text:
# Electron-positron Annihilation Radiation from Sgr A East at the Galactic Center

## 1 Introduction

Electron-positron annihilation radiation from the Galactic Center region was first reported in the 1970s after the successful flight of a series of balloon-borne instruments (Johnson, Harnden & Haymes 1972; Johnson & Haymes 1973; Haymes et al. 1975). An unambiguous identification of the 511 keV line and the detection of the positronium continuum followed several years later (Leventhal, MacCallum & Stang 1978). Since that time, numerous follow-up experiments have provided additional monitoring of this source, though not always with a consistent measurement of the location or distribution of the emission, nor on the possible time variability of the 511 keV line flux (see the review by Tueller 1993). However, the Oriented Scintillation Spectrometer Experiment (OSSE) on the Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory was recently able to carry out high-sensitivity observations of the Galactic plane and uniquely map the distribution of positron annihilation radiation and search for time variability of the emission (Purcell et al. 1997).

The resulting maps show evidence for three distinct and significant features: (1) a central bulge source with a total flux (line plus continuum) of $`3.3\times 10^4`$ photons cm-2 s-1 and a Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) of $`4`$ degrees, (2) emission in the Galactic plane with a total flux of $`10^3`$ photons cm-2 s-1 and a broad extension of more than $`9`$ degrees FWHM in both latitude and longitude, and (3) an enhancement or extension of emission at positive latitudes above the Galactic Center with a total flux of $`9\times 10^4`$ photons cm-2 s-1 and a FWHM of over $`16`$ degrees. The average spectrum for the 1991 December viewing period of the Galactic Center (central bulge plus enhancement) exhibits a clear line feature at $`509\pm 5`$ keV. The line width ($`2.5`$ keV) is consistent with the instrumental resolution. The observed ratio of the 511 keV line flux to the total positronium flux corresponds to a positronium fraction of $`0.98\pm 0.04`$. In addition, OSSE found no evidence for time variability.

Sources proposed as contributers to the annihilation emission have included cosmic-ray interactions in the interstellar medium (Lingenfelter & Ramaty 1982), pulsars (Sturrock 1971) and $`\beta ^+`$ decay products from radioactive nuclei (e.g., 56Co, 44Sc, and 26Al) produced by supernovae, novae, or Wolf-Rayet stars (Clayton 1973; Ramaty & Lingenfelter 1979; Signore & Vedrenne 1988; Woosley & Pinto 1988; Lingenfelter & Ramaty 1989). However, efforts to model the distribution of the 511 keV emission have been only moderately successful (see, e.g., Purcell et al. 1993). These models, consisting of components generally representing Galactic emission observed at other wavelengths (e.g., CO maps) or geometric configurations assuming that the emission of annihilation radiation follows a Galactic distribution of known sources, were not able to describe the OSSE maps adequately. It is evident that simple Galactic distributions are not sufficient to describe the most recent 511 keV data and that additional components are required. For example, the expected 511 keV line flux resulting from the radioactive decay of 26Al represents only $`39\%`$ of the total Galactic 511 keV line flux (Purcell et al. 1997).

In this paper, we explore the possibility that Sgr A East, a very prominent elongated radio structure surrounding (although slightly off-centered from) the Galactic nucleus, is a significant source of the annihilation radiation associated with the bulge feature. The motivation for doing so stems from the association of this radio object and the EGRET $`\gamma `$-ray source 2EG J1746-2852 suggested by Melia et al. (1998). These authors show that the high-energy component of the EGRET spectrum can be accounted for by the decay of neutral pions ($`\pi ^0\gamma \gamma `$) produced in $`pp`$ scatterings between ambient protons and a relativistic population accelerated by shocks within the Sgr A East shell. Since charged pions which decay leptonically ($`\pi ^\pm \mu ^\pm \nu _\mu `$, with $`\mu ^\pm e^\pm \nu _e\nu _\mu `$) are also produced, the rest of Sgr A East’s spectrum, extending down to GHz energies, is filled uniquely by the bremsstrahlung, Compton and synchrotron interactions of the associated electrons and positrons. The VLA data, for example, are consistent with the synchrotron emissivity of the decay leptons within an equipartition magnetic field of $`10^5`$ G.

If this scenario is correct, Sgr A East must be a site of copious positron production. Here, we investigate whether this process is sufficient to power the measured flux of annihilation radiation from the Galactic Center, and if not, whether theses observations suggest an evolutionary history of Sgr A East.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents what is known about Sgr A East from observations as well as what we infer based on the results of Melia et al. (1998). This section also includes a calculation of the ionization state of the gas in Sgr A East. The fate of positrons produced in Sgr A East is then considered in Section 3. Two different evolutionary cases for this environment are presented in Section 4. The characteristics of the annihilation radiation spectra for these cases are determined in Section 5 and compared to observations. Our concluding remarks are also given in Section 5.

## 2 The Environment of Sgr A East

### 2.1 The Basic Properties

Sgr A East is an elliptical structure with nonthermal radio emission peaked at its periphery. Geometrically, the structure is elongated along the Galactic plane with a major axis of length 10.5 pc and a center displaced from the apparent dynamical nucleus, Sgr A West, by 2.5 pc in projection toward negative Galactic latitudes. The actual distance between Sgr A West and the geometric center of Sgr A East has been estimated to be $`7`$ pc (Yusef-Zadeh & Morris 1987; Pedlar et al. 1989; Yusef-Zadeh et al. 1999). Although morphologically similar to supernova remnants (SNRs), the energetics ($`4\times 10^{52}`$ ergs) of Sgr A East, based on the power required to carve out the radio synchrotron remnant within the surrounding dense molecular cloud, appear to be extreme compared to the total energy ($`10^{51}`$ ergs) released in a typical supernova (SN) explosion. It has been suggested that Sgr A East may be the remnant of a tidally disrupted star (Khokhlov & Melia 1996). Regardless of what actually caused the initial explosion, recent observations of this region at 1720 MHz (the transition frequency of OH maser emission) have revealed the presence of several maser spots at the SE boundary of Sgr A East with a velocity of $`50\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, and one near the Northern arm of Sgr A West at a velocity of $`134\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Yusef-Zadeh et al. 1996). These observations are consistent with the presence of shocks produced at the interface between the expanding Sgr A East shell and the surrounding environment. The implied age of Sgr A East ($`\tau 5\mathrm{pc}/100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^15\times 10^4`$ yr) is then consistent with those of typical SNRs.

Given its proximity to the Galactic Center, Sgr A East is bathed by intense IR and UV radiation fields associated with the central 1 $``$ 2 parsecs of the galaxy (Telesco et al. 1998; Davidson et al. 1992; Becklin, Gatley & Werner 1982; Melia, Yusef-Zadeh & Fatuzzo 1998). Although there are no direct measurements of the properties of the ambient medium enveloped by Sgr A East, X-ray observations suggest an average electron ambient density of $`36\mathrm{cm}^3`$ (Koyama et al. 1996; Sidoli & Mereghetti 1999). These results are consistent with an upper limit of $`30\mathrm{cm}^3`$ inferred by Melia et al. (1998). The temperature of the ambient medium is considerably less constrained. Observationally, the ISM within the inner 150 pc is comprised of several gas components with a range of temperatures. Inside the minicavity, the electron temperature lies in the range $`40007000`$ K, and is comparable to the average value of $`7000`$ K found for Sgr A West (Roberts, Yusef-Zadeh & Goss 1996). However, on a larger scale (i.e., tens of pc), the X-ray spectra observed with ASCA exhibit several emission lines from highly ionized elements that are characteristic of a $`10`$ keV thermal plasma. In particular, this region stands out in the intense $`6.7`$ keV K$`\alpha `$-transition of He-like Fe (Yamauchi, et al. 1990; Koyama, et al. 1996). These spectra indicate a common origin for the plasma in the entire region, rather than a superposition of individual sources. Assuming an expansion velocity comparable to the sound speed for $`kT10`$ keV, Koyama et al. (1996) infer an expansion age of $`10^5`$ yr, which is similar to that of Sgr A East. Thus, both the X-ray plasma and the relativistic synchrotron source may have been produced by the same explosive event $`0.51\times 10^5`$ yr ago. The BeppoSAX observations of the Sgr A Complex suggest somewhat different characteristics, in which the high-energy data are well fit by the sum of two thermal models with $`kT0.6`$ and $`8`$ keV, with the lower temperature plasma well correlated to Sgr A East (Sidoli & Mereghetti 1999).

### 2.2 Other Inferred Characteristics

Adopting the scenario of Melia et al. (1998) invoked to account for the Galactic Center EGRET observations, we assume that pion-production occurs within the Sgr A East shell as a result of collisions between shock-accelerated and ambient protons (see also Markoff, Melia & Sarcevic 1997). A crucial aspect of this mechanism is the decay of charged pions to muons, and subsequently, to relativistic electrons and positrons. The rate at which these leptons are produced is linked directly to the rate at which neutral pions are produced (since the charged pions and neutral pions are both byproducts of the same scattering events), and is therefore well constrained by the EGRET observations (Markoff, Melia & Sarcevic 1999). In addition, since the relativistic leptons radiate synchrotron emission, their energy distribution is well constrained by the radio properties of Sgr A East. These observations also provide an indirect measure of the magnetic field strength in Sgr A East (see below).

In order to keep the analysis as concise as possible while at the same time capturing the important characteristics of the Sgr A East environment, we assume a uniform and homogeneous shell geometry, with an inner radius of 4 pc and an outer radius of 5pc, and a centroid about $`R=`$ 7 pc from the Galactic Center. The IR and UV radiation fields bathing this region are assumed to have blackbody spectra with temperatures $`T_{ir}=100`$ K and $`T_{uv}=30,000`$ K, respectively, and energy densities

$$u=\frac{L}{4\pi R^2c}=4.4\times 10^{10}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^3\left(\frac{L}{2\times 10^7L_{}}\right)\left(\frac{R}{7\mathrm{pc}}\right)^2,$$
(1)
where $`L`$ is either $`L_{ir}=10^7L_{}`$, or $`L_{uv}=2\times 10^7L_{}`$. Furthermore, we will assume that Sgr A East has an age of $`75,000`$ years and is comprised mostly of hydrogen with an average density $`n_H=5\mathrm{cm}^3`$, and helium with an average density $`n_{He}=0.5\mathrm{cm}^3`$. The temperature profile $`T`$ within the Sgr A Complex must reflect the superposition of the various components discussed above. For our purposes here, however, we assume that the ambient plasma where the positrons are produced may be ascribed a single characteristic value of $`T`$ at any given time. The positrons are assumed to be produced within the Sgr A East shell in accordance with Case 2 of Melia et al. (1998), the one that produced the best fit to the gamma-ray data. The injection function $`I_+`$ for these particles is shown in Figure 1 as a function of the positron energy $`E_+`$. The total production rate, found by integrating this function over all values of $`E_+`$, is equal to $`2.7\times 10^{18}`$ cm-3 s-1. The corresponding magnetic field strength, inferred from the VLA spectrum, is $`B=1.1\times 10^5`$ G, which is within a factor of 2 of its equipartition value.

One of the processes by which annihilation occurs is charge exchange between positrons and atoms. Our analysis of the electron-positron annihilation considered below will therefore require an assessment of the ionization fractions in the Sgr A East shell, which are set by the balance of total recombination and ionization rates for hydrogen and helium. For simplicity, we assume that all atoms are ionized from their ground state. We will confirm a posteriori that the ambient plasma in Sgr A East is highly ionized and that therefore the approximations we make here do not greatly affect the results. We can therefore ignore the trace presence of neutral helium as the charge exchange process is dominated by the more prevelant singly ionized species of this atom. In addition, the number density of ambient electrons is well-approximated by the constant value $`n_e=6\mathrm{cm}^3`$. The recombination rates are therefore independent of the ionization fractions of the species comprising the plasma, and hence the ionization equations for hydrogen and helium decouple and reduce to the following:

$$\frac{n^{HI}}{n^{HII}}=\frac{\underset{i}{}R_{fi}^{HII}}{R_{1f}^{HI}+C_{1f}^{HI}},$$
(2)
$$\frac{n^{HeII}}{n^{HeIII}}=\frac{\underset{i}{}R_{fi}^{HeIII}}{R_{1f}^{HeII}+C_{1f}^{HeII}},$$
(3)
where $`R_{fi}`$ is the radiative recombination rate to state $`i`$ and $`R_{1f}`$ and $`C_{1f}`$ are the radiative and collisional ionization rates from the ground state. Collisional recombination can be ignored for the conditions found in Sgr A East.

Since the electron self-collision rate

$$R_c1/t_c7.1\times 10^{10}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(\frac{T}{10^7\mathrm{K}}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{n_e}{6\mathrm{cm}^3}\right)$$
(4)
(Spitzer 1956) is much larger than the radiative recombination rates in the Sgr A East environment (see Figure 2), the free electrons thermalize prior to recombining. We can therefore use the collisional ionization rates for HI and HeII in terms of the ambient electron temperature $`T`$ and the corresponding ground-state ionization energy $`\chi `$ from Bell et al. (1983). These represent the best fits to the observation and theory, and take the form

$$C_{1f}=n_e\mathrm{exp}(\chi /kT)\left(kT/\chi \right)^{1/2}\underset{n=0}{\overset{5}{}}a_n\left[\mathrm{log}(kT/\chi )\right]^n,$$
(5)
when $`\chi /10kT10\chi `$, and

$$C_{1f}=n_e(kT/\chi )^{1/2}\left[\gamma \mathrm{ln}(kT/\chi )+\underset{n=0}{\overset{2}{}}\beta _n(\chi /kT)^n\right],$$
(6)
when $`kT>10\chi `$. The values of the coefficients are given in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1

$`a_0`$ $`a_1`$ $`a_2`$ $`a_3`$ $`a_4`$ $`a_5`$    HI 2.3742E-08 -3.6866E-09 -1.0366E-08 -3.8010E-09 3.4159E-09 1.6834E-09  HeII 3.4356E-09 -1.6865E-09 -6.9236E-10 9.7863E-11 1.5591E-10 6.2236E-11

Table 2

$`\gamma `$ $`\beta _0`$ $`\beta _1`$ $`\beta _2`$    HI 2.4617E-08 9.5986E-08 -9.2463E-07 3.9973E-06  HeII 3.0772E-09 1.1902E-08 -1.1514E-07 5.0489E-07

The radiative ionization rate from the ground state is given by the expression

$$R_{1f}=_\chi ^{\mathrm{}}\sigma _{1f}(ϵ)cn_ϵ𝑑ϵ,$$
(7)
where $`n_ϵ`$ is the differential number density of ionizing UV photons, normalized so that

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}ϵn_ϵ𝑑ϵ=u_{uv}.$$
(8)
The ionization cross-section for hydrogenic atoms (e.g., HI and HeII) in their ground state is given by

$$\sigma _{1f}(ϵ)=\frac{8h^3}{3^{3/2}\pi ^2e^2m_e^2cZ^2}\left(\frac{\chi }{ϵ}\right)^3\left[8\pi \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3}^{1/2}\left(\frac{\chi }{ϵ}\right)\frac{e^{4(\alpha /\beta )\mathrm{cot}^1(\alpha /\beta )}}{1e^{2\pi (\alpha /\beta )}}\right],$$
(9)
where $`Z`$ is the atomic number, $`\alpha `$ is the fine structure constant, $`\beta =v/c`$ is the ratio of the free electron speed to that of light, and the term in square brackets is an analytical expression for the gaunt factor (Spitzer 1978).

The total radiative recombination rate for hydrogenic atoms is

$$\underset{i}{}R_{fi}=n_e\underset{i}{}<v\sigma _{fi}(E)>,$$
(10)
where $`v`$ and $`E`$ are, respectively, the speed and kinetic energy of the electrons prior to capture,

$$\sigma _{fi}(E)=\frac{2^4}{3^{3/2}}\frac{he^2}{m_e^2c^3}\frac{\chi ^2}{(E+\chi /i^2)E}\frac{g}{i^3}$$
(11)
is the cross-section for radiative capture to the $`i`$-th state, and the brackets $`<>`$ denote an average over the thermal electron distribution function. The sum over $`i`$ may be truncated at $`i=20`$ without introducing any appreciable error. For simplicity, the gaunt factors $`g`$ are set equal to unity, therefore introducing a possible error that ranges from $``$ 3% at $`T=10^4`$ K to $``$ 20% at temperatures in excess of $`10^6`$ K. We note, however, that our final results are not subject to the large errors incurred at temperatures $`10^6`$ K.

Values of the rate coefficients as a function of the ambient temperature $`T`$ are shown in Figure 2. Note that the radiative recombination rates are lower at all temperatures than the electron self-collision rate, as discussed above. For these conditions then, the ionization equations are easily solved to determine the atomic number densities. The results of these calculations are shown in Figure 3, and these help to justify the assumption stated earlier that the plasma is highly ionized for the environment in the Sgr A East shell.

## 3 The Positron Population

In this section, we calculate the positron distribution, and determine whether these particles thermalize before annihilating. We then consider how to calculate the present positron number density for a given evolution of the Sgr A East environment.

### 3.1 The Positron Annihilation Rates

Positron annihilation in a hydrogen and helium plasma can occur via three dominant mechanisms: direct (in-flight) annihilation; radiative capture; and charge exchange. The first of these processes, in which a free positron annihilates with an ambient electron without first forming positronium, results in the production of two photons. The direct annihilation rate for a positron of kinetic energy $`E_+`$ interacting with an isotropic Maxwell-Boltzman distribution $`n_ef_{mb}(E_{})`$ of electrons (where $`E_{}`$ is the electron kinetic energy) is given by the expression

$$R_{da}(E_+)=cn_ef_{mb}(E_{})𝑑E_{}_1^1\frac{d\mu }{2}f_{kin}(E_+,E_{})\sigma _{da}(E_+,E_{}),$$
(12)
where

$$f_{kin}=\left[\beta _{}^2+\beta _+^2\beta _{}^2\beta _+^2(1\mu ^2)2\beta _{}\beta _+\mu \right]^{1/2}$$
(13)
accounts for the kinematics of the two-particle motion, and

$$\beta _\pm =\left[\frac{2E_\pm m_ec^2+E_\pm ^2}{(mc^2)^2+2E_\pm m_ec^2+E_\pm ^2}\right]^{1/2}$$
(14)
are the positron/electron speeds in units of $`c`$. The cross-section as a function of the relative Lorentz factor $`\gamma =(1\beta ^2)^1`$ can be determined using the plane-wave approximation and is found to be

$$\sigma _{da}=\left[2\pi \left(\frac{\alpha }{\beta }\right)\left(1e^{2\pi \alpha /\beta }\right)^1\right]\left[\frac{\pi r_0^2}{\gamma +1}\left(\frac{\gamma ^2+4\gamma +1}{\gamma ^21}\mathrm{ln}[\gamma +(\gamma ^21)^{1/2}]\frac{\gamma +3}{(\gamma ^21)^{1/2}}\right)\right],$$
(15)
where

$$\beta =\left[\frac{(1\beta _+\beta _{}\mu )^2(1\beta _+^2)(1\beta _{}^2)}{(1\beta _+\beta _{}\mu )^2}\right]^{1/2}$$
(16)
is the relative speed (in units of $`c`$) between the electrons and positrons (Coppi & Blandford 1990), $`r_0`$ is the classical electron radius, and the term in the first set of square brackets takes into account the Coulomb attraction.

Radiative capture produces positronium in either a singlet spin-0 state (0.25 probability) or a triplet spin-1 state (0.75 probability). Annihilation from the singlet state produces two line photons whereas annihilation from the triplet state produces three continuum photons. The overall capture rate is given by summing over the radiative capture rates into each state $`i`$:

$$R_{rc}(E^+)=\underset{i}{}cn_ef_{mb}(E_{})𝑑E_{}_1^1\frac{d\mu }{2}f_{kin}(E_+,E_{})\sigma _{rc}(E_+,E_{}),$$
(17)
where the cross-section is easily generalized from Equation (11) by replacing $`m_e`$ with the reduced mass $`m_e/2`$ and noting that the ionization energy from the ground state of positronium is $`\chi =6.8`$ eV.

The presence of HeII implies that charge exhange ($`e^+`$ \+ HeII $``$ Ps + HeIII) is an important mechanism by which positronium is formed. The rate at which this process occurs is given by

$$R_{ce}(E_+)=n_{HeII}\beta _+c\sigma _{ce}(E_+).$$
(18)
To our knowledge, no generally accepted theoretical or experimental value exists for the cross-section of this process. However, based on measurements of the cross-sections for the $`e^+`$ \+ HI $``$ Ps + HII (Sperber et al. 1992) and the $`e^+`$ \+ HeI $``$ Ps + HeII reactions (Overton et al. 1993), it is clear that the desired cross-section is peaked at 54.4 eV (the ground-state ionization energy for HeII) with a value there of $`\pi a_0^2`$. Assuming an energy profile similar to that of the $`e^+`$ \+ HeI $``$ Ps + HeII cross-section, we may therefore adopt an empirically based cross-section of the form

$$\sigma _{ce}(E_+)=2.4\times 10^{16}\mathrm{cm}^2\left(\frac{E_+}{E_1}1\right)e^{\left(1\frac{E_+}{E_1}\right)},$$
(19)
for positron kinetic energies $`E_+>E_1=28`$ eV.

The annihilation rates are shown as functions of the positron kinetic energy in Figures 4-6 for three different values of the ambient temperature. The dotted lines, which represent the Maxwell-Boltzman functions $`f_{mb}(E_{})`$ at each specified temperature, will be introduced in § 4.

### 3.2 The Positron Cooling Rates

We present here the cooling rates for a positron moving through Sgr A East with a Lorentz factor $`\gamma _+=[1\beta _+^2]^1`$. The dominant energy loss mechanisms are: (1) Synchrotron losses at a rate

$$\frac{dE_s}{dt}=\frac{4}{3}\frac{\sigma _Tc}{8\pi }\beta _+^2\gamma _+^2B^2;$$
(20)
(2) Compton scattering losses at a rate

$$\frac{dE_\gamma }{dt}=\frac{4}{3}m_ec^3\beta _+^2\gamma _+^2\left[\frac{u_{uv}\sigma _c\left(x_{uv}\right)}{m_ec^2+\gamma _+kT_{uv}}+\frac{u_{ir}\sigma _c\left(x_{ir}\right)}{m_ec^2+\gamma _+kT_{ir}}\right],$$
(21)
where $`x_{uv}=2.7\gamma _+kT_{uv}/m_ec^2`$, $`x_{ir}=2.7\gamma _+kT_{ir}/m_ec^2`$, and

$$\sigma _c(x)=\frac{3}{4}\sigma _T\left[\frac{1+x}{x^3}\left(\frac{2x(1+x)}{1+2x}\mathrm{ln}(1+2x)\right)+\frac{1}{2x}\mathrm{ln}(1+2x)\frac{1+3x}{(1+2x)^2}\right];$$
(22)
(3) Bremmstrahlung emission losses at a rate

$$\frac{dE_B}{dt}=4\alpha r_o^2m_ec^3(2n_H+6n_{He})\mathrm{ln}(2\gamma _+1/3)\gamma _+;$$
(23)
and (4) Coulomb losses at a rate of

$$\frac{dE_C}{dt}=m_ec^3n_ef_{mb}(E^{})𝑑E^{}_1^1\frac{d\mu }{2}f_{kin}<\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }\gamma >,$$
(24)
where

$$<\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }\gamma >=\frac{3\sigma _T(\gamma _{}\gamma _+)}{64ϵ^2}\left[\left(4\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }+4\mathrm{ln}2\right)\left(\frac{ϵ^2+p^2}{p^2}\right)^22\left(\frac{8ϵ^41}{p^2ϵ^2}\right)+\frac{12ϵ^4+1}{ϵ^4}\frac{8p^2}{3}\frac{\left(ϵ^2+p^2\right)}{ϵ^4}+\frac{2p^4}{ϵ^4}\right]$$
(25)
is given in terms of the parameters $`ϵ^2=(1+\gamma )/2`$ and $`p^2=ϵ^21`$, where $`\gamma `$ is the relative Lorentz factor (Coppi and Blandford 1990). The corresponding cooling rates, defined by the general expression $`R=E_+^1(dE/dt)`$, are plotted in Figure 7 for an ambient temperature of $`10^5`$ K. We note that only the Coulomb cooling rate depends on the temperature, with the low-energy turnover occuring at an energy of $`kT`$.

### 3.3 The Fate of Positrons in Sgr A East

It is clear from the results shown in Figures 4-7 that the total positron cooling rate is much greater than the total positron annihilation rate over the entire energy range. In addition, for energies below $`10^8`$ eV, the total cooling rate increases with decreasing particle energy. Taken together, these results imply that particles produced in Sgr A East with energies $`10^8`$ eV thermalize to the same temperature as the ambient electrons on a time scale equal to the inverse of their initial cooling rate, and do so before they annihilate. These results are summarized in Figure 8, which shows the total annihilation (short-dash) and cooling (long-dash) rates assuming an ambient temperature of $`T=10^5`$ K along with the injection function (solid line, right-hand scale) for the Sgr A East positrons. The two horizontal dotted lines mark the inverse of $`10^4`$ and $`10^5`$ years, and the energy at which they first intersect the injection function then yields the threshold energy below which particles (i.e., those to the left of the corresponding vertical lines) have had sufficient time to thermalize within that time scale. A plot of the threshold energy $`E_t`$ as a function of time ranging between $`10^4`$ and $`10^5`$ years is shown in Figure 9. Figure 10 then illustrates the rate per unit volume with which positrons thermalize in Sgr A East (found by integrating the injection function up to the threshold energy) as a function of its age. This value falls well short of the total rate per unit volume with which positrons are produced in Sgr A East ($`2.7\times 10^{18}`$ cm-3 s-1) since $`E_t`$ is smaller than the energy at the peak of the injection function.

In other words, Sgr A East is apparently producing positrons at a rate that is currently much higher than that with which they cool and thermalize. The positrons in this remnant are being “stockpiled.”

## 4 Evolutionary Models of Sgr A East

The number density of thermal positrons populating Sgr A East as a function of its age $`t^{}`$ is found by integrating the evolution equation

$$\frac{dn_+}{dt}=\left[_0^{E_t(t^{})}I_+(E)𝑑E\right]\left[n_+\left(<R_{da}>+<R_{ce}>+<R_{rc}>\right)\right],$$
(26)
where $`I_+`$ is the injection function shown in Figure 1 and the terms in the $`<>`$ brackets represent the annihilation rates (da - direct annihilation; ce - charge exchange; rc - radiative capture) averaged over the thermal positron distribution function. Note that the term in the first square brackets represents the rate at which positrons are thermalized in Sgr A East.

We first consider a static evolutionary model for Sgr A East where both the temperature and thermalization rate are constant in time. For this case, the number density of positrons increases with age until the annihilation rate matches the thermalization rate. Assuming that all thermal positrons form positronium before annihilating, each positron produces an average of $`0.25\times 2+0.75\times 3=2.75`$ annihilation photons. A reasonably good estimate for the ensuing flux at Earth, found by multiplying the product of the injection rate (which is clearly larger than the thermalization/annihilation rate) and the Sgr A East volume by $`2.75`$ to find the total rate of annihilation radiation photons produced in Sgr A East, and then dividing by $`4\pi D^2`$ (where $`D=8.5`$ kpc is the distance to the Galactic Center), yields a value of $`6.5\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$. This number is clearly much smaller than the measured flux arriving at earth from the bulge.

Is it possible then that a time-dependent positron production rate in Sgr A East could account for the current high rate of annihilation? Let us consider the possibility that positrons were stockpiled in Sgr A East during its infancy, and are now being depleted at a rate exceeding the current thermalization rate. This feat can be accomplished in two ways. First, the positron injection rate in Sgr A East may have been much higher earlier in its life. Indeed, the energy content of the relativistic proton population for Case 1 of Melia et al. (1989) is $`7.7\times 10^{51}`$ ergs, or roughly 10% of the energy associated with Sgr A East. (We note, however, that this value is really an upper limit, as it was derived assuming steady state conditions.) In that case, the number density of positrons populating Sgr A East would now be $`10^2`$ cm-3. In contrast, for the static evolutionary model discussed above, the number density of positrons injected into Sgr A East during the assumed lifetime of 75,000 years is $`6\times 10^6`$ cm-3. This difference suggests that the initial injection rate may have been as high as $`10^4`$ times greater than what is observed today.

We therefore consider two cases for the evolution of the injection rate, both of the form

$$I_+(t)=AI_+(t^{})\mathrm{exp}(t/\tau ),$$
(27)
where $`A=10^2`$ for Case A and $`A=10^4`$ for Case B. The value for $`\tau `$ is then well-defined for the assumed age $`t^{}`$ of 75,000 years.

Another reason why positrons may have been stockpiled in Sgr A East is that its temperature decreases with age. This can be seen by considering the annihilation rates averaged over the thermal positron distribution as a function of temperature. As shown in Figure 11, the averaged charge-exchange rate is strongly peaked at $`10^5`$ K, where the overlap between the Maxwell-Boltzman distribution function and the charge-exchange rate produces a clear maximum (see Figures 4 - 6). It is intriguing that the lower limit of 0.94 for the positronium fraction observed from the Galactic Center indicates that the temperature where the annihilation radiation is produced must lie in the range between $`3.2\times 10^4`$ K and $`3.2\times 10^5`$ K. This result is clearly seen from the plot of the positronium fraction

$$f_{Ps}=\frac{<R_{ce}>+<R_{rc}>}{<R_{ce}>+<R_{rc}>+<R_{da}>}$$
(28)
versus temperature, as shown in Figure 12. These results are somewhat consistent with the observed line-width of $`2.5`$ keV, since the expected relation

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ}{ϵ}3.2\times 10^3\left(\frac{T}{10^4\mathrm{K}}\right)^{0.41},$$
(29)
(Wallyn et al. 1996) then implies a temperature of $`2.8\times 10^4`$ K. We caution, however, that the above line-width relation is somewhat suspect (as noted by Wallyn et al.). We therefore assume that the initial temperature of Sgr A East may have been $`10^7`$ K and that it decays exponentially so that the temperature will be $`10^5`$K at an age of $`10^5`$ years.

## 5 Results and Discusson

We have integrated Equation (26) for the two evolutionary cases (A and B) discussed above. The number densites as a function of age for these situations are shown in Figure 13 as solid lines. The dotted lines represent the number densities stockpiled in the event that the annihilation rates are zero. To gain insight into these results, we plot the rate per unit volume at which positrons are thermalized (dotted line) and annihilated (solid and dashed lines) as a function of age for case B in Figure 14. It is clear that the positrons are indeed stockpiled when the thermalization rates are high, and this stockpile is depleted when the charge-exchange annihilation rate peaks.

The ensuing annihation spectrum is easily determined by noting that the observed flux of line photons is given by

$$F_l=\frac{N_+}{4\pi D^2}\left(2<R_{da}>+0.5<R_{rc}>+0.5<R_{ce}>\right),$$
(30)
and the observed flux of continuum photons is given by

$$F_c=\frac{N_+}{4\pi D^2}\left(2.25<R_{rc}>+2.25<R_{ce}>\right),$$
(31)
where $`N_+`$ is the total number of thermal positrons in Sgr A East. The total flux observed as a function of age is presented in Figure 15 for the two cases discussed above. As expected, the flux peaks at around $`75,000`$ years, where the positrons are just beginning to be depleted.

It is clear by comparing the values in Figure 15 to the observed flux from the bulge that even ideal evolutionary conditions cannot make up for the fact that only a small fraction of the injected positrons will have thermalized and are annihilating. This point is emphasized by the requirement of a very efficient cooling mechanism for the conditions in Sgr A East to account for the observed annihilation radiation flux, as may be seen by making the ad hoc assumption that all of the injected positrons thermalize. In that (extreme) case, the resulting flux curve (as shown in Figure 16 for the case with $`A=10^2`$) would agree well with the observations.

Our first conclusion is therefore that Sgr A East is not (by itself) the source of annihilation radiation from the Galactic Center, unless some efficient cooling mechanism (not considered here) is thermalizing the positrons on a time scale shorter than the age of this remnant.

However, since Sgr A East’s age is much shorter than the age of the Galaxy, it is reasonable to ask whether the process that produced this relatively unique remnant was a singular event. If not, then the accumulated “stockpiles” of positrons may now be at the required level to account for the observed annihilation rate. Unfortunately, there is very little to go by in terms of phenomenologically pinning down the rate at which these explosive events have occurred. But we can at least use the properties of the bulge component of the $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation radiation to infer what the minimum explosion rate must have been.

Using the required positron density, and assuming that no special cooling rate, beyond what we have considered here, is acting on the positrons, we estimate that $`30`$ explosions (like the one that produced Sgr A East) must have occurred over the past one million years if $`A=10^2`$. The number of events drops as the value of $`A`$ increases, reaching about one event per million years when $`A=10^4`$. This is interesting in view of the fact that Sgr A East’s age is estimated to be about 75,000 years, which means that indeed we may be witnessing the most recent of a series of catastrophic events that occur on average about once every 30,000 to 1 million years. This lends indirect support to the idea (Khokhlov and Melia 1996) that Sgr A East may have been produced by the tidal disruption of a $`2M_{}`$ star that ventured within $`10`$ Schwarzschild radii or so of the central black hole. Given the stellar density in the vicinity of Sgr A\*, such events are expected to occur roughly once every 10,000 to 100,000 years. The bulge component of the $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation radiation may therefore be the best evidence we have right now for the existence of accumulated relics of this ongoing stellar disruption process.

Acknowledgments This research was partially supported by NASA under grants NAG5-8239 and NAG5-9205, and has made use of NASA’s Astrophysics Data System Abstract Service. FM is very grateful to the University of Melbourne for its support (through a Miegunyah Fellowship) and MF would like to thank the John Hauck Foundation for partial support.


format: text

text:
# Contents

## 1 Requirements on an inner tracking detector for LHCb

LHCb  is a second generation experiment on $`b`$ quark physics which will be operated at the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) at CERN. The goal of the experiment is to measure systematically all observable CP violation effects and the rare decays in the $`B`$-meson system with unprecedented precision. It will allow to improve the knowledge on standard model physics and look for new CP violation effects possibly induced from physics beyond the standard model.

The analysis of rare $`B`$ decay channels requires an excellent resolution of the kinematic quantities of the decay products, their momentum, invariant masses and vertex position. A beam axial magnetic spectrometer with a large, high resolution tracking system complemented with particle identification devices (RICH, electromagnetic and hadronic calorimeters and a muon system) provides optimal performance for $`B`$ physics studies at LHC.

The tracking system consists of three parts: A vertex detector (silicon microstrip technology within the vacuum chamber of LHC), an outer tracking system to be installed in areas with small particle occupancies and an inner tracking system for areas with large particle occupancies. For the latter the collaboration recently decided among the various micropattern gas detector technologies to choose the triple GEM detector as described in this note. However this gas detector is still in competition with a microstrip silicon detector, the decision for one or the other of the two is presently foreseen to be made by end of the year 2001.

There are 11 inner tracking stations mounted vertically around the beam axis, each with a size of 60 cm (horizontal) $`\times `$ 40 cm (vertical). Momentum and invariant mass resolution ask for a position resolution of $`\sigma <200\mu `$m, while the radiation length should be kept as small as possible (in the simulations so far a value of about 2% per station is assumed). A stereo angle of 100 mrad is foreseen and each station needs to provide 4 measurements: $`x`$, $`u`$, $`v`$, $`x`$, where $`u`$ and $`v`$ denote the stereo layers. For an efficient pattern recognition the channel occupancy has to be kept below a few %, which also requires the time occupancy of the signals not to exceed about two or three LHC bunch crossings of 25 ns.

Simulation of the LHCb interaction region, including the beam vacuum chamber, were performed to estimate the particle fluxes , using an average nominal luminosity of 2$`\times `$1032 cm-2s-1. The peak luminosity is assumed to be higher by a factor 2.5. The particle fluxes and its compositions depend strongly on the position parallel to the beam axis $`z`$ and on the distance from the beam: the maximum charged hadron rate is expected to be 8$`\times `$103 mm-2s-1 and the maximum electron and positron rate (originating mostly from photon interaction with the beam pipe) might be as high as 5$`\times `$104 mm-2s-1. A large fraction of the latter enters the detector under a large inclination angle. The total counting rate per station reaches between 200 and 1000 MHz, again depending on $`z`$. These rates correspond to a maximum total radiation dose of about 1.6 Mrad/year.

A major problem of gas micropattern detectors comprises the fact, that in hadronic particle beams from time to time very high primary ionisations occur, which may lead to high voltage breakdowns producing dead time, huge electronic noise to other detectors and even may damage the detector and the readout electronics. For GEM foils it has been shown, that they usually withstand several hundred sparks per cm2 without permanent damage . We require both, that the spark rate is limited to one per hour per tracking plane and the detector should stay alive for several years. Taking into account the expected hadron particle flux it follows, that the discharge probability per incident particle must not exceed 10-12.

## 2 Detector construction

The triple GEM detector is depicted schematically in figure 1. The size of the active surface is 30 $`\times `$ 23 cm2.

### 2.1 Drift gap and amplification stages

The drift cathode consists of a 50 $`\mu `$m thick Kapton foil covered with a 15 $`\mu `$m thick copper layer. The drift gap is 3 mm wide.

The gas amplification takes place in three stages in the holes of the GEM foils222The GEM foils were manufactured by Rui de Oliveira et al. in the CERN workshop, which are mounted with a gap of 1 mm between them. The basis material for the foils is 50 $`\mu `$m thick Kapton with a 15 $`\mu `$m thick copper cladding on both sides. The hole parameters are chosen in accordance with results of studies made by the CERN GDD group . The holes are arranged with a pitch of 140 $`\mu `$m, the diameter of the copper hole is 80 $`\mu `$m and the diameter of the hole in the Kapton is 50 $`\mu `$m (see also figure 3).

The capacity between the two electrodes of a GEM foil is as large as 30 nF. To reduce the total charge released in a high voltage breakdown the GEM electrode is divided on one side into 10 rectangular segments, which are separated by copper free gaps of 200 $`\mu `$m width. Within these gaps there are no GEM holes (figure 3). Each segment is powered through an individual HV resistor of 10 M$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$and 1 M$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$resistor for the first two and the last GEM foil respectively outside the detector. This segmentation has the additional advantage, that only a small fraction of the detector would fail in the unlikely case of a high voltage breakdown causing a permanent GEM short.

To avoid contact between two GEM foils due to electrostatic forces or other mechanical instabilities spacers are glued onto them about every 4.5 cm. Since HV breakdown problems may occur due to unintentionally deposited glue in the GEM holes, the GEM contains 2 mm diameter regions without holes, where spacers can be placed (see figure 3). The spacers consist of small cylinders with diameter 1.1 mm and height 1 mm of pure epoxy resin H72333EPO–TEK H72, Polytek GmbH, D-76337 Waldbronn, Germany. They are glued with the same epoxy resin onto the GEM foil. Each GEM is equipped with 35 spacers, which were positioned by hand under a microscope. This procedure took about 45 minutes per foil. The total fraction of inactive surface of the detector due to spacers is $`1.6\times 10^3`$, however the inefficency introduced is expected to be even smaller, since typical charge cluster diameters resulting from particle tracks are of order 0.5 mm.

The detector was mounted together starting with the drift cathode. An aluminum frame was glued mit the same H72 glue on the Kapton side and a 3 mm G10 frame onto the copper side simultanously. The aluminum frame is required to assure mechanical stability of the detector. In future this frame should be replaced by a full size plate of thin material (e.g. Rohacell) to reduce the total radiation length.

Then the GEM foil was stretched by putting it onto a large aluminum frame and pulling it with tape to the sides (figure 5) with the spacers already in place. Now a high voltage test in a nitrogen atmosphere was performed. The voltage applied to the foils was increased continously during about two hours until sparking started somewhere between 580V and 650V. The GEMs were kept sparking about twenty times before decreasing the voltage again to make sure that dust possibly trapped in the GEM holes would burn out without generating a short circuit between the GEM surfaces.

After this test was successfully completed the first GEM foil was simultanously glued to the 3 mm G10 frame and the first 1 mm frame onto the other side of this GEM. Afterwards the next two GEMs were stretched, tested and glued in the same way. An overview of a part of the detector in this state is shown in figure 5. Finally the hole sandwich structure was glued to the readout board.

### 2.2 High voltage supply

To allow for maximal flexibility in choosing the electrical fields that are needed to run the detector all high voltages are delivered separatly by an individually controllable power supply channel. The high voltage schema is shown in figure 6. The currents are monitored for each high voltage channel. A discharge in a GEM can be indentified by observing the reloading current of this GEM segment.

Of the two detectors built, one has the segmented GEM on the upper side as in figure 6, in the other detector the segmentation is on the side towards the readout board. No significant difference (e.g. in sparking probability) has been observed.

### 2.3 Two dimensional readout board

The separation of the amplifying stage from the readout stage in a triple GEM detector allows to use any readout pattern that is appropriate for the application. Here a two dimensional readout printed circuit board was chosen with a stereo angle of $`5^{}`$ between two sets of parallel strips. The rotated strips on the top are separated through a 50 $`\mu `$m Kapton layer from the lower strips (see figure 8 and figure 8). The lower strips have to be wider than the upper ones in order to collect in average an equal amount of charge on both layers (charge sharing). We have used 60 $`\mu `$m and 250 $`\mu `$m wide strips with a pitch of 300 $`\mu `$m for each plane. Although this pitch was chosen for practical reasons to connect the printed circuit board to a HELIX front-end chip, it turns out to be reasonable choice for such a detector (see the discussion of the results below). The length of the strips is 30 cm.

This readout board was manufactured from copper cladded Kapton foil with the same etching technology as the GEM foils in the CERN workshop. It is glued to a 100 $`\mu `$m thick G10 sheet to insure a reasonable flatness. Below the readout board a 4 mm thick Rohacell plate is mounted covered with a grounded aluminum foil, which acts as an electrical shield.

### 2.4 Readout electronics

The readout strips are connected to the HELIX 128 readout chip , originally developped for the HERA-B experiment. Each layer of a detector is equipped with 4 chips (= 512 read out channels). Two thirds of the active area of the detector can be read out this way.

The connection (see figure 9) is made through a short (3 cm length) Kapton stripline bonded with Z-bond glue444done by Dr. U. Werthenbach University of Siegen and a fan-in, which fits the pitch of the HELIX input pads of 41.4 $`\mu \mathrm{m}`$. This fan-in is made of thin film ceramics555manufactured by Siegert TFT, Hermsdorf, Thüringen and includes a serial overcurrent protection resistor of 600 $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to avoid damage of the preamplifier input in case of chamber sparks or shorts (optimised for the HERA-B MSGC operation).

The signal path is closed through the capacity between the lowest GEM and the readout board of about 500 pF.

The capacity of the ceramic fanin was measured to be 2 pF. The total capacity of the fully mounted system of one strip to all its neighbour strips and the full electrical environment measured by coupling a square wave pulse to the readout board (still connected to the HELIX) through a 1 k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$serial resistor. From the observed rise time of this pulse a capacity of 86 pF was determined.

By coupling a well defined charge to a readout strip the HELIX gain was measured to be 880 e-/mV in this configuration. The average noise level (Figure 10) of 4.8 mV corresponds therefore to 4200 electrons. From this information and the HELIX data sheet a total capacity of the readout board of $``$ 100 pF was derived, which is consistent with the value above. In addition an electrical simulation of the setup gave similar figures on the capacity .

The HELIX comes in its analog characteristics very close to the chip, that will be used later in LHCb. The shape of the preamplifier output of the HELIX depends on the capacity of the detector connected to the input. For our detector it has a FWHM of about 90 ns. The amplitudes of these signals are sampled by a 10 MHz clock and are stored in the analog pipeline, that is included in the HELIX chip. The HELIX was run in standard conditions .

The 10 MHz clock was in general operated independantly of the particles traversing the chambers. Therefore the sampling time was not optimally set to the pulse maximum, but randomly distributed over 100 ns. The data used to measure the pulse height distributions were however taken with an additional trigger condition requiring the signal to be within 25 ns of the active clock edge.

After a trigger occurs each HELIX chip sends the analog value from all 128 channels multiplexed through one readout line, which were digitised by an oscilloscope connected to a PC via GPIB bus and controlled by LabVIEW. The communication between the oscilloscope and the PC limited the readout speed to 0.5 Hz. For cosmics data taking the scope was replaced by VME ADC boards.

The pedestal for each readout channel is subtracted offline and each signal is corrected for baseline variations (common mode noise) by using a filter to remove large period components from the data. In figure 11 the corrected data from a minimum ionising particle crossing the detector is shown. For identifying the signals a threshold of 3.5 sigma of the noise distribution is applied.

### 2.5 Signal shape

In order to study the shape of the chamber signal a fast amplifier VV61666R. Rusnyak Physikalisches Institut der Universität Heidelberg with a rise time of 0.5 ns was connected to the detector.

The signal from a Fe55 source is shown in figure 12 on the left. For comparison the signal of our previous prototype detector  with a transfer gap of 3 mm is shown on the right in the same figure. The pulse shape can be understood by interpreting the signal as the induced current due to the moving charged cluster in the gap between the lowest GEM foil and the readout board: the drift velocity in Ar:CO2 (70:30) at 5 kV/cm is $``$7.5 cm/$`\mu `$s, corresponding to a drift time for the 3 mm gap of 40 ns. Although the total current should be constant, we can observe a rising signal due to the effect that the strips close to the center of the cloud see an increasing fraction of the total current, as the charged cloud moves closer to the readout board surface. This rise time is close to the expected 40 ns.

For the new detector the rising of the signal is barely visible, since the drift time in the 1 mm gap is expected to be about 13 ns only.

## 3 Operation and performance measurements

Two identical complete detectors were built and mounted back to back, such that the stereo angles are +5 and -5 compared to the vertical strips. The distance between the centers of the primary ionisation gaps is 17.9 mm (see figure 13 right) allowing a crude crossing angle determination of the observed tracks.

The detectors were operated both at PSI beams and in a cosmic ray setup.

### 3.1 High rate particle beam experiment

At PSI four other groups of the LHCb Inner Tracker collaboration tested their detectors simultanously in December 1999. Picture 13 (left) shows the triple GEM detectors mounted between the prototypes of the other groups.

Beam intensities and distributions were measured by a pair of 5$`\times `$5 mm2 scintillators mounted on a remotely movable table. The width of the beam was typically $``$6 cm. For operation stability tests a 350 MeV/c $`\pi ^+`$ beam was used. The maximum achievable total rate was 60 MHz with a peak rate of 1$`\times `$104 Hz/mm2. For most of the data taking a 215 MeV/c $`\pi ^{}`$ beam with low intensity (60 Hz/mm2) was used.

### 3.2 Cosmic ray experiment

For a high statistics study of the performance as a function of the track crossing angle a cosmic ray setup was used. The chamber were mounted horizontally. A pair of 10$`\times `$10 cm2 scintillators were mounted below and above the detectors. To be able to study large clusters in detail the chambers were operated at a higher gain ($`V_{GEM}=390`$ V) than usually.

### 3.3 Electrical field configuration

As an optimal HV setting the following values were exposed: drift field 3.0 kV/cm; transfer fields (between the GEM foils) 2.2 kV/cm; collection field 5.0 kV/cm. The most critical fields with respect to sparking are the two transfer fields. An increasing of these fields from 2.2 kV/cm to 3.0 kV/cm lead to an enhancement of the sparking probability by a factor of 10.

At the beginning the detector was operated with a drift field of 2.0 kV/cm. Later we discovered that an increase to 3.0 kV/cm causes a gain reduction of 15 %. This is qualitatively explained by a better transparency for lower drift fields: in the optimal case all field lines from the drift cathode are focused and compressed through the holes terminating on the readout board. According to simulations in the symmetric case a typical transparency for the primary electrons of 88%  can be reached in our configuration. By increasing the drift field some field lines terminate on the GEM foil and primary electrons are therefore lost.

It was observed, that the sparking probability is also reduced by about a factor of three with higher drift field corresponding to the lower gain of the chamber (see section on gain and spark probability). In contrast to that, the collection field between the lower side of the last GEM foil does not seem to influence the sparking rate.

After the amplification process in a GEM hole a major part of the electrons is lost to the lower GEM side. If the field on the lower side is increased, more electrons can be collected to the readout board (collection efficiency). On the other hand a high collection field may cause sparks to propagate to the readout board and may damage it. Because of the robustness of the readout board and the well proven high voltage protection of the HELIX readout electronics, we decided to increase the collection field to 5.0 kV/cm.

According to simulations the collection efficiency in this configuration for the upper and middle GEM is 42 %, for the lowest GEM 62 %. Taking into account in addition the primary electron transparency and the loss due to attachment in the gas, the total fraction of all primary and secondary electrons collected on the readout board is only 7.5 % .

### 3.4 Detector signal gain and spark probability

The detector is operated with Argon and CO2 gases with a mixing ratio of 70:30. Although CO2 alone is not a very stable quencher gas, the simpler infrastructure with respect to safety and the chemical ageing stability of this mixture outweighs a possible improvement in discharge performance of more complex quencher gases. The primary ionisation gap has a width of 3 mm, where in the Ar:CO2 70:30 gas mixture a vertically incidenting minimum ionising particle produces in average 21 primary electrons in about 8 clusters .

The detector gain (see figure 14) was measured in various different ways.

The total incident particle rate was calculated by measuring the coincidence rate of the two scintillators moving them along $`x`$ and $`y`$ across the beam cross section. The anode current was determined by measuring the current in the ground lines of the preamplifiers and it was verified, that this is the same value as the sum of all upper and lower GEM currents and the drift current taking the proper sign into account. From this current and the assumption of 21 primary electrons per minimum ionising particle the detector gain was calculated.

Due to a possible missalignment of the scintillators against each other an overestimation of the rate of 20 % is possible. The exact shape of the beam varies with details in the beam line settings giving rise to a further systematic uncertainty of about 20 %.

The gain was also determined from a Landau distribution fitted to the pulse height spectra (see section on results) and the known gain of the electronics chain taking into account the charge sharing between the two readout coordinates.

Furthermore signals of an Fe55 $`\gamma `$–ray source were observed in the chamber resulting in gain values between the two previously mentioned. In summary, considering the various uncertainties we believe, that the correct signal gain is located somewhere between the two curves in figure 14.

When turning on the detector the gain observed is initially lower and slowly increases with time during irradiation with a source. After a few minutes the signal size becomes stable at about double of the initial value. This is interpreted as charge up of the Kapton surface in the GEM holes and has been seen by many other groups as well .

The spark probability per particle was measured at 350 MeV/c beam energy (see figure 14). The maximal beam intensity was 60 MHz. For example 45 sparks were observed in both detectors in 12.5 hours at a GEM voltage of 375 V, resulting in a spark probability of 8.3$`\times `$10-12.

## 4 Results

### 4.1 Analysis procedures

After the detector signals were digitised and stored on disk the analysis proceeds in an offline procedure with the following steps:

1. Baseline correction and subtraction as described in the section of readout electronics.
2. Applying a threshold of 3.5 times the average noise. Each channel is treated seperately. Signals exceeding this threshold are identified as a cluster.
3. The center of gravity and both the root mean square of the width and the number of channels above threshold of these clusters are determined. For the PSI data in addition a Gaussian fit to each signal gives the width of the cluster in terms of $`\sigma `$ in units of strips.
4. In cases, where there is exactly one cluster in each plane, the $`x`$ and $`y`$ coordinates are calculated from the center of gravities. This works only for the low rate data at PSI and for cosmics.

### 4.2 PSI data

#### 4.2.1 Pulse height and efficiency

Figure 15 shows the correlation between the pulse heights of the two readout coordinates as determined from low rate PSI data. In average the signals on the upper strips are $``$1.25 times larger than those of the lower ones.

Figure 16 demonstrates, that the pulse height distribution can be well fitted by a Landau type function reflecting the pulse height variations due to primary ionisation statistics. These distributions were used to determine the gain (see section on chamber gain).

Counting the number of non empty events for each scintillator trigger and variing the GEM voltages allows to determine an efficiency plateau for each of the four available planes (two chambers with two readout coordinates each), one of those is displayed in Figure 17.

#### 4.2.2 Cluster size

The width of the signal was studied as a function of the GEM gain. In figure 18 two different methods of determining the cluster size are compared. An often used definition just uses the number of channels in the cluster, which have a signal larger than the noise threshold. This quantity clearly depends on the pulse height and as expected the average values rise with the gas gain.

A more physical definition of the cluster size uses the $`\sigma `$ of a Gaussian fit to each pulse. Figure 18 shows, that this cluster size does in fact not depend on the gain of the chamber. The value of 0.8 strip pitches (240 $`\mu `$m) is consistent with an estimation, which is based only on the transvere diffusion ($`D_t300\mu \text{m}/\sqrt{\text{cm}}`$) of the charged cloud along an average drift length of 4.5 mm.

In addition the cluster size (using the $`\sigma `$ from the Gaussian fit) is correlated with the pulse height. A substantial electronic crosstalk between neighbouring readout strips would manifest itself in an increasing width for larger pulses. Figure 19 indicates, that there seems to be no problem with electronic crosstalk.

#### 4.2.3 Resolution

Although 215 MeV/c $`\pi `$’s give large multiple scattering and are therefore not suitable to do a resolution measurement, the differences between the coordinates measured by the two detectors are plotted as a cross check in figure 20. It shows that the alignment of the two detectors is well understood in both coordinates. A Gaussian fit gives $`\sigma _x`$ 0.25 mm and $`\sigma _y`$ 1.3 mm. Multiple scattering in the first chamber contributes about 0.1 mm to these values, while the angular divergence of the beam is estimated to be below 20 mrad, an upper limit of its contribution is therefore 0.36 mm indicating, that $`\sigma _x`$ is dominated by this beam divergence. For a real spatial resolution measurement a better defined beam of higher energy is obviously needed.

### 4.3 Cosmic ray data

With the identical detectors also cosmic data was taken. In figure 21 the channel map for the lower and upper strips is shown. Figure 22 shows the reconstructed hits of all recorded cosmic data. To cover a larger area of the detector the scintillators were moved gradually in $`y`$-direction. The distinct region with no hits corresponds to a disconnected GEM segment. Broken and hot channels (masked off) are clearly recognised.

#### 4.3.1 Signal homogenity

The homogenous irradiation of the chamber with high statistics allows to observe variations in the signal size in different regions of the chamber. In general the detectors behave rather homogenous, however closer to the borders of the active region the signal size starts to drop down to about a half of its value compared to the center of the detector (see figure 23). Similar reductions in signal size have been observed on all chamber boundaries.

There is a suspicion, that the copper and the Kapton GEM holes might be badly aligned to each other at the border of large surfaces due to stability problems of the film masks .

#### 4.3.2 Track inclination

In the LHCb application the distribution of the inclination angle of the dominating background particles (mainly electrons and positrons) is very broad. It is therefore interesting, how the signals depend on the polar angle of the incident particle.

The cosmic ray sample is well suitable to study this question: from the position information of the two detectors the inclination angle of the incoming cosmic particle was reconstructed, and the events were studied as a function of this angle.

Figure 24 shows the signal of a cosmic ray event observed under an angle of about 45 compared with a normal, vertical incidenting track. The cluster is wider as expected since the tracks crosses several drift cells. The signal height varies according to the primary ionisation statistics. Due to the smaller number of clusters for each cell this variation is much bigger than for a normal signal. This leads to the difficulty that from the signal alone it is impossible to decide whether the event originates from a single, inclined track or from several vertical particles. In a high rate application additional tracking information from other devices would be needed to analyse the data.

Figure 25 shows the correlation of the total width of the signals with the inclination angle of the track, which behaves as expected.

In principle it would be thinkable, that this feature could be used to suppress the low angle background already on the chamber level by cutting on the cluster width. In figure 26 the efficiency for tracks as a function of the inclination angle for different such cuts shows, that this method in principle works. By choosing a threshold of 7 the efficiency for tracks with an angle larger than 30 is reduced by a factor of three without loosing too much efficiency at the nominal inclination angle of 0.

However this feature depends so critical on the cut value, that even small instabilities in the signal size of the chamber would have big effects on the background acceptance or even on the efficiency of the nominal tracks.

## 5 Conclusions

Large triple GEM detectors have shown stable operation in the worst hadronic beam environment at PSI, giving a large signal gain of more than $`10^4`$ with spark probabilities per incoming $`\pi `$ below $`10^{10}`$.

By using a “zig-zag” geometry of the readout board its capacity could be reduced by a factor three to four, which would proportionally reduce the thermal noise of the preamplifier, thus allowing to run the chamber with a gain of about 5000, where the spark probability is far below $`10^{12}`$.

This very high rate capability is supported in addition by an intrinsically very fast signal response without showing any “ion tail” in the detected signal.

The cluster size is comparable with expectation from the transverse diffusion of the charge cloud. The FWHM diameter of the signal at the readout board of about 0.5 mm allows in principle very accurate position measurements with typical readout line pitches of 0.3 mm, to be measured in a future test beam setup with high energy particles. But for very high rate application this large clustersize can result in significant channel occupancy.

Reducing acceptance of low angle tracks by cutting on the clustersize works in principle, but the efficiencies are very sensitive to the actual cut value.

In summary the triple GEM detector is a very stable, robust, low $`X_0`$, fast and cheap detector for applications with intermediate size areas and very high, even hadronic particle densities, showing lowest sparking rates at very high gains compared to other technologies. Low angle tracks should be avoided. Significant safety factors for the gas gain should be used to compensate for inhomogenous signal size across the chamber. If analog readout is used a very high accuracy in track position measurement can be expected.


text:
# 𝐽/𝜓 suppression in ultrarelativistic nuclear collisions

## I introduction

According to the fundamental theory of the strong interactions, Quantum Chromo-Dynamics (QCD), normal nuclear matter is expected to undergo a phase transition to deconfined quarks and gluons when its density and/or temperature are high . To produce such a quark-gluon plasma (QGP) in the laboratory, experiments involving collisions of nuclei at relativistic energies have been carried out at the CERN SPS . Possible evidences for the production of this new phase of matter have recently been announced . Further experiments at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC), which allows collisions at much high energies than those available previously, are expected to provide a better opportunity to create the quark-gluon plasma and to study its properties.

Since quarks and gluons cannot be directly detected in experiments, many indirect observables have been proposed as possible signatures for the QGP. These include: enhanced production of strange hadrons as a result of the short strangeness equilibration time in QGP , suppression of $`J/\psi `$ production due to color screening in QGP , quenching of high $`p_t`$ jets due to passage through the QGP , and enhancement of low mass dileptons as a result of medium modifications of hadron properties in high density matter . Although all these signals have been observed in heavy ion collisions at CERN SPS, alternative explanations without invoking the formation of the quark-gluon plasma have also been proposed. As the QGP is expected to be produced at RHIC, it is of interest to study these signatures in heavy ion collisions at such high energies. Since the quark-gluon plasma has a finite size, exists for a finite time, and may not be in equilibrium, it is important to use a dynamical model to take into account these effects. Using the parton cascade model , Satz and Srivastava  have recently studied the time evolution of the density profile of the parton system in these collisions and demonstrated the possibility of using a dynamical model to study the onset of deconfinement and its effect on quarkonium suppression. In this paper, we shall investigate explicitly $`J/\psi `$ suppression in central nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC energies using a multiphase transport model (AMPT) . Since the AMPT model includes both initial partonic and final hadronic interactions as well as the transition between these two phases of matter, it allows us to study the relative importance of the partonic and hadronic effects on $`J/\psi `$ suppression.

This paper is organized as follows. In Section II, we briefly describe the AMPT model for ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions and its extension to include $`J/\psi `$ production. The mechanisms for $`J/\psi `$ suppression are given in Section III. Results for Au+Au and S+S collisions at RHIC are given in Section IV. First, we show the time evolution of the particle number and energy densities in both the partonic and hadronic matters. This is then followed by the time evolution of various $`J/\psi `$ suppression effects and the $`J/\psi `$ survival probability. Finally, a summary is given in Section V.

## II multiphase transport model

In the AMPT model, the initial conditions are obtained from the minijets generated by the Heavy Ion Jet Interaction Generator (HIJING)  by using a Woods-Saxon radial shape for the colliding nuclei and including the nuclear shadowing effect on partons via the gluon recombination mechanism by Mueller-Qiu . After the passage of the colliding nuclei, the Gyulassy-Wang model  is then used to generate the initial space-time information of partons. The subsequent time evolution of the parton phase-space distribution is modeled by the Zhang’s Parton Cascade (ZPC) , which at present includes only the gluon elastic scattering. After partons stop interacting, the Lund string fragmentation model  is used to convert them into hadrons. The dynamics of resulting hadronic matter is described by a relativistic transport model (ART) . Details of the AMPT model can be found in .

To include $`J/\psi `$ in the AMPT model, we use the perturbative approach  as its production probability is small in heavy ion collisions. Specifically, the reaction $`ggJ/\psi g`$ is selected from the PYTHIA program whenever there is an inelastic scattering between projectile and target nucleons. Instead of allowing the produced $`J/\psi `$ to undergo multiple interactions, fragmentation, and decay in the PYTHIA, its momentum is stored in a file and read into HIJING. The transverse position of the $`J/\psi `$ is determined by propagating it to the time of formation from the average transverse position of the colliding projectile and target nucleons. Since the $`J/\psi `$ production probability is increased from $`\sigma (NNJ/\psi X)`$ to $`\sigma _{inel}`$, each $`J/\psi `$ is given a probability of $`\sigma (NNJ/\psi X)/\sigma _{inel}`$ in order to have the correct number in an event, given by the total probability of all $`J/\psi `$’s. The $`J/\psi `$ formation time is taken to be 0.5 fm/$`c`$, which is suggested by the virtuality argument of Kharzeev and Satz  and is also consistent with the uncertainty principle used for estimating the lifetime of an expanding $`c\overline{c}`$ . Before this time, the $`c\overline{c}`$ pair is considered a precursor $`J/\psi `$.

## III $`J/\psi `$ absorption

After a pair of $`c\overline{c}`$ is produced in the initial collisions, whether it can materialize as a $`J/\psi `$ depends on its interactions in the initial partonic and final hadronic matters. In the partonic matter, the $`c\overline{c}`$ pair, which are initially close in phase space and would normally form a $`J/\psi `$ after the formation time of 0.5 fm/$`c`$, will move beyond the confinement distance of $`J/\psi `$ and become unbound if the plasma screening remains strong . They will later combine with the more abundant light quarks to form instead the charm hadrons when the parton density is low. The critical density for the plasma screening to be effective can be estimated using $`n_c=(2k_0\mu _c^2)/(3\pi ^2\alpha _S)`$ , where $`\mu _c`$ is the critical Debye screening mass, $`\alpha _S`$ is the QCD coupling constant, and $`k_0`$ is the slope parameter of the transverse momentum distribution. Using $`\mu _c=0.7`$ GeV, $`\alpha _S=0.47`$, and $`k_0=0.6`$ GeV, one obtains a critical density of $`5`$ fm-3. Following the method of Ref. , we first determine from the AMPT model the time evolution of the radius of the volume in which the parton density is above the critical density. A $`J/\psi `$ is thus not formed from the $`c\overline{c}`$ pair if its radial position after the formation time of 0.5 fm/$`c`$ is within the critical radius at that time.

Besides dissociation due to plasma screening, a $`J/\psi `$ may also be dissociated by collisions with gluons in the partonic matter . The cross section for $`gJ/\psi c\overline{c}`$ has been estimated in Ref.  to be 3 mb. Similarly, a precursor $`J/\psi `$ can also be dissociated by gluon scattering. The cross section is expected to be smaller as its size is smaller than a physical $`J/\psi `$. In the present study, we ignore the difference between the scattering of a gluon with precursor and physical $`J/\psi `$, and use the same cross section. Since this cross section is not well-known, we have also used a value of $`1`$ mb in the following study.

In the hadronic matter following the parton stage, a $`J/\psi `$ can be further destroyed by collisions with hadrons. The $`J/\psi `$ absorption cross section by baryons is taken to be 6 mb  while that by meson is taken to be 3 mb  above their respective thresholds. Although earlier studies based on the perturbative QCD  and simple hadronic model  give a much smaller $`J/\psi `$ absorption cross sections by hadrons, the above values are consistent with recent studies using the quark-interchange model  and the more complete hadronic model . Using these cross sections in the transport model, it has been found that the observed suppression of $`J/\psi `$ production in heavy ion collisions at the SPS energies can be reasonably described except for the most central collisions . As the formation time of $`J/\psi `$ is comparable to the passing time ($`0.1`$ fm/$`c`$) of two colliding nuclei at RHIC energies, $`J/\psi `$ absorption by the projectile and target nucleons is not expected to be important  and will be ignored in the present study. We note that as the $`J/\psi `$ is treated perturbatively in the simulation, the momenta of other hadrons are not affected by their interactions with $`J/\psi `$ .

## IV Results

### A time evolution of particle number and energy densities

In Fig. 1, we show the time evolution of the particle number and energy densities of partons and hadrons in central Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s}=200`$ GeV. They are the densities in the central cell, which has a transverse radius of 1 fm for partons and 2 fm for hadrons. The longitudinal dimension of the central cell is taken to be $`\pm 5\%`$ of the time $`t`$, which is equivalent to taking the central space-time rapidity cell. The results are not significantly changed if $`\pm 10\%`$ of the time is used for the longitudinal dimension. We see that the initial parton density is about $`30`$ fm-3 and is much higher than the $`J/\psi `$ dissociation critical density (about $`5`$ fm-3) given above. The time evolution of these densities is seen to deviate from that based on the ideal Bjorken boost invariant scenario , which would lead to a linear curve on the log-log plot. This difference is mainly due to the more realistic treatment of initial collisions by using the the Gyulassy-Wang model for the formation time and the presence of radial flow as well as a gradual freeze-out  at the later hadronic stage. From the ratio of the parton energy density to its number density, one sees that the average energy of a parton is more than $`1`$ GeV. The parton stage lasts about $`23`$ fm/$`c`$, while the hadron stage starts gradually at around $`34`$ fm/$`c`$ and lasts until about $`10`$ fm/$`c`$. The average energy of a hadron is less than $`1`$ GeV, since the central rapidity is dominated by mesons instead of baryons in ultrarelativistic nuclear collisions. In Fig. 2, we show the results for central collisions of S+S at $`\sqrt{s}=200`$ AGeV. Due to the smaller size of the system comparing to that of Au+Au collisions, the plasma lifetime is shorter, i.e., about $`12`$ fm/$`c`$, and the hadron stage sets in at about $`23`$ fm/$`c`$. We note that even in the smaller parton system produced in S+S collisions, the initial density is much higher than the critical density for $`J/\psi `$ dissociation.

In Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, we show, respectively, the parton density in central Au+Au and S+S collisions at different times. As minijet gluons are produced from initial hard collisions, their densities at different radii reflect the number of initial binary nucleon-nucleon collisions. As seen from the figure, they are different from the initial nuclear density distribution given by a Woods-Saxon form. As expected, both the size and lifetime of the partonic matter produced in S+S collisions are smaller than those in Au+Au collisions. From the time evolution of the parton density, one can determine the time evolution of the critical radius for $`J/\psi `$ dissociation, and this is shown in Fig. 5 by full dots for Au+Au collisions and open dots for S+S collisions. The solid lines are polynomial fits to the above results using the form, $`r_c(t)=a_0+a_1t+a_2t^2+a_3t^3`$ for $`t_{min}<t<t_{max}`$, with $`r_c(t)=r_c(t_{min})`$ for $`t<t_{min}`$ and $`r_c(t)=0`$ for $`t>t_{max}`$. For the partonic matter produced in Au+Au collisions, we have $`t_{min}=0.15`$ fm/$`c`$, $`t_{max}=1.2`$ fm/$`c`$, $`a_0=6.39`$, $`a_1=4.06`$, $`a_2=4.79`$, and $`a_3=4.86`$. For S+S collisions, they are $`t_{min}=0.12`$ fm/$`c`$, $`t_{max}=0.5`$ fm/$`c`$, $`a_0=3.278`$, $`a_1=11.949`$, $`a_2=31.514`$, and $`a_3=41.428`$. In Au+Au collisions, the critical radius for $`J/\psi `$ dissociation extracted from our model is about 6 fm at beginning of the parton cascade and vanishes after about 1.2 fm/$`c`$. The critical radius is reduced to about 2 fm initially and vanishes after only about 0.5 fm in S+S collisions. Since the duration of the partonic matter that is above the critical density for $`J/\psi `$ dissociation is shorter than the $`J/\psi `$ formation time, $`J/\psi `$ suppression due to plasma screening is therefore unimportant in central S+S collisions.

### B time evolution of $`J/\psi `$ survival probability

Including the above three mechanisms for $`J/\psi `$ suppression in the AMPT model, we have evaluated the $`J/\psi `$ survival probability in ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions at RHIC energies. In Fig. 6, we show for central Au+Au collisions the time evolution of the $`J/\psi `$ formation probability $`P_f(t)`$, the $`J/\psi `$ absorption probability $`P_c^g(t)`$ by gluon scattering, the $`J/\psi `$ dissociation probability $`P_d(t)`$ by plasma screening, the $`J/\psi `$ absorption probability $`P_c^h(t)`$ by hadrons, and the $`J/\psi `$ survival probability $`P_s(t)=1P_c^g(t)P_d(t)P_c^h(t)`$. The results are taken for the $`J/\psi `$ produced in the central rapidity interval $`|y_{J/\psi }|<1`$. It is seen that the $`J/\psi `$ formation probability increases quickly with time and about $`90\%`$ of the $`J/\psi `$ are formed by $`0.5`$ fm/$`c`$. Absorption by gluons starts very early in the process and ends at about $`1`$ fm/$`c`$ after dissociation due to plasma screening begins. The latter also ends at about $`1`$ fm/$`c`$. Both dissociation due to plasma screening and absorption by gluon collisions give comparable contributions, accounting for the suppression of about 90% of the $`J/\psi `$, while absorption by hadrons contributes only about a few percent. The final $`J/\psi `$ survivability is about 6%.

The results for the case without plasma screening is shown in Fig. 7. Comparing to Fig. 6, we see that the $`J/\psi `$ absorption probability by gluons is similar for time up to $`0.5`$ fm/$`c`$, but it lasts longer until $`23`$ fm/$`c`$. This indicates that there is a competition between $`J/\psi `$ suppression due to gluon scattering and plasma screening, i.e., some $`J/\psi `$’s that are destroyed by collisions with gluons would have been dissociated by plasma screening if they are not allowed to scatter with gluons. Fig. 8 shows the results without $`J/\psi `$ absorption by gluon scattering. In this case, the plasma dissociation probability saturates quickly. Compared to that shown in Fig. 7, the $`J/\psi `$ suppression probability is seen to start late but saturate early. This difference in the survival probability may be seen by studying the azimuthal distribution of final survival $`J/\psi `$ in mid-central collisions. It is interesting to note that $`J/\psi `$ suppression during the parton stage is similar whether when both plasma screening and gluon scattering are present or when only one of them is present. The effect of reducing the $`J/\psi `$ scattering cross section by gluon is shown in Fig. 9. Compared with Fig. 6, we see that the decrease in the contribution from gluon scattering is partly compensated by the plasma screening.

In Table I, we summarize the final absorption probabilities due to gluons ($`P_c^g`$), hadrons ($`P_c^h`$), plasma dissociation ($`P_d`$), and the survival probability ($`P_s`$) in central Au+Au collisions. It is seen that the $`J/\psi `$ survival probability after the parton stage, $`S_g=1P_cP_d`$, is about 9% and 17% for $`\sigma _{gJ/\psi }=`$ 3 mb and 1 mb, respectively. The parton stage thus has a large effect on $`J/\psi `$ suppression in heavy ion collisions at RHIC. In both cases, the $`J/\psi `$ suppression factor in the hadron stage is $`S_h=P_h/S_g35\%`$. Depending on the different assumptions on the mechanisms for $`J/\psi `$ suppression, the final survival probability can range from about $`6\%`$ to about $`26\%`$. This indicates that finite size effects may be important in $`J/\psi `$ suppression at RHIC energies. We have also studied $`J/\psi `$ suppression in S+S collisions at RHIC energies, and the results are summarized in Table II. As expected from the discussion of Fig. 5, there is no contribution from plasma screening in collisions of such light system, although the initial density is above the critical density. As a result, the $`J/\psi `$ has an appreciable survival probability (about 50%) after absorption by gluons and hadrons. Since $`J/\psi `$ absorption by gluon scattering still contributes appreciably to the final $`J/\psi `$ suppression, it may provide an opportunity for studying this mechanism. We note that the $`J/\psi `$ suppression factor in the hadron stage is about $`S_h16\%`$, which is smaller than in Au+Au collisions.

## V summary

In summary, we have studied $`J/\psi `$ suppression in Au+Au and S+S collisions at RHIC energies in a multiphase transport model. It is found that finite size effects may be important in $`J/\psi `$ suppression at RHIC energies even in central Au+Au collisions. Both $`J/\psi `$ suppression due to plasma screening and gluon scatterings are important in Au+Au collisions, leading to a final $`J/\psi `$ survival probability of only about $`6\%`$. For S+S collisions, even though the initial energy density is above the critical density for $`J/\psi `$ dissociation, only $`J/\psi `$ absorption by gluon and hadron scatterings contribute to its suppression as a result of the short lifetime of the plasma. $`J/\psi `$ suppression in heavy ion collisions between light nuclei thus provides a possible opportunity for studying the interactions between $`J/\psi `$ and gluon.

In our study, we have ignored both $`J/\psi `$ formation from the recombination of $`c\overline{c}`$ pairs during hadronization and $`J/\psi `$ production from charm mesons in the final hadronic matter. The number of $`J/\psi `$ formed from charm quarks during hadronization can be roughly estimated from considerations of the phase space and the spin and color factors. At the end of parton stage, the volume of the partonic matter in the central unit of rapidity is approximately given by $`V=\pi R^2\tau `$, where $`R`$ and $`\tau `$ are the transverse radius and longitudinal dimension, respectively. For Au+Au collisions, they are $`R7\mathrm{fm}`$ and $`\tau 3\mathrm{fm}`$. The probability that an anticharm quark is found within a distance of the $`J/\psi `$ radius from a charm quark is given by the ratio of the size of the $`J/\psi `$ to the size of the partonic matter. With a $`J/\psi `$ radius $`r_{J/\psi }0.3\mathrm{fm}`$, one obtains the probability $`2.5\times 10^4`$. In order for this charm pair to form a $`J/\psi `$, their spins must be parallel and their total color should be neutral. This reduces the probability by the factor $`(3/4)(1/9)0.083`$. Requiring that the charm pair has a relative momentum distribution within $`p_01/r_{J/\psi }0.67`$ GeV at $`T200`$ MeV further suppresss the probability by a factor of 0.29. Since there are about 1.5 charm pairs per unit rapidity per central Au+Au collision at RHIC, the number of $`J/\psi `$ formed from their recombination is about $`1.5^22.5\times 10^40.0830.291.4\times 10^5`$, which is much smaller than the expected number of $`J/\psi `$, i.e., $`1.5/400.0612.3\times 10^3`$. In the above, the factor 40 is the ratio of charm to $`J/\psi `$ production in initial hard collisions  and the factor 0.061 is the final $`J/\psi `$ survival probability from Table I. As to $`J/\psi `$ production from charm mesons in hadronic matter, it has been shown to be insignificant in heavy ion collisions at RHIC, although it may not be negligible at LHC .

We have not included the effect due to $`\psi ^{}`$ and $`\chi _c`$, which are also produced in initial collisions and can decay to $`J/\psi `$. Since these particles are less bound than $`J/\psi `$, they are more likely to be dissociated and absorbed in both the quark-gluon plasma and the hadronic matter. As a result, inclusion of $`\psi ^{}`$ and $`\chi _c`$ is expected to lead to a smaller number of $`J/\psi `$ than predicted in the present study. Also, we have used the default gluon shadowing in HIJING without flavor and scale dependence, which is different from the one suggested by Eskola  that includes such dependence. If the latter is used, then we expect a reduction of the $`J/\psi `$ survival probability as the gluon density would be higher at RHIC energies . These effects will be studied in the future.

## VI Acknowledgments

The authors thank M. Gyulassy and J. Nagle for helpful discussions. They also thank the Parallel Distributed System Facility at National Energy Research Scientific Computer Center for providing computing resources. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-9870038, the Welch Foundation under Grant No. A-1358, and the Texas Advanced Research Program under Grant Nos. FY97-010366-0068 and FY99-010366-0081. The work of B.A. Li was supported in part by the NSF under Grant No. 0088934 and the Arkansas Science and Technology Authority under Grant No. 00-B-14. B.H. Sa was partially supported by the Natural Science Foundation and Nuclear Industry Foundation of China.


text:
# REFERENCES

preprint:  DPNU-00-xx

Comment on “Linking solar and long baseline terrestrial neutrino experiments”

In the recent letter , it has been said that the measurements of $`U_{e3}`$ would help discriminate between the possible solar neutrino solutions under the natural conditions with the neutrino mass hierarchies of $`m_1m_2m_3`$ and $`m_1m_2m_3`$, where $`m_i`$ is the $`i`$-th generation neutrino absolute mass. However, in general the value of $`U_{e3}`$ cannot predict the solar neutrino solutions without one additional nontrivial condition as the following reasons. Neglecting the $`CP`$ phases in the lepton sector, the number of independent parameters in the Majorana mass matrix of neutrino are six. Five parameters are enough to determine the MNS matrix, since overall factor in the neutrino mass matrix does not contribute to the MNS matrix. Thus we need five input parameters in order to determine the MNS matrix, and its element $`U_{e3}`$. Since the neutrino oscillation experiments except for the CHOOZ give us only four input parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{ATM}}^2`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{sol}}^2`$, $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}`$ , and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{23}`$, the value of $`U_{e3}`$ remains as an unknown parameter, which we only know the upper bound from CHOOZ experiments as $`U_{e3}<0.16`$. Therefore if we would like to predict the solar neutrino solutions from the value of $`U_{e3}`$, one additional nontrivial condition must be needed. In Ref., they have denoted $`\epsilon \alpha +\beta `$ and $`\epsilon ^{}\alpha \beta `$, where $`\alpha \sqrt{2}U_{e3}(1(m_1\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _{12}+m_2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12})/m_3)`$ and $`\beta \sqrt{2}(m_2m_1)\mathrm{cos}\theta _{12}\mathrm{sin}\theta _{12}/m_3`$, and said that $`\epsilon +\epsilon ^{}`$ and $`\epsilon \epsilon ^{}`$ are expected to be of the same order if there are no accidental cancellations. However, $`\alpha `$ is the free parameter which has nothing to do with $`\beta `$ at all. Therefore, the condition $`\epsilon +\epsilon ^{}\epsilon \epsilon ^{}`$ means $`\alpha \beta `$, which is not the natural condition but just the trivial assumption.

What are considerable nontrivial conditions from the theoretical point of view? How about introducing the new lepton number symmetry conservation, for example, $`L_{new}L_eL_\mu L_\tau `$? It is useful only for the case of $`m_1m_2m_3`$ with bi-maximal mixing (case(b2)). In this case the $`L_{new}`$ symmetric mass in (1,2) and (1,3) elements in the neutrino mass matrix are leading, and other $`L_{new}`$ symmetry breaking elements are negligibly small. If elements of (1,2) and (1,3) are the same order including the $`L_{new}`$ symmetry breaking order, we can obtain the relation between $`U_{e3}`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{12}`$ as

$$U_{e3}(1\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{12})\left(\frac{m_3}{m_1}\frac{|m_2||m_1|}{2m_1}\right)^1.$$
(1)
However, the equality of (1,2) and (1,3) elements including the $`L_{new}`$ symmetry breaking order is the trivial assumption again. In other cases of mass hierarchies of $`m_1m_2m_3`$ and $`m_1m_2m_3`$, the relations induced from the condition that the elements of (1,2) and (1,3) are the same order are also trivial, since there are no physical reason.

For another theoretical nontrivial condition, how about considering the situation of the maximal mixing between the second and the third generations and the zero mixing between the first and the third generations at the high energy scale? In this case the quantum corrections can change the mixing angles and mass squared differences. Let us pick up the case of $`m_1m_2m_3`$ (case (c2) in Ref.), and estimate the quantum effects. When the effect of quantum corrections is large enough to neglect neutrino mass differences, the mixing angles of the MNS matrix approach to certain fixed angles. In the large limit of quantum collections the relation between the values of $`U_{e3}`$ and $`U_{e2}`$ is obtained as

$$U_{e3}=U_{e2}\sqrt{\frac{1U_{e2}^2}{1+U_{e2}^2}}$$
(2)
at the low energy independently of the mass squared differences. This determines the values of $`U_{e3}`$ according to the values of mixing angles of the solar neutrino solutions, which are given by

$$U_{e3}0.4(\mathrm{large}\mathrm{angle}),\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0.016}(\mathrm{small}\mathrm{angle}).$$
(3)
This means that the large angle solutions are not consistent with the CHOOZ experiment. Also in the small angle solution, the mass squared differences $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{sol}}^2m_1^2\eta `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{ATM}}^2\mathrm{Max}[m_1^2\eta ^2,m_1^2\eta \mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}]`$, can not suggest the suitable MSW solution  ,where

$$\eta \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\frac{m_\tau }{v^2}(1+\mathrm{tan}^2\beta )\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{m_h}{m_z}\right).$$
(4)
Here we have suggested two theoretical conditions in order to obtain the relation between $`U_{e3}`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{12}`$. However, in the first condition the equality of symmetry breaking elements must be needed, which is trivial assumption. In the second condition, we cannot obtain suitable mass squared difference. Thus, in order to obtain the nontrivial relation between the solar neutrino solutions and the value of $`U_{e3}`$, there must be another nontrivial condition.

N. Haba and Tomoharu Suzuki
Department of Physics, Nagoya University,
Nagoya, Japan 464-8602