text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Cosmic quintessence  is proposed recently to be an alternative to understand the astronomical data of supernova (see also  for a summary of the data constraints.) indicating an everlasting accelerating universe, which can also be interpretated as the effect of a small slowly time-varying cosmological constant . Recently there are discussions on the difficulty about the string theory in a spacetime with future cosmological horizon  which exists both for de Sitter space and the universe dominated by cosmic quintessence at late time, and hinders the notion of S-matrices in the perturbative string or quantum field theory. However, from the cosmological point of view, the quintessence proposal has milder cosmological constant problem without severe fine tuning since it does not require a zero cosmological constant at all time, instead it models a slowly decaying cosmological constant and its effect at the present moment will fit the observational data by properly tuning its energy density.

Let us start with the usual (3+1)-dim. Friedman-Robertson-Walker(FRW) metric

$$ds_{FRW}^2=d\tau ^2+a^2(\tau )d\mathrm{\Sigma }_k^2,$$
(1.1)
and the Einstein equations are reduced to the FRW equations

$`H^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k}{a^2}}+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _i}{3}}({\displaystyle \frac{a_0}{a}})^{\kappa _i},`$ (1.2)
$`6{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}(2\kappa _i)\rho _i({\displaystyle \frac{a_0}{a}})^{\kappa _i}.`$ (1.3)
Note that the second FRW equation is independent of $`k`$ where $`k=1,0,1`$ corresponds to open, flat and closed universe with the corresponding hypersphere $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_k`$; $`a(\tau )`$ is the cosmological scale factor with $`a_0`$ parameterizing the initial size of the universe; $`H=\dot{a}/a`$ is the Hubble parameter with $`\dot{a}\frac{da}{d\tau }`$. In the above we have assumed the universe contains only the perfect fluids of pressure $`p_i`$ and the energy density $`\rho _i=\rho _{0i}(a_0/a)^{\kappa _i}`$, and obeying the equation of state $`p_i=\omega _i\rho _i`$ with

$$\kappa _i=3(1+\omega _i).$$
(1.4)
Usually one could have different types of matters present in the universe, for example, a CFT matter or photon has $`\omega =1/3`$(or $`\kappa =4`$), and a cosmological constant corresponds to $`\omega =1`$(or $`\kappa =0`$), and the usual matters have $`\omega =0`$($`\kappa =3`$). In the late time or for the large scale factor, the dynamics of the FRW cosmology is dominated by the component with small $`\kappa >0`$.

In this paper, the dominated matter in the late time is assumed to be the quintessence in accord with the observation data in  giving the following constraint on $`\omega `$

$$1<\omega _{obs}<\frac{2}{3}or0<\kappa <1,$$
(1.5)
which indicates the universe is accelerating at the present stage according to the 2nd FRW equations for both flat, open and closed universes. In general an accelerating universe requires

$$1<\omega <\frac{1}{3}or0<\kappa <2,$$
(1.6)
which is driven by some matters coined as quintessence dominated at the late time of cosmic evolution . As emphasized in , an observer in an accelerating universe will see a future horizon.

In this paper we will investigate the possibility of having the quintessence as the holographic imprint of the brane-world scenarios. Since the quintessence can be in general modelled as a slowly-rolling scalar which does not exist in the usual Randall-Sundrum(RS) type brane-world scenarios  with a brane embedded in the pure AdS space. However, in the dilatonic gravity it is natural to have a Liouville type potential, that is, in the exponential form. As one follows the AdS/CFT correspondence , the bulk gravity will induce holographic matters with similar on-shell Liouville type potential on the brane, which can be interpretated as the holographic dark energy from the point of view of brane cosmology; and for some specific dilaton gravity one may obtain the holographic cosmic quintessence.

Our answer to this investigation is positive. In the next section 2 and 3 we will review the general holographic principle in dilaton gravity which is intimately related to the holographic renormalization group  and induces intrinsic geometry on the brane. Based upon this intrinsic brane gravity we will discuss the possibility of having the holographic cosmic quintessence on the static brane. In section 4 and 5 we will turn to the more general bulk dilatonic background and discuss the holographic quintessence on a moving brane based upon the FRW cosmology derived from the extrinsic geometry of the brane, the Israel junction condition. It turns out that the quintessence on the moving brane has the similar effect as a mildly time-varying Newton constant. In the last section we conclude with some remarks and discussions.

## 2 Dilatonic Brane Gravity from Holography

The Randall-Sundrum model  of branes embedded in a bulk (anti-de Sitter) spacetime can be thought as a variant of the AdS/CFT correspondence , that is, the dual CFT is coupled to the brane gravity as the induced holographic dark matters . After integrating out the hidden CFT matters we will obtain an effective gravity theory in which we can add the local matters like the Standard model on the curved brane. This consideration of holography can be generalized to the bulk dilatonic gravity with the action

$$S=_{}d^{n+2}x\sqrt{g}(\frac{1}{2}R\frac{1}{2}g^{MN}_M\varphi _N\varphi V(\varphi )),$$
(2.1)
where $`V(\varphi )`$ is the dilaton potential which usually have its origin in higher dimensional supergravity or superstring theory. After integrating out the dual holographic field theory on the brane, one will obtain an effective dilaton gravity theory on the brane with the following action

$$S_\mathrm{\Sigma }=_\mathrm{\Sigma }d^{n+1}x\sqrt{\gamma }(Z(\varphi )\frac{1}{2}M(\varphi )\gamma ^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi U(\varphi ))+\mathrm{\Gamma }[\gamma ,\varphi ],$$
(2.2)
where $``$ is the scalar curvature with respect to the boundary metric $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$. The UV part $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contains the higher-derivative and non-local terms and thus can be neglected in the low energy regime111The trace of the variation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }[\gamma ,\varphi ]`$ with respect to $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ is the conformal anomaly which is argued in  to drive the inflation of the brane universe, and is thus relevant in the early universe in accord with its UV nature..

The boundary functionals $`Z(\varphi )`$, $`M(\varphi )`$ and $`U(\varphi )`$ on the brane worldvolume $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ are not arbitrary but are determined or induced by the bulk gravity theory and the geometry, and can be viewed as the holographic dark energy on the brane( or domain wall). In the bulk geometry of the Randall-Sundrum type with the metric

$$g_{MN}dx^Mdx^N=dr^2+ds_{brane}^2dr^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(r)\overline{\gamma }_{\mu \nu }(x^\mu )dx^\mu dx^\nu ,$$
(2.3)
where $`\overline{\gamma }_{\mu \nu }`$ depends only on the brane coordinates not on $`r`$, and the on-shell bulk and boundary potentials are related by the following ”superpotential-like” relation

$$\frac{1}{2}(\frac{U}{\varphi })^2\frac{2}{3}U^2=V(\varphi ).$$
(2.4)
A more general and systematic discussions based upon the Hamilton-Jacobi formalism about the holographic relations was given in  (see also  for the recent attempt in the cosmology context). This formalism is a generalization of AdS/CFT correspondence, and the dilaton is interpretated as the effective coupling of the holographic renormalization group flow in the boundary theory with its beta function defined by

$$\beta =\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{\varphi }{\mathrm{\Lambda }},$$
(2.5)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the overall scale factor in (2.3) and is interpretated as the holographic energy scale in the dual theory.

On the other hand, one can determine the intrinsic brane gravity described by $`S_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ from the Hamilton-Jacobi equation given in  which is

$$[\pi _{\sigma \nu }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{det\gamma }}\frac{\delta S_\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \gamma ^{\sigma \nu }},\mathrm{\Pi }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{det\gamma }}\frac{\delta S_\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \varphi }]=0,$$
(2.6)
where $``$ is the Hamilton density constructed from the action (2.1) in the standard ADM formalism. The $`\pi _{\mu \nu }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ are the canonical conjugate momenta with respect to $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ and $`\varphi `$. The boundary action $`S_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is then identified as the Hamilton-Jacobi functional as indicated above. From the Hamilton-Jacobi equation, we obtain the following independent holographic relations 222Our convention taken here is different from the one in  with an additional factor $`1/2`$ in front of the bulk scalar curvature term so that the coefficients in the following holographic relations change accordingly.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}UZ+2U^{^{}}Z^{^{}}=1,`$ (2.7)
$`\beta =12{\displaystyle \frac{Z^{^{}}}{M}},`$ (2.8)
$`4M24Z^{^{\prime \prime }}+\beta M^{^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{6}{U}},`$ (2.9)
where  means the derivative with respect to $`\varphi `$. Moreover, the beta function can be determined from inverting the defining equations of the canonical momenta, and it turns out to be

$$\beta =\frac{6U^{^{}}}{U}.$$
(2.10)
From the set of the holographic relations we can determined the brane gravity theory with a given boundary dilaton potential. It is easy to see that there is no nontrivial solution for constant $`M`$ and $`Z`$, so it implies that the brane gravity usually has a nontrivial dilaton potential. Since we are interested in the possibility of the holographic quintessence which can be modelled with a power-law or exponential form dilaton potential, we try the ansatz for such kind of the potential form. We find that there is no simple solution for the power-law potential, while we have the solution for the Liouville type as the following

$`U`$ $`=`$ $`e^{b(\varphi \varphi _0)},`$ (2.11)
$`M`$ $`=`$ $`2Z=({\displaystyle \frac{6}{4+6b^2}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{U}},`$ (2.12)
for arbitrary constants $`b`$ and $`\varphi _0`$333 In fact, the general solutions for $`Z`$ and $`M`$ are    $`Z`$ $`=`$ $`c_0e^{\frac{2\varphi }{3b}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4+6b^2}}e^{b\varphi }`$    $`M`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4c_0}{3b^2}}e^{\frac{2\varphi }{3b}}{\displaystyle \frac{6}{4+6b^2}}e^{b(\varphi \varphi _0)}`$  where $`c_0`$ is an integration constant. Since the $`c_0`$ terms have the opposite running behavior from the other terms and will destroy the UV/IR relation in the holographic RG scheme, thus we should put it to zero for consistency.. Moreover, the bulk and boundary potential is related by (2.4) as

$$V=(\frac{3b^24}{6})U^2.$$
(2.13)
Note that for $`3b^2=4`$, $`V=0`$ which corresponds to the self-tuning brane model of . In the next section we will study the FRW cosmology of the brane gravity $`S_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ to check the possibility of the holographic cosmic quintessence for the static brane.

## 3 Quintessence on the Holographic Brane

Before going to the FRW cosmology of the brane gravity described by $`S_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ we first recall some facts about the FRW cosmology of the quintessence modelled by the following (3+1)-dim. scalar Lagrangian

$$L=\sqrt{\gamma }(\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{\Phi })^2+W(\mathrm{\Phi })),$$
(3.1)
With respect to the FRW metric (1.1), the energy density $`\rho `$ and the pressure $`p`$ take the form

$$\rho =\frac{1}{2}\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2+W(\mathrm{\Phi }),p=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2W(\mathrm{\Phi }),$$
(3.2)
and the equation of state is

$$\omega \frac{p}{\rho }=\frac{\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^22W(\mathrm{\Phi })}{\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2+2W(\mathrm{\Phi })}.$$
(3.3)
Note that when $`\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2<W(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ in the late time, then $`\omega <1/3`$(or $`\kappa <2`$) giving the quintessence. In the case of $`k=0`$, it has been shown in  that the only stable attractive fixed point of the solution space for $`\kappa =3(1+\omega )<2`$ is that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ scales as

$$a\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{a}=\sqrt{\kappa },$$
(3.4)
and the scalar energy density red-shifts as

$$\rho =\rho _0(\frac{a_0}{a})^\kappa $$
(3.5)
as usual. Note that the scalar-field equation of motion implies the conservation of the scalar-field stress tensor. At this fixed point it is easy to see that

$$W(\mathrm{\Phi })=W_0e^{\sqrt{\kappa }\mathrm{\Phi }}.$$
(3.6)
The above indicates that a scalar field with Liouville type potential could be the quintessence within the usual Einstein gravity. However, the brane gravity in the last section is the gravity not in the Einstein frame but in the stringy frame with nontrivial $`Z(\varphi )`$ and $`M(\varphi )`$ in the action $`S_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. In order to study the usual FRW cosmology, we need to change to the Einstein frame by the following Weyl transformation444There is an issue about the equivalence of the different conformal frames as discussed in , we adopt the point of view that the standard FRW cosmology should be considered in the Einstein frame, we also find that the boundary gravity in the stringy frame (2.2) will lead to negative energy density for the FRW cosmology which agrees with the observation in .

$$\widehat{\gamma }_{\mu \nu }=Z(\varphi )\gamma _{\mu \nu },$$
(3.7)
and with the $`Z`$, $`M`$ and $`U`$ of (2.12) and (2.11) the new action in the Einstein frame555In this section we adopt the convention in  such that there is no $`1/2`$ factor in front of the Einstein-Hilbert term in (3.8). is

$$S_E=d^{3+1}x\sqrt{\widehat{\gamma }}[R\frac{1}{2}(\widehat{}\mathrm{\Phi })^2(\frac{4+6b^2}{3})^2e^{\frac{3b}{\sqrt{2+3b^2}}(\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }_0)}],$$
(3.8)
where we have defined

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\sqrt{2+3b^2}\varphi .$$
(3.9)
so that the scalar kinetic term is in the canonical form. Note that the resulting potential in the Einstein frame is positive definite so that the positive energy density of the holographic matters is ensured.

In the Einstein frame the brane gravity has the scalar-field Lagrangian $`L`$ of (3.1) with a specific potential $`W(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ by identifying

$$\sqrt{\kappa }=\frac{3b}{\sqrt{2+3b^2}},$$
(3.10)
which then requires $`b<0`$666The condition $`b<0`$ is consistent with the usual runaway behavior of the string dilaton so that the string coupling $`g_s=e^{b\varphi }0`$ as $`\varphi \mathrm{}`$. and the quintessence condition $`0<\kappa <2`$ requires

$$0<b^2<\frac{4}{3}.$$
(3.11)
Note that the marginal point for quintessence $`b^2=4/3`$ is the self-tuning brane condition for zero cosmological constant777For $`b^2=4/3`$ the potential in the Einstein frame is nonzero, this may indicate the inequivalence between the intrinsic holographic gravity and the extrinsic approach based upon some generalization of the method developed by ; however, it needs further investigations to clarify this point. . From the holographic relation (2.13), we conclude that a bulk potential $`V(\varphi )=V_0e^{2b\varphi }<0`$ with $`0<b^2<4/3`$ will induce holographic quintessence on the brane cosmology. We want to emphasize the fact $`V_0<0`$ for $`0<b^2<4/3`$ because this leads to an anti-de Sitter-like bulk geometry which is far more easy to be realized in the supergravity than the de-Sitter-like one . It is interesting to look for the origin of $`V(\varphi )`$ in the higher dimensional supergravities or string theory.

There are further complications by adding the standard matter fields besides the above Liouville scalar to cook up the more realistic cosmological model, the related issues and results have been discussed in  and can be directly carried to the holographic brane scenarios discussed here.

## 4 FRW Cosmology on the Moving Brane

In the last section we have considered the brane world scenarios as the generalization of AdS/CFT correspondence, by which the intrinsic geometry on the static brane is induced by the dual QFT on the brane. Although it is very intriguing to have covariant intrinsic gravity on the brane, it is difficult to generalize such program to a moving brane since the energy scale on the brane keeps changing all the time, which looks bizarre from the holographic RG point of view. Instead an extrinsic approach is more appropriate in which the brane cosmology is derived from the extrinsic geometry of the brane by using the Israel patching condition . However, from the general holographic principle point of view, we should expect the equivalence of the intrinsic and extrinsic approaches, which remains to be explored. Moreover, the FRW cosmology for a moving brane is also known as the mirage cosmology from the point of view of the effective theory on the brane , that is, the holographic image of the bulk gravity serves as the dark energy which drives the evolution of the brane universe.

To derive the brane FRW equations for a brane moving along the radial direction, we can add the following Gibbons-Hawking boundary action to (2.1)

$$S_{GH}=_\mathrm{\Sigma }d^{n+1}x\sqrt{\gamma }K,$$
(4.1)
where $`K`$ is the extrinsic curvature. The brane FRW equations can be obtained from the following Israel junction condition with brane situated at $`r=R`$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }K_{\mu \nu }=K_{\mu \nu }(r=R_+)K_{\mu \nu }(r=R_{})=(T_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{n}T_\gamma ^\gamma \gamma _{\mu \nu }),$$
(4.2)
which specifies the patching condition of the bulk geometry on the two sides of the brane with the boundary energy-momentum tensor $`T^{\mu \nu }\frac{2}{\sqrt{\gamma }}\frac{\delta S_\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \gamma _{\mu \nu }}`$. As remarked at beginning of this section, only the effective tension term of the brane, $`U(\varphi )`$ of $`S_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is kept since we are taking an extrinsic approach, of which there is no essential information about the intrinsic geometry on the brane. Moreover, by assuming the bulk spacetime is symmetric under the reflection with respect to the brane, (4.3) becomes

$$K_{ij}=\frac{1}{2n}\gamma _{ij}U(\varphi ).$$
(4.3)
Rewriting the junction condition (4.3) into the FRW equations on the brane has been done in  for the AdS gravity of which $`U(\varphi )`$ is a constant, especially a moving brane embedded in a Anti-de Sitter-Schwarzschild space results in a brane FRW cosmology with the CFT matters . Here we will generalize it to the dilatonic gravity with nontrivial $`U(\varphi )`$ for the following bulk geometry

$$g_{MN}dz^Mdz^N=f(r)dt^2+g(r)dr^2+h(r)\delta _{ij}dx^idx^jg(r)dr^2+\gamma _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu ,$$
(4.4)
with $`i,j`$ run from $`1`$ to $`n`$.

For the simplicity, we now restrict to the $`n=3`$ case, and consider a moving brane with the trajectory described by $`R(\tau )`$ where $`\tau `$ is the proper time defined by

$$d\tau ^2=f(R)dt^2+g(R)dR^2,$$
(4.5)
then the brane metric takes the FRW form of (1.1) with $`a^2(\tau )=h(R(\tau ))`$. Once the trajectory of the moving brane is assumed with respect to the proper time, we can calculate the extrinsic curvature $`K_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{2}n^M_M\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ with the unit normal $`n^M`$ defined with respect to the velocity vector $`u^M=(\dot{t},\dot{R},0,0,0)`$, where dot denotes the derivative withe respect to $`\tau `$. The junction condition (4.3) then turns out to have the form of FRW equation for the cosmology on the moving brane as

$$(\frac{\dot{a}}{a})^2=\frac{1}{4g}(\frac{h^{^{}}}{h})^2+(\frac{U}{6})^2.$$
(4.6)
To get familiar with the above FRW equation, we consider the simplest case for the bulk to be the pure black hole background without dilaton, we have $`f(r)=g^1(r)=kV_0r^2/3M/r`$ with $`k=1,0,1`$, $`h(r)=r^2`$ and $`U=U_0,V=V_0`$ with $`U_0,V_0`$ constants, then the FRW equation (4.6) becomes

$$(\frac{\dot{a}}{a})^2=\frac{k}{a^2}+\frac{M}{a^4}+\frac{V_0}{3}+(\frac{U_0}{6})^2.$$
(4.7)
It is clear that this corresponds to the (3+1)-dim. radiation dominated FRW cosmology with a cosmological constant proportional to $`\frac{V_0}{3}+(\frac{U_0}{6})^2`$ which can be fine tuned to zero only for bulk anti-de Sitter space with $`V_0<0`$. This kind of fine-tuning is the brane version of cosmological constant problem.

Another interesting example is the dilatonic background for the self-tuning (static) brane proposed in  to solve the brane version of the cosmological constant problem, in which $`V_0=0`$ but $`U=U_0e^{\sqrt{\frac{4}{3}}\varphi }`$, and the metric is888Since we have a different normalization of the scalar kinetic term from the one in , the corresponding factors in the $`A`$ and $`\varphi `$ change accordingly.

$$ds^2=dr^2+e^{2A(r)}dx_{brane}^2,$$
(4.8)
where $`A(r)`$ is related to the dilaton profile which is

$$\varphi (r)=2\sqrt{3}A(r)=\sqrt{\frac{3}{4}}\mathrm{log}|\frac{4r}{3}+c_1|+c_0,$$
(4.9)
with $`c_{0,1}`$ the integration constants which can be exploited to tune the brane cosmological constant . It is easy to see that the bulk geometry has a naked singularity at finite $`r`$ although it has been argued that this kind of singularity are harmless according to the criterions given in .

Instead of considering the static brane, we now embed a moving brane in such a background, the brane cosmology is then described by the following FRW equations

$$(\frac{\dot{a}}{a})^2=(\frac{e^{\frac{4c_0}{\sqrt{3}}}}{9}+(\frac{U_0}{6})^2)\frac{1}{a^8}.$$
(4.10)
Note that the scale behavior of the holographic matter on the RHS of the above FRW equation is neither of CFT nor of the quintessence. In some sense the above FRW cosmology has zero cosmological constant since the holographic matter is highly damped for the large scale factor and then leave nothing on the RHS of the FRW equation. This fact coincides with the claim of self-tuning cosmological constant for the static brane case .

Moreover, if the holographic matter in (4.10) has positive energy by proper choice of the parameters $`C_0`$ and $`U_0`$, then the brane is inflating and moving away from the naked singularity which thus will not cause any physical problem in the history of the evolution of the brane universe. In this sense, the naked singularity is harmless. On the other hand, if the holographic matter has negative energy, then the brane world is moving toward the singularity and will finally crash on it even our universe is flat. The analogue of a naked singularity in the brane world scenarios and the big bang( crunch) singularity has been exploited in  to give some criterion for the allowing naked singularities which appear generically in many bulk geometry, and this kind of criterion is argued to be equivalent to the one in .

Despite that the self-tuning brane model provide a possible solution to the cosmological constant problem, from the point of view of the FRW cosmology, the holographic matters induced on the brane do not yield the quintessence. In the next section we will see that some more general dilatonic background does induce holographic quintessence.

## 5 Holographic Quintessence on the Moving Brane

There are three types of dilatonic backgrounds (see also .) which solve the bulk equations of motion of (2.1) with the bulk and boundary dilaton potentials taken the following form

$$V=V_0e^{\beta \varphi },U=U_0e^{\alpha \varphi }.$$
(5.1)
The cosmological behaviors on the brane in these backgrounds have been discussed in details in , in the following we recapitulate their results but focus on the possible existence of the quintessence.

The 1st type background is just the one given in the last section with $`\alpha =\beta =0`$ which gives the radiation dominated FRW cosmology. We then look into the 2nd type dilatonic background with $`\alpha =\beta /2`$,$`k=0`$ and

$$f(r)=g^1(r)=(1+\delta ^2)^2r^{\frac{2}{1+\delta ^2}}(2Mr^{\frac{4\delta ^2}{1+\delta ^2}}\frac{2V_0e^{2\delta \varphi _0}}{3(4\delta ^2)}),$$
(5.2)
$$h(r)=r^{\frac{2}{1+\delta ^2}},\varphi (r)=\sqrt{3}(\varphi _0\frac{\delta }{1+\delta ^2}\mathrm{log}r),$$
(5.3)
where $`M`$ and $`\varphi _0`$ are integration constants and $`\delta =\frac{\sqrt{3}\beta }{2}=\sqrt{3}\alpha `$.

The FRW equation (4.6) of the brane in this background becomes

$$(\frac{\dot{a}}{a})^2=\frac{2M}{a^{(4+\delta ^2)}}+\frac{\widehat{V}_0}{a^{2\delta ^2}}.$$
(5.4)
where $`\widehat{V}_0(\frac{2V_0}{3(4\delta ^2)}+\frac{U_0^2}{36})e^{2\delta \varphi _0}`$. In the late time the second term dominates and is quintessential if

$$\delta ^2<1.$$
(5.5)
To ensure the positive energy condition for the all time, it requires $`M,\widehat{V}_0>0`$ which corresponds to a bulk dilatonic black hole background for $`V_0<0`$ . Moreover, the factor $`e^{2\delta \varphi _0}`$ implies no need for fine-tuning for the energy density of the quintessence.

Similarly, the brane FRW cosmology in the 3rd type dilatonic background is

$$(\frac{\dot{a}}{a})^2=2\delta ^4M(\frac{a_0}{a})^{4+\frac{1}{\delta ^2}}+\frac{2\delta ^4V_0e^{2\delta \varphi _0}}{3(1+2\delta ^2)}(\frac{a_0}{a})^2+(\frac{U_0e^{\frac{\varphi _0}{\delta }}}{6})^2(\frac{a_0}{a})^{\frac{2}{\delta ^2}}.$$
(5.6)
and the background geometry is given by

$$f(r)=g^1(r)=(1+\delta ^2)^2r^{\frac{2}{1+\delta ^2}}(2Mr^{\frac{1+2\delta ^2}{1+\delta ^2}}\frac{2V_0e^{2\delta \varphi _0}}{3(1+2\delta ^2)}),$$
(5.7)
$$h(r)=a_0^2r^{\frac{2\delta ^2}{1+\delta ^2}},\varphi (r)=\sqrt{3}(\varphi _0\frac{\delta }{1+\delta ^2}\mathrm{log}r),$$
(5.8)
and $`\delta =\frac{\sqrt{3}\beta }{2}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}\alpha }`$, $`a_0=|\frac{V_0e^{2\delta \varphi _0}(1\delta ^2)}{3}|^{1/2}`$.

It is then easy to see that in the late time the quintessence requires

$$\delta ^2>1.$$
(5.9)
For the bulk geometry to be a black hole type, it requires $`V_0<0,M>0`$ , then the positive energy condition may be violated.

To explore a little bit on the nature of the above quintessence, we can add the local matter on the brane. As usual, we focus on the perfect fluid matter with energy-momentum tensor

$$T_{\mu \nu }^{(m)}=\rho ^{(m)}u_\mu u_\nu +p^{(m)}(\gamma _{\mu \nu }+u_\mu u_\nu )$$
(5.10)
where $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }=g_{\mu \nu }n_\mu n_\nu `$. Then the FRW equation from the Israel junction condition changes to

$$(\frac{\dot{a}}{a})^2=\frac{1}{4g}(\frac{h^{}}{h})^2+(\frac{\rho ^{(m)}+U}{6})^2$$
(5.11)
For the 1st type bulk background $`U`$ is constant, so we have the well-known $`(\rho ^{(m)})^2`$ term different from the conventional FRW cosmology . On the other hand, for the 2nd and 3rd type quintessential brane, $`U`$ is not a constant and will dress its scale dependence on the $`\rho ^{(m)}`$ and $`(\rho ^{(m)})^2`$. If we restore the Newton constant dependence in the FRW equation, that is,

$$H^2=\frac{8\pi G_N}{3}\rho ,$$
(5.12)
we can absorb the dressing scale dependence of the $`\rho ^{(m)}`$ term into the Newton constant $`G_N`$ so that the matter density $`\rho ^{(m)}`$ scales as required by the energy conservation and equation of state. This implies that the quintessence on the moving brane has the nature of a mildly time-varying Newton constant since the dressing scale dependence due to the quintessence is very slowly varying. Similar conclusion about the time-varying Newton constant for a moving brane of zero cosmological constant is also discussed in . We also expect the similar situation for the static brane case. Moreover, these dressing will red-shift the matter energy.

## 6 Conclusion

Dilaton definitely has its deep origin in string theory and supergravity. In this paper we show that some dilaton potentials will induce the holographic quintessences on the brane, which provides a natural candidate to conform to the cosmological observational data in the brane world scenarios. By the way, it is interesting to compare our result with the efforts in getting the quintessences from some dilaton potentials in supersymmetric theory of supergravity origin. In  it has been shown that the quintessential behavior is incompatible with the positive energy condition in the case of the dilaton potential in the suspersymmetric theory. However, as shown in this paper, the holographic principle shows that the boundary potential is related to the bulk potential by some inverse super-potential like relation, and there is no inconsistency between quintessence and positive energy condition.

We also see that the intrinsic brane gravity based upon the Hamilton-Jacobi formalism of holographic RG approach provide a useful tool in studying the brane cosmology. But it is speculative to claim the equivalence between this intrinsic approach and the extrinsic ones  in generalizing to the dilaton gravity , which requires more investigations. It deserves more study on the phenomenological aspects of the above quintessential brane world scenarios. Especially the quintessence on the moving brane has the effect as the time-varying Newton constant which may lead to some novel effect beyond the standard FRW cosmology. Moreover, it is also interesting to look into the interplay between the sectors of holographic and normal matter to find a way out of the eternal acceleration of the quintessential universe in the brane world scenarios.

Acknowledgements

BC would like to thank A. Mazumdar for valuable comments and reading the manuscript. FLL is supported by BK-21 Initiative in Physics (SNU - Project 2), he is also grateful to the hospitality of ICTP at Trieste and KIAS at Seoul where this work was initialized during his visit, and also thanks Hyung Do Kim for very helpful and stimulating discussions.


format: text

text:
# Heating of the Hot Intergalactic Medium by Powerful Radio Galaxies and Associated High Energy Gamma-Ray Emission

## 1 Introduction

Within the framework of currently popular structure formation theories, the hot, X-ray emitting intracluster medium (ICM) observed in clusters and groups of galaxies (hereafter collectively referred to as ‘clusters’, unless otherwise specified) arises when baryonic gas falls into the gravitational potential wells of hierarchically merging dark matter halos, and is shock heated to near the corresponding virial temperature.

Kaiser (1986) predicted that if the structure and evolutionary behavior of X-ray clusters are governed solely by gravitational processes, they should be ‘self-similar’ and their physical properties should obey well-defined scaling laws. Detailed numerical simulations (e.g. Bryan & Norman 1998, Eke, Navarro & Frenk 1998) also agree with this prediction.

However, observational evidence has been mounting that this is not the whole story. Significant deviations from self-similarity are observed, most conspicuously in the X-ray luminosity-temperature (L-T) relation. Whereas the self-similar model predicts the X-ray luminosity $`L`$ to scale with temperature $`T`$ as $`LT^2`$, the observed relation is considerably steeper, being close to $`LT^3`$ for $`T`$ 2 keV clusters (e.g. David et al. 1993, Allen & Fabian 1998, Markevitch 1998, Arnaud & Evrard 1999), and perhaps even steeper for lower $`T`$ groups (Ponman et al. 1996, Mulchaey & Zabludoff 1998, Helsdon & Ponman 2000, Xue & Wu 2000). Deviations have also been discovered in the entropy-temperature (S-T) relation, with evidence of an excess ‘entropy floor’ in objects of $`T`$ 2 keV (Ponman, Cannon & Navarro 1999, Lloyd-Davies, Ponman & Cannon 2000).

A plausible solution to these discrepancies is that the ICM (or the intergalactic medium prior to cluster formation which eventually becomes the present day ICM; also designated ‘ICM’ for brevity) has been shock heated by some type of energy source in addition to gravitational heating (Kaiser 1991, Evrard & Henry 1991; for alternative views, see Bryan 2000, Muanwong et al. 2001). This process, while having little effect for the most massive and hottest clusters, can significantly modify lower $`T`$ systems, raising their temperature as well as decreasing their central gas densities from the self-similar expectations, and thereby bringing them into agreement with the observed scaling relations. The most widely discussed energy source to date has been supernovae (SNe) (e.g. Wu, Fabian & Nulsen 1998, 2000, Menci & Cavaliere 2000, Cavaliere, Giacconi & Menci 2000, Loewenstein 2000, Brighenti & Mathews 2001). As the ICM is observed to contain sub-solar abundances of Fe and other heavy elements, it is certain that metals produced by SNe inside cluster galaxies have been ejected into the ICM by some process, perhaps in the form of SN-driven ‘galactic winds’ (e.g. Finoguenov, David & Ponman 2000, Renzini 2000 and references therein). However, a number of recent studies have brought into question the effectiveness of SNe as energy sources for the ICM. Employing semi-analytic models of cluster evolution, Valageas & Silk 1999, Wu et al. 2000 and Bower et al. 2001 have all shown that in order to reproduce the L-T relation, the non-gravitational heat input must amount to 0.5–3 keV per particle. For supernovae, this implies an extremely high efficiency of energy conversion, close to 100%, which is unrealistic considering that a large fraction of the initial energy is likely to be lost radiatively (e.g. Kravtsov & Yepes 2000). Some of the above papers have discussed the possibility that active galactic nuclei are instead the true heating agents of the ICM, but none have attempted a quantitative estimation of such an effect in any detail.

A related problem regards the soft X-ray background emission from the intergalactic medium (IGM), including regions outside virialized clusters. Recent observational estimates (Fukugita, Hogan & Peebles 1998) as well as numerical simulations (e.g. Cen & Ostriker 1999, Davé et al. 2001) suggest that the majority of the baryons in the universe today exists in a warm/hot IGM at temperatures $`T10^510^7`$ K. Concerns have been raised that the thermal emission from such regions may exceed the observed soft X-ray background in the absence of non-gravitational heating (Pen 1999, Wu, Fabian & Nulsen 2001, Voit & Bryan 2001, Bryan & Voit 2001). Again, the level of heating required to reconcile theory with observations may be of the order of a few keV per particle for the IGM. However, this issue is currently controversial, as the inferences seem to depend critically on the numerical resolution and treatment of cooling in the calculations (Bryan & Voit 2001 and references therein).

We consider in this work high-power, FRII radio galaxies (RGs) and shock heating of the ICM/IGM by their large-scale jets. (The term ‘radio galaxy’ is used here to connote all sources with strong jets including radio-loud quasars, which are believed to be intrinsically similar objects in the context of AGN unification schemes, Urry & Padovani 1995.) For Cyg A, the only nearby FRII RG residing inside a cluster that has been studied in sufficient depth, a strong case can be made that the RG is driving a bow shock into the ambient ICM (Carilli & Barthel 1996 and references therein). We wish to quantify the consequences of such effects for the ICM/IGM in a cosmological context. As detailed observational information is available on the statistics of RGs in clusters (Ledlow & Owen 1995, 1996) as well as on the evolution of RGs out to high redshifts (Dunlop & Peacock 1990, Willott et al. 2001), we can obtain a reasonably reliable estimate of the total energy input into the ICM by RGs (Sec.2).

We discuss the notable features and advantages of ICM heating by RGs (Sec.3.1), as well as the validity of the assumptions and uncertainties that go into the above evaluation (Sec.3.2). A crucial diagnostic with which the RG scenario may be verified and distinguished from SN heating is proposed: the observation of high energy gamma-rays emitted by shock-accelerated non-thermal electrons during the period of shock activity (Sec.3.4). Other implications, including non-thermal X-ray emission from groups, are also discussed (Sec.3.5).

A rough estimate of the RG energy input along the above lines have already been presented by Rawlings (2000). Enßlin et al. (1997, 1998) have pointed out the importance of RGs for the energetics of the ICM, and calculations similar to those given below were also carried out by Enßlin & Kaiser (2000); however, their focus was on the Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect, and they did not quantify the consequences in relation to the observed X-ray properties of clusters (cf. Yamada & Fujita 2001).

## 2 Energy Budget of Radio Galaxies

### 2.1 Global Energy Output in the Universe

We first evaluate the total energy output by RG jets in the universe, utilizing observational information on the evolution of the RG luminosity function (LF), and the correlation between jet kinetic power and radio luminosity of RGs. Two cosmologies are considered, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, $`h_{50}=1`$ (Einstein-de Sitter, referred to as ‘EdS’), and $`\mathrm{\Omega }=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$, $`h_{50}=1.4`$ (referred to as ‘lambda’) where $`H_0=50h_{50}\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$. All radio luminosities are measured in units of $`\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1\mathrm{sr}^1`$.

The redshift evolution of steep spectrum radio sources has recently been quantified in detail by Willott et al. (2001, hereafter W01). Based on a large source sample with complete redshifts and less affected by various complicating effects due to the low frequency (151 MHz) selection, their data constitute the most accurate such information yet obtained. Defined in terms of number of sources per unit comoving volume per unit logarithmic 151 MHZ radio luminosity $`L_{151}`$ at redshift $`z`$, their LFs $`\rho (L_{151},z)`$ were modeled as comprising two populations, a low-luminosity one and a high-luminosity one, corresponding to sources with weak and strong emission lines, respectively. The break luminosity separating the populations, $`\mathrm{log}L_{151}26.5`$, is roughly one order of magnitude larger than the luminosity of the FRI/FRII division between the two morphological classes of RGs (Fanaroff & Riley 1974). The evolutionary behavior of each population was assumed to be different, with three different models being considered for the high-luminosity population: Model A (symmetric Gaussian in $`z`$), Model B (Gaussian rise up to a certain $`z`$ and constant beyond with no cutoff), Model C (Gaussian rise plus Gaussian decline in $`z`$ with different widths). The low luminosity population was characterized as a power-law rise up to some $`z`$ and then constant beyond. W01 fit such parameterizations to the data assuming two cosmologies, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$ or $`\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$ with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, $`h_{50}=1`$, and found that all three models in either cosmology gave acceptable fits to the data including the ‘no cutoff’ model B. However, we will see that the total RG energy input is determined principally by RGs in the redshift range well constrained by the data, and does not depend greatly on the uncertain high-$`z`$ evolution. For our lambda cosmology, the LFs were obtained by converting the $`\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$ LFs of W01 using their equation (14).

Willott et al. (1999, hereafter W99), have derived a relation between the jet kinetic powers $`L_j`$ of RGs and their emitted radio luminosities at 151MHz $`L_{151}`$ of the form $`L_j=3\times 10^{45}f_j(L_{151}/10^{28}\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1\mathrm{sr}^1)^{6/7}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. This is based on physical considerations as well as on observational constraints of hot spot advance speeds and spectral ages for the general population of FRII RGs. The important parameter $`f_j`$ takes into account uncertainties in the physical conditions inside the jet lobes (e.g. departures from equipartition, proton and low energy electron content, volume filling factor, etc.), and is expected to be in the range $`f_j120`$ (W99). On the other hand, jet kinetic powers have also been determined observationally for individual RGs (modulo the uncertainty factor $`f_j`$) by Rawlings & Saunders (1991), and the direct correlation between $`L_j`$ and $`L_{151}`$ is available in Rawlings (1992) for RGs in different environments; this is shown in Fig.1. The W99 relation has the correct slope but seems to underpredict the magnitude of the observed $`L_j`$-$`L_{151}`$ relation. We choose to adopt

$$L_j=3\times 10^{46}f_j\left(\frac{L_{151}}{10^{28}\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1\mathrm{sr}^1h_{50}^2}\right)^{6/7}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1h_{50}^2,$$
(1)
agreeing well with the data for RGs in group-like environments (densities $`n10^510^3\mathrm{cm}^3`$) that we are most interested in. This modification to W99 may imply that some of the parameters (e.g. the RG age) they discuss as being typical for powerful FRII RGs deviate from their actual values. However, eq.1 is not entirely inconsistent with the constraints discussed in W99, and is also in line with that given by Enßlin et al. (1997) using radio luminosities at 2.7 GHz. For $`f_j`$, we take a fiducial value of $`f_j=10`$, which is supported by a number of independent observational inferences (e.g. Leahy & Gizani 1999, Hardcastle & Worrall 2000, Blundell & Rawlings 2000; see Sec.3.2 for discussion of uncertainties in $`f_j`$).

Regarding individual RGs, $`L_{151}`$ should also depend on the RG’s age even for constant $`L_j`$; however this dependence is expected to be weak (e.g. W99), allowing us to neglect this complication. The density of the ambient medium obviously affects $`L_{151}`$ as well, but we assume that this does not induce any systematic effects, and that the above correlation is independent of $`z`$ (see Sec.3.2 for justification).

Utilizing the redshift dependent LFs and the above $`L_jL_{151}`$ correlation, we integrate over radio luminosity and cosmic time to derive the total jet energy output by RGs $`U_j`$ in the universe,

$`U_j={\displaystyle _{z_{\mathrm{min}}}^{z_{\mathrm{max}}}}𝑑z{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dz}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{log}L_{151,\mathrm{min}}}^{\mathrm{log}L_{151,\mathrm{max}}}}d\mathrm{log}L_{151}`$ (2)
$`\times L_j(L_{151})\rho (L_{151},z).`$
(c.f. Enßlin & Kaiser 2000). The lower and upper limits for $`\mathrm{log}L_{151}`$ were taken to be 25.5 and 30, respectively. The lower limit corresponds to the FRI/FRII dichotomy in radio morphology, below which RGs appear to be subsonic on large scales and do not drive strong shocks into the surrounding medium (e.g. Bicknell 1995, Laing 1996, Fabian 2001 and references therein). The upper limit on $`z`$ was fixed to be $`z_{\mathrm{max}}=5`$, above which Compton cooling of RG lobes by the cosmic microwave background becomes very severe (Kaiser, Dennett-Thorpe & Alexander 1997). However, the results are not so sensitive to these values as $`U_j`$ is mainly determined by RGs near the ‘break’ in the LF, $`\mathrm{log}L_{151}2627`$, and in the redshift interval $`z13`$. The results, both cumulative (integrated from $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ to $`z`$) and differential (per unit $`z`$), are shown in units of $`\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{Mpc}^3`$ in Figs.2 and 3.

We see that the values of $`U_j`$ integrated to $`z=0`$ amount to $`13\times 10^{57}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{Mpc}^3`$, and depend little on the LF model or on cosmology. As can be seen from $`dU_j/dz`$ in Figs.2b and 3b, the dominant contribution to $`U_j`$ comes from sources at redshifts $`z`$ 1–3, which are well constrained by the data and leave only small uncertainties in the integrals. The numbers are also quite consistent with those obtained by Enßlin & Kaiser (2000) using different radio LFs and jet power-radio luminosity correlations.

We may average $`U_j`$ over the present-day baryon density in the universe and obtain

$$ϵ_{\mathrm{IGM}}0.15\frac{U_j}{2\times 10^{57}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{Mpc}^3}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_bh_{50}^2}{0.06}\right)^1\mathrm{keV}/\mathrm{particle},$$
(3)
taking a mean molecular weight $`\mu =0.6`$. If excess energies of a few keV/particle turn out to be necessary to halt overproduction of the soft X-ray background from the warm/hot IGM, (Sec.1), RGs seem to fall short by at least an order of magnitude, even when assuming 100% energy transfer from RG jets to the IGM. However, more detailed calculations which account for the inhomogeneous IGM and RG clustering may be required to conclusively settle this matter.

If we consider groups in the mass range $`M2\times 10^{13}2\times 10^{14}M_{}`$ (corresponding to $`T0.52`$ keV) in the context of currently favored structure formation models, their typical formation redshifts are $`z_f0.30.5`$ ($`0.041.4`$, 2 $`\sigma `$ dispersion range) for the EdS cosmology, and $`z_f0.60.8`$ ($`0.11.9`$, 2 $`\sigma `$ dispersion range) for the lambda cosmology (Lacey & Cole 1993, Kitayama & Suto 1996). The main epoch of RG energy input, $`z13`$, therefore mostly precedes or coincides with the formation of low $`T`$ systems, and is generally consistent with the picture of ‘preheating’, i.e. heating of the ICM prior to halo collapse. Note also that this interval largely overlaps with the turnaround redshifts for these objects, at which the required amount of energy injection is minimal (e.g. Balogh, Babul & Patton 1999, Tozzi & Norman 2001); in comparison, the energy demands are much greater for heating after collapse and virialization (e.g. Tozzi, Scharf & Norman 2000).

### 2.2 Energy Input into the Intracluster Medium

We now translate the above results into the thermal energy input into the ICM gas, making use of the local LF of RGs inside clusters. It is assumed that the redshift evolution of cluster RGs is similar to that of the whole RG population as determined by W01 (see Sec.3.2). We begin by normalizing the local LF of W01 to the LF determined for RGs inside clusters by Ledlow & Owen (1995, 1996, hereafter respectively LO95, LO96), based on their 1.4 GHz VLA survey of Abell clusters. Conversion between luminosities at 1.4 GHz and 151 MHz are done assuming a spectral energy index $`\alpha =0.8`$. The LO96 univariate LF $`f(L)`$ is presented as the fraction of elliptical galaxies (excluding S0’s) of R magnitude $`R_c20.5`$ detected at 1.4 GHz per logarithmic radio luminosity bin. We determine the normalization factor $``$ (units $`\mathrm{Mpc}^3`$) so that the W01 local LF $`\rho (L,0)`$ matches the LO96 LF, $`\rho (L,0)f(L)`$, in the ‘break’ luminosity range $`\mathrm{log}L_{151}`$ 26–27. (The quantity $`^1`$ reflects the density of elliptical galaxies inside local clusters averaged over the universe, and $`U_j`$ corresponds to the average time-integrated jet energy input per cluster elliptical.) We obtain $`\mathrm{log}5.4`$ for $`h_{50}=1`$ (EdS) and $`\mathrm{log}4.5`$ for $`h_{50}=1.4`$ (lambda). The shape of the W01 local LF does not agree well with that of the LO96 LF for luminosities $`\mathrm{log}L_{151}25`$, but this is irrelevant for our purposes as our lower luminosity limit of integration is taken to be $`\mathrm{log}L_{151}25.5`$. We assume that this fractional LF at $`z=0`$ is the same for all clusters and groups within the mass range of our interest (see Sec.3.2).

It is further assumed that the number of elliptical galaxies $`N_E`$ in a cluster is proportional to its gas mass $`M_g`$. More precisely, we posit that the gas which eventually evolves into the ICM of present-day clusters contains RG hosting ellipticals with a ratio of $`N_E/M_g`$ similar to that observed in local rich clusters. This implies a mass-independent specific energy input, being the same for small groups as well as rich clusters. Taking the Coma cluster as a reference point, the number of elliptical galaxies of $`R_c20`$ within a radius $`r3.4h_{50}^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ from the cluster center is $`38`$ (Thompson & Gregory 1980). The LO96 LF, when integrated over radio luminosity, gives a total fraction $`0.14`$ implying $`5`$ RG hosting ellipticals in Coma; this compares favorably with the actual number of radio ellipticals observed with the appropriate properties in the Coma cluster (Venturi, Giovannini & Feretti 1990). The gas mass within the same radius is $`M_g4\times 10^{14}h_{50}^1M_{}`$ (Fusco-Femiano & Hughes 1994), so we get a reference value of $`N_E/M_g0.95\times 10^{13}M_{}^1`$.

The relativistic jet of an FRII RG should drive a strong shock into the ambient medium, heating and compressing it, but not all of the jet power can be directly conveyed outside in this manner. A major portion of the total energy should also accumulate inside the ‘cocoon’, the region immediately enveloping the jet lobes and filled with hot, shocked jet plasma, which is separated from the ICM by a contact discontinuity (Begelman & Cioffi 1989). Of the total energy $`E_{\mathrm{RG}}`$ released during a RG’s lifetime, the fraction imparted to the surrounding ICM as work $`E_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$ and that stored inside the cocoon as internal energy $`E_c`$ can be evaluated in a simple way following Enßlin & Kaiser (2000, hereafter EK00). After cessation of the RG activity, the cocoon should expand up to a volume $`V_c`$ where its internal pressure $`p_c`$ reaches equilibrium with that of the ICM $`p_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$, $`p_cp_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$. The work done against the ICM can be roughly estimated to be $`E_{\mathrm{ICM}}p_{\mathrm{ICM}}V_c`$. If the cocoon plasma is predominantly relativistic, $`p_c\frac{1}{3}E_c/V_c`$, and since $`E_{\mathrm{RG}}E_{\mathrm{ICM}}+E_c`$, we get $`E_{\mathrm{ICM}}/E_{\mathrm{RG}}0.25`$, whereas for primarily non-relativistic cocoon plasma, $`p_c\frac{2}{3}E_c/V_c`$ and $`E_{\mathrm{ICM}}/E_{\mathrm{RG}}0.4`$. As explained below (Sec.3.1), the ICM gas shocked by the large-scale jets of FRII RGs should generally be hot and rarefied enough for radiative cooling to be negligible, and no further reduction in efficiency is expected. We conservatively adopt $`\xi _s=0.2`$ for the fraction of the total RG energy output imparted to the ICM. (This value could be larger for reasons discussed in Sec.3.2.)

Putting all of this together, the specific energy input into the ICM $`ϵ_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$ is

$`ϵ_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$ $`=`$ $`\xi _sU_j\mu m_pN_E/M_g`$
$``$ $`1.2{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _s}{0.2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{10^5\mathrm{Mpc}^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{U_j}{2\times 10^{57}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{Mpc}^3}}`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N_E/M_g}{0.95\times 10^{13}M_{}^1}}\mathrm{keV}/\mathrm{particle},`$
using $`\mu =0.6`$. In Figs.2a and 3a, the right axes denote the values of $`ϵ_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$ calculated for the different LF models. We see that with reasonable assumptions, the total energy input into the ICM by RGs lies in the range $``$ 1–2 keV per particle (and could be even higher, see Sec.3.2). According to recent detailed models of cluster evolution incorporating non-gravitational feedback (Valageas & Silk 1999, Wu et al. 1998, 2000, Bower et al. 2001, Brighenti & Mathews 2001), a few keV per particle is just the amount of excess energy input required to account for the observed deviations from self-similarity in X-ray clusters.

## 3 Discussion

### 3.1 On Heating of the Intracluster Medium by Radio Galaxies

We discuss some important issues regarding heating of the ICM by RGs. First, a single FRII RG is capable of sweeping out and shock heating a volume of order $`(\mathrm{Mpc})^3`$ during its lifetime. This is enough to affect a major fraction of the total ICM volume, especially for relatively low $`T`$ clusters and groups. We also mention that RGs are observed to possess a more centrally concentrated spatial distribution relative to normal galaxies, at least for relatively rich clusters (LO95).

Next, we emphasize the crucial advantage of RGs compared to SNe for ICM heating. The jets of high-power, FRII RGs are known to transport their energy efficiently out to regions well outside their host galaxies, and then deposit it directly into the low-density, large-scale ICM. The shocked gas is expected to possess a sufficiently low density and high temperature such that its radiative cooling time is much longer than the Hubble time (Heinz, Reynolds & Begelman 1998, Kaiser & Alexander 1999), possibly apart from the innermost regions of rich clusters constituting a minor fraction of the whole ICM (Tozzi & Norman 2001). This is in stark contrast to SNe, which must first explode into the dense interstellar medium of their host galaxies where the cooling time is much shorter (see however Sasaki 2001), and thereby lose a major fraction of their energy as escaping radiation (Kravtsov & Yepes 2000, Wu et al. 2000).

In relation to the above two points, we note that the lifetimes of individual FRII RGs are believed to be $`10^8`$ yr (e.g. Blundell, Rawlings & Willott 1999), much shorter than the main duration of activity for the FRII population as a whole, as well as the typical ages of clusters. By virtue of the long cooling time of the shocked ICM, any FRII activity in a cluster’s past will have left its mark on the ICM, but need not have any direct correspondence with the degree of present-day RG activity in a particular cluster. It is also to be noted that for small groups, which typically contain only a few large elliptical members, the LO96 fractional local LF nominally implies RG numbers less than one. This is to be interpreted as the present-day probability of observing RG activity in these systems; e.g. for a mass range in which 0.1 RGs are implied, one should see only 1 out of 10 groups to harbor a RG. However, the occurrence of FRII RGs increases dramatically at high $`z`$, and we expect that all sufficiently large ellipticals have hosted an FRII RG at some point in their lives (c.f. LO96).

We also note that X-ray observations of a number of presently active RGs inside nearby clusters, including recent high-resolution data by Chandra, do not show any evidence of the RG heating the external medium (Fabian 2001 and references therein). However, one must remember that nearly all such nearby objects, including M87 in Virgo or 3C84 in Perseus, are relatively low-power, FRI-type RGs, which are presumably subsonic on large scales and incapable of shock heating the ambient ICM (e.g. Bicknell 1995, Laing 1996); such RGs were not included in our evaluation above. FRII RGs in dense environments are known to be quite rare in the local universe, with the one exception, Cyg A, displaying good evidence for a bow shock being driven into the ICM, compressing and heating it (Carilli, Perley & Dreher 1988, Carilli, Perley & Harris 1994, Clarke, Harris & Carilli 1997, Wilson, Young & Shopbell 2001b). The prominence of FRII RGs at high redshifts does not entail any contradictions in the role of RGs in shock heating the ICM with observations of nearby cluster RGs.

It is to be mentioned that besides the process of shock heating, which endows the ICM with excess thermal energy and entropy, a ‘gravitational’ form of the surplus energy may arise if RGs can displace the ICM gas sufficiently outward in the cluster potential at appropriate epochs before cluster virialization (see Sec.7.1 of Wu et al. 2000). For low mass clusters, RGs may also entirely unbind parts of the ICM from the potential, reducing the gas fraction and helping to steepen the L-T relation. Note that since this spatial redistribution can be realized adiabatically without shocking, even FRI RGs become potential contributors to self-similarity breaking. However, such processes alone may be inadequate to account for the observed magnitude of the entropy floor in the S-T relation, so that shock heating by FRII RGs is still essential. (FRII RGs should also be more efficient at expelling the ICM gas anyhow.) A quantitative assessment of these effects requires more detailed modeling, as well as better observational data on the scaling relations.

### 3.2 On Assumptions and Uncertainties

We have obtained numbers for the excess energy input of $`ϵ_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$ 1 keV/particle using what we deem to be the most plausible assumptions and reasonable parameter values. Some remarks concerning these are in order.

We first call attention to three key assumptions used in the above evaluation: 1) the $`L_jL_{151}`$ correlation is independent of $`z`$; 2) the redshift evolution of RGs in clusters is the same as that for the whole RG population; and 3) the fractional RG LF is the same for all clusters. Assumption 1) is consistent with inferences drawn by Blundell et al. (1999), who find no systematic epoch-dependence in the gaseous environments of the RG population as a whole. Recent investigations of the clustering environments of RGs (e.g. Wold et al. 2000, McLure & Dunlop 2001) do not point to a strong influence of the environment on the evolutionary properties of RGs, compatible with assumptions 1) and 2). For assumption 3), the Ledlow-Owen fractional LF is independent of cluster richness or morphological type within in their sample of Abell clusters (LO95), and it is not unreasonable to expect that this extends down to the scale of small groups. These are certainly no proofs, but lend some credence to our assumptions.

Next we consider the uncertainties in some of our parameters that directly affect $`ϵ_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$. Although the fiducial value of $`f_j=10`$ was chosen to conform with observational inferences made by several authors using different methods (Leahy & Gizani 1999, Hardcastle & Worrall 2000, Blundell & Rawlings 2000), it is warned that the associated uncertainty could be rather large, perhaps by a factor of a few or more. We note that detections of synchrotron-self-Compton X-rays from the hot spots of some FRII RGs suggest that in these objects the magnetic fields are close to equipartition with the radiating electrons (Harris, Carilli & Perley 1994, Wilson, Young & Shopbell 2000, Harris et al. 2000, Hardcastle, Birkinshaw & Worrall 2001). At face value, this may indicate $`f_j1`$, but some caveats are to be mentioned: i) even if the hot spot is in equipartition, significant deviations from it may arise inside the whole radio lobe, as discussed by Blundell & Rawlings (2000) who argue for $`f_j10`$ in FRII RGs; ii) there are no convincing reasons a priori that equipartition must hold, so the possibility is open that the hot spots and lobes carry a substantial amount of energy in non-radiating particles (such as protons or low-energy electrons) by violating equipartition (Hardcastle & Worrall 2000). Indeed, measurements of the thermal pressure of the external medium of RGs, arguably being a more direct probe of the total lobe energy content, show that in general FRII RG lobes would be highly underpressured with respect to the ambient gas if equipartition prevails (Clarke, Harris & Carilli 1997, Leahy & Gizani 1999, Hardcastle & Worrall 2000). This would be at odds with our current understanding of FRII RGs, which requires the lobe pressures to be at least as high as the external medium (e.g. Begelman & Cioffi 1989, Kaiser & Alexander 1997 and references therein), so that i) and/or ii) of the above may be occurring in reality. We also add that there are some FRII RGs whose hot spot X-ray emission cannot be readily explained with equipartition parameters (e.g. Wilson, Young & Shopbell 2001a). Further detailed observations of RG hot spots and lobes and of the external confining medium of RGs should help to nail down the value of the crucial parameter $`f_j`$.

We also need to check that the ratio $`N_E/M_g`$ of the Coma cluster we have used is representative of the global value, as well as to substantiate the assumption that this is relatively constant within the cluster mass range of interest. Here we simply remark that this number could also be rather uncertain, and warrants better constraints from future observations with improved statistics.

In contrast to parameters deduced from observations, $`\xi _s`$ was evaluated theoretically, and we point to one uncertain aspect which can increase this value. Our discussion above was limited to heating of the ICM by the forward shocks induced by RGs, but as mentioned in Sec.2.2, the better part of the total RG energy release should be stored inside its cocoon as internal energy of jet plasma. Although it is believed that the the cocoons of FRII RGs are overpressured and their interior segregated from the ICM during much of the RGs’ lifetime (Begelman & Cioffi 1989), it is unclear what occurs after the activity ceases. One possibility is that cocoons mostly dissipate after reaching pressure equilibrium with the ambient ICM due to instabilities operating at the cocoon-ICM interface (or perhaps even earlier, Reynolds, Heinz & Begelman 2001). Alternatively, it has been proposed that cocoons may retain their entity for a long time afterwards, perhaps until the host cluster undergoes a major merger (EK00). If the cocoon dissipates, its internal energy, amounting to 75% (60%) of the total RG energy release for relativistic (non-relativistic) cocoon plasma, can be released into the ICM, and any fraction that is thermalized with the ICM will add to the excess energy and raise $`\xi _s`$. The actual amount that can contribute to $`ϵ_{\mathrm{ICM}}`$ in this way is difficult to assess, as it depends on the highly uncertain composition, particle distribution, and magnetic field content of the jet plasma, but in any case, we should bear in mind the fact that the RG cocoon is a significant energy reservoir.

### 3.3 Comments on Heating by Supernovae

As discussed in Sec.1, the substantial amounts of heavy elements observed in the ICM certifies that SNe must have affected the ICM in one way or other, but this does not immediately imply that they have been energetically important. One may envision ways of polluting the ICM with metals without recourse to SN-driven galactic winds, such as ram-pressure stripping, repeated tidal interactions (‘galaxy harassment’), mergers, etc. Theoretical models, at least in their simplest forms, face difficulty in transporting the combined kinetic energy of an ensemble of SNe out from their host galaxies and into the ICM with high efficiency; severe radiative losses are to be expected during this process (Thornton et al. 1998, Kravtsov & Yepes 2000).

However, observations of SN-driven winds in starburst galaxies indicate a relatively high efficiency of energy conversion (Heckman 2000), and theoretical consideration of a realistic, multiphase nature of the starburst region into which SNe explode may alleviate adverse radiative energy loss (Strickland 2001). Thus the view that SN-driven winds play a significant role in the energetics of the ICM cannot be ruled out. Sasaki (2001) has also suggested the possibility of intracluster SNe, i.e. those which explode outside galaxies and directly heat the ICM. It is then preferable to have some independent observational test which can discriminate between our proposal of RGs heating the ICM and that by SNe.

In principle, one method involves the redshift evolution of the X-ray scaling relations. The space density of FRII RGs is seen to increase with redshift faster than the average star formation rate (approximately equal to the SN rate) in the universe (e.g. Madau 1999 and references therein), and this may be reflected in the $`z`$ evolution of the L-T and S-T relations. At present the L-T relation is available only out to $`z0.4`$ and only with large errors (Mushotzky & Scharf 1997), but the observational situation should improve significantly in the near future with Chandra and XMM-Newton observations. However, the expected difference between RGs and SNe may not be too drastic, and could render this prospect impractical.

One would appreciate some observational signature which can directly identify RGs in the process of heating the ICM at the expected epochs. The long radiative cooling time of the shocked ICM means that the thermal X-ray emission from this gas never becomes very luminous and could be difficult to observe. However, the same shocks which heat the ICM should also generate non-thermal particles through shock acceleration, and the associated high energy radiation, particularly from relativistic electrons, can offer a potent diagnostic, which we discuss next.

### 3.4 Non-thermal Gamma-ray Emission

Non-thermal gamma-rays emitted by shock accelerated electrons hold the promise of being a very direct and powerful probe of large-scale shock heating processes in the ICM/IGM. Strong shocks, which are a requisite element in our picture of ICM heating, are also known to be very conducive to non-thermal particle acceleration via the first order Fermi mechanism (Blandford & Eichler 1987 and references therein). Relativistic electrons accelerated and injected into the shocked ICM subsequently lose energy by emitting synchrotron and inverse Compton (IC) radiation, the latter mainly by upscattering cosmic microwave background photons. For typical ICM magnetic fields ($`B_{\mathrm{ICM}}0.11\mu \mathrm{G}`$), IC dominates, and much of the electrons’ energy should end up as gamma-rays. The crucial point of note is that at sufficiently high energies, relativistic electrons have IC cooling times much shorter than the duration of the shock (here the RG lifetime), so that the resultant gamma-ray emission is ‘prompt’ and directly traces the period of strong shock activity. Such gamma-rays therefore serve as beacons, enabling us to ‘see’ the moment at which large-scale shocks are occurring. The significance of such prompt gamma-ray emission was recognized by Loeb & Waxman (2000) and Totani & Kitayama (2000), in the context of gravitational shocks in groups and clusters. Gamma-rays of gravitational shock origin may be suppressed if, as in our RG scenario, the pre-collapse IGM of groups and clusters has been substantially heated by non-gravitational sources (Totani & Inoue 2001).

For shocks induced by the RGs themselves, the typical gamma-ray spectra and luminosities can be estimated as follows. A fraction $`\xi _e`$ of the RG kinetic power $`L_j`$ is assumed to be converted to non-thermal electrons with a power-law distribution $`dn/d\gamma \gamma ^p`$, $`\gamma `$ being the electron Lorentz factor. The maximum Lorentz factor $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}`$ is set by equating the shock acceleration time with the IC cooling time, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}1.2\times 10^9(1+z)^2(B_{\mathrm{ICM}}/1\mu \mathrm{G})^{1/2}(V_s/10^4\mathrm{kms}^1)`$, where $`V_s10^4\mathrm{kms}^1`$ is a typical velocity of the forward shock ($``$ the hot spot advance speed) for an FRII RG. The cooling Lorentz factor $`\gamma _c`$ is where the IC cooling time equals the RG lifetime $`\tau _{\mathrm{RG}}10^8\mathrm{yr}`$, $`\gamma _c2.3\times 10^4(1+z)^4(\tau _{\mathrm{RG}}/10^8\mathrm{yr})^1`$, and above this Lorentz factor all electrons cool within the shock duration. The emission energies corresponding to $`\gamma _c`$ and $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}`$ are respectively $`E_c450\mathrm{k}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}(1+z)^7(\tau _{\mathrm{RG}}/10^8\mathrm{yr})^2`$ and $`E_{\mathrm{max}}1.2\times 10^3\mathrm{TeV}(1+z)^3(B_{\mathrm{ICM}}/1\mu \mathrm{G})(V_s/10^4\mathrm{kms}^1)^2`$, between which the spectrum will have a cooled energy index $`\alpha _c=p/2`$. Below $`\gamma _c`$ the electrons are mostly adiabatic, and the energy index of the spectrum below $`E_c`$ is $`\alpha _{ad}=(p1)/2`$.

Strong shocks should result in $`p2`$ and hence $`\alpha _{ad}0.5`$ and $`\alpha _c1`$, i.e. constant luminosity per logarithmic energy interval above $`E_c`$. The efficiency of electron injection $`\xi _e`$ in astrophysical shocks is a critical but rather uncertain parameter, both observationally and theoretically. For shocks in supernova remnants, this is believed to be somewhere in the range $`\xi _e0.0010.05`$ (e.g. Sturner et al. 1997, Baring et al. 1999, Tanimori et al. 1998). It may also be more appropriate to measure $`\xi _e`$ with respect to the thermal energy of the post-shock gas rather the total kinetic energy, in which case we must also account for $`\xi _s`$, the efficiency of energy input into the ICM. Although our fiducial choice will be $`\xi _e=0.05`$, we caution that this number could be lower in reality, and our estimates below rather optimistic. We do note that recent observations of hard X-ray tails in groups and clusters (e.g. Rephaeli 2001), if interpreted as non-thermal emission from electrons, seem to require high electron injection efficiencies, of order $`\xi _e=0.05`$ (e.g. Sarazin 1999, Takizawa & Naito 2000, Blasi 2001).

A RG at $`z`$ will be observed to have an integral gamma-ray flux above energy $`E_{}`$

$$F_{}\frac{1+z}{E_{}\mathrm{ln}(\gamma _{\mathrm{max}})}\frac{\xi _eL_j}{4\pi d_L(z)^2},$$
(5)
where $`d_L(z)`$ is the luminosity distance (c.f. Totani & Kitayama 2000). The nearest, luminous FRII RG Cyg A lies in a relatively rich cluster at $`z=0.058`$, and should possess a jet power $`L_j3\times 10^{46}\mathrm{ergs}^1`$. In the lambda cosmology, the high-energy gamma-ray flux above 100 MeV from this object is estimated to be $`F_{100}8\times 10^8`$ $`\mathrm{photons}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$, below the 2 $`\sigma `$ upper limit ascertained by the EGRET instrument, $`1.7\times 10^7`$ $`\mathrm{photons}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Fichtel et al. 1994). However, this is easily detectable by the GLAST satellite, whose nominal sensitivity for a 2 year all-sky survey is $`2\times 10^9`$ $`\mathrm{photons}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ above 100 MeV (Gehrels & Michelson 1999); other relatively nearby FRII RGs should be observable as well. The more luminous high-redshift RGs with radio luminosities $`L_{151}10^{28}\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1\mathrm{sr}^1`$ and corresponding jet powers $`L_j2.7\times 10^{47}\mathrm{ergs}^1`$ would be within the capabilities of GLAST even at $`z=1`$, allowing the era of substantial ICM heating to be directly probed.

Using the W01 radio LFs, it is also straightforward to evaluate the gamma-ray source counts for the whole population. The number of RGs with gamma-ray flux greater than $`F_{}`$ is

$`N(>F_{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑z\frac{dV}{dz}_{\mathrm{max}\{\mathrm{log}L_{151}(F_{},z),\mathrm{log}L_{151,\mathrm{min}}\}}^{\mathrm{log}L_{151,\mathrm{max}}}}`$
$`\times `$ $`d\mathrm{log}L_{151}\rho (L_{151},z),`$
where $`L_{151}(F_{},z)`$ is the 151 MHz radio luminosity of a RG at $`z`$ that would produce a flux $`F_{}`$, and $`\frac{dV}{dz}`$ is the comoving volume element of the universe. Fig.4 shows the predicted $`\mathrm{log}N\mathrm{log}F_{100}`$ distribution of gamma-ray emitting RGs. For the lambda cosmology, we predict that GLAST would see about 20 discrete gamma-ray sources which are non-variable and associated with powerful RGs during a 2 year all-sky survey. Since these RGs are strong radio emitters as well, targeted observations of selected objects could do even better; for example, at a sensitivity of $`10^9`$ $`\mathrm{photons}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ (just a factor of 2 better than the 2 year survey limit), up to 70 RGs are detectable.

On the other hand, the number of observable RGs should have been negligible for EGRET. This indicates that RGs are unlikely to have contributed greatly to any of the unidentified EGRET sources (Hartman et al. 1999) or the extragalactic gamma-ray background (Sreekumar et al. 1998).

It is emphasized that besides the forward shock in the ICM, electron acceleration should also be conspicuous at the reverse shock inside the radio lobes, i.e. the hot spots. However, copious high energy gamma-ray emission is expected only from the forward shock; since the magnetic fields in the hot spots are much higher than in the ICM (e.g. Meisenheimer et al. 1989), synchrotron cooling dominates and forces the maximum emission energy of the reverse shock electrons to be well below the GLAST energy band. This makes the above test all the more effective: high energy gamma-ray emission does not merely signal the presence of a powerful RG per se, but necessitates that the external medium is being actively shocked.

The gamma-ray diagnosis should be markedly different if ICM heating is due to SN-driven winds. The kinetic powers of individual winds is probably at most $`L_w10^{42}10^{43}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$, and their lifetimes may be around $`\tau _w10^7\mathrm{yr}`$ (Heckman 2000). Thus the consequent non-thermal emission by shock-accelerated electrons of SN-driven wind origin is much too weak to be detectable as discrete gamma-ray sources, barring the highly unlikely situation of $`10^3`$ to $`10^4`$ such winds being active nearly simultaneously (i.e. within $`\tau _w`$). These statements apply to intracluster SNe as well, whose explosion times should be even less correlated with each other. Thus future gamma-ray observations offer good prospects for directly corroborating that RGs indeed shock heat the ICM at the expected epochs, as well as discriminating between the SNe scenario.

We further remark that the same shocks which accelerate electrons should do so for protons as well, perhaps with an even higher injection efficiency. These non-thermal protons can undergo inelastic collisions with thermal protons of the ICM gas, and thereby emit high energy gamma-rays via neutral pion decay (e.g. Dar & Shaviv 1995, Völk, Aharonian & Breitschwerdt 1996, Berezinsky, Blasi & Ptuskin 1997), or through IC radiation by secondary electrons (e.g. Blasi & Colafrancesco 1999). As the cooling times of such high energy protons are generally longer than the Hubble time (Enßlin et al. 1997), proton-induced gamma-ray emission is neither efficient nor prompt, and would not serve as useful ‘signposts’ of the shock heating epoch. On the other hand, their confinement times in the ICM are also expected to be very long (Völk et al. 1996, Berezinsky et al. 1997), so any non-thermal protons injected into the ICM by various kinds of shock activity may accumulate over the lifetime of a cluster, and the accompanying emission should carry important information on its entropy history. We wish to explore this interesting issue of non-thermal protons in relation to non-gravitational mechanical feedback processes in the IGM/ICM in a future paper.

### 3.5 Non-thermal X-ray Emission and Other Implications

We briefly remark on some additional implications.

Following the above discussion, we note that relativistic electrons accelerated at the ICM shock should also emit non-thermal X-ray emission. These X-rays will not be as effective as gamma-rays in offering a test of our proposal, since 1) the emitting electrons have cooling times longer than the shock duration, so most of the emission is not ‘prompt’ and delayed with respect to the RG activity, and 2) confusion with other X-ray components, such as emission from the RG hotspots and knots, the nucleus, as well as from the undisturbed ICM, is problematic. Conversely, non-thermal X-ray emission is interesting in that it may last for a relatively long time after the shock activity and particle injection has ceased, and the implications of such ‘relic’ X-ray emission has been discussed in several recent papers (e.g. Sarazin 1999, Atoyan & Völk 2000, Blasi 2001) in response to possible detections of hard X-ray tails in rich clusters (Rephaeli 2001 and references therein). With regard to our study, we call attention to recent reports of excess hard X-ray emission in the nearby group of galaxies HCG62 by Fukazawa et al. (2001), and similar detections for other groups by Nakazawa (2001, private communication). In any non-gravitational heating scenario which envisions significant shock heating of group gas prior to its formation, the gravitational shock accompanying the subsequent collapse is strongly suppressed (e.g. Balogh et al. 1999, Tozzi & Norman 2001). Non-thermal particle acceleration should result only from the heating sources themselves, which are RGs in our case. The radio emission from the RG itself could fade rather rapidly after its death (Goldshmidt & Rephaeli 1994, EK00), and may not leave a visible trace of past RG activity. If interpreted as non-thermal emission, the X-ray excesses could then be the ‘smoking gun’ of shock heating by RGs in the not-too-remote past for these particular groups.

A different type of non-thermal emission may also arise, which would be peculiar to RGs and related to the issue of cocoon dissipation (Sec.3.2) As already mentioned, the exact constituents of the jet plasma inside the cocoon are unknown, but it is quite possible that it comprises primarily relativistic, non-thermal particles, whose energy content can be very large. Cocoon particles of this kind injected into the ICM may give forth to observable non-thermal features distinct from the forward shock emission, at much later epochs. Although such processes cannot be reliably predicted at the moment, this possibility needs to be explored in the future.

Finally, as suggested by Valageas & Silk (1999) for active galaxies in general, we speculate that the large energy input into the ICM by RGs may have played some role in regulating the formation and evolution of stars and galaxies inside clusters.

## 4 Conclusions

We conclude by summarizing the salient points addressed in this paper.

Utilizing recently published radio LFs (W01) and the observed correlation between jet power and radio luminosity (Rawlings 1992, W99), the total energy output of RG jets in the universe can be evaluated with reasonable confidence, $`U_j13\times 10^{57}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{Mpc}^3`$, the bulk of which is attained at redshifts $`z13`$. Combining this with the local RG LF in clusters (LO96), the total energy input into the ICM can be estimated to be 1–2 keV per particle, precisely in the range recent models require to reproduce the observed deviations from self-similarity in the luminosity-temperature relation of groups and clusters. RGs have a decided edge over SNe in that they directly heat the ICM outside galaxies and are immune to radiative cooling. The picture of ICM shock heating by RGs may be most clearly tested and distinguished from that due to SNe by observing the high energy gamma-rays promptly emitted by shock-accelerated electrons during the era of ICM heating, which can be realized by GLAST.

S.I. is grateful to a number of colleagues for valuable discussions, particularly T. Kitayama, as well as M. Nagashima, Y. Fujita and T. Totani. He has also greatly benefited from conversations with E. Waxman. We thank the anonymous referee for helpful comments. This research was supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan (No. 12304009).


text:
# The anomalous 0.5 and 0.7 conductance plateaus in quantum point contacts

## I Introduction

It has been known and well understood since 1988 that the dc-conductance $`G`$ of narrow quantum point contacts and quantum wires (both referred to as QPCs below) is quantized in units of $`G_2=2e^2/h`$. During the past five years an increasing part of the experimental and theoretical work on QPCs has been devoted to studies of a particular deviation from this integer quantization known as 0.7 conductance anomaly . This anomaly is a narrow plateau, or in some cases just a plateau-like feature appearing in scans of $`G`$ versus gate voltage $`V_g`$ at a value of $`G`$ which is reduced by a factor 0.7 relative to the ideal value $`G_2`$. The 0.7 anomaly has been recorded in numerous QPC transport experiments (even before it was noted in 1996, see e.g. Ref. ). Recently the appearance of an anomalous plateau at the value $`0.5G_2`$ was also reported .

In this paper we show that many of the experimental findings regarding the 0.5 and 0.7 anomalous plateaus can be consistently interpreted by invoking the model of enhanced spin correlations in the QPC, which we previously put forward to explain the 0.7 plateau . We emphasize that our model does not rely on the existence of static polarization, which would be inconsistent with some general theorems , but rather on effects of dynamical local polarization in the QPC.

Already in the first paper it was pointed out that due to its magnetic field dependence the 0.7 anomaly may be related to spontaneous spin polarization of electrons in the QPC. Theoretical attempts to link the 0.7 anomaly to spontaneous spin polarization have been made . However, none of these approaches have explained all of the experimental facts, and most strikingly they failed to predict the observed plateau at $`0.7G_2`$. Also the 0.7 anomaly cannot be explained by impurity backscattering mechanisms, Luttinger liquid effects or an interplay of both, the predicted temperature dependence being opposite to the observed one.

## II Summary of experimental facts

In summarizing experimental data we will mainly refer to the work of the Cambridge group  and the Copenhagen group  presenting detailed studies of the magnetic field and temperature dependence of the 0.7 anomaly.

The main experimental features of the 0.7 anomaly are:

(e1) The anomalous plateau is observed in a large variety of QPCs at a value $`G=\gamma G_2`$, where the suppression factor $`\gamma `$ is close to 0.7 .

(e2) The temperature dependence is qualitatively the same for all samples: the anomalous plateau is fully developed in some (device dependent) temperature range typically above 2 K. With increasing temperature both the anomalous and the integer plateaus vanish by thermal smearing, while with decreasing temperature the width of the anomalous plateau shrinks the conductance approaching $`2G_2`$. .

(e3) A detailed study of the temperature dependence of $`\gamma `$ shows that in the low temperature regime the conductance suppression has an activated behavior: $`1\gamma (T)\mathrm{exp}(T_a/T)`$ .

(e4) The activation temperature $`T_a`$ is a function of $`V_g`$ vanishing at some critical gate voltage $`V_g^0`$. Close to $`V_g^0`$ the dependence of $`T_a`$ on $`V_g`$ is well approximated by a power law , $`T_a(V_gV_g^0)^\alpha `$, with $`\alpha 2`$.

(e5) At a fixed temperature corresponding to a well developed 0.7 plateau, $`\gamma `$ shows a strong dependence on an in-plane magnetic field. With increasing magnetic field $`\gamma `$ smoothly decreases from 0.7 at $`B=0`$ T to 0.5 at $`B=13`$ T.

(e6) Under the same temperature conditions as in (e5) the 0.7 anomaly depends on the source-drain bias. The suppression factor $`\gamma `$ increases smoothly from $`0.7`$ at zero bias to $`0.9`$ at large bias ($`2`$ mV) .

(e7) In some samples the anomalous plateau was reported to appear at $`G=0.5G_2`$  rather than at $`G=0.7G_2.`$

## III The phenomenological model

The ground state of the two-dimensinal electron gas (2DEG) has been studied extensively using ever more refined methods involving local density functional theory and Monte Carlo calculations. In particular it is argued in the latter work that at at zero temperature there exist at least three phases of the 2DEG: an unpolarized fluid ($`r_s<13`$), a fully spin polarized fluid ($`13<r_s<33`$), and a Wigner crystal polarization ($`r_s>33`$). More recently, also using density functional theory, the quasi-1d case has been studied and evidence for a spin polarization has been found . In Ref.  the spin polarization in QPC’s was studied at zero temperature assuming that the expression in the local-density approximation for the exchange energy of the bulk 2DEG is also valid in narrow quasi-1d constrictions. This work suggested the possibility of spin polarization in QPC’s, but yielding only plateaus at 0.5 and 1.0, it failed to explain the 0.7 anomaly. We base our phenomenological model on these previous works on spin polarization. Without refering to any particular model for the exchange energy, we simply assume the existence on spin polarization expressed by a general spin-density functional involving three unknown constants that are to be determined experimentally.

We stress that the spin polarization not necessarily is permanent. It may well exhibit mesoscopic fluctuations. It is in fact enough to assume that the dynamics of the spin degrees of freedom in the constriction is adiabatic (slow) as compared to both the length of the QPC and the time of passage of electrons through the QPC. Then, given some instantaneous spin configuration the transmission coefficient $`𝒯_\sigma ^{\mathrm{tot}}`$ for a spin-$`\sigma `$ electron going through the QPC can thus be calculated as $`𝒯_\sigma ^{\mathrm{tot}}=𝒯_\sigma (E)P_\sigma +𝒯_{\overline{\sigma }}(E)P_{\overline{\sigma }}`$. Here $`P_\sigma `$ ($`P_{\overline{\sigma }}`$) is the probability of finding the incoming spin parallel (antiparallel) to the instantaneous polarization. In the isotropic case with $`P_\sigma =P_{\overline{\sigma }}`$ this leads to the same results as a static situation where two spin subbands are formed. For simplicity we just treat the case of a stationary polarization in the following and derive the subband structure shown in Fig. 1a.

This discussion of spin-polarization serves as the justification of the basic assumption in our work: the existence of a “critical” chemical potential $`\mu _c`$, where the cross-over from full to partial polarization occurs. For $`\mu <\mu _c`$ the densities are $`n_{}=n_{}^0`$ and $`n_{}=0`$, while for $`\mu >\mu _c`$ a non-zero $`n_{}`$ develops, i.e. two spin subbands appears with different subband edges $`\epsilon _\sigma ^s`$ as depicted in Fig.1a. It turns out that all the phenomenology of the anomalous plateaus is contained in the $`\mu `$ dependence of the position of the minority subband edge $`\epsilon _{}^s(\mu )`$ relative to $`\mu `$. This important parameter is denoted $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )`$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )=\mu \epsilon _{}^s(\mu ).$$
(1)
Our entire analysis is based on the local spin density functional written as

$$F=E[n_{},n_{}]\mu (n_{}+n_{}).$$
(2)
Near the critical point $`\mu _c`$, for $`\mu >\mu _c`$, we have $`n_{}n_{}`$ and the condition for the minimum of the free energy becomes

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\frac{F}{n_{}}\hfill & =& \alpha +\alpha ^{}\delta n_{}+\gamma n_{}\mu \hfill & =& 0,\hfill \\ \frac{F}{n_{}}\hfill & =& \beta +\beta ^{}n_{}+\gamma \delta n_{}\mu \hfill & =& 0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(3)
We have made the linearization $`n_{}=n_{}^0+\delta n_{}`$ for the majority spins and assumed that the energy functional $`F`$ near the minimum is bilinear in $`\delta n_{}`$ and $`n_{}`$.

The solution for the minority spin density in the case of $`\mu >\mu _c`$ is $`n_{}(\mu \mu _c)`$ which combined with the 1d property that $`n_{}^2\epsilon _F^{}`$. But $`\epsilon _F^{}=\mu \epsilon _{}^s=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and we arrive at:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )=C(\mu \mu _c)^2,\mathrm{for}\mu >\mu _c.$$
(4)
For $`\mu <\mu _c`$ we have $`n_{}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )`$ is now the excitation gap for flipping a spin at the Fermi level, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )=(_n_{}F_n_{}F)=0`$, which gives $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )=\beta +\gamma \delta n_{}`$. This combined with $`\delta n_{}\mu \mu _c`$ leads to:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )=D(\mu \mu _c),\mathrm{for}\mu <\mu _c.$$
(5)
We have thus derived the dispersion laws depicted in Fig. 1:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \epsilon _{}(k)& =& \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}k^2+\epsilon _{}^s,\hfill \\ \hfill \epsilon _{}(k)& =& \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}k^2+\mu \mathrm{\Delta }(\mu ).\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
Given these dispersion relations, at finite temperature $`T`$ using an idealized step-function transmission coefficient the LB conductance $`G(T)`$ of this system is

$$G(T)=\frac{1}{2}G_2\underset{\sigma =,}{}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\epsilon \mathrm{\Theta }(\epsilon \epsilon _\sigma ^s)\left(f^{}[\epsilon \mu ]\right),$$
(7)
where $`f^{}`$ is the derivative of the Fermi-Dirac distribution $`f[x]=[\mathrm{exp}(x/k_BT)+1]^1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)`$ is the step function. By integration and using Eq. (1) we obtain

$$G(T)=\frac{1}{2}G_2\left(f[\epsilon _{}^s\mu ]+f[\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )]\right).$$
(8)
All predictions relating to experiments on the conductance of QPC’s follow from this simple analytical form.

Before turning to a thorough analysis of this expression we note some of its basic features. Consider first the situation where the spin polarization is nearly complete, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )\epsilon _{}^s(\mu )\epsilon _{}^s(\mu )`$. In this case, at low temperatures, $`k_BT\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )`$, both terms in Eq. (8) are 1 and the conductance is the usual $`G_2`$. However, in the temperature range

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )k_BT\epsilon _{}^s(\mu )\epsilon _{}^s(\mu ),$$
(9)
the contribution of the first term is 0.5 while the second term remains 1 yielding $`G=0.75G_2`$. Due to the parabolic $`\mu `$-dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ given by Eq. (4), which in a sense pins $`\epsilon _{}^s`$ to $`\mu `$, the condition (9) is in fact fulfilled for a sufficiently broad range of $`\mu `$ (in experiments $`\mu V_g`$), thus giving rise to a 0.7 quasi-plateau.

An in-plane magnetic field B is readily taken into account by adding Zeeman energy terms and substituting

$$\epsilon _{}^s\epsilon _{}^sg\mu _B|𝐁|,\epsilon _{}^s\epsilon _{}^s+g\mu _B|𝐁|.$$
(10)
## IV Experimental implications of the model

In the following we discuss how the model can explain the experimental observations (e1)-(e6). In Fig. 2(a) observations (e1) and (e2) are clearly seen in the model calculation. In this idealized case with a step-function transmission coefficient the plateau appears at $`0.75`$ as discussed above.

Observation (e3) follows trivially from Eq. (7) with the activation temperature $`T_a=\mathrm{\Delta }(\mu )`$. Assuming that in the vicinity of $`\mu _c`$ the chemical potential depends linearly on the gate voltage $`V_g`$ Eq. (4) immediately predicts (e4) with the exponent $`\alpha =2`$.

The result of the model calculation in the presence of a magnetic field using Eqs. (8), (4) and (10) is shown in Fig. 2(b). In accordance with observation (e5) the 0.7 anomaly develops smoothly into an ordinary Zeeman split 0.5 plateau. The experimental observation (e6) concerns finite bias. This brings us into a strong non-equilibrium situation which is outside the scope of the present work. However, considering a small finite bias not too far from the equilibrium case, we do find that the 0.75 plateau rises, which gives additional support for the picture presented here. In Ref.  the finite bias measurements were well explained by straightforward extension of our model to the non-linear regime.

Apart from 0.7 quasiplateau, our model also predicts a plateau at $`0.5G_2`$, which should be seen in perfect QW/PCs at zero temperature and zero magnetic field when $`\epsilon _{}^s<\mu <\mu _c`$ (full polarization). In order to observe the 0.5 plateau the condition $`k_BT<\mathrm{min}\{|\mathrm{\Delta }|,\mu \epsilon _{}^s\}`$ must be fulfilled. Otherwise thermal smearing will destroy the plateau. Note that even if the 0.5 plateau is thermally smeared, Eq. (9) may still hold and result in a 0.7 plateau. This is illustrated in Fig. 3. In Fig. 3(a) $`\mu _c`$ is fixed and the temperature is changed, while in Fig. 3(b) the value of $`\mu _c`$ is changed at a fixed temperature. One can see that in a situation where $`T<\mu _c/8`$ the 0.5 and the 0.7 plateaus can be seen simultaneously. This situation has never been observed experimentally, which might be an indication that the experimentally accessible temperatures are too high to resolve the 0.5 plateau. However according to (e7), a situation where $`0.5`$ plateau appeared without a $`0.7`$ plateau was observed. This might happen if the range of $`\mu `$ corresponding to partial polarization in the QPC was particularly narrow as compared to that corresponding to full polarization. In terms of the parameters of our model it would mean e.g. a very large constant $`C`$.

The role of parameter $`C`$ is illustrated in Fig. 4. One can see that with increasing $`C`$ the 0.7 quasiplateau becomes narrower and less prominent, and practically disappears in comparison with the $`0.5`$ at very large values of $`C.`$

## V Non-ideal transmission

In our idealized model we used a step-function transmission coefficient for electrons traversing the QPC. Non-ideal transmission is easily taken into account by replacing the theta function in Eq. (7) with a given transmission coefficient $`𝒯_\sigma (\epsilon )`$:

$$G(T)=\frac{1}{2}G_2\underset{\sigma =,}{}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\epsilon 𝒯_\sigma (\epsilon )\left(f^{}[\epsilon \mu ]\right).$$
(11)
Through the transmission coefficient $`𝒯_\sigma (\epsilon )`$ the conductance now depends on the geometry of the QPC and is no more universal. However, some qualitative predictions can still be made without a knowledge of the exact transmission properties of the QPC. First of all, due to the conditions Eqs. (9) and (4) the quasi-plateau persists. Secondly, mainly the transmission coefficient of minority spin band is affected which results in a suppression of the anomalous plateau while the integer plateau remains close to 1. Model calculations show that the anomalous 0.7 plateau may be suppressed to the values of $`G=0.6G_2`$ without being destroyed . Another effect of non-ideal transmission is the ”smearing” of the $`G`$ vs. $`\mu `$ dependence as compared to the situation of ideal transmission. The character of smearing is not unlike the thermal smearing, and it may e.g. contribute to the effect of masking the $`0.5`$ plateau in the samples where only the $`0.7`$ plateau is seen.

## VI Summary and conclusion

We have presented a phenomenological model which can account for the experimental observations of the anomalous 0.7 and 0.5 conductance plateaus in mesoscopic QPCs. The model is built on an assumption of an effective instantaneous partial polarization seen by the traversing electrons, while the ground state itself needs not have a finite magnetic moment. Even in its simplest form excluding effects of non-ideal transmission our model is capable of providing a very satisfactory description of different experimental situations, which is achieved by varying the two model parameters $`\mu _c`$ and $`C.`$

### Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge support from the Danish Natural Science Research Council through Ole Rømer Grant No. 9600548.