text:
# Chapman’s model for ozone concentration: earth’s slowing rotation effect in the atmospheric past

## 1.- Introduction

The dynamics of the ozone layer in the atmosphere has different basic process like: chemical reactions, photochemical reactions and transport (diffusion, convection, etc.). In a general point of view, this dynamics is complex and requires some approximations to be studied. In this sense, we consider a photochemical model proposed by S. Chapman (Brasseur, 1986; Chapman, 1930; Wayne, 1991). This model considers a set of reactions between the oxygen components. Explicitly,

| R1) |  | $`O+O_2+MO_3+M,`$ |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| R2) |  | $`O+O_32O_2,`$ |  |  |
| R3) |  | $`O_2+h\nu O+O,`$ |  |  |
| R4) |  | $`O_3+h\nu O+O_2.`$ |  |  |

In the reaction of the ozone production R1, $`M`$ denotes any atmospheric element acting as catalyzer. The reaction R2 denotes the loss of oxygen $`O`$ and ozone $`O_3`$ producing molecular oxygen $`O_2`$. R3 and R4 correspond to photochemical destruction process related to the solar radiation (symbolized by $`h\nu `$).

The time evolution equations for the constituents consider the above reactions for variable concentration assuming the concentration of $`O_2`$ being stationary. Let $`X`$ and $`Y`$ be the concentration of $`O`$ and $`O_3`$ respectively. Then, the Chapman’s model (see for instance Brasseur, 1986; Montecinos, 1998; 1999) considers the time evolution equations for the concentrations given by

$$\frac{dX}{dt}=J_1+J_2Y\left(k_1+k_2Y\right)X,$$
(1)
$$\frac{dY}{dt}=k_1X\left(J_2+k_2X\right)Y,$$
(2)
where, on the right hand, the positive terms are production rates, and the negative ones are loss rates. In the nonlinear system (1,2), the quantities $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$ are related to the reactions R3 and R4 and correspond to the photodissociation of $`O_2`$ and $`O_3`$ respectively. The important fact is that they dependent on the sun’s radiation, and then, they are periodic in time with a period $`T=24`$ hours. In this paper, and by simplicity, we assume

$$J_i(t)=J_i^o(1\mathrm{cos}\omega t),i=1,2$$
(3)
where $`\omega =2\pi /T`$ , and $`J_i^o`$ are positive constants. On the other hand, the positive constants $`k_1`$ and $`k_2`$ in (1,2), are temperature dependent. Also they are dependent on the $`O_2`$ concentration, and related to the reaction velocity in R1 and R2 respectively (DeMore, 1994).

In this paper we propose an analytical study of the nonlinear model (1-3). In a general point of view, the study of this system is a difficult task, nevertheless, some interesting results can be find in the high frequency ($`\omega `$) limit. In fact, we use a method proposed originally by Kapitsa (Landau, 1982) for a mechanical particle in a field with rapid temporal oscillations in the parameters and nonlinear terms. We find explicitly the solutions of the systems (1-3) in the high frequency regime (19,20). They are the equilibrium solution for the time-averaged concentration. Calculations tell us that no solution exist in some frequency range. The study of the behavior of this model, for different frequencies, has a physical interest because earth period of rotation changes with the geological age. It is a known fact that the rotation of earth is gradually slowing down by friction. In fact, the estimated rotation velocity diminishes by 4.4 hours every billon of years (Shu, 1982).

For explicit calculations, we assume the following values for the parameters:

$$J_1^o10^7[1/s];J_2^o10^3[1/s];k_110[1/s];k_22.5\times 10^{15}[1/s],$$
(4)
corresponding to the values for the ozone layer altitude at, more or less, 35 km.

Finally we note that the case of small frequency ($`\omega 0`$) can be solved. In fact, here the parameters $`J_i(t)`$ evolve slowly with time and then, they can be assumed as constant in the integration process of (1,2). So the solutions corresponding to the ‘fixed point’ ($`\frac{dx}{dt}\frac{dy}{dt}0`$, for definitions see (Seydel, 1988; Wio, 1997)) are

$$Y=\frac{J_1^o}{4J_2^o}+\sqrt{\left(\frac{J_1^o}{4J_2^o}\right)^2+\frac{k_1J_1^o}{2k_2J_2^o}},$$
(5)
$$X=\frac{Y}{k_1k_2Y}J_2\left(t\right).$$
(6)
Namely, in this approximation, the variable $`Y`$ is constant and $`X`$ varies linearly with the dissociation coefficient. Moreover, the solutions (5,6) are consistent with the numerical solution in the stratosphere (Fabian, 1982; Montecinos, 1996). We note that, from (5), it is easy to show that the variable $`Y`$ satisfies $`Y\frac{k_1}{k_2}.`$ In fact, it is a general bound for the solution of the systems (1,2) (Montecinos, 2000).

## 2.- The method of Kapitsa

As said before, we shall study the system (1-3) in the high frequency regime. High frequency means here small period of oscillations $`T`$ respect to the relaxation-time $`T_R`$ for the slow variables.

Assume the separation of the concentrations $`X`$ and $`Y`$ in a slow temporal variation ($`x`$ and $`y`$) and other fast ($`\epsilon `$ and $`\eta ,`$ respectively). Namely,

$$X=x+\epsilon ;Y=y+\eta ,$$
(7)
where the fast variables are periodic with temporal average zero, namely,

$$\epsilon _T=\eta _T=0.$$
(8)
The equation (1) can be re-written like

$$\frac{dx}{dt}+\frac{d\epsilon }{dt}=J_1^o+J_2^oy\left(k_1+k_2y\right)x\left(J_1^o+J_2^oy\right)\mathrm{cos}\omega t+$$

$$\left(J_1^oJ_2^o\mathrm{cos}\omega tk_2x\right)\eta \left(k_1+k_2y\right)\epsilon k_2\epsilon \eta ,$$
(9)
and equation (2) becomes

$$\frac{dy}{dt}+\frac{d\eta }{dt}=k_1x\left(J_2^o+k_2x\right)y+J_2^oy\mathrm{cos}\omega t$$

$$\left(J_2^o+k_2xJ_2^o\mathrm{cos}\omega t\right)\eta +\left(k_1k_2y\right)\epsilon k_2\epsilon \eta .$$
(10)
On the other hand, the fast variables are only related to rapid oscillation (Landau, 1982). In this way, from the above expression (9,10), they are assumed to be a solution to the differential equations:

$$\frac{d\epsilon }{dt}=\left(J_1^o+J_2^oy\right)\mathrm{cos}\omega t;\frac{d\eta }{dt}=J_2^oy\mathrm{cos}\omega t.$$
(11)
At this point a remark becomes necessary. The expression (7), complemented with the above equations (11), defines a change of variables without approximations. Nevertheless, the differential equations (11) are suggested by the direct oscillatory term in (9) and (10). Kapitsa’s method consider the equations for $`\frac{d\epsilon }{dt}`$ and $`\frac{d\eta }{dt}`$ as approximated.

In one period, the slow variables are essentially constants and the fast have zero average (8), then, the time average of the equation (9) becomes.

$$\frac{dx}{dt}=J_1^o+J_2^oy\left(k_1+k_2y\right)xJ_2^o\eta \mathrm{cos}\omega t_Tk_2\epsilon \eta _T,$$
(12)
and, for equation (10), we obtain

$$\frac{dy}{dt}=k_1x\left(J_2^o+k_2x\right)y+J_2^o\eta \mathrm{cos}\omega t_Tk_2\epsilon \eta _T.$$
(13)
Nevertheless, since equations (11) can be solved exactly,

$$\epsilon (t)=\frac{1}{\omega }\left(J_1^o+J_2^oy\right)\mathrm{sin}\omega t;\eta (t)=\frac{J_2^o}{\omega }y\mathrm{sin}\omega t,$$
(14)
the evolution equations for the slow variables become

$$\frac{dx}{dt}=J_1^o+J_2^oy\left(k_1+k_2y\right)x+\frac{J_2^ok_2}{2\omega ^2}y\left(J_1^o+J_2^oy\right),$$
(15)
and

$$\frac{dy}{dt}=k_1x\left(J_2^o+k_2x\right)y+\frac{J_2^ok_2}{2\omega ^2}y\left(J_1^o+J_2^oy\right).$$
(16)
This set of equations are the basis for our analytical results. They are restricted to the high frequency approximation. This approximation becomes given by the ‘expansion’ in $`1/\omega ^2`$ related to the last term in (15,16). Remark that it is an autonomous nonlinear systems and then, without the explicit temporal dependence. This transformation, from a set of equations with time-periodic parameters, to other autonomous, is related to the Kapitsa original ideas (Landau, 1982).

In a general frame of work, the system (15,16) is complex. Moreover, the approximation of high frequency is valid when the relaxation time $`T_R,`$ of the equations (15,16), is bigger than $`2\pi /\omega `$. This comparison is a difficult task, nevertheless, the case  $`J_2^o=0`$ can be solved exactly to estimate the validity of the approximation. It corresponds formally to eliminate the dissociation of $`O_3`$. The asymptotic solution of the non-autonomous system (1-3) is (Montecinos, 2000).

$$X=\frac{J_1^o}{2k_1}\frac{J_1^o}{\sqrt{4k_1^2+\omega ^2}}\mathrm{cos}(\omega t\varphi ),Y=\frac{k_1}{k_2},$$
(17)
where the phase $`\varphi `$ is given by the relation: $`\mathrm{tan}\varphi =\omega /2k_1`$. On the other hand, combining the equations (15,16) with (7), in the high frequency approximation we found that the equilibrium solution given by the Kapitsa’s method is:

$$X=\frac{J_1^o}{2k_1}\frac{J_1^o}{\omega }\mathrm{sin}\omega t;Y=\frac{k_1}{k_2}.$$
(18)
It is direct to show that the exact solution (17) reduces to (18) in the high frequency limit. Moreover, the relaxation time $`T_R`$ can be calculated here analytically. It is given by $`T_R=1/2k_1`$. So, we expect that the high frequency approximation (15,16) is valid when $`4\pi k_1`$ $`\omega `$.

## 3.- Existence of equilibrium solutions

In this section we are concerned with the fixed point solution (Seydel, 1988; Wio, 1997) of the autonomous set (15,16). This system have an equilibrium point $`(x_o,y_o)`$, defined by $`\frac{dx}{dt}=\frac{dy}{dt}=0,`$ and given by the solution of the equations:

$$k_2J_2^o\left(2\frac{k_1J_2^o}{\omega ^2}\right)y_o^2+k_2J_1^o\left(1\frac{k_1J_2^o}{\omega ^2}\right)y_ok_1J_1^o=0,$$
(19)
and

$$x_o=\frac{\left(J_1^o+J_2^oy_o\right)\left(1+\frac{k_2J_2^o}{2\omega ^2}y_o\right)}{\left(k_1+k_2y_o\right)}.$$
(20)
Equations (19) and (20) define the homogeneous equilibrium solution of the autonomous system (15) and (16) and then, with (7) and (14), we have the solution of the systems (1,2) in the high frequency regime.

The existence of real solutions, for the second degree equation (19), requires the inequality

$$\frac{1}{\omega ^4}\frac{4}{k_2J_1^o}\left(1+\frac{k_2J_1^o}{2k_1J_2^o}\right)\frac{1}{\omega ^2}+\frac{8}{k_1k_2J_1^oJ_2^o}\left(1+\frac{k_2J_1^o}{8k_1J_2^o}\right)0,$$
(21)
which corresponds to an inequality of second degree for $`1/\omega ^2`$. Namely, there is no equilibrium solution of (15,16) if and only if,

$$\frac{2}{k_2J_1^o}+\frac{1}{k_1J_2^o}\frac{2}{k_2J_1^o}\sqrt{1\frac{k_2J_1^o}{k_1J_2^o}}\frac{1}{\omega ^2}\frac{2}{k_2J_1^o}+\frac{1}{k_1J_2^o}+\frac{2}{k_2J_1^o}\sqrt{1\frac{k_2J_1^o}{k_1J_2^o}}.$$
(22)
If we assume the condition

$$\frac{k_2J_1^o}{k_1J_2^o}1,$$
(23)
valid for the parameters (4) of section 1, the inequality (22) can be re-written for the period $`T`$. In fact, there is no equilibrium solution of the system (15,16) when

$$T_1TT_2(nosolution),$$
(24)
where

$$T_1=2\pi \sqrt{\frac{2}{k_1J_2^o}};T_2=4\pi \sqrt{\frac{1}{k_2J_1^o}}.$$
(25)
## 4.- Earth’s slowing rotation and the existence of solution

It is interesting that the inequality (24) gives a region were no solution exist. Here we must take care because no oscillating solution like (7) exist. In fact, (24) splits the $`\omega `$space parameter in three regions: (i) The region defined by $`T<T_1`$ where a real positive solution ($`y_o>0`$) of equation (15) exist, with a negative one ($`y_o<0`$) . (ii) The region defined by (24), where no solution of (15) exist. (iii) The region defined by $`T>T_2`$ where solutions are negative ($`y_o<0`$). From (5,6), we known that in the slow frequency limit (region (iii)) a real positive solution exist. Then, Kapitsa’s method does not work well in this region, nevertheless, at least it says that an oscillating solution exist.

At this point we can formulate the following question: since the earth-rotation has diminished by friction, how has the change in rotation affected the existence of the ozone layer ?. This question seems appropriate because the Kapitsa’s method tells us that the frequency of rotation and the ozone concentration are related. Using the parameter values (4), of section 1, we can estimate the critical period (24) : $`T_10.02`$ hours and $`T_222`$ hours. Is interesting that the actual period $`T=24`$ hours, is in the region of permitted solution ($`T>T_2`$). Moreover this is suggestive: from the retardation of earth rotation velocity data (4.4 hours/billon of years, (Shu, 1982)), a simple calculation tells us that before $`\frac{2422}{4.4}0.46`$ billons years no solution existed because we were in the region (24). This is a surprising estimation if we consider that actually the ozone layer is believed to have been in existence $`0.7`$ billon years (Graedel, 1993).

## 5.- Conclusions

We have considered the Chapman’s model for ozone production (1,2). In this nonlinear model, the parameters related to photodissociation are periodic in time (3). We were interested at the analytical study of this model by using the high frequency approximation, due to Kapitsa. Namely, we have considered the autonomous system (15,16), depending on the frequency, for the averaged variable concentrations. The existence of equilibrium solutions (fixed points (19,20)) is depending on the frequency. In fact, there are two critical period $`T_1`$ and $`T_2`$ so that for $`T_1<T<T_2`$ there is no equilibrium solution (24).

The values for the parameters (4), in section 1, give the condition of no-existence (24): $`0.02`$ hours $`T22`$ hours, and then compatible with the actual earth’s period of rotation, and existence of the ozone layer. Moreover, considering the earth’s slowing rotation motion due to friction (4.4 hours every billon of years, (Shu, 1982)), we estimate that the ozone existence condition is verified after $`\frac{2422}{4.4}0.46`$ billon years (section 4). This is a good estimation if we consider the simplicity of the autonomous model given by equations (15,16). The age of the ozone layer is 0.7 billons of years (Graedel, 1993)).

Before to ending a remark, equations (15) and (16) are very adequate to the study of diffusion process, which was neglected in the original equations (1) and (2). In fact, because they are not time depending, when we add spatial diffusion terms $`D\frac{d^2}{dx^2}X`$ and $`D\frac{d^2}{dx^2}Y`$, they become similar to reaction-diffusion-equations.

Acknowledgments: This work was possible thanks to Project UTA-Mayor 4725 (Universidad de Tarapacá). Useful discussion with professor H. Wio, D. Walgraef (visits supported by the FDI-UTA and PELICAN Projects) and M. Pedreros, are acknowledged.


format: text

text:
# Collective Evolution of Hot QCD Matter from the QGP to Freeze-Out

## Abstract

We present results on the evolution of $`p_t`$ with energy, for hadrons emerging from hadronization of a quark-gluon plasma possibly produced in high-energy heavy-ion collisions. We find that BNL-RHIC energy corresponds to the previously predicted plateau of $`p_t`$, reminiscent of the assumed first-order QCD phase transition. Heavy hadrons are the best messengers of the transverse flow stall.

Theoretical arguments adum:QGP  and lattice QCD studies adum:lattice  suggest that at high temperatures, roughly $`T200`$ MeV, the thermodynamically stable state of QCD is different from that at $`T=0`$, i.e. the theory of strong interactions exhibits a phase transition to a new state called “Quark Gluon Plasma” (QGP). It is the only phase transition of a fundamental theory accessible to experiments under defined laboratory conditions. In the QGP the effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom is expected to be substantially larger than below the phase transition temperature $`T_c`$. The search for signatures of that phase transition is one of the primary goals of high-energy heavy-ion collision experiments.

In particular, if the transition is first order with non-vanishing latent heat, it is supposed to leave fingerprints on the hydrodynamical expansion pattern adum:kataja ; adum:hung . Isentropic expansion would proceed through phase coexistence, where the pressure $`p`$ is independent of the energy density $`ϵ`$, such that the isentropic speed of sound $`c_s^2=\mathrm{d}p/\mathrm{d}ϵ=0`$. Thus, during that phase coexistence stage energy density gradients in the system do not reflect in pressure gradients, and the average transverse flow velocity does not increase substantially. As the $`p_t`$ spectra of the emitted hadrons are determined by the transverse boost velocity and the temperature at freeze-out, one expects a plateau of $`p_t`$ of charged hadrons for some range of beam energies where the central region “sweeps” through the mixed phase adum:kataja .

However, the early studies of that effect suffered from some simplifications which render comparisons to existing experimental data, and extrapolation to higher energies, unrealistic. First, the latent heat of the transition (and therefore the space-time volume of the mixed phase) was overestimated because only pions were assumed to contribute to the entropy of the hadronic phase. Second, final-state decays of hadronic resonances (like $`\rho \pi \pi `$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }\pi N`$) which contribute more than 50% to the measured pion multiplicity were not taken into account. Finally, the most serious problem arises from the arbitrariness of the decoupling hypersurface, which can not be determined within hydrodynamics but affects the results considerably.

To reduce the uncertainties and the number of free parameters one therefore has to improve on the treatment of the post-hadronization stage by considering microscopic transport adum:dum1 ; adum:BassDum , e.g. within the relativistic Boltzmann equation with collision kernel as determined by the known hadronic cross sections. The expansion and subsequent hadronization of the high-temperature QGP state can be modelled within relativistic hydrodynamics, assuming that the system evolves locally through a phase coexistence. Thus, in the space-time region inbetween the initial-time (purely space-like) hypersurface and the hadronization hypersurface (the boundary between mixed phase and hadronic phase, which has both space-like and time-like parts) we solve the continuity equation for the energy-momentum tensor,

$$_\mu T^{\mu \nu }=0,\mathrm{with}T^{\mu \nu }=(ϵ+p)u^\mu u^\nu pg^{\mu \nu }.$$
(1)
In the QGP we assume a gas of quasi-free $`u`$, $`d`$, $`s`$ quarks and gluons; for simplicity, the only contribution from interactions to the QGP pressure is due to the temperature independent vacuum pressure (bag pressure), see e.g. adum:QGP .

On the hadronization hypersurface, we switch to the Boltzmann equation,

$$pf_i(x^\mu ,p^\nu )=𝒞_i,$$
(2)
where $`f_i(x^\mu ,p^\nu )`$ denotes the phase-space distribution function of species $`i`$. The binary collision approximation is used to construct the collision kernel $`𝒞_i`$ adum:uuck , which treats almost all hadrons from Caso:1998tx  explicitly. All those hadrons are also taken into account in the equation of state of the mixed phase entering eq. (1). The switch from hydrodynamics to microscopic transport is performed by matching the energy momentum tensors and conserved currents on the hadronization hypersurface. The evolution towards freeze-out is thus determined by the relevant hadronic cross-sections and decay rates, competing with the local expansion rate $`_\mu u^\mu `$. The initial condition for central collisions of Pb/Au nuclei and CERN-SPS energy is that hydrodynamic flow sets in on the $`\tau _i=1`$ fm proper time hypersurface, and the entropy per net baryon is $`s/n_B=45`$, which reproduces a variety of measured final-state hadron multiplicities as well as the $`p_t`$ spectra of $`\pi `$, $`K`$, $`p`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, see adum:dum1 ; adum:BassDum . For the higher BNL-RHIC energy, $`\sqrt{s}=200A`$ GeV, the parameters were assumed to be $`\tau _i=0.6`$ fm and $`s/n_B=205`$, which yields $`\mathrm{d}N_{ch}/\mathrm{d}y800`$ at $`y=0`$.

Fig. 1 depicts $`p_t`$ for a variety of hadrons, for CERN-SPS, BNL-RHIC, and CERN-LHC energies. One observes that at each energy $`p_t`$ increases with $`m`$. Reminiscent of the collective expansion before decoupling, all hadrons flow approximately with the same transverse velocity, and therefore their momentum essentially increases in proportion to their mass. This effect is seen in data obtained for Pb+Pb collisions at the SPS adum:na44 . The spectra of heavy hadrons are much less affected by the random thermal motion at decoupling, $`v_{th}\sqrt{T/m}`$, and are therefore better suited to measure the transverse flow build up during the evolution. One also observes that despite the five times higher entropy per baryon assumed to be achieved at RHIC energy, the average transverse momenta are predicted by this model to be similar to the lower SPS energy. This is mainly due to the first-order phase transition featuring a region of energy densities where $`c_s^2`$ is small (it is not exactly zero in this calculation due to the finite conserved baryon charge); and to some extent also due to earlier decoupling of the hadrons emerging from the hadronization of the plasma at RHIC energy adum:dum1 .

If the initial energy density in the central region continues to grow towards higher energy as predicted by models assuming saturation of the transverse density of gluons adum:sat  (see however adum:dg ), the hydrodynamical expansion will lead to very large $`p_t`$ at LHC energy, see Fig. 1. Thus, RHIC-energy is possibly right in the plateau of $`p_t`$, if the concept of a phase mixture is applicable to high-energy collisions.

Fig. 2 shows the freeze-out volume of the pions at central rapidity, calculated as the average transverse area $`\pi r_t^2`$ times the average length of the central rapidity slice, which is equal to proper time $`\tau `$. The space-time volume is essentially increasing linearly with the multiplicity. Thus, the pion density at freeze-out is not affected much by the presence of the phase transition, unlike the average transverse momentum. When extrapolating each line to $`\mathrm{d}N_\pi /\mathrm{d}y=0`$ we obtain a “hollow” volume $`V_0`$, which increases with $`p_t`$. This is caused by the radial flow: high $`p_t`$ pions can not be emitted from the center, where the collective velocity field vanishes for symmetry reasons, and where the pions have only random thermal momenta.

Acknowledgements: A.D. thanks the organizers for the invitation to CIPANP2000 and acknowledges support from a DOE Research Grant, Contract No. De-FG-02-93ER-40764. S.A.B. is supported by NSF grant PHY-00-70818.


text:
# Galaxy Disks and Disk Galaxies1footnote 11footnote 1Conference was held in Rome, Italy at the Pontifical Gregorian University on June 12-16, 2000. Proceedings will be edited by J.G. Funes, S.J. & E.M. Corsini and published in the ASP Conference Series

Conference Highlights

The conference Galaxy Disks and Disk Galaxies, sponsored by the Vatican Observatory, was held in June 2000 at the Pontifical Gregorian University, in the very center of Rome. The meeting hosted about 230 participants coming from 30 countries. Social events included a visit of the Vatican Observatory and the Papal Villas at Castel Gandolfo. A buffet supper was served on one of the terraces of the Papal Summer Residence where the Vatican Observatory is located. The very full program consisted of 29 review papers, 34 invited talks, and more than 180 posters. The meeting covered topics regarding the structure, formation and evolution of galaxies with disks. Particular attention was dedicated to the stellar and gaseous disk of the Milky Way, the global characteristics of galaxy disks, their structure, morphology and dynamics, the gaseous components, star formation, and chemical evolution, the interactions, accretion, mergers and starbursts, the dark and luminous matter, the establishment of the scaling laws, and the formation and evolution of disk galaxies from a theoretical and observational point of view.

New observational evidences constraining the star formation and merging history of the Galaxy were presented. There was a broad consensus about the mass distribution of the Milky Way. NIR data show that the Galactic bar extends to about 4 kpc while the terminal curve, the Oort limit, and the bulge microlensing observations together favour the idea of a massive and near-maximal disk. The vertical structure the Galactic disk, and in particular the origins of heating, was explored both from the empirical and theoretical point of view. A new composite CO survey provided a nearly complete inventory of giant molecular clouds, which are one of the main sources for disk heating. The correlation between the thickening of the Galactic disk, its stability, and the fraction of the total mass to be attributed to the Galactic halo have been taken into account and tidal tails from satellites have been used to probe the gravitational potential. Chemical abundances and abundance ratios derived for the Galactic disk impose strong constraints on its formation and evolution and they indicate an inside-out process of growth which is still ongoing.

Analysis of the surface photometry of a sample of around 750 early-type galaxies reveals that elliptical galaxies also have disks, suggesting that all galaxies were either born with, or later acquired, disks. The scaling relations of typical disks in ellipticals smoothly join those of spiral and S0 disks, even if some marked differences do exist for disks deeply embedded in spheroids. New $`K`$band images show that the morphological structure of disk galaxies differs from that observed at shorter wavelengths, in particular the decoupling between the stellar and the gaseous disks can be dramatic. In any event, the co-existence of radically different morphologies within the same galaxy can be explained naturally by the modal theory of spiral structure. Large-scale magnetic fields, remarkable in their extent and close correlation with the spiral arms, have been detected in the disks of all nearby galaxies. Sometimes they show vertical orientation suggesting field closure through the halo. Their origins have been interpreted in terms of a multi-mode dynamo theory.

Theoretical efforts that take into account the dynamical processes in self-gravitating disks have been made in order to explain the large spiral structure observed in the optical and the near-infrared. The role of spiral arms and bars in driving the evolution of disks was also discussed, showing that we now have a mature theory of disk instability. The secular evolution of disks proceeds through self-regulation and feedback mechanisms. Dynamical modeling has benefited greatly from the unique capabilities of integral field spectroscopy. Observation of external galaxies suggests that the dominant heating mechanism varies along the Hubble sequence and has shown the existence of cyclones and anticyclones in gaseous disks. An update of the correlation between black-hole mass and the mass of the host spheroidal component was presented (the black-hole mass fraction is $`0.17\%`$). It also appears that the black-hole mass is even more strongly correlated with the stellar velocity dispersion of the host galaxy. This new result corroborates the idea that black holes, quasars and bulges grew and turned on as parts of the same process.

Neutral hydrogen in and around some 200 spiral and irregular galaxies has now been mapped with the WHISP survey. The H I disks are more extended than the corresponding optical disks and show a wider variety of features such as debris of tidal interactions, warps, lopsidedness, spiral arms and even bar-shaped structures. Although H I structures are rare in giant elliptical galaxies, they appear to be more common in low-luminosity systems. Their morphology ranges from chaotic, through loops and rings, to still-growing disks with surprisingly regular kinematics. New interferometric surveys have enhanced our knowledge of the distribution and kinematics of molecular gas on sub-kiloparsec scales, and impressive Chandra pictures unveiled the violent side of the ISM by mapping the hot gaseous component in nearby galaxies. Characterizing the demographics and quantifying the spatial variation of the star forming galaxy population, as well as probing the dependence of the local SFR on the properties and dynamics of the ISM, turned out to be hot topics for a detailed understanding of star formation in galaxy disks. Their most luminous H II regions seems to be density bounded and responsible for half of the H$`\alpha `$ emission in normal disks.

Great emphasis was given to the role played by galaxy interactions and mergers in the nearby universe, and even more so in the early universe, where galaxies appear to be far from equilibrium. Numerical simulations are widely used to explore the merging processes driving morphological transformations, and show that low-luminosity fast-rotating ellipticals are not formed as byproducts of collisionless mergers of unequal-mass disk galaxies. Beyond this, a complete picture of the role and the fate of gas has not yet been produced and it deserves further investigation. Extended disks form by accreting material from the environment and are often warped, most probably due to a continuously maintained misalignment between the angular momenta of the galaxy and its halo. A large fraction of spirals exhibit kinematic disturbances ranging from mild to major, and can generally be explained as the visible signs of tidal encounters. Planetary nebulae around ellipticals can be used to trace the gravitational potential and interactions with the surrounding cluster. Gravitational interactions are also likely to be the main mechanism for both the transformation of cluster spirals into S0s and of the fuelling of gas into the center of the encounter partners, thus triggering star formation.

New combined optical and radio rotation curves were presented both for high and low surface brightness spirals. They were used to derive mass models and constrain the size of dark halos. LSB and dwarf galaxies are dominated by dark matter in agreement with early results based on H I data alone. Closer to us, the kinematics of the LMC is consistent with a truncated, finite-thickness exponential disk model with no dark halo. The origin of scaling laws related to the structural properties of disk galaxies were discussed with the help of high-resolution gas-dynamical simulations and semi-analytic models, and a lively debate arose on the controversy about the relative fraction of luminous to dark matter inside the optical region of spirals. Observational evidence, modeling results, and theoretical considerations were provided for and against the idea that stellar disks contribute a maximal rotational support in the inner parts of galaxies. Two of the most promising developments presented were the discovery of rapidly rotating bars through the direct measurement of their pattern speed and the better agreement between the predicted and observed Tully-Fisher zero point obtained by semi-analytical modelers through a proper choice of the initial power spectrum.

General agreement on the scheme for galaxy formation based on hierarchical clustering and mergers was the the strongest point of convergence of the meeting. The formation of bulged galaxies is a problem which has been essentially resolved. Large bulges are assembled by mergers of subclumps, formed from gas cooled in the center of dark halos, and then acquire their disks, while small bulges are most probably the result of disk secular evolution. The formation of pure-disk galaxies still remains an open question which must be addressed. New ideas have focussed on the formation and structure of dark matter halos, including their density and angular-momentum profiles, abundance, and merging rates. Evidence supporting the idea that damped Ly$`\alpha `$ systems observed at $`z3`$ are the direct progenitors of the current thick disks in galaxies was discussed, and there were indications that some extremely red objects at high redshift are disks. The chemical history of Local Group galaxies has been used to infer the nature and evolutionary status of higher-redshift objects and new spectrophotometric codes are now available to follow galaxy evolution and to constrain cosmic star formation history.

As pointed out in the Conference Summary, galaxies are the cross roads of Astronomy because they look up to Cosmology and they look down to the interstellar medium and star formation. This meeting highlighted the points of convergence in our comprehension of the formation and properties of disk galaxies, suggesting at the same time that the future challenges in this field are to make those connections (such as between the properties of hydrodynamical models and those of real galaxies or between a physically based theory of star formation and what is observed in galaxies) that at the moment we have failed to make.

José G. Funes, S.J. and Enrico Maria Corsini

Vatican Observatory, Università di Padova


text:
# Public Release of N-body simulation and related data by the Virgo consortium.

## 1 Introduction

The Virgo consortium is an international collaboration whose aim is to perform large cosmological simulations of the formation of structure. We have been carrying out simulations on parallel supercomputers since 1996. In this short article we provide a brief description of datasets that we are making publicly available and we give a list of papers for refereed journals which have already made use of the data.

Over the past few years, the Virgo consortium has carried out a large number of high-resolution simulations of the clustering evolution of cold dark matter (CDM). They follow structure formation in four cosmological models: a flat model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.3`$ and cosmological constant, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }/3H_0^2=0.7`$ ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM); an open model also with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.3`$ (OCDM); and two models with $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$, one with the standard CDM power spectrum (SCDM), and the other with the same power spectrum as the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.3`$ models ($`\tau `$CDM). The number of particles in the older simulations is about 17 million, with the box sizes ranging from 85 to 240 h$`{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{Mpc}`$(where $`\mathrm{h}`$ denotes the Hubble constant in units of 100 km s-1 Mpc-1) and the particle mass from 6.86 to 22.7 $`\times 10^{10}\mathrm{h}^1\mathrm{M}_{}.`$

A variety of studies have been carried out using these data. These include investigations of the clustering statistics of the dark matter (Jenkins et al 1998, Juskiewicz, Springel & Durrer 1999); detailed analyses of the internal structure (Thomas et al 1998), velocity distributions (Colberg et al 2000) and the large-scale environment of galaxy cluster halos (Colberg et al 1999); a novel description of the topology of the dark matter distribution and a comparison with recent galaxy surveys (Springel et al 1998, Canavezes et al 1998, Canavezes & Sharpe 1998); analyses of the strong gravitational lensing properties of clusters (Bartelmann et al 1998); ray-tracing simulations and statistical analysis of the shear fields produced by weak lensing (Reblinsky & Bartelmann 1999, Reblinsky et al 1999, Jain, Seljak & White 2000, Jain & van Waerbecke 2000, Munshi & Jain 2000a,b); studies of the Sunyaev-Zel’dovich signatures imprinted on the CMB (Diaferio, Sunyaev & Nusser 2000); tests of analytic models both for the abundance and clustering of dark halos (Sheth & Tormen 1999; Sheth, Mo & Tormen 2000) and for the bias of the galaxy population (Peacock & Smith 2000).

For the higher resolution simulations the relation between the galaxy and mass distributions has been studied both by inserting “semi-analytic” galaxy populations into the simulated dark halos at various times (Benson et al 2000a,b) and by using similar “recipes” for baryonic processes to follow the formation of galaxies directly in the simulations (the GIF project: Kauffmann et al 1999ab, Diaferio et al 1999, 2000; Somerville et al 2000). Galaxy populations constructed with the first technique have also been applied to the study of cosmic reionization (Benson et al 2000c) and in making predictions of clustering and higher order correlations which are compared to measurements from the PSCz survey (Szapudi et al 2000). The GIF galaxy, mass and halo catalogs have been used by others for studies of the statistics of the galaxy distribution (Seljak 2000, Scoccimarro et al 2000), of lensing effects due to individual galaxies (Guzik & Seljak 2000), of infall patterns onto galaxy clusters (Diaferio 1999) and for comparison with the topology of the local galaxy distribution (Schmalzing & Diaferio 2000).

Several years ago we completed the two largest N-body simulations ever attempted using a specially designed code (MacFarland et al 1999). These “Hubble volume” simulations follow a billion particles each – almost one order of magnitude more than the largest previous simulations – in the $`\tau `$CDM and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM cosmologies. The simulated regions have linear, comoving dimensions of 2000-3000 h$`{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{Mpc}`$so that, for $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$, the diagonal of the simulation cube extends to a redshift $`z=4.6`$, nearly the size of the “observed” universe. The total mass in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$ volume is $`2.2\times 10^{21}\mathrm{h}^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$, and so a cluster as rich as Coma has about 500 particles within an Abell radius. The comoving gravitational softening, $`0.1\mathrm{h}^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$, is sufficiently small to provide reliable cluster velocity dispersions and gross assembly histories. Particles masses and softenings are similar in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM simulation. Such large volumes require the application of new analysis techniques that take into account the substantial light travel time across the region. In addition to storing a number of standard “snapshots” of the mass distribution, we therefore created surveys along the past light cones of hypothetical observers.

The Hubble volume simulations contain several tens of thousands of rich clusters and are so large that they can be used to investigate the behaviour of clustering diagnostics, including high order statistics, with unprecedented accuracy. The first papers analyzing Hubble volume data (Szapudi et al 2000, Colombi et al 2000) present the probability distribution of fundamental statistics such as the distribution of counts-in-cells, together with a full analysis of sampling uncertainties for estimates constructed from surveys of realistic (finite) size. Analysis of the two-point correlations of clusters is presented in Colberg et al (2000). Data from the Hubble volume simulations, together with a wide range of other Virgo data, has been used to study the mass function of dark matter halos over more than four orders of magnitude in mass (Jenkins et al 2000). Mock-galaxy catalogs constructed from the Hubble Volume simulations are used to assess the uncertainties in observational power spectrum estimates by Hoyle et al (1999).

The numerical data from all the original $`N=256^3`$ Virgo simulations are now publically available, as are a variety of data products from the Hubble Volume simulations (“snap-shots”, light-cone output and cluster catalogs)and from the galaxy formation modelling of the GIF project (halo catalogs, merger trees and galaxy catalogs). They may be found at: http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/

Virgo/data\_download.html

We anticipate making further data available from this site as our projects progress. Smaller data volumes can be down-loaded directly over the net. Many of our datasets are too large, however, for this to be practicable. Such data can be obtained on tape after payment of a nominal fee; we impose this to avoid frivolous requests imposing unnecessary work on our archive manager. Images of many of these simulations can be down-loaded from the related websites:

http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/NumCos

http://star-www.dur.ac.uk/$``$frazerp/virgo/

http://www.physics.lsa.umich.edu/hubble-volume/

We would appreciate an appropriate credit if these data are used in published work. This should include the relevant reference as detailed below, as well as a mention in the acknowledgements that the data were obtained from the Virgo consortium. The $`N=256^3`$ simulations in Table 1 were first presented in Jenkins et al (1998). The original motivation for the set-up of the -gif simulations and the additional analysis involved in constructing halo catalogs, merger trees and galaxy catalogs are described in Kauffmann et al (1999a). The Hubble Volume simulations are outlined in Evrard (1998) and a detailed description is in preparation (Evrard etal 2000). We would like to keep an up-to-date record of all published papers using our data and so we would appreciate your help in notifying us by email (to C.S.Frenk@durham.ac.uk) of new papers making use of Virgo data.

## Acknowledgements

CSF acknowledges a PPARC Senior Research Fellowship and a Leverhulme Research Fellowship. PAT is a PPARC Lecturer Fellow. AEE’s participation was supported in France by the CIES and CNRS and in the US by NSF AST98-03199 and by the NASA Astrophysics Theory Program. The simulation data were generated using supercomputers at the Computer Centre of the Max-Planck Society (the Rechenzentrum, Garching) and at the Edinburgh Parallel Computing Centre. We particularly wish to thank Jacob Pichlmeier (SGI/Cray, RZG) for his support. We thank the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics for hosting our down-load site and, in particular, Norbert Gruener for acting as site administrator.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Properties of black holes in quantum theories of gravity have intrigued physicists for many years. In recent years much progress has been made in understanding some of these properties using string theory. However because string theory is usually formulated perturbatively about a given spacetime background, it has been difficult to obtained a unified and complete description of black hole physics. In the past few years nonperturbative formulations of string theory have been proposed in terms of large $`N`$ gauge theories. These formulations give new hope for understanding some of these fundamental issues.

In particular, Maldacena’s conjecture gives a promising arena to answer some of these questions. Maldacena’s conjecture  relates string theories in anti-de Sitter backgrounds to conformal field theories in a large-$`N`$ limit. However there is no free lunch. In this framework, seemingly obvious questions on the string theory side are hard to formulate on the gauge theory side. Moreover, in the range of parameters where semi-classical string theory may be used to construct black hole geometries, the dual gauge theory is strongly coupled. This makes understanding black hole states very difficult.

One way of dealing with these difficulties is to perform Monte Carlo simulations of the gauge theory at strong coupling . In the present work we pursue a different approach, in which we begin with an ansatz for the density matrix which describes the black hole in the continuum gauge theory.

The version of Maldacena duality to be considered here relates black holes in ten dimensions with 0-brane charge to supersymmetric gauged $`SU(N)`$ quantum mechanics with sixteen supercharges . The metric of the non-extremal black hole is

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^{}\left[h(U)dt^2+h^1(U)dU^2+{\displaystyle \frac{c^{1/2}(g_{YM}^2N)^{1/2}}{U^{3/2}}}d\mathrm{\Omega }_8^2\right]`$
$`h(U)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{U^{7/2}}{c^{1/2}(g_{YM}^2N)^{1/2}}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{U_0^7}{U^7}}\right)`$ (1)
where $`c=2^7\pi ^{9/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(7/2)`$ and $`g_{YM}`$ is the Yang-Mills coupling constant. The horizon of the black hole is at $`U=U_0`$, which corresponds to a Hawking temperature

$$T=(g_{YM}^2N)^{1/2}\left(\frac{U_0}{11.1}\right)^{5/2}.$$
(2)
The dual quantum mechanics is to be taken at the same finite temperature. The black hole has a free energy, which arises from its Bekenstein-Hawking entropy .

$$\beta F=2.52N^2\left(\frac{T}{(g_{YM}^2N)^{1/3}}\right)^{1.80}$$
(3)
Duality predicts that the quantum mechanics should have the same free energy. The supergravity description is expected to be valid when the curvature and the dilaton are small near the black hole horizon. This regime corresponds to the ’t Hooft large $`N`$ limit of the quantum mechanics, when the dimensionless effective coupling $`g_{YM}^2N/T^3`$ is large.

In this report we describe a set of approximations that can be applied to the quantum mechanics in the regime of interest. Using these techniques we calculate the finite temperature partition function of the quantum mechanics. Over a certain range of temperature our results can be well fit by a power law,

$$\beta F\mathrm{const}.2.0N^2\left(\frac{T}{(g_{YM}^2N)^{1/3}}\right)^{1.7}.$$
(4)
This is in quite good agreement with the black hole prediction (3). We believe this is the first nontrivial direct test of a strong/weak coupling duality that does not rely on supersymmetric non-renormalization theorems or special properties of BPS states. Although in the present paper we are primarily interested in the thermodynamics of the quantum mechanics, our approximation scheme should also be useful for addressing questions about the spacetime structure of the black hole, perhaps along the lines of .

The basic idea is to treat the $`𝒪(N^2)`$ degrees of freedom of the quantum mechanics as statistically independent, using a type of mean field approximation. This assumption is motivated by the overall $`N^2`$ dependence of the free energy (3). The approximation involves constructing a trial action $`S_0`$ from the full action $`S`$. All quantities can then be systematically computed as an expansion in powers of $`SS_0`$. The parameters in the trial action are fixed by solving a truncated version of the Schwinger-Dyson equations of the quantum mechanics. This procedure can be viewed as re-summing an infinite number of Feynman diagrams. Since we are interested in large-$`N`$ behavior, we will only resum planar diagrams. Thus, in our approximation, the overall $`N^2`$ factor in the free energy (4) and the appearance of $`g_{YM}^2`$ only in the combination $`g_{YM}^2N`$ is guaranteed. The crucial test of the approximation is to obtain the correct dependence of the thermodynamics on the effective dimensionless coupling $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=g_{YM}^2N/T^3`$.

The sort of approximation that we are considering has several attractive features, which we regard as a priori reasons to believe that it captures some of the essential physics of the strongly-coupled quantum mechanics.

* As mentioned above, the approximation automatically respects ’t Hooft large-$`N`$ counting.
* The approximation partially respects the symmetries of the problem. More precisely, it respects all symmetries which act linearly on the fields. Thus our trial action will have $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry and $`SO(2)\times SO(7)`$ rotational symmetry (out of the underlying $`𝒩=16`$ supersymmetry and $`SO(9)`$ rotational symmetry).
* The approximation is non-perturbative in the Yang-Mills coupling constant, and self-consistently cures the infrared divergences present in conventional perturbation theory.

Before continuing there is one other issue we would like to comment on. The partition function of the full quantum mechanics contains an infrared divergence from the regions in moduli space when the D0-branes are far apart. This leads to a divergent contribution to the entropy with an overall coefficient $`𝒪(N)`$. From the supergravity point of view, this corresponds to a thermal gas of gravitons. This divergence may be regulated by putting the system in a finite box. The black hole entropy which is $`𝒪(N^2)`$ can easily be made to dominate over the $`𝒪(N)`$ contribution. Our mean field approximation computes the $`𝒪(N^2)`$ piece by design, and this infrared divergence does not make an appearance.

## 2 Gaussian Approximation for 0-brane Quantum Mechanics

In this section we sketch the application of the Gaussian approximation  to gauged $`SU(N)`$ supersymmetric quantum mechanic with sixteen supercharges. Further details will appear in .

One key requirement is that supersymmetry, although softly broken by the finite temperature of the black hole, should not be broken explicitly by the approximation. To avoid such explicit breaking we adopt an unconstrained superfield formulation, in which supersymmetry acts linearly on the fields. This ensures that we recover exact supersymmetry in the zero temperature limit. We will use an $`𝒩=2`$ superspace so that only an $`SO(2)\times G_2`$ subgroup of the $`SO(9)`$ R-symmetry is manifest. First let us recall the superspace and supermultiplets that we are going to use; for more details on notation see .

With $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry we have an $`SO(2)`$ R-symmetry, with spinor indices $`\alpha ,\beta =1,2`$ and vector indices $`i,j=1,2`$. The $`SO(2)_R`$ Dirac matrices $`\gamma _{\alpha \beta }^i`$ are real, symmetric, and traceless. Given two spinors $`\psi _\alpha `$ and $`\chi _\alpha `$, besides the invariant $`\psi _\alpha \chi _\alpha `$, one can construct a second invariant which we denote

$$\psi ^\alpha \chi _\alpha =\frac{i}{2}ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\psi _\alpha \chi _\beta .$$

$`𝒩=2`$ superspace has coordinates $`(t,\theta _\alpha )`$ where $`\theta _\alpha `$ is real. We denote $`\theta ^2=\theta ^\alpha \theta _\alpha `$, and define the supercovariant derivative

$$D_\alpha =\frac{}{\theta _\alpha }i\theta _\alpha \frac{}{t}.$$
(5)
The simplest representation of supersymmetry is a real scalar superfield

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\varphi +i\psi _\alpha \theta _\alpha +f\theta ^2$$
(6)
containing a scalar field $`\varphi `$, its superpartner $`\psi _\alpha `$, and an auxiliary field $`f`$. The gauge superfield denoted by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha `$ has an expansion in ‘linear’ components as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha =\chi _\alpha +A_0\theta _\alpha +X^i\gamma _{\alpha \beta }^i\theta _\beta +dϵ_{\alpha \beta }\theta _\beta +2ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _\beta \theta ^2.$$
(7)
The fields $`X^i`$ are physical scalars, while $`\lambda _\alpha `$ are their superpartners, $`d`$ is an auxiliary boson, $`\chi _\alpha `$ are auxiliary fermions, and $`A_0`$ is the 0+1 dimensional gauge field.

To construct our action we introduce a collection of seven adjoint scalar multiplets $`\mathrm{\Phi }_a`$ transforming in the $`\mathrm{𝟕}`$ of $`G_2SO(9)`$. The $`𝒩=16`$ supersymmetric $`SU(N)`$ gauged quantum mechanics action is

$$S_{\mathrm{sym}}=\frac{1}{g_{\mathrm{YM}}^2}𝑑td^2\theta \mathrm{Tr}\left(\frac{1}{4}^\alpha _i_\alpha _i\frac{1}{2}^\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_a_\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_a\frac{i}{3}f_{abc}\mathrm{\Phi }_a[\mathrm{\Phi }_b,\mathrm{\Phi }_c]\right)$$

where $`_i`$ is the field strength constructed from the gauge multiplet, $`_\alpha =D_\alpha +\mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha `$, and $`f_{abc}`$ is a suitably normalized totally antisymmetric $`G_2`$-invariant tensor.

We impose the supersymmetric gauge condition $`D^\alpha \mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha =0`$, which sets $`A_0/t=0`$, $`d=0`$ and $`\lambda =\frac{1}{2}\chi /t`$. This is a convenient gauge fixing, as this gauge condition helps make the approximation compatible with Ward identities . To the SYM action we must add the corresponding ghost action (but no gauge fixing term)

$$S_{\mathrm{ghost}}=\frac{1}{g_{\mathrm{YM}}^2}𝑑td^2\theta \mathrm{Tr}\left(D^\alpha \overline{C}_\alpha C\right)$$

where the ghost superfield $`C`$ is a complex scalar superfield with Grassmann statistics.

We are interested in the finite temperature behavior of the quantum mechanics. As usual we compactify the Euclidean time coordinate on a circle of circumference $`\beta `$, which is identified with the inverse temperature. The bosonic fields have integer mode expansions, while the fermions have half integer modes; for example we write

$$X^i(\tau )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\beta }}\underset{l}{}X_l^ie^{i2\pi l\tau /\beta }.$$

Note that in Euclidean space the zero mode of the gauge field, which we denote $`A_{00}`$, survives as a physical degree of freedom (fluctuations in $`A_0`$ are eliminated by our gauge condition).

Our strategy is to construct a trial action $`S_0`$, which we use as an approximation to the full action $`S=S_{\mathrm{sym}}+S_{\mathrm{ghost}}`$. The free energy can then be calculated as an expansion in powers of $`SS_0`$; note that such an expansion is non-perturbative in the original Yang-Mills coupling $`g_{YM}^2`$. Throughout this paper we use the following expression for the free energy in this scheme.111This quantity can be identified with the two-loop 2PI effective action of .

$$\beta F\beta F_0+SS_0_0\frac{1}{2}S_{III}^2_{\text{C},0}$$
(8)
Here $`\beta F_0`$ is the free energy of the trial action, and $`_0`$ denotes an expectation value computed using $`S_0`$. Also $`S_{III}`$ refers to cubic terms in the original SYM plus ghost action, and the subscript C denotes a connected correlation function. It is straightforward, though tedious, to compute higher order terms in the expansion of $`\beta F`$. In principle this could be used as a check on the validity of the approximation.

We make the following ansatz for the trial action:

$$S_0=\frac{N}{\lambda }\mathrm{Tr}(U+U^{})+\underset{l,i}{}\frac{1}{2\sigma _l^2}\mathrm{Tr}(X_l^iX_l^i)+\underset{l,a}{}\frac{1}{2\mathrm{\Delta }_l^2}\mathrm{Tr}(\varphi _l^a\varphi _l^a)+\mathrm{}.$$
(9)
Here all fields (except the gauge field) appear in Gaussian form. Indeed this is the most general Gaussian action which is quadratic in the fundamental fields. This means that the trial action can respect all symmetries which act linearly on the fundamental fields.

The gauge field must be treated in a special way, owing to its periodicity properties. To do this we have introduced the timelike Wilson loop operator $`U`$, which can be expressed in terms of the gauge zero mode.

$$U=Pe^{i_0^\beta A_0}=e^{i\sqrt{\beta }A_{00}}$$

This makes it manifest that at finite temperature $`A_0A_0+2\pi /\beta `$ is periodic. As a trial action for the gauge field we have adopted the unitary one plaquette model action. As $`\lambda `$ varies the trial action goes through a Gross-Witten phase transition at $`\lambda =2`$ .

The key step in the approximation is to find a closed set of “gap” equations for the dressed propagators $`\sigma _l^2,\mathrm{\Delta }_l^2,\mathrm{}`$ appearing in (9). Again, the gauge field must be treated as a special case. All other propagators are obtained by demanding stationarity of the estimate (8) for the free energy. Up to contributions from the gauge field, it can be shown this procedure correctly re-sums all one-loop self-energy corrections to the propagators.

The gap equation for $`\lambda `$ is obtained from the Schwinger-Dyson equation for $`U`$ that arises from the change of variables $`UgU`$ with $`gSU(N)`$. Demanding that this equation hold with respect to the one-plaquette measure yields

$$\mathrm{Tr}U_0=\frac{1}{\beta ^{3/2}}\mathrm{Tr}U\left(\frac{\delta S}{\delta A_{00}}\frac{1}{2}\frac{\delta S_{III}^2}{\delta A_{00}}\right)_{C,0}.$$
(10)
This equation resums one-loop corrections to the Wilson loop, in the same sense that stationarizing (8) resums one-loop corrections to the propagators. At large $`N`$ the terms on the right hand side factorize into a gauge field correlator times matter field correlators; the terms involving the gauge fields may be computed using the results of .

As (8), (10) are somewhat lengthy expressions we will not present them here. Rather we report on the solution to these equations in the next section.

## 3 Numerical Results

The gap equations can be solved numerically, using the methods discussed in Appendix B of . The basic strategy is to start at high temperature, where the gap equations can be solved semi-analytically, then use Newton-Raphson to solve the gap equations at a sequence of successively lower temperatures. As mentioned in the introduction, $`g_{YM}^2`$ and $`N`$ only appear in the combination $`g_{YM}^2N/T^3`$. Henceforth we choose units for $`T`$ which effectively scales $`g_{YM}^2N`$ to $`1`$.

In principle the resulting Gaussian action contains a great deal of information about correlation functions in the quantum mechanics. But in this section we will just concentrate on the behavior of three basic quantities: the free energy, the Wilson loop, and the mean size of the state.

At high temperature, where the gauge theory is weakly coupled, we find that the free energy of the system is

$$\beta F=6\mathrm{log}\beta +𝒪(1).$$
(11)
This result can be obtained analytically: the gap equations are dominated by the bosonic zero modes, and the free energy is dominated by $`\beta F_0`$.

In general, for a weakly-coupled theory in $`0+1`$ dimensions, one would expect the free energy to behave like $`\mathrm{log}\beta `$. But note that, even though the gauge theory is weakly coupled at high temperature, the perturbation series is afflicted with IR divergences. Thus, to determine the coefficient of the logarithm (which depends on the value of the dynamically generated IR cutoff) one must re-sum part of the perturbation series. This is a well-known phenomenon in finite temperature field theory . In any case, we expect a priori that the Gaussian approximation gives good results in the high temperature regime.

As the temperature is lowered the behavior of the free energy changes: at $`\beta 0.7`$ we find that it begins to roll over and fall off as a non-trivial power of the temperature. In the range $`1<\beta <4`$ the numerical results for the free energy are well fit by

$$\beta F0.792.0\beta ^{1.7}.$$
(12)
This fit to the numerical results is illustrated in Fig. 1. Note that supersymmetry is crucial in making such power-law behavior possible. Without supersymmetry the free energy would behave as $`\beta F\beta E_0`$ in the low temperature regime $`\beta >1`$, where $`E_0`$ is the ground state energy of the system.

We obtained (12) by performing a Levenberg-Marquardt nonlinear least-squares fit to 75 numerical calculations of the free energy, carried out in the temperature range $`1\beta 4`$. To estimate the uncertainty in the best fit parameters we varied the window of $`\beta `$ over which the fit was performed (fitting over the ranges $`2<\beta <4`$ and $`1<\beta <3`$), which leads to: $`0.79\pm 0.06`$, $`2.0\pm 0.1`$ and $`1.7\pm 0.2`$.

It is quite remarkable that the power law (12) is in excellent agreement with the semiclassical black hole prediction

$$\beta F=2.52\beta ^{1.80}.$$
(13)
The exponents differ by 6% while the coefficients of the power-law differ by 26%. (An additive constant appears in the Gaussian approximation for the free energy. We will generally ignore this ‘ground state degeneracy’, since it seems to be an artifact of the Gaussian approximation when applied to systems with a continuous spectrum. Similar behavior was noted in .)

As we go to still lower temperatures, we find that the energy $`(\beta F)/\beta `$ calculated in the Gaussian approximation begins to drop below the energy of the black hole. In fact the Gaussian energy becomes negative around $`\beta =5.8`$. Ultimately, as $`\beta \mathrm{}`$, the Gaussian energy does asymptote to zero, as required by the $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry which is manifest in the approximation. But a negative energy clearly reflects some problem with the approximation.

Fortunately, we can be rather precise about exactly where the approximation is going wrong: the difficulty is with the Schwinger-Dyson gap equation we have been using to fix the value of the one-plaquette coupling $`\lambda `$. Although we do not know how to write down a better gap equation for $`\lambda `$, we can give a prescription for fixing $`\lambda `$, that will allow us to obtain reasonable results at much lower values of the temperature. This may be regarded either as a check on our understanding of why the approximation is breaking down, or as a way of building a model for the black hole that can be used at lower temperatures. Our prescription for fixing $`\lambda `$ is simply that, when $`\beta >2.5`$ (the midpoint of our range $`1\beta 4`$), we choose $`\lambda `$ so that the free energy is given by (12).

The energy $`E=(\beta F)/\beta `$ calculated with this prescription is shown in Figs. 2 and 3. The behavior of $`\lambda `$ given by this prescription is shown in Fig. 4. Note that $`\lambda `$ increases monotonically with $`\beta `$. A Gross-Witten phase transition takes place when $`\lambda =2`$; this value is reached at $`\beta =7.8`$. Thus a phase transition takes place as the system moves into the supergravity regime .

By adopting the prescription of fitting $`\beta F`$ to a power law, we cannot say anything about the order of the phase transition. If one takes the Schwinger-Dyson result for $`\lambda `$ seriously, then the Gross-Witten transition occurs at $`\beta =14.2`$, and is second order (the second derivative of the free energy drops by $`0.01`$ in crossing the transition).

Our prescription for choosing $`\lambda `$ begins to break down around $`\beta =14`$, as we find that $`\lambda `$ rapidly diverges as $`\beta `$ approaches 14. By itself, this is not necessarily a problem: infinite $`\lambda `$ simply means that the Wilson loop is uniformly distributed over $`U(N)`$. But unfortunately, we do not have a good prescription for continuing past this temperature. Evidently some of the other gap equations (not just the gap equation for $`\lambda `$) start to break down at this point. Note that this breakdown does not occur until well into the strong coupling regime, as an inverse temperature $`\beta =14`$ corresponds to an effective gauge coupling $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=\beta ^33\times 10^3`$.

Finally, let us comment on the average ‘size’ of the state. In our approximation the scalar fields $`X^i(\tau )`$ and $`\varphi ^a(\tau )`$ are Gaussian random matrices, and their eigenvalues obey a Wigner semi-circle distribution. We can define the size of the state in terms of the quantities

$`R_{\mathrm{scalar}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{Tr}\left(X^i(\tau )\right)^2_0,`$
$`R_{\mathrm{gauge}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi ^a(\tau )\right)^2_0.`$ (14)
The radius of the Wigner semi-circle, given by $`2\sqrt{R^2}`$, is shown in Fig. 5. Note that the radius stays fairly constant in the region corresponding to the black hole. However, because the superfield formalism we are using does not respect the full $`SO(9)`$ invariance, the radius measured in the scalar multiplet directions is not the same as the radius measured in the gauge multiplet directions. At $`\beta =14`$ we find

$$2R_{\mathrm{scalar}}=1.812R_{\mathrm{gauge}}=0.80.$$

This shows that, as expected, the trial action does not respect the underlying $`SO(9)`$ invariance. Nonetheless, the trial action may provide a useful approximate description of the black hole density matrix in the supergravity regime.

In Fig. 5 we have also plotted the Schwarzschild radius of the black hole222Our Higgs fields are related to radial position by $`X=r/2\pi \alpha ^{}`$, while ref.  sets $`U=r/\alpha ^{}`$. $`U_0/2\pi =1.76\beta ^{2/5}`$. Note that, as the temperature decreases, the Schwarzschild radius becomes much smaller than the radius of the eigenvalue distributions. It seems appropriate to identify the radius of the eigenvalue distributions with the size of the region $`U(g_{\mathrm{YM}}^2N)^{1/3}`$ in which 10-dimensional supergravity is valid . The Gaussian approximation should provide a good laboratory for studying the way in which the horizon of the black hole can be detected in the dual quantum mechanics, perhaps along the lines suggested in .

## 4 Discussion

To summarize, we have presented an ansatz for a trial action which captures some of the behavior of 0-brane quantum mechanics at large $`N`$ and strong coupling. The parameters appearing in the trial action are chosen according to a set of gap equations which resum an infinite set of planar diagrams. The approximation automatically respects ’t Hooft large-$`N`$ counting, and also partially respects the supersymmetries and R-symmetries of the quantum mechanics.

Our main result is that we obtained a non-trivial power law for the free energy, which is in remarkably good agreement with the black hole prediction. The power law was obtained by fitting numerical results calculated in the range $`1<\beta <4`$; we would like to emphasize that in this range of temperature the approximation involves no arbitrary or adjustable parameters. We also gave a prescription for fixing the expectation value of the Wilson loop, which allowed us to extend our results to $`\beta =14`$. This is well into the strong coupling regime, where the supergravity description of the system should be valid.

Although our prescription for fixing the Wilson loop cannot be regarded as entirely satisfactory, it does let us build a model for the black hole density matrix in the strongly-coupled quantum mechanics. This model could be a basis for further studies of black hole properties. It would be particularly interesting to address questions of spacetime locality and causality from the gauge theory point of view, perhaps along the lines suggested in .

Acknowledgments

DK wishes to thank Rutgers University and New York University for hospitality, and Emil Martinec and Mark Stern for valuable discussions. The work of DK is supported by the DOE under contract DE-FG02-90ER40542 and by the generosity of Martin and Helen Chooljian. GL would like to thank the Aspen Center for Physics for hospitality, and Vipul Periwal for useful discussions. The work of GL is supported by the NSF under grant PHY-98-02484. D.L. wishes to thank the Aspen Center for Physics, the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics and the Erwin Schroedinger Institute program in Duality, String Theory and M-Theory for hospitality during the course of this research. The research of D.L. is supported in part by DOE grant DE-FE0291ER40688-Task A.


text:
# Radial velocity measurements of white dwarfs

## 1 Introduction

The observed mass distribution of white dwarf stars is strongly peaked around 0.55$`\mathrm{M}_{}`$(Finley et al. 1997, Bergeron et al. 1992, Bragaglia et al. 1995). Although models of the evolution leading to white dwarfs are extremely uncertain, it appears that this is the minimum mass of a white dwarf that can be formed through single star evolution in the lifetime of the Galaxy (Bragaglia et al. 1995). White dwarfs more massive than this minimum are formed from initially more massive stars, but they are much less common than lower mass stars, and so the observed mass distribution is strongly peaked. In this paper we deal with white dwarf stars below this “minimum” mass. These are thought to be the result of binary star evolution, in which the evolution of a star during the red giant phase is interrupted by interactions with a nearby star. The physics of this interaction is complex but it is thought to lead to the stripping of the outer hydrogen layers from the red giant in a “common-envelope” phase, halting the formation of the degenerate helium core and leading to the formation of an anomalously low mass white dwarf (Iben & Livio 1993). The hypothesis that binary evolution forms low mass white dwarfs (LMWDs) was confirmed by the discovery of Marsh et al. (1995) of at least 5 short period binary white dwarfs in a sample of 7 LMWDs. However, there is growing evidence that LMWDs may not all be binaries (Maxted & Marsh 1998). It has been suggested that this is a result of the merging of the binary following the common-envelope phase (Iben et al. 1997), but the lack of any detectable rotation in the apparently single white dwarfs has cast doubt on this suggestion (Maxted & Marsh 1998). An alternative hypothesis is that the giant planets recently discovered orbiting solar-type stars lead to a common-envelope phase, but evaporate during that phase leaving an apparently single LMWD (Nelemans & Tauris 1998).

We have been successful in finding new white dwarf binaries and measuring their orbital periods using the techniques of Marsh et al. (1995). Those results have been presented elsewhere (Moran 1999; Moran, Marsh & Maxted 2000; Maxted , Marsh & Moran, 2000). We have observed many white dwarfs in the course of our search for binary white dwarfs but have not, in general, reported these radial velocity measurements unless the star was found to be a binary and the orbital period identified. These radial velocity measurements are a valuable resource, both for kinematic studies and for future surveys for binary white dwarfs. Therefore, in this paper we report our 594 radial velocity measurements for 71 white dwarfs not already reported elsewhere. We identify 4 new candidate binary white dwarfs and report preliminary orbital periods for three of them. We also consider the evidence for the existence of a population of single low mass white dwarfs.

## 2 Observations and reductions

The data have been obtained over several years using several instruments. Most of the data come from observations obtained with the intermediate dispersion spectrograph (IDS) on the 2.5m Isaac Newton Telescope (INT) on the Island of La Palma. Additional spectra for some stars were obtained using the ISIS spectrograph on the 4.2m William Herschel Telescope (WHT), also on La Palma, and the RGO spectrograph on the 3.9m Anglo-Australian Telescope (AAT) at Siding Spring, Australia. The detectors used in every case were charge-coupled devices (CCDs). Details of all three instruments, the dates of all the observing runs and the dispersion per pixel used are given in Table 1.

The observing procedure is very similar in each case. We obtain spectra of our target stars around the H$`\alpha `$ line with a resolution of $``$1Å. Exposure times are typically 5–20 minutes and never longer than 30 minutes. Spectra of an arc lamp are taken before and after each target spectrum with the telescope tracking the star. None of the CCDs used showed any structure in unexposed images, so a constant bias level determined from a clipped-mean value in the over-scan region was subtracted from all the images. Sensitivity variations were removed using observations of a tungsten calibration lamp. The sensitivity variations along the spectrograph slit are removed using observations of the twilight sky in the AAT images because the tungsten calibration lamp is inside the spectrograph. We have occasionally used the same technique for the WHT and INT spectra, though it makes little difference in practice whether we use sky images or lamp images to calibrate these images.

Extraction of the spectra from the images was performed automatically using optimal extraction to maximize the signal-to-noise of the resulting spectra (Horne 1986). The arcs associated with each stellar spectrum were extracted using the profile determined for the stellar image to avoid possible systematic errors due to tilted arc lines. The wavelength scale was determined from a polynomial fit to measured arc line positions and the wavelength of the target spectra interpolated from the calibration established from the bracketing arc spectra. Uncertainties on every data point calculated from photon statistics are rigorously propagated through every stage of the data reduction.

## 3 Analysis

### 3.1 Radial velocity measurements.

To measure the radial velocities we used least-squares fitting of a model line profile. This model line profile is the summation of four Gaussian profiles with different widths and depths but with a common central position which varies between spectra. Only data within 5000 km s-1 of the H$`\alpha `$ line is included in the fitting process. We first normalize the spectra using a linear fit to the continuum either side of the H$`\alpha `$ line. We then use a least-squares fit to all the spectra to establish the shape of the model line profile. A least squares fit of this profile to each spectrum in which the position of the line is the only free parameter gives the final heliocentric radial velocities reported in Table 9. The uncertainties quoted are calculated by propagating the uncertainties on every data point in the spectra right through the data reduction and analysis. These uncertainties are reliable in most cases, but some caution must be exercised for quoted uncertainties of less than $`0.5`$ km s-1. This corresponds to less than $`1/20`$ of a pixel in the original data, so systematic errors such as telluric absorption features and uncertainties in the wavelength calibration are certain to be a significant source of uncertainty for these measurements.

Where data has been obtained for a star on more than one instrument we have measured the offset between the data sets to look for systematic differences. These offsets are given in Table 2. Almost all of these offsets are consisted with an offset between data sets of no more than $`1`$ km s-1. The obvious exceptions are WD 0341+021 and WD 1407$``$475, which we discuss more fully below.

### 3.2 Criterion for variability.

For each star we calculate a weighted mean radial velocity. This mean is the best estimate of the radial velocity of the star assuming this quantity is constant. We then calculate the $`\chi ^2`$ statistic for this “model”, i.e. the goodness-of-fit of a constant to the observed radial velocities. We can then compare the observed value of $`\chi ^2`$ with the distribution of $`\chi ^2`$ for the appropriate number of degrees of freedom. We then calculate the probability of obtaining the observed value of $`\chi ^2`$ or higher from random fluctuations of constant value, $`p`$. The observed values of the weighted mean radial velocity, $`\chi ^2`$ and the logarithm of this probability, $`\mathrm{log}_{10}(p)`$, are given for all the white dwarfs in our sample in Table 4. If we find $`\mathrm{log}_{10}(p)<4`$ we consider this to be a detection of a binary. In a sample of 71 objects, this results in a less than 1 percent chance of random fluctuations producing one or more false detections.

In order to estimate the fraction of binaries that would be detected using our observations with this detection criterion we use a Monte Carlo approach. We generate synthetic radial velocity measurements with the same temporal sampling and accuracy as the actual observations of each star and add the appropriate amount of noise. We include the projection effects due to randomly oriented orbits. Periods are selected randomly from one of the theoretical period distributions described below. The mass of the white dwarf observed, $`M`$, is taken from Table 4 if known or is calculated for each trial perid $`P`$ from $`\mathrm{log}(M)=0.13\mathrm{log}(P)0.6`$. This is simply an approximation to the main feature of the bivariate distribution of periods and masses for binary white dwarfs given by Saffer et al. (1998). We then estimate our detection efficiency using the number of trials which statisfy our detection criterion for the following two cases.

The first case is a white dwarf companion with the same mass as the visible white dwarf. We use the sum of the period distributions for white dwarfs with white dwarf companions of all types including the loss of systems due to $`10^8`$y of gravitational wave radiation given by Iben et al. (1997, their Figs 2(c) and 2(d)). Note that their models give a mean mass ratio of around 0.7 with the fainter, i.e., older, companion being more massive. However, there are now six white dwarf – white dwarf binaries with directly measured mass ratios, and these tend to be $`1`$ (Table 3). It is not straightforward to estimate the selection effects but a mass ratio of 1 does seem to be more typical for these binaries. This detection efficiency is given in Table 4 under $`e(A)`$.

The second case is a main-sequence companion with a mass of 0.08$`\mathrm{M}_{}`$. The theoretical period distribution in this case is the sum of the distributions given by Iben et al. for companions to white dwarfs with mass less than 0.3$`\mathrm{M}_{}`$(their Figs 3(c) and 3(d)). This detection efficiency is given in Table 4 under $`e`$(B). We use 100,000 trials to measure these efficiencies, which is sufficient to give an accuracy of a few tenths of one percent. We can also plot these detection efficiencies as a function of period to get a more qualitative view. Some examples are shown in Fig. 1.

## 4 Notes on individual objects

This object is variable according to our criterion. The H$`\alpha `$ line is narrower than usual so we only use data within 2000 km s-1 of H$`\alpha `$ to measure the radial velocities. The periodogram of these velocities is complex with peaks near 0.16cycles/d and 0.85cycles/d. We used a circular orbit fit by least squares to the measured radial velocities to fix the position of the absorption core in each spectrum in a least-squares fit to all the spectra to re-determine the model line profile. We then re-measured the radial velocities with this improved model line profile. These are the velocities given in Table 9. The periodogram of these data shows many peaks of similar significance. We used the seven most significant peaks to give an initial value of the period in a least-squares fit of a circular orbit to the data. The results are given in Table 5. Periods near 6.4d and 1.2d are equally likely and there are several periods near these values which would give a satisfactory fit to our data. The real period of this binary should be easy to identify with a few more spectra. The value of chi-squared is unusually low for all the circular orbit fits in Table 5. There are 14 data points and 4 free parameters in the fitting process, so we might expect a typical value of chi-squared around 10, but a value of chi-squared as low as 5.27 occurs by chance for about 1/8 trials, so such a low value of chi-squared is to be expected occasionally given the number of binaries we have studied.

This star is clearly variable according to our criterion. The variability is due to an offset between two data sets (see Table 2). Although there is only one spectrum in the INT data set, the offset is clearly seen in the data and far exceeds the typical offset between data sets. We suspect this is a long period binary.

The H$`\alpha `$ line of this star is weak and broad so we only used two Gaussians in the model line profile.

This star is certainly variable according to our criterion. We used the same procedure as for WD 0101+048 to re-calculate the model profile. There is a clear peak in the periodogram near 0.32d with no other significant peaks. A circular orbit fit to the measured radial velocities is given in Table 6. The $`\chi ^2`$ value for this fit is rather high so we present this as a tentative identification of the orbital period. The measured radial velocities and circular orbit fit are shown in Fig. 3

Schultz et al. (1992) found an emission line superimposed on the usual absorption line which shows variable radial velocity and indicates the presence of a companion. We measured the radial velocity of both the absorption and emission lines and found both to be slightly variable, though neither satisfies our strict criterion for binarity. The measurements of the emission line are listed in Tables 4 and 9 under WD 0752$``$146 B. We were unable to identify a definite period from our data combined with the data of Schultz et al.

This star, also known as LB 11146, was studied by Glenn et al. (1994) who found that the spectrum is a composite of a magnetic and a non-magnetic white dwarf. Their radial velocity measurements showed no variability over a baseline of 16 days. We find no evidence for variability from our own data nor from the combination of both sets of radial velocity measurements.

This is a rare DA+dC star (Finley et al. 1997) also known as PG 0824+289. We were unable to measure the radial velocity of the white dwarf from our 2 H$`\alpha `$ spectra, but the results of measuring the radial velocity of the dC component measured from the H$`\alpha `$ emission line are given in Tables 4 and 9 under WD 0824+288 B.

This hot white dwarf has a broad, shallow H$`\alpha `$ line so we only used two Gaussians to form the model line profile.

The core of the H$`\alpha `$ line in star this reversed (in emission).

Although this star is variable according to our criterion, there are no obvious periods in the data and circular orbit fits to potential periods are not convincing. The uncertainties for several of the radial velocities given in Table 9 are very small. These uncertainties take no account of systematic errors in the data. If we assume there is an additional uncertainty of only 0.5 km s-1 in the data, we find $`\mathrm{log}_{10}(p)=3.3`$. We believe that the data for this star simply reflect the fact that systematic errors in the data limit the accuracy of our radial velocity measurements to $`0.5`$ km s-1.

We only used data within 3500 km s-1 of H$`\alpha `$ for the fitting process because four of our spectra only extend 3500 km s-1 to the red of H$`\alpha `$.

Although this star is variable according to our criterion, there are no obvious periods in the data and circular orbit fits to potential periods are not convincing. This would appear to be a similar case to WD 1105$``$048, i.e, the small uncertainties on some radial velocity measurements are over-optimistic.

This star is clearly variable according to our criterion. The variability is due to the large offset between two data sets (see Table 2). A periodogram shows significant peaks near 1, 2 and 3 cycles/d. We used the same technique applied to WD 0101+048 to measure the circular orbit fits to these three orbital periods given in Table 7. The fit for a period near one day is shown in Fig. 4. The circular orbit fits are good but further data is required to confirm this star is a binary and to then identify the correct orbital period.

This star incorrectly labelled as 1615$``$154 by Bragaglia et al. (1995) and Saffer, Livio & Yungelson (1998).

We found this star showed emission at H$`\alpha `$ due to a companion which is variable in strength (Maxted et al. 1999). We used an additional Gaussian component to model the emission line, though it is not always visible in the spectra. Radial velocities for the 4 spectra where the line could be measured are listed in Tables 4 and 9 under WD 2151$``$015 B.

## 5 Discussion

### 5.1 Evidence for a population of single, low mass white dwarfs.

We have used the results in Table 4 to investigate whether there is any evidence for a population of single, LMWDs. For the purposes of this discussion we define an LMWD to be a white dwarf for which more than half the mass estimates, $`M\pm \sigma _M`$, satisfy the condition $`(M_{\mathrm{lim}}M)>2\sigma _M`$, i.e., they are at least two standard deviations below some mass limit $`M_{\mathrm{lim}}`$. The value of $`M_{\mathrm{lim}}`$ is a matter of some debate, so we consider three cases, $`M_{\mathrm{lim}}=0.45\mathrm{M}_{}`$ ,$`M_{\mathrm{lim}}=0.50\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`M_{\mathrm{lim}}=0.55\mathrm{M}_{}`$. Of the 20 white dwarfs which satisfy the condition $`M_{\mathrm{lim}}=0.55\mathrm{M}_{}`$, 19 show no evidence for a binary companion. The nature of the companion to WD 0341+021, if it is a binary, is not known. The results in Table 4 cannot be taken at face value because the obvious binaries have already been excluded. In order to account for these binaries we have reviewed our records to identify objects excluded from Table 4 which were observed because of their low mass and subsequently discovered to be binaries. There are 16 such stars, 3 of which have main-sequence companions and 13 of which are known or strongly suspected to have white dwarf companions.

It must be emphasized that we did not set out from the start to observe white dwarfs is such a way as to determine whether there is any evidence for a population of single LMWDs. The various stars were observed for different reasons, sometimes with a different motivation for the same star at different times. Nevertheless, these stars were, in general, observed because of their low mass and we continued to observe them if possible until we had either established an orbital period or had established that they were likely to be single. Therefore, our sample of LMWDS is fairly homogeneous and while it is not ideal it is, by far, the best available. We have simplified our analysis by assuming that there are only two populations of binary LMWDs, those with a companion of equal mass (population $`A`$) and those with companions of mass 0.08$`\mathrm{M}_{}`$(population $`B`$) and that our detection efficiencies for these binaries are as given in Table 4. The question we address here is whether our data show evidence for a population of single LMWDs (population $`C`$). We then have two models. The first model is that all LMWDs belong to either population $`A`$ or population $`B`$. We denote this model M2 because it contains only two populations. The second model is that there are three populations of LMWDs, $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$, so we denote this model M3. Using Bayes’ theorem we find:

$$\frac{\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{M3}|\mathrm{D})}{\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{M2}|\mathrm{D})}=\frac{\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{M3})}{\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{M2})}\frac{\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{D}|\mathrm{M3})}{\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{D}|\mathrm{M2})},$$

where the usual notation applies, e.g., $`\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{M2}|\mathrm{D})`$ is the probability of model M2 given our data, D. Our data consist of $`N_A`$ LMWDs with white dwarf companions we identify as belonging to population $`A`$, $`N_B`$ LMWDS with main-sequence companions we identify as belonging to population $`B`$ and $`N_0`$ that are not detected as binaries. For these “non-detections”, we have detection efficiencies $`e_i(A)`$ and $`e_i(B)`$, $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},N_0`$, for binaries belonging to population $`A`$ and $`B`$, respectively. If some fraction $`f_A`$ of binaries belong to population $`A`$ and some fraction $`f_C`$ of all LMWDs belong to population $`C`$, then

$$\frac{\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{D}|\mathrm{M3})}{\mathrm{P}(\mathrm{D}|\mathrm{M2})}=\frac{((1f_C)f_A)^{N_A}((1f_C)(1f_A))^{N_B}q_i}{f_A^{N_A}(1f_A)^{N_B}p_i}$$

where

$$p_i=f_A(1e_i(A))+(1f_A)(1e_i(B))$$

and

$$q_i=f_A(1e_i(A))+(1f_A)(1e_i(B))+f_C$$

This ratio of probabilities has the considerable merit that we do not need to make any assumptions concerning the detection efficiencies for those LMWDs identified as belonging to population $`A`$ or $`B`$. As we have no prior assumptions concerning the values of $`f_A`$ or $`f_C`$, we simply integrate the function numerically over a uniform grid of all possible values. In addition, we can identify the most likely values of $`f_A`$ and $`f_C`$ given our data.

We have calculated the value of $`\frac{P(D|M3)}{P(D|M2)}`$ for the three cases shown in Table 8 corresponding to three different assumptions concerning the nature of the companion to WD 0341+021. We include the case of an undetected companion despite having noted this star as a binary to allow for this detection being a “false-alarm”, though we consider this to be unlikely. Also given in Table 8 are the most likely values of $`f_A`$ and $`f_C`$.

The sensitivity of our result to the assumed properties of just one star in a sample of 37 demonstrates that the results must be treated with some caution. However, they do seem to favour the existence of a population of single LMWDs. This result should not be taken as conclusive for several reasons. Firstly, we have assumed that some of the binaries from our other studies which show no sign of a companion star have white dwarf companions. If this is not the case, then the value $`\frac{P(D|M3)}{P(D|M2)}`$ may be much lower. Secondly, there have been many simplifying assumptions made concerning the nature of the companions to these star. Thirdly, we have used the theoretical period distribution for these binaries despite the problems with these theories. In summary, we can say the the data favour the existence of a population of single LMWDs, but this result is not conclusive.

We have assumed that the companions to the LMWDs in our sample are either white dwarfs or main-sequence stars ($`M0.08\mathrm{M}_{}`$). The question of whether companions of such low mass or lower (i.e., sub-stellar companions) can survive a common envelope phase is a difficult one to answer (Siess & Livio 1999). It would certainly be useful to continue observations of the LMWDs presented here to push down the limits on the mass of any possible companion.

### 5.2 Comparison with the results of Saffer, Livio & Yungelson (1998).

Several of the stars in this paper are candidate radial velocity variables from Saffer , Livio & Yungelson (1998). There are four “weight 1” candidates (WD 1232+479, WD 1310+583, WD 1647+591, WD 2117+539) and four “weight 2” candidates (WD 0401+250, WD 0549+158, WD 0839+231, WD 1229$``$012). Only one of these shows any hint of variability from our own data, which is quite extensive for all these stars. This is, perhaps, not surprising given that Maxted & Marsh (1999) found that the mean number of false detections of binaries expected in their survey based on the quoted uncertainty in the radial velocity measurements and the detection criterion is 17.7. This estimate is clearly too high given the number of binary candidates identified by the survey which were known to be binaries beforehand or which have been confirmed subsequently. This suggests that the typical uncertainty quoted for these radial velocity measurements is to low. It also shows the problems that can arise when trying to draw quantitative conclusions from a survey for binary stars based on rather subjective detection criteria.

## 6 Conclusion

We have presented 594 radial velocity measurements for 71 white dwarfs. We find that WD 0101+048 is certainly a binary, but are unable to determine whether the orbital period is near 6.4d or 1.2d. Similarly, WD 1407$``$475 is also a binary but we are unable to determine whether its orbital period is near 1d, 1/2d or 1/3d from our data. WD 0416+701 is likely to be binary and our data favours an orbital period of 0.32d, but further observations are required to show this convincingly. We also identify WD 0341+021 as another likely binary but are unable to establish the orbital period fom our data. There is some evidence in our data for a population of single, low mass white dwarfs, but this result is dependent on several assumptions.

## Acknowledgements

PFLM was supported by a PPARC post-doctoral grant. CM was supported by a PPARC post-graduate studentship. The William Herschel Telescope and the Isaac Newton Telescope are operated on the island of La Palma by the Isaac Newton Group in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias.