (as done in ) because of the efficiency of evaporative cooling. For $`TT_c`$, effects related to the spectrum discreteness appear to be irrelevant, as they are in determining $`T_c`$ as a function of $`N`$ , . Another critical temperature $`T_d`$ is however found (see Fig. 2) defined by the ground state filling $`n_0/N`$ crossing the value $`1/2`$.

As Fig. 2 shows, $`C`$ is constant, equal to $`3k_B`$ (as it should, since the system does not condense and behaves as a classical gas) for $`T>T_c`$; it is almost zero (as entropy and energy decrease with quite different slopes because only a few atoms progressively migrate from the warmer tail of the spectrum into the fundamental level) for $`T_d<T<T_c`$, and exhibits a peak for $`T=T_d`$, where condensation becomes a global effect. Note that, after the spike at $`T_d`$, the specific heat goes to zero as $`T`$ goes to zero, as required by Nernst’s theorem.

FIG. 2. Specific heat $`C`$ vs. $`T`$ in units $`k_B=h\nu =1`$ for $`N=10^6`$ bosons in an isotropic harmonic trap, as predicted by discrete quantum statistics.

4) The chemical potential is no longer equal to the Lagrange multiplier $`\alpha ^{}`$ and does not appear to present major differences from the results reported in the literature .

5) Repeated numerical analysis for various values of $`N`$ indicates that $`T_cN^{1/3}`$, in agreement with , , whereas one finds $`T_dN^{1/3}/\mathrm{ln}N`$.

6) As explicitly shown in Fig. 1, the high energy tail of the velocity distribution is not of Maxwell-Boltzmann type and it cannot be straightforwardly used to determine the experiment temperature .

FIG. 3. The fraction of condensate $`n_0/N`$ vs. $`N^{1/3}\left(E/Nh\nu 3/2\right)`$ for $`N=10^4`$ ($`\mathrm{}`$), $`10^6`$ (- - -), $`10^8`$ (—).

7) Thermo-dynamical temperature, despite its conceptual relevance, does not appear to be the physical parameter that best describes the process of condensation: it is difficult to measure in the typical experimental set-up, and as one does not have equipartition its intuitive meaning of ′′average energy per particle$`^{\prime \prime }`$ is lost. We prefer then to describe the onset of condensation by exhibiting the behavior of $`n_0/N`$ vs. the true (dimensionless) ′′energy per particle$`^{\prime \prime }`$ $`E/Nh\nu `$ (Fig. 3, where in abscissa we actually reported $`N^{1/3}\left(E/Nh\nu 3/2\right)`$ to point out the dependence on $`N^{1/3}`$), much easier to compare with experiments. Our results are consistent with the experimental findings in ref. . Fig. 4, of which Fig. 2 shows the derivative, provides $`E/N`$ as a function of $`T`$. This curve can be inverted giving $`T=T(E/N)`$, a relation which replaces equipartition (where it would be linear) and allows us to evaluate temperature dependent quantities as functions of the experimentally more accessible internal energy.

FIG. 4. Specific internal energy $`E/N`$ vs. $`T`$, for $`N=10^6`$ (units as in Fig. 2).

We shall now discuss in some mathematical detail how the above features come into play. The traditional textbook way (see e.g. ) of deriving the boson gas equilibrium distribution is the following. Starting from Gibbs’ assumption, in order to derive the combinatorics many single particle states (levels) of energy practically equal are collected together in cells (an assumption justified a posteriori by the thermodynamic limit) and the particle distribution is straightforwardly found to be, up to normalization, given by

$`W\{n_i\}={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_i+g)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_i+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(g)}},`$ (1)
where $`g`$ is the multiplicity, that with no loss of generality we assume equal for all cells. The equilibrium distribution, identified with that of maximum probability, is then obtained by finding the set $`\{n_i\}`$ that maximizes (the logarithm of) $`W\{n_i\}`$, constrained by the two conditions $`_in_i=N`$ and $`_iϵ_in_i=E`$. One obtains the exact equation

$`\psi (n_i+g)\psi (n_i+1)=\alpha +\beta ϵ_ih_i,`$ (2)
where $`\alpha =\alpha (g)`$, dimensionless, and $`\beta =\beta (g)`$, with the physical dimension of an inverse energy, are the two Lagrange multipliers, clearly depending on the value of $`g`$, introduced in order to implement the constraints, while $`\psi `$ is the digamma function .

For large argument $`\psi `$ coincides with the logarithm, thus for $`n_i1`$ and $`g1`$ it is easy to obtain (identifying $`n(ϵ_i)`$ with the finite density $`n_i/g`$)

$`n(ϵ_i)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{h_i}1}}.`$ (3)
The latter is the Bose-Einstein distribution we are accustomed to, so well established that it is sometimes considered as an alternative definition of bosons. The essential assumption of this derivation is of course that the energy spectrum is continuous, hypothesis that does not hold in the presence of an harmonic potential.

Eq. (2) has more general validity in that it holds true for any value of $`g`$ and hence also for the discrete case. For example, in the case of photons in a laser beam, where degeneracy of states is two because of helicity, it gives

$`n_i={\displaystyle \frac{1}{h_i}}1\mathrm{for}h_i<1\mathrm{and}n_i=0\mathrm{for}h_i>1.`$ (4)
For a physical (3-dimensional) quantum harmonic oscillator, $`g`$ should be set equal to 1. Indeed, even in the ′′isotropic$`^{\prime \prime }`$ case, that we shall consider as an example, the experimental frequencies are such that $`\nu _i\nu _j\nu _i`$, but $`\nu _i`$ is never exactly equal to $`\nu _j`$; we have then a computing degeneracy only, because statistics remains undegenerate. However, setting $`g=1`$ leads for (2) to a perfectly acceptable but void equation (left hand side identically zero, implying $`\alpha (1)=\beta (1)=0`$). On the other hand: i) eq. (2) is defined for $`g`$ in the whole complex plane except for negative integers, and ii) in ref.  an alternative definition of bosons has been proposed in terms of coherent states of the discrete series of $`\stackrel{~}{SU}(1,1)`$, where the highest weight of the representation is $`g/2`$, with $`g`$ any strictly positive real number. In this latter context $`g`$ is not restricted to the integer values imposed by the combinatorial interpretation and we can define by analytical continuation for $`g1`$ the equation for undegenerate levels that we need. $`n_in(ϵ_i)`$ results thus to be the solution to the equation

$`\psi ^{}(n_i+1)=\alpha ^{}+\beta ^{}ϵ_ih_i^{},`$ (5)
where $`\alpha ^{}\underset{g1}{lim}\alpha (g)/(g1)`$ and $`\beta ^{}\underset{g1}{lim}\beta (g)/(g1)`$ are the new Lagrange multipliers to be determined by the constraints of fixed $`N`$ and $`E`$, and $`\psi ^{}`$ is the trigamma function , derivative of $`\psi `$. Eq.(5) is one-to-one and can be inverted, giving us the correct formula for discrete spectrum, to be used instead of eq.(3):

$`n_i`$ $`=`$ $`[\psi ^{}]^1(h_i^{})1\mathrm{for}h_i^{}<\pi ^2/6`$ (6)
$`\mathrm{and}`$ (7)
$`n_i`$ $`=`$ $`0\mathrm{for}h_i^{}\pi ^2/6,`$ (8)
$`[\psi ^{}]^1`$ denoting the inverse function of $`\psi ^{}`$. $`\pi ^2/6\psi ^{}(1)`$. For $`h^{}0`$ eq. (7) has the same asymptotic behavior as (3) : $`n_ih_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\frac{1}{2}`$. The two formulas (3) and (7) exhibit a similar structure, characteristic of all values of $`g`$, with a pole (with residue 1) at argument zero and a zero for large values of the argument (compare eq. (4)). The discrete description, however, does not require an ad hoc delta function at the ground state, which is instead discussed on the same footing as all the others. In fact one may assign first the values of $`N`$ and $`E`$; from these the two Lagrange multipliers $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha ^{}(N,E)`$, $`\beta ^{}=\beta ^{}(N,E)`$ are then obtained from the constraints using for $`n_i`$ the defining equation (7); then, inserting them in (7) itself, one gets $`n_in_i(\alpha ^{},\beta ^{})=n_i(N,E)`$ (see Figs. 1 and 3).

As condensation derives from the existence of the pole combined with the feature that multiplicity increases quadratically for the excited states, the continuum formula (3) is correct in predicting the collapse of the atoms in the fundamental level, but it is unable to describe what happens for $`T<T_c`$. The subtlety here is that the very concept of temperature, as defined in the theory of gases, cannot be straightforwardly extended to the discrete spectrum case.

Numerical calculations performed for a physical 3-dimensional ′′isotropic$`^{\prime \prime }`$ quantum harmonic oscillator with $`N`$ ranging from $`10^2`$ to $`10^{12}`$, made for simplicity approximating $`[\psi ^{}]^1`$ by fixing only pole and zero,

$`n_i={\displaystyle \frac{1}{h_i}}{\displaystyle \frac{6}{\pi ^2}}\mathrm{for}h_i<\pi ^2/6\mathrm{and}n_i=0\mathrm{for}h_i>\pi ^2/6,`$ (9)
show indeed that, for $`E/N`$ large, $`\pi ^2/6\alpha ^{}\left(E/N\right)^3`$ while $`\beta ^{}\left(E/N\right)^4`$. The internal energy is therefore not proportional to the inverse Lagrange multiplier $`\beta _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}`$ but to the more complex expression $`(\pi ^2/6\alpha ^{})\beta _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}`$. Temperature can then no longer be obtained, as in the continuum, by $`T=\left(k_B\beta ^{}\right)^1`$ and equipartition of energy must be demonstrated. The only way to proceed is to adopt the basic definition of temperature based on entropy. In order to do so, we use Shannon’s definition of entropy in terms of probabilities

$`S=k_B{\displaystyle p_i\mathrm{ln}p_i}`$ (10)
where we set $`p_in_i/N`$, recalling that the $`n_i(N,E)`$’s are now known. At fixed $`N`$ we thus straightforwardly obtain $`S=S(E)`$. Simple numerical operations finally give the temperature

$`TT(E)=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{S}{E}}\right]_N^1.`$ (11)
Once more the function is one-to-one, and from $`T=T(E)`$ we can obtain $`E=E(T)`$ (see Fig. 4), whence the specific heat $`C{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{E}{T}}\right]_N`$ is obtained by (numerical) differentiation (see Fig. 2). Also $`\mu `$, which is no longer related in a simple way to $`\alpha ^{}`$, can be calculated in analogous way, $`\mu \left[{\displaystyle \frac{E}{N}}\right]_S`$, and all the results presented above are thus obtained.

It should be pointed out that the theory presented leads not only to a set of specific behaviors, but it determines as well the measurable quantities: specific heat, filling order parameter, chemical potential, etc., all of which can be experimentally measured and are related to the characteristics of the experiment ($`N`$, $`E`$, $`\nu `$). To this latter effect, it should be pointed out that in the experiments the harmonic potential is usually anisotropic: extension of our results to the corresponding physical parameters is straightforward. Whether or not the features predicted theoretically are correct or not can therefore be tested by direct measurements of sufficiently high sensitivity. This feedback from the laboratory is crucial before further refinements of our analysis, such as e.g. inclusion of many body effects, is carried over.


format: text

text:
# THE H𝛽 INDEX AS AN AGE INDICATOR OF OLD STELLAR SYSTEMS : THE EFFECTS OF HORIZONTAL-BRANCH STARS

## 1 INTRODUCTION

For distant stellar populations, one relies upon the integrated colors or spectra to investigate their ages and metallicities since individual stars are not resolved. In this paper, we will specifically focus on the H$`\beta `$ index that is widely used as an age indicator. It has been highlighted because it is (1) the only index that shows the anticorrelation with metallicity and (2) sensitive to temperature by reaching a maximum strength at around 9500 K (Worthey (1994)).

Most of the previous works (e.g., Worthey (1994); Buzzoni (1995)), however, have been done on the basis that stars near the main-sequence turnoff (MSTO) region are the most dominant sources for the integrated strength of H$`\beta `$. Consequently, without the meticulous consideration for stars beyond the red giant branch (RGB), they claimed that the strength of H$`\beta `$ depends on the location of the MSTO, which in turn depends on the age at a given metallicity. Several investigators, however, have cast some doubt upon the sensitivity of the H$`\beta `$ index given the presence of other warm stars, especially blue horizontal-branch (HB) stars (see, e.g., Rabin (1982); Christian & Schommer (1983); Burstein et al. (1984); Buzzoni, Mantegazza, & Gariboldi (1994); de Freitas Pacheco & Barbuy (1995); Ferguson (1995); Fisher, Franx, & Illingworth (1995); Bressan, Chiosi, & Tantalo (1996); Lee, Lee, & Park (1996); Greggio (1997); Jorgensen (1997)).

On the observational side, it was barely possible to obtain low S/N spectra of globular clusters in systems outside the Local Group (e.g., Mould, Oke, & Nemec (1987); Mould et al. (1990); Huchra & Brodie (1987); Brodie & Huchra (1991); Grillmair et al. (1994)). These spectra have only been used for kinematic information. With the advent of 10 m-class telescopes, however, Kissler-Patig et al. (1998) and Cohen, Blakeslee, & Ryzhov (1998) have successfully obtained relatively high S/N spectra that provide reliable line indices calibration for globular clusters in NGC 1399 and M87, the central giant elliptical galaxies in Fornax and Virgo clusters. Figure 1 shows the distribution of globular clusters in the Milky Way Galaxy and those in NGC 1399 in the H$`\beta `$ versus Mg2 diagram. At first glance, there seems to be little difference between these two systems especially when considering the large uncertainties in NGC 1399 globular cluster system. Some careful scrutiny of the data, however, indicates that there is a systematic difference in the sense that the metal-rich clusters in NGC 1399 have higher H$`\beta `$ compared to Galactic counterparts, while the opposite seems to be the case for the more metal-poor clusters. In fact, a Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test gives only 2.14% probability, excluding the two very metal-rich NGC 1399 clusters, that the two samples are extracted from the same parent population.

This systematic difference has motivated us to explore the sensitivity of the integrated H$`\beta `$ strength with detailed population synthesis models that reproduce the systematic variation of HB morphology with age and metallicity. The HB stars are not unusual components of old stellar systems since they are ubiquitously found from the color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs) of Galactic globular clusters and the stellar evolution theories remarkably reproduce them to a certain degree (e.g., Lee, Demarque, & Zinn 1990, 1994). In the following section, our population models without and with considering HB stars are presented. Section 3 reinforces the validity of our models with HB stars by comparing them to a sample of Galactic globular clusters and compares our results with the observations of globular cluster systems in the Milky Way Galaxy, M31, NGC 1399, and M87. Finally, section 4 discusses major implications from our works.

## 2 POPULATION MODELS WITHOUT & WITH HORIZONTAL-BRANCH STARS

The present models were constructed by using our evolutionary population synthesis code, which was developed specifically to study the stellar populations in globular clusters. For our population models, the Yale Isochrones (Demarque et al. (1996)) rescaled for $`\alpha `$-elements enhancement (Salaris, Chieffi, & Straniero (1993)) and the HB evolutionary tracks by Yi, Demarque, & Kim (1997) have been used. For metal-rich (\[Fe/H\] $`>`$ $``$ 0.5) populations, the helium enrichment parameter, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Y/$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Z = 2, is assumed (cf. Maeder (1992); Pagel et al. (1992)). The Salpeter (1955) initial mass function (IMF)

$$dN=CM^\chi dM$$
(1)
with $`\chi `$ = 2.35 is adopted for the relative number of stars along the isochrones, but the effects of the variations of $`\chi `$ are also tested and described in section 2.2. For the conversion from theoretical quantities to observable quantities, we have taken the most recently compiled stellar library of Lejeune, Cuisinier, & Buser (1998) in order to cover the largest possible ranges in stellar parameters such as metallicity, temperature, and gravity.

The strength of the spectral line indices is calculated with either

$$EW=\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda (1(F_\lambda /F_C))$$
(2)
or

$$Mag=2.5log(F_\lambda /F_C),$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda `$ is an index bandpass and $`F_\lambda `$ and $`F_C`$ are the flux in the index bandpass and the pseudocontinuum flux in the index bandpass (Worthey et al. (1994)). First, for each star (or bunch of stars after the binning) with a given metallicity, temperature, and gravity, we find the flux values at both pseudocontinuum regions for each index from the stellar library. Then we calibrate $`F_C`$ at the center of each index bandpasses. Second, we calculate either the equivalent width (EW; for H$`\beta `$ and Mg $`b`$) or the magnitude (Mag; for Mg2) using Worthey et al.’s (1994) fitting functions. Then we solve for $`F_\lambda `$. After $`F_C`$ and $`F_\lambda `$ are all summed up for a simple stellar population of a given metallicity and age, finally, we compute the integrated strengths of spectral line indices using formulae (2) and (3). Table 1 lists the Lick/IDS system bandpasses that have been used in this work as defined in Burstein et al. (1984). Unless otherwise noted, we have used Burstein et al. (1984) definitions in this work to be compatible with the data that we are going to fit in section 3.

We have not taken into account either blue stragglers (BSs) or post-HB stars in our models, since it is hard to quantify them systematically with metallicity and age because of the poor knowledge of their evolution and also due to their scarcity. With the inclusion of the BSs, we would expect the strength of H$`\beta `$ to slightly increase. We suspect, however, that the post-HB stars would hardly affect this index mainly due to their paucity.

### 2.1 Population Models without Horizontal-Branch Stars

Before proceeding to the construction of models with HB stars, we have first compared our models without considering HB stars with those of Worthey (1994), the most widely used models, to make sure that our calculations are consistent with previous investigations. For this purpose, we have taken the same index bandpasses that Worthey (1994) used in his model calculations. It is clear from Figure 2 that both models generate very similar results although there are slight differences mostly due to the different isochrones employed in the two models. It is also worth noting that Worthey models which treated HB stars as red clumps are similar to our models without HB stars as already noted by Rabin (1982) (cf. Worthey & Ottaviani (1997), see the caption of their Fig. 6). Without the systematic variation of HB morphology that we are going to employ in the following subsection, one can see from Figure 2 that the H$`\beta `$ decreases as metallicity and age increase simply because the MSTO temperature decreases with these variations.

Recently, there have been increasing number of reports that the evolutionary time scale from MS to RGB should be substantially decreased if the developments of the stellar evolution theories, particularly due to the effects of diffusion and the Coulomb correction to the equation of state in the isochrones, are employed (see, e.g., Chaboyer et al. (1996); Salaris, Degl’Innocenti, & Weiss (1997); Cassisi et al. (1998)). In particular, according to Chaboyer et al. (1996), it is suggested that the age of Galactic globular clusters should be reduced by 18% once one considers this improved input physics. Hence, a correction was applied in our models to simulate these age reduction effects. For example, 15 Gyr isochrones are consequently employed to represent 12 Gyr populations. One can see this effect on the H$`\beta `$ index in Figure 3. The dashed lines are made when the standard Yale isochrones are used, while the solid lines show what we described above after employing the correction. It is clear from Figure 3 that the isochrones with the improved input physics (solid lines) should result in the decrease of H$`\beta `$ mainly due to the decrease of the MSTO temperature. Hereafter, these simulated isochrones are used for further computations even though the conclusions drawn below should be relatively insensitive to this correction. Furthermore, it should be noted that only relative ages are meaningful from this study until the isochrones that incorporate the input physics fully consistent with real stars emerge.

### 2.2 Population Models with Horizontal-Branch Stars

In order to include HB stars into our models, first, we need to estimate the amounts of mass loss on the RGB. In this study, we have adopted Reimers’ mass-loss relation (Reimers (1975)). The value of $`\eta `$, the empirical fitting factor in Reimers’ mass-loss relation, was estimated by matching the tight correlations between \[Fe/H\] and HB morphology type \[(B$``$R)/(B+V+R)\] (Lee, Demarque, & Zinn (1994)) of the inner halo Galactic globular clusters (Galactocentric radius $``$ 8 kpc, filled symbols in Figure 4). The value of $`\eta `$ = 0.65 was determined at the recently favored mean age ($``$ 12 Gyr, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$t = 0 Gyr) of them in the light of new distance scale as suggested by HIPPARCOS (e.g., Feast & Catchpole (1997); Gratton et al. (1997); Reid (1998); Chaboyer et al. (1998)) as well as from the recent developments of the stellar evolution theories (Chaboyer et al. (1996); Salaris & Weiss (1997); Cassisi et al. (1999)). The modified Gaussian mass distribution (Lee, Demarque, & Zinn (1990); Demarque et al. (1999)),

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(M)=\mathrm{\Psi }_{}[M(\overline{M_{HB}}\mathrm{\Delta }M)](M_{RG}M)exp[\frac{(\overline{M_{HB}}M)^2}{2\sigma ^2}]$$
(4)
where $`\sigma `$ is a mass dispersion factor in solar mass, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$ is a normalization factor, and $`\overline{M_{HB}}`$ ($``$ MRG $``$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$M) is the mean mass of HB stars, was employed with $`\sigma `$ = 0.02 M.

Figure 4 presents our model isochrones in the plot of the HB type as a function of \[Fe/H\]. Figure 5 vividly shows how the isochrones in Figure 4 are generated. From the CMDs in the first column of Figure 5, one clearly sees the effect of metallicity, the first parameter that governs the HB morphology type, in the sense that HB becomes redder as metallicity increases. One can also see that the age works as the global second parameter that characterizes the HB morphology by looking at Figure 5 horizontally, in the sense that it becomes bluer with increasing age at a given metallicity (see also Lee, Demarque, & Zinn (1994)).

In Figure 6, the variations of H$`\beta `$ strength as a function of metallicity are plotted at given ages based on the model loci of Figure 4. It should be noted here that, unlike the models without HB stars (dashed lines), the distinct “wave-like” features (solid lines) appear from our models with HB stars. These features are clearly understood with the aid of Figure 5. For example, refer the five CMDs in the first column of Figure 5 from bottom to top and accordingly follow the model line of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$t = 0 Gyr in Figure 6 from low to high metallicity. It is evident that (1) there is an enhancement in H$`\beta `$ and it becomes a maximum where HB stars are centered around 9500 K (($`B`$ $``$ $`V`$)o $``$ 0), the temperature at which the H$`\beta `$ index becomes strongest, even though the temperature of MSTO is getting lower with increasing metallicity, (2) after the peak, the H$`\beta `$ enhancement decreases since the mean temperature of HB stars is getting lower, and (3) with only cool red HB stars, the strength of H$`\beta `$ even becomes slightly weaker than that from the models without HB stars. In addition, it should be noted that the peak of the H$`\beta `$ enhancement moves to higher metallicity as age gets older.

Therefore, the strength of H$`\beta `$ does not simply decrease with either increasing age or increasing metallicity once HB stars are included in the models. As Figure 5 clearly demonstrates, the strength of H$`\beta `$ depends not only on the location of the MSTO but also on the distribution of HB stars. Now it is clear that the blue HB stars around ($`B`$ $``$ $`V`$)o $``$ 0 are the key contributors for the strength of H$`\beta `$. The differences in H$`\beta `$ strengths between the models with and without HB stars are as much as 0.75 Å at the peak. This is in accordance with the empirical estimate by Burstein et al. (1984) and Buzzoni, Mantegazza, & Gariboldi (1994), although these authors did not investigate the systematic variations we report here.

It must be noted here that Worthey et al.’s (1994) fitting functions are only given till 13,260 K. For the stars hotter than 13,260 K, we extrapolated their fitting functions for Mg2 and Mg $`b`$. For H$`\beta `$, however, we employed tables by Kurucz (1993) that give explicit values for the Balmer line strengths at a given metallicity, temperature, and gravity. A systematic shift ($``$ 6.1 Å) was necessary in order to make H$`\beta `$ values from Kurucz (1993) match those from Worthey et al.’s (1994) fitting function at temperature around 13,000 K. Note that this treatment takes effect only for blue HB stars from very metal-poor and very old populations (the left-side of the peaks for model lines of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$t = + 2 and + 4 Gyr in Figure 6). Therefore, the general “wave-like” features including the location of peaks should not be affected by this treatment. The fitting functions in this temperature range are needed in the near future, however, to better estimate the effects from those hot stars on the spectral line indices.

We also have looked into the dependence of strengths of H$`\beta `$ and Mg2 on the initial mass function. It is found that the variations of the exponent $`\chi `$ of the initial mass function between 1.35 and 3.35 are negligible, in the sense that they roughly correspond to the errors estimated from the fitting functions, $``$ 0.22 Å for H$`\beta `$ and $``$ 0.008 mag for Mg2.

## 3 COMPARISON WITH OBSERVATIONS

### 3.1 TEST OF THE MODELS VIA GALACTIC GLOBULAR CLUSTERS

The remarkable effects of HB stars on the strength of H$`\beta `$ are elaborated in the previous section. To corroborate our results, our models with HB stars are tested using observations of Galactic globular clusters, the only objects that the independent HB morphology types can be evaluated. We have chosen a sample within a narrow range of metallicity, so that the metallicity effects on the HB morphology can be put aside. Then we investigate whether the strengths of H$`\beta `$ of the sample globular clusters are really in connection with their HB morphology.

In Figure 7, we have fixed the metallicity (\[Fe/H\] = $``$ 1.535 ; dashed lines and $``$ 0.814 ; solid lines, respectively) and calculated the strengths of H$`\beta `$ with varying ages. As age increases, the MSTO temperature is getting cooler while the HB morphology becomes bluer. It is shown here that the strength of H$`\beta `$ gradually increases as the HB morphology becomes bluer surpassing the MSTO temperature variations. The thin lines that have actually nothing to do with HB types only indicate the level of H$`\beta `$ strengths without HB stars. The sample of Galactic globular clusters within the similar metallicity range (data from Burstein et al. (1984)) that already denoted by squares in Figure 4 is superposed. It is clear from Figure 7 that (1) the inclusion of relevant HB stars is essential in the population models for H$`\beta `$ and (2) our assumption of the age as the global second parameter reproduces the observations within the errors.

What is evident from this test is that the inclusion of pertinent HB stars is dominant over the MSTO temperature variations for the strengths of H$`\beta `$ of globular clusters. Therefore, one should give great care to HB stars for the population synthesis models in order to match the observations of old stellar systems such as globular clusters.

### 3.2 COMPARISON WITH GLOBULAR CLUSTER SYSTEMS

Having confirmed that the detailed modeling of HB is crucial in the use of H$`\beta `$ index as an age indicator, now we compare our results with observations of globular cluster systems in the Milky Way Galaxy, M31, NGC 1399, and M87. It is important to note here that all of these observations except for M31 globular clusters were carried out at the Keck telescope with the identical instrumental configuration, the Low Resolution Imaging Spectrograph (LRIS, Oke et al. (1995)), so that the relative comparisons between these cluster systems are not affected by systematic and instrumental inhomogeneity.

First, Figure 8a presents the comparison of the globular cluster system in the Milky Way Galaxy with that in M31 in the H$`\beta `$$``$Mg2 plane. For the Galactic globular cluster system, a set of 12 globular clusters that were obtained by Cohen, Blakeslee, & Ryzhov (1998) are used. For that in M31, 15 out of 18 globular clusters in common with Burstein et al. (1984) and Huchra et al. (1996) are used. We have taken Huchra et al. (1996) data here, since they were obtained with higher resolution and high S/N at the Multiple Mirror Telescope. Three clusters (G1, G33, and G222; G from Sargent et al. (1977)) are excluded because they show more than 1 Å differences in H$`\beta `$ between Burstein et al. (1984) and Huchra et al. (1996) observations. The errors given in the diagram are the average from the M31 sample. It is found from Figure 8a that both globular cluster systems are fundamentally not quite different, in terms of H$`\beta `$ strengths as a function of metallicity. They are reasonably well traced by our models of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$t = 0 Gyr, i.e., t = 12 Gyr.

Next, in Figure 8b, the globular cluster system in NGC 1399 is compared with that in the the Milky Way Galaxy. Despite the still large observational uncertainties in NGC 1399 globular cluster system obtained by Kissler-Patig et al. (1998), the systematic shift that we noticed in section 1 between these two systems is now understood by the age difference. It is inferred from Figure 8b that the NGC 1399 globular cluster system is perhaps systematically older, in the mean, than the Galactic counterpart by about 4 Gyr.

In the following diagram, we compare M87 globular cluster system with that in the the Milky Way Galaxy. For M87 globular clusters, H$`\beta `$$``$Mg $`b`$ plane is used since Cohen, Blakeslee, & Ryzhov (1998) preferred narrower Mg $`b`$ index to broader Mg2 index due to their observational condition. Among 150 sample from Cohen, Blakeslee, & Ryzhov (1998), we have taken 35 globular clusters that have relatively higher S/N (QSNR $`>`$ 50). It appears from Figure 8c that the age difference of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$t = + 3.5 best reproduces the M87 globular cluster system in the H$`\beta `$$``$Mg $`b`$ plane, although better data are clearly needed to confirm this.

We do not claim here that all of the globular clusters in giant elliptical galaxies are coeval and older than Galactic counterparts. In fact, there is now a growing body of evidence that suggests age variations among globular clusters in the Milky Way (e.g., Lee, Demarque, & Zinn (1994); Sarajedini, Chaboyer, & Demarque (1997)). In this respect, we suspect that there would be a similar age variations among globular clusters in giant elliptical galaxies. However, the quality of the present data, even taken with the 10 m-class telescope, is still far from attempting such detailed analysis.

## 4 DISCUSSION

We have found in this work that (1) the integrated H$`\beta `$ strengths of old stellar systems, such as globular clusters, are significantly affected by HB stars, and (2) the present observational data for the globular cluster systems are best understood in terms of systematic age differences among them, in the sense that globular clusters in more massive galaxies are older. If our age estimation is confirmed to be correct, this would indicate that the star formation in denser environments has proceeded much more rapidly and efficiently, so that the initial epoch of star formation in more massive (and denser) systems occurred several billion years earlier than that of the Milky Way (see also Lee 1992). This is also consistent with the view that a substantial population of the massive early-type galaxies formed earlier at very high redshift (e.g., Larson (1990); Maoz (1990); Bender et al. (1996); Harris et al. (1998); Stanford et al. (1998)).

Further observations of globular cluster systems in nearby galaxies from the large ground-based telescopes are imperative to manifest this possible systematic age difference. In addition, satellite UV photometry could also provide a test for the validity of our results presented in this paper, because it is expected that older globular clusters would reveal the stronger UV fluxes and the bluer UV colors as their blue HB stars should be hotter than those in the Galactic counterparts at given metallicity (see Figure 1 of Park & Lee (1997)). These new observations, together with the detailed population models presented here, will undoubtedly help to clarify our understanding of the formation epoch of galaxies.

Support for this work was provided by the Creative Research Initiatives Program of the Korean Ministry of Science and Technology.


text:
# CDF/PUB/ELECTROWEAK/PUBLIC/5148Fermilab-Pub-00/085-EV1.6 2000-04-15 Direct Measurement of the 𝑾 Boson Width in 𝒑𝒑̄ Collisions at √𝒔=1.8𝐓𝐞𝐕

## Abstract

Abstract

This Letter describes a direct measurement of the $`W`$ boson total decay width, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$, using the Collider Detector at Fermilab. The measurement uses an integrated luminosity of $`90\mathrm{pb}^1`$, collected during the 1994–1995 run of the Fermilab Tevatron $`p\overline{p}`$ collider. The width is determined by normalizing predicted signal and background distributions to 49844 $`We\nu `$ candidates and 21806 $`W\mu \nu `$ candidates in the transverse-mass region $`M_T<200\mathrm{GeV}`$ and then fitting the predicted shape to the 438 electron events and 196 muon events in the high-$`M_T`$ region, $`100<M_T<200\mathrm{GeV}`$. The result is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W=2.04\pm 0.11`$ (stat) $`\pm 0.09`$ (syst) GeV.

T. Affolder,21 H. Akimoto,43 A. Akopian,36 M. G. Albrow,10 P. Amaral,7 S. R. Amendolia,32 D. Amidei,24 K. Anikeev,22 J. Antos,1 G. Apollinari,10 T. Arisawa,43 T. Asakawa,41 W. Ashmanskas,7 M. Atac,10 F. Azfar,29 P. Azzi-Bacchetta,30 N. Bacchetta,30 M. W. Bailey,26 S. Bailey,14 P. de Barbaro,35 A. Barbaro-Galtieri,21 V. E. Barnes,34 B. A. Barnett,17 M. Barone,12 G. Bauer,22 F. Bedeschi,32 S. Belforte,40 G. Bellettini,32 J. Bellinger,44 D. Benjamin,9 J. Bensinger,4 A. Beretvas,10 J. P. Berge,10 J. Berryhill,7 B. Bevensee,31 A. Bhatti,36 M. Binkley,10 D. Bisello,30 R. E. Blair,2 C. Blocker,4 K. Bloom,24 B. Blumenfeld,17 S. R. Blusk,35 A. Bocci,32 A. Bodek,35 W. Bokhari,31 G. Bolla,34 Y. Bonushkin,5 D. Bortoletto,34 J. Boudreau,33 A. Brandl,26 S. van den Brink,17 C. Bromberg,25 M. Brozovic,9 N. Bruner,26 E. Buckley-Geer,10 J. Budagov,8 H. S. Budd,35 K. Burkett,14 G. Busetto,30 A. Byon-Wagner,10 K. L. Byrum,2 P. Calafiura,21 M. Campbell,24 W. Carithers,21 J. Carlson,24 D. Carlsmith,44 J. Cassada,35 A. Castro,30 D. Cauz,40 A. Cerri,32 A. W. Chan,1 P. S. Chang,1 P. T. Chang,1 J. Chapman,24 C. Chen,31 Y. C. Chen,1 M. -T. Cheng,1 M. Chertok,38 G. Chiarelli,32 I. Chirikov-Zorin,8 G. Chlachidze,8 F. Chlebana,10 L. Christofek,16 M. L. Chu,1 C. I. Ciobanu,27 A. G. Clark,13 A. Connolly,21 J. Conway,37 J. Cooper,10 M. Cordelli,12 J. Cranshaw,39 D. Cronin-Hennessy,9 R. Cropp,23 R. Culbertson,7 D. Dagenhart,42 F. DeJongh,10 S. Dell’Agnello,12 M. Dell’Orso,32 R. Demina,10 L. Demortier,36 M. Deninno,3 P. F. Derwent,10 T. Devlin,37 J. R. Dittmann,10 S. Donati,32 J. Done,38 T. Dorigo,14 N. Eddy,16 K. Einsweiler,21 J. E. Elias,10 E. Engels, Jr.,33 W. Erdmann,10 D. Errede,16 S. Errede,16 Q. Fan,35 R. G. Feild,45 C. Ferretti,32 R. D. Field,11 I. Fiori,3 B. Flaugher,10 G. W. Foster,10 M. Franklin,14 J. Freeman,10 J. Friedman,22 H. Frisch,7 Y. Fukui,20 S. Galeotti,32 M. Gallinaro,36 T. Gao,31 M. Garcia-Sciveres,21 A. F. Garfinkel,34 P. Gatti,30 C. Gay,45 S. Geer,10 D. W. Gerdes,24 P. Giannetti,32 P. Giromini,12 V. Glagolev,8 M. Gold,26 J. Goldstein,10 A. Gordon,14 A. T. Goshaw,9 Y. Gotra,33 K. Goulianos,36 C. Green,34 L. Groer,37 C. Grosso-Pilcher,7 M. Guenther,34 G. Guillian,24 J. Guimaraes da Costa,14 R. S. Guo,1 R. M. Haas,11 C. Haber,21 E. Hafen,22 S. R. Hahn,10 C. Hall,14 T. Handa,15 R. Handler,44 W. Hao,39 F. Happacher,12 K. Hara,41 A. D. Hardman,34 R. M. Harris,10 F. Hartmann,18 K. Hatakeyama,36 J. Hauser,5 J. Heinrich,31 A. Heiss,18 M. Herndon,17 B. Hinrichsen,23 K. D. Hoffman,34 C. Holck,31 R. Hollebeek,31 L. Holloway,16 R. Hughes,27 J. Huston,25 J. Huth,14 H. Ikeda,41 J. Incandela,10 G. Introzzi,32 J. Iwai,43 Y. Iwata,15 E. James,24 H. Jensen,10 M. Jones,31 U. Joshi,10 H. Kambara,13 T. Kamon,38 T. Kaneko,41 K. Karr,42 H. Kasha,45 Y. Kato,28 T. A. Keaffaber,34 K. Kelley,22 M. Kelly,24 R. D. Kennedy,10 R. Kephart,10 D. Khazins,9 T. Kikuchi,41 B. Kilminster,35 M. Kirby,9 M. Kirk,4 B. J. Kim,19 D. H. Kim,19 H. S. Kim,16 M. J. Kim,19 S. H. Kim,41 Y. K. Kim,21 L. Kirsch,4 S. Klimenko,11 P. Koehn,27 A. Köngeter,18 K. Kondo,43 J. Konigsberg,11 K. Kordas,23 A. Korn,22 A. Korytov,11 E. Kovacs,2 J. Kroll,31 M. Kruse,35 S. E. Kuhlmann,2 K. Kurino,15 T. Kuwabara,41 A. T. Laasanen,34 N. Lai,7 S. Lami,36 S. Lammel,10 J. I. Lamoureux,4 M. Lancaster,21 G. Latino,32 T. LeCompte,2 A. M. Lee IV,9 K. Lee,39 S. Leone,32 J. D. Lewis,10 M. Lindgren,5 T. M. Liss,16 J. B. Liu,35 Y. C. Liu,1 N. Lockyer,31 J. Loken,29 M. Loreti,30 D. Lucchesi,30 P. Lukens,10 S. Lusin,44 L. Lyons,29 J. Lys,21 R. Madrak,14 K. Maeshima,10 P. Maksimovic,14 L. Malferrari,3 M. Mangano,32 M. Mariotti,30 G. Martignon,30 A. Martin,45 J. A. J. Matthews,26 J. Mayer,23 P. Mazzanti,3 K. S. McFarland,35 P. McIntyre,38 E. McKigney,31 M. Menguzzato,30 A. Menzione,32 C. Mesropian,36 T. Miao,10 R. Miller,25 J. S. Miller,24 H. Minato,41 S. Miscetti,12 M. Mishina,20 G. Mitselmakher,11 N. Moggi,3 E. Moore,26 R. Moore,24 Y. Morita,20 A. Mukherjee,10 T. Muller,18 A. Munar,32 P. Murat,10 S. Murgia,25 M. Musy,40 J. Nachtman,5 S. Nahn,45 H. Nakada,41 T. Nakaya,7 I. Nakano,15 C. Nelson,10 D. Neuberger,18 C. Newman-Holmes,10 C.-Y. P. Ngan,22 P. Nicolaidi,40 H. Niu,4 L. Nodulman,2 A. Nomerotski,11 S. H. Oh,9 T. Ohmoto,15 T. Ohsugi,15 R. Oishi,41 T. Okusawa,28 J. Olsen,44 W. Orejudos,21 C. Pagliarone,32 F. Palmonari,32 R. Paoletti,32 V. Papadimitriou,39 S. P. Pappas,45 D. Partos,4 J. Patrick,10 G. Pauletta,40 M. Paulini,21 C. Paus,22 L. Pescara,30 T. J. Phillips,9 G. Piacentino,32 K. T. Pitts,16 R. Plunkett,10 A. Pompos,34 L. Pondrom,44 G. Pope,33 M. Popovic,23 F. Prokoshin,8 J. Proudfoot,2 F. Ptohos,12 O. Pukhov,8 G. Punzi,32 K. Ragan,23 A. Rakitine,22 D. Reher,21 A. Reichold,29 W. Riegler,14 A. Ribon,30 F. Rimondi,3 L. Ristori,32 W. J. Robertson,9 A. Robinson,23 T. Rodrigo,6 S. Rolli,42 L. Rosenson,22 R. Roser,10 R. Rossin,30 A. Safonov,36 W. K. Sakumoto,35 D. Saltzberg,5 A. Sansoni,12 L. Santi,40 H. Sato,41 P. Savard,23 P. Schlabach,10 E. E. Schmidt,10 M. P. Schmidt,45 M. Schmitt,14 L. Scodellaro,30 A. Scott,5 A. Scribano,32 S. Segler,10 S. Seidel,26 Y. Seiya,41 A. Semenov,8 F. Semeria,3 T. Shah,22 M. D. Shapiro,21 P. F. Shepard,33 T. Shibayama,41 M. Shimojima,41 M. Shochet,7 J. Siegrist,21 G. Signorelli,32 A. Sill,39 P. Sinervo,23 P. Singh,16 A. J. Slaughter,45 K. Sliwa,42 C. Smith,17 F. D. Snider,10 A. Solodsky,36 J. Spalding,10 T. Speer,13 P. Sphicas,22 F. Spinella,32 M. Spiropulu,14 L. Spiegel,10 J. Steele,44 A. Stefanini,32 J. Strologas,16 F. Strumia, 13 D. Stuart,10 K. Sumorok,22 T. Suzuki,41 T. Takano,28 R. Takashima,15 K. Takikawa,41 P. Tamburello,9 M. Tanaka,41 B. Tannenbaum,5 W. Taylor,23 M. Tecchio,24 P. K. Teng,1 K. Terashi,41 S. Tether,22 D. Theriot,10 R. Thurman-Keup,2 P. Tipton,35 S. Tkaczyk,10 K. Tollefson,35 A. Tollestrup,10 H. Toyoda,28 W. Trischuk,23 J. F. de Troconiz,14 J. Tseng,22 N. Turini,32 F. Ukegawa,41 T. Vaiciulis,35 J. Valls,37 S. Vejcik III,10 G. Velev,10 R. Vidal,10 R. Vilar,6 I. Volobouev,21 D. Vucinic,22 R. G. Wagner,2 R. L. Wagner,10 J. Wahl,7 N. B. Wallace,37 A. M. Walsh,37 C. Wang,9 C. H. Wang,1 M. J. Wang,1 T. Watanabe,41 D. Waters,29 T. Watts,37 R. Webb,38 H. Wenzel,18 W. C. Wester III,10 A. B. Wicklund,2 E. Wicklund,10 H. H. Williams,31 P. Wilson,10 B. L. Winer,27 D. Winn,24 S. Wolbers,10 D. Wolinski,24 J. Wolinski,25 S. Wolinski,24 S. Worm,26 X. Wu,13 J. Wyss,32 A. Yagil,10 W. Yao,21 G. P. Yeh,10 P. Yeh,1 J. Yoh,10 C. Yosef,25 T. Yoshida,28 I. Yu,19 S. Yu,31 Z. Yu,45 A. Zanetti,40 F. Zetti,21 and S. Zucchelli3

(CDF Collaboration)

1 Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan 11529, Republic of China

2 Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois 60439

3 Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, University of Bologna, I-40127 Bologna, Italy

4 Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts 02254

5 University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90024

6 Instituto de Fisica de Cantabria, CSIC-University of Cantabria, 39005 Santander, Spain

7 Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637

8 Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, RU-141980 Dubna, Russia

9 Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708

10 Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois 60510

11 University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611

12 Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, I-00044 Frascati, Italy

13 University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland

14 Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

15 Hiroshima University, Higashi-Hiroshima 724, Japan

16 University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801

17 The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218

18 Institut für Experimentelle Kernphysik, Universität Karlsruhe, 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany

19 Korean Hadron Collider Laboratory: Kyungpook National University, Taegu 702-701; Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742; and SungKyunKwan University, Suwon 440-746; Korea

20 High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305, Japan

21 Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720

22 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139

23 Institute of Particle Physics: McGill University, Montreal H3A 2T8; and University of Toronto, Toronto M5S 1A7; Canada

24 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109

25 Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824

26 University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131

27 The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210

28 Osaka City University, Osaka 588, Japan

29 University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3RH, United Kingdom

30 Universita di Padova, Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Padova, I-35131 Padova, Italy

31 University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104

32 Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, University and Scuola Normale Superiore of Pisa, I-56100 Pisa, Italy

33 University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260

34 Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907

35 University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627

36 Rockefeller University, New York, New York 10021

37 Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey 08855

38 Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843

39 Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 79409

40 Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, University of Trieste/ Udine, Italy

41 University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305, Japan

42 Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155

43 Waseda University, Tokyo 169, Japan

44 University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706

45 Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520

13.38.Be

The masses and coupling strengths of the gauge bosons that mediate the known forces are fundamental parameters in the Standard Model (SM). The $`W`$ boson width, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$, is precisely predicted in terms of these masses and couplings. The leptonic partial width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(W\mathrm{}\nu )`$ for the lepton $`\mathrm{}`$ can be expressed as $`G_FM_W^3/6\sqrt{2}\pi (1+\delta _{\mathrm{SM}})`$ in terms of the well-measured muon decay constant $`G_F`$, the $`W`$ boson mass $`M_W`$, and a small ($`<\frac{1}{2}\%`$) radiative correction $`\delta _{\mathrm{SM}}`$ to the Born-level expression . Dividing the partial width by the branching ratio, $`B(W\mathrm{}\nu )=1/(3+6(1+\alpha _s(M_W)/\pi +𝒪(\alpha _s^2)))`$, gives the SM prediction for the full width of the $`W`$ boson, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W=2.093\pm 0.002\mathrm{GeV}`$ .

The $`W`$ width has been measured indirectly using the ratio $`R\frac{\sigma B(p\overline{p}W\mathrm{}\nu )}{\sigma B(p\overline{p}Z^0\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{})}`$ , with a current precision of 50 MeV , by assuming SM values for $`\sigma (W)/\sigma (Z)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(W\mathrm{}\nu )`$ and using the LEP measurement of the branching ratio $`B(Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{})`$. Direct measurements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ from lineshape analyses have been reported in $`p\overline{p}`$ collisions with a precision of 320 MeV  and in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions where presently the most precise measurement has an uncertainty of 375 MeV .

The CDF collaboration previously reported  a direct measurement of the $`W`$ width using an integrated luminosity of 20 pb-1 of $`We\nu `$ data collected by CDF during the 1992-1993 run of the Fermilab Tevatron collider. This Letter extends that measurement, using a 90 pb-1 sample of $`We\nu `$ and $`W\mu \nu `$ data collected by CDF during the period from January 1994 to July 1995.

This paper presents a measurement of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ obtained in studies of the transverse-mass spectra of leptonic $`W`$ decays. The transverse mass is defined as $`M_T\sqrt{2P_T^{\mathrm{}}P_T^\nu [1\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi )]}`$, where $`\mathrm{}=e`$ or $`\mu `$, $`P_T^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`P_T^\nu `$ are the transverse momenta  of the charged lepton and neutrino, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi `$ is the azimuthal angle between them. The transverse-mass spectrum exhibits a Jacobian edge at the $`W`$ mass. Events with $`M_T>M_W`$ arise due to a combination of the non-zero $`W`$ width and the detector resolution. A precise $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ measurement from the high-mass tail is possible, however, because the width component of the high-$`M_T`$ lineshape falls off much more slowly than the resolution component. In this analysis the $`W`$ width is determined from a binned log-likelihood fit to the transverse-mass distribution in the region $`100<M_T<200`$ GeV. The choice $`M_T>100`$ GeV minimizes the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties.

The portions of the CDF detector relevant to this analysis are described briefly below. Detailed descriptions can be found elsewhere . Electromagnetic and hadronic calorimeters, arranged in a projective tower geometry, cover the pseudorapidity range $`|\eta |<4.2`$. In the region $`|\eta |<1.0`$, a lead/scintillator electromagnetic calorimeter (CEM) measures electron energies with resolution $`\sigma (E)/E=13.5\%/\sqrt{E_T(\mathrm{GeV})}1.5\%`$. A cylindrical drift chamber (CTC), immersed in a 1.4 T solenoidal magnetic field, tracks charged particles in the range $`|\eta |<1.0`$ with vertex-constrained momentum resolution $`\sigma (p_T)/p_T=0.09\%\times p_T(\mathrm{GeV})`$. A system of drift chambers and steel absorber identifies muons in the region $`|\eta |<1.0`$. Finally, a time-projection chamber (VTX) finds $`p\overline{p}`$ interaction vertices along the $`z`$ axis.

Candidate $`We\nu `$ events are required to have an electron in the central barrel region of the detector ($`|\eta |<1.0`$) with CEM transverse energy $`E_T^e>25`$ GeV and CTC transverse momentum $`p_T^e>15`$ GeV. The electron track must be isolated in the CTC, having no other track with $`p_T>1`$ GeV within a cone in the $`\eta `$-$`\varphi `$ space of $`\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi )^2+(\mathrm{\Delta }\eta )^2}=0.25`$ centered on the electron. The ratio of energy in the hadron (Had) and electromagnetic (CEM) calorimeter towers of the electron cluster is required to satisfy $`E_{\mathrm{Had}}/E_{\mathrm{CEM}}<0.055+0.00045E(\mathrm{GeV})`$. The electron shower must be contained within a fiducial region of the CEM, away from calorimeter cell boundaries, and have a profile consistent with test-beam data.

Candidate $`W\mu \nu `$ events must have a CTC track with transverse momentum $`p_T^\mu >25`$ GeV. The CTC track must be well matched to a track segment in the muon chambers. The signal in the electromagnetic and hadronic calorimeters must be consistent with the passage of a minimum-ionizing particle, satisfying $`E_{\mathrm{CEM}}<2`$ GeV and $`E_{\mathrm{Had}}<6`$ GeV. Trigger prescale factors, trigger efficiency, and limited azimuthal coverage reduce the $`W\mu \nu `$ acceptance by a factor $`2`$ with respect to the $`We\nu `$ acceptance .

In both $`We\nu `$ and $`W\mu \nu `$ candidate events, a transverse momentum imbalance is required to signal the presence of the neutrino. The missing transverse energy, $`\stackrel{}{\overline{)}E}_T(\stackrel{}{P_T^{\mathrm{}}}+\stackrel{}{u})`$, must satisfy $`\overline{)}E_T>`$25 GeV, where $`P_T^{\mathrm{}}`$ denotes $`E_T^e`$ for electrons or $`p_T^\mu `$ for muons. The recoil transverse energy vector, $`\stackrel{}{u}`$, is defined as $`_iE_i\mathrm{sin}\theta _i(\mathrm{cos}\varphi _i,\mathrm{sin}\varphi _i)`$, for calorimeter towers $`i`$ with $`|\eta |<3.6`$, excluding those traversed by the charged lepton. The vector $`\stackrel{}{u}`$, which includes initial state QCD radiation, underlying event energy, and the products of overlapping $`p\overline{p}`$ interactions, is an estimator of the transverse momentum of the $`W`$. To reduce backgrounds and improve transverse mass resolution, the recoil energy must satisfy $`u<20`$ GeV. To ensure good measurements in the drift chamber and calorimeters, both electrons and muons must pass through all 84 layers of the CTC and must originate from an event vertex located within 60 cm of the detector center along the $`z`$ axis. Events consistent with cosmic rays or $`Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ decays are removed. The $`We\nu `$ sample consists of 49844 events in the range $`40<M_T<200`$ GeV; the $`W\mu \nu `$ sample consists of 21806 events with transverse masses in the same range.

Several background processes can mimic the $`W`$ signal. The process $`W\tau \nu \mathrm{}\nu \nu \nu `$ has a signature similar to $`W\mathrm{}\nu `$ decays but at lower $`M_T`$. The process $`Zee`$, where one electron is detected and the other is lost because it falls into an uninstrumented region of the detector, can produce the signature of an electron and $`\overline{)}E_T`$; similarly, a $`Z\mu \mu `$ event can pass the $`W\mu \nu `$ selection if one muon is outside the $`|\eta |`$ acceptance of the CTC. Multijet backgrounds from QCD processes arise when one jet fragments into a single particle that mimics a charged lepton and another is mismeasured to produce an energy imbalance. A Monte Carlo simulation normalized to the $`W\mathrm{}\nu `$ data is used to predict the $`W\tau \nu `$ and $`Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ backgrounds. The QCD contribution is estimated from a study of non-isolated leptons in the data. Table I summarizes the background contributions for the $`We\nu `$ and $`W\mu \nu `$ samples. In the $`M_T>200\mathrm{GeV}`$ region, 23 $`Wl\nu `$ candidates are observed, consistent with the expectation of $`20\pm 5`$ events.

Since the $`W`$ and $`Z`$ bosons share a common production mechanism and are close in mass, $`Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ decays are used extensively to model the detector’s response to $`W\mathrm{}\nu `$ events. Samples of $`Zee`$ and $`Z\mu \mu `$ candidates are selected using the same charged-lepton requirements as for $`W\mathrm{}\nu `$ candidates, with the exception that one muon from each $`Z\mu \mu `$ pair is subjected to less stringent fiducial requirements. The invariant mass must fall in the window $`70<M^{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}<110`$ GeV and the boson transverse momentum must satisfy $`P_T^Z<50`$ GeV. There are 2012 $`Zee`$ and 1830 $`Z\mu \mu `$ candidates, with negligible background. Using the LEP values of the $`Z`$-boson mass and width , the scales and resolutions of the lepton energy and momentum measurements are extracted from a fit to the $`Z`$-candidate $`M^{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}`$ spectra. Additional fits to the $`Z`$ data constrain the boson transverse-momentum spectra and provide an empirical model of the recoil response $`\stackrel{}{u}`$ as a function of $`P_T^{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}`$. Details of the recoil model can be found in Refs. .

The $`W`$ transverse mass spectrum is modeled using a Monte Carlo simulation that generates lowest-order diagrams of $`W`$ production, $`q\overline{q}W`$, according to an energy-dependent Breit-Wigner distribution:

$`\sigma (\widehat{s}){\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{s}}{(\widehat{s}M_W^2)^2+\widehat{s}^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_W^2/M_W^2}},`$

where $`\sqrt{\widehat{s}}`$ is the (generally off-shell) $`l\nu `$ mass. The MRS-R2  parton distribution functions are used. The effects of higher order QCD diagrams for $`W`$ production are included by giving the $`W`$ bosons transverse momenta according to a fit to the boson momentum spectra in the $`Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ samples; a theoretical calculation  allows the $`W`$ transverse momentum spectrum to be derived from the $`Z`$ transverse momentum spectrum. The generator includes the effect of $`W\mathrm{}\nu \gamma `$ decays, and the effect of photon radiation on the lepton selection is accounted for in a detailed simulation. The lepton momenta are passed through a simulation of the detector response, which includes a parametric model of the $`\stackrel{}{u}`$ measurement as a function of boson transverse momentum. The same kinematic and geometric cuts as in the data are applied in the simulation.

The simulation produces $`M_T`$ spectra for a range of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ values, from 1.0 to 3.0 GeV in 50 MeV intervals. Each spectrum is normalized to the number of expected signal events in the region $`M_T<200`$ GeV, and background shapes at the rates shown in Table I are added to the predicted spectra. A binned likelihood fit in 1 GeV bins over the region $`100<M_T<200`$ GeV returns $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W=2.175\pm 0.125`$ (stat) GeV for the electron channel and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W=1.780\pm 0.195`$ (stat) GeV for the muon channel. Figure 1 shows the data with the best fits and normalized background shapes superimposed.

The systematic uncertainties in this measurement of the $`W`$ width are due to effects that alter the shape of the transverse mass distribution. The most important sources of uncertainty are non-linearity of the CEM $`E_T`$ measurement (relevant only for electrons), recoil modeling, the $`W`$ transverse momentum spectrum, and backgrounds. To estimate the uncertainties due to these effects, these parameters are varied in the simulation and the simulated transverse mass spectra with the varied input parameters are fit to the nominal templates.

Linearity of the CEM energy measurement is studied by comparing CEM energies to CTC momenta over the range of energies spanned by electrons from the $`W`$ and $`Z`$ data samples. A fit to the form $`E^{\mathrm{meas}}/E^{\mathrm{true}}=1+ϵ(E_T^{\mathrm{meas}}E_T)`$ yields $`ϵ=(2.9\pm 1.3)\times 10^4\mathrm{GeV}^1`$; a study of $`\psi ee`$ and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}ee`$ events yields a consistent value of $`ϵ`$. CEM energies in the data are corrected event-by-event for this effect. Taking the uncertainty on $`ϵ`$ to be $`\pm 2.9\times 10^4\mathrm{GeV}^1`$ shifts $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ in the simulation by $`60`$ MeV. A study of $`\psi \mu \mu `$, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\mu \mu `$, and $`Z\mu \mu `$ resonances finds no evidence for non-linearity in the momentum measurement. Varying the linearity of the momentum measurement within the bounds allowed by the data changes the muon-channel $`W`$ width by only 5 MeV in the simulation.

The parameters of the recoil model are varied according to the covariance matrices obtained in the fits of $`\stackrel{}{u}`$ as a function of $`P_T^{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}`$ in the $`Z`$ data. Because the $`e`$ and $`\mu `$ analyses use independent fits to their respective $`Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ samples, the uncertainties are different for the two channels and are statistically independent. The effect on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ is 60 MeV in the electron channel and 90 MeV in the muon channel. Similarly, the statistical uncertainty in the fits to the transverse momentum spectra of the two $`Z`$ boson samples yields a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ error of 55 MeV in the electron channel and 70 MeV in the muon channel. Varying the background predictions within the errors quoted in Table I changes the electron result by 30 MeV and the muon result by 50 MeV.

Varying the muon identification cuts in the data and the muon acceptance model in the simulation yield a combined $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ error of 40 MeV. To check the detector simulation used in the electron analysis, a sample generated using an independent simulation program is fit with the standard $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ templates and found to agree; the statistical precision of the the check, 30 MeV, is taken as a systematic uncertainty.

Fits to the $`Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ mass spectra determine both the CEM energy and CTC momentum scales to 0.1%. Varying these scales by 0.1% in the simulation changes $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ by 20 MeV and 15 MeV respectively in the electron and muon analyses. Varying the CEM and CTC resolutions within the uncertainties allowed by fits to the $`Z`$ mass spectra varies $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ by 10 MeV and 20 MeV respectively.

Monte Carlo spectra have been generated using a variety of modern parton distribution functions, including a set whose $`d/u`$ ratio was modified  to span the range allowed by CDF measurements of the rapidity asymmetry in $`W\mathrm{}\nu `$ decay. The RMS shift in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ is 15 MeV in both channels. Varying the $`W`$ mass by the current world average uncertainty of 40 MeV  from the central value 80.40 GeV changes $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ by 10 MeV in each channel. Finally a study comparing $`W\mathrm{}\nu \gamma `$ and $`W\mathrm{}\nu \gamma \gamma `$ in the PHOTOS simulation yields a systematic uncertainty of 10 MeV. These three final sources of uncertainty are common to both analyses.

Uncertainties have been calculated separately for the fit regions $`M_T>90`$ GeV, $`M_T>100`$ GeV, and $`M_T>110`$ GeV. While the statistical uncertainty decreases as the cut value is lowered, the systematic uncertainty increases. The $`M_T>100`$ GeV fit minimizes the total uncertainty. The results of the $`M_T>100`$ GeV and $`M_T>110`$ GeV fits differ by 10 MeV in the electron channel and 60 MeV in the muon channel.

Table II summarizes the sources of uncertainty described above. Combining the $`e`$ and $`\mu `$ results, with a common error of 25 MeV, yields $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W=2.04\pm 0.11`$ (stat) $`\pm 0.09`$ (syst) GeV. Including the previously published CDF electron result  with the same common error yields $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W=2.05\pm 0.10`$ (stat) $`\pm 0.08`$ (syst) GeV. The result is in good agreement with the Standard Model value.

The vital contributions of the Fermilab staff and the technical staffs of the participating institutions are gratefully acknowledged. This work is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Instituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare of Italy, the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture of Japan, the National Science Council of the Republic of China, and the A.P. Sloan Foundation.


text:
# Observations of Mira stars with the IOTA/FLUOR interferometer and comparison with Mira star models

## 1 INTRODUCTION

The resolution of large optical telescopes and interferometers is high enough to resolve the stellar disk of nearby M giant stars, to reveal photospheric asymmetries and surface structures, and to study the dependence of the diameter on the wavelength, variability phase, and cycle. Previous speckle or long-baseline interferometry observations were, for example, reported in Refs. 3-10. Theoretical studies (e.g. Refs. 1-2 and 11-13) show that accurate monochromatic diameter measurements can significantly improve our understanding of M giant atmospheres. With the IOTA interferometer a resolution of $``$ 9 mas can be achieved with its largest baseline of 38 m in the K-band. The IOTA interferometer is located at the Smithsonian Institution’s Whipple Observatory on Mount Hopkins in Arizona. A detailed description of IOTA can be found in Refs. 14 and 15. IOTA can be operated in the K-band with the FLUOR16 fiber optics beam combiner. This beam combiner provides high-accuracy visibility measurements in spite of time-variable atmospheric conditions. The single-mode fibers in the beam combiner spatially filter the wavefronts corrugated by atmospheric turbulence (see Refs. 16 and 17).

## 2 OBSERVATIONS

The five Miras X Oph, R Aql, RU Her, R Ser, V CrB were observed with the IOTA interferometer on May 16, 17 and 18, 1999. The observations were carried out with the fiber optics beam combiner FLUOR in the K-band and with 38 m baseline. The interferograms are scanned by the delay line during the coherence time of the atmosphere. The OPD length of the scan is $``$ 100 $`\mu `$m. Approximately 100 scans per baseline were recorded. Several reference stars (Table 1) were observed for the calibration of the observations (see Ref. 17 for more details). The diameters of the reference stars were derived from the scale of stellar diameters at K-magnitude = 0 for giants by Dyck et al.18. The fringe visibility of the reference stars was 64% - 94%. Fig. 1 shows the obtained visibility functions of the five Mira stars together with uniform-disk fits. The errors of the derived Mira star diameters are 1-3%.

In Table 1 the calibrated visibilities and the derived uniform-disk diameters of the five Miras are listed, together with observational parameters (spectral type, variability period $`P`$, date of observation, variability phase $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{vis}`$, projected baseline length $`B_\mathrm{p}`$, calibrated visibilities $`V`$, derived uniform-disk diameters $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mathrm{UD}}`$, and reference stars).

## 3 COMPARISON OF THE OBSERVATIONS WITH MIRA STAR MODELS

In this section we derive angular diameters from the measured visibilities by fitting different theoretical center-to-limb intensity variations (hereafter CLV) of different Mira star models (Bessel, Scholz and Wood 1996 = BSW961, Hofmann, Scholz and Wood 1998 = HSW982). From these angular diameters and the bolometric flux, we derive effective temperatures. For R Aql a HIPPARCOS parallax is available which allows us to determine linear radii. The comparison of these measured stellar parameters with theoretical ones indicate whether any of the models are a fair representation of the observed Mira stars. All Mira star models used in this paper are from BSW96 (D and E series) and from HSW98 (P, M and O series). They were developed as possible representations of the prototype Mira variable o Ceti, and hence have periods $`P`$ very close to the 332 day period of this star; they differ in pulsation mode, assumed mass $`M`$ and assumed luminosity $`L`$; and the BSW96 models differ from the (more advanced) HSW98 models with respect to the pulsation modelling technique. The five models represent stars pulsating in the fundamental mode ($`f`$; D, P and M models) or in the first-overtone mode ($`o`$; E and O models). Table 2 lists the properties of these Mira model series ($`R_\mathrm{p}`$ = Rosseland radius of the non-pulsating parent star of the Mira variable = distance from the ”parent star’s” center, at which the Rosseland optical depth $`\tau _{\mathrm{Ross}}`$ equals unity, see BSW96 and HSW98; $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}(L/R_\mathrm{p}^2)^{1/4}`$ = effective temperature). Table 3 provides the link between the 22 abscissa values (model-phase combinations m) in Figs. 2 and 3, and the models, and it additionally lists the variability phase, relative Rosseland and stellar K-band filter radius, and the effective temperature. We compare predictions of these models at different phases and cycles with our observations.

Monochromatic radius $`R_\lambda `$ and Rosseland radius $`R`$. We use the conventional stellar radius definition where the monochromatic radius $`R_\lambda `$ of a star at wavelength $`\lambda `$ is given by the distance from the star’s center at which the optical depth equals unity ($`\tau _\lambda `$ = 1). In analogy, the photospheric stellar radius $`R`$ (Rosseland radius) is given by the distance from the star’s center at which the Rosseland optical depth equals unity ($`\tau _{\mathrm{Ross}}`$ = 1). This radius has the advantage of agreeing well (see Table 6 and the discussion in HSW98 for deviations sometimes occurring in very cool stars) with measurable near-infrared continuum radii and with the standard boundary radius of pulsation models with $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}(L/R^2)^{1/4}`$.

Stellar filter radius $`R_\mathrm{f}`$. For the K-band filter used for the observations we have calculated the theoretical CLVs corresponding to the above mentioned five Mira star models at different phases and cycles. The stellar radius for filter transmission $`\mathrm{f}_\lambda `$ is the intensity and filter weighted radius $`R_\mathrm{f}=R_\lambda I_\lambda \mathrm{f}_\lambda 𝑑\lambda /I_\lambda \mathrm{f}_\lambda 𝑑\lambda `$, which we call stellar filter radius $`R_\mathrm{f}`$ after the definition of Scholz & Takeda19. In this equation $`R_\lambda `$ denotes the above monochromatic $`\tau _\lambda `$ = 1 radius, $`I_\lambda `$ the central intensity spectrum and $`\mathrm{f}_\lambda `$ the transmission of the filter.

Observed angular stellar K-band radius $`R_{\mathrm{K},\mathrm{m}}^a`$ and observed angular Rosseland radius $`R_\mathrm{m}^a`$. The observed angular stellar K-band radii $`R_{\mathrm{K},\mathrm{m}}^a`$ of the observed Miras corresponding to the model-phase combinations m (see Table 3), were derived by least-squares fits between the measured visibilities and the visibilities of the corresponding theoretical CLVs. Additionally, the angular Rosseland radii $`R_\mathrm{m}^a`$ were derived from the obtained stellar K-band radii $`R_{\mathrm{K},\mathrm{m}}^a`$ and the theoretical ratios $`R_\mathrm{m}`$/$`R_{\mathrm{K},\mathrm{m}}`$ from Table 3 (Table 3 provides theoretical $`R`$ and $`R_\mathrm{K}`$ values for each model-phase combination m). In the following subsections we apply CLVs predicted from all five models at phases both near our observations and, for comparison, also at other phases.

### 3.1 Effective temperature

Effective temperatures of each observed Mira star were derived from its angular Rosseland radii $`R_\mathrm{m}^a`$ and its bolometric flux using the relation

$$T_{\mathrm{eff}}=2341\mathrm{K}\times (F_{\mathrm{bol}}/\varphi ^2)^{1/4}$$
(1)
where $`F_{\mathrm{bol}}`$ is the apparent bolometric flux in units of 10-8 erg cm-2 s-1 and $`\varphi `$ = 2$`\times `$$`R_\mathrm{m}^a`$ is the angular Rosseland diameter in mas. The bolometric flux was derived from JHKLM-band observations carried out twelve days after the visibility observations. For cool stars such as LPVs, where most of the luminosity is emitted at near-infrared wavelengths, a convenient approximation for calculating bolometric magnitudes is to use a blackbody function to interpolate between photometric observations in the J, H, K, L and M bands. For estimating the bolometric flux we used JHKLM photometric measurements which were carried out with the 1.25 m telescope at the Crimean station of the Sternberg Astronomical Institute in Moscow twelve days after our visibility observations.

Fig. 2 shows a comparison of the measured and theoretical effective temperatures. Table 4 lists the measured bolometric flux and the average measured effective temperature for each of the five observed Mira stars. For R Aql we also derived effective temperatures for the best-fitting D and P models:

( average over phases 1.0, 2.0; ∗∗ average over phases 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0)

( average over all near-maximum model-phase combinations m since the phase of the observation was near-maximum)
(∗∗ average over all model-phase combinations m since models with phases close to the observation do not exist)

### 3.2 Linear radii

We have derived linear stellar K-band radii $`R_{\mathrm{K},\mathrm{m}}`$ and Rosseland radii $`R_\mathrm{m}`$ of R Aql from the measured angular stellar K-band radii $`R_{\mathrm{K},\mathrm{m}}^a`$ and Rosseland radii $`R_\mathrm{m}^a`$ by using the R Aql HIPPARCOS parallax of 4.73$`\pm `$1.19 mas20. The HIPPARCOS parallaxes of the other four observed Miras have too large errors for estimating useful linear radii. Fig. 3 shows the obtained linear Rosseland radii $`R_\mathrm{m}`$ and stellar K-band radii $`R_{\mathrm{K},\mathrm{m}}`$ of R Aql for all model-phase combinations m. The theoretical Rosseland radii of the D, M and P model series at all available near-maximum phases are close (within the error bars) to the measured Rosseland radii of R Aql. The theoretical Rosseland radii of the first-overtone models E and O are clearly too large compared with measured Rosseland radii. The same conclusions are also valid for the linear stellar filter radii $`R_\mathrm{K}`$ (Fig. 3).

If we calculate average R Aql radii by averaging the radii derived with all available near-maximum D model CLVs (i.e., m = 1, 3) and/or near-maximum P model CLVs (i.e., m = 9, 11, 13, 15) we obtain:

### 3.3 Pulsation mode

Adopting the above phase-averaged (over models D and P at maximum phases) linear Rosseland radius of 250 R$`\pm `$63 R for R Aql, we find for the pulsation constant $`Q=P(M/M_{})^{1/2}(R/R_{})^{3/2}`$ a value of $`Q`$=0.072$`\pm `$0.027 for a 1 M-Mira with period $`P`$=284 days. This $`Q`$ value agrees within the 1$`\sigma `$ error with the theoretical value ($`Q`$=0.088) for fundamental pulsation mode for 1 M-AGB stars with a period of $``$ 284 days21. The corresponding $`Q`$ value of first overtone pulsation mode is $`Q`$=0.049. Note, however, that no direct measurement of a Mira mass exists and that a 20% uncertainty of $`M`$ would for example result in a 10% uncertainty of $`Q`$.

## 4 DISCUSSION

We derived the following angular uniform-disk diameters $`\varphi `$ of five Mira stars from K-band visibility measurements with the 38 m baseline of the IOTA interferometer and the FLUOR beam combiner:

The following effective temperatures were obtained from photometric JHKLM observations and the derived angular Rosseland radii:

Previous interferometric K-band observations of some of our target stars (R Aql, X Oph, R Ser) were carried out by van Belle et al.8 at similar phases. Their derived uniform-disk diameters (R Aql; $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{vis}}`$ = 0.90: 10.76$`\pm `$0.61 mas, X Oph; $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{vis}}`$ = 0.75: 12.30$`\pm `$0.66 mas, R Ser; $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{vis}}`$ = 0.32: 8.56$`\pm `$0.58 mas) are in good agreement with our observations (within the error bars). Their measured effective temperatures (R Aql: 3189$`\pm `$147 K, X Oph: 3041$`\pm `$160 K, R Ser: 2804$`\pm `$144 K) are also in good agreement with our results, with the exception of R Ser.

For R Aql a good HIPPARCOS parallax (4.73$`\pm `$1.19 mas) is available and it is therefore possible to compare measured linear Rosseland and stellar K-band radii with the theoretical radii of the BSW96 and HSW98 models. The measured radii were derived by fitting theoretical (BSW96, HSW98) center-to-limb intensity variations to the visibility data. In the following table we compare measured and theoretical values:

( average over phases 1.0, 2.0; ∗∗ average over phases 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0)

The comparison suggests that R Aql is well represented by the fundamental mode D and P model (BSW96, HSW98). The measured Rosseland radius of $`R`$ = 250$`\pm `$63 R (average of the derived values from D and P model CLVs; corresponding theoretical D/P model Rosseland radius = 255 R) places R Aql among the fundamental mode pulsators in the period-radius relation which also is in agreement with Ref. 8. Note, however, that observations in more filters than just one continuum filter may be necessary for safely distinguishing a well-fitting model from an accidental match (cf. Ref. 10).

## 5 REFERENCES

1. M.S. Bessell, M. Scholz, P.R. Wood, A&A 307, pp. 481, 1996 (BSW96)
2. K.-H. Hofmann, M. Scholz, P.R. Wood, A&A 339, pp. 846, 1998 (HSW98)
3. D. Bonneau, A. Labeyrie, ApJ 181, pp. L1, 1973
4. M. Karovska, P. Nisenson, C. Papaliolios, R.P. Boyle, ApJ 374, pp. L51, 1991
5. A. Quirrenbach, D. Mozurkewich, J.T. Armstrong, et al., A&A 259, pp. L19, 1992
6. C.A. Haniff, M. Scholz, P.G. Tuthill, MNRAS 276, pp. 640, 1995
7. G. Weigelt, Y. Balega, K.-H. Hofmann, M. Scholz, A&A 316, pp. L21, 1996
8. G.T. Van Belle, H.M. Dyck, J.A. Benson, M.G. Lacasse, AJ 112, pp. 2147, 1996
9. G. Perrin, V. Coud$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}`$ du Foresto, S.T. Ridgway, et al., A&A 345, pp. 221, 1999
10. K.-H. Hofmann, Y. Balega, M. Scholz, G. Weigelt, A&A 353, pp. 1016, 2000
11. T. Watanabe, K. Kodaira, PASJ 31, pp. 61, 1979
12. M. Scholz, A&A 145, pp. 251, 1985
13. M.S. Bessell, J.M. Brett, M. Scholz, P.R. Wood, A&A 213, pp. 209, 1989
14. N.P. Carleton, W.A. Traub, M.G. Lacasse, et al., Proc. SPIE 2200, pp. 152, 1994
15. W.A. Traub, et al., Proc. SPIE 3350, pp. 848, 1998
16. V. Coud$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}`$ du Foresto, S.T. Ridgway, J.-M. Mariotti, A&AS 121, pp. 379, 1997
17. G. Perrin, V. Coud$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}`$ du Foresto, S.T. Ridgway, et al. A&A 331, pp. 619, 1998
18. H.M. Dyck, J.A. Benson, G.T. Van Belle, S.T. Ridgway, AJ 111(4), pp. 1705, 1996
19. M. Scholz, Y. Takeda, A&A 186, pp. 200, 1987 (erratum: 196, 342)
20. F. Van Leeuwen, M.W. Feast, P.A. Whitelock, B. Yudin, MNRAS 287, pp. 955, 1997
21. M.W. Fox, P.R. Wood, ApJ 259, pp. 198, 1982


text:
# Report NPI Řež–TH–02/2000 Internal conversion coefficients for superheavy elements

## 1 Introduction

The $`\gamma `$–ray and conversion electron spectroscopies have contributed substantially to our knowledge of the nuclear decay schemes. The extensive tables of the theoretical internal conversion coefficients (ICC) have enabled the investigators to derive from the spectroscopic data the multipolarities and total intensities of the electromagnetic transitions depopulating the excited nuclear states. Existing tables of the ICC cover wide region of the atomic numbers: 30$``$Z$``$104 for all atomic shells  and 10$``$Z$``$104 for the K, L, and M shells .

Very recently, Reiter et al  investigated the Z=102 isotope 254No produced in a heavy ion reaction. By means of a multidetector $`\gamma `$–ray spectrometer, the authors identified the ground-state band of the even–even nucleus up to spin 14. The transitions of energy less than 100 keV could not be seen in the $`\gamma `$–ray spectrum since they proceed almost entirely via emission of the conversion electrons. In connection with a great effort to produce superheavy (SH) nuclei, e.g. the indication for formation of the Z=118, A=293 isotope , a further progress in the $`\gamma `$–ray and conversion electron spectroscopies can be expected. With this motivation, we calculated in this work the ICC for SH elements with Z up to 126.

## 2 Calculations

The internal conversion coefficients for the elements with Z $``$ 104 were evaluated using the program NICC . The physical model used for the atom description was the Hartree–Fock one with the Slater’s exchange term, the nucleus was described as the finite one with the Fermi distribution of charge. With the exception of the nucleus description, this model is identical with that utilized by Rösel et al  (they used a homogenously charged sphere). The electron wavefunctions – both for the bound and free electrons – were calculated as solutions of the Dirac equation with the atomic potential of Lu et al  using the formulae of Bühring . The conversion matrix elements were then evaluated by direct integration with reasonably small step. The resulting ICC correspond to the first non-vanishing order of the perturbation theory.

The kinetic energy of the converted electron is very well approximated by the difference between the transition energy and the binding energy of this electron before the conversion. Since the electron binding energies are not known for the SH atoms, we used the eigenvalues from . There are two reasons for it. First, the eigenvalues  approximate the binding energies fairly well (up to tens of eV for the K–shell, up to eV’s at the outermost shells) for the lower Z. Second, the theoretical ICC are not too sensitive to small changes of the electron kinetic energy (except for the transition energies very close, say hundreds of eV, to the threshold).

## 3 Results and discussion

We have calculated the ICC for all subshells of the elements with 104 $``$ Z $``$ 126, the multipolarities E1 – E4 and M1 – M4, and 16 energies from 10 keV up to 1 MeV. Altogether, almost 90000 coefficients were evaluated. The total ICC’s were determined using the subshell occupation numbers of .

We did not notice any unusual behaviour of the subshell ICC in the very high Z region. Generally, the subshell ICC are increasing with Z and the multipolarity, and decreasing with the transition energy. Non-monotonous energy dependence can appear near the threshold. As exemplified in figure 1, the ICC of this work represent a smooth extention of the tables of Roesel et al  for Z$`>`$104. For Z=104, we compared the two sets of the ICC for various subshells and various transition energies and multipolarities. In 100 comparisons, the ICC of reference  and those of this work agreed typically within 1 - 2 %. In order to show the important role of the internal conversion in the region of superheavy elements, we present in table 1 the total ICC for every fifth Z value and a wide scope of transition energies and multipolarities.

An example of the energy dependence of the total ICC is depicted in figure 2. For each atomic subshell, there is a discontinuity at its treshold energy. Note that not all of them are seen in the logarithmic scale of figure 2, in dependence on the relative contribution of the particular subshell to the total ICC. For other multipolarities, the subshells with another angular momenta can play more important role and the most pronounced discontinuity will appear at another energy (e.g. at the L1 threshold for the M1 multipolarity and the L2 and L3 thresholds for the E2 one).

Figure 2 also demonstrates why it is not reasonable to interpolate in the tables of the total ICC if the transition energy is not far enough above the K-shell threshold. If it is not possible to evaluate the ICC for the particular energy directly, the only more or less reliable way is to interpolate in the tables of the subshell ICC. We have to remind that the systematic errors unfortunately appeared in the tables of the total ICC of Roesel et al  as explained in our previous work . (We also noticed that otherwise useful graphs of the ICC, presented in Appendix F1 of widely distributed Table of Isotopes  show incorrect behaviour of the total ICC in the neighbourhood of some energy thresholds.)

Considering the important role of the internal conversion we have also inspected the line shape which could be observed in the electron spectra in experiments with the SH nuclei. The measured spectra are influenced by energy losses and scattering of conversion electrons emerging from the target where they originated.

To estimate this effect we performed the Monte Carlo calculations (see, e.g.,  for description) of electron scattering for the conditions typical in the experiments with SH nuclei. We considered the case of 600 nm thick lead target and the initial electron energy of 10 keV. The isotropic initial distribution of emitted conversion electrons was assumed apart from a possible angular dependence of electron emission in the case of nuclei produced in the reaction. Assuming prompt electron emission from the created SH atoms, the homogeneous distribution of electron sources in the target volume was used. The total number of the simulated initial electrons was 10 millions. The energy distribution of all electrons emitted into the 2$`\pi `$ solid angle corresponding to the space behind the plane of the target surface was calculated. The curves corresponding to the convolution of the Gaussian spectrometer response function with the MC calculated distribution are displayed in figure 3. The Gaussian curves with the FWHM = 0.5 and 1 keV were used. It is seen that in this case of a realistic instrumental resolution of the present semiconductor spectrometers the electron scattering in the target causes increase of the spectral line width but it does not hinder the observation of interesting internal conversion lines. Moreover, with increasing electron energy and for thinner targets the effect of electron energy losses and scattering will be smaller. In addition, the SH atoms move after the recoil in nuclear reaction and therefore some conversion electrons can be emitted in the sites closer to the target surface or even outside of the target.

The more comprehensive Monte Carlo study of the electron scattering effect in the experiments with the SH nuclei will be presented at the conference MC2000 in Lisbon.

## 4 Conclusion

We have calculated the first internal conversion coefficients for SH elements. These theoretical data should facilitate planning of the heavy ion experiments aimed at production of the SH nuclei as well as interpretation of the electron spectra taken with future spectrometers. Via Monte Carlo simulations we have demonstrated that the electron scattering and energy losses within today’s reaction targets do not prevent the conversion electron spectroscopy down to 10 keV.

The extensive tables of the subshell and total ICC for 104$``$Z$``$126 were deposited at LANL preprint server . For cases of special interest, we can calculate the necessary ICC directly upon request.
Acknowledgement — This work was supported by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic under contract No. 202/00/1625.