text:
# Orbital perturbations of transiting planets: A possible method to measure stellar quadrupoles and to detect Earth-mass planets

## 1 Introduction

The first transiting extrasolar planet has been identified around the G0 star HD209458 (Charbonneau et al. 2000; Henry et al. 2000b). The planet has a mass $`M_p=0.62M_{\mathrm{Jup}}`$ and orbits the star with a period of 3.52 days with semimajor axis $`a=0.047`$ AU. Subsequent observations of the transit with the STIS camera on board HST have provided highly precise photometry of the lightcurve during the transit (Brown et al. 2001), with about 300 flux measurements of an accuracy close to $`10^4`$ magnitudes. The shape of the lightcurve has been used to determine the radius of the planet, $`R_p=1.35R_{Jup}`$.

As discussed by Brown et al. (2001), the determination of transit lightcurves of such high precision opens up many opportunities for detecting other phenomena that could induce small changes in the lightcurve, such as the presence of satellites or rings around the planet. As more transits by other planets are discovered and observed with high precision, the opportunities to observe these effects will rapidly increase. This paper considers the effect of perturbations of the planet’s orbit due to the quadrupole moment of the star or to a second planet. These perturbations should cause a precession of the periastron of an eccentric orbit, and a precession of the line of nodes if the orbital plane is not coincident with the stellar equator, or the plane of the second planet. The precession of the periastron and the line of nodes should result in long-term variations of the period and the duration of the transits. We will compute these two effects and discuss their detectability with future space missions.

## 2 Precession of the orbital plane

We consider first the effect of the precession of the orbital plane in the simple case where the orbit is circular. The orbital angular momentum of the planet is $`L_p=M_pna^2`$, where $`n=(GM_s/a^3)^{1/2}`$ is the mean motion (or orbital angular frequency), and $`M_s`$ is the mass of the star. We consider two possible causes for the precession of the orbital plane: the quadrupole moment of the star, which for solid body rotation has angular momentum $`L_sk^2M_sR_s^2\omega _s`$ (where $`R_s`$ is the stellar radius, $`\omega _s`$ the angular frequency of rotation, and $`k^20.1`$ for main-sequence stars; e.g., Ford, Rasio, & Sills 1999), or a second planet, with angular momentum $`L_2=M_2n_2a_2^2`$, where we will assume $`a_2>a`$. The precession occurs relative to the plane perpendicular to the total angular momentum vector $`𝐋_t=𝐋_p+𝐋_{(s,2)}`$, which will be referred to as the mean plane hereafter. The subindex $`(s,2)`$ means that we are considering either the stellar rotation or a second planet.

Let $`i`$ be the inclination of the orbital plane relative to either the stellar equator or the plane of the second planet, and $`i_p`$ and $`i_{(s,2)}`$ the inclinations of these two planes relative to the mean plane. Obviously, $`i=i_p+i_{(s,2)}`$, and $`L_p\mathrm{sin}i_p=L_{(s,2)}\mathrm{sin}i_{(s,2)}`$. We define the x-axis as the intersection of the mean plane and the plane perpendicular to the line of sight, and $`\beta `$ as the angle between the mean plane and the line of sight. The line of nodes is the intersection of the orbital plane of the planet and the mean plane, and forms an angle $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ relative to the x-axis. The orbital precession consists of the rotation of the angle $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, with a precession angular frequency $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$.

### 2.1 Precession induced by the stellar quadrupole moment

The potential of a star expanded up to its quadrupole moment is given by

$$\varphi =\frac{GM_s}{r}+\frac{J_2}{2}\frac{GM_sR_s^2}{r^3}(3\mathrm{sin}^2\theta 1),$$
(1)
where $`R_s`$ is the equatorial radius of the star, $`r`$ is the distance to the center, $`\theta `$ is the angle relative to the equatorial plane, and $`J_2`$ is the quadrupole moment. Estimates of the quadrupole moment of the Sun are quite uncertain and over the range $`10^7`$ to $`10^6`$ (Godier & Rozelot 1999; Rozelot, Godier, & Lefebvre 2001). For self-similar main-sequence stars, $`J_2\omega _s^2R_s^3/M_s`$. In the case of the star HD209458, the spectroscopically measured rotational velocity indicates a rotation slightly faster than the Sun (Queloz et al. 2000). We will use a fiducial value $`J_2=10^6`$ in this paper.

To evaluate the time-averaged torque acting on the planet’s orbit as a secular perturbation, we calculate the potential of a ring of mass $`M_p`$ in the quadrupole potential of the star,

$$V=\frac{GM_sM_pR_s^2J_2}{2a^3}_0^{2\pi }\frac{d\phi }{2\pi }(3\mathrm{sin}^2\phi \mathrm{sin}^2i1)=\frac{GM_sM_pR_s^2J_2}{2a^3}\left(\frac{3}{2}\mathrm{sin}^2i1\right).$$
(2)
The torque is

$$\tau =dV/di=\frac{3GM_sM_pR_s^2J_2}{4a^3}\mathrm{sin}2i.$$
(3)
Since the component of the planet’s angular momentum that is changing is $`L_p\mathrm{sin}i_p`$, the precession frequency is $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}=\tau /(L_p\mathrm{sin}i_p)`$. We will see below that the quantity determining the change in the transit width is $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{sin}i_p`$, which is

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{sin}i_p=\frac{\tau }{L_p}=n\frac{R_s^2}{a^2}\frac{3J_2}{4}\mathrm{sin}2i.$$
(4)
### 2.2 Precession induced by a second planet

The presence of a second planet will in general cause perturbations on all the orbital elements. When averaged over long timescales, the perturbations are classified as secular or resonant, and can be calculated with Lagrange’s planetary equations (e.g., Murray & Dermott 1999, §6). Here we will consider only the secular precession of the line of nodes, in the most simple case when both the perturbing and perturbed planets are on circular orbits, which is easily obtained by replacing the planets by uniform rings of mass. Moreover, we will use the approximation $`a_2a`$. The case $`a_2<a`$ is less interesting, because the most accurate measurements of transits will be for planets very close to their stars; however, the precession effects caused by a planet interior to the transiting one can be calculated similarly to the exterior case.

The potential of a ring of radius $`a_2`$ and mass $`M_2`$, as a function of the cylindrical radius $`r`$ on the plane of the orbit and the height $`z`$ above the plane, is, up to second order in $`r/a_2`$ and $`z/a_2`$,

$$\varphi =\frac{GM_2}{a_2}\left(1+\frac{r^2}{4a_2^2}\frac{z^2}{2a_2^2}\right).$$
(5)
The potential energy of interaction of this ring with another ring due to the inner planet, of mass $`M_p`$ and radius $`a`$, and an inclination angle $`i`$ between the two orbital planes, is

$$V=\frac{GM_pM_2}{a_2}\left(1+\frac{a^2}{4a_2^2}\frac{3a^2}{8a_2^2}\mathrm{sin}^2i\right),$$
(6)
and the torque is

$$\tau =dV/di=\frac{3GM_pM_2a^2}{8a_2^3}\mathrm{sin}2i.$$
(7)
Just as before, the precession frequency is

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{sin}i_p=\frac{\tau }{L_p}=n\frac{M_2}{M_s}\frac{a^3}{a_2^3}\frac{3}{8}\mathrm{sin}2i.$$
(8)
### 2.3 Effect on the transit duration

The properties of the transit lightcurve are determined by the angle $`\alpha `$ between the orbital plane of the planet and the line of sight. Simple spherical trigonometry shows that

$$\mathrm{sin}\alpha =\mathrm{sin}i_p\mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}i_p\mathrm{sin}\beta ,$$
(9)
where $`\beta `$ is the angle between the mean plane and the line of sight. The duration of the transit is

$$t_d=\frac{2(R_s+R_p)}{na}\mathrm{cos}\gamma ,$$
(10)
where the angle $`\gamma `$ is related to the impact parameter $`b`$ of the transit by $`(R_s+R_p)\mathrm{sin}\gamma =b=a\mathrm{sin}\alpha `$. The relevant question to determine the observability of the precession of the orbital plane is if the rate of change of $`t_d`$ can be measured over a reasonable observing time baseline $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_{obs}10`$ years. We will see that the typical value of the precession period is much longer than 10 years, so only the time derivative $`dt_d/dt`$ matters:

$$\frac{dt_d}{dt}=t_d\frac{a}{R_s+R_p}\frac{\mathrm{sin}\gamma }{\mathrm{cos}^2\gamma }\frac{d\alpha }{dt}=t_d\frac{a}{R_s+R_p}\frac{\mathrm{sin}\gamma }{\mathrm{cos}^2\gamma }\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{sin}i_p\mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }.$$
(11)
Using $`nt_d=2(R_s+R_p)\mathrm{cos}\gamma /a`$, we can reexpress this equation as

$$\frac{dt_d}{dt}=\frac{\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{sin}i_p}{n}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\mathrm{tan}\gamma \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }.$$
(12)
We can now estimate the value of $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{sin}i_p`$ and see if the variation of the transit duration would be observable. A quadrupole moment of the star $`J_210^6`$, with $`a10R_s`$, and $`\mathrm{sin}2i0.1`$, yields a precession frequency $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{sin}i_p10^9n`$, from equation (4). In the case of the perturbation by a planet, if its mass is $`M_210^3M_s`$ (i.e., a gas giant), the effect of the planet would be comparable to that of the quadrupole for an orbital size $`a_230a`$. For a 51-Peg type perturbed planet with $`a0.05`$ AU, the second Jupiter-mass planet would be at $`a_21.5`$ AU. Such a massive planet should also be detected from the Doppler measurements in any case. A more interesting case is if there is a lower mass planet (not detectable by Doppler measurements) on a smaller orbit. For example, for an Earth-like planet, with $`M_23\times 10^6M_s`$, at $`a_25a0.25`$ AU, and $`\mathrm{sin}2i0.1`$, the precession frequency is also $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{sin}i_p10^9n`$. Therefore, from equation (12) (assuming that the trigonometric factors are of order unity), in these cases we should expect a time variation of the transit duration $`dt_d/dt10^9`$.

What is the highest accuracy to which we can measure $`dt_d/dt`$ ? In the STIS observations of Brown et al. (2001) of HD209458, the flux varies by $``$ 1% during a time $`t_c0.01`$ days at the beginning and the end of the transit. Each one of their flux measurements is obtained from a 60 s integration and has a relative accuracy of $`10^4`$. Therefore, each data point taken during the falling or rising part of the lightcurve gives us the starting or ending time of the transit to an accuracy $`(10^4/0.01)t_c`$, or $`10`$ seconds. Brown et al. have measured nearly 100 data points in the rapidly varying part of the lightcurve, so their present data should allow to determine the transit duration to an accuracy approaching 1 second. Repeating the measurement 3 years later would yield $`dt_d/dt`$ to an accuracy of $`10^8`$.

The star HD209458 has magnitude $`V=7.64`$, implying that the number of photons received by HST over a 60 s integration time is $`10^9`$. Therefore, the photometric accuracy achieved by Brown et al. could be improved by only a factor $`3`$ by reaching the photon shot noise limit; alternatively, a telescope aperture of $`0.7`$ m could reach the same photometric accuracy with improvements in the detection efficiency. A dedicated mission observing all the $`1000`$ transits over a period of 10 years of stars similar to HD209458 with the same accuracy as Brown et al. would yield $`dt_d/dt`$ to an accuracy $`10^{9.5}`$.

We can easily change the parameters of the examples discussed previously to consider cases where the orbital perturbations would be detectable with the more easily achievable accuracy of $`dt_d/dt10^8`$. For example, a perturbing planet with $`M_p=3\times 10^5M_s`$, $`a_2/a=4`$, and $`\mathrm{sin}2i=0.3`$, would be detectable at the 5-$`\sigma `$ level.

## 3 Precession of the periastron

The orbits of the 51-Peg type planets tend to be circular, as expected owing to tidal dissipation in the planet, which circularizes the orbit on a timescale (Goldreich & Soter 1966)

$$\tau _e=\frac{4}{63}Qn^1\frac{M_p}{M_s}\left(\frac{a}{R_p}\right)^5,$$
(13)
where the factor $`Q`$ is inversely proportional to the dissipation rate. For the planet Jupiter, $`Q10^5`$ has been found observationally from the tidal effect on Jupiter’s satellites (Ioannou & Lindzen 1993). Assuming the same $`Q`$ for HD209458, for which case $`M_p/M_s5\times 10^4`$ and $`a/R_p75`$, we find $`\tau _e10^7`$ years. How the parameter $`Q`$ may vary among different planets is highly uncertain, because the origin of the dissipation is not well understood (e.g., Murray & Dermott 1999, §4.13). So, while internal dissipation in the planets is a plausible explanation for the orbital circularity of the closest planets, it is possible that some of the closest planets may have eccentric orbits. In addition, the extreme sensitivity of the time $`\tau _e`$ to $`a/R_p`$ implies that planets that are only slighly further out from their star can have significant eccentricities even if $`Q`$ is constant. Orbital eccentricities can also be excited by planetary companions (e.g., Rivera & Lissauer 2000). In fact, among known extrasolar planets, high eccentricities are common when $`a>0.1`$ AU (Butler et al. 2000), and the planet around HD217107 has $`a=0.072`$ AU and $`e=0.14\pm 0.05`$ (Fischer et al. 1999). We can expect that transits of planets in eccentric orbits will be discovered in the near future.

We note here that tidal dissipation in the star can also circularize the orbit, and make the orbit coplanar with the stellar equator. However, the timescale for dissipation in the star is much longer than the age of the system, and is in any case similar to the timescale for orbital decay (Rasio et al. 1996; Zahn 1977).

### 3.1 Precession rates

The periastron of an eccentric orbit should precess due to three effects: the relativistic precession, and the same two effects considered previously, the stellar quadrupole moment and the perturbations from other planets.

The relativistic precession rate is given by (e.g., Landau & Lifshitz 1951)

$$\dot{\varpi }=n\frac{3}{1e^2}\left(\frac{na}{c}\right)^2,$$
(14)
where $`e`$ is the eccentricity, and we denote the precession of the periastron as $`\dot{\varpi }`$. For an orbital period of ten days, $`a0.1`$ AU, and small eccentricity, this gives $`\dot{\varpi }4\times 10^7n10^4\mathrm{yr}^1`$.

For the stellar quadrupole moment, we assume here that the orbital plane coincides with the stellar equator. The potential of the star is given by equation (1) with $`\theta =0`$. The precession rate for small eccentricities is easily obtained using the epicycle approximation. The orbital angular frequency is $`n^2=(1/r)d\varphi /dr`$, and the epicycle frequency is (e.g., Binney & Tremaine 1987)

$$\kappa ^2=r\frac{dn^2}{dr}+4n^2=n^2\frac{3GM_sR_s^2J_2}{r^5}.$$
(15)
The precession frequency is

$$\dot{\varpi }=n\kappa =\frac{3J_2R_s^2}{2a^2}n,$$
(16)
where we have substituted $`a=r`$ and have used $`\dot{\varpi }n`$. Typically, $`J_210^6`$ and $`R_s0.1a`$, so $`\dot{\varpi }10^8n`$. Except in rapidly rotating stars, the effect of the stellar quadrupole is always much less than the relativistic precession.

For the effect from a second planet, repetition of the same method with the potential in equation (5) at z=0 yields a precession frequency

$$\dot{\varpi }=\frac{3M_2a^3}{4M_sa_2^3}n.$$
(17)
For an Earth-like planet with $`M_2/M_s3\times 10^6`$, and $`a_22a`$, the precession rate is $`\dot{\varpi }3\times 10^7n`$, comparable to that from the relativistic precession. All the three effects we have discussed cause an advance of the periastron, and therefore the total precession is the sum of the three effects.

### 3.2 Detectability of the periastron precession

The periastron precession causes both the period and the duration of the transits to change. We discuss first the variation of the period.

In the epicycle approximation (valid for small eccentricities), the eccentric orbit of the planet can be described by the motion along an epicycle relative to a circular orbit, with coordinates $`x(t)`$ along the inward radial direction and $`y(t)`$ in the backward tangential direction along the orbit. For an orbit in a quasi-Keplerian potential (where the precession of the periastron is small), we have (Binney & Tremaine 1987):

$$x(t)=ae\mathrm{cos}(\kappa t+\psi _0);$$
(18)
$$y(t)=2ae\mathrm{sin}(\kappa t+\psi _0).$$
(19)
The central time of the transits is determined by $`y(t)`$ at the time of the transit. Between two successive transits, the epicycle phase $`\psi =\kappa t+\psi _0`$ changes by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\psi =2\pi (\dot{\varpi }/n)`$, and therefore $`y(t)`$ changes by $`\mathrm{\Delta }y=2ae\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\pi (\dot{\varpi }/n)\mathrm{cos}(\kappa t+\psi _0)`$. Thus, the observed transit period, $`P_t`$, is (to first order in $`e`$)

$$P_t=\frac{2\pi }{n}\left(1\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{2\pi a}\right)=\frac{2\pi }{n}\left(12e\frac{\dot{\varpi }}{n}\mathrm{cos}\psi \right).$$
(20)
A first possible method to detect the periastron precession is to compare the transit period $`P_t`$ with the true orbital period $`P=2\pi /n`$ determined from the Doppler measurements. The accuracy of the Doppler measurements are at present $`ϵ_D0.1`$ times the velocity variation amplitude, and they are unlikely to improve very much due to limitations set by photospheric turbulence. Hence, the orbital period can be determined to an accuracy $`\mathrm{\Delta }P/Pϵ_DP/(2\pi N^{1/2}t_0)`$, where $`N`$ is the number of Doppler measurements and $`t_0`$ is the total time of observation. For $`ϵ_D=0.1`$, $`N=1000`$ and $`P/t_0=10^3`$, the accuracy achieved is $`\mathrm{\Delta }P/P10^6`$, allowing detection only for a planet with $`M_2/M_s10^4`$ if $`e0.2`$ and $`a_2/a2`$.

A second possibility is to detect the change of $`P_t`$ with time:

$$\frac{dP_t}{dt}=4\pi e\left(\frac{\dot{\varpi }}{n}\right)^2\mathrm{sin}\psi .$$
(21)
If the time of each transit can be measured to an accuracy of $`1`$ second, the accuracy of the period after observing $`N=1000`$ transits would be $`1\mathrm{s}/N^{3/2}10^{4.5}`$ s, and for an observing time of 10 years the accuracy of $`dP_t/dt`$ would reach $`10^{13}`$. For $`e0.1`$, this allows for a 10-$`\sigma `$ detection of a planet with $`M_2/M_s=10^5`$ and $`a_2=2a`$.

Next we evaluate the change in the duration of the transit, which is caused by the variation of the planet’s velocity during transit as the periastron precesses. From equation (19), the velocity of the planet at transit is $`v=na(12e\mathrm{cos}\psi )`$ (notice that for the purpose of computing this velocity we can use the approximation $`\kappa n`$), so the duration is

$$t_d=\frac{2(R_s+R_p)\mathrm{cos}\gamma }{v}2\frac{(R_s+R_p)}{na}\mathrm{cos}\gamma (1+2e\mathrm{cos}\psi ),$$
(22)
and its time derivative is

$$\frac{dt_d}{dt}=4e\frac{\dot{\varpi }}{n}\frac{(R_s+R_p)}{a}\mathrm{cos}\gamma \mathrm{sin}\psi .$$
(23)
As mentioned previously, the perturbation by an Earth-like planet with $`a_2=2a`$ implies a periastron precession rate $`\dot{\varpi }/n3\times 10^7`$; for $`R_s/a0.05`$, $`4e1`$, we infer $`dt_d/dt10^8`$, which is not difficult to detect as discussed in §2.3. From equations (8) and (12), we see that the transit duration change due to the precession of the orbital plane would be comparable if $`\mathrm{sin}2i0.1`$.

In principle, the change in transit duration due to the precession of the periastron and the lines of nodes can be distinguished by the effect on the shape of the lightcurve. Precession of the periastron changes only the velocity, so the shape of the lightcurve does not change. However, precession of the line of nodes changes the impact parameter of the transit. Of course, separating the two effects requires a higher photometric accuracy, and will increase the measurement errors unless the effect of the periastron precession is also measured from the change in the transit period. The most favorable case would be when the planet transits over the edge of the star, when the lightcurve shape has the fastest change with a variation of the impact parameter.

It is simple to see which one of the two measurements, the change in the period or the duration of the transit, can yield the highest accuracy to measure the ratio $`\dot{\varpi }/n`$. The period derivative is always measured to an accuracy better than the transit duration derivative by a factor $`P/t_0`$, where $`t_0`$ is the time of observation. Equating this to the ratio of equations (21) and (23), we find that the transit duration change yields a higher accuracy until the time of observation is $`t_0<\dot{\varpi }^1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}(R_s+R_p)\mathrm{cos}\gamma /a`$, and the period change gives the most accurate determination after that. For a close-in planet with $`2R_s/a0.1`$, and an Earth-mass perturbing planet with $`a_2/a2`$, we find $`\dot{\varpi }^13\times 10^4`$ years. Therefore, the transit duration change should yield the periastron precession rate with the highest accuracy, except for substantially more massive perturbing planets.

## 4 Conclusions

Accurate photometry of transit lightcurves of extrasolar planets allows the detection of slow orbital perturbations which affect the lightcurve. Here, we have considered the perturbation due to a stellar quadrupole moment or to a second planet as possible causes for the precession of the line of nodes and of the periastron of the orbit. Both types of precession cause a time variation of the duration of the transit, and the periastron precession also causes a variation of the period. The rate of this variation is given by equations (12), (23), and (21).

The quadrupole moment of the star is important for the close-in planets, at $`a10R_s`$. These planets are likely to be on circular orbits and therefore the precession of the line of nodes should usually be the most important effect. From observations of the stellar spectrum one can infer the projected rotational velocity of the star, and monitoring the CaII flux can also reveal the rotation period (Henry et al. 2000a). In addition, spectroscopic variations of the star during the transits can in principle be used to measure the angle $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of the line of nodes (Quelloz et al. 2000). If all these quantities are measured, it should be possible to infer from the precession rate of the orbital plane, the quadrupole moment of the star $`J_2`$, which is sensitive to the state of rotation of the inner parts of the star.

The precession induced by other planets will be added to that caused by the stellar quadrupole, and only the sum of both effects is observable. However, once the stellar rotation is measured the effect of the quadrupole is predictable to some extent, and it should be negligible compared to the effect of another planet in many cases (for large $`a`$ or $`M_2`$).

The precession induced by a second planet depends only on the quantities $`(M_2/M_s)(a/a_2)^3`$, and $`\mathrm{sin}2i`$ (see eqs.  and ). In principle, by measuring both the orbital and periastron precession from the change in the duration and the shape of the lightcurve, or from measuring the change in the period as well, both of these quantities could be determined assuming that there is only one perturbing planet. Even then, the mass and semimajor axis of the perturbing planet cannot be separately inferred, and the detected precession could be the result of a low-mass planet close to the transiting planet, or a more massive planet further away, or a disk of planetessimals.

In the examples mentioned previously in this paper, we have considered perturbations by planets of low enough mass that they would not be detected via the Doppler measurements of the star. However, transits could also allow the detection of perturbations by other known planets. Several cases of systems with two or three planets have now been discovered, some of which seem to be on resonant orbits (Marcy et al. 2001). Measuring the orbital and periastron precessions in one of these systems, if they were to show transits, could allow the determination of their relative orbital inclination. For a case with $`M_2/M_s10^3`$, $`a_2/a=2^{2/3}`$, the precession periods may be as short as hundreds of years, making it possible that a whole series of transits may be observed over a reasonable time of $`10`$ years as the line of nodes precesses, and enabling very accurate measurements of the orbital perturbations. A more general analysis than that presented here would be required to compute the precession rates when the two planets are not coplanar, are both on eccentric orbits, and are possibly resonant, including also the effect of changes of the eccentricity on the transit period and duration.

I am grateful to David Weinberg and the Ohio State astronomy graduate students Khairul Alam, Chris Burke, Julio Chanamé, Frank Delahaye, Dale Fields, Susan Kassin, Jennifer Marshall, Chris Onken, James Pizagno, Jeremy Tinker, and Zheng Zheng, for a wonderful class on the precession of the orbital plane induced by a planet, which made me think of the interesting case of a perturbing Earth-mass planet. I thank the Institute for Advanced Study for their hospitality when this work was being completed.


format: text

text:
# On the fourth 𝑃₁₁ resonance predicted by the constituent quark model

\[

## Abstract

We point out a distinguishing difference between constituent quark models based on one-gluon exchange and one-boson exchange dynamics. In the latter one, the $`P_{11}`$ nucleon resonance with predominantly symmetrical spatial wave function in the $`N=4`$ band gets strongly attracted such that it drops below some states in the $`N=2`$ band. Calculations of strong decay widths are presented in order to establish an identification with experimental states. Our results are relevant for the interpretation of the fourth $`P_{11}`$ resonance that was found in the partial wave analysis of the Zagreb group and recently discussed by Capstick et. al. in the framework of a model based on one-gluon exchange.

\]

11footnotetext: e-mail address: lukas@isn.in2p3.fr22footnotetext: e-mail address: Robert.Wagenbrunn@kfunigraz.ac.at

Constituent quark models (CQM’s) are useful for interpreting the results of partial wave analyses (PWA) that are usually employed to extract the properties of nucleon resonances from the experimental data of pion-nucleon scattering . Generally, such models predict four $`P_{11}`$ excited states of the nucleon below or around 2 GeV which are predominantly part of the $`N=2`$ band in a harmonic oscillator basis. The lightest of these states with a totally symmetrical spatial wave function is usually attributed to the Roper resonance, the first radial excitation of the nucleon. Its low mass has presented some problems for conventional CQM’s, based on one-gluon exchange (OGE) dynamics, as these models are not able to describe the right level ordering of positive and negative parity states . The second excitation, with a spatial wave function of mixed symmetry, is attributed to the $`N_{1710}`$ resonance, an identification that is confirmed by studies of decay amplitudes with a specific decay operator . The third state predicted is an orbital momentum $`L=2`$ state with quark spin $`\frac{3}{2}`$ and a mixed symmetrical spatial wave function while the fourth is a $`L=1`$ state with quark spin $`\frac{1}{2}`$. The latter one has a totally antisymmetrical spatial wave function and is therefore naturally expected to be the heaviest of these resonances with a weak coupling to the $`\pi N`$ decay channel.

The last two states were not found yet by any partial wave analysis, a fact that constitutes part of the problem of “missing states” , i.e. the fact that constituent quark models generally predict more states than observed. In ref.  it was argued that the lighter of these missing states in the $`N=2`$ band can be identified with the fourth $`P_{11}`$ resonance that was discovered by the Zagreb group in their partial wave analysis based on a multi-channel, multi-resonance, unitary model . It was pointed out that the crucial element for finding this resonance is the fit to the $`\pi N\eta N`$ data, which was carried out with great care in ref. . Results for partial decay widths in the strong decay channels $`\pi N`$, $`\eta N`$ and $`\pi \pi N`$, as calculated in ref.  in a relativized version of a model based on OGE dynamics, were given to confirm the identification. We redisplay these results in Table I together with the experimental results from ref. .

It can be seen, that the first OGE state that could correspond to the new solution found by the Zagreb group at $`M1740`$ MeV is the state at $`M=1880`$ MeV. A feature that was not discussed in ref.  is the fact that the model based on OGE predicts this state to decay more strongly into $`N\eta `$ than into $`N\pi `$, a situation that seems to be contradicted by the experimental results (even though one should consider the large error bars in this case).

The fourth state at $`M=1975`$ MeV is the totally antisymmetrical and the heaviest one in the $`N=2`$ band, as expected. Its weak coupling to the decay channels was used in particular to explain why it has not been seen in any partial wave analysis yet.

The first OGE state in the $`N=4`$ band appears at $`M=2065`$ MeV and it was assigned to the $`P_{11}(N_{2100})`$ state of the Particle Data Group , which, however, has the status of a 1-star resonance only. Its decay properties are very similar to those of the Roper resonance which indicates the same structure for these two states. However, as for the relative strength of decay amplitudes in the $`\pi N`$ and $`\eta N`$ channels, the wrong ordering is again predicted by the OGE as compared to the solution of the Zagreb analysis. In fact, just from the decay widths, one would rather guess that this state corresponds to the new solution of the Zagreb group at $`M1740`$ MeV, an identification that is hardly possible in this model because of the large mass of this state in the OGE.

We have calculated the spectrum and wave functions that follow from a model based on Goldstone-boson exchange (GBE) dynamics . Here we use a slightly different parameterization where the tensor components of the pseudoscalar meson-exchange interaction are included. Those tensor forces were dropped in  and only the spin-spin components of the pseudoscalar meson-exchange interaction were taken into account.

Partial decay widths are then calculated in a microscopic decay model of the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ type, which differs from the one used in ref.  by two main points:

* First we use a $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ decay operator in a modified form as introduced in ref. . It has been checked that the qualitative features of decay predictions are not influenced by this choice.
* Second, and more important, for all the baryon resonances we use the theoretical masses as they follow from the solution of the Schrödinger equation as input in our decay calculation. This would result in different phase space factors for states whose masses are predicted far off their experimental values, which is not the case in the GBE for any of the resonances considered here. However it may influence the relative ordering of $`\pi N`$ and $`\eta N`$ widths due to the “structure dependence”  of the $`P_{11}`$ resonances***The decay amplitude for $`P_{11}`$ resonances has a zero as a function of the (off-shell) meson momentum $`q`$. Depending on whether one chooses $`q`$ to be consistent with the theoretical or with the experimental resonance mass, one may approach this zero or move away from it..

First results in this approach were presented in ref. , where also a more thorough discussion regarding constituent quark- and decay models may be found. The masses of the lightest resonances predicted by the GBE in the $`P_{11}`$ channel are given in Table I and it can be seen that, apart from the Roper resonance, which is better described by the GBE, they correspond almost exactly to the masses of the OGE model. The decay properties are rather different however.

First we note that for the $`N_{1710}`$ resonance the GBE model predicts $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\eta <\mathrm{\Gamma }_\pi `$, contrary to the OGE model but in qualitative agreement with the experimental result of the Zagreb analysis. A similar difference appears for the next $`P_{11}`$ resonance, where again the GBE reproduces roughly the experimental pattern of decay amplitudes, whereas the OGE predicts the opposite ordering.

In order to explain these qualitative differences we display in Table II the $`LS`$ \- components of the GBE wave functions in question.

It is seen immediately, that the GBE state at $`M=1874`$ MeV cannot be identified with any of the remaining states in the $`N=2`$ band, since it is an almost pure $`L=0`$ state. It rather corresponds to the predominantly symmetrical solution in the $`N=4`$ band, i.e. the second radial excitation of the nucleon after the Roper resonance. The properties of the Goldstone-boson exchange dynamics lead to a strong attraction in symmetrical components of the wave function, a property that explained already the low mass of the Roper resonance in this model.

We see also from Table I that the decay properties correspond almost exactly to those of the $`N=4`$ state in the OGE model. In particular, we predict the fourth $`P_{11}`$ resonance to decay more strongly into $`N\pi `$ than into $`N\eta `$, as it was found for the new resonance in the Zagreb analysis.

The last two GBE states given in Table I are found to be almost 50% - mixtures of the $`L=2`$, $`S=\frac{3}{2}`$ and $`L=1`$, $`S=\frac{1}{2}`$ components. These ones receive a repulsive contribution from the GBE interaction, because they contain quark pairs with antisymmetrical spin-flavor wave functions. This enhances the effect of level inversion with the symmetrical state in the $`N=4`$ band.

Due to the different symmetry structure it is also expected that they should have smaller branching fractions into the $`N\pi `$ channel than the lower $`P_{11}`$ resonances, a feature that is shared with the OGE predictions for the corresponding states. A qualitative difference between the two models again occurs when comparing the $`N\eta `$ with the $`N\pi `$ widths: both these resonances give $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\eta >\mathrm{\Gamma }_\pi `$ in the GBE, a relation that is also satisfied by the state at $`2157`$ MeV found in the Zagreb analysis, but contradicted by the predictions of the OGE. This feature is a consequence of the strong mixing of these two states, as evidenced in Table II. In fact, the main contribution to the decay widths for both of them comes from the $`L=2`$, $`S=\frac{3}{2}`$ component which explains their similar decay properties as opposed to the OGE model.

We would finally like to stress that the inversion of states discussed above is also found in different parameterizations of the GBE interaction. We have checked in particular that in the models of ref.  as well as ref. , it is always the mainly symmetrical state that follows the $`N_{1710}`$ resonance. A good description of the Roper resonance has also been obtained in a model including a three-body force . Since this one acts mainly on the nucleon and its radial excitations while producing essentially no effect on states with mixed symmetry, one may expect a similar inversion in the upper part of the spectrum as in the GBE model. Unfortunately, calculations of decay widths as presented in ref.  do not include the states of interest here.

In addition to $`\pi N`$ and $`\eta N`$ widths, also results for the $`\pi \pi N`$ channel were given in ref.  and compared to the results of the Zagreb group. We did not repeat these calculations in the GBE model because of some theoretical ambiguities associated with the determination of a decay operator for quasi-two-body decays . Furthermore the branching fractions extracted from the PWA depend sensitively on the input data of $`\pi N\pi \pi N`$ reactions, but the inelastic data in channels like $`\pi \mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\rho N`$, etc., were not explicitly included in the analysis of the Zagreb group .

In all the considerations presented above, one has to bear in mind the rather large uncertainties of experimental data which prevents one from drawing definite conclusions about the quality of predictions from any CQM for the moment. However, the inversion of states in the GBE model is a unique and distinguishing feature leading to qualitatively different predictions of decay properties. This would permit a definite discrimination of different models, once the experimental data are determined with sufficient accuracy.

In summary, we have pointed out that the states that are predicted by models based on OGE and GBE dynamics at almost the same mass of $`M1880`$ MeV do not correspond to the same SU(6) $``$ O(3) state in a harmonic oscillator basis. As a consequence they show very different decay properties. In particular, predictions for decay widths using wave functions stemming from GBE dynamics are in qualitative agreement with the recent PWA of ref. . Differences with predictions from the OGE model may allow a discrimination between the two models, which is not possible at the moment due to rather large experimental uncertainties. Clearly, a more precise determination of the resonance parameters discussed in this paper is needed to definitely settle the issue.

Acknowledgements We are grateful to Fl. Stancu and B. Desplanques for useful discussions and to the ECT, Trento, for the support and hospitality during the time when this work was begun. This work was supported by the Scientific-Technical Agreement ’Amadée’ between Austria and France under contract number II.9.


text:
# Black Holes and Galaxy Metamorphosis.

## Introduction

Observations are beginning to conclude that massive central black holes are a natural part of elliptical galaxy centers kormendy00 ; richstone98 . In fact, best-fit models of black hole demography indicate that approximately $`97\%`$ of ellipticals harbor a massive black hole. Black hole mass seems to be correlated with the host bulge potential; current dynamical estimates of the best galactic black hole candidates have yielded masses on the order of $`0.005M_{\mathrm{bulge}}`$kormendyrichstone95 ; magorrian98 ; vandermarel99 . There also seems to be a strong correlation between black hole mass and global velocity dispersion, implying that the Fundamental Plane exists even in the four-dimensional space described by ($`\mathrm{log}M_{\mathrm{BH}},\mathrm{log}L,\mathrm{log}\sigma _e,\mathrm{log}R_e`$) Gebhardt00 ; merritt00 . It appears, then, that black hole formation and the evolution of the host galaxy may be deeply connected. This proceeding explores one way in which black holes may drastically change the structure of an elliptical galaxy over large scales: by inducing axisymmetry in a triaxial galaxy. It appears, then, that a supermassive black hole’s impact on the structure and subsequent evolution of its host galaxy is both dramatic and far-reaching.

## Black Holes and Triaxial Galaxies

There is evidence, both observationally and theoretically, that elliptical galaxies are at least mildly triaxial in shape bak00 ; dubinski91 . Even a mildly triaxial galaxy will generate entirely different orbit families than are present in a spheroid. In particular, there are a rich variety of regular box and boxlet orbits that are centrophilic and comprise the backbone of the galaxy (Figure 1). These centrophilic orbits can be driven chaotic with the introduction of a supermassive black hole norman85 ; gerhard85 ; merritt97 ; quinlan98 ; vallurimerritt98 ; holley01 . And, since chaotic orbits will eventually fill all available phase space, the time-averaged shape of a chaotic orbit is spherical. Hence, the destruction of these centrophilic orbits breaks the backbone of the triaxial model and the system evolves toward axisymmetry. This effect has been shown in numerous computational and analytic studiesnorman85 ; gerhard85 ; merritt97 ; quinlan98 ; vallurimerritt98 ; holley01 . In fact, the main controversies are whether the galaxy becomes axisymmetric locally or globally, and whether the transformation occurs in a few crossing times or over many Hubble times.

If the transformation is rapid and global, there are important implications for elliptical galaxy evolution. For example, one possible difference between an intrinsically bright elliptical (which is thought to be more triaxial) and a faint elliptical is that the faint elliptical, with its shorter crossing time, has had more interactions with the black hole and is thus more dynamically evolved vallurimerritt98 . Secondly, the black hole/bulge mass relation can be explained in terms of galaxy evolution vallurimerritt98 . In this scenario, spiral galaxies begin as gas-rich disks with a small triaxial bulge. Since triaxiality supports box orbits, gas can flow radially inward along these orbits, which can rapidly funnel matter into a black hole. The black hole grows until a critical black hole mass of $`M_{}=0.02M_{\mathrm{gal}}`$, which breaks triaxiality and strongly curtails the gas inflow. Subsequent disk-disk merging can create a elliptical galaxy, and black hole feeding ensues in this larger triaxial bulge until the critical black hole mass is achieved. In both types of galaxies, the process is the same: once the black hole mass fraction is large enough to disrupt box orbits, gas inflow is sharply diminished.

However, most self-consistent N-body simulations which have studied this effect have employed astrophysically unrealistic galaxy models norman85 ; quinlan98 . For example, the models have been highly flattened, maximally triaxial models, while observations indicate that ellipticals are most likely mildly triaxial and not very flattened. Furthermore, the black hole was often grown within a flat inner density profile (a ’core’) which, while it maximized the change in the inner potential, does not reflect the observations of cuspy inner density profiles in ellipticals.

My collaborators and I holley01  have explored the issue of black hole-embedded triaxial galaxies with more realistic galaxy models. Our models exhibited a range of moderate triaxialities ($`0.25<T<0.75`$) with mild flattening and cuspy inner density profiles. They were generated by ’adiabatically squeezing’ a cuspy Hernquist sphere into a stable triaxial figure, and then adiabatically growing a central black hole in this modelholley01 . The models were populated with $`N=512,000`$ multimass particles to accurately reproduce the central density cusp, and the particles were advanced with a multiple timestep, high-order Hermite integrator in the SCFcode.

Figure 2 shows the change in the physical structure of a triaxial model as the black hole is grown. Initally, the model had axis lengths $`a:b:c=1:0.85:0.7`$, and a central density cusp $`\gamma =1`$. If this galaxy were to lie on the core and global Fundamental Planes, the density cusp dictates the absolute magnitude ($`M_v21.6`$), mass ($`M_{\mathrm{gal}}2\mathrm{x}10^{12}M_{}`$), core radius ($`r_{\mathrm{core}}150\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$) and effective radius ($`r_{\mathrm{eff}}4\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$) of the corresponding galaxy.

Although the final state of this black hole-embedded model is decidedly not axisymmetric on global scales, it is certainly more round near the center. We developed an automated orbit analysis routine to determine if this central roundening was caused by black hole-induced centrophilic orbit destabilization. Figure 3 presents xy,xz surfaces of section for the initial state of the triaxial potential (ie no black hole). Despite the rich variety of resonant boxlets, boxes, and tubes, less than $`0.2\%`$ of the orbits were strongly chaotic (see holley01  for details).

After the black hole has grown, the orbital content is quite different. In the inner regions, nearly all centrophilic orbits have become stochastic, including the population of eccentric loops. However, for less bound orbits, there are only a scattered few strongly chaotic orbits. A common interpretation for the lack of chaos in these less bound orbits is that they have been integrated for far fewer dynamical times than the highly bound orbits. Thus these outermost orbits have not been exposed to the perturbative black hole potential enough for substantial chaos to set in. To test this explanation, we integrated a subset of the lesser bound box and boxlet orbits ($`E=0.40`$) in the xy plane for $`200`$ orbital times. Although the percentage of chaotic orbits in this subset increased from $`4\%`$ to $`71\%`$ over the experiment, many stable centrophilic orbits existed after $``$ 2 Hubble times, including a large fraction of non-resonant boxes. A possible explanation is that these weakly bound orbits spend very little of the orbit in the inflection region between spherical potential and the triaxial potential, and are thus not driven stochastic at all. This explanation is far different than scenarios which involve scattering by the black hole, but black hole scattering is difficult to envision as the cause of the chaos observed in our models, since there were many outer orbits that passed quite close to the black hole, yet remained stable after hundreds of dynamical times.

## Conclusion

The black hole in our model induced axisymmetry out to nearly 100 parsecs, and resulted in a clearly observable change in the shape and structure of the galaxy. Since the transformation did not take place globally, it is tempting to say that the black hole mass/bulge mass relation observed in the current galaxy population is it not simply an artifact of gas inflow in a more triaxial-shaped progenitor population. However, it is not immediately clear how the more localized axisymmetry we observed would effect gas inflow and subsequent black hole feeding. While it it true in our globally triaxial model that gas inflow from outside the half mass radius would never be entirely cut off, the behavior of the gas once it hits the axisymmetric region requires detailed gas dynamical simulations. Nonetheless, it is clear that a central supermassive black hole causes dramatic and long-lasting changes in the host galaxy over scales well outside the region in which it dominates the potential.


text:
# Evidence of ultra-slow polaron dynamics in low-doped manganites from 139La NMR-NQR and muon spin rotation

\[

## Abstract

We report a 139La NMR investigation of low-doped insulating manganite samples (LaMnO3+δ and La1-yCayMnO3+δ) as a function of temperature. A volume fraction with fast nuclear relaxations was revealed by the inhomogeneous loss of the NMR signal over a broad temperature interval. Comparison with $`\mu `$SR data demonstrates that the wipe out of the 139La signal is mainly due to slowly fluctuating electric field gradients. This provides strong evidence for the slow diffusion of lattice excitations, identified with Jahn-Teller small polarons.

\]

Lanthanum manganites La1-xAxMnO3 (A = alkali-earth metal) have attracted great interest because of their correlated magnetic and transport properties, which include a colossal magnetoresistance (CMR) at suitable composition ($`x0.3`$). Recently the role of the electron-lattice coupling has been emphasized. Millis et al.  pointed out that the metal-insulator transition originating CMR arises from the cross-over from a large Jahn-Teller (JT) polaron to a small JT polaron regime. Experimental evidence of the involvement of lattice degrees of freedom in the electronic properties has been provided in recent years by a giant isotopic effect on $`T_c`$ and on the EPR linewidth , by transport  and electric thermopower  measurements, and by optical spectroscopies . The prominent role of the JT effect in manganites is now widely accepted among the physics community. Direct evidence of local lattice distortions, identified with JT polarons, has also been provided by the pair distribution function (PDF) from neutron diffraction data . PDF, however, only yields the rms lattice distortion, without any information on lattice dynamics.

This paper addresses the issue of polaron dynamics in low doped, insulating manganites by means of 139La NMR and muon spin rotation ($`\mu `$SR). We will show that, throughout this region of the phase diagram, 139La actually probes a slow diffusion of charged entities which are straightforwardly identified with lattice polarons.

The investigated samples were LaMnO3+δ and La1-yCayMnO3+δ, with hole concentration $`0x0.23`$ ($`x=y+2\delta `$). La0.95Ca0.05MnO3 was a twinned single crystal grown by the floating zone method. The other samples were sintered powders prepared by standard solid state reaction. Details of sample preparation and characterization are reported elsewhere . Resistivity of the doped samples was measured by the four-lead method. The most doped sample, La0.8Ca0.2MnO3.015, exhibits a metallic behavior, with a resistivity maximum near $`T_c`$ = 190 K and $`d\rho /dT>0`$ at $`T<T_c`$, while the other samples are insulators.

139La NMR was performed in an applied field of 7 T, in a temperature range of 40-360 K. Spectra were recorded point by point with a standard $`90^{}\tau 90^{}`$ spin echo sequence on a phase coherent spectrometer. The pulse delay $`\tau `$ was kept as short as possible, limited by the dead time of the receiver following the transmission of a rf pulse (typically 10-14 $`\mu `$s). At all temperatures the spin-spin relaxation rates $`T_2^1`$ were determined by varying $`\tau `$, and the echo amplitude decay was best fitted by two exponentials. The spin echo amplitudes were extrapolated back to $`\tau =0`$, and divided by the NMR sensitivity $`\omega ^2/k_BT`$. With this correction, the integrated amplitudes of each spectrum is proportional to the number of nuclei giving rise to the signal. $`\mu `$SR spectra were recorded at ISIS, on either the MUSR or EMU instruments. The data shown here are part of an extensive $`\mu `$SR investigation of La manganites, reported elsewhere .

139La NMR is sensitive both to the magnetic and to the electronic structure. Lanthanum nuclei ($`\gamma /2\pi =6.014`$ MHz/T) are coupled to the neighboring Mn electronic spins by a transferred hyperfine interaction. The local field $`𝑩_l`$, including the external field $`\mu _0𝑯`$, has the form

$$𝑩_l\frac{\omega _L}{\gamma }=\frac{2\pi }{\gamma }g\mu _B\underset{j}{\overset{n.n.}{}}𝒞_j\mathrm{SS}_j+\mu _0𝑯$$
(1)
The hyperfine coupling constant is estimated in all lanthanum manganites as $`𝒞0.1`$ T/$`\mu _B`$. Owing to nearly cubic symmetry of the lanthanum site, the transferred hyperfine field on 139La is approximately proportional to the ferromagnetic moment of the surrounding Mn octet. At $`TT_c`$, the spontaneous field ranges from $`3.5`$ T ($`\nu _L20`$ MHz) in a fully ferromagnetic (F) environment , down to a small but non zero value of $`300`$ mT in the pure antiferromagnetic (AF) structure of LaMnO3, due to the distortion of the perovskite cell. In the paramagnetic (P) phase large frequency shifts proportional to the magnetic susceptibility are produced by hyperfine couplings in the presence of external field.

Note that in the present experiments we do not expect any critical divergence of the nuclear relaxations rates near the magnetic transition, since AF fluctuation modes yield negligible instantaneous fields at the La site, and F fluctuations are suppressed by the intense external field .

In addition, 139La ($`I=7/2`$) is coupled to the local electric field gradient (EFG) tensor $`V_{ij}`$ through its electric quadrupole moment $`Q`$. In the frame of reference of the EFG principal axes ($`\left|V_{zz}\right|\left|V_{yy}\right|\left|V_{xx}\right|`$), the nuclear Hamiltonian accounting for both magnetic and electric interactions is written as :

$$_n=\mathrm{}\gamma 𝑩_l𝑰+\frac{h\nu _Q}{6}[3I_z^2I(I+1)+\frac{1}{2}\eta (I_+^2+I_{}^2)]$$
(2)
Here $`\nu _Q=3eQV_{zz}/[2hI(2I1)]`$, and $`\eta =\left|V_{xx}V_{yy}\right|/V_{zz}`$ is the EFG asymmetry parameter. The quadrupole interaction resolves the Zeeman transitions, leading in a single crystal to angle-dependent multiline spectra with quadrupolar satellites. In a polycrystalline sample the angular average of the satellite patterns gives rise to a characteristic powder spectrum.

The spectra of stoichiometric LaMnO3 are plotted in Fig. 1a. The spectra fit to quadrupolar powder patterns,

broadened by magnetic interactions . The best fit parameters for the EFG are $`\nu _Q=3.8(1)`$ MHz, $`\eta =0.94(2)`$ at all temperatures, in close agreement with data reported by Kumagai et. al. . The paramagnetic shifts agree with magnetic susceptibility data, which follow a Curie-Weiss law for $`S=2`$, $`g=2`$ moments, and the magnetic line broadening is negligibly small at $`T>T_N`$. This indicates a highly homogeneous and accurate stoichiometry for this sample. The onset of an AF order is solely witnessed by a sizeable magnetic broadening below $`T_N=139`$ K. Figure 2 shows that the integrated spectral intensity, corrected for the NMR sensitivity, is constant within experimental accuracy, i.e. the signal originates from the whole sample volume at all temperatures.

Spectra from a subset of hole doped compounds are plotted in Fig. 1b-d. In the order phase they show magnetic shifts and line broadening increasing at increasing doping, in agreement with a ferromagnetic moment increasing with $`x`$. The shifts at 70 K in LaMnO3.04, LaMnO3.06 (not shown, $`T_c`$ = 125 and 150 K) and La0.87Ca0.13MnO3.035 ($`T_c`$ = 170 K) are 7, 12 and 15 MHz, respectively. A comparison with the spontaneous frequency of $`20`$ MHz in the CMR ferromagnet La0.7Ca0.3MnO3 indicates $`35`$%, 60% and 75% ferromagnetically polarized Mn octets in the three samples. Furthermore, a dependence of the EFG on composition was observed. In LaMnO3.02 and La0.95Ca0.05MnO3 (both $`T_N`$ = 130 K) the fit yields the same quadrupolar linewidth as in LaMnO3 within experimental accuracy. At doping concentrations $`0.06<x0.1`$, however, a progressively reduced EFG was detected, down to $`\nu _Q=3.0`$ MHz, $`\eta =0.3`$ in LaMnO3.05 ($`T_c`$ = 140 K), whereas no further EFG reduction was observed in the high temperature spectra at higher doping, up to $`x=0.23`$ in the metallic La0.8Ca0.2MnO3.015. The EFG reduction is probably due to a lower static distortion of the MnO6 octahedra in the doped compounds.

The most remarkable feature of the La spectra is however the strong reduction of the signal amplitude, which occurs over a wide temperature range in all the doped insulating samples (Fig. 2). In LaMnO3.04 ($`T_c`$ = 125 K) in particular, the signal was completely lost at $`75\text{ K}T140\text{ K}`$. The temperature interval where the signal diminishes depends on composition. It is maximum in the least doped compounds LaMnO3.02 and La0.95Ca0.05MnO3, where a missing fraction is already detected at $`TT_c`$, right below room temperature. At increasing doping the interval narrows, and its upper limit is lowered down to 140 K in La0.87Ca0.13MnO3.035, a temperature well below $`T_c`$. The full signal amplitude is recovered in all samples only at $`T60K`$. The missing amplitude in the insulating doped compounds is clearly due to fast and inhomogeneous spin-spin relaxations. This is confirmed by the relaxation time constants $`T_2`$ of the measured signals, which actually decrease down to values of order 10 $`\mu `$s as temperature is lowered, and by echo amplitudes decaying with multi-exponential behavior, as shown in Fig. 3. The wipe out of the signal originates therefore from a fraction of nuclei with an even shorter $`T_25`$ $`\mu `$s, outside the time window of NMR because of the aforementioned dead time. In the metallic sample La0.8Ca0.2MnO3.015, on the contrary, the full signal amplitude is detected at all temperatures, except for a slight amplitude reduction at $`60\text{K}<T110\text{K}`$. The small missing fraction in this sample is most likely due to a minority insulating phase, either due to chemical inhomogeneity or to the electronic phase separation of hole-rich domains. This is indicated also by 139La nuclear relaxations, which reveal two distinct components (inset of Fig. 3). The minority signal shows larger relaxation rates increasing with decreasing temperature, similar to those of the insulating compounds. The majority component displays the opposite temperature dependence typical of fully metallic manganites near optimum composition for CMR , and its spin-spin relaxation eventually saturates to the gaussian behavior due to nuclear moments alone (homonuclear linewidth). We relate therefore the wipe out of the signal to the lightly doped insulating phase in all of our samples.

In principle, the fast nuclear relaxations responsible for the 139La wipe out might be due either to magnetic or to EFG fluctuations, $`T_{2(La)}^1=T_{2M}^1+T_{2E}^1`$. A clarification is provided by the comparison between NMR and $`\mu `$SR data. Implanted positive muons ($`S_\mu =1/2`$) are another local probe of magnetism, coupled only to the Mn electronic spins and not to the EFG. Spontaneous precession frequencies $`\nu _L^\mu 80`$ MHz have been observed in manganites at $`TT_{c,N}`$, regardless the AF or F order . Longitudinal muon relaxations in the P phase in a small applied field of 20 G are shown in Fig. 4 for a typical low-doped sample (LaMnO3.045, $`T_c130`$K). Muons exhibit the full initial polarization and comparatively low lorentzian relaxation rates $`\lambda _\mu `$ never exceeding $`10^5\text{s}^1`$ down to $`T_c`$.

Above $`T=250K`$ the ratio of the La and muon relaxation rates is $`T_{2(La)}^1/\lambda _\mu =1/5`$, which indicates that $`T_{2M}^1`$ is at most $`1/5`$ of the muon rate. This empirical upper limit implies that $`T_{2M}5/\lambda _\mu 50\mu `$s also close to $`T_c`$ where the La signal vanishes. If the La relaxation were dominated by the magnetic channel it would be safely within the time window of NMR, contrary to the experimental evidence. Note that relaxation rates scale as $`T_{2M}^1/\lambda _\mu =16(\nu _{La}/\nu _\mu )^2`$, where $`\nu _{La}`$ ($`\nu _\mu `$) is the instantaneous frequency in the La ($`\mu `$) fluctuating hyperfine field. Hence, even in the unrealistic worst case of fully F fluctuations, actually suppressed by the large external magnetic field, the spontaneous precession frequencies in the F state ($`\nu _L^\mu 80`$ MHz, $`\nu _L^{La}20`$ MHz) set a theoretical limit $`T_{2M}\lambda _\mu ^110`$ $`\mu `$s, still within the time window of NMR. Therefore $`T_{2E}^1`$ must dominate in the wiped out fraction.

A similar loss of the Cu NQR signal intensity has been recently reported for the cuprate series La2-x-yRySrxCuO4 (R = rare earth), which exhibit stripe instability, and, close to the concentration $`x=1/8`$, the localization of static incommensurate charge-ordered stripes below a transition temperature $`T_{charge}`$ . The wipe out of the Cu signal was ascribed to the glassy slowing down of the stripes, which are dynamic above $`T_{charge}`$. In the case of cuprates, however, it is still debated whether the diverging nuclear relaxations mainly involve spin or charge degrees of freedom .

In lightly doped manganites no long range superstructure has ever been detected above $`T_c`$. Here, the wipe out of the La signal must arise from the diffusion of short range charge excitations coupled to lattice distortions. A fine dispersion of these centers is actually indicated by the residual NMR signal, which also relaxes very fast and with several time constants, like in the case of a distribution of distances between the diffusing local distortion and the La nuclei. Like in cuprates, however, the diffusion slows down continuously without any critical

behavior as temperature is lowered, as in a glass transition. A relaxation model adapted from Curro et al.  fits our 139La amplitude data (Fig. 2); we assume i) an instantaneous quadrupolar frequency $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _Q`$ fluctuating with a lorentzian spectrum and a correlation time $`\tau _c=\tau _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{exp}(E_a/k_BT)`$, ii) an inhomogeneous $`T_2^1=\mathrm{\Delta }\omega ^2\tau _c`$ arising from a distribution of either the activation energy $`E_a`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _Q`$, and iii) the recovery of the signal in the static limit whereby $`\tau _c`$ is longer than the duration $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ of the whole pulse sequence ($`\mathrm{\Delta }t30`$ $`\mu `$s). The narrowing of the wipe out temperature interval at increasing doping corresponds to the decrease of $`\overline{E}_a/k_B`$ from 750(50) K in LaMnO3.02 down to 350(50) K in La0.87Ca0.13MnO3.035. Assuming also for convenience EFG fluctuations of comparable amplitude to the static EFG (i.e., $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _Q/2\pi 1`$ MHz), the following threshold for the occurrence of the wipe out can be established: $`\overline{\tau }_c10^9`$ s. We stress that direct determination of collective dynamics on this time scale is only accessible to slow microscopic probes like NMR-NQR and $`\mu `$SR.

It is remarkable that the wipe out occurs throughout the whole low doping insulating region of the phase diagram, whereas it is absent in both the undoped and the metallic phases. This peculiar fact, namely the occurrence of this phenomenon under the combination of charge carriers and a macroscopic insulating behavior, strongly suggests that the diffusing centers are JT small polarons. The recovery of the full signal amplitude at approximately the same temperature $`T_{rec}60`$ K in all the samples denotes the freezing of the polarons, which appear static to NMR at $`T<T_{rec}`$. It is worth noting that, in the same composition range investigated here, Millis  recently reported private communications by S.W. Cheong on a charge ordered (CO) phase at low temperature. The flat phase boundary of the CO region with $`T_{CO}(x)60`$-70 K is in good agreement with our nearly $`x`$-independent $`T_{rec}`$. We therefore associate the polaron freezing with the onset of a CO state. If the identification holds, the CO transition may be viewed as the transition from a polaron liquid to a polaron crystal.

In conclusion, comparison of 139La NMR and $`\mu `$SR data from low doped manganites demonstrates the slow diffusion of charge-lattice excitations, which we identify with small JT polarons.

This work was partially supported by a MURST-PRIN 2000 grant “Polaroni magnetoelastici”. Discussion with G. Guidi and M. Hennion is gratefully acknowledged.


text:
# Heavy charged Higgs boson production at next generation 𝑒^±𝛾 colliders

## 1 Motivation

The physics case for exploiting the $`\gamma \gamma `$ and $`e^\pm \gamma `$ beam options of future electron-positron linear colliders (LCs) in testing the Higgs sector of the electroweak interactions is quite strong . The scenario that one may well imagine as the legacy of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) era could be the following. A neutral Higgs signal is detected at the CERN hadron collider, but no other particles are found, and all measurements of the parameters related to the new state (mass, width, couplings, etc.) are consistent with those of both, e.g., the Standard Model (SM) Higgs boson, $`\varphi `$, and the lightest of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) Higgs bosons, $`h^0`$. (This scenario corresponds in the MSSM to the so-called ‘decoupling regime’, when the additional Higgs states, $`H^0,A^0`$ and $`H^\pm `$, are much heavier than the $`h^0`$.)

Since, to be optimistic, one should expect in the rather messy hadronic environment of the LHC no more than a 10% precision in the measurements of most of the Higgs boson couplings to ordinary matter (quarks, leptons and gauge vector bosons), it is reasonable to argue that one may have to wait till the advent of a future leptonic machine in order to be able to pin down the exact nature of the Higgs sector111The precision of mass and width measurements in the two collider environments can become comparable in some instances, at least for the SM Higgs particle .. In fact, at future $`e^+e^{}`$ LCs, operating in the energy range $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}=500`$ to 1000 GeV, the accuracy of the same measurements is expected to improve to the level of 1% or even less . Besides, one can efficiently convert these machines to operate in the $`\gamma \gamma `$ and $`e^\pm \gamma `$ modes. By using Compton back-scattering of a few MeV laser light , one gets a spectrum of high energy photons which emerge with mean energy $`E_\gamma 0.8E_{e^\pm }`$, typical spread $`<\mathrm{\Delta }E_\gamma >0.07E_\gamma `$ and luminosity $`_{\gamma \gamma /e\gamma }(x>0.8x_{\mathrm{max}})\frac{1}{3}_{ee}`$, where $`x\sqrt{s_{\gamma \gamma /e\gamma }}/\sqrt{s_{ee}}`$ and $`x_{\mathrm{max}}`$ will be given in eq. (7) (see Ref.  for details).

Under these circumstances, one could conceivably perform high precision measurements of the ‘$`\mathrm{Higgs}\gamma \gamma `$’ vertex222Here, ‘Higgs’ signifies either $`\varphi `$ or $`h^0`$. in either $`\gamma \gamma `$  or $`e^\pm \gamma `$ collisions and of the ‘$`\mathrm{Higgs}\gamma Z`$’ one in the latter. Deviations in their experimental determinations from the values predicted by the SM can be considered as a signal of New Physics 333Recall that these vertices occur at one-loop level in both models and can be mediated by new virtual MSSM charged (s)particles.. From now on, we will assume that the underlying dynamics of the Higgs sector is the one of the MSSM and will start by summarising the Higgs discovery potential of the $`\gamma \gamma `$ and $`e^\pm \gamma `$ options of future LCs within this particular model.

The $`\gamma \gamma `$ mode can profitably be exploited in the search for other Higgs boson states, in addition to the scalar $`h^0`$, via the same reaction which produces the latter444Hereafter, the symbol $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ collectively refers to the three neutral Higgs boson states of the MSSM., $`\gamma \gamma \mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ . Besides, the $`\gamma \gamma H^+H^{}`$ production mode  of charged Higgs scalars has a cross section larger than the one of the $`e^+e^{}`$ initiated mode . As for the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ case, other than via $`e^{}\gamma e^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ , one can access neutral Higgs states via the processes $`e^{}\gamma e^{}Z^0\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$, $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eW^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ and $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$, with the latter mode serving also the purpose of generating charged Higgs scalars, alongside the pair production channel $`e^{}\gamma e^{}H^+H^{}`$  (see also ). Furthermore, the loop-induced production process $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}`$ is an interesting possibility , which has been shown to yield sizable rates for small values of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, though difficult to detect because of the SM continuum background. For both photonic environments, a detailed phenomenological simulation (at hadron and detector level), similar to those already carried out for the $`e^+e^{}`$ mode, see Refs. , does not exist to date.

It is the purpose of our study to further elaborate on the potential of future LCs operating in the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ mode in detecting $`H^\pm `$ states, by looking at the case in which the mass of the charged Higgs boson of the MSSM is not only heavy (i.e., near or above the top mass, $`m_t`$), as dictated by the mentioned decoupling scenario, but also near or above half the centre-of-mass (CM) energy of the collider, where the pair production modes of neutral and charged Higgs bosons have exhausted their potential, because of phase space suppression. In fact, for light enough $`M_{H^\pm }`$ values (i.e., below $`m_t`$), the processes

$$e^{}\gamma e^{}H^+H^{}$$
(1)
and

$$e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0$$
(2)
have already been proved to offer some chances in detecting such elusive particles . When $`M_{H^\pm }\stackrel{>}{}m_t`$, they can both still be exploited, but the latter only when $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0H^0`$ or $`A^0`$, the $`h^0`$ case being suppressed as in the heavy $`M_{H^\pm }`$ case the $`h^0`$ quickly decouples from the rest of the Higgs sector, see Fig. 7 of Ref. . Here, in addition to the two modes (1)–(2), we also consider the channels

$$e^{}\gamma \nu _ef\overline{f}H^{},$$
(3)
where $`f=b,\tau `$ or $`\nu _\tau `$, and

$$e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}.$$
(4)
In particular, we intend to investigate whether the last two production modes can adequately complement the first two, possibly providing an extended coverage in the charged Higgs sector of the MSSM, beyond the kinematic threshold $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}2M_{H^\pm }M_{H^\pm }+M_{\mathrm{\Phi }^0}`$ (here, $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0=H^0,A^0`$, in the decoupling regime).

We are also interested in assessing whether fundamental couplings of the underlying Higgs model can be better measured through $`e^\pm \gamma `$ reactions than in $`e^+e^{}`$ processes, such as: the $`(\gamma )W^\pm H^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ vertices, via (2), the Yukawa couplings to top and bottom quarks of both neutral and charged Higgs states, in (3), the ‘form factors’ of the vertex $`\gamma W^\pm H^{}`$, via (4).

Our present effort is meant to complement the one carried out in Refs.  (see also ) and  for the case of $`e^+e^{}`$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions, respectively, hence providing a complete overview of the feasibility of detecting heavy charged Higgs states in a future LC environment.

Notice that processes (1)–(3) all occur at tree level, whereas (4) takes place at one loop as the $`\gamma W^\pm H^{}`$ vertex is forbidden at tree level because of gauge invariance. The Feynman graphs corresponding to the above reactions are shown in Figs. 14, respectively. Also notice that, in order to avoid double counting process (2), we have not included in the simulation of (3) final states the contribution of graphs proceeding via intermediate $`\nu _eH^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ stages (i.e., the diagrams in Fig. 2, followed by $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0b\overline{b}`$).

## 2 Production cross sections

We have computed the production cross sections for $`e^{}\gamma e^{}H^+H^{}`$ and $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ by using the program originally developed in Ref. ; the $`e^{}\gamma \nu _ef\overline{f}H^{}`$ reactions were simulated by producing a totally new code, based on helicity amplitudes ; finally, for $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}`$ production, our code was based on that developed in Refs. .

All processes were calculated at leading order only. For the SM parameters we adopted the following setup: $`m_b=4.25`$ GeV, $`m_t=175`$ GeV, $`m_e=0.511`$ MeV, $`m_\tau =1.78`$ GeV, $`m_\nu =0`$, $`M_W=80.23`$ GeV, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W=2.08`$ GeV, $`M_Z=91.19`$ GeV, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z=2.50`$ GeV, $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W=0.232`$. The top quark width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_t`$ was evaluated at leading order for each value of $`M_{H^\pm }`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$. Neutral and charged Higgs masses were calculated for given values of $`M_{A^0}`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ using the HDECAY package , with the SUSY masses, the trilinear couplings and the Higgsino mass parameter $`\mu `$ being set to 1 TeV. The Higgs boson widths $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{H^\pm ,\mathrm{\Phi }^0}`$ were all evaluated again by using the above package. In the one-loop analysis of process (4) we assumed that the superpartners are sufficiently heavy to decouple, so that only the heavy-quark loops and Higgs–gauge loops need to be included.

We have used the energy spectrum of the back–scattered (unpolarised) photon given by Ref.

$$F_{\gamma /e}(x)=\frac{1}{D(\xi )}\left[1x+\frac{1}{1x}\frac{4x}{\xi (1x)}+\frac{4x^2}{\xi ^2(1x)^2}\right],$$
(5)
where $`D(\xi )`$ is the normalisation factor

$$D(\xi )=\left(1\frac{4}{\xi }\frac{8}{\xi ^2}\right)\mathrm{ln}(1+\xi )+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{8}{\xi }\frac{1}{2(1+\xi )^2},$$
(6)
and $`\xi =4E_0\omega _0/m_e^2`$, where $`\omega _0`$ is the incoming laser photon energy and $`E_0`$ the (unpolarised) positron one. In eq. (7) $`x=\omega /E_0`$ is the fraction of the energy of the incident positron carried by the back–scattered photon, with a maximum value

$$x_{\mathrm{max}}=\frac{\xi }{1+\xi }.$$
(7)
In order to maximise $`\omega `$ avoiding $`e^+e^{}`$ pair creation, one takes $`\omega _0`$ such that $`\xi =2(1+\sqrt{2})`$. So, we obtain the typical values $`\xi 4.8`$, $`x_{\mathrm{max}}0.83`$, $`D(\xi )1.8`$, with $`\omega _01.25(0.63)`$ eV for a $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}=0.5(1)`$ TeV $`e^+e^{}`$ collider. In the case of an $`e^\pm \gamma `$ scattering the total cross section $`\sigma `$ is obtained by folding the subprocess cross section $`\widehat{\sigma }`$ with the photon luminosity $`F_{\gamma /e}`$:

$$\sigma (s_{ee})=_{x_{\mathrm{min}}}^{x_{\mathrm{max}}}𝑑xF_{\gamma /e}(x)\widehat{\sigma }(\widehat{s}_{e\gamma }=xs_{ee}),$$
(8)
where $`\widehat{s}_{e\gamma }`$ is the center of mass (CM) energy at parton ($`e\gamma `$) level, while

$$x_{\mathrm{min}}=\frac{(M_{\mathrm{final}})^2}{s_{ee}},$$
(9)
with $`M_{\mathrm{final}}`$ the sum of the final state particle masses.

We present the cross sections as functions of the charged Higgs boson mass $`M_{H^\pm }`$ at collider energies of $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}=500`$ and 1000 GeV and four different values of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, 1.5, 7, 30 and 40. This is done in Fig. 5 for the pair production process (1) — for which there exists no $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ dependence, in fact — and in Figs. 6 to 8 for the single $`H^\pm `$ modes. The $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ dependence of processes (2)–(4) can be understood as follows. In $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ ($`\mathrm{\Phi }^0=h^0,H^0,A^0`$), only couplings relevant to $`W^\pm `$ bosons are involved. If we represent the Higgs fields in the gauge basis (through a so-called ‘$`\beta `$-rotation’, i.e., a rotation of the mass matrix by the angle $`\beta `$, the ratio of the vacuum expectation values of the two MSSM Higgs doublets), we have two new doublets, $`H_{\mathrm{SM}}`$ (a SM-like one) and $`H_{\mathrm{add}}`$,

$$H_{\mathrm{add}}=\left(\begin{array}{c}H^+\\ (\varphi _2^0+\mathrm{i}A^0)/\sqrt{2}\end{array}\right),$$
(10)
where the field $`\varphi _2^0`$ is a superposition of the physical mass eigenstates $`h^0`$ and $`H^0`$, and is diagonalised through a rotation by the angle $`\alpha \beta `$. From this formulation, it is clear that in the vertices $`W^\pm H^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ only the cases $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0=h^0,H^0`$ can carry a $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ dependence. However, for large $`M_{H^\pm }`$, one has that $`\varphi _2^0H^0`$, so that such dependence disappears to a large extent also for the case $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0=H^0`$. (In other terms, as already mentioned, in the decoupling limit $`M_{H^\pm }\mathrm{}`$, $`H^0`$ carries the full gauge coupling dependence and $`h^0`$ does decouple.) Furthermore, for $`e^{}\gamma \nu _ef\overline{f}H^{}`$, the $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ dependence mainly comes from the $`H^\pm f\overline{f}^{}`$ Yukawa couplings, with some minor contaminations due to $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0f\overline{f}`$ vertices as well. There is also a resonant effect for $`f=b`$, in the region $`M_{H^\pm }\stackrel{<}{}m_t`$, induced by $`\overline{t}\overline{b}H^{}`$ decays (see diagrams 2 and 6 in Fig. 3). Finally, in $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}`$, the $`H^\pm t\overline{b}`$ Yukawa interaction is modulated by the chirality structure of the loop diagrams (top-bottom loop contributions are dominant in fact), so that in the end the $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ dependence becomes $`1/\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ or $`m_b^2/m_t^2\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, rather than $`1/\mathrm{tan}\beta ^2`$ or $`m_b^2/m_t^2\mathrm{tan}\beta ^2`$ (at amplitude level), for any $`M_{H^\pm }`$, this explaining the enhancement for low $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ values.

If we assume, for instance, an integrated luminosity of 500 fb-1 (which could be collected after a few years running ), $`10^5`$ pb corresponds to 5 events before acceptance cuts and background reduction. We do not discuss the background reduction procedure in detail in this study, and $`10^5`$ pb is taken naively as the threshold of the ‘relevance’ of a process to the study of charged Higgs production at an $`e^\pm \gamma `$ LC. We emphasise that this is not intended in any way as a threshold of detectability, or even visibility, as the evaluation of such thresholds would require jet simulations and machine-dependent considerations which are clearly beyond the scope of the current study.

The most prolific production channel is surely $`e^{}\gamma e^{}H^+H^{}`$, for any value of $`M_{H^\pm }`$ up to $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}2M_{H^\pm }`$. However, the contribution from all other single $`H^\pm `$ production modes becomes comparable to that of the pair production mode. In fact, after 500 inverse femtobarns of luminosity have been collected, one may expect between 2,000 and 110 $`H^+H^{}`$ events to be produced, for $`M_{H^\pm }`$ ranging between 140 GeV and $`0.4\sqrt{s}_{ee}`$ when $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}=500`$ GeV, whereas corresponding numbers at 1000 GeV of CM energy are 6,000 and 20. The single $`H^\pm `$ production channels can altogether furnish between 395 (122)  {490} and 14 (7)  {17} events at $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}=500`$ GeV, corresponding to $`M_{H^\pm }=140`$ and 200 GeV, respectively, for $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =1.5`$ (7)  {40}. At $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}=1000`$ GeV, one instead has 877 (683)  {2201} events for $`M_{H^\pm }=140`$ GeV and 15 (2)  {13} for $`M_{H^\pm }=400`$ GeV.

Above the kinematic threshold of pair production, i.e., when $`2M_{H^\pm }\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.8}\sqrt{s}_{ee}`$, only the loop-mediated process $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}`$ can in principle be useful, at least at low $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$. In fact, for $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =1.5`$, one has 10 events when $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}=500`$ GeV and $`M_{H^\pm }=300`$ GeV, or $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}=1000`$ GeV and $`M_{H^\pm }=600`$ GeV. For such heavy masses, all other single $`H^\pm `$ channels become negligible, even at large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$. Further notice the much steeper descent in the production rates of processes (2)–(3), Figs. 67, with respect to those of process (4), see Figs. 8, with growing Higgs mass values.

## 3 Possible signals and detection strategies

Over most of the heavy mass range, $`M_{H^\pm }m_t`$, charged Higgs bosons decay to $`t\overline{b}`$ (and charge conjugate) pairs . Given the not so large production rates in all modes considered, it is natural to focus on this decay channel first555In the pair production mode, one may alternatively conceive to ask for one of the two charged Higgs bosons to decay via $`H^{}\tau \nu _\tau `$, assuming large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ values, where the corresponding Branching Ratio (BR) can be as large as 10% . However, we do not consider here this possibility..

If both charged Higgs bosons decay to top-bottom pairs, the final signature produced by the $`H^+H^{}`$ production channel is $`b\overline{b}b\overline{b}W^+W^{}`$666The $`H^+H^{}t\overline{b}\overline{t}b`$ decay combination can be complemented by the $`H^+H^{}W^+h^0W^{}h^0`$ one, at low $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, and mixtures of the four $`H^\pm `$ decays modes, all producing the $`b\overline{b}b\overline{b}W^+W^{}`$ intermediate stage., with the very forward/backward electron escaping detection. Under these circumstances, one may apply the same selection procedure outlined in Ref. , for the $`e^+e^{}H^+H^{}`$ case. Here, the two $`W^\pm `$’s are required to decay hadronically, hence, the final signal is made up by eight jets. Four of these can be $`b`$-tagged with high efficiency. Both $`W^\pm `$’s and $`t`$’s are reconstructed. After completing the jet assignment, one can finally perform a kinematical fit, imposing the constraint of equal Higgs boson masses. This way, the signal should clearly emerge from the background with high statistical significance. The latter is expected to mainly be constituted by $`e^{}\gamma e^{}t\overline{t}h^0`$ events, with $`h^0b\overline{b}`$, the counterpart of $`e^+e^{}t\overline{h}^0t\overline{t}b\overline{b}`$, discussed in the above paper. Another noise could be induced in the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ case by triple-gauge-vector production, via $`e^{}\gamma e^{}Z^0W^+W^{}`$, with $`W^+W^{}jjjj`$ and $`Zjjjj`$ too. This background can however be suppressed by imposing $`M_{jjjj}M_{Z^0}`$, even before enforcing $`b`$-tagging. (Events of the type $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eW^{}W^+W^{}`$, with a longitudinal $`W^{}`$ boson exchange, could in principle be relevant; in practise to impose $`b`$-tagging should be enough to remove them efficiently.)

The signature expected from the single $`H^\pm `$ production modes (2)–(3) is either the one above, or else $`b\overline{b}b\overline{b}W^{}`$, with $`W^{}jj`$, yielding one less jet pair (again, assuming $`H^{}\overline{t}b`$ hadronic decays). On the one hand, it should be noticed that processes of the type (3) with $`f=\tau ,\nu _\tau `$ are smaller in comparison to the case $`f=b`$. On the other hand, for $`M_{\mathrm{\Phi }^0}`$ below 400 GeV, the dominant decays of neutral Higgs bosons are either $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0b\overline{b}`$ (yielding the six-jet signature) or $`H^0h^0h^0,W^+W^{},Z^0Z^0`$ and $`A^0Z^0h^0`$, with $`h^0b\overline{b}`$ and $`W^\pm ,Z^0jj`$ (yielding the eight-jet signature). Thus, one could pursue in either case a selection strategy along the lines already described, with the only caution of constraining the final kinematical fit to different intermediate masses ($`M_{h^0}`$, $`M_{W^\pm }`$ and/or $`M_{Z^0}`$, rather than a second $`m_t`$). Unfortunately, in the single $`H^\pm `$ production cases, one can no longer impose the equal Higgs mass constraints, which revealed itself rather effective in rejecting both combinatorial and genuine background in the $`e^+e^{}H^+H^{}`$ case. Significant noises in the eight-jet channel are as above, whereas in the six-jet case one may expect $`e^{}\gamma e^{}t\overline{t}`$ (again, the electron is assumed to be undetected), with $`t\overline{t}b\overline{b}W^+W^{}`$ and $`W^+W^{}`$ yielding in turn four jets, to be relevant. This can however be suppressed by a triple (at least) $`b`$-tagging and/or a mass rejection, $`M_{jj}M_{W^\pm }`$, against a second jet-pair reconstructing a $`W^\pm `$ mass.

The total production rate for the $`\nu _eb\overline{b}H^{}`$ final state can be found in Figs. 9 (upper curves). These have been computed by adding to the diagrams in Fig. 3 (for the case $`f=b`$ and $`f^{}=t`$) those in Fig. 2, the latter supplemented by the decay currents $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0b\overline{b}`$ (including Higgs propagator effects), then taking the square of the sum of all such diagrams. This way, interference effects between the two channels are taken into account appropriately. In the total cross sections, one may appreciate the different components of $`b\overline{b}H^{}`$ final states. When $`M_{H^\pm }\stackrel{<}{}m_t`$, there is a resonant contribution from $`\overline{t}\overline{b}H^{}`$ decays (graphs 2,5,7 and 11 in Fig. 3), which is clearly visible in the lower curves. The resonant $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0b\overline{b}`$ contributions are responsible for the general increase of the production rates for $`M_{H^\pm }\stackrel{<}{}\sqrt{s}_{e\gamma }/2`$ (upper curves versus lowers curves in Figs. 9). The relative strength of the two resonant contributions in the allowed kinematic regions is regulated by $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ . The contributions from the Higgs-strahlung diagrams, namely 3 and 8 in Fig. 3, is much smaller at both energies considered, and can yield rates in small excess of $`𝒪(10^5)`$ fb only at $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =40`$ and $`M_{H^\pm }\stackrel{<}{}m_t`$.

Process (4) has already been studied in Ref. , where a detailed signal-to-background analysis has been carried out, for the dominant charged Higgs decay channel, to top-bottom pairs, with respect the continuum production $`e^{}\gamma \nu _e\overline{t}b`$. Unfortunately, despite the signal is above our threshold of relevance up to very large masses, well beyond $`\sqrt{s}_{e\gamma }/2`$ (as already remarked), for both CM energy considered and at small $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ (see Fig. 8), the mentioned irreducible noise is in the end prohibitive (besides, notice that the latter scales with $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ exactly as the signal does, see Ref. ). Finally, it was also pointed out in the study of Ref. ) the negative interference effects between signal and background, which further deplete the signal-to-background rates.

To summarise our findings, the interesting production modes (1)–(4), which are specific to the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ option, have cross sections which are too small to be of much use, and the quantities which can in principle be measured there (such as multiple Higgs-gauge-boson and Higgs-fermion couplings) can be better accessed in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions, as can be confirmed by comparing the results presented here with those obtained in Ref. .

## 4 Conclusions

We have verified that the potential of future LCs operating in the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ mode in covering the heavy charged Higgs boson sector of the MSSM is only limited to values of the charged Higgs boson mass compatible with the kinematic constraint $`2M_{H^\pm }\stackrel{<}{}\sqrt{s}_{e\gamma }0.8\sqrt{s}_{ee}`$. However, over this range, not only the pair production mode $`e^{}\gamma e^{}H^+H^{}`$ is large, but also a variety of single $`H^\pm `$ production channels, $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^0`$ (when $`\mathrm{\Phi }^0=H^0`$ and $`A^0`$), $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eb\overline{b}H^{}`$ and $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}`$, can produce rates of the same order of magnitude. In general, we have so far established that the $`e^+e^{}`$ beam option of future LCs offers better chances than the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ one of detecting and studying heavy charged Higgs bosons of the MSSM (recall Ref. ). In fact, the arguments adopted here and in Ref.  can equally be applied to a more general Two-Higgs-Doublet-Model (2HDM).

The drawbacks of the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ beam option in comparison to the $`e^+e^{}`$ are twofold. Firstly, Higgs cross sections are significantly smaller, both for pair production and single $`H^\pm `$ channels. Secondly, when $`M_{H^\pm }`$ is significantly larger than $`\sqrt{s}_{e\gamma }/2`$ — so that $`H^+H^{}`$ final states are no longer available — none of the single production modes considered here is able to furnish enough events to pursue a statistically significant analysis. Not even the loop-induced mode $`e^{}\gamma \nu _eH^{}`$ is very helpful. Here, despite the fact that the production rates are very stable up to very large $`M_{H^\pm }`$ values (indeed, comparable to $`\sqrt{s}_{e\gamma }`$) and that in principle the signal could be observable at very low $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ (in which case though, one should dismiss the MSSM in favour of a general 2HDM), one has to cope with a large irreducible background in non-resonant $`e^{}\gamma \nu _e\overline{t}b`$ events, overwhelming the signal in the $`H^{}\overline{t}b`$ decay mode, even before taking into account the negative interference between the two competing processes . This situation is in contrast with the case of single charged Higgs production at the $`e^+e^{}`$ option, where it has been revealed that there are several channels which are viable complements to the pair production mode .

Finally, although at the energy scales which we have considered in this work the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ option offers no advantage compared to the $`e^+e^{}`$ one, the situation would get somewhat brighter at higher CM energies. We note that the cross sections typically behave as $`1/s_{ee}`$ in annihilation reactions (i.e., in the $`e^+e^{}`$ option of a LC), whereas the $`t`$-channel induced $`e^\pm \gamma `$ processes have cross sections which scale as $`\mathrm{log}(s_{e\gamma })`$ with increasing energy. At 5 TeV , for example, we believe that the $`e^\pm \gamma `$ option would offer physics opportunities that can complement those available in $`e^+e^{}`$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ LCs. However, we have not pursued here this possibility, as we have confined ourselves to current design values of $`\sqrt{s}_{ee}`$ at TESLA , i.e., in the TeV region.

A similar analysis  to the one performed here and in Ref.  is now in progress for the $`\gamma \gamma `$ beam option of future LCs.

### Acknowledgements

SK would like to thank C.-P. Yuan for useful discussions. SK and KO would like to thank KEK for enabling KO’s visit to Osaka and for hospitality during SK’s visit to KEK. SK and KO also thank Y. Okada for discussions.


text:
# Reply to “Comment on ‘Pipe network model for scaling of dynamic interfaces in porous media’ ”

In a previous experiment , imbibition fronts moving up in a paper sheet, that drifts down into a water tank at speed $`v`$, were found to have an average height $`\overline{h}v^{1/\mathrm{\Omega }}`$, a width $`w\overline{h}^{\mathrm{\Omega }\kappa }`$, and a temporal correlation function $`C(t)=v^\kappa f(tv^{(\theta _t+\kappa )/\beta })`$. We simulated the phenomenon using a pipe network model and reproduced the rich scaling behaviors with $`all`$ exponents $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`\kappa `$, $`\theta _t`$ and $`\beta `$ in agreement with the experimental values . Another study based on a phase-field model leads to predictions on exponents that are unfortunately incompatible with the experimental ones.

The front propagation exemplifies two related dynamics, namely mean flow and roughening. Assuming a unique time scale controlling both dynamics, an exponent identity $`\beta =\mathrm{\Omega }(\theta _t+\kappa )/(\mathrm{\Omega }+1)`$ was derived. Inserting experimental values into the right-hand side, we get $`\beta =0.52`$ compared with the measured value 0.56. Using numerical estimates, $`\beta =0.54`$ is obtained to be compared to the numerically measured value $`0.63`$. The identity is also supported by a constancy in the relative degree of roughening for simulated fronts in stationary paper sheets .

The unique time scale assumption and hence the identity are the main objections by Dube et al. . We now give further evidences by directly extracting relevant time constants from experimental and numerical data in Refs. . The mean flow is characterized by $`t_1=\overline{h}/v`$. For roughening, we observe that $`C(t)`$ can be nicely fitted by $`\sqrt{2}w[1+(t/t_2)^{a\beta }]^{1/a}`$ at $`a=3.5`$ and the relaxation time $`t_2`$ hence follows. Results are plotted in Fig. 1. The unique time scale assumption means that $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ are different representations of a unique time scale for the front propagation dynamics. It requires $`t_1/t_2`$ to be a constant of order, but $`not`$ necessarily exactly unity. In contrast, if flow and roughening were distinct dynamics , $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ could easily differ by a factor of, say, 10 or 100. Using the experimental results, $`t_1/t_20.82`$ on average for various values of $`\overline{h}`$. It is close to unity and is a strong experimental support of our view. A further numerical support is that $`t_1/t_22.0`$ roughly from our simulation. The very similar magnitudes of $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ $`both`$ in experiment and simulation independently, in addition to their approximate proportionality, should not be causally dismissed as accidental. Instead, its implication of a unique time scale can be a helpful hint for a complete theory of the experimental observations.

The discrepancy between the ratios 0.82 and 2.0 deserves some caution, though it can be due to finite size effects, which affects prefactors more severely than exponents. In Fig. 1, variations in the slopes of the fitted lines for either the experimental or numerical values reflect slight deviations from $`t_1t_2`$. These are alternative representations of deviations of the estimated exponents from our identity discussed above. They have been attributed to finite size effects which are particularly significant in the simulations .

C.H.L. is supported by HK RGC Grant 5191/99P. V.K.H. is supported by Hungarian Science Foundation grant OTKA-F17310, M-27950 and NATO grant DGE-9804461.


text:
# References

The universal potential fluctuations

D.L. Khokhlov

Sumy State University, R.-Korsakov St. 2,
Sumy 40007, Ukraine
E-mail: khokhlov@cafe.sumy.ua

## Abstract

It is assumed the existence of the universal potential fluctuations valid for all scales in the universe which follow the fractal law $`\delta _U=(\mathrm{\Delta }r/r)^2`$. The value of the universal potential fluctuations is determined from the data on anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background on degree scales. It is suggested to test the existence of the universal potential fluctuations in the laboratory experiment.

There are two independent arguments that the universe can be viewed as a fractal with the law

$$m(<r)r^2$$
(1)
where $`m(<r)`$ is the mass restricted within radius $`r`$. With the use of heuristic conjecture Dirac  obtained the fractal relation between the microworld scale and the universe scale

$$\frac{m_U}{m_{mic}}=\left(\frac{r_U}{r_{mic}}\right)^2$$
(2)
where $`m_U`$ and $`r_U`$ are the mass and the radius of the universe, $`m_{mic}`$ and $`r_{mic}`$ are the mass and the radius of microparticle. Pietronero et al.  claimed that galaxies have a fractal distribution

$$N(<r)r^2$$
(3)
on all scales up to the deepest scales probed until now $`1000h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$. Thus it is natural to assume that the fractal law $`m(<r)r^2`$ extends on all scales from the microworld scale to the universe scale.

Let us assume that there exist universal potential fluctuations valid for all scales in the universe

$$\delta _U=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m}{m}=\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }r}{r}\right)^2.$$
(4)
That is the universal potential fluctuations follow the above fractal law. The universal potential fluctuations can be registered as angular fluctuations of the electromagnetic radiation. Let us assume that the universal potential fluctuations cause anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) on degree scales. The peak of the temperature fluctuations in the CMB spectrum $`\mathrm{\Delta }T/T=3\times 10^5`$ is seen at the multipole $`\mathrm{}_{eff}=260`$ . These values can be bounded by the relation

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T}{T}2\mathrm{}_{eff}^2.$$
(5)
Let us assume that the multipole $`\mathrm{}_{eff}`$ relates with the universal potential fluctuations as

$$\delta _U=\mathrm{}_{eff}^2.$$
(6)
The value $`\mathrm{}_{eff}=260`$ yields the value $`\delta _U=1.48\times 10^5`$.

It is interesting to test the existence of the universal potential fluctuations in the laboratory experiment. The scheme of the experiment is the following. Two identical sources of the electromagnetic radiation are placed at the distance $`\mathrm{\Delta }r`$ between them and at the distance $`r`$ from the detector. The universal potential fluctuations should cause fluctuations of the temperature of the electromagnetic radiation $`\mathrm{\Delta }T/T3\times 10^5`$ at the angle $`\mathrm{\Delta }r/r1/260`$.