text:
# Large scale jets in AGN: multiwavelength mapping

## 1 Introduction

The $`Chandra`$ X–ray Observatory (CXO) is providing us with unprecedented high spatial (and spectral) resolution data on extended structures. The very first observation of a radio–loud quasar, PKS 0637–752, revealed the presence of an X-ray jet extending for $``$ 10 arcsec (Chartas et al. 2000; Schwartz et al. 2000), and since then other X–ray jets have been detected with high spatial resolution (Cen A, Pictor A, see CXO www page http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/cycle1.html).

While the detection of an X–ray jet is not unprecedented (e.g. M87, Biretta, Stern & Harris, 1991; 3C273, Harris & Stern 1987; Röser et al. 2000), it is interesting to notice that both radio–galaxies and blazar–like sources (i.e. with a jet oriented close to the line of sight) have been observed. Models involving inverse Compton scattering of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) and nuclear hidden quasar radiation to produce large scale X–rays have been proposed (e.g. Brunetti, Setti & Comastri 1997 in the case of emission from the lobes). However it has been found that the local broad band spectral energy distributions from the knots in both PKS 0637–752 and M87, are not straightforward to interpret, since the level of the X–ray emission is higher than what simple models predicts (e.g. Chartas et al. 2000; Schwartz et al. 2000, Röser et al. 2000).

Here we propose a scenario involving both highly and mildly relativistically moving plasma in the jet and consider the dominant radiation fields on which relativistic particles Compton scatter. This can satisfactorily account for enhanced large scale X–ray emission in all jetted sources, both blazars and radio–galaxies. We also consider the spatial distribution of emission at different frequencies (Section 3). The predictions are compared to the results on PKS 0637–752 in Section 4 and our conclusions drawn in Section 5.

## 2 Mirrors in the jet

Comparatively little is observationally known on the structure and dynamics of extragalactic jets. Theoretically one would expect the existence of a velocity structure along the jet, from a faster inner core to slower outer regions of the flow – dissipation can be produced by shocks in the relativistic plasma flow, or deceleration of the jet material can be caused by obstacles in the jet or by the interaction of the relativistic flow with the (steady) walls. However only recently observational evidence has been accumulating in support of such possibility and on the relevant role of the outer layers in contributing to the observed emission. This evidence includes the morphology and polarization structure of large scale low power jets (Komissarov 1990, Laing 1993, 1999; Giovannini et al. 1999) as well as apparent inconsistencies on the value of the relativistical beaming parameters as inferred from the flux observed at large angles with the jet direction and the statistic properties of beamed and parent populations according to the unification schemes (Chiaberge et al. 2000). These facts have been satisfactorily accounted for by schematically consider the jet as constituted by two main components: a slow, but still mildly relativistic, outer “layer” and a high relativistically moving “spine”. Strong support for such a fast component even at large (arcsec) distances from the active nucleus comes from the detected superluminal motion of M87 on kpc scales (Biretta, Sparks & Macchetto 1999).

Within this assumption on the jet structure, let us consider the electromagnetic fields (magnetic and radiative) which can contribute to the emission of relativistic electrons at different distances along the jet, and thus determine the corresponding dominant cooling process for relativistic particles. Indeed, if dissipation occurs in knots at large distances, the accelerated particles can cool by the synchrotron and synchrotron self–Compton (SSC) processes, but also by scattering any radiation produced externally to the knot itself. The relative importance of the fields clearly depends on the bulk Lorentz factor of the emitting regions in the jet, i.e. the spine and the layer bulk Lorentz factors.

### 2.1 Radiation fields

Theoretical advances in recent years (especially due to high energy $`\gamma `$–ray observations) have convinced us that the bulk of the emission seen in blazars is produced in a rather well defined region of the jet, which on one hand cannot be too compact (hence, close to the jet apex) in order not to absorb $`\gamma `$–ray photons through $`\gamma `$$`\gamma `$ interactions, and on the other hand cannot be too large in order to vary on short timescales (Ghisellini & Madau 1996). This region should be located at some hundreds of Schwarzschild radii from the black hole, and produce radiation collimated in the beaming cone of semi–aperture angle $`1/\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}`$ is its bulk Lorentz factor. At larger distances, the jet is therefore illuminated by this radiation: it turns out that it can be observationally relevant as scattered radiation if the large scale plasma has only mildly relativistic speeds, as supposed for the jet layer.

In fact, let us assume that on the parsec and sub–parsec scale the jet contains a blazar–like emitting region, moving with a bulk Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}`$ at an angle $`\theta `$ with the line of sight. This region emits an intrinsic (comoving) synchrotron luminosity $`L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{in}}^{}`$. Further out, at a distance $`z`$ from the jet apex, there is a knot where dissipation occurs and electrons are accelerated and therefore radiate. If the bulk Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}`$ of this region is significantly smaller than $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}`$ this region will see the nuclear (inner) flux enhanced by beaming, with a corresponding radiation energy density

$$U_{\mathrm{in}}^{}\frac{L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{in}}}{4\pi z^2c\delta _{\mathrm{in}}^4}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}^2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}^2}$$
(1)
where $`\delta _{\mathrm{in}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}^1[1\beta _{\mathrm{in}}\mathrm{cos}(\theta )]^1`$ is the beaming or Doppler factor of the inner jet, and $`\beta _{\mathrm{in}}c`$ is the corresponding velocity.

This external energy density must be compared with the local magnetic ($`U_\mathrm{B}^{}`$) and synchrotron radiation ($`U_{\mathrm{out}}^{}`$) energy densities. If the magnetic field is in equipartition with the locally produced synchrotron radiation, we have $`U_\mathrm{B}^{}U_{\mathrm{out}}^{}`$, and the self–Compton emission is then of the same order. Alternatively, the field can be estimated by conservation of magnetic flux $`L_\mathrm{B}`$, which at large distances gives

$$U_\mathrm{B}^{}=\frac{L_\mathrm{B}}{\pi \psi ^2z^2c\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}^2},$$
(2)
where we assume that the emitting region located at $`z`$ has a transverse dimension $`R=\psi z`$. In general $`\psi `$ can be a function of $`z`$ if the jet is not conical, especially at $`>`$kpc scale, where some recollimation may occur (see e.g. Kaiser & Alexander 1997). The synchrotron energy density can be written as

$$U_{\mathrm{out}}^{}=\frac{L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{out}}}{4\pi \psi ^2z^2c\delta _{\mathrm{out}}^4}.$$
(3)
where $`\delta _{\mathrm{out}}`$ is the beaming factor of the knot radiation.

### 2.2 The quasi–isotropic fields

Further fields which can provide seed photons for Compton scattering are those reprocessed in the Narrow Line Region (NLR) and by any large scale dust structure surrounding the nucleus. We consider these two components as produced within $``$kpc scale and therefore they would be seen de–amplified by plasma moving along the jet on larger scales:

$$U_{\mathrm{kpc}}^{}U_{\mathrm{NLR}}^{}+U_{\mathrm{dust}}^{}\frac{fL_{\mathrm{disk}}+4\pi z_{\mathrm{dust}}^2\sigma T_{\mathrm{dust}}^4}{4\pi z^2c\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}^2};z>z_{\mathrm{NLR}},z_{\mathrm{dust}}$$
(4)
where $`fL_{\mathrm{disk}}`$ is the fraction of the disk emission reprocessed by the NLR. Dust is assumed to re-emit as a quasi-blackbody at temperature $`T_{\mathrm{dust}}`$ at a distance $`z_{\mathrm{dust}}`$.

Finally, the CMB radiation provides a uniformly distributed contribution to the radiation fields:

$$U_{\mathrm{CMB}}^{}aT_{\mathrm{CMB}}^4(1+z)^4\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}^2.$$
(5)
The inverse Compton process on the CMB photons is particularly relevant if the knot is moving relativistically, since in this case the CMB energy density as seen in the comoving frame is amplified by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}^2`$.

A possible contribution to the seed photons comes from the interplay between the spine and the layer of the jet, if both are active and relatively close. Radiation produced in one zone can in fact be seen amplified (by beaming) by the other zone. We have however verified that these contributions are less important than the other ones, at least for the range of parameters considered in this work. We have also neglected any stellar contribution.

### 2.3 The relevant fields

The relative importance of the radiation produced by the blazar component and the local SSC emission is given by

$$\frac{U_{\mathrm{in}}^{}}{U_{\mathrm{out}}^{}}=\frac{(\psi \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}})^2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}^2}\frac{L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{in}}}{L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{out}}}\left(\frac{\delta _{\mathrm{out}}}{\delta _{\mathrm{in}}}\right)^4=\frac{(\psi \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}})^2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}^2}\frac{L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{in}}^{}}{L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{out}}^{}}.$$
(6)
For illustration, consider the two cases of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}`$ (corresponding to a fast moving spine) and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}1`$ (corresponding to a layer at rest relative to the center):

i) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}`$: in this case $`U_{\mathrm{in}}^{}`$ dominates if $`L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{in}}>L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{out}}/\psi ^2`$, i.e. if the observed power coming from the nucleus is two orders of magnitude (for $`\psi 0.1`$) greater than the power of the knot;

ii) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}1`$: in this case, for $`\psi \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}`$ of the order of unity, $`U_{\mathrm{in}}^{}`$ dominates if the power dissipated in the inner jet is greater than the power dissipated at large scales, i.e. if $`L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{in}}^{}>L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{out}}^{}`$.

We conclude that it is likely that some part of the outer jet can produce – depending on the relative velocities of the inner and outer regions – an inverse Compton spectrum dominated by seed photons coming from the inner regions, for $`L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{in}}>10^2`$$`10^4`$ $`L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{out}}`$.

In order to fully compare all the contributions discussed above to the Compton emission of the knot, in Fig. 1 we report the relevant energy densities as a function of the distance along the jet, for two values of the bulk Lorentz factors (schematically corresponding to a “spine” and “layer”). For semplicity, in Fig. 1 we also assumed that $`\psi `$ is constant (and equal to 0.1), i.e. a conical jet. Clearly, if the jet progressively recollimates at large $`z`$, the scaling of $`U_\mathrm{B}`$ and $`U_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{out}}`$ changes and their values increases relatively to the other energy densities.

Fig. 1 shows that along most of the jet the CMB is the dominant field for the spine: the energy densities of the magnetic field and of the nuclear blazar emission becomes relatively important only in the inner parts ($`<`$ few kpc). On the contrary for a slowly moving layer the beamed inner radiation can dominate the radiation energy density up to large scales. Reprocessed radiation from the NLR and dust structures do not provide a relevant contribution at any distance.

For the spine emission, a systematic increase of the Compton dominance (ratio of the luminosity in the high energy and low energy spectral components) is expected with increasing distance. Clearly in terms of the observed luminosity the relative contributions of the spine and layer have to be weighted by the corresponding beaming factors.

### 2.4 Particle energy density

Finally, let us consider the relative importance of the energy density in relativistic electrons and fields (see Fig. 1). The electron density can be estimated from the intrinsic synchrotron luminosity $`L_s^{}=L_s/\delta _{\mathrm{out}}^4`$ of the knot:

$$n_\mathrm{e}^{}=\frac{3L_{\mathrm{s},\mathrm{out}}^{}}{4\pi R^3c\sigma _\mathrm{T}U_\mathrm{B}^{}\gamma ^2}.$$
(7)
Then the electron energy density $`U_\mathrm{e}^{}=n_\mathrm{e}^{}\gamma m_\mathrm{e}c^2`$ is

$$U_\mathrm{e}^{}=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.2}\times 10^2\frac{U_{\mathrm{out}}^{}}{U_\mathrm{B}^{}}\frac{3p}{p2}\frac{(\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}/\gamma _{\mathrm{min}})^{p2}}{\psi _1z_{\mathrm{kpc}}\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^3$$
(8)
where $`\psi =10^1\psi _1`$. We have assumed that the particle distribution is a power law, $`N(\gamma )\gamma ^p`$, between $`\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}`$ and $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}`$, with $`2<p<3`$. For illustration, assume $`p=2.5`$, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}=100`$, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}=10^5`$, and equal synchrotron and magnetic energy densities. In this case $`U_\mathrm{e}^{}4\times 10^6\psi _1^1z_{\mathrm{kpc}}^1`$ erg cm-3. It is then clear that if $`U_B^{}U_{\mathrm{out}}^{}`$ holds, then the energy density of relativistic electrons is bound to dominate by a large factor, especially at large distances, as long as $`\psi z`$ increases with $`z`$ (since $`U_\mathrm{e}^{}`$ scales as $`z^1\psi ^1`$ while the other energy densities scale as $`z^2\psi ^2`$).

The only way to decrease the particle dominance is to increase the relative importance of $`U_\mathrm{B}^{}`$. But this immediately implies that the SSC component of the spectrum becomes weaker than the synchrotron one. If a large Compton X–ray flux is instead observed, then a more moderate particle dominance can be achieved only if this emission is not due to SSC. Equipartition between $`U_\mathrm{B}^{}`$ and $`U_\mathrm{e}^{}`$ is however possible if the external radiation fields are orders of magnitude greater that the local synchrotron energy density (if the X–ray flux is comparable to the low energy synchrotron one). Such large ratios of external to local radiation fields are possible for the spine component (see Fig. 1) at large distances. The spine component of jets can then have a Compton dominated spectrum even in the case of equipartition between magnetic field and particles, providing that the magnetic field in the emitting region is greater than the values shown in Fig. 1 (possibly due to shock compression and field amplification).

In summary, suppose to observe a significant inverse Compton X–ray flux in an extended jet structure. If the source is a radio–galaxy, we have a strongly particle dominated emitting region, since we are likely observing the emission from the layer, for which the external photon fields can only slightly reduce the particle to magnetic energy density ratio. If the source is an extended jet of a blazar, we are observing the emission from the spine, with a strongly dominating CMB field. In this case it is possible (even if not guaranteed), that $`U_\mathrm{B}^{}U_\mathrm{e}^{}`$.

## 3 Multifrequency mapping

In aligned sources (i.e. superluminal sources and blazars) the more visible parts of the jet will be those still moving at relativistic speeds, producing radiation highly beamed towards the observer (i.e. the spine emission will dominate). On the contrary, in misaligned radio–galaxies the slower moving parts (layer) dominate with quasi–isotropic radiation providing most of the observed flux.

A further crucial point to be considered in such extended structures is the relative role of radiative versus adiabatic cooling. The bottom panel of Fig. 1 shows the radiative cooling timescales of $`\gamma =10^5`$ electrons of both the spine and the layer. Due to the different radiation fields dominating in the spine and in the layer, the spine is radiatively efficient in the outer parts and the layer in the inner parts. Therefore at large distances the adiabatic losses are negligible for the spine, and are instead important for the layer.

In Fig. 2 we show examples of the SED for the spine and layer, where the corresponding jets are assumed to be observed at $`5^{}`$ and $`60^{}`$ from the jet axis, respectively. The particle distribution is normalized to give a fixed amount of total (synchrotron plus Compton) luminosity. The addition of the external radiation field then changes also the synchrotron flux level, and greatly changes the Compton to synchrotron flux ratio. This can be seen in the upper panel of Fig. 2, comparing the SED corresponding to SSC only with the one including the contribution of the external nuclear photons. Note that the pure SSC case can be appropriate for a curved or bent jet, in which the beamed radiation from the center does not illuminate the large scale jet.

A further prediction of the model due to the energy dependent cooling timescales is that the relative extension from the dissipation region where particles are accelerated would be larger for slower cooling particles, i.e. will depend on the mapping frequency, as $`ct_{\mathrm{cool}}(1+z)\mathrm{\Gamma }^1`$.

## 4 The jet of PKS 0637–752

Let us consider the specific case of the jet associated with PKS 0637–752, and in particular of its knot W7.8, for which detailed information are reported (Chartas et al. 2000).

The spatially resolved X–ray images allowed to identify knots of emission similar in structure and intensity to those seen in the radio (Tingay et al. 1998) and optical (HST; Schwartz et al. 2000) bands. According to the CXO and radio results, the source can be resolved at 5 GHz with a dimension of 0.3”, at a distance from the central source of about 7.8”, yielding $`\psi 0.04`$. VSOP observations detected superluminal motion in the (pc scale) jet (Lovell 2000), setting a lower limit on the (inner) bulk Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }>17.5`$ and an upper limit on the viewing angle $`\theta <6.4`$ degrees (assuming $`H_0=50`$ km $`s^1`$ Mpc-1 and $`q_0=0`$). The small scale jet appears to be well aligned with the kpc scale one.

As discussed by Chartas et al. and Schwartz et al., the radio spectrum can be explained as synchrotron emission, as also supported by the detection of strong linear radio polarization, while the X–ray emission largely ($``$ 2 orders of magnitude) exceeds the extrapolation from the radio–optical spectrum. On the other hand, if the X–ray flux is due to SSC emission, large deviation from equipartition between magnetic field and particle energy density and/or strong inhomogeneities have to be invoked in the emitting region. Thermal emission by e.g. shocked plasma also appears to be unlikely, as it would imply high particle density and thus unobserved large rotation measures. On the contrary in the proposed scenario the X–ray emission can be satisfactorily interpreted as scattered CMB radiation.

Fig. 3 shows the SED of both the nuclear blazar component and of the knot W7.8. To fit the core emission, we have assumed an emitting region of size $`R=9\times 10^{16}`$ cm, magnetic field $`B=4`$ Gauss, bulk Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{in}}=17`$ and viewing angle $`\theta =6^{}`$ (yielding $`\delta _{\mathrm{in}}=8.2`$). The emitted intrinsic luminosity is $`L^{}=8\times 10^{43}`$ erg s-1. For this nuclear jet component we could estimate the kinetic power carried by the jet: in the form of Poynting flux and emitting electrons we have respectively $`L_\mathrm{B}=1.4\times 10^{46}`$ erg s-1 $`L_\mathrm{e}=1.4\times 10^{45}`$. Assuming one (cold) proton for each electron, the estimated kinetic power is of order $`L_{\mathrm{kin}}=3\times 10^{47}`$ erg s-1.

For the knot, we have assumed that the emission region has a size of $``$3 kpc, at a distance of 640 kpc from the center (corresponding to the deprojected observed distance, with a viewing angle of $`6^{}`$). The magnetic field is $`B=6\times 10^5`$ G, the intrinsic luminosity is $`L=10^{41}`$ erg s-1 and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}=14`$. The viewing angle is the same as the core. With these parameters, the CMB contribution to the radiation fields as seen by the knot is largely dominating. At the redshift of PKS 0637–752 this corresponds to $`U_{\mathrm{CMB}}^{}6\times 10^{10}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{out}}/14)^2`$ erg cm-3, to be compared with $`U_\mathrm{B}^{}1.4\times 10^{10}`$ and $`U_{\mathrm{out}}^{}2\times 10^{15}`$ erg cm-3. The jet bulk kinetic powers are $`L_\mathrm{e}=5\times 10^{45}`$ and $`L_\mathrm{B}=2.6\times 10^{47}`$ erg s-1. If there is one proton for emitting electron $`L_{\mathrm{kin}}=4\times 10^{47}`$ erg s-1. These numbers, typical for powerful radio sources, are in rough agreement with the corresponding values for the core, suggesting that the kinetic power is conserved along the jet (see e.g. Celotti & Fabian 1993). Note that both the large bulk Lorentz factor and the small size (i.e. a much smaller value of $`\psi `$ than what adopted in the previous section) refer to the spine component, while the jet could appear wider and slower if the layer dominates (i.e. at large viewing angles). However, so far direct evidence for layers exists only for $``$kpc scale jets (Swain, Bridle & Baum 1998; Laing et al. 1999).

The optical emission can be self–consistently interpreted as the higher energy part of the synchrotron component. This in turn implies that the emission is due to high energy electrons, whose cooling length corresponds to distances $`0.5`$ kpc. Radio and X–ray emission are instead accounted for by particles of similar (lower) energies and therefore images in these two bands are expected to resemble each other (with cooling lengths $`150`$ kpc), as indeed observed (Schwartz et al. 2000).

In our model, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}`$ is required to be small (10–20) in order to fit the X–ray flux and spectrum. The presence of such low energy electrons can cause some depolarization of the radio emission of the knot (Wardle et al. 1998) possibly indicating the contribution of electron–positron pairs (which do not affect polarization).

## 5 Discussion and conclusions

We have discussed the role of different electromagnetic fields for the radiative dissipation of relativistically accelerated electrons in large scale jets. The dissipation regions (knots) act as scattering mirrors for any externally produced photon field as well as the nuclear beamed radiation. A jet structure comprising components with different speeds can account for large scale emission in jets associated with both blazar and radio–galaxies.

In the former case, we expect to detect more intense radiation from a fast moving component (spine), spatially concentrated in the outer jet regions and dominated by the CMB scattered field at distances greater than a few kpc. On the contrary, weaker and more isotropic emission would dominate in radio–galaxies, produced by a mildly relativistic portion of the jet, mainly Compton scattering the beamed radiation coming from the nucleus. Deviation from this behavior in radio galaxies is expected for jets which are subject to strong bending: in this case the inner beamed field would not reach any misdirected component.

While the above estimates imply values of the kinetic power associated with the emitting knots typical of high power radio sources, a quasi–stationary hydrodynamical confinement of such structures appears to be a problem as extreme high gas densities for the external gas would be required.

We expect that optical and X–ray emission to be common in large scale jets of both blazar and radio–galaxies. The promising results by $`Chandra`$ and HST will thus play a key role in the understanding of the jet structure and dynamics as well as the dissipation processes.

Acknowledgments

We thank the anonimous referee for useful suggestions. This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Caltech, under contract with the NASA.


format: text

text:
# The compact core-jet region of the superluminal quasar 3C 216

## 1. Introduction

The central region of radio-loud active galactic nuclei (AGN) can be studied with sub-milliarcsecond (mas) resolution using the space very long baseline interferometry (space VLBI) technique; this corresponds to only a few parsecs projected linear size even for the highest redshift sources. The inclusion of an orbiting element into the VLBI array is important because the achievable resolution increases without using higher observing frequencies. As theory predicts that the size of the optically thick region of compact jets is inversely proportional to the frequency (Blandford & Königl 1979), sources that are too compact for ground VLBI arrays can only be resolved by space VLBI. The other advantage of this technique over ground-based VLBI is that higher brightness temperatures can be measured. The maximum achievable brightness temperature (for an isotropic source) is limited by inverse Compton scattering to $`T_\mathrm{B}=10^{12}`$ K (Kellermann & Pauliny-Toth 1969); $`T_\mathrm{B}`$ values exceeding $`10^{12}`$ K indicate Doppler-boosting of the emission. Observational evidence for Doppler-boosting and investigation of parsec-scale jet misalignments at sub-mas resolution (e.g. Tingay et al. 1998) help us to refine orientation-based unification models.

Below we present results of our VLBI Space Observatory Programe (VSOP) observations of 3C 216 (0906+430). The source ($`z=0.67`$, Spinrad et al. 1985) shows high optical polarization and variability, typical of the class of blazars (Angel & Stockman 1980). It was classified as a compact steep spectrum (CSS) quasar as well (e.g. Fanti et al. 1985; Pearson & Readhead 1988), though this classification may not be entirely correct as the observed small source size ($``$15 kpc) is probably not intrinsic, and within $`100`$ mas of the centre the radio structure is reminiscent of core dominated sources (Fejes et al. 1992). There are slightly misaligned radio lobes on arcsecond scales oriented to South-West and North-East directions from the centre (Pearson et al. 1985; Fejes et al. 1992); the latter seems to align with the barely-resolved optical structure observed by the Hubble Space Telescope (de Vries at al. 1997). Images made by the VLA at 1.4 GHz (Barthel et al. 1988) and by the MERLIN array at 408 MHz (Fejes et al. 1992) reveal the presence of a low surface brightness halo about 8” in size – there is no evidence for larger scale emission at lower frequencies, according to 81.5 MHz long baseline interferometric observations (Hartas et al. 1983). Regardless of the strong lobes that dominate the spectrum at low frequencies, 3C 216 shows the structural properties of a core dominated source at centimeter wavelengths on VLBI scales. It has a bright core component and a jet that is perpendicular to to the arcsecond-scale radio lobes (Fejes et al. 1992). The jet follows a gently curved path, with underlying wiggles, and ends in a sharp bend at 140 mas from the centre (Fejes et al. 1992; Akujor et al. 1996). In the innermost part of the source, components emerge at superluminal speeds (Barthel et al. 1988). Venturi et al. (1993) showed that deceleration takes place in the inner few mas (10-20 parsecs). There is also a quasi-stationary component at $`1.5`$ mas from the radio core at 5 GHz. Our main goal was to investigate this region in more detail.

## 2. Observations, data reduction and imaging

The source was observed at 5 GHz with the array of the VSOP satellite HALCA, the 43m Green Bank telescope and the western part of the European VLBI Network (EVN) on 14/15 February 1999. Characteristics of the radio antennas are listed in Table 1. There were three tracking passes during the 8.5 hour experiment using the Green Bank, Tidbinbilla and Goldstone tracking stations. The data were recorded in left circular polarization in VLBA mode, and correlated at the NRAO VLBA correlator in Socorro (USA). We used AIPS (Cotton 1995; Diamond 1995) version 15OCT98 for data processing at the FÖMI Satellite Geodetic Observatory, Hungary. The measured antenna system temperatures ($`T_{\mathrm{sys}}`$) were used for a-priori amplitude calibration where available. We used nominal $`T_{\mathrm{sys}}`$ values for Green Bank and HALCA. Fringes were found with high signal-to-noise ratio for space baselines during the experiment, except in the short third tracking pass. We averaged data in frequency and time (one minute integration time) and performed imaging in DIFMAP (Shepherd et al. 1994).

We experimented with a variety of $`uv`$ cut-offs and data weighting in imaging, in order to image the source structure on different spatial scales. We were able to reconstruct the jet bend at $`140`$ mas from the core using natural weighting – this feature was resolved out using uniform weighting, when ground-space baselines dominate in imaging. We found that the gain of the EVN telescopes – which have baselines sensitive to the 100 mas scale structure – could be better self-calibrated if we added clean components from the large scale emission ”manually”, when performing imaging with uniform weighting.

The process is described below. 1) A self-calibration and imaging cycle was carried out using natural weighting. 2) The source model file obtained was edited so that clean components within 5 mas from the phase centre were deleted (emission from larger scales do not have a significant contribution to the correlated flux density on the Earth-space baselines). 3) A new self-calibration and imaging cycle was started with uniform weighting of the data. After the starting phase self-calibration to a 1 Jy point source model, the edited model file from 1) was appended to the clean component model. Imaging of the inner few mas region of the source was then continued in the usual way. This method should be applied with caution but proved to be useful in our case. While the basic structure of the source obtained as described above was not different from what can be achieved by the standard way, we were able to improve the dynamic range of the final space VLBI map.

## 3. Results

Contour representations of the resulting images – according to the various imaging strategies – are shown in Fig. 1. and Fig. 2. The bright knot at the jet bend can be identified at 140 mas from the core in Fig. 1., where the inset shows the wiggling jet in more detail. Components in the full resolution space VLBI image (Fig. 2a) are labelled in the same way as in Venturi et al. (1993). The core region is resolved; however, the clean beam is highly elongated roughly along the jet direction. The results of model fitting of the self-calibrated data are listed in Table 2. Using a 0.5 mas circular restoring beam, Component A is apparently well separated from the core (Fig. 2b). The separation is estimated as 1.25$`\pm `$0.05 mas. This is not in agreement with the results of model fitting; an elongated component closer to the core (0.87 mas) gives the best fit to the data (see Table 2.). Component B is clearly resolved, and seems to be edge brightened on the western side. It is difficult to estimate the positional uncertainty of component B; we will use 0.2 mas in further analysis (as well as for other epochs). The position angle of the inner jet components ($`PA=152^{}`$) is slightly misaligned with respect to the 100 mas scale jet ($`PA=146149^{}`$).

In order to scale angular sizes to projected linear sizes, we used $`H_0=100h`$km s-1 Mpc-1 and $`q_0=0.5`$; 1 mas corresponds to $`3.9h^1`$pc at the distance of 3C 216. We also calculated the observed brightness temperatures of the source components in the core region, after correction for the $`z`$ cosmological redshift, using the formula given by Kellermann and Owen (1988):

$$T_\mathrm{B}[K]=1.22\times 10^{12}(1+z)\frac{S}{\theta _1\theta _2\nu ^2},$$
(1)
where $`S`$ is the flux density in Jy, $`\theta _1`$ and $`\theta _2`$ are the sizes of the major and minor axes of the fitted Gaussian component in mas, and $`\nu `$ is the observing frequency in GHz. These values are listed in Table 2. For the radio core, $`T_\mathrm{B}=7.9\times 10^{11}`$ K, which is comparable to the inverse Compton limit (Kellermann & Pauliny-Toth 1969).

## 4. Discussion

The overall radio structure of 3C 216 can be modelled with either helical flows or precessing beams in which jet components move ballistically, but a unique solution cannot be found (Fejes et al. 1992). Helical jets are proposed to exist in some radio-loud AGN (e.g. Conway & Murphy 1993, and references therein) e.g. due to Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities introduced by a driving mechanism such as precession of the central engine. Note that precessing jet models invoking ballistic ejection of plasmons are less favoured at present as it would require two orders of magnitude higher density of the jet with respect to the ambient medium, which is not observed in AGN (Hardee et al. 1994).

In the case of 3C 216, Akujor et al. (1996) noted that the edge brightened structure and the flattened spectrum of the component near the jet bend may indicate interaction with the interstellar medium. Such jet-ISM interaction is proposed to be a general phenomenon in the sample of CSS sources (including 3C 216) investigated by de Vries et al. (1999) with the Hubble Space Telescope, which gives evidence for the presence of emission-line gas aligned with the radio structures. The very high rotation measure observed in the jet bend (Venturi & Taylor 1999) and the recently discovered H i absorption in the source (Pihlström et al. 1999) indicate that the jet is indeed deflected by an interstellar cloud in the host galaxy. High resolution H i observations have been carried out in the UHF band with the EVN to identify the location of the absorbing gas (Y. Pihlström, priv. comm.).

The position of component B from earlier VLBI measurements is shown in Fig. 3. These data are consistent with a constant proper motion of $`\mu =0.14\pm 0.01`$ mas/yr between 1979 and 1999. But note that the higher resolution observations (the two 8 GHz data points and our 5 GHz space VLBI measurement) show significantly larger separations of the component from the centre. The ground only data points obtained at 5 GHz are still indicative of jet deceleration or orientation changes, if we compare the trend in the component separation evolution before and after 1988. It may be misleading to compare component separations measured with instruments of different resolution or measured at different frequencies, which may result in a shift of the reference point (the location of the observed brightness peak). This can happen in a case e.g. when a jet component is blended with the core in a lower resolution observation. But the reference point is also expected to shift with the observing frequency due to a change in synchrotron self-absorption opacity, if the core region can be described with compact jet models (Lobanov 1988 and referencies therein, see below). Such a shift was recently detected e.g. in the BL Lac objects 1803+784 (Pérez-Torres et al. 2000) and 1823+568 (Paragi et al. 2000). The latter was observed at four-frequencies (5–22 GHz) with the VLBA; these observations show a systematic increase of core–jet component separation with increasing frequency.

The topic of constant component speed vs. jet deceleration scenario for 3C 216 will be investigated further by T. Venturi et al. (in preparation). For the present discussion we assumed the most simple case of constant component speed, and calculated the apparent transverse velocity with the following formula (e.g. Pearson & Zensus (1987)):

$$\beta _{\mathrm{app}}=\mu \frac{z}{H_0(1+z)}\left[\frac{1+(1+2q_0z)^{1/2}+z}{1+(1+2q_0z)^{1/2}+q_0z}\right].$$
(2)
The observed proper motion corresponds to $`\beta _{\mathrm{app}}=(3.0\pm 0.2)h^1`$ apparent transverse velocity.

The nature of component A is rather unclear. Its separation from the core is 1.25 mas (see the super-resolved image in Fig. 2b), compared to the earlier reported quasi-stationary position of 1.4–1.6 mas (Venturi et al. 1993). The beam orientation is not suitable to decide whether this feature is a separate component, or just an extension to the core emission. As we could not model the source structure with a stable component at a distance of 1.25 mas in the model-fitting process, the latter seems more favourable. It is very probable that the ”core” and ”component A” together form the so-called ultracompact jet region of 3C 216 (see Lobanov 1998). In this case we can apply the equipartition jet model of Blandford and Königl (1979) in which the limiting brightness temperature is about $`3\times 10^{11}\delta ^{5/6}`$K. A comparison with the observed value results in a lower limit to the Doppler factor: $`\delta 3.17`$. The Lorentz factor of the jet ($`\gamma `$) and the viewing angle to the line of sight ($`\theta `$) can be given by (e.g. Daly et al. 1996):

$$\gamma =(2\delta )^1(\beta _{\mathrm{app}}^2+\delta ^2+1),$$
(3)
and

$$\mathrm{cos}\theta =\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{\gamma ^21}}\right)(\gamma \delta ^1).$$
(4)
Using the calculated values of $`\beta _{\mathrm{app}}`$ and the lower limit of $`\delta `$, and assuming $`h=0.7`$ our results are $`\gamma >3.16`$ and $`\theta <18^{}.4`$. Much higher Doppler factors for 3C 216 have been determined by other methods ($`\delta =33`$ in Ghisellini et al. 1992 and $`\delta =65`$ in Güijosa & Daly 1996). These Doppler factors would result in very large Lorentz factors of $`\gamma >16`$ and much smaller angles to the line of sight ($`1^{}`$), unless $`\beta _{\mathrm{app}}`$ represents a jet pattern speed instead of bulk motion. Note that the $`\delta `$ estimations from the literature mentioned above made use of VLBI data taken during an outburst, when the flux density of the source core was much higher (cf. Barthel et al. 1988).

## 5. Conclusions

The blazar type core of the source can be interpreted in terms of compact jets. We estimate that the inner jet is oriented close to the line of sight with $`\theta <18^{}.4`$, and the radio emission is Doppler-boosted by a factor of $`3`$ at the epoch of observations. We conclude that the observed small projected size of 3C 216 is probably caused by both interaction of the radio beams with the interstellar medium and a projection effect. The nature of the core region should be investigated in more detail in future high resolution multi-frequency VLBI experiments, which would allow us to compare the observed spectral distribution with physical models.

We gratefully acknowledge the VSOP Project, which is led by the Japanese Institute of Space and Astronautical Science in cooperation with many organizations and radio telescopes around the world. This research was supported in part by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research and the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (grant no. N31721 & T031723), as well as the Hungarian Space Office. The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is operated by Associated Universities, Inc. under a Cooperative Agreement with the National Science Foundation. We thank the anonymous referee for useful comments.

## References

Angel J.R.P., Stockman H.S. 1980, ARA&A 18, 321

Akujor C.E., Porcas R.W., Lüdke E., Shone D.L. 1993, in Davies E., Booth R.J. (eds.) Sub-arcsecond Radio Astronomy, Cambridge University Press, p. 265

Akujor C.E., Porcas R.W., Fejes I. 1996, in Ekers R., Fanti C., Padrielli L. (eds.) Extragalactic Radio Sources, Dordrecht: Kluwer, p. 83

Blandford R.D., Königl A. 1979, ApJ 232, 34

Barthel P.D., Pearson T.J., Readhead A.C.S. 1988, ApJ 329, L51

Conway J.E., Murphy D.W. 1993, ApJ 411, 89

Cotton W.D. 1995, in Zensus J.A., Diamond P.J., Napier P.J. (eds.) Very Long Baseline Interferometry and the VLBA, ASP Conference Series Vol. 82, p. 189

Daly R.A., Guerra E.J., Güijosa A. 1996, in Hardee P.E., Bridle A.H., Zensus J.A. (eds.) Energy Transport in Radio Galaxies and Quasars, ASP Conference Series Vol. 100, p. 73

Diamond P.J. 1995, in Zensus J.A., Diamond P.J., Napier P.J. (eds.) Very Long Baseline Interferometry and the VLBA, ASP Conference Series Vol. 82, p. 227

Fanti C., Fanti R., Schilizzi R.T., Spencer R.E., van Breugel W.J.M. 1985, A&A 143, 292

Fejes I., Porcas R.W., Akujor C.E. 1992, A&A 257, 459

Ghisellini G., Celotti A., George I.M., Fabian A.C. 1992, MNRAS 258, 776

Güijosa A., Daly R.A. 1996, ApJ 461, 600

Hardee P.E., Cooper M.A., Clark D.A. 1994, ApJ 424, 126

Hartas J.S., Rees W.G., Scott P.F., Duffett-Smith P.J. 1983, MNRAS 205, 625

Kellermann K.I., Owen F.N. 1988, in Verschuur G.L., Kellermann K.I. (eds.) Galactic and Extragalactic Radio Astronomy, Springer, p. 577

Kellermann K.I., Pauliny-Toth I.I.K. 1969, ApJ 155, L71

Lobanov A.P. 1998, A&A 330, 79

Paragi Z., Fejes I., Frey S. 2000, in Vandenberg N.R., Baver K.D. (eds.) International VLBI Service for Geodesy and Astrometry 2000 General Meeting Proceedings, NASA/CP–2000–209893

Pearson T.J., Readhead A.C.S. 1988, ApJ 328, 114

Pearson T.J., Zensus J.A. 1987, in Zensus J.A., Pearson T.J. (eds.) Superluminal Radio Sources, p. 1

Pearson T.J., Perley R.A., Readhead A.C.S. 1985, AJ 90, 738

Pérez-Torres M.A., Marcaide J.M., Guirado J.C. et al. 2000, A&A 360, 161

Pihlström Y.M., Vermeulen R.C., Taylor G.B., Conway J.E. 1999, ApJ 525, L13

Shepherd M.C., Pearson T.J., Taylor G.B. 1994, BAAS 26, 987

Spinrad H., Djorgovski S., Marr J., Aguilar L. 1985, PASP 97, 932

Tingay S.J., Murphy D.W., Edwards P.G. 1998, ApJ 500, 673

Venturi T., Pearson T.J., Barthel P.D., Herbig T. 1993, A&A 271, 65

Venturi T., Taylor G.B. 1999, AJ 118, 1931

de Vries W.H., O’Dea C.P., Baum S.A. et al. 1997, ApJS 110, 191

de Vries W.H., O’Dea C.P., Baum S.A., Barthel P.D. 1999, ApJ 526, 27


text:
# Cosmology with Varying Constants

## I Motivation

According to our present understanding, higher-dimensional theories , are thought to be required to provide a consistent unification of the know fundamental interactions of nature. Even though there is at present no robust ideas about how one can go from these theories to our familiar low-energy $`(3+1)`$ spacetime, it is clear that such a process should necessarily involve two crucial mechanisms, namely dimensional reduction and compactification.

From our present purposes, the most important consequence of this process is that in such theories the effective three-dimensional constants will typically be related to the true higher-dimensional constants via the radii of the (compact) extra dimensions . Furthermore, it is well known that these radii often have a non-trivial evolution***Indeed, this is such a pressing question from the string theory point of view that it has been promoted to the category of a ‘problem’—the radius stabilisation problem.. Hence one is naturally led to the expectation of time (or even space) variations of the ‘effective’ coupling constants we can measure . This provides more than enough motivation to consider the cosmological consequences of these variations.

## II Modelling and measurements

In order to do this, one must first build ‘toy-models’ for the evolution of the effective constantsThis might at first seem a little ad-hoc, until one realizes that there is no well-motivated particle physics model for inflation. Hence so far so good….

These issues have been discussed at least since the time of Dirac , who first considered variations of the gravitational constant $`G`$. Almost half a century later, Beckenstein  introduced a theory with a varying electric charge $`e`$.Finally, much more recently, there has been an extraordinary growth in the interest in theories with a varying speed of light $`c`$ .

Before proceeding, one should recall that one can only measure dimensionless combinations of dimensional constants , and that such measurements are necessarily local. For example, the statement that “the speed of light here is the same as the speed of light in Andromeda” is either a definition or it’s completely meaningless. The paper by Albrecht & Magueijo in  provides some further instructive examples of this point.

An important consequence of the above point is that when considering observational tests one should focus on dimensionless quantities. The most relevant example is that of the fine-structure constant,

$$\alpha \frac{e^2}{\mathrm{}c}.$$
(1)
One consequence of what was said above is the fact that any evidence for a variation in a dimensionfull quantity will necessarily be dependent on the choice of units in which we choose to measure it. In other words, given a theory with a varying constant (say $`c`$), one can always, by a suitable re-definition of units of measurement, transform it into another theory where another constant (say $`e`$) varies, and furthermore any two such theories will be observationally indistinguishable. Hence, deciding which system of units one adopts is, in some sense, a matter of convenience and mathematical simplicity. It seems to be the case that theories with varying speed of light $`c`$ are generally easier to work with than those with a varying electric charge or Planck constant, although one could think of counter-examples of this statement.

## III Observational status

Tests for possible variations of the fine-structure constant $`\alpha `$ have been carried out for a number of years, and the current observational status is rather exciting, but also a little bit confusing—see  for a brief summary.

The best limit from laboratory experiments (using atomic clocks) is

$$|\dot{\alpha }/\alpha |<3.7\times 10^{14}yr^1.$$
(2)
Measurements of isotope ratios in the Oklo natural reactor provide the strongest geophysical constraints ,

$$|\dot{\alpha }/\alpha |<0.7\times 10^{16}yr^1,$$
(3)
although there are suggestions  that due to a number of nuclear physics uncertainties and model dependencies a more realistic bound is $`|\dot{\alpha }/\alpha |<5\times 10^{15}yr^1`$. Note that these measurements effectively probe timescales corresponding to a cosmological redshift of about $`z0.1`$ (compare with astrophysical measurements below).

Three kinds of astrophysical tests have been used. Firstly, big bang nucleosynthesis  can in principle provide rather strong constraints at very high redshifts, but it has a strong drawback in that one is always forced to make an assumption on how the neutron to proton mass difference depends on $`\alpha `$. This is needed to estimate the effect of a varying $`\alpha `$ on the $`{}_{}{}^{4}He`$ abundance. The abundances of the other light elements depend much less strongly on this assumption, but on the other hand these abundances are much less well known observationally. Hence one can only find the relatively weak bound

$$|\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha |<2\times 10^2,z10^910^{10}.$$
(4)
Secondly, observations of the fine splitting of quasar doublet absorption lines probe smaller redshifts, but should be much more reliable. Unfortunately, the two groups which have been actively studying this topic report different results. Webb and collaborators  were the first to report a positive result,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha =(1.9\pm 0.5)\times 10^5,z1.01.6$$
(5)
Note that this means that $`\alpha `$ was smaller in the past. Recently the same group reports two more (as yet unpublished) positive results , $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha =(0.75\pm 0.23)\times 10^5`$ for redshifts $`z0.61.6`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha =(0.74\pm 0.28)\times 10^5`$ for redshifts $`z1.62.6`$. On the other hand, Varshalovich and collaborators  report only a null result,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha =(4.6\pm 4.3\pm 1.4)\times 10^5,z24;$$
(6)
the first error bar corresponds to the statistical error while the second is the systematic one. This corresponds to the bound

$$|\dot{\alpha }/\alpha |<1.4\times 10^{14}yr^1$$
(7)
over a timescale of about $`10^{10}`$ years. It should be emphasised that the observational techniques used by both groups have significant differences, and it is presently not clear how the two compare when it comes to eliminating possible sources of systematic error. Clearly this is an issue which can only be resolved with more and better data.

Finally, a third option is the cosmic microwave background (CMB) . This probes intermediate redshifts, but has the significant advantage that one has (or will soon have) highly accurate data. A varying fine-structure constant changes the Thomson scattering cross section for all interacting species, and also changes the recombination history of Hydrogen (via changes in the energy levels and binding energies of all species). The authors of  provide an analysis of these effects and conclude that future CMB experiments should be able to provide constraints on a varying $`\alpha `$ at the recombination epoch (that is, at redshifts $`z1000`$) at the level of

$$|\dot{\alpha }/\alpha |<7\times 10^{13}yr^1,$$
(8)
or equivalently

$$|\alpha ^1d\alpha /dz|<9\times 10^5,$$
(9)
which seems to indicate that these constraints can only become competitive in the near future. For example, a recent analysis  which uses the BOOMERanG  determination of the position of the first Doppler peak find that this still allows for a variation of up to $`4\%`$ in the speed of light after recombination. More recently , it has been shown that the BOOMERanG and MAXIMA data slightly prefer a fine-structure constant that was smaller in the past, in agreement with quasar data.

We thus see that constraints at recent times are fairly strong, and any drastic recent departures from the standard scenario are excluded. On the other hand, there are no significant constraints in the pre-nucleosynthesis era, which leaves a rather large open space for theorists to build models—in fact, too large a space, as we’ll see next.

## IV Generalising general relativity

Theories with varying constants require a generalisation of Einstein’s theory of relativity. However, there is no unique (or even preferred) way of doing this. Hence one will be faced with the task of choosing a set of postulates to characterise the chosen theory. An associated task is the choice of ‘fundamental units’ in which measurements are to be made in the theory—in other words, the ‘rulers and clocks’ for the theory.

In particular, one can break a number of invariance principles and conservation laws. Examples of these include covariance and Lorentz invariance, mass, particle number, energy and momentum conservation, charge conservation and various energy conditions. In some ways, this is perhaps a too drastic step (as argued in , for example). On the other hand, it does have the rather desirable feature  of allowing rather simple solutions to some outstanding cosmological enigmas, such as the horizon, flatness and cosmological constant problems.

But are these drastic steps really necessary, and what is physically the role of a varying speed of light (or other constants)? In  it was conjectured that any theory that reduces to General Relativity in some appropriate limit and solves the horizon and flatness problems must necessarily violate at least one of the followingStronger requirements will be needed if one wants to solve the cosmological constant problem as well—which is something that inflation can not do.: the strong energy condition, Lorentz invariance or covariance. Note that inflation is of course an example of a theory which solves the horizon and flatness problems through a violation of the strong energy condition. The above statement is a conjecture in the sense that no rigorous ‘mathematical’ proof was provided, although physical arguments were discussed in  which make it (we think) rather plausible§§§On the other hand, it should be said that a number of other people, most notably J. Magueijo, came quite close to providing counter-examples..

What one can prove is, in some sense, the opposite result: No theory that reduces to General Relativity and obeys the above three principles will be able to solve the horizon and flatness problems, no matter what varying constants are included in it. Physically this is because for any theory that is subject to these four requirements one can always find a particular choice of fundamental units that will transform it into the ‘standard’ theory, where there are no varying constants and the standard cosmological problems can not be solved.

Nevertheless, if one considers that breaking Lorentz invariance in this way is too drastic, there are alternatives. Most notably, Bassett et al.  have extensively discussed the consequences of soft Lorentz invariance breakingThis is in some sense analogous to the concept of spontaneous symmetry breaking in particle physics. In this analogy, the Lorentz invariance breaking process described previously would correspond to explicit symmetry breaking.. In particular, this will still solve the horizon problem, but not the flatness problem (at least by itself). As discussed in detail in , there are numerous examples of this kind of ‘effective’ theories in other areas of physics.

Physically, theories with soft Lorentz invariance breaking will have two (or more) natural speed parameters, and hence to the realm of two-metric theories. For example, one can have a characteristic speed for photons and another one for the rest of particles, or one for gravitons and another one for the rest, or one for bosons and another one for fermions, or even (as will be the case in the example that we will consider in some detail in the next section) one characteristic speed for the Higgs sector and another one for all the standard model (including gravity) particles.

## V Primordial adiabatic fluctuations from defects

There are currently two basic classes of models that could be responsible for producing “seeds” for structure formation. In the first , it is assumed that the universe was smooth at the start of its standard evolution, and defects were produced at one or more symmetry-breaking phase transitions which then continuously seeded structures on a specific set of comoving scales. In the second , an inflationary epoch is assumed to have happened before the standard evolution of the universe began, and the corresponding primordial fluctuations were laid out at this earlier epoch.

The main difference between these two scenarios is related to causality. In the first case, the initial conditions for the defect network that will be responsible for the primordial seeds are set up on a Cauchy surface that is part of the standard history of the universe. Hence, there will not be any correlations between quantities defined at any two spacetime points whose backward light cones do not intersect on that surface. On the other hand, inflation effectively pushes this surface to much earlier times, and if the inflationary epoch lasts long enough to solve the well-known set of “cosmological enigmas” then there will be essentially no causality constraints.

This can be seen in an alternative way by noting that inflation can be physically defined as an epoch when the comoving Hubble length decreases. Hence this length starts out very large, and perturbations can therefore be generated causally. Then inflation forces this length to decrease enough so that, even though it grows again after inflation ends, it’s never as large (by today, say) as the pre-inflationary era value. Note that once the primordial fluctuations are produced they can simply freeze in comoving coordinates and let the Hubble length shrink and then (for small enough scales) grow past them later.

As a first step towards identifying the specific model that operated in the early universe, one would like to be able to determine which of the two mechanisms above (if any) was involved. Features like super-horizon perturbations or the so-called ‘Doppler peaks’  on small angular scales in the CMB angular power spectrum, however, do not provide good discriminators (at least on their own) . Gaussianity tests  are in principle a better discriminator, though it is possible to build inflationary models that produce some forms of non-Gaussianity. Notably, it is easy to obtain non-Gaussianity with a chi-squared distribution—an example are the so called iso-curvature inflation models . On the other hand, if one found non-Gaussianity in the form of line discontinuities, then it is hard to see how cosmic strings could fail to be involved.

The above discussion shows that even though defect and inflationary models have of course a number of distinguishing characteristics, there is a greater overlap between them than most people would care to admit. Moreover, it is also quite easy to obtain models where both defects and inflation generate density fluctuations . We discuss an explicit example  of a model where the primordial fluctuations are generated by a network of cosmic defects, but are nevertheless very similar to a standard inflationary model; the only difference between these models and the standard inflationary scenario will be a small non-Gaussian component.

We consider a theory that contains two different speed parameters, say $`c_\varphi `$ and $`c`$; the first is relevant for the dynamics of the scalar field which will produce topological defects, while the second is the ordinary speed of light that is relevant for gravity and all standard model interactions.

The basic idea should now be clear. We assume that $`c_\varphi c`$ so that the correlation length of the network of topological defects will be much greater than the horizon size (which is of course defined with respect to $`c`$). We could, in analogy with , explicitly define our effective theory by means of an action, and postulate a relation between the ‘standard’ metric and the one describing the propagation of our scalar field. However, this is not needed for the basic point we’re discussing here. Also, we concentrate on the case of cosmic strings, whose dynamics and evolution are much better known than those of other defects  although much of what we will discuss will apply to other defects as well.

Note that $`c_\varphi `$ could either be a constant, with say

$$[g_\varphi ]_{00}=\frac{c_\varphi ^2}{c^2}g_{00},$$
(10)
or, as discussed in  one could set up a model such that the two speeds are equal at very early and at recent times, and between these two epochs there is a period, limited by two phase transitions, where $`c_\varphi c`$. As will become clear below, the basic mechanism will work in both cases, although the observational constraints on it will of course be different for each specific realization.

The evolution of the string network will be qualitatively analogous to the standard case , and in particular a “scaling” solution will be reached after a relatively short transient period. Thus the long-string characteristic length scale (or “correlation length”) $`L`$ will evolve as

$$L=\gamma c_\varphi t,$$
(11)
with $`\gamma =𝒪(1)`$, while the string RMS velocity will obey

$$v_\varphi =\beta c_\varphi ,$$
(12)
with $`\beta <1`$.

Note, however, that there are a small number of important differences relative to the standard scenario. The first one is the most obvious: if $`c_\varphi c`$, then the string network will be outside the horizon, measured in the usual way. Hence these defects will induce fluctuations when they are well outside the horizon, thus avoiding causality constraints.

On the other hand, we also expect the effect of gravitational back-reaction to be much stronger than in the standard case . The general effect of the back-reaction is to reduce the scaling density and velocity of the network relative to the standard value, as has been discussed elsewhere . Thus we should expect fewer defects per “$`c_\varphi `$-horizon”, than in the standard GUT-scale case. Having said that, it is also important to note that despite this strong back-reaction, strings will still move relativistically. Indeed, it can be shown  that although back-reaction can slow strings down by a measurable amount, only friction forces  can force the network into a strong non-relativistic regime. Thus we expect $`v_\varphi `$ to be somewhat lower than $`c_\varphi `$, but still larger than $`c`$.

Only in the case of monopoles, which are point-like, one would expect the defect velocities to drop below $`c`$ due to graviton radiation . This does not happen for extended objects, since their tension naturally tends to make the dynamics take place with a characteristic speed $`c_\varphi `$ . This point is actually crucial, since if the network was completely frozen while it was outside the horizon (as it happens in more standard scenarios ) then no significant perturbations would be generated.

A third important aspect, to which we shall return below, is that the scale of the symmetry breaking, say $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, which produces the defects can be significantly lower than the GUT scale, since density perturbations can grow for a longer time than usual. Indeed, the earlier the defects are formed, the lighter they could be. Proper normalisation of the model will produce a further constraint on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

Finally, we also point out that in the scenario we have outlined above where $`c_\varphi `$ is a time-varying quantity which only departs from $`c`$ for a limited period (which is started and ended by two phase transitions), the defects will become frozen and start to fall inside the horizon after the second phase transition. In this case what we require is that the defects are sufficiently outside the horizon and are relativistic when density fluctuations in the observable scales are generated. This will introduce additional constraints on the parameters of the model, and in particular on the epochs at which the phase transitions take place.

The evolution of the primordial fluctuations in our model is detailed in . One obtains a model with primordial, adiabatic ($`\delta _r=4\delta _m/3`$), nearly Gaussian fluctuations whose primordial spectrum is of the Harrison-Zel’dovich form. This model is almost indistinguishable from the simplest inflationary models (as far as structure formation is concerned) except for the small non-Gaussian component which could be detected with future CMB experiments. The $`C_l`$ spectrum and the polarisation curves of the CMBR predicted by this model should also be identical to the ones predicted in the simplest inflationary models as the perturbations in the CMB are not generated directly by the defects.

Note that the key ingredient consists of having the speed characterising the defect-producing scalar field much larger than the speed characterising gravity and all standard model particles. This provides a ‘violation of causality’, as required in the criterion provided by Liddle . The only distinguishing characteristic of this model, by comparison with the simplest inflationary models, will be a small non-Gaussian signal which could be detected by future experiments.

In fact, one can even think  of an alternative model arising in the same context, but where the defect-induced primordial fluctuations are also Gaussian. In this case we require that the characteristic speed of the decay products of the defect network is much larger than the speed characterising gravity and all the standard model particles. Thus this model will exactly reproduce the CMB and large-scale structure predictions of the standard inflationary models, and the only way to identify it would be through the decay products of the defect network involved.

We emphasise again that in open or hybrid models of inflation defects can also be stretched outside the horizon  but in this case they are frozen in comoving coordinates so that the perturbations they induce while being outside the horizon are negligible.

Admittedly, these models might admittedly seem somewhat “unnatural” in the context of our present theoretical prejudices, though they are certainly not the only ones to fit in this category . However, if one keeps in mind that any fully consistent cosmological structure formation model candidate should eventually be derivable from fundamental physics, one could argue that at this stage they are, caeteris paribus, on the same footing as inflation. Certainly no single fully consistent realization of an inflationary model is known at present.

Be that as it may, however, the fact that these examples can be constructed (and one wonders how many more are possible) highlights the fact that extracting robust predictions from cosmological observations is a much more difficult and subtle task than many experimentalists (and theorists) believe.

###### Acknowledgements.

The work presented here was done in collaboration with Pedro Avelino, and is part of an ongoing collaboration which also involves Graca Rocha and Pedro Viana. I thank Bruce Bassett, João Magueijo, Anupam Mazumdar and Paul Shellard for useful discussions and comments. This work has been supported by FCT (Portugal) under ‘Programa PRAXIS XXI’, grant no. PRAXIS XXI/BPD/11769/97, and by FCT/ESO, undar project ESO/PRO/1258/98.


text:
# SDW and FISDW transition of (TMTSF)2ClO4 at high magnetic fields

## Abstract

The magnetic field dependence of the SDW transition in (TMTSF)2ClO4 for various anion cooling rates has been measured, with the field up to 27T parallel to the lowest conductivity direction $`c^{}`$. For quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4, the SDW transition temperature $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ increases from 4.5K in zero field up to 8.4K at 27T. A quadratic behavior is observed below 18T, followed by a saturation behavior. These results are consistent with the prediction of the mean-field theory. From these behaviors, $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ is estimated as $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}_0}`$=13.5K for the perfect nesting case. This indicates that the SDW phase in quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4, where $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ is less than 6K, is strongly suppressed by the two-dimensionality of the system. In the intermediate cooled state in which the SDW phase does not appear in zero field, the transition temperature for the field-induced SDW shows a quadratic behavior above 12T and there is no saturation behavior even at 27T, in contrast to the FISDW phase in the relaxed state. This behavior can probably be attributed to the difference of the dimerized gap due to anion ordering.

The compounds (TMTSF)2X, where TMTSF denotes tetramethyltetraselenafulvane and X=PF6, AsF6, ClO4 etc., are highly anisotropic organic conductors with a rich phase diagram exhibiting spin-density-wave (SDW), metallic, superconducting and field-induced SDW (FISDW) phases at low temperatures . At ambient pressure the PF6 salt undergoes a metal-SDW transition at 12K. The temperature of the SDW transition decreases with pressure and ultimately tends to zero. Above a critical pressure, the superconducting phase appears at $`T_\mathrm{C}`$=1.1K. In the magnetic field parallel to the lowest conductivity direction $`c^{}`$ and above the critical pressure, a cascade of FISDW states is observed, with quantized Hall resistance $`\rho _{xy}h/(n2e^2)`$ in the sequence n=…..4,3,2,1,0 as the magnetic field is increased. The states labeled with integer n have been identified as semimetallic FISDW states while that with n=0 is a FISDW insulating state. The phase diagram of the metallic-SDW and FISDW transition for the PF6 salt is successfully explained by the mean field theory based on the nesting of the slightly warped, quasi one-dimensional Fermi surface.

In (TMTSF)2ClO4, the ordering of the non-centrosymmetric anion ClO$`{}_{}{}^{}{}_{4}{}^{}`$ occurs at an anion ordering temperature $`T_{\mathrm{AO}}`$24K. For the ClO4 salt slowly cooled (relaxed) through $`T_{\mathrm{AO}}`$, the anion ordering creates a superlattice potential with a wave vector Q=(0,1/2,0)  and the superconducting phase appears below 1.2K. When the sample is rapidly cooled (quenched) through $`T_{\mathrm{AO}}`$, the orientations of anions are frozen in random directions and the SDW phase is induced below 6K. With decreasing cooling rate, the SDW transition temperature $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ decreases . This phenomenon is similar to the results for (TMTSF)2PF6, if we identify the effect of pressure with that of cooling rate.

Within the standard model based on the imperfect nesting theory, in the SDW phase the closed orbits region due to the two-dimensionality of the system is near the SDW gap created in the band structure. When the magnetic field is applied along the c-axis, the total energy of the SDW proves to be lowered by quantization of these closed orbits, since the zero-field state density in the energy region of closed-orbits is a decreasing function of energy . As a result of this energy gain, it has been predicted that $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ increases nearly quadratically with the field in low magnetic field, as $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}(H)=T_{\mathrm{SDW}}(0)+\mathrm{C}H^2`$ where C is a constant, and shows a saturation behavior in high magnetic field. The quadratic magnetic field dependence has been confirmed by the experiments for (TMTSF)2PF6  and quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4 .

While relaxed (TMTSF)2ClO4 exhibits superconductivity and a cascade of FISDW, similar to the behavior observed in (TMTSF)2PF6 above the critical pressure, some experimental results for relaxed (TMTSF)2ClO4 cannot be explained in terms of the standard model which works so well for the PF6 salt i.e. (1)In the low-field cascade of FISDW’s the sequence of Hall plateaus is not in the expected order . (2)The n=0 insulating state is not observed, but a very stable quantum Hall state is observed from 7.5 to 27T . (3)The FISDW transition temperature is about 5.5K and is essentially independent of field above 15T . For the ClO4 salt slowly cooled through $`T_{\mathrm{AO}}`$, the anion ordering creates a superlattice potential and it separates the original Fermi surface into two pairs of open sheets. This dimerized gap due to anion ordering is usually thought to be the cause of above anomaly.

In this paper, we describe the cooling rate dependence of the SDW and FISDW transition for (TMTSF)2ClO4 under the strong magnetic field. We aimed: (1) to check the mean-field predictions and to estimate an absolute value of the characteristic energy for the SDW state of quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4; (2) to confirm a new phase diagram which has been proposed for the FISDW relaxed state; (3) to check the role of the dimerized gap due to anion ordering in the FISDW state.

Single crystals of (TMTSF)2ClO4 were synthesized by the standard electro-chemical method. The resistance measurements along the conducting a-axis were carried out using a standard four probe AC method over the temperature range from 1.2K to 10K. Electric leads of 10$`\mu `$m gold wire were attached with silver paint onto gold evaporated contacts. The quenching of the sample was done by immersing it into liquid helium directly after annealing at 30K. The temperature was measured using a Cernox CX-1050-SD resistance thermometer. The measurements in the fields to 27T were done in a resistive magnet at the Grenoble High Magnetic Field Laboratory.

Figure 1 shows the temperature dependence of the transverse magnetoresistance with the field parallel to the lowest conductivity direction $`c^{}`$ in quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4, in which the cooling rate is faster than 10K/s. From this figure it is clear that the transition is shifted toward higher temperature as the field is increased. The derivative of the logarithm of these data with 1/T is also shown in Fig.1. The SDW transition temperatures $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ determined from the peak in the derivative are plotted vs field in Fig.2. For quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4, $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ increases from 4.5K in zero field up to 8.4K at 27T. As predicted in the mean-field theory , a quadratic behavior is observed below 18T, followed by a saturation behavior. The solid line is the best fit of the quadratic function to experimental data in the low field range and is described by $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}(H)=4.58+0.0070H^2`$. This coefficient of the quadratic term is consistent with previous results .

From the observed curvature of the field dependence of $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ in high magnetic field, we can determine several important parameters for the SDW transition using a mean-field theory . The relevant parameters entering this theory are: the SDW transition temperature corresponding to the perfect nesting case $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}_0}`$, Fermi velocity $`v_\mathrm{F}`$ and the ratio of the energy parameter $`ϵ_0`$ which characterizes the deviation from perfect nesting to the SDW order parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ at T=0K for $`ϵ_0`$=0. When $`ϵ_0`$ becomes equal to $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ (i.e., $`ϵ_0`$/$`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$=1), the nesting of the Fermi surface is so imperfect that the SDW state is suppressed. The dashed line in Fig.2. is the fit of this theory to the experimental data. The agreement is good. The fit gives $`v_\mathrm{F}`$=7.8$`\times `$104m/s, $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}_0}`$=13.5K and $`ϵ_0`$/$`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$=0.994 using a lattice parameter along the $`b^{}`$ axis of 7.7$`\times `$10-10m. This indicates that the mean field calculations nicely account for the field induced increase of $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ and the SDW phase of quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4, where $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ is less than 6K, is strongly suppressed by the two-dimensionality of the system.

Measurements of the temperature dependence of the transverse magnetoresistance in relaxed (TMTSF)2ClO4, in which the cooling rate is about 0.001K/s, are shown in Fig.3. The FISDW transition is observed above 12T. In the case of relaxed (TMTSF)2ClO4, the increase of resistance starts sharply at the transition temperature in contrast to the case of the quenched and intermediate cooled states. The FISDW transition temperatures $`T_{\mathrm{FISDW}}`$ of relaxed (TMTSF)2ClO4 determined from the intersection of the extrapolations of the resistivity curve from the FISDW and metallic phases are plotted vs field in Fig.4 (open squares). For relaxed (TMTSF)2ClO4, $`T_{\mathrm{FISDW}}`$ increases from 4.5K at 12T to 5.5K at 18T and is almost independent of field above 18T. This result supports the new phase diagram which has been proposed for the relaxed (TMTSF)2ClO4 .

The temperature dependence of the transverse magnetoresistance in the intermediate cooled (TMTSF)2ClO4, in which the cooling rate is about 0.5K/s, is shown in Fig.5. In this state, there is also no SDW phase in zero field  and the FISDW state appears above 12T at 3K . It is clear that the transition temperature is shifted toward higher temperatures as the field is increased. The derivative of the logarithm of these data with 1/T is also shown in Fig.5. The transition temperatures $`T_{\mathrm{FISDW}}`$ determined from the peak in the derivative are plotted vs field in Fig.4 (full circles). As shown in Fig.4, $`T_{\mathrm{FISDW}}`$ shows a quadratic behavior above 12T and there is no saturation even at 27T.

When the SDW transition appears in zero field, $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ decreases and the coefficient of the quadratic term increases with decreasing cooling rate . These results are consistent with the prediction of the mean field theory . In the intermediate cooled state, $`T_{\mathrm{FISDW}}`$ also shows a quadratic behavior above 12T, but there is no SDW phase in zero field in contrast to the quenched state. The value of $`T_{\mathrm{FISDW}}`$ at zero field extrapolated from the quadratic behavior is 2.4K as shown in Fig.4. In our experiment on (TMTSF)2ClO4, we find the SDW state in which the SDW transition appears at 2.4K in zero field for a more rapidly cooled state with the cooling rate about 2K/s . The field dependence of $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ is shown in Fig.4(Open circles) and is also described by the quadratic behavior. Although $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ for this SDW state at zero field is almost the same as the extrapolated values of $`T_{\mathrm{FISDW}}`$ for the intermediate cooled state, the coefficient of the quadratic term in the former SDW state is about twice as large as that in the latter. The saturation of the quadratic term for the intermediate cooled state will occur for higher fields, because the coefficient of the quadratic term becomes small.

The X-ray diffraction studies indicate that the size of the regions, over which the anion is ordered, decreases with increasing cooling rate . Thus, the concentration of the scattering centers associated with the boundaries between anion ordered states increases with increasing cooling rate. In fact, the residual resistances in the quenched and the intermediate cooled state are about 2 and 1.5 times that in the relaxed state around 6K, respectively. Because the periodic anion potential is out of phase at the boundary between anion ordered regions, the boundary not only works as a scattering center but also suppresses the anion gap in the intermediate cooled state, where the size of the ordered region is quite small. As a result, the difference between the relaxed and intermediate cooled states can be explained by the assumption that the FISDW phase of the relaxed state is a peculiar state in (TMTSF)2ClO4 stabilized by the dimerized gap due to anion ordering and the FISDW phase of the intermediate cooled state is the standard FISDW state as observed in (TMTSF)2PF6 turned back on by the disappearance or a strong decrease of the anion gap. In fact, the T-H phase diagram of the intermediate cooled (TMTSF)2ClO4 looks very similar that of the FISDW phase in (TMTSF)2PF6 . It seems reasonable that the quadratic increase of $`T_{\mathrm{FISDW}}`$ with magnetic field in the intermediate cooled state is not the quadratic increase predicted from the mean field theory in the SDW phase but the envelope line of the FISDW states with different quantum number n.

In summary, we have measured the magnetic field dependence of the SDW transition in (TMTSF)2ClO4 for various anion cooling rates with the field up to 27T and shown that the mean-field calculations nicely account for the field-induced increase of $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ in quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4. Satisfactory values of both $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}_0}`$ and Fermi velocity have been obtained from the analysis. In the intermediate cooled state in which the SDW phase does not appear in zero field, $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ shows a quadratic behavior above 12T and there is no saturation even at 27T. This behavior is quite different to the FISDW phase of the relaxed state. The difference between the relaxed and intermediate cooled states can be explained by the assumption that the FISDW phase of the relaxed state is a peculiar state stabilized by the dimerized gap due to anion ordering and the FISDW phase of the intermediate state is the standard FISDW state turned back on by the disappearance or a strong decrease of the anion gap.

Some of this work was carried out as part of the ’Research for the Future’ project, JSPS-RFTF97P00105, supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

Note added-After submission of this article we were informed of work a reporting similar magnetic field dependence of $`T_{\mathrm{SDW}}`$ for quenched (TMTSF)2ClO4 .


text:
# Bordism classes of the multiple points manifolds of smooth immersion

## 1. Introduction

In this paper we will consider smooth orientable $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-manifolds and $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-mappings between them. Let $`V^n`$ and $`M^m`$ be manifolds without boundary, $`V^n`$ be compact, $`f:V^nM^m`$ be a smooth generic immersion and $`mn`$ be even. From Thom multijet transversality theorem  it follows that the set of immersions $`f`$ such that the map $`f^{(k)}:V^{(k)}M^{(k)}`$ is transverse to the ”thin” diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k(M)=\{(x,\mathrm{},x)xM\}M^{(k)}`$ outside the ”thick” diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2(V)=\{(x_1,\mathrm{},x_k)ij:x_i=x_j\}V^{(k)}`$ is open and everywhere dense in the set of all immersions $`V^nM^m`$ (in $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ Whitney topology). Therefore, for a generic $`f`$ the set $`V_k=(f^{(k)})^1(\mathrm{\Delta }_k(M))\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }_2(V)V^{(k)}`$ is an oriented submanifold. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$ the group of permutations on $`k`$ elements. Permutation of factors in the product $`V^{(k)}`$ induce the free action of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$ on the set $`V^{(k)}`$. Denote by $`\stackrel{~}{V}_k`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{M}_k`$ the quotient manifolds $`V_k/\mathrm{\Sigma }_{k1}`$ and $`V_k/\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$, where the subgroup $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{k1}\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$ is the stabilizer of the first element. Since $`mn`$ is even, the action of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$ preserves the orientation of the manifold $`V_k`$. Therefore $`\stackrel{~}{V}_k`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{M}_k`$ are canonically oriented. Let us define immersions $`f_k:\stackrel{~}{V}_kV^n`$ and $`g_k:\stackrel{~}{M}_kM^m`$ by formulae $`f_k(x_1,[x_2,\mathrm{},x_k])=x_1`$ and $`g_k[x_1,\mathrm{},x_k]=f(x_1)`$ (see  for details).

For an integer $`k>0`$ and an immersion $`f:V^nM^m`$ we assign the oriented bordism classes $`(\stackrel{~}{V}_k,f_k)\mathrm{\Omega }_{mk(mn)}(V^n)`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,g_k)\mathrm{\Omega }_{mk(mn)}(M^m)`$. From  it follows that these classes do not change under a regular homotopy of the immersion $`f`$. By the fundamental Smale-Hirsch theorem , the set of regular homotopy classes of immersions $`V^nM^m`$ is in 1-1 correspondence with the set of linear monomorphism classes of the tangent bundles $`\tau V\tau M`$. The class of the immersion $`f:V^nM^m`$ corresponds to the class of the differential $`df:\tau V\tau M`$. Hence, the classes $`(\stackrel{~}{V}_k,f_k)\mathrm{\Omega }_{mk(mn)}(V^n)`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,g_k)\mathrm{\Omega }_{mk(mn)}(M^m)`$ have to be computable in terms of the differential $`df:\tau V\tau M`$. In this paper (see corollary 2.3) we compute $`(\stackrel{~}{V}_k,f_k)`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,g_k)`$ up to elements of order $`(k1)!`$ and $`k!`$, respectively. This weakening is in some sense natural, for the manifolds $`\stackrel{~}{V}_k`$ $`\stackrel{~}{M}_k`$ were constructed as the images of $`(k1)!`$\- and $`k!`$-fold coverings.

Recall that all the finite order elements of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}(pt)`$ have the order 2. Therefore, for $`M^m=^m`$ we compute the classes $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,g_k)`$ up to elements of order 2. It is another approach to \[5, Theorem 5\], where all the Pontrjagin numbers of the manifolds $`\stackrel{~}{M}_k`$ were computed in terms of the Pontrjagin classes of the manifold $`V^n`$ and the integral Euler class of the normal bundle of the immersion $`f`$. Lemma 2.1 gives a formula to compute the unoriented bordism class $`(\stackrel{~}{V}_2,f_2)_2\mathrm{}_{}(V^n)`$, if we do not require $`mn`$ to be even, and $`V^n`$ and $`M^m`$ to be oriented. For up-to-date reviews of results on the bordism classes of self-intersection manifolds see  for oriented case, and  for unoriented case.

## 2. Formulation of results

Denote by $`S\tau M`$ the spherical fibration, associated to the tangent bundle $`\tau M`$ and by $`Sdf:S\tau VS\tau M`$ the fiberwise monomorphism of spherical fibrations, induced by the differential $`df:\tau V\tau M`$. Since the manifolds $`V^n`$, $`M^m`$, $`S\tau V`$ and $`S\tau M`$ are oriented (in usual sense), they are oriented in oriented bordism theory . Thus, there is the Poincare duality on these manifolds. Denote by $`Sdf^!:\mathrm{\Omega }_{}(S\tau M)\mathrm{\Omega }_{}(S\tau V)`$ the Gysin homomorphism, induced by the mapping $`Sdf`$.

Let us formulate the key lemma of this paper.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`M^m`$ be an oriented manifold without boundary such that there is a nowhere zero cross-section of the tangent bundle $`\tau M`$, or, in other words, a section $`s_M:M^mS\tau M`$. Then for any generic immersion $`f:V^nM^m`$ of compact oriented manifold without boundary $`V^n`$ the bordism class $`(\stackrel{~}{V}_2,f_2)\mathrm{\Omega }_{2nm}(V^n)`$ is

$$(\stackrel{~}{V}_2,f_2)=(1)^{m1}i_{}Sdf^!(M^m,s_M),$$
(1)
where $`i`$ is the natural projection $`S\tau VV^n`$.

To formulate our results, it will be convenient to use the oriented cobordism classes $`v_k\mathrm{\Omega }^{(k1)(mn)}(V^n)`$ and $`m_k\mathrm{\Omega }_{comp.}^{k(mn)}(M^m)`$, the Poincare duals to $`(\stackrel{~}{V}_k,f_k)`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,g_k)`$, respectively. Denote by $`1_V`$ the identity element of the ring $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(V^n)`$, and by $`f_!`$ the Gysin homomorphism, induced by the map $`f`$.

###### Corollary 2.2.

Under the conditions of lemma 2.1 and if $`mn`$ is even, the Euler class $`e`$ of the normal bundle of the immersion $`f`$ is

$$e=f^{}f_!(1_V)+(1)^m\gamma i_{}Sdf^!(M^m,s_M),$$

where $`\gamma :\mathrm{\Omega }_{}(V^n)\mathrm{\Omega }^n(V^n)`$ is the Poincare duality.

###### Corollary 2.3.

Under the conditions of lemma 2.1 and if $`mn`$ is even,

$$\begin{array}{c}(k1)!v_k=\phi _{k1}\phi _{k2}\mathrm{}\phi _1(1_V)\\ k!m_k=f_!\phi _{k1}\phi _{k2}\mathrm{}\phi _1(1_V),\end{array}$$

where $`\phi _k(a)=f^{}f_!(a)kea`$, and $`e`$ is the Euler class of the normal bundle of the immersion $`f`$ (which was computed in corollary 2.2).

## 3. The bordism group of immersions

Let us call two oriented immersions $`f_0:V_0^nM^m`$ and $`f_1:V_1^nM^m`$ bordant, if there exists a compact oriented manifold with boundary $`W^{n+1}`$ such that $`W^{n+1}=V_0^n(V_1^n)`$, and an immersion $`W^{n+1}M^m\times [0,1]`$ such that for a collar $`V_0^n\times [0,\epsilon )(V_1^n)\times (1\epsilon ,1]`$ of the boundary $`W^{n+1}`$ the restrictions $`F|_{V_0^n\times [0,\epsilon )}=f_0\times id`$ and $`F|_{(V_1^n)\times (1\epsilon ,1]}=f_1\times id`$. Then the set of equivalence classes of bordant oriented immersions with disjoint union operation is a group $`Imm_n^{SO}(M^m)`$. The group $`Imm_n^{SO}(M^m)=[M^m,QMSO(mn)]`$, where $`QX=\underset{}{\mathrm{lim}}\mathrm{\Omega }^qS^qX`$ is the infinite loop space of infinite suspension and $`MSO`$ is the Thom spectrum .

From the results of paper  it follows that the map, assigning for any immersion $`f:V^nM^m`$ the bordism class $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,g_k)\mathrm{\Omega }_{mk(mn)}(M^m)`$, is a well-defined homomorphism $`\epsilon _k:Imm_n^{SO}(M^m)\mathrm{\Omega }_{mk(mn)}(M^m)`$. The classes $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,g_k)`$ involve much information about the class of immersion $`[f]Imm_n^{SO}(M^m)`$. The following theorem was proved in , using algebraic technics.

###### Theorem 3.1 (\[10, Corollary 1\]).

If $`3n+1<2m`$ and $`mn`$ is even, then the homomorphism

$$\epsilon _1\epsilon _2:Imm_n^{SO}(^m)\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Omega }_{2nm}$$

is an isomorphism modulo the class $`C_2`$ of finite 2-primary groups.

Our calculations probably clarify the geometric core of theorem 3.1. The matter is that in these very dimensional restrictions ($`3n+1<2m`$) any skew map 111a skew map $`\tau V\tau M`$ can be understood as the ”fiberwise cone” over a fiber map $`h:S\tau VS\tau M`$ such that $`h(x)=h(x)`$ in each fiber $`\tau V\tau M`$ can be homotoped to a monomorphism of tangent bundles (see details in ). Our formula (lemma 2.1) connects the map of spherical fibrations, induced by the differential $`df:\tau V\tau M`$, and the oriented bordism class $`2(\stackrel{~}{M}_2,g_2)\mathrm{\Omega }_{2nm}(M^m)`$. These reasoning was the initial motivation of this paper.

###### Conjecture 3.2.

Let $`M^m`$ be an oriented manifold without boundary such that there is a nowhere zero cross-section of the tangent bundle $`\tau M`$, $`3n+1<2m`$, and $`mn`$ be even. Then the homomorphism

$$\epsilon _1\epsilon _2:Imm_n^{SO}(M^m)\mathrm{\Omega }_n(M^m)\mathrm{\Omega }_{2nm}(M^m)$$

is an isomorphism modulo the class $`C_2`$ of finite 2-primary groups.

## 4. Proofs

Denote the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }(V)=\{(x,x)V\times VxV\}`$. Since $`f:V^nM^m`$ is an immersion, there exists a small enough tubular neighborhood $`U_V`$ of the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }(V)`$ in $`V\times V`$ such that $`f^{(2)}(U_V\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(V))\mathrm{\Delta }(M)=\mathrm{}`$. Note that $`(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)=(U_V)`$. Since $`f^{(2)}(U_V\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(V))\mathrm{\Delta }(M)=\mathrm{}`$, we get the map $`f^{(2)}:(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V))(M^{(2)},M^{(2)}\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(M))`$. Denote by $`U_M`$ a tubular neighborhood of the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }(M)`$ in $`M^{(2)}`$. Without loss of generality we may assume that $`f^{(2)}(U_V)U_M`$. Denote the inclusion

$$j:(U_M,U_M\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(M))(M^{(2)},M^{(2)}\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(M))$$

By excision axiom , the homomorphisms $`j_{}:\mathrm{\Omega }_{}(U_M,U_M\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(M))\mathrm{\Omega }_{}(M^{(2)},M^{(2)}\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(M))`$ and $`j^{}:\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(M^{(2)},M^{(2)}\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(M))\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(U_M,U_M\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(M))`$ are isomorphisms. Note that the pair $`(U_M,\mathrm{\Delta }(M))`$ is canonically isomorphic to the pair $`(\tau M,\tau _0M)`$ . Since $`M^m`$ is oriented, there exists the Thom class $`t\mathrm{\Omega }^m(\tau M,\tau M\backslash \tau _0M)`$ of the tangent bundle $`\tau M`$.

###### Lemma 4.1.

The class $`(\stackrel{~}{V}_2,f_2)\mathrm{\Omega }_{2nm}(V^n)`$ for an immersion $`f:V^nM^m`$ can be calculated in the following way

$$(\stackrel{~}{V}_2,f_2)=(\pi _1)_{}\left((f^{(2)})^{}((j^{})^1t)[V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)]\right),$$
(2)
where $`\pi _1:V^{(2)}\backslash U_VV`$ is the projection on the first factor, and $`[V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)]`$ is the fundamental class.

###### Proof of lemma 4.1.

Let us recall the construction of the class $`(\stackrel{~}{V}_2,f_2)`$. Since $`f`$ is an immersion, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(V)`$ is a closed subset in $`(f^{(2)})^1(\mathrm{\Delta }(M))`$. Since $`f`$ is a generic immersion, $`f^{(2)}`$ is transversal to $`\mathrm{\Delta }(M)`$ outside $`\mathrm{\Delta }(V)`$. Therefore $`(f^{(2)})^1(\mathrm{\Delta }(M))\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(V)`$ is a compact oriented submanifold without boundary $`\stackrel{~}{f}_2:\stackrel{~}{V}_2V^{(2)}\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(V)`$. Then the composition $`\pi _1\stackrel{~}{f}_2`$ is $`f_2:\stackrel{~}{V}_2V^n`$ (see details in ). By definition  of Lefschetz duality $`\gamma :\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V))\mathrm{\Omega }_{}(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill (f^{(2)})^{}((j^{})^1t)[V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)]=(1)^{2nm}& \gamma \left((f^{(2)})^{}((j^{})^1t)\right)\hfill \\ & =\gamma \left((f^{(2)})^{}((j^{})^1t)\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`f^{(2)}`$ is transversal to $`\mathrm{\Delta }(M)`$ outside $`\mathrm{\Delta }(V)`$, we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill (\pi _1)_{}\left(\gamma \left((f^{(2)})^{}((j^{})^1t)\right)\right)=(\pi _1)_{}& \left((\stackrel{~}{f}_2)_{}\left[(f^{(2)})^1(\mathrm{\Delta }(M))\backslash \mathrm{\Delta }(V)\right]\right)\hfill \\ & =(\pi _1)_{}(\stackrel{~}{V}_2,\stackrel{~}{f}_2)=(\stackrel{~}{V}_2,f_2)\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Proof of lemma 2.1.

To prove lemma 2.1, it suffices to interpret the right hand side of formula (2) in terms of the differential $`df`$. Since $`(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)=(U_V)`$, we have

$$_{}[V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)]=\left[(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)\right],$$

where $`_{}:\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n}(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V))\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n1}((V^{(2)}\backslash U_V))`$ is the differential in the exact bordism sequence of pair. Denote by $`j_1`$ the inclusion $`S\tau M\tau M\backslash \tau _0M`$. Obviously, the map $`j_1`$ is a homotopy equivalence. Since $`j_1s_M:M^m\tau M\backslash \tau _0M`$ is a nowhere zero cross-section of $`\tau M`$, we have

$$\delta ^{}\left((j_1^{})^1\gamma (M^m,s_M)\right)=t,$$

where $`\delta ^{}:\mathrm{\Omega }^{m1}(\tau M\backslash \tau _0M)\mathrm{\Omega }^m(\tau M,\tau M\backslash \tau _0M)`$ is the differential in the exact cobordism sequence of pair, and $`\gamma `$ is the Poincare duality on the total manifold $`S\tau M`$. Denote by $`j_2`$ the isomorphism $`(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)\stackrel{}{}S\tau V`$. From the explicit formula  for the $`_2`$-equivariant isomorphism, that identify a small neighborhood of zero section of $`\tau V`$ with the neighborhood $`U_V`$

$$\tau V(x,\stackrel{}{v}_x)(\mathrm{exp}_x(\stackrel{}{v}_x),\mathrm{exp}_x(\stackrel{}{v}_x))V\times V,$$

it follows that the following diagram commutes (double arrows here denote isomorphisms).

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{}\\ \\ \text{Figure 1}\end{array}$$

Therefore, $`\delta ^{}(j_2^{}Sdf^{}\gamma (M^m,s_M))=(f^{(2)})^{}((j^{})^1t)`$. From the naturality of the $``$-product  we have

$$(j_3)_{}\left(j_2^{}Sdf^{}\gamma (M^m,s_M)\left[(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)\right]\right)=(f^{(2)})^{}((j^{})^1t)[V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)],$$

where $`j_3:(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)V^{(2)}\backslash U_V`$ is the inclusion. Then, by lemma 4.1

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill (\stackrel{~}{V}_2,f_2)& =(\pi _1)_{}\left((f^{(2)})^{}((j^{})^1t)[V^{(2)}\backslash U_V,(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)]\right)\hfill \\ & =(\pi _1j_3)_{}\left(j_2^{}Sdf^{}\gamma (M^m,s_M)\left[(V^{(2)}\backslash U_V)\right]\right)\hfill \\ & =(1)^{(2n1)(m1)}(\pi _1j_3)_{}\gamma (j_2^{}Sdf^{}\gamma (M^m,s_M))\hfill \\ & =(1)^{m1}(\pi _1j_3)_{}(j_2)_{}^1\gamma Sdf^{}\gamma (M^m,s_M)\hfill \\ & =(1)^{m1}(\pi _1j_3)_{}(j_2)_{}^1Sdf^!(M^m,s_M)\hfill \end{array}$$

It remains only to note that $`i_{}=(\pi _1j_3)_{}(j_2)_{}^1`$. ∎

To prove the corollaries 2.2 and 2.3 we will need the following results from the paper .

###### Theorem 4.2 ().

For any smooth generic immersion $`f:V^nM^m`$ of the compact oriented manifold without boundary $`V^n`$ to the oriented manifold without boundary $`M^m`$ such that $`mn`$ is even, we have

$$v_k=f^{}(m_{k1})ev_{k1},$$
(3)
where $`e`$ is the Euler class of the normal bundle of the immersion $`f`$ over $`V^n`$.

###### Corollary 4.3 ().

Under the conditions of theorem 4.2, we have

$$(k1)!v_k=\phi _{k1}\phi _{k2}\mathrm{}\phi _1(1_V),$$

where $`\phi _k(a)=f^{}f_!(a)kea`$; $`e`$ is the Euler class of the normal bundle of the immersion $`f`$ over $`V^n`$.

###### Proof of corollary 2.2.

It suffices to substitute (1) into formula (3) with $`k=2`$. ∎

###### Proof of corollary 2.3.

follows immediately from corollaries 4.3 and 2.2. ∎

## Acknowledgments

I would like to thank P.M. Akhmetiev and Yu.P. Soloviev for useful remarks.