text:
# The X-ray view of highly obscured AGN

## 1. Introduction

Both direct (surveys) and indirect (synthesis models of the Cosmic X–ray Background, XRB) methods clearly indicate that most AGN are ‘obscured’ in X–rays, i.e. their emission is seen through absorbing material in excess of the Galactic one. Often (see next section) this absorbing matter is very thick, its column density exceeding the value, 1.5$`\times `$10-24 cm-2. for which the Compton scattering optical depth equals unity. For many years it has been customary to identify the absorber with the torus envisaged in popular and, on the whole, very successful Unification Models (Antonucci 1993). We now know that the strictest version of the Unification Models needs modifications, and there are alternative unification models like the outflowing wind proposed by Elvis (2000, and this conference). In the following, I will call ‘torus’ the (sub)pc–scale, large covering factor, Compton-thick circumnuclear matter for which there is plenty of evidence in X–rays (and in other bands), whatever its actual geometrical configuration, to be distinguished from dust lanes or other distant (scale of hundreds of parsecs), Compton–thin matter.

I have used the word ‘obscured’, instead of ‘type 2’, deliberately. In the following, I will use ‘type 1’ and ‘type 2’ in their original meaning, which is based on the optical emission line spectrum. As far as X–ray are concerned, I will classify sources as ‘obscured’ and ‘unobscured’, the former including all sources in which there is absorption significantly in excess of the Galactic one. In the classical Unification Models, a one–to–one relation between optical type 1 and unobscured sources, and between type 2 and obscured sources, is predicted. We now know that there is plenty of exceptions (see below and other contributions in this volume): type 1 sources may be obscured in X–rays, and X–ray selected sources may simply not appear as AGN in the optical. Of course, I am not claming here that there is no relation whatsoever between optical and X–ray appearances. More often than not, the optical (X–ray) appearance is just what one would predict from Unification Models after observing the X–ray (optical) emission. I am only saying that sometimes obscured sources turn out to be type 1 (e.g. Fiore et al. 2001; see also Maiolino, this volume), at one extreme, or dull galaxies (e.g. Mushotzky et al. 2000; Fiore et al. 2000; Barger et al. 2001; Hornschemeier et al. 2001), at the other extreme. On the contrary, I am not aware of any certainly unobscured AGN which are not type 1111Hardness ratios alone may not be sufficient to indicate obscuration in case of Compton–thick absorbers; with an appropriate choice of the bands, NGC 1068 would appear a very soft source indeed!, and of any type 2 which are not obscured. So, at present the ‘strict’ (in the sense of no exceptions found yet) relations between optical and X–ray classifications are reduced to:

type 1 $``$ unobscured

type 2 $``$ obscured

I would not be too much surprised, however, if in the future exceptions to these rules would also be found.

The mismatch between optical and X–ray properties (mismatch from the Unification Models point of view) may solve the long standing problem of the lack, or at least rarity, of type 2 QSO (in fact, at least one convincing case has been presented by Norman et al. 2001), which sometimes is considered a problem for the standard model of the XRB. From X–ray surveys, it is clear that obscured, high luminosity AGN exist, and that is enough for explaining the XRB. The fact that type 2 high luminosity AGN are not found copiousuly, if not due to some selection effects, may indicate that, for some unclear but certainly worth studying reason, at high luminosity (amd/or high redshift) the Narrow Line Regions are invisible or absent altogether. This in turn suggests a luminosity/redshift dependence of the structure of the absorber (as in the obscured Quasar growth model proposed by Fabian 1999). For instance, the absorber may fully cover the nucleus, so either obscuring the NLR or preventing the ionizing photons from illuminating them.

## 2. General properties of X–ray absorbers

X–ray absorption is very common in AGN. All Seyfert 2s observed in X–ray are absorbed, and because Seyfert 2s outnumbers Seyfert 1s by a factor of a few, at least in the local Universe, this implies that optically selected AGN are preferentially obscured. Synthesis models of the XRB (e.g. Setti & Woltjer 1989; Comastri et al 1995; Comastri et al. 2001; see also Comastri 2001 for a review, and the references therein for the several flavours of the model) also require a large fraction of absorbed sources. Heavy absorption is also very common: about half of the optically selected Seyfert 2s in the local Universe are Compton–thick (e.g. Maiolino et al. 1998). Indeed, the very first object observed by XMM–$`Newton`$ in the framework of a program devoted to study the absorption properties of optically selected Seyfert 2s, NGC 4968, is clearly a Compton–thick source (Guainazzi et al 2001), as shown in Fig. 1. Actually, there is a relation between optical classification and column density: Risaliti et al. (1999) have in fact shown that Intermediate (1.8-1.9) Seyferts are usually Compton–thin, while classical Seyfert 2s are Compton–thick. It is possible (Matt 2000) that Compton–thin/Intermediate Seyferts are obscured by the dust lanes at distances of hundred of parsecs which Malkan et al. (1999) found to be common in Seyfert galaxies222Compton–thin absorption may also be partly due to matter much closer to the Black Hole like the BLR, see Risaliti et al. 2001 for evidence based on variability studies., while Compton–thick/Seyfert 2s are obscured by the torus (in the abovementioned meaning). The heavy absorbers should have a large covering factor, to account for the large fraction of Compton–thick sources, and must be fairly compact, not to exceed the dynamical mass, at least in the best studied cases like Circinus and NGC 1068 (Risaliti et al. 1999). (For these two sources, a completely independent estimate of the inner size of the torus has been derived by Bianchi et al, 2001 and this volume, by modeling the X–ray line spectra. They found a minimum distance of the torus of about 0.2 and 4 pc, respectively).

## 3. The X–ray spectrum of bright Compton–thick AGN

Just because they are so heavily absorbed, Compton–thick AGN are the ideal sources for studying the circumnuclear matter. The reflection components which, in unabscured sources, would be diluted into invisibility by the primary radiation, are here well visible. In these sources absorption is so heavy that no nuclear radiation is observable in the ‘classical’ X–ray band, i.e. below 10 keV. If the column density is of the order of a few times 1024 cm-2, however, the nucleus may become visible at energies of a few tens of keV (see Fig 2). At these energies, the most sensitive instrument so far has been the PDS onboard BeppoSAX.

In the following subsections I will describe in some details the BeppoSAX results for the brightest of them (for a summary, see Table 1). For other, fainter Compton–thick AGN observed by BeppoSAX see: Malaguti et al. (1998) for NGC 7674; Iwasawa et al. (2001a) for Tololo 0109-383; Franceschini et al. (2000) for IRAS 09104+4109. The data of Mrk 3 are presented by Cappi et al. (1999), while the interesting case of Arp 220 is discussed by Iwasawa et al. (2001b, and this volume). For a general discussion of BeppoSAX results on Compton–thick sources see Matt et al. (2000).

### 3.1. NGC 1068

NGC 1068, the archetypal Seyfert 2 and Compton–thick galaxy, has a very complex X–ray morphology, as revealed by $`Chandra`$ observations (Young et al. 2001). The bulk of the iron K$`\alpha `$ lines, however, come from the nucleus. ASCA (Ueno et al. 1994; Iwasawa et al. 1997; Netzer & Turner 1997) resolved three iron K$`\alpha `$ lines, corresponding to cold, He– and H–like iron. Matt et al. (1996) and Iwasawa et al. (1997) suggested that at least two reflectors were at work, one cold and optically thick (to be identified with the torus), the other hot and optically thin. Matt et al. (1997) confirmed these suggestions by disentangling the two reflecting continua in the BeppoSAX spectrum. No direct emission is observable, suggesting a very thick ($`N_H`$ of 1025 cm-2 or more) absorber. A complete analysis of the BeppoSAX data revealed also a O vii line (Guainazzi et al. 1999, now confirmed by $`Chandra`$, Young et al. 2001, and XMM–$`Newton`$, Kinkhabwala et al. 2001) which, combined with the lines from intermediate $`Z`$ elements like Mg, Si and S, implies that at least a third, warm reflector is present. Bianchi et al. (2001 and this volume) reanalysed the BeppoSAX and ASCA data, and estimated the physical and geometrical properties of the reflectors. In particular, the inner surface of the torus was estimated to be at a distance of $``$4 pc from the Black Hole.

Comparing the two BeppoSAX observations, performed about 1 year apart, Guainazzi et al. (2000) measured an energy dependent flux variation, explained in terms of a variation of one or both the ionized reflectors. This would imply a size, for these reflectors, of the order of magnitude of a parsec or so.

### 3.2. Circinus Galaxy

Also for the Circinus Galaxy, $`Chandra`$ observations (Sambruna et al. 2001a,b) show a rather complex morphology, but the bulk of the reflection comes from the nuclear region. The spectrum below 10 keV is dominated by a cold reflection component (Matt et al. 1996), while the nuclear radiation becomes visible at energies of a few tens of keV (Matt et al. 1999). An analysis of the ASCA and BeppoSAX line spectrum (Bianchi et al. 2001 and this volume) suggests that the inner surface of the torus is at a distance of about 0.2 pc from the Black Hole.

### 3.3. NGC 6240

Since the discovery by BeppoSAX of the nuclear radiation piercing through a Compton–thick absorber (Vignati et al. 1999), NGC 6240 has became the archetypal obscured, high–luminosity source, and its SED is widely used to study the relations between IR and X-ray surveys and cosmic bacgkrounds. From IR diagnostic tools, the source appears to be dominated by starburst emission (Genzel et al. 1998), but already Iwasawa & Comastri (1998) found strong evidence for AGN activity in the ASCA spectrum. This was definitely confirmed by the BeppoSAX observation cited above. The X–ray nuclear luminosity is rather large and, when translated to the bolometric luminosity, suggests that the AGN dominates the energy output in this source. The pretty cold IRAS colours, however (see Fig. 3), point to starburst emission for the far IR. It is likely that in this source starlight and accretion powers are actually of the same order of magnitude. Whether this is just a coincidence, or it is indicating a strong relation between the two phenomena, it is not clear at the moment, but it is certainly a very intriguing question.

Finally, it is worth remembering that from optical spectroscopy NGC 6240 is classified as a LINER (Veilleux et al. 1995), representing one of the first example of the mismatch between optical and X–ray classifications, for which there are now several cases from $`Chandra`$ and XMM–$`Newton`$ surveys.

### 3.4. NGC 4945

An even more extreme case of mismatch between optical and X–ray classifications is that of NGC 4945, for which there is no evidence whatsover for AGN activity at all wavelenghts but in hard X–rays. Iwasawa et al. (1993) discovered a heavily obscured nuclear emission in the $`GINGA`$ spectrum of this source. Later on, Done et al. (1996) confirmed this result with a RXTE observation. Recently, Guainazzi et al. (2000) and Madejski et al. (2000), from BeppoSAX and RXTE observations respectively, discovered large amplitude variations on time scale of thousands of seconds in hard X–rays, where the nuclear radiation dominates the emission. With the column density of the absorber, most of the radiation should emerge after one or more scatterings, if the covering factor of the absorbing matter is large, and no short term variation should be visible, unless the absorber is very close to the nucleus (of the order of milliparsecs or less) or, more likely, the covering factor of the absorber is in this source, differently from the common case, rather small.

## 4. Evidence for the ‘torus’ in unobscured AGN

One of the least tested prediction of Unification Models is that the torus should be present also in type 1/unobscured objects. One of the best way to check it is to search for X–ray reprocessed components (Ghisellini et al. 1994, Krolik et al. 1994). The problem is that reprocessing also occurs in the accretion disc, but fortunately there are at least two significant differences between the two cases: firstly, reprocessed components from the accretion disc should respond to variations of the primary emission on very short time scales (thousands of seconds), while those from the torus should be delayed by months or years, due to the far larger distance from the Black Hole. Secondly, features originating in the innermost part of the accretion disc are strongly affected by GR and kinematic effects, contrary to those from the torus. In this respect, iron line profile is much more useful than the Compton reflection continuum, modifications from the GR effects being much more dramatic (Fabian et al. 1989; Matt et al. 1991; Fabian et al. 2000 and references therein).

The most convincing case so far for a type 1 AGN with the torus has been obtained by variability studies. In 1998 NGC 4051 went to a prolonged (several months) low state (Uttley et al. 1999), almost at the end of which was observed by BeppoSAX (Guainazzi et al. 1998). From the spectrum, it was clear that the primary emission was disappeared into invisibility, while the reflection components were still there. (This is best seen in comparison with a previous ASCA observation performed during a normal activity state, see Fig. 4). Reprocessing should therefore occurs in matter at a distance of at least a few light–months from the Black Hole. It is worth noting that the reprocessing material must be Compton–thick, to provide a significant reflection continuum.

Observations of the iron line profiles are more ambiguous. $`Chandra`$ gratings and XMM CCDs are discovering several narrow iron lines in Seyfert 1s (e.g. Kaspi et. al. 2001; Yaqoob et al. 2001; Reeves et al. 2001; Gondoin et al. 2001; Pounds et al. 2001; see also Lubinski & Zdziarski 2001 for a reanalysis of ASCA data). Without a determination of the amount of associated reflection continuum (hard to achieve with $`Chandra`$ and even with XMM–$`Newton`$, due to the limited bandwidth) it may be difficult, however, to understand if these narrow lines come from the torus or from Compton–thin matter, like the Broad Line Region. Even the $`Chandra`$ gratings may not always be sufficient to resolve the line at the velocity of the BLR, often for want of photons rather than of spectral resolution. To overcome these problems, simultaneous observations with hard X–ray instruments have to be performed. We observed NGC 5506 (a Compton–thin obscured AGN, and therefore a source for which there is no direct evidence for the torus) simultaneously with XMM–$`Newton`$ and BeppoSAX (Matt et al. 2001). The iron line, as measured by the EPIC/p-n instrument onboard XMM–$`Newton`$, is clearly complex, being composed by at least two components: one unresolved and corresponding to neutral matter, the other broad and corresponding to ionized matter (see Fig. 5). Combining the p-n spectrum with the BeppoSAX/PDS one, a strong reflection component is clearly detected. This component clearly comes from neutral matter (as derived from the edge–like feature at 7.1 keV observed in the p-n spectrum) and must therefore be associated with the narrow line. Both components, henceforth, are originated in distant, Compton–thick material.

## 5. Obscured AGN in the Universe

When looking at the Spectral Energy Distribution of the extragalactic Backgrounds, the XRB may appear almost negligible when compared with the sub–mm and IR backgrounds. One can therefore wonder why bothering to perform X–ray surveyes, as they seem to regard a tiny fraction of the energy in the Universe. There are at least two answers to this question. Firstly, the X–ray band is by far the cleanest band where to study accretion luminosity: any point–like source with an X–ray luminosity exceeding 1042 erg s-1 or so is very likely powered by accretion. Secondly, the luminosity we observe in the XRB is only a minority, probably of the order of 10%, of the energy really emitted, the remaining 90% having been absorbed and reemitted at longer wavelenghts. For instance, Fabian & Iwasawa (1999) estimated that a by no means negligible fraction (something like 20% or so) of the IR background is actually due to X–ray photons absorbed and reprocessed from the obscuring medium.

Just because most AGN are absorbed (and, moreover, most of the absorbed AGN are Compton–thick), the ideal survey would be at 30 keV (where the XRB peaks!). Unfortunately, at these energies no real imaging instrument is available until the launch of Constellation–X at the end of the decade. In the meanwhile, we are forced to use the hardest imaging instrument available at present.

Prior to the launch of XMM–$`Newton`$, the MECS instrument onboard BeppoSAX provided the best compromise between hard X–ray sensitivity and spatial resolution. We therefore started a project called hellas (High Energy Large Area Survey; Fiore et al. 1999; 2001) aiming to search and identify sources in the 5–10 keV energy range. It is important to note that such a hard selection not only exclude most non AGN X–ray sources, but discovers sources not observable (because heavaly obscured) in soft X–ray surveys (a number of hellas sources have in fact not been detected by ROSAT, see Vignali et al. 2001). The hellas survey has resolved about 25% of the 5–10 keV XRB (Comastri et al. 2001). The sample includes 118 sources, 74 of which have been spectroscopically identified in the optical (La Franca et al. 2001 and this conference). The largest fraction turned out to be type 1 AGN. This is mainly because at these energies, and at these flux limits, unobscured objects still provide the majority of sources. Interestingly, however, some of the objects optically identified as type 1 are indeed obscured in X–rays (Fiore et al. 2001).

The launch of $`Chandra`$ and XMM–$`Newton`$ provided of course a dramatic improvement in X–ray surveys. Many large collaborations are active in this field (see Hasinger, this conference) with the final aim to understand the birth and evolution of Supermassive Black Holes, and their relation with galaxies. We decided to exploit the good sensitivity of XMM–$`Newton`$ up to about 15 keV to continue our project started with BeppoSAX and build up a sample of 5–10 keV XMM–$`Newton`$ selected sources (Baldi et al. 2001 and this conference). We decided to prefer large area to depth, in order to have a sizable sample of relatively bright sources, for which the redshift and optical classification could be easily obtained from 4m class telescopes, and for which at least basic spectral informations can be obtained in X–rays too. First results from this project (named hellas2xmm) can be found elsewhere in this volume (see contributions by Baldi and Fiore).

Acknowledgements It is a pleasure to thank all my collaborators in these researches: S. Bianchi, A.C. Fabian, F. Fiore, M. Guainazzi, K. Iwasawa, G.C. Perola and all members of the hellas team. I thank R. Maiolino, A. Marconi, and M. Salvati for scientific discussions and, of course, for having organized this conference. I acknowledge financial support from ASI and MURST under grant cofin-00-02-36.

## References

Antonucci R.R., 1993, ARA&A, 31, 473

Baldi A., et al., 2001, in preparation

Barger A. J., Cowie, L.L., Mushotzky R.F., Richards E.A., 2001, AJ, 121, 662

Bianchi S., Matt G., Iwasawa K., 2001, MNRAS, 322, 669

Cappi M., et al., 1999, A&A, 344, 857

Comastri A., Setti G., Zamorani G., Hasinger G., 1995, A&A, 296, 1

Comastri A., et al., 2001, MNRAS, in press (astro–ph/0105525)

Comastri A., 2001, Astron. Lett. & Comm., in press (astro–ph/0003437)

Done C., Madejski G.M., Smith D.A., 1996, ApJ 463, L63

Elvis M., 2000, ApJ, 545, 63

Fabian A.C., Rees M.J., Stella L., White N.E., 1989, MNRAS, 238, 729

Fabian A.C., 1999, MNRAS, 308, L39

Fabian A.C., Iwasawa K., 1999, MNRAS, 303, L34

Fabian A.C., Iwasawa K., Reynolds C.S., Young A.J., 2000, PASP, 112, 1145

Fiore F., et al., 1999, MNRAS, 306, L55

Fiore F., et al., 2000, New As., 5/3, 143

Fiore F., et al., 2001, MNRAS, in press (astro–ph/0105524)

Franceschini A., et al., 2000, A&A, 353, 910

Genzel R., et al.: 1998, A&A, 498, 579

Ghisellini G., Haardt F., Matt G., 1994, MNRAS, 267, 743

Gondoin P., Lumb D., Siddiqui H., Guainazzi M., Schartel N., 2001, A&A, 373, 805

Guainazzi M., et al., 1998, MNRAS, 301, L1

Guainazzi M., et al., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 10

Guainazzi M., et al., 2000a, A&A, 356, 463

Guainazzi M., Molendi S., Vignati P., Matt G., Iwasawa K., 2000b, New As., 5/4, 235

Guainazzi M., et al., 2001, in preparation

Hornschemeier A.E., et al., 2001, ApJ, 554, 742

Iwasawa K., et al., 1993, ApJ 409, 155

Iwasawa K., Fabian A.C., Matt G., 1997, MNRAS, 289, 443

Iwasawa K., Comastri A., 1998, MNRAS, 297, 1219

Iwasawa K., et al., 2001a, MNRAS, in press (astro–ph/0104175)

Iwasawa K., Matt G., Guainazzi M., Fabian A.C., 2001b, MNRAS, in press (astro–ph/0103417)

Kaspi S., et al., 2001, ApJ, 554, 216

Kinkhabwala A., et al., 2001, in “The Central kpc of Starburst and AGN”, ASP Conference Series, is press (astro–ph/0107224)

Krolik J.H., Madau P., Życki P.T., 1994, ApJ, 420, L57

La Franca F., 2001, et al., in preparation

Lubinski P., Zdziarski A.A., 2001, MNRAS, 323, L37

Madejski G., et al., 2000, ApJ, 535, L87

Maiolino R., et al., 1998, A&A, 338, 781

Malaguti G., et al., 1998, A&A, 331, 519

Malkan M.A., Gorjian V., Tam R., 1998, ApJS, 117, 25

Matt G., Perola G.C., Piro L., Stella L., 1992, A&A, 257, 63

Matt G., Brandt W.N., Fabian A.C., 1996a, 280, 823

Matt G., et al., 1996b, MNRAS, 281, 69

Matt G., et al., 1997, A&A, 325, L13

Matt G., Pompilio F., La Franca F., 1999a, New As., 4, 191

Matt G., et al., 1999b, A&A, 341, L39

Matt G., 2000, A&A, 355, L31

Matt G., et al., 2000, MNRAS, 318, 173

Matt G., et al., 2001, A&A, submitted

Mushotzky R.F., Cowie L.L., Barger A.J., Arnaud K.A., 2000, Nature, 404, 459

Netzer H., Turner T.J., 1997, ApJ, 488, 694

Norman C., et al., 2001, ApJ, submitted (astro–ph/0103198)

Pounds K.A., et al., 2001, ApJ, in press (astro–ph/0105308)

Risaliti G., Maiolino R., Salvati M., 1999, ApJ, 522, 157

Risaliti G., Elvis M., Nicastro F., 2001, ApJ, in press (astro–ph/0107510)

Reeves J.N., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, L134

Sambruna R., et al., 2001a, ApJ, 546, L9

Sambruna R., et al., 2001b, ApJ, 546, L13

Setti G., Woltjer L., 1989, A&A, 224, 21

Ueno S., et al., 1994, PASJ 46, L7

Uttley M., et al., 1999, MNRAS, 307, L6

Veilleux S., Kim D.-C., Sanders D.B., Mazzarella J.M., Soifer B.T., 1995, ApJSS 98, 171

Vignali C., Comastri A., Fiore F., La Franca F., 2001, A&A, 370, 900

Vignati P., et al., 1999, A&A, 349, L57

Yaqoob T., et al., 2001, ApJ, 546, 759

Young A.J, Wilson A.S., Shopbell P.L., 2001, ApJ, 556, 6


format: text

text:
# Physical Vacuum and Cosmic Coincidence Problem

## 1 Introduction

The four major forms of energy in current cosmological models are the acceleration (A) energy which is vacuum and/or a rolling scalar quintessential field, cold dark (D) matter, baryons (B) and ultra-relativistic (R) energy which includes cosmic microwave background (CMB) photons and other possible light or massless particles (neutrinos, gravitons, etc.) of cosmological origin. The first of these forms of cosmic energy has recently been discovered in the observations of high-redshift supernovae (Ries et al. 1998, Perlmutter et al. 1999), and this has been also confirmed by evidence from the cosmic age, the large-scale structure, the CMB anisotropy in combination with cluster dynamics and galaxy velocity field, etc. (see Cohn 1998, Carol 2000, Bahcall et al. 2000 and references therein).

The best fit concordant with the bulk of all observational evidence today is provided by the following figures for the densities of these forms of energy (see the references above):

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_A=0.7\pm 0.1,\mathrm{\Omega }_D=0.3\pm 0.1,\mathrm{\Omega }_B=0.02\pm 0.01,\mathrm{\Omega }_R=0.6\alpha \times 10^4,$$
(1)
where $`1<\alpha <30100`$ is a dimensionless constant factor that accounts for non-CMB contributions to the relativistic energy. With the Hubble constant $`h_{100}=0.65\pm 0.15`$, the figures lead to either an open cosmological model or a spatially flat model.

The density of A-energy, $`\rho _A10^{123}M_{Pl}^4`$ (in the units in which $`c=k=\mathrm{}=1;M_{Pl}=1.2\times 10^{19}`$ GeV is the Planck mass), conflicts drastically with simple field theoretic expectations, if this density is treated as the density of physical vacuum. Symmetry arguments may explain why the vacuum density should be either zero or Planckian, but there is no explanation from the ‘first principles’ for a non-zero, tiny and positive vacuum density. This is the well-known ‘naturalness problem in theoretical physics’ (Weinberg 1989).

On the other hand, the density of acceleration matter is near-coincident with the density of dark matter and also with the densities of the two other forms of non-vacuum energy, as is seen from Eq.(1); this is another problem, known as the ‘cosmic coincidence problem’, that has been recognized as a severe challenge to current cosmological concepts (Wang et al. 2000).

One possible approach to both problems would be to assume that the acceleration of the expansion is produced by non-vacuum energy which has negative pressure and negative effective gravitating density (Peebles and Ratra 1988, Frieman and Waga 1998, Caldwwell and Steinhardt 1998, Caldwell et al. 1998, Zlatev et al. 1999). This energy form is called quintessence; it can naturally be realized in some scalar field models in which the field depends on time, and so the density of quintessence is diluted with the expansion. If so, the densities involved in the observed cosmic coincidence are all diluted, which makes them seemingly more similar to each other. Quintessence density might temporarily or even always be comparable to the density of dark matter. Although such an idea may make the closeness of all cosmic densities natural, it does not explain the coincidence that the quintessence field becomes settled with a finite energy density comparable to the matter energy density just now (see, for instance, Arkani-Hamed et al. 2000).

In the present paper, a framework is suggested that is alternative to the idea of quintessence. The cosmic acceleration is understood below as a dynamical effect of physical vacuum with constant density $`\rho _V=\rho _A`$ in any reference frame. In this framework, the cosmic coincidence problem and the naturalness problem are treated as two basic aspects of a more fundamental problem in theoretical physics and cosmology. This new problem can be formulated in terms of energy integrals of the Friedmann cosmology.

In Secs.2,3 it is demonstrated that the energy integrals are constant genuine physical characteristics of both vacuum and non-vacuum energy forms; on this basis, the formulation of the problem is given in Sec.4; in Sec.5, it is argued that the electroweak scale physics can be the major mediator in the interplay between vacuum and non-vacuum energy forms, and a kinetics model that describes this process at TeV temperatures in early Universe is studied in Sec.6; a brief summary is given in Sec.7.

## 2 Energy integrals

The constant energy integrals enter the general Friedmann solution for the four cosmic energies mentioned above:

$$𝑑a(A_V^2a^2+2A_Da^1+2A_Ba^1+A_R^2a^2K)^{1/2}=t,$$
(2)
were $`a(t)`$ is the curvature radius and/or a scale factor of the model, $`K=1,0,1`$, accordingly to the sign of the spatial curvature. Constants $`A`$ come from the Friedmann ‘thermodynamic’ equation which is equivalent to energy and entropy conservation relation in a co-moving volume during the process of adiabatic expansion:

$$A=[(\frac{1+3w}{2})^2\kappa \rho a^{3(1+w)}]^{\frac{1}{1+3w}}.$$
(3)
Here $`w=p/\rho `$ is the pressure-to-density ratio for a given energy form; $`w=1,0,0,1/3`$ for vacuum, dark matter, baryons and radiation, respectively; $`\kappa =8\pi G/3=(8\pi /3)M_{Pl}^2`$. The interpretation of the constants $`A_D,A_B,A_R`$ is quite obvious in Eq.(3) for non-vacuum energies: they express the conservation of the number of particles in the co-moving volume. It is most interesting that the constant for vacuum $`A_V`$ is also given by the same general relation of Eq.(3), while the interpretation in terms of particles does not work in this later case.

In an explicit form, the solution of Eq.(3) may be written separately for the earlier epoch ($`z>z_V1`$), when the non-vacuum energies dominate and for the later vacuum domination epoch ($`z<z_V`$). For a spatially flat model at $`z>z_V`$ one has (Chernin 1965)

$$a(\eta )=A_M\eta ^2+A_R\eta ,t(\eta )=\frac{1}{3}A_M\eta ^3+\frac{1}{2}A_R\eta ^2.$$
(4)
Here $`\eta `$ is conformal time, and $`A_M,A_R`$ are given by Eq.(3) with $`\rho =\rho _M=\rho _D+\rho _B,w=0`$ and $`\rho =\rho _R,w=1/3`$, respectively.

For the vacuum domination epoch, one has a well-known solution that describes accelerating expansion controlled by vacuum only:

$$a(t)=A_Vf(t),f(t)=\mathrm{sinh}(t/A_V),\mathrm{exp}(t/A_V),\mathrm{cosh}(t/A_V),$$
(5)
for open, spatially flat and close models, respectively. The present-day ($`t=t_015\pm 2`$ Gyr) value of $`a(t)`$ is estimated with this solution and the observed Hubble constant; one has approximately: $`a(t_0)A_V`$ for all the three models.

Eqs.(2-5) suggest a framework in which the time-independent integrals for all the four energy forms are considered as basic cosmological quantities.

Indeed, the energy integrals given by Eq.(3) are genuine constant characteristics for the respective forms of energy during all the time when each of the energies exists (and not only at the epoch when a given energy dominates – see the solutions of Eqs.2,4,5 above). Each of the energies is represented by its corresponding integral independently from other components. Being constants of integration, the integrals are completely arbitrary, in the sense that the Friedmann equations provide no limitations on them, except for trivial ones. From the view point of physics, the integrals are determined by ‘initial conditions’ at the epoch of the origin of the forms of energy in the early Universe; at that time, each of the energies acquires its own integral $`A`$ as a genuine quantitative characteristic, which is then kept constant in time.

## 3 Evaluation of energy integrals

The numerical estimation of the integrals can be made with the figures of Eq.(1) and with the use of Eqs.(3,5):

$$A_V=(\kappa \rho _A)^{1/2}10^{42}GeV^110^{61}M_{Pl}^1,$$
(6)
$$A_D=\frac{1}{4}\kappa \rho _Da^310^{41}GeV^110^{60}M_{Pl}^1,$$
(7)
$$A_B=\frac{1}{4}\kappa \rho _Ba^310^{40}GeV^110^{59}M_{Pl}^1,$$
(8)
$$A_R=(\kappa \rho _R)^{1/2}a^210^{40}GeV^110^{59}M_{Pl}^1.$$
(9)
The integrals (that have the dimension of the length) are evaluated for the open model with $`a(t_0)`$ given by Eq.(5). It is easy to see that the evaluation for the flat (with the scale factor normalized as it is indicated above in Eq.(5)) and close models gives rise to similar results, on the order of magnitude. In the estimation of $`A_R`$, a conservative value $`\alpha =1`$ is adopted which takes into account the CMB photons only.

As one sees, the integrals have proven to be close to each other within two orders of magnitude, and this result may be summarized in a compact formula:

$$A10^{60\pm 1}M_{Pl}^1.$$
(10)
Note that the analysis may easily be extended to include quintessence alongside with or instead of vacuum. For instance, according to Eq.(3), quintessence with $`w=2/3`$ is characterized by $`A_Q10^{61}M_{Pl}^1`$, if it is estimated with $`\rho _q=\rho _A`$ from Eq.(1). A special case is the integral for non-accelerating energy with $`w=1/3`$ which is not contained in Eq.(3); using directly the corresponding solution of the Friedmann equations, one finds: $`A_{1/3}=A_V`$, if $`\rho _{1/3}=\rho _A`$.

## 4 Symmetry of cosmic energy forms

The integrals of Eqs.(3,10) exist in the Universe since the epoch at which the four major forms of energy came to existence themselves, e.g. at least after $`t1`$ sec, and will exist until the decay of the protons at $`t10^{3132}`$ yrs or the decay of the particles of dark matter. In the beginning of this time interval, the vacuum density is about forty orders of magnitude less than the density of R-energy that dominates at that epoch; but the numbers $`A_A`$ and $`A_R`$ are as close at $`t1`$ sec as they are in Eqs.(6,9). In the future, the scale factor will change in orders of of orders (!) of magnitude during the life-time of proton, and so the densities of D-, B-, and R-energies, as well as their ratios to the vacuum density, will change enormously. But the four constant numbers of Eq.(6-10) will remain the same keeping their near-coincidence for all this future time.

The empirical analysis of Secs. 2,3 has led to a novel version of the cosmic coincidences that appear now as a tetramerous coincidence of time-independent constant numbers – in contrast to the epoch-dependent (and therefore temporal, and accidental, in this sense) coincidence of densities. It is clear that the densities are coincident at the present epoch because this is the epoch of the transition from the decelerated matter dominated expansion to the accelerated vacuum domination expansion. Indeed, since the relation of Eq.10 exists from the early state of the Universe, the densities must be coincident just now, because $`a(t)A_V`$ presently. Another question is why do we happen to live in a transition epoch; this is among the matters that may be discussed with antropic principle (see,for instance, Weinberg 1987).

The coincidence of the four integrals reveals a new type of basic regularities which are conserved in the evolving Universe. Since none of the energy forms looks preferable, in terms of the energy integrals of Eq.10, the regularity has a character of a symmetry that relates vacuum to non-vacuum forms of cosmic energy. The symmetry is not perfect, and its accuracy is within a few percent, on logarithmic scale, according to Eqs.(6-10).

The symmetry of two forms of energy, namely B- and R-energies, in terms of energy integrals, was first recognized soon after the discovery of the CMB (Chernin 1968). The significance of this B-R symmetry is obvious from the fact that the relation $`A_BA_R10^{59}M_{Pl}^1`$ enables alone to quantify such important things as the baryon-antibaryon asymmetry of the Universe, the entropy per baryon, the light-element production in the nucleosynthesis, the epoch of hydrogen recombination, the present-day temperature of CMB, etc.

In the framework of the symmetry extended to the all vacuum and non-vacuum cosmic energies, the genuine constant characteristic of physical vacuum $`A_V`$ finds its natural non-vacuum counterparts which are also constant in time. Since all the forms of cosmic energy are treated in a unified manner and on the common ground of the energy integrals, the naturalness problem looses its uniqueness and finds its place in this broader cosmological framework. This way the naturalness problem together with the cosmic coincidence problem are transformed into a more general problem in fundamental physics and cosmology: Why is $`A_VA_DA_BA_R10^{60}M_{Pl}^1`$?

## 5 Vacuum and electroweak scale physics

In any fundamental unified theory, the value of the vacuum density would have to be calculable. Alongside with this, the symmetry of energy forms described by Eq.10 would have to be explained. This seems to be a rather remote goal. What could seemingly be done now is to try, first, to identify a clue physical factor that determines both the symmetry and the value of the vacuum density.

One possible way to do this is to assume that the vacuum density is completely due to zero oscillations of the quantum fields, as it was suggested not once since the 1930-s (see, for instance, Dolgov et al. 1988). If so, the vacuum density is given by an integral over all frequencies of the zero oscillations, – but this gives infinite value for the density. One may cut off the range of the frequencies, introducing a maximal frequency $`\omega _V`$; then the integral takes a form: $`\rho _V\omega _V^4`$ (as it can be seen, for instance, from dimension considerations). With the observed vacuum density, one finds from this that $`\omega _V10^{31}M_{Pl}`$. Then one may put this maximal frequency into the cosmological context and compare it with the rate of cosmological expansion in the early Universe $`1/t(G\rho )^{1/2}`$; here $`\rho \rho _RT^4`$, and $`T`$ is the temperature of radiation which dominates at that times. From this one finds that $`\omega _V1/t`$ at the epoch, when $`T10^{16}M_{Pl}1`$ TeV. The last value is close to the electroweak energy scale $`M_{EW}`$, and so $`\omega _VM_{EW}^2/M_{Pl}`$.

With this maximal frequency, the vacuum density is

$$\rho _V\omega _V^4(M_{EW}/M_{Pl})^8M_{Pl}^4.$$
(11)
These considerations suggest that the electroweak scale physics might be behind the observed density of cosmic vacuum. This physics may also be the major mediator between vacuum and non-vacuum forms of cosmic energies in the processes that might develop in the early Universe at the epoch of TeV temperatures.

Note that the relation of Eq.(11) was obtained also in a field-theoretic model (Arkani-Hamed 2000, – unfortunately, under some arbitrary additional assumptions).

## 6 A model

Having in mind the central part that may be played by the electroweak scale physics at the epoch of TeV temperatures, one may try to examine, if this physics could determine also the symmetry between vacuum and non-vacuum energies. For this purposes, a kinetics model can be used, in which non-relativistic dark matter is considered as thermal relic of early cosmic evolution. This possibility has been widely discussed (see, for instance, the books by Zeldovich and Novikov 1983, Dolgov et al. 1988, Kolb and Turner 1990, and a recent work by Arkani-Hamed et al. 2000). The model below is incomplete: baryonic energy is not included in it, and so baryogenesis at TeV temperatures must be studied separately, but, perhaps, not independently of the model. As for vacuum, dark matter and radiation, they will be represented in the model by the corresponding energy integrals.

For stable (or long-living) particles of the mass $`m`$, the abundance freezes out when the temperature falls below the mass $`m`$ and the expansion rate $`1/t`$ wins over the annihilation rate, $`\sigma n`$, where the annihilation cross-section $`\sigma m^2`$. So that at that moment the particle density is

$$n1/(\sigma t)m^2(G\rho _R).$$
(12)
Using Eq.(3) for $`A_D`$ and $`A_R`$ and putting $`\rho _Dmn`$, one finds:

$$A_Da(t)m^3M_{Pl}^2A_R.$$
(13)
One also has at that moment $`\rho _Rm^4`$, and because of this

$$A_Ra(t)^2m^2M_{Pl}^1,$$
(14)
where $`a(t)A_V(1+z)^1`$, and $`z`$ is the redshift at the freeze-out epoch; in this way, the vacuum integral comes to the model.

To specify the underlying fundamental physics, one can refer to a special significance of the electroweak scale physics, as it was mentioned above, and assume that only two fundamental energy scales are involved in the process, namely $`M_{EW}`$ and $`M_{Pl}`$. If so, it is natural to identify the mass $`m`$ with the electroweak energy scale $`M_{EW}`$. Then, one may use the relation for the vacuum density in terms of the two fundamental energy scales, $`M_{EW}`$ and $`M_{Pl}`$, as given by Eq.(11). With this density, the vacuum integral is

$$A_V(M_{Pl}/M_{EW})^4M_{Pl}^1.$$
(15)
Arguing along this line, one may expect that the redshift $`z`$ at the freeze-out epoch may be a simple combination of the same two mass scales:

$$zM_{Pl}/M_{EW}.$$
(16)
Now the kinetics model is described by a system of four algebraic Eqs.(13-16) (with $`m=M_{EW}`$) for the four numbers $`A_M,A_R,A_V,z`$. The solution of the system is:

$$A_MA_RA_V(M_{Pl}/M_{EW})^4M_{Pl}^1.$$
(17)
Thus the coincidence of the three energy integrals appears as a direct result of the freeze-out process mediated by the electroweak scale physics. This physics determines also the value of the integrals.

Following Arkani-Hamed (2000) and another recent work by Kawasaki et al. (2000), one may introduce the gravitational scale $`M_G`$, or the reduced Planck scale $`m_{Pl}`$, instead of the standard Planck scale: $`M_Gm_{Pl}gM_{Pl}`$, where $`g0.10.3`$. The dimensionless factor $`g`$ accounts for the fact that the gravity constant $`G`$ enters the exact cosmology relations in combinations like $`8\pi G/3,6\pi G`$, or $`32\pi G/3`$. Similarly, a few dimensionless factors, like the effective number of degrees of freedom, etc., may also be included in the model – see again the books mentioned above. One gets finally:

$$Ag^4(M_{Pl}/M_{EW})^4M_{Pl}^110^{61\pm 1}M_{Pl}^1,w=[1,0,1/3].$$
(18)
A quantitative agreement with the empirical result of Eq.(10) looks satisfactory here. With $`A_V`$ of Eq.(15), one finds that the vacuum density is $`\rho _Ag^8(M_{Pl}/M_{EW})^8M_{Pl}^410^{122\pm 2}M_{Pl}^4`$.

The numerical value of the redshift in Eq. (16) $`zgM_{Pl}/M_{EW}10^{15}`$, and so the temperature at the freeze-out is $`T1`$ TeV $`M_{EW}`$, which reflects once again the central role of the electroweak energy scale in the model above.

Thus, the model shows how – at least, in principle – the problem of the symmetry of cosmic energy forms can be discussed in terms of basic physics. The model gives an example of a possible (while partial and incomplete yet) solution to this problem.

## 7 Conclusions

The results of the discussion above may be summarized as follows:

1. A framework is suggested in which the energy integrals of the Friedmann cosmology equations (see Eqs.2,3) are identified as genuine time-independent physical characteristics for both vacuum and non-vacuum forms of cosmic energy.

2. The empirical analysis of the observational data on the four major energy forms leads to the conclusion that the corresponding energy integrals are numerically coincident within two orders of magnitude (Eqs.6-10).

3. It is argued that the coincidence of the energy integrals found at the empirical level reveals a symmetry that relates vacuum to non-vacuum forms of cosmic energy at fundamental level.

4. The symmetry shows the cosmic coincidence problem and the naturalness problem as two inter-related aspects of a more general problem: Why are the energy integrals numerically coincident and equal to $`10^{60}M_{Pl}^1`$?

5. A special significance of the electroweak scale physics is demonstrated for this general problem.

6. Under the assumption that dark matter is a thermal relic of the early Universe, a simple kinetics model of cosmological freeze out is used to demonstrate how – at least, in principle – the electroweak scale physics might explain the nature of the symmetry between vacuum and non-vacuum cosmic energies and determine the value of the energy integrals in terms of the fundamental energy scales.

The work was partly supported by the grant of the Academy of Finland ‘Galaxy streams and dark matter structures’.

## References

Arkani-Hamed, N., Hall, L.J., Kolda, Ch., H. Murayama, H., 2000. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4434.

Bahcall, N., Ostriker, J., Perlmutter, S., and Steinhard, P., 1999. Science 284, 1481.

Caldwell, R.R., and Steinhardt, P.J., 1998. Phys.Rev. D 57, 6057.

Caldwell, R.R., Davé, R., and Steinhardt, P.J., 1998. Phys.Rev. Lett. 80, 1582.

Carol, S., 2000. Astro-ph/0004075.

Chernin, A.D., 1965. Sov. Astron. 42, 1124.

Chernin, A.D., 1968. Nature (London) 220, 250.

Cohn, J., 1998. Astro-ph/9807128.

Dolgov, A.D., Zeldovich, Ya.B., Sazhin, M.V., 1988. Cosmology of the Early Universe. (In Russian; Moscow Univ. Press, Moscow.

Frieman, J.A., Waga, I., 1998. Phys. Rev. D 57, 4642.

Kawasaki, M., Yamaguchi, M., Yanagida, T., 2000. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 3572.

Kolb, E.W., Turner, M.S., 1990. The Early Universe. (Addison-Wesley, Reading).

Peebles, P.J.E., Ratra, B., 1988. Astrophys. J. Lett. 325, L17.

Perlmutter, S. et al., 1999. Astrophys. J. 517, 565.

Riess, A.G. et al., 1998. Astron. J. 116, 1009.

Wang, L., Caldwell, R.R., Ostriker, J.P., and Steinhardt, P.J., 2000. Astrophis. J. 530, 17.

Weinberg, S., 1987. Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1.

Weinberg, S., 1989. Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 1.

Zeldovich, Ya.B., Novikov, I.D., 1983. The Structure and Evolution of the Universe. (The Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago and London).

Zlatev, I., Wang, L., Steinhard, P.J., 1999. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 896.


text:
# Kinematics of Herbig-Haro objects and jets in the Orion Nebula

## 1 Introduction

The Orion Nebula (M 42) was discovered in 1610 by Nicholas-Claude Fabri de Peiresc (Bigourdan 1916, Frommert & Kronberg 2000). Later, in 1656, Christian Huygens rediscovered it and reported the inner region of this nebula describing, for the first time, the Trapezium stars (Huygens, 1659). This nebula is still being studied at several wavelengths because Orion is one of the nearest star forming regions (Orion is located at a distance of 450 pc) and consequently, the phenomena can be studied with the highest spatial resolution. In the Orion region several phases of the interstellar medium coexist, such as molecular, neutral and ionized gas. With the development of near IR imaging and spectroscopy in recent years, new phenomena have been revealed that constitute important clues in the understanding of the process of star formation and evolution of shocks in a molecular medium (see for example, the H2 fingers discovered near the BN-IRc2 object in the OMC-1 molecular cloud whose bow shocks host several Herbig-Haro objects, e.g. Axon & Taylor 1984, Hartigan et al. 1987 and Salas et al. 1999). The Orion Nebula is also one of the more studied objects with the HST, which provides a unique set of images in several emission lines revealing a plethora of new objects with the best detail. A general information and historic description of this nebula are presented in de la Fuente (2001).

The kinematics of the Orion Nebula have been studied mainly with long-slit spectroscopy (Goudis et al. 1984, Castañeda 1988, Wen & O’Dell 1993). The long-slit data do not give the spatial coverage required to study larger, possible high velocity features as well as the whole set of interesting objects. That is why recent Fabry-Perot spectroscopy at \[SII\] and \[OIII\] (O’Dell et al. 1997b) has been successful in revealing high velocity flows and proplyds.

Two other findings in the study of star forming regions motivated our interest in the Orion Nebula:

– The discovery that Herbig-Haro (HH) flows could be much larger than previously thought (Reipurth et al. 1997) implying a revision of the energetics and time scales involved in these flows. These giant HH flows are constituted of two or more HH objects that, in the past, were thought to be isolated.

– The interest in studying jets produced by newly formed stars that are photo-ionized by external sources. The most striking example is the recently discovered jet in the Trifid Nebula (Cernicharo et al. 1997) whose peculiar kinematics has been studied by Rosado et al. (1999). Theoretical models have been recently developed to study the complex emission and kinematical properties of these jets (Raga et al. 2000 ).

The Orion Nebula is the better place to study these phenomena. The large quantity of HH objects discovered there and the fact that in this nebula coexist star forming regions embedded in the UV flux of the Trapezium stars ensure that these kinds of studies can be accomplished successfully with observations which provide large spatial coverage and high spectral resolution, qualities easily furnished by imaging Fabry-Perot spectroscopy.

With the aim of obtaining a global view of the kinematics of the HH objects and jets in the Orion Nebula, allowing us to look for large dimension structures linking some of the objects, we have undertaken a study based on imaging Fabry-Perot spectroscopy in the emission lines of H$`\alpha `$, \[NII\], \[SII\] and \[OIII\]. We present results based on H$`\alpha `$ and \[NII\] observations. In Section 2 we comment on the observations and data reduction. In Section 3 we give our results about Orion HH objects. In Section 4 we present morphological and kinematic evidences suggesting the existence of a big bipolar outflow that includes several of the studied HH objects. In Section 5 we give our conclusions.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

The Fabry-Perot (FP) observations of the Orion Nebula were carried out during several observing runs (though the more successful one was during the nights from November 30 to December 5 1996) at the f/7.5 Cassegrain focus of the 2.1 m telescope of the Observatorio Astronómico Nacional at San Pedro Mártir, B.C. (México) using the UNAM Scanning Fabry-Perot Interferometer PUMA (Rosado et al. 1995).

A 1024$`\times `$1024 thinned Tektronix CCD detector, with an image scale of 0.59″ pixel-1, was used only in its central 512$`\times `$512 pixels to cover a field of 5′ in the sky. Thus, the resulting image format was of 512$`\times `$512 pixels, with a spatial resolution of 0.59″ pixel -1.

Interference filters centered at H$`\alpha `$ and \[NII\]( $`\lambda `$ 6583 Å ), having bandpasses of 20 and 10 Å , respectively, were used in order to isolate the H$`\alpha `$ and \[N II\] ($`\lambda `$ 6583 Å ) emission lines, respectively. Other interference filters centered at \[SII\]( $`\lambda `$ 6720 Å ) and \[OIII\]( $`\lambda `$ 5007 Å ), with bandpasses of 20 and 10 Å , respectively, were used to isolate the \[S II\] and \[O III\] emission lines. As mentioned before, in this work we only present the study of the H$`\alpha `$ and \[NII\] emission lines since O’Dell et al. (1997b) have already published results of the \[SII\] and \[OIII\] lines.

The scanning Fabry-Perot interferometer is an ET-50 of Queensgate Instruments with a servo-stabilization system. The main characteristics of this interferometer are: interference order of 330, free spectral range of 19.89 Å (equivalent to a velocity range of 908 km s-1) and sampling spectral resolution of 0.41 Å (equivalent to 18.9 km s-1), at H$`\alpha `$, achieved by scanning the interferometer gap at 48 positions. Thus, the resulting data cubes have dimensions of 512$`\times `$512$`\times `$48. The velocity resolution of the data is two times the sampling resolution, i. e., the velocity resolution is of 37.8 km s-1. On the other hand, the accuracy in the measurement of the peak velocities of the velocity profiles is of about 5 km s-1.

With these setups, we have obtained two nebular data cubes at H$`\alpha `$ and six at \[NII\] with exposure times of 24 min. each. The nebular cubes of the same emission line were co-added in order to enhance the S/N ratio of the faint regions, resulting in two nebular data cubes with total exposure times of 48 and 144 min., respectively. We also obtained calibration data cubes spaced at the beginning, during and at the end of the observations in order to check for possible flexures of the equipment. For the calibration cubes we have used the H$`\alpha `$ line (from a H lamp) so that we do not have to do any phase shift correction due to the FP interferometer plates for the H$`\alpha `$ data cubes while we needed to do such a correction for the \[NII\] data cubes.

The data reduction and analysis were performed using the specific reduction package CIGALE (Le Coarer et al. 1993). This software was used to remove cosmic rays, to carry out the wavelength calibration of the data cubes, to obtain continuum subtracted velocity-cubes and to carry out the emission line profile analysis. We have also used some IRAF22affiliation:  IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observato ries, operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. , under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation. routines for part of the data reduction.

Since the Orion Nebula is so bright, some problems are present when observing it, as discussed in O’Dell et al. (1997b). We took two or more exposures instead of a single longer one in order to detect the bright Trapezium stars without saturation. We have identified quite well the reflective ghosts due to those bright stars. An inspection of them during the course of the observations allowed us to place the orientation of the field in the less harmful way with the ghosts falling outside the more interesting regions. On the other hand, while we also observed the “ringing” of the calibrated velocity maps discussed in O’Dell et al. (1997b) –due to the undersampling of the FP scans because of the increase of accuracy in the velocities given the high S/N of the observations of bright emission lines– we do not obtain appreciable velocity changes or spurious features in the radial velocity profiles in order to do the interpolations that O’Dell et al. (1997b) have developed to handle their FP data. This is because our reduction packages work with the original interference rings and not with the calibrated velocity maps in the extraction of radial velocity profiles. In fact, calibrated velocity maps are used only to study the morphology of the emission at different radial velocities. For these velocity maps some ringing is present.

## 3  Kinematics of individual HH objects

Figures 1 and 2 show the velocity maps at $`V_{helio}`$ = – 127 km s-1 (i.e., 145 km s-1 blueshifted relative to the velocity of the intense nebular background) at H$`\alpha `$ and \[NII\], respectively. In Figure 1 we have identified the different detected objects: the HH objects HH 202, HH 269 (barely seen at H$`\alpha `$), HH 203 and HH 204, the E-W jet mentioned in O’Dell et al. (1997b) and several proplyds which we have denominated following the terminology of O’Dell et al. (1993) and O’Dell & Wen (1994).

### 3.1  HH 202

HH 202 was discovered by Cantó et al. (1980) as an emission line object showing two knots embedded in an arc-shaped nebulosity. These authors reported that the northern knot moves at $`V_{helio}`$ = – 31 km s-1. Further spectroscopic work, in \[OIII\], of the HH 202 region (Meaburn 1986) showed that the arc-shaped nebulosity was not seen in \[OIII\] and that a more extensive region (a half-disk of 20″ diameter), emitting in the \[OIII\] lines, had similar velocities to those of the knot seen in \[SII\].

Further spectroscopy has been performed in several emission lines by O’Dell et al. (1991) showing two velocity systems that these authors identified with a bow shock and its corresponding Mach disk. More recently, O’Dell et al. (1997a) have obtained wonderful HST images of the HH 202 region in the \[SII\], H$`\alpha `$ and \[OIII\] lines. O’Dell et al. (1997a) also detect strong \[OIII\] emission inside the arc-shaped nebulosity. O’Dell et al. (1997b) obtained \[SII\] and \[OIII\] FP spectroscopy of the Trapezium region (and consequently, of the HH 202 region). They found a blueshifted portion of HH 202 that extends towards the NW. In the case of HH 202 the identification of the driving source is still a mystery given the richness of the Orion Nebula field, which has a large amount of possible candidates.

No reliable proper motions have been measured for this object. Indeed, Bally et al. (2000) report proper motion determinations of several objects in the Orion Nebula but HH 202 is not included. Their proper motion measurements were based on the comparison of 1994 and 1998/99 HST monochromatic images of Orion. Previous proper motion determinations were done based on continuum images where the emission lines were not isolated. Since in this work we show that the structure and kinematics of HH 202 are very dependent on the studied line, it is possible that those determinations are spurious. At least, they are not confirmed by the recent study of Bally et al. (2000).

Figure 3 shows close-ups of the H$`\alpha `$ and \[NII\] velocity maps at $`V_{helio}`$ = – 90 km s-1 showing the region around HH 202 (which is located at the NW corner of the FP field). The \[NII\] image shows the arc-shaped nebulosity ending to the SW in one of the HH 202 knots. On the other hand, the H$`\alpha `$ image shows several morphological differences both in the HH object and in the neighboring region. We detect the arc-shaped nebulosity but the southern knot is not easily disentangled from the emission of a bright nebulosity and of several other knots (as confirmed by an \[OIII\] image not shown). Instead, we see a bright head of irregular shape (somewhat like an arrow head) pointing in the E-W direction, with three faint filamentary extensions also oriented in the E-W direction. The longest filamentary extensions seem to form a rotated spur, or $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

We also find that the arc-shaped nebulosity of HH 202 seems to be part of a larger scale lobe (of 82″$`\times `$ 25″ and aperture angle of $``$ 40°), oriented in the NW-SE direction, that converges in its SE end towards a point close to the eastern region of the E-W jet of O’Dell et al. (1997a). Furthermore, inside this lobe, two elongated cavities (one of 35″$`\times `$ 9″ and another of 55″$`\times `$ 12″, with aperture angles of $``$ 20°) somewhat similar to bow shocks or to the H2 Orion’s fingers (Axon & Taylor 1984, Salas et al. 1999), are detected. On the other hand, the walls of the lobe are better appreciated in \[NII\], but the elongated interior cavities (hereafter called ‘fingers’) are confused with the bright background nebula.

We extracted radial velocity profiles integrated over boxes of different dimensions selected in order to cover the different features mentioned above. The velocity profiles are complex and cannot be fitted by a simple Gaussian function. Figure 4 shows a typical velocity profile integrated over the box shown in Figure 3. In general, the brightest component corresponds to the intense HII region and has a gradual velocity variation with position from $`V_{helio}`$ = +10 km s-1 (for the zone near to the E-W jet) to $`V_{helio}`$ = +17 km s-1 (for the region of the HH 202 head). In addition, the velocity profiles show wings blueshifted relative to the bright HII region component, reaching relative velocities of up to 100 km s-1. Blueshifted wings are found: at the E-W jet ($`V_{relative}`$ = 70 km s-1), in the ‘fingers’ ($`V_{relative}`$ = 60 km s-1), in the cavity or lobe ($`V_{relative}`$ = 86 km s-1), in the arc ($`V_{relative}`$ = 78 km s-1), in the northern knot ($`V_{relative}`$ = 70 km s-1), in the southern knot ($`V_{relative}`$ = 70 km s-1) and in the spur ($`V_{relative}`$ = 105 km s-1). From the profile decomposition, we were not able to find any redshifted component as suggested in the velocity maps. Thus, we can conservatively say that motions of up to 100 km s-1 are present in this system and that the spur (which has the largest velocity values) belongs to the HH system. The high velocities found in these features indicate the presence of an HH flow of large dimensions ( $``$ 0.18 pc long) not catalogued as such because of the difficulties of disentangling it from the bright nebular background. It is unclear whether this flow is associated with HH 202 or whether it constitutes another HH system.

### 3.2  HH 203 and HH 204

These objects were discovered by Munch & Wilson (1962). Taylor & Munch (1978) show images of these bow-shaped objects near the star $`\mathrm{\Theta }^2`$ A Ori, and also report the existence of a third object, ‘object C’, located in the opposite side to $`\mathrm{\Theta }^2`$ A Ori (this object has recently been identified as the proplyd 244–440). These authors also give radial velocities and velocity dispersions of the several different features in these objects, obtained with a Coudé spectrograph and a tandem scanning FP interferometer. However, Taylor & Munch (1978) interpreted the velocity motions of the different features as due to an expanding motion of a wind blown bubble. Cantó et al. (1980) identified these objects as HH objects. Walsh (1982) obtained the electron densities of HH 203 and 204. O’Dell et al. (1997a) show HST images of these HH objects.

Proper motions for HH 204 have been obtained by Cudworth & Stone (1977), using broad bandpass images, indicating tangential velocities between 30 and 70 km s-1 directed towards the apex of the bow. Hu (1996) has also measured tangential velocities of 0 and 70 km s-1 for HH 203 and HH 204, respectively, using HST images in the \[NII\] line before and after the refurbishment mission. The more recent (and more accurate) work of Bally et al. (2000), using HST monochromatic images obtained after the refurbishment mission, gives as a result tangential velocities of 74 $`\pm `$ 10 km s-1 for HH 203 and of 59 $`\pm `$ 6 km s-1 for HH 204, moving toward a position angle of 140°.

There are at least two important questions related to these objects: are HH 203 and HH 204 parts of the same object? and, why does HH 204 show an asymmetry in its brightness distribution?.

In Figures 5 and 6 we show some representative velocity maps, at H$`\alpha `$ and \[NII\], respectively, where the most important features appear. There appears to be some differences in the morphology of HH 203 and HH 204 according to the emission line (H$`\alpha `$ or \[NII\]) and the velocity.

With respect to HH 204, we see that, in H$`\alpha `$, HH 204 has a complete and symmetrical conical or bow shock shape (height of at least 34″ and aperture angle of $``$ 65°) whose apex correspond to a bright knot (B according to Taylor & Munch 1978). The cone’s H$`\alpha `$ emission starts to be confused with the bright nebular background at the Orion bar, while in \[NII\] the cone is still detected well above the ‘bar’ (to the NW). We distinguish a pronounced asymmetry in the brightness distribution of the cone: the side near to the star $`\mathrm{\Theta }^2`$ A Ori is brighter than the side located away from this star. This asymmetry is better appreciated in \[NII\] than in H$`\alpha `$. Also, the whole conical shape of HH 204 is better appreciated at extreme velocities (either redshifted or blueshifted: $`V_{helio}`$ = +43 km s-1 and – 50 km s-1).

HH 203, featuring a jet-like appearance of at least 83″ long, appears to be partially superposed on HH 204. It is better disentangled from HH 204’s cone at blueshifted velocities ($`V_{helio}`$ = – 70 km s-1) and its H$`\alpha `$ emission is found in both sides of the ‘bar’. The jet-like feature encompassing HH 203 is directed towards HH 202 and the E-W jet discussed in the previous section. The end of this jet-like object (knot A1 according to Taylor & Munch 1978) is bent and brighter. In \[NII\], we distinguish well the jet-like feature but, it seems to be shorter than in H$`\alpha `$ (no emission is found in the western side of the bar) and it appears to have an interaction with the neighboring cone wall of HH 204 just to the north of the ‘bar’. Thus, HH 203 seems to be a jet colliding with the bow shock of HH 204. There are well known examples of jets entering bow shocks on the side, as the cases of HH 34 (Buehrke et al. 1988) and HH 47 (Eisloeffel & Mundt 1994). A precessing jet could be responsible of this particular morphology.

Figure 7 shows a close-up of the H$`\alpha `$ velocity map at $`V_{helio}`$ = – 89 km s-1 containing HH 203 and HH 204. Superimposed on this map are the boxes over which we extracted radial velocity profiles (both from the H$`\alpha `$ and \[NII\] cubes). The radial velocity profiles integrated over the boxes are, in general, complex and cannot be fitted by a single Gaussian function. Indeed, they can be fitted by: (1) a narrow and bright component (that corresponds to the HII region emission, with velocity widths varying between 20 and 40 km s-1) with $`V_{helio}`$ varying between +13 to +25 km s-1 (the highest values are found in preference near the ‘bar’ and to the North of it) and (2) blueshifted wings which are fainter and broader than the redshifted component (typical velocity width of 70 km s-1). In the brightest zones (the end of HH 203 and the apex of HH 204) we detect a splitting of the velocity profiles into two components of more or less the same intensity. In those cases, the redshifted components are clearly distinguished from the HII region and, consequently, this component should belong to the HH objects.

In Figure 7 we also show the velocity difference of the components that fit the radial velocity profiles integrated over the boxes, or in other words, the object velocities relative to the HII region. The brightest zone of HH 203 shows a splitting of the velocity profiles in two components at +13 and – 53 km s-1 while the apex of HH 204 shows another splitting in two components at +20 and – 24 km s-1 and, in addition, a wing reaching $`V_{helio}`$ = – 118 km s-1. The splitting values found for these zones are in agreement with several other determinations (Taylor & Munch 1978, Cantó et al. 1980, Walsh 1982 and Bally et al. 2000). However, the high blueshifted velocity value for the wing in the velocity profile of the apex HH 204 has never been reported before. It is important because the apex of HH 204 is thus, the zone with maximum velocity, as predicted by bow shock models.

On the other hand, the zones with maximum velocities relative to the HII region correspond to the cone side of HH 204 far away from $`\mathrm{\Theta }^2`$ A Ori (relative blueshifted velocities of up to 100 km s-1) while in the bright side of the cone, near to $`\mathrm{\Theta }^2`$ A Ori, the relative velocities are of 70 km s-1. Consequently, the fainter regions have larger velocities. Henney (1996) has proposed that a transverse density gradient in the ambient medium where a bow shock propagates, could lead to an asymmetry in brightness of the bow shock. Our results give some support to this idea of a transverse density gradient because we find that there is a slight velocity gradient running perpendicular to the axis of HH 204 in the sense that the fainter (and less dense) regions have larger velocities.

Finally, HH 203 and HH 204 seem to be part of a structure of large dimensions or lobe. Indeed, a careful inspection of Figures 5 and 6 suggests the detection of an incomplete lobe ending at HH 204 on one side, and at the mark shown in Figures 5 and 6 on the other side. This lobe would be 132″ or 0.29 pc long and is also oriented in the NW-SE direction as the lobe associated with HH 202. It is more intense in its northern half. The possible existence of this lobe is also revealed in O’Dell’s image of the Orion Nebula published in the National Geographic Supplement (Grosvenor et al. 1995).

### 3.3  HH 269 and other Herbig-Haro objects near the Trapezium stars

#### 3.3.1  HH 269

HH 269 has an elliptical shape of 41″$`\times `$ 32″ with the major axis oriented in the E-W direction. A distinctive feature of this object is that two knots are detected (hereafter called the E and W knots, respectively) at the ends of the major axis.

The singular appearance of HH 269 and the possibility that it could be an HH object were reported for the first time by Feibelman (1976), who also estimated its tangential expansion velocity (90 - 100 km s-1). However, given that the proper motion estimates were made from plates obtained from different telescopes, these results should be regarded with caution. Later on, Walter et al. (1995) reported their results of HST imagery and low and high resolution spectroscopy showing that this object is of low excitation, obtaining the electron densities of the knots and the central region and detecting blueshifted velocity components at $`V_{helio}`$ = – 22.5 and – 13 km s-1 for the W and E knots, respectively. These authors suggest that the central region has an emission line spectrum more of the type of an HII region than of an HH object. The more recent work of Bally et al. (2000) shows HST imagery of this object revealing that the E and W knots are filamentary and embedded in the tenuous elliptical nebula. These authors measure tangential velocities of 56 km s-1 at P.A. = 250°for the E knot and 71 km s-1 at P.A. = 260°for the W knot.

We have analized our \[NII\] velocity cubes in order to know more about this object. Figure 8 shows the \[NII\] velocity maps where HH 269 is detected. As we can see, the object becomes brighter in the maps corresponding to $`V_{helio}`$ = – 14 and +5 km s-1 and, consequently, its systemic velocity must be between that velocity range and thus, blueshifted relative to the systemic velocity of the HII region. Also, the object shows more knots that the previously reported: the E and W knots already mentioned and, at least, five additional knots. Figure 9 is a close-up of the velocity map at $`V_{helio}`$ = +5 km s-1. Superimposed on it we show several boxes where we have extracted integrated FP velocity profiles. Also, in this figure the heliocentric radial velocities found from our profile fitting are displayed.

We find a bright and narrow component (FWHM = 20 km s-1) present all over the whole extension of the object, which we interpret as due to the HII region emission. Its velocities vary from $`V_{helio}`$ = – 1 to +6 km s-1. For the W knot we find a splitting in the velocity profile into two components: the HII region component and another component at $`V_{helio}`$ = – 33 km s-1 (slightly larger than the value reported by Walter et al. 1995). However, we do not find the blueshifted component at – 13 km s-1 reported by Walter et al. (1995) for the E knot. This negative result is probably due to our lower spectral resolution that does not allow us to disentangle this component from the bright HII region component.

On the other hand, the central and southern zones show the HII region velocity component and very faint blueshifted wings of up to – 190 km s-1. The wings are visualized in the velocity maps as arcs running perpendicular to the E-W axis of HH 269. Given the high blueshifted velocities we think that these arcs are related to the HH object.

#### 3.3.2  Other HH objects

We have identified in the FP field of view of our observations the regions where the HH objects: HH 528, HH 529, HH 530 and HH 507, reported in Bally et al. (2000), are located in order to cross-identify these objects and obtain their radial velocities. In the case of HH 528, no conspicuous feature could be seen neither in the H$`\alpha `$ nor in the \[NII\] maps at high velocities. In the case of HH 530, although we detect it in the \[NII\] FP cubes, the integrated radial velocity profiles of several knots and regions of this nebulosity only show the velocity component corresponding to the HII region. HH 529 is different because it is quite conspicuous at H$`\alpha `$ where it can be seen, at blueshifted velocities, to the East of the E-W jet (Figure 3). In our ground-based velocity maps, the bow shock shown in the HST image of Bally et al. (2000) appears as a bright elongated knot with faint curved extensions. The radial velocities of the E-W jet have been discussed in Section 3.1 and, in Bally et al. (2000), there is no measured proper motion for this interesting feature. The radial velocity profiles we have obtained for the tip of the bow shock of HH 529 and its southern wall show that, in addition to the HII region component at $`V_{helio}`$ = +15 km s-1, there is a blueshifted component at $`V_{helio}`$ = – 19 km s-1 at the tip of the bow shock. On the other hand, Bally et al. (2000) report proper motions of several features in HH 529 implying transverse velocities of 85 $`\pm `$ 24 km s-1 with a P.A. = 100°, i.e., directed eastwards from the E-W jet.

## 4  The large scale features

Our results show that HH 202 seems to be part of a lobe which is larger than the known dimensions of the arc-shaped nebulosity associated with HH 202. This lobe is blueshifted relative to the main HII region velocity and shows the large internal motions (of up to 100 km s-1) characteristic of HH flows. The \[NII\] velocity cubes show that this lobe (hereafter the NW lobe) is formed by two ‘fingers’ starting from a region close to the E-W jet discovered by O’Dell et al. (1997a). The point of convergence of this large flow is marked in Figure 3.

On the other hand, HH 203 and HH 204 also seem to be part of a large structure or lobe (hereafter the SE lobe) of similar dimensions to the ones of the NW lobe. HH 204 is at one of the ends of the SE lobe while the other end is located close to the E-W jet, as in the case of the NW lobe. Furthermore, the SE lobe shares the same orientation and point of convergence of the flow as the NW lobe (see Figure 5).

The other HH objects we have detected and the additional ones revealed by their high transverse velocities ( Bally et al. 2000) are not so large or not so symmetrical relative to the point of convergence of the large structures forming HH 202 and HH 203-204. Bally et al. (2000) have suggested that at least six relatively large ( 0.2 pc size) HH outflows are emerging from the OMC1-S cloud core and the sources CS-3 and FIR-4. However,considering the point of convergence that we have found for the ends of the NW and SE lobes, we see that the smallest HH objects are not symmetrical relative to this point. Indeed, in Figure 3 we have marked the end of the NW lobe (point of convergence of the flow) as well as several sources in the vicinity of OMC1-S (the IR sources A, B and C and the exciting sources of molecular outflows CS-3 and FIR-4 discussed in Bally et al. 2000). As we can see from this figure, those sources are about 40 $`\mathrm{}`$ to the west of the center of convergence of the NW lobe. Furthermore, the proper motion vectors of HH 269 are oriented pointing towards a point to the north of OMC1-S for it is probable that HH 269 does not belong to the same flow as the system HH 202 and HH 203-204.

Considering the results presented in the previous sections and in a preliminary study of our data (Rosado et al. 2001), we suggest that HH 202 and HH 203-204, are part of a large bipolar outflow, 0.55 pc long, that arises from an object close to the E-W jet. In addition, we have seen that the NW lobe is blueshifted relative to the background nebula while the SE lobe is also detected at redshifted velocities, as is typical for bipolar outflows. The measured proper motions of HH 203-204 ( Bally et al. 2000) agree with this interpretation while there are no reliable proper motions measurements for HH 202. On the other hand, the region close to the E-W jet is so rich in objects that it is difficult to identify, by means of the existing stellar data, the object that could be the source of this suggested bipolar outflow. It is interesting to note that at the position of the suggested source there is a point-like source with high \[NII\]/H$`\alpha `$ line-ratio (see Figure 3). Figure 10 shows the H$`\alpha `$ velocity map at $`V_{helio}`$ = – 50 km s-1 of the inner 5′ of the Orion Nebula, which allows us to have a global view of this outflow. At blueshifted velocities, the NW lobe is better detected than the SE lobe. However, jet-like features (such as HH 203 and the ‘fingers’ inside the NW lobe) are detected inside these lobes. Further studies of the stellar content close to the E-W jet and of proper motions of the HH 202 knots are required in order to confirm or reject this possibility.

## 5 Conclusions

We present a kinematic study of the Herbig-Haro objects HH 202, 203, 204, 269 and 529 using H$`\alpha `$ and \[NII\] Fabry-Perot imaging spectroscopy.

For HH 202 we find new features that could belong to this HH object or that perhaps are associated with a different outflow. Because of its high velocity (of up to 100 km s-1) this outflow can probably be an HH flow not catalogued previously.

We have found that HH 203 has a jet-like appearance at blueshifted velocities while HH 204 has a conical shape resembling a bow shock with a strong asymmetry in its brightness distribution. Large internal motions are found in the fainter regions of HH 203-204, as well as some evidence of transverse density gradients. We show that the apex of HH 204 is the zone of maximum velocity in agreement with bow shock models.

We also studied the radial velocity field of HH 269 finding that near the center and to the south, a high blueshifted velocity component which is seen as a series of two arcs or bows running perpendicular to the main axis of this HH object.

We searched for violent motions in other HH objects detected in the field of view and we have only found them for HH 529.

Finally, from the studies of the individual HH objects and of their close environments, we find kinematic evidence to suggest that HH 202 and HH 203-204 are part of a big bipolar ($``$ 0.55 pc) HH outflow.

## Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the comments of the anonymous referee and also, they thank Alfredo Díaz and Carmelo Guzmán for the computer help. MR wishes to acknowledge the financial support from grants 400354-5-2398PE of CONACYT and IN104696 of DGAPA-UNAM and EdelaF akcnowledges the finantial support from CONACYT grant 124449 and DGEP-UNAM through graduate scholarships.


text:
# Two-Loop Jet Physics: Status and Prospects 11footnote 1Talk presented at 9th International Workshop on “Deep Inelastic Scattering and QCD” (DIS 2001), April 2001, Bologna, Italy

## 1 Introduction

Jet production observables are among the most sensitive probes of QCD at high energy colliders, where they are used for example to determine the strong coupling constant. At present, the interpretation of jet production data within perturbative QCD is restricted to next-to-leading order (NLO) calculations, with theoretical uncertainties considerably larger than current experimental errors. The extension of jet calculations to NNLO requires various ingredients, such as two-loop corrections to multi-leg amplitudes, multiple collinear limits of tree amplitudes, as well as a consistent method for the numerical computation of jet observables from NNLO parton level cross sections. In this talk, I review recent progress made on these subjects.

Jet observables of particular phenomenological relevance correspond to $`22`$ scattering or $`13`$ decay kinematics. They are:

* Three-jet observables in $`e^+e^{}`$
* DIS (2+1)-jet production
* Hadron-hadron 2-jet and $`(V+1)`$-jet production

The experimental accuracy on these processes at LEP, HERA and the Tevatron has already reached a level that makes theoretical predictions beyond NLO desirable.

## 2 Structure of NNLO jet physics

At leading order in perturbation theory, a jet is approximated by a single parton. Each parton in an event is required to be well separated in phase space from all other partons. Extending jet calculations to higher orders, this simple picture is no longer true.

At NLO, one has to include one-loop virtual corrections to the leading order subprocess as well as corrections from one-particle real emission. Both these contributions contain divergences, which have to be extracted, usually using dimensional regularization , before a jet algorithm is applied to the different final states in order to compute a particular jet observable. Since the jet algorithm acts differently on each partonic final state, it is not possible to combine contributions from real and virtual emission, as is done in multi-loop calculations of fully inclusive observables. It is for this reason that calculations of jet observables were limited to NLO accuracy up to now.

At the next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO), one has to consider three different contributions: two-loop corrections to the leading order subprocess, one-loop corrections to the one-particle real emission, as well as two-particle real emission. Figure 1 shows the different contributions to three-jet production in $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation. All three contributions individually contain divergences of infrared origin, which cancel only in the sum of the contributions. Again, each contribution has to be evaluated separately, since the (experimental) jet algorithm acts differently on final states with different numbers of partons.

## 3 Real corrections

Real corrections at NNLO consist of one-loop corrections to one-particle emission processes and of two-particle emission processes. Since the infrared divergences of these real corrections have to be extracted before application of the jet algorithm, it is necessary to introduce an infrared separation procedure, such as phase space slicing, subtraction, or a hybrid of these two methods.

At present, general algorithms exist for the computation of the one-loop corrections to one-particle emission processes  both in the framework of slicing and of subtraction methods. The computation of all two-particle emission contributions relevant to jet physics still is, however, an open issue. Some of these contributions have been computed within the hybrid subtraction method in the context of the calculation of the photon+1 jet rate in $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation . This calculation is moreover the only example so far of a numerical implementation of NNLO corrections to a jet observable.

## 4 Virtual corrections

The jet production observables listed in the introduction correspond to $`22`$ scattering or $`13`$ decay kinematics, i.e. the relevant scattering amplitudes are four-point functions with massless internal propagators and up to one external leg off shell. The large number of different integrals appearing in the corresponding two-loop Feynman amplitudes can be reduced to a small number of master integrals. The techniques used in these reductions are integration-by-parts identities  and Lorentz invariance . A computer algorithm for the automatic reduction of all two-loop four-point integrals has been derived .

For two-loop four-point functions with massless internal propagators and all legs on shell, which are relevant for example in the NNLO calculation of two-jet production at hadron colliders, all master integrals have been calculated over the past two years. The calculations  were performed using the Mellin–Barnes method and the differential equation technique . The resulting master integrals can be expressed in terms of Nielsen’s generalized polylogarithms . Very recently, these master integrals were already applied in the calculation of two-loop virtual corrections to Bhabha scattering , in the limit of vanishing electron mass, and to parton–parton scattering . To obtain the full virtual corrections, one also needs to know the corresponding squared one-loop amplitudes .

We have used  the differential equation approach to compute all master integrals for two-loop four-point functions with one off-shell leg. Earlier partial results on these functions were available in the literature , as well as a purely numerical approach to their computation . We find full agreement with these earlier results. Our results  for these master integrals are in terms of two-dimensional harmonic polylogarithms (2dHPL), a generalization of the harmonic polylogarithms . All 2dHPL appearing in the divergent parts of the master integrals can be expressed in terms of Nielsen’s generalized polylogarithms of suitable non-simple arguments, while the 2dHPL appearing in the finite parts are one-dimensional integrals over generalized polylogarithms. An efficient numerical implementation of these functions is currently being worked out. Our results correspond to the kinematical situation of a $`13`$ decay, their analytic continuation into the region of $`22`$ scattering processes requires the analytic continuation of the 2dHPL, which is outlined in .

These four-point two-loop master integrals with one leg off shell are a crucial ingredient to the virtual NNLO corrections to three-jet production in $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation, two-plus-one-jet production in $`ep`$ scattering and vector-boson-plus-jet production at hadron colliders.

## 5 Summary and Outlook

Considerable progress towards the computation of jet observables has been made recently, concerning in particular the analytic calculation of the virtual two-loop corrections to four-point amplitudes: all two-loop amplitudes for parton–parton scattering are now known, and all master integrals relevant to the decay of a vector boson into three partons have been calculated.

However, these corrections form only part of a full NNLO calculation, which also has to include the one-loop corrections to processes with one soft or collinear real parton as well as tree-level processes with two soft or collinear partons. While a general procedure exists for the calculation of the former, considerable effort is still needed to derive the latter.

Only after summing all these contributions (and including terms from the renormalization of parton distributions for processes with partons in the initial state) do the divergent terms cancel one another. The remaining finite terms have to be combined into a numerical programme implementing the experimental definition of jet observables and event-shape variables.

## Acknowledgement

I wish to thank E. Remiddi for a pleasant and fruitful collaboration on the topics discussed in this talk.