text:
# Absolute spin-valve effect with superconducting proximity structures

## Abstract

We investigate spin dependent transport in hybrid superconductor(S)–normal-metal(N)–ferromagnet(F) structures under conditions of proximity effect. We demonstrate the feasibility of the absolute spin-valve effect for a certain interval of voltages in a system consisting of two coupled tri-layer structures. Our results are also valid for non-collinear magnetic configurations of the ferromagnets.

Spin transport in hybrid systems of ferromagnets and normal metals is a very active field of research. This is inspired by prospectives of spin-based electronics or “spintronics” . The feasibility to create and control spin accumulation in such systems by injecting spin polarized current from a ferromagnetic material into a non-magnetic one is being extensively studied . The theory predicts a variety of novel effects in the case of non-collinear magnetizations .

The main attention receives the so-called spin-valve effect, which provides the mechanism for the giant magnetoresistance (GMR) . An idealized ferromagnetic metal would have electrons with only one direction of spin. The current between two such metals would not go if their magnetizations are opposite. This is the absolute spin-valve effect. The absolute effect is impossible to achieve with common ferromagnetic metals, since electron states of both spin directions are present at Fermi surface. This is why the actual values of GMR are relatively small. There have been substantial efforts to increase these values by exploring various material combinations . Recent attempts to realize the  absolute spin-valve effect concentrated on exotic magnetic materials. A spin polarization of up to 80 % was achieved using the dilute magnetic semiconductor Zn1-x-MnxSe .

In this Letter we propose a different approach, in which an absolute spin-valve effect can be achieved without using “exotic” compounds. We suggest to use the proximity effect minigap induced in a normal metal by an adjacent superconductor. This minigap has been predicted long ago  and has been intensively investigated in recent years . Features related to the proximity effect can be probed by tunneling spectroscopy measurements. The tunneling current between two superconducting proximity structures exhibits a jump at the voltage $`eV_{\text{th}}=(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{1(2)}`$ being the minigaps in the structures. This is a consequence of sharp peak in the density of states at the minigap edge, that mimics a BCS density of states. The current jump at the threshold voltage is well known for tunneling between superconductors .

We will use the minigap to achieve an absolute spin-valve effect for the tunneling current between two hybrid structures. Each structure combines a normal metal part with superconducting and magnetic reservoirs, that induce superconducting and magnetic correlations in the normal metal part. The presence of a normal part is essential to provide a physical separation between the sources of superconducting and ferromagnetic correlations. This assures that neither the ferromagnet suppress superconductivity nor the superconductor affects ferromagnetism. It also provides more control over the strength of the correlations.

We have found that the best result is achieved if the ferromagnet is an insulator. Then the only result of the magnetic correlations is a shift $`\pm `$ $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ of the minigap edges for opposite spin directions. The peaks of the density of states are therefore split. If one combines two such structures by a tunnel contact between the normal metal parts, the tunneling current exhibits jumps at different threshold voltages depending on which spin components contribute to the current. In the voltage interval between these threshold voltages, the tunneling current jumps from zero to a finite value differently for parallel than for antiparallel orientations of magnetizations in the two structures. Generally, the results depend on the relative orientation of the magnetizations of the two ferromagnets in the system, as well as on the induced superconducting gaps and the induced spin-splitting in each normal metal.

A possible design for an actual device is shown in Fig.1. It consists of two S/N/F structures as described above with their normal parts connected by a tunnel junction. For the calculation, we adopt the circuit theory description of the system . In terms of Green’s functions, this means that we assume isotropic Green’s functions in momentum space. Quasiclassical Green’s functions methods have already been used to study structures involving superconducting materials and magnetically active interfaces . The advantage of the circuit theory description is that we do not have to specify a concrete geometry of the structures. Each part of the structure is then presented by a normal node, which is connected to superconducting and ferromagnetic reservoirs by means of tunnel junctions. We concentrate first on one of the structures.

In the circuit theory, the Green’s functions are calculated from balance equations for matrix “currents” in each node. These currents come from each connector to the node. The matrix current is expressed in terms of the connector properties and the Green’s functions on the two sides of the connector. The case of a matrix current, that accounts both for the ferromagnetic and for the superconducting nature of the reservoirs, as well as for the magnetic structure of the contact, has not yet been included into the circuit theory. We have investigated this problem in some details . Here, we only give the results for the relevant case of a tunnel connector:

$`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_{21}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_\text{T}}{2}}[\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_2,\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1]+{\displaystyle \frac{G_{\text{MR}}}{4}}[\{\stackrel{}{M}\widehat{\stackrel{}{\sigma }}\widehat{\tau }_3,\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_2\},\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1]`$ (2)
$`+i{\displaystyle \frac{G_\varphi }{2}}[\stackrel{}{M}\widehat{\stackrel{}{\sigma }}\widehat{\tau }_3,\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1].`$
Here $`\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_{1(2)}`$ are the Green’s functions on the two sides of the junction. They are matrices in Keldysh-Nambu-spin space, obeying the normalization condition $`\stackrel{ˇ}{G}^2=\stackrel{ˇ}{1}`$. The first term presents the usual boundary condition for tunnel junctions , $`G_T`$ being the junction conductance. The second term accounts for the different conductances for different spin directions. This term leads to a spin polarized current through the junction. We assume a small value of this effect, $`G_{\text{MR}}G_\text{T}^{}G_\text{T}^{}G_\text{T}`$. The unity vector $`\stackrel{}{M}`$ is in the direction of the magnetization, and $`\widehat{\stackrel{}{\sigma }}`$, $`\widehat{\tau }`$ are Pauli matrices in spin and Nambu space, respectively.

The third term is of the most interest for us. It will not vanish even if there is no conductance through the junction. In this special case, the physical meaning of the third term can be understood as follows: electrons with different spin directions pick up different phases when reflecting from the magnetic insulator. The coefficient $`G_\varphi `$ is related to the mixing conductance introduced in  via $`G_\varphi =\text{Im}G^{}`$. To give a concrete example, we have calculated $`G_\varphi `$ in the framework of an effective mass model for electrons with Fermi momentum $`k_\text{f}`$ and with spin-dependent penetration depths $`\kappa _,^1`$ . Assuming $`\delta \kappa \kappa _{}\kappa _{}\kappa `$, we find $`G_\varphi =16AG_\text{Q}\kappa \delta \kappa \text{ arcsin}\left(ik_\text{f}/\kappa \right)/(k_\text{f}^2+\kappa ^2)`$, $`A`$ being the surface area of the interface and $`G_Qe^2/2\pi \mathrm{}`$. First principles calculations of these interface spin conductances have been performed recently .

We proceed by finding the Green’s functions for equilibrium conditions. In particular it is sufficient to find the solution in the retarded block only. The retarded Green’s functions associated with the ferromagnetic and with the superconducting reservoirs are respectively $`\widehat{R}_\text{F}=\widehat{\tau }_3`$ and $`\widehat{R}_\text{S}=\widehat{\tau }_1`$, assuming that the range of energies considered is smaller than gap of the superconducting reservoir ($`\epsilon \mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{bulk}}`$). The retarded function $`\widehat{R}`$ in the normal metal is obtained from the conservation of matrix currents in the node. The current from the superconductor is given by the first term in (2), and the current from the ferromagnetic insulator is given by the third term. A further current (called “leakage current” in Ref. ) being proportional to energy $`\epsilon `$ and inversely proportional to the average level spacing $`\delta `$ in the normal node, is also included. It describes decoherence between electrons and holes. The matrix current conservation then reads

$$[iG_\text{Q}\frac{\epsilon }{\delta }\widehat{\tau }_3i\frac{G_\varphi }{2}\stackrel{}{M}\widehat{\stackrel{}{\sigma }}\widehat{\tau }_3+\frac{G_\text{T}^{(\text{S})}}{2}\widehat{\tau }_1,\widehat{R}]=0,$$
(3)
where $`G_\text{T}^{(\text{S})}`$ is the conductance of the tunnel junction to the superconductor. This equation is easy to solve since it again separates into two blocks for spin parallel $`()`$ and antiparallel $`()`$ to the magnetization. We introduce parameters $`\stackrel{~}{h}G_\varphi \delta /2G_Q`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=G_T^{(S)}\delta /2G_Q`$. In these notations, the normalized density of states in the normal node is different for two spin directions and reads

$$\upsilon ^{()}(\epsilon )=\frac{\left|\epsilon \pm \stackrel{~}{h}\right|}{\sqrt{(\epsilon \pm \stackrel{~}{h})^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}}$$
(4)
This expression is the same as the one for a BCS superconductor in the presence of the spin-splitting magnetic field. However, here the density of states is formed in the normal metal, where neither superconductivity nor magnetization are present. The quantities $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ are induced by the corresponding reservoirs. This is why superconductivity and ferromagnetism do not have to compete and the relevant parameters can be experimentally controlled by adjusting the conductivities of the barriers .

Having obtained the simple solution (4), we discuss now the limits of its validity. The first limitation is the presence of sufficiently strong scattering in the normal part and/or at its boundaries to provide the isotropy of the Green function. Two other limitations are provided by the homogeneity of the Green’s function in the node. The minimum size $`L`$ of the normal part should exceed neither the superconducting coherence length nor the spin-flip length. If the size of the system is larger than the spin-flip length, the circuit theory description fails and spatially dependent Green’s functions have to be considered. In addition, the conductance of the normal part itself should exceed both $`G_\varphi `$ and $`G_\text{T}^{\text{(S)}}`$.

Now we consider transport between the two S/N/F structures through a non-magnetic tunnel junction with conductance $`G_\text{T}^{\text{(J)}}`$ connecting the two normal metals (see Fig.1). Both structures are assumed to be in local equilibrium. This assumption is justified if $`G_\text{T}^{\text{(J)}}G_\varphi ,`$ $`G_\text{T}^{\text{(S)}}`$. A voltage $`V`$ is applied between them. We also assume that the temperature $`T`$ is much smaller than $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }},`$ $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$. This is required for the absolute spin-valve effect. The magnetization directions $`\stackrel{}{M}_{1(2)}`$ of each magnetic insulator may be arbitrary. The matrix current between the two nodes reads

$$\stackrel{ˇ}{I}=\frac{G_\text{T}^{\text{(J)}}}{2}[\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1,\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_2],$$
(5)
where $`\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_{1(2)}`$ are the quasiclassical Green’s functions for the left $`(1)`$ and for the right node $`(2)`$ respectively. We can choose the spin-quantization axis to be parallel to $`\stackrel{}{M}_1`$. As a result, the Green’s function $`\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1`$ separates into two blocks in spin space

$$\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1^{}& 0\\ 0& \stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1^{}\end{array}\right].$$
(6)
The Green’s function $`\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_2`$ can be presented as

$$\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_2=U\left[\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_2^{}& 0\\ 0& \stackrel{ˇ}{G}_2^{}\end{array}\right]U^1.$$
(7)
$`U`$ being the spin rotation matrix that transforms $`\stackrel{}{M}_2`$ into $`\stackrel{}{M}_1`$. The electric current is given by the Keldysh component of Eq. (5)

$$I_e=\frac{G_\text{T}^{(J)}}{8\text{ }e}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\epsilon \text{Tr}\left\{\widehat{\tau }_3[\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_1,\stackrel{ˇ}{G}_2]^\text{K}\right\}.$$
(8)
It may be written as

$$I_\text{e}=\frac{1}{4}I_\text{p}+\frac{1}{4}I_\theta (\stackrel{}{M}_1\stackrel{}{M}_2),$$
(9)
where $`I_{\text{p},\theta }=I^{}+I^{}\pm I^{}\pm I^{}`$. Each $`I^{ss^{}}`$ ( $`s`$ and $`s^{}=\{,\}`$) is an integral of the form

$$I^{ss^{}}=\frac{G_\text{T}^{(J)}}{e}_0^{eV}𝑑\epsilon \text{ }\upsilon _1^s(\epsilon eV)\text{ }\upsilon _2^s^{}(\epsilon )$$
(10)
. As a function of the applied bias voltage, the left density of states $`\upsilon _1^s(\epsilon eV)`$ is shifted in energy. Now we assume $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{1(2)}\stackrel{~}{h}_{1(2)}`$. Each component $`I^{ss^{}}`$ will be zero until the voltage reaches a certain threshold $`eV_{\text{th}}^{ss^{}}`$, at which both left and right densities of states start to overlap. Because both densities of states are spin-split, there are four different threshold voltage $`eV_{\text{th}}^{ss^{}}`$, depending on which spin components of both densities of states are “matched” together

$$eV_{\text{th}}^{ss^{}}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2\left(\stackrel{~}{h}_1\pm \stackrel{~}{h}_2\right).$$
(11)
So the voltage interval $`|eV\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2|\stackrel{~}{h}_1+\stackrel{~}{h}_2`$ can be divided in four regions, separated by the four different threshold voltages $`eV_{th}^{ss^{}}`$.

To illustrate the effect, we consider the symmetric case  $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{h}_1=\stackrel{~}{h}_2\stackrel{~}{h}`$. In this case, there are only three threshold voltages $`eV_{\text{th}}^\text{ }=2\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\stackrel{~}{h}\right),eV_{\text{th}}^{\text{ }\text{ (}\text{ }\text{)}}=2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ and $`eV_{\text{th}}^\text{ }=2\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+\stackrel{~}{h}\right)`$. At each threshold, the correspondent spin component $`I^{ss^{}}`$ jumps from zero to the value

$$I^{ss^{}}\frac{\pi }{4}\frac{G_\text{T}^{(J)}}{e}eV_{\text{th}}^{ss^{}}.$$
(12)
These jumps are characteristic of tunneling between superconductors (S-S tunneling) . Through the voltage interval $`|eV2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}|2\stackrel{~}{h}`$, the total current $`I_\text{e}`$ presents steps reflecting these jumps (Fig. 2). These steps depend on the relative angle $`\theta `$ between the magnetization of the magnetic insulators (see Fig. 2). Of specific interest is the first jump of the current in antiparallel configuration ($`\theta =\pi `$), occurring at the threshold $`eV_{\text{th}}^\text{ }=2\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\stackrel{~}{h}\right)`$. In this case only spin-down quasiparticles in the left node overlap with spin-up quasiparticles in the right node, which constitutes the absolute spin valve-effect. As expected, the total current being finite at $`\theta =\pi `$, goes to zero if the magnetization of one of the ferromagnetic insulator is reversed (see Fig.2). The absolute spin valve-effect already vanishes at the second zone. Nevertheless again the difference between $`\theta =\pi `$ and $`\theta =0`$ currents resembles the effect. Generally these results depend on the relative values of $`\stackrel{~}{h}_{1(2)}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{1(2)}`$. In general the region of voltages where the effect occurs $`eV_{\text{th}}^\text{ }eV_{\text{th}}^\text{ }`$ is equal to $`2`$ min($`\stackrel{~}{h}_1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{h}_2`$).

In conclusion, we have investigated theoretically spin transport in multiterminal S/N/F proximity structures using quasiclassical Green’s function methods, inspired by circuit theories of mesoscopic transport . Spin-splitting of the induced density of states, caused by the presence of magnetic insulators, is probed by means of tunneling spectroscopy of the superconducting proximity effect. The tunneling current has jumps for certain intervals of voltages, in which an absolute spin valve effect can be achieved. These features of the current depend on the relative angular configuration of the different magnetic insulators and on the relative values of the induced superconducting minigap and the induced spin-splitting in each node. Moreover our proposal allows for the possibility of inducing two independent “fields” (i.e. antiparallel “fields”) in the device. This would be very difficult to achieve with an applied magnetic field in a system of superconducting electrodes. Finally, we emphasize, that the physical separation of the sources of both superconducting and ferromagnetic correlations provides a feasible way to manipulate specifically the spin-filtering properties of our proposed multiterminal S/N/F proximity structure.

We thank discussions with A. Brataas, Ya. M. Blanter, Gerrit E. W. Bauer and M.R. Wegewijs. We specially thank N.M. Chtchelkatchev for stimulating discussions and for his help with the numerical calculations. This work was financially supported by the Stichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der Materie (FOM).

FIG. 1. Schematic circuit of two coupled tri-layer S/N/F structures. In each trilayer structure, a normal metal node (N) is coupled to superconducting (S) and ferromagnetic (F) reservoirs through tunnel junctions of conductances $`G_T^{(S)}`$ and $`G_\varphi `$ respectively. The ferromagnetic reservoir is assumed to be a magnetic insulator. Both normal metal nodes are coupled together through a third tunnel junction $`G_\text{T}^{(J)}`$. The relative magnetic configuration of the ferromagnetic insulators may be non-collinear. A voltage $`V`$ is applied between both N nodes.

FIG. 2. Steps of the normalized N-N tunneling current $`e`$ $`I_\text{e}/(G_\text{T}^{(J)}\mathrm{\Delta })`$ with the applied voltage $`V`$ for the symmetric case  $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{h}_1=\stackrel{~}{h}_2\stackrel{~}{h}`$. In this case $`\stackrel{~}{h}/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=`$ $`0.5`$. The tunneling current presents jumps in the range of voltages $`|eV2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}|2\stackrel{~}{h}`$. For $`\theta =0`$, the current jumps at the voltage $`eV=2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. For $`\theta =\pi `$ the current presents two jumps at voltages $`eV=2(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\stackrel{~}{h})`$ and $`eV=2(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+\stackrel{~}{h})`$ respectively. This jumps reflect how the different spin components of the induced density of states in each normal node, contribute to the total tunneling current at different voltages. Between the voltages $`eV=2(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\stackrel{~}{h})`$ and $`eV=2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ the absolute spin-valve effect is achieved. The change of the current between $`\theta =0`$ and $`\theta =\pi `$ situations is shown for various values of the angle $`\theta `$.


format: text

text:
# RECURTION OPERATOR AND RATIONAL LAX REPRESENTATION

## I. Introduction

Recently a new method of constructing a recursion operator from Lax representation was introduced in . This construction depends on Lax representation of a given system of PDEs. Let

$$L_t=[A,L]$$
(1)
be Lax representation of an integrable nonlinear system of PDEs. Then a hierarchy of symmetries can be given by

$$L_{t_n}=[A_n,L],n=0,1,2\mathrm{},$$
(2)
where $`t_0=t`$, $`A_0=A`$ and $`A_n,n=0,1,2\mathrm{},`$ are Gel’fand-Dikkii operators given in terms of $`L`$. The recursion relation between symmetries can be written as

$$L_{t_{n+1}}=LL_{t_n}+[R_n,L],n=0,1,2\mathrm{},$$
(3)
where $`R_n`$ is an operator such that $`ordR_n=ordL`$.
This symmetry relation allows to find $`R_n`$, hence $`L_{t_{n+1}}`$, in terms of $`L`$ and $`L_{t_n}`$.

In ,  this method was applied to construct recursion operators for Lax equations with different classes of scalar and shift operators, corresponding to field and lattice systems respectively. In  the method was applied to Lax equations on a Poissson algebra of Laurent series

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\{\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}u_ip^i:u_i\text{ – smooth}\text{functions}\}$$
(4)
with the polynomial Lax function. Such equations give systems of hydrodynamic type. They were also discussed in . The Hamiltonian structure of the Lax equation on a Poisson algebra was studed in .

Here we consider the Lax equation on the Poisson algebra $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ with a rational Lax function

$$L=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_1}{\mathrm{\Delta }_2},$$
(5)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ are polynomials of degree $`N`$ and $`M`$, respectively, and $`N>M`$. The Lax equation is

$$\frac{L}{t_n}=\{(L)_0^{\frac{1}{NM}+n},L\},$$
(6)
where the Poisson bracket is given by

$$\{f,g\}=p\left(\frac{f}{p}\frac{g}{x}\frac{f}{x}\frac{g}{p}\right).$$

First we study the symmetry relation (3) for the rational Lax function. Then we give some examples.

In particular, we find a recursion operator $``$ for equation (6) with the Lax function

$$L=p+S+\frac{P}{p+Q},$$
(7)
which leeds to the system

$$\begin{array}{ccc}S_t\hfill & =\hfill & P_x,\hfill \\ P_t\hfill & =\hfill & PS_xQP_xPQ_x,\hfill \\ Q_t\hfill & =\hfill & QS_xQQ_x.\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
The recursion operator is given by

$$=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}S& 1& PQ^1+P_xD_x^1Q\\ 2P& SQ& 2P+(PS_x(PQ)_x)D_x^1Q\\ Q& 1& PQ^1+SQ+(QS_xQQ_x)D_x^1Q\end{array}\right)$$
(9)
In  bi-Hamiltonian representation of this equation was constructed with Hamiltonian operators

$$𝒟_1=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& P& Q\\ P& 2PQ& Q^2\\ Q& Q^2& 0\end{array}\right)D_x+\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& P_x& Q_x\\ 0& (PQ)_x& QQ_x\\ 0& QQ_x& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(10)
and

$$𝒟_2=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2P& P(S3Q)& Q(SQ)\\ P(S3Q)& P(2P2SQ+4Q^2)& Q(2PSQ+Q^2)\\ Q(SQ)& Q(2PSQ+Q^2)& 2Q^2\end{array}\right)D_x+$$
(11)
$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}P_x& SP_x2(PQ)_x& SQ_xQQ_x\\ PS_x(QP)_x& (SPQ+P^2+2PQ^2)_x& Q_x(2P+Q^2SQ)\\ QS_xQQ_x& Q(2P_x+2QQ_xS_xSQQ_x)& 2QQ_x\end{array}\right)$$

These Hamiltonian operators are degenerate, so, one can not use them to find a recursion operator. But it turns out that they are related to the recursion operator $``$. One can easily check that the following equality holds

$$𝒟_1=𝒟_2.$$

We observe that the degeneracy in the bi-Hamiltonian operators is due to the following fact. Let $`p^{}=p+F`$ then the Lax function becomes

$$L=p^{}+G+\frac{P}{p^{}}.$$
(12)
This means that we have two independent variabels $`P`$ and $`G`$, where
$`G=SF`$. The equation corresponding to the Lax function (12) has been studied in .

To remove degeneracy one can take the Lax function as

$$L=p+S+\frac{P}{p}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{Q_i}{p+F_i}.$$
(13)
As an example we shall consider the equation (6) with the Lax function

$$L=p+S+\frac{P}{p}+\frac{Q}{p+F}.$$
(14)
## II. Symmetry Relation for Rational Lax Representation.

Following  we consider the hierarchy of symmetries for the Lax equation (6) with the Lax function (5)

$$\frac{L}{t_n}=\{(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+n})_0,L\}.$$
(15)
Lemma 1.  For any $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{},`$

$$\frac{L}{t_n}=L\frac{L}{t_{n1}}+\{R_n,L\}.$$
(16)
Function $`R_n`$ has a form

$$R_n=A+\frac{B}{\mathrm{\Delta }_2}$$
(17)
where $`A`$ is a polynomial of degree $`(NM)`$ and $`B`$ is a polynomial
of degree $`(M1)`$.

Proof. We have

$$(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+n})_0=[L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_0+L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_{<0}]_0$$

So,

$$(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+n})_0=L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_0+(L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_{<0})_0$$

$$(L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_0)_{<0}.$$

If we take

$$R_n=(L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_{<0})_0(L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_0)_{<0},$$
(18)
then

$$(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+n})_0=L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_0+R_n.$$

Hence,

$$\frac{L}{t_n}=\{(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+n})_0;L\}=\{L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_0+R_n;L\}=L\frac{L}{t_n}+\{R_n;L\},$$

and (16) is satisfied. The remainder $`R_n`$ has form (17). Indeed in (18) we set

$$A=(L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_{<0})_0$$

and

$$B=\mathrm{\Delta }_2(L(L^{\frac{1}{NM}+(n1)})_0)_{<0}$$

Then $`A`$ is a polynomial of degree $`(NM1)`$ and $`B`$ is a polynomial
of degree $`(M1)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we can apply the Lemma 1 to find recursion operators.

## III. Examples.

Example 2.  Let us consider the equation (8) given in introduction.

Lemma 3.  A recursion operator for (8) is given by (9).

Proof. Using (17) for $`R_n`$, we have $`R_n=A+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{p+Q}}`$. So, the symmetry relation (16) is

$$\frac{S}{t_n}+\frac{P}{t_n}\frac{1}{p+Q}+\frac{Q}{t_n}\frac{P}{(p+Q)^2}=$$

$$\left(p+S+\frac{P}{p+Q}\right)\left(\frac{S}{t_{n1}}+\frac{P}{t_{n1}}\frac{1}{p+Q}+\frac{Q}{t_{n1}}\frac{P}{(p+Q)^2}\right)+$$

$$p\left(A_x+\frac{B_x}{p+Q}+\frac{BQ_x}{(p+Q)^2}\right)\left(1+\frac{P}{(p+Q)^2}\right)$$

$$\frac{pB}{(p+Q)^2}\left(S_x+\frac{P_x}{p+Q}+\frac{PQ_x}{(p+Q)^2}\right)$$

To have the equality the coefficients of $`p`$ and $`(p+Q)^3`$ must be zero. It gives the recursion relations to find $`A`$ and $`B`$. Then the coefficients of $`p^0,(p+Q)^1,(p+Q)^2`$ give expressions for $`{\displaystyle \frac{S}{t_n}},{\displaystyle \frac{P}{t_n}},{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{t_n}}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Example 4. The Lax equation (6) with the Lax function (14), for $`n=1`$, gives the following system

$$\begin{array}{ccc}S_t\hfill & =\hfill & P_x+Q_x,\hfill \\ P_t\hfill & =\hfill & PS_x,\hfill \\ Q_t\hfill & =\hfill & QS_xFQ_xQF_x,\hfill \\ F_t\hfill & =\hfill & FS_xFF_x.\hfill \end{array}$$
(19)
Lemma 5.  A recursion operator for (19) is given by

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}S\hfill & 2+P_xD_x^1P^1\hfill & 1\hfill & QF^1+Q_xD_x^1F^1\hfill \\ & & & \\ 2P\hfill & S+QF^1+PS_xD_x^1P^1\hfill & PF^1\hfill & 2PQF^2\hfill \\ & PF^1(Q_xQF^1F_x)D_x^1P^1\hfill & & PF^1(Q_xQF^1F_x)D_x^1F^1\hfill \\ & & & \\ 2Q\hfill & QF^1\hfill & SF\hfill & 2PQF^22Q\hfill \\ & PF^1(Q_xQF^1F_x)D_x^1P^1\hfill & PF^1\hfill & +PF^1(Q_xQF^1F_x)D_x^1F^1\hfill \\ & & & +(QS_xQF_xFQ_x)D_x^1F^1\hfill \\ & & & \\ F\hfill & 1+(P_xPF^1F_x)D_x^1P^1\hfill & 1\hfill & PF^1F+(FS_xFF_x)D_x^1F^1\hfill \\ & & & (P_xPF^1F_x)D_x^1F^1\hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(20)
Proof. Using (17) for $`R_n`$, we have $`R_n=C+{\displaystyle \frac{A}{p}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{p+F}}`$. So, the symmetry relation (16) is

$$\frac{S}{t_n}+\frac{P}{t_n}\frac{1}{p}+\frac{Q}{t_n}\frac{1}{(p+F)}+\frac{F}{t_n}\frac{Q}{(p+F)^2}=$$

$$\left(p+S+\frac{P}{p}+\frac{Q}{p+F}\right)\left(\frac{S}{t_{n1}}+\frac{P}{t_{n1}}\frac{1}{p}+\frac{Q}{t_{n1}}\frac{1}{(p+F)}+\frac{F}{t_{n1}}\frac{Q}{(p+F)^2}\right)+$$

$$p\left(\frac{B}{p^2}+\frac{C}{(p+F)^2}\right)\left(S_x+\frac{P_x}{p}+\frac{Q_x}{(p+F)}+\frac{QF_x}{(p+F)^2}\right)$$

$$p\left(A_x+\frac{B_x}{p}+\frac{C_x}{(p+F)+\frac{CF_x}{(p+F)^2}}\right)\left(1+\frac{P}{p}+\frac{Q}{(p+F)^2}\right)$$

Therefore, the coefficients of $`p`$, $`p^2`$, and $`(p+F)^3`$ must be zero, it gives recursion relations to find $`A,B`$ and $`C`$. Then the coefficients of $`p^0,p^1,`$
$`(p+F)^1`$ and $`(p+F)^2,`$ give expressions for $`{\displaystyle \frac{S}{t_n}},{\displaystyle \frac{P}{t_n}},`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{t_n}}`$ and $`{\displaystyle \frac{F}{t_n}}.`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

## Acknowledgments

I thank Professors Metin Gürses, Atalay Karasu and Maxim Pavlov for several discussions. This work is partially supported by the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey.


text:
# Cutoff in the TeV Energy Spectrum of Markarian 421 During Strong Flares in 2001

## 1 Introduction

Since the discovery of TeV $`\gamma `$-rays from the BL Lac objects, Mrk 421 (Punch et al. 1992) and Mrk 501 (Quinn et al. 1996), detailed very high energy observations of these nearby blazars (z = 0.031, z = 0.034) have been made. Measurements of flux variation with time, particularly simultaneous measurements at several wavelengths, constrain models of particle acceleration and $`\gamma `$-ray production in the jets. Spectral energy density measurements constrain both the models of the jets and of the infra-red (IR) photon density in the intervening intergalactic medium. The possibility of absorption of $`\gamma `$-rays by IR radiation has been predicted for some time (see, e.g., Nikishov 1962; Gould & Schrèder 1967; Stecker, De Jager & Salamon 1992; Biller et al. 1998; Vassiliev 1999).

The general picture which has emerged for the spectral energy density of emitted radiation from BL Lacs has two components, a lower one with energies extended up to about 100 keV attributed to synchrotron radiation from electrons, and a higher one with energies sometimes extending to the TeV range, usually attributed to inverse Compton scattering (see, e.g., Maraschi, Ghisellini & Celotti 1992, Marscher & Travis 1996). There are also competing models (Mannheim & Biermann 1992; Mannheim 1993; Mannheim 1998) which assume that the higher energy component arises from protons, either by proton-induced synchrotron cascades (PIC models) or by decays and/or interactions of secondary particles such as neutral pions and neutrons, or synchrotron radiation from proton beams (Mücke & Protheroe 2000; Aharonian 2000). See Catanese and Weekes (1999) and Mukherjee (2001) for reviews of TeV observations and an overview of relevant models.

Mrk 421 and Mrk 501 are particularly useful in separating the spectral characteristics intrinsic to the object from absorption effects in the intervening medium because they have almost the same redshift. They also exhibit strong flares in the TeV energy regime, well above typical quiescent levels, making detailed spectral measurements possible for both (Gaidos et al. 1996; Catanese et al. 1997; Protheroe et al. 1997; Aharonian et al. 1997).

Measurements by various TeV astronomy groups have shown that the energy spectrum of Mrk 501 is not a simple power law (Samuelson et al. 1998; Aharonian et al. 1999a; Djannati-Ataï et al. 1999; Aharonian et al. 2001) but has significant curvature. The two-component nature of multiwavelength blazar spectra implies that, over a sufficiently wide energy range, TeV spectra must be intrinsically curved. The measured curvature however depends on the distance of the energy range of the data from the IC peak. During the strong flaring activity the synchrotron peak of Mrk 501 appears to shift to above 100 keV (Catanese et al. 1997; Pian et al. 1998), with the IC peak shifting to several hundred GeV (Samuelson et al. 1998). Measurements of the HEGRA collaboration have the highest energies extending to $``$ 20 TeV; their spectrum is fit better with an exponential cutoff at $`68`$ TeV (Aharonian et al. 1999a; Aharonian et al. 2001), rather than a simple parabolic correction to the power law as used in Samuelson et al. (1998).

Several groups have determined energy spectra for Mrk 421, both at low average flux levels ($`<1`$ Crab) (Aharonian et al. 1999b; Krawczynski et al. 2001; Bazer-Bachi et al. 2001) and from intense flares (2.8 - 7.4 Crab) (Zweerink et al. 1997; Krennrich et al. 1999a). Analysis of the intense flare data showed that Mrk 421 had a spectral index different from Mrk 501. The data could be acceptably fit with a simple power law, although there was weak evidence for curvature (Krennrich et al. 1999a). The shape of the spectral energy distribution for Mrk 421 (Aharonian et al. 1999b; Krennrich at al 1999b) and Mrk 501 generally appears independent of the flux level (Aharonian et al. 1999a), although some evidence for spectral variability has been reported by Djannati-Ataï et al. (1999) and Krawczynski et al. (2001) for Mrk 501.

In this Letter, we present results from $`\gamma `$-ray observations of Mrk 421 taken during intense flares in January - March 2001 with the Whipple Observatory 10 m telescope yielding a spectrum spanning the energy range between 260 GeV and 17 TeV. The spectrum has high statistical precision and shows a distinct cutoff with a characteristic energy of about 3-6 TeV.

## 2 Observations & Data Analysis

The observations were made with the Whipple Observatory 10 m $`\gamma `$-ray telescope equipped with the GRANITE-III high resolution camera (Finley et al. 2001). The fine granularity ($`0.12^{}`$) of the 379 photomultiplier camera provides good sensitivity for point sources. The sensitive energy range of the instrument is $``$ 200 GeV to greater than 20 TeV. Based on finer sampling of $`\gamma `$-ray images, the linear response of the telescope at the highest energies is improved in comparison with previous camera configurations.

The use of a different type of photomultiplier (Hamamatsu R-960, previously Hamamatsu R1398), a complete re-coating of the mirrors and the installation of a new set of light concentrators necessitated a comprehensive and detailed new calibration of the telescope. Three methods were used: the first was based on laboratory measurements of the individual instrument components, the second utilized the calibrated Cherenkov light signal from single secondary cosmic-ray muons, and the third used simulated cosmic-ray showers to match observed distributions of the parameters of the background images. All three methods provide an energy calibration consistent within 20% for the absolute energy of primary $`\gamma `$-rays.

The calibration can be evaluated by checking the energy spectrum of the Crab Nebula, which is a standard candle for TeV $`\gamma `$-ray astronomy. The measurements of the spectrum of the Crab Nebula with the Whipple telescope over several years data using different camera configurations, are all statistically consistent, showing the same flux constant and energy spectral index. Therefore, we also show the Crab spectrum in this paper for comparison with the Mrk 421 spectrum. The Crab data consist of 15.4 hours of on-source observations (zenith angle $`<35^{}`$) with the same amount of data for the background estimate.

Mrk 421 was more active in 2000 and 2001 than in previous years of observations, with the most intense flaring episodes in 2001. The unusually high flaring states in 2001 provide remarkable statistics, and we have chosen the strongest flares for the analysis of the spectral energy distribution. Observations of flaring states on January 21, January 31, February 1-3, February 27, March 19, March 21, March 26-27, 2001 provide together $`23,000`$ photons above 260 GeV. To test the validity of combining various flares we have also divided the data into two subsets and found no statistical inconsistency in the derived energy spectral indices. The statistical significance of the excess events corresponds to more than 86 standard deviations.

The selected 2001 flaring data consist of 30.8 hours of on-source observations at zenith angles less than $`35^{}`$. For background comparison, the same amount of off-source data is used from observations made at similar zenith angles. The on-source data provide an average rate of 12.5 $`\gamma `$/min, corresponding to 3.7 Crab. The excellent signal to background ratio can be seen from figure 1. This plot shows the alpha distribution (for explanation of alpha parameter see caption of figure 1 or Reynolds et al. 1993) of events with energies greater than 1 TeV from the source (solid line) after applying $`\gamma `$-ray selection criteria. The dotted line shows the corresponding distribution for the background measurements.

The data analysis, $`\gamma `$-ray selection and energy estimate use the methods developed by Mohanty et al. (1998). These $`\gamma `$-ray selection criteria are derived from parameter distributions of simulated $`\gamma `$-ray showers as a function of their total light intensity (size) in the camera. The criteria vary with size and are set so that they keep 90% of the $`\gamma `$-ray images whose centroids lie within $`0.4^{}1.0^{}`$ of the center of the camera. To avoid the difficulties of modeling the trigger electronics we apply an additional cut, requiring that a signal of at least 15.1 photo electrons (p.e.), 13.6 p.e. and 12.1 p.e. be present in the three highest image pixels, respectively.

## 3 Results

The differential energy flux values derived from the intense flaring states of Mrk 421 in 2001, and for comparison the Crab Nebula, are shown in figure 2. The spectrum of the Crab Nebula can be well fit by a power law of the form:

$`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}=(3.11\pm 0.3_{\mathrm{stat}}\pm 0.6_{\mathrm{syst}})\times \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}10}^7\mathrm{E}^{2.74\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.08}_{\mathrm{stat}}\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.05}_{\mathrm{syst}}}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{TeV}^1`$

giving a $`\chi ^2`$ of 6.9 for 10 degrees of freedom (probability 73%). This result is consistent, within its limited statistics, with previous measurements made by the Whipple collaboration (Hillas et al. 1998; Mohanty et al. 1998; Krennrich et al. 1999a), showing that the analysis methods, the calibration of the detector, and the reconstruction of energy spectra are all consistent at the 2 sigma level including systematic uncertainties. The first set of errors on the measured spectral index are statistical and the second are systematic. The systematic errors are determined by varying the gain of the system by 20%, and by varying the cut efficiencies (see Mohanty et al. 1998).

Fitting a power law to the energy distribution of Mrk 421 yields the following result:

$`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}\mathrm{E}^{2.64\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.01}_{\mathrm{stat}}\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.05}_{\mathrm{syst}}}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{TeV}^1`$

giving a $`\chi ^2`$ of 410.7 for 10 degrees of freedom. The spectrum is clearly not compatible with a simple power law form. A curvature fit for the Mrk 421 spectrum yields:

$`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}`$ $`\mathrm{E}^{2.47\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.02}_{\mathrm{stat}}\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.05}_{\mathrm{syst}}(0.51\pm 0.03_{\mathrm{stat}}\pm 0.05_{\mathrm{syst}})\mathrm{log}_{10}(\mathrm{E})}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{TeV}^1`$.

giving a $`\chi ^2=56.5`$ for 9 degrees of freedom with a chance probability of $`6\times 10^9`$. As shown in figure 2, the Mrk 421 spectrum exhibits clear curvature, but a parabola is not a suitable shape. Assuming that part of the curvature in the spectrum is due to a cutoff, the data can be fit by:

$`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}`$ $`\mathrm{E}^{2.14\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.03}_{\mathrm{stat}}}\times \mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{E}/\mathrm{E}_0}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{TeV}^1`$

with $`\mathrm{E}_0=4.3\pm 0.3_{\mathrm{stat}}(1.4+1.7)_{\mathrm{syst}}\mathrm{TeV}`$.

While the $`\chi ^2`$ (25.2 for nine degrees of freedom or a probability of 0.3%) is not particularly good, the fit using an exponential cutoff is much better than the fits using the two simple forms considered above.

We should point out here that for the first time statistical errors of the flux measurements in TeV astronomy reached the level of 2%, likely making systematic uncertainties dominant. Because of this, indicated confidence levels should be accepted with a caution as they are based only on statistics of detected photons. We have also examined the flux values at 5.6 and 8.2 TeV, which appear high to the eye, $`2.6\sigma _{\mathrm{stat}}`$ and $`1.8\sigma _{\mathrm{stat}}`$, respectively above the exponential cutoff fit. Considering the statistical uncertainties we do not regard this as a significant feature in the data. In future, a more complete analysis will be pursued to understand systematic errors at the percent level. In derivation of the cutoff energy we have included two most prominent sources of systematics: uncertainties in the reconstruction of the spectrum with a cutoff derived from simulation tests (test spectra), and uncertainty in absolute energy calibration of the instrument (20%).

We also tried a ”super-exponential” form (e.g., see Stecker, De Jager & Salamon 1992; Aharonian et al. 2001), but with no improvement in quality of fit. The result is:

$`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}`$ $`\mathrm{E}^{2.24\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.09}_{\mathrm{stat}}}\times \mathrm{e}^{(\mathrm{E}/\mathrm{E}_0)^{1.3\pm 0.4}}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{TeV}^1`$

with $`\mathrm{E}_0=5.8\pm 1.5_{\mathrm{stat}}\mathrm{TeV}`$. The $`\chi ^2`$ of the fit is 24.0 for eight degrees of freedom (probability of 0.2%).

## 4 Discussion

For the first time, the Mrk 421 energy spectrum at very high energy has been determined over a sufficiently wide energy range, and with sufficient statistical precision, that an important feature (a cutoff) could be discerned. The spectrum is best described by a power law attenuated by an exponential cutoff at an energy of $`\mathrm{E}_0=4.3\pm 0.3_{\mathrm{stat}}(1.4+1.7)_{\mathrm{syst}}`$ TeV.

The cutoff feature could have several origins, e.g., the termination of the particle energy distribution in the primary beam, absorption near the $`\gamma `$-ray source (Dermer & Schlickeiser 1994) or absorption in intergalactic space by IR background radiation fields. If the cutoff energy varied in time, or differed for Mrk 421 and 501, it would not be due to extragalactic absorption. We examined our previous published flare spectra of Mrk 421 (Krennrich et al. 1999a; Zweerink et al. 1997) and found them consistent with the present spectrum. Fitting the previous Mrk 421 spectrum (Krennrich et al. 1999a) with the parametrization of $`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}`$ $`\mathrm{E}^{2.14\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.03}_{\mathrm{stat}}}\times \mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{E}/4.3\mathrm{TeV}}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{TeV}^1`$ results in an acceptable $`\chi ^2`$ of 19.4 for 13 degrees of freedom (P = 11%).

We also examined our previously published spectrum for Mrk 501 (Samuelson et al., 1998) and find that its spectrum can be fit by $`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}\mathrm{E}^{1.95\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.07}_{\mathrm{stat}}}\times \mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{E}/\mathrm{E}_0}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{TeV}^1`$ with $`\mathrm{E}_0=4.6\pm 0.8_{\mathrm{stat}}\mathrm{TeV}`$. However, fitting the Mrk 501 spectrum with $`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}`$ $`\mathrm{E}^{2.14\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.03}_{\mathrm{stat}}}\times \mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{E}/4.3\mathrm{TeV}}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{TeV}^1`$ results in a poor fit with a $`\chi ^2`$ of 37.6 for 13 degrees of freedom (P = $`3\times 10^4`$). The cutoff energy for Mrk 501 is consistent with the cutoff energy for Mrk 421, but a different spectral index is required for an acceptable fit. Thus, we find no inconsistency with the assumption that the cutoff might be due to the IR background. More detailed studies of spectral variability of Mrk 421 are in progress and will be presented elsewhere.

Energy spectra for Mrk 421 reported by the HEGRA collaboration (Aharonian et al. 1999b) are based on data taken in 1997 and 1998 with the source at a lower average flux level ($`0.5`$ Crab). However, the primary sensitivity of the HEGRA array is at energies above 1 TeV requiring a comparison above that energy. Those results indicate a power law spectrum of $`\frac{\mathrm{dN}}{\mathrm{dE}}\mathrm{E}^{3.09\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.07}\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.1}}`$. When the Mrk 421 spectral data presented here are fit with a power law using only data points above 1 TeV, a spectral index of $`3.01\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.03}_{\mathrm{stat}}\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.05}_{\mathrm{syst}}`$ with a $`\chi ^2`$ of 106.8 for 6 degrees of freedom is measured ($`2.73\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.04}_{\mathrm{stat}}\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.05}_{\mathrm{syst}}`$ if the 1.2 TeV - 8.2 TeV range is fitted, $`\chi ^2`$ of 11.1 for 4 degrees of freedom) which is consistent with the HEGRA result, considering statistical and systematic uncertainties between two different instruments.

In summary, we have presented a Mrk 421 spectrum over the energy range 260 GeV to 17 TeV which shows an exponential-like cutoff in the range 3-6 TeV, similar to the cutoff found earlier for Mrk 501 (see figure 3) which has almost the same redshift. The new Mrk 421 spectrum is consistent with those reported earlier both by our group and others. The occurrence of a cutoff at similar energy in the very high energy spectra of the two equally distant $`\gamma `$-ray blazars Mrk 421 and Mrk 501 might indicate that TeV $`\gamma `$-rays are absorbed by IR background radiation fields. Future investigations regarding the implications for the energy density of extragalactic IR background radiation are underway (Vassiliev 2001).

The VERITAS Collaboration is supported by the U.S. Dept. of Energy, N.S.F., the Smithsonian Institution, P.P.A.R.C. (U.K.) and Enterprise Ireland.


text:
# Are There 𝜈_𝜇 or 𝜈_𝜏 in the Flux of Solar Neutrinos on Earth?

(10 October 2001)

## Abstract

Using the model independent method of Villante, Fiorentini, Lisi, Fogli, Palazzo, and the rates measured in the SNO and Super-Kamiokande solar neutrino experiment, we calculate the amount of active $`\nu _\mu `$ or $`\nu _\tau `$ present in the flux of solar neutrinos on Earth. We show that the probability of $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ transitions is larger than zero at 99.89% CL. We find that the averaged flux of $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ on Earth is larger than 0.17 times the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ $`\nu _e`$ flux predicted by the BP2000 Standard Solar Model at 99% CL. We discuss also the consequences of possible $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$ or $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_e`$ transitions of solar neutrinos. We derive a model-independent lower limit of $`0.52`$ at 99% CL for the ratio of the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ $`\nu _e`$ flux produced in the Sun and its value in the BP2000 Standard Solar Model.

Solar Neutrinos, Neutrino Physics, Statistical Methods  preprint: hep-ph/0107310

The first results of the SNO solar neutrino experiment Ahmad et al. (2001) have beautifully confirmed the existence of the solar neutrino problem. A comparison of the neutrino flux measured through charged-current interactions in the SNO experiment with the flux measured through elastic scattering interactions in the Super-Kamiokande experiment Fukuda et al. (2001) shows an evidence of the presence of active $`\nu _\mu `$ or111 In this paper the conjunction “or” is used as a logical inclusive disjunction (the sentence is true when either or both of its constituent propositions are true).  $`\nu _\tau `$ in the solar neutrino flux measured by the Super-Kamiokande experiment Ahmad et al. (2001); Fogli et al. (2001a). Such a presence represents a very interesting indication in favor of neutrino physics beyond the Standard Model, most likely neutrino mixing that generates oscillations between different flavors (see Bilenky et al. (1999)).

The purpose of this paper is to quantify the amount of this flux of active $`\nu _\mu `$ or $`\nu _\tau `$ in a model-independent way in the framework of Frequentist Statistics222 Since the results that we obtain are not too close to physical boundaries for the quantities under discussion and we assume a normal distribution for the errors, the numerical values in the framework of Bayesian Probability Theory with a flat prior are close to those obtained here, but their meaning is different (see, for example, Ref. D’Agostini (1999)). .

The authors of Refs. Villante et al. (1999); Fogli et al. (2001b) have noted that the response functions of the SNO and Super-Kamiokande (SK) experiments to solar neutrinos can be made approximately equal with a proper choice of the energy thresholds of the detected electrons. It turns out that given the threshold $`T_e^{\mathrm{SNO}}=6.75\mathrm{MeV}`$, the two response functions are approximately equal for $`T_e^{\mathrm{SK}}=8.60\mathrm{MeV}`$ Fogli et al. (2001a). In this case the SNO and Super-Kamiokande event rates normalized to the BP2000 Standard Solar Model (SSM) prediction Bahcall et al. (2001) can be written in a model-independent way as Fogli et al. (2001a)

$`R_{\mathrm{SNO}}=f_\mathrm{B}P_{\nu _e\nu _e},`$ (1)
$`R_{\mathrm{SK}}=f_\mathrm{B}P_{\nu _e\nu _e}+f_\mathrm{B}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}}P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }},`$ (2)
where $`f_\mathrm{B}`$ is the ratio of the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ $`\nu _e`$ flux produced in the Sun and its value in the SSM Bahcall et al. (2001), $`P_{\nu _e\nu _e}`$ is the survival probability of solar $`\nu _e`$’s averaged over the common SNO and Super-Kamiokande response functions,

$$\frac{\sigma _{\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}=0.152$$
(3)
is the ratio of the averaged $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ and $`\nu _e`$ cross sections in the Super-Kamiokande experiment, and $`P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}`$ is the averaged probability of $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ transitions.

Calling

$$R_AR_{\mathrm{SK}}R_{\mathrm{SNO}},$$
(4)
from Eqs.(1) and (2) we have

$$R_A=f_\mathrm{B}\frac{\sigma _{\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}.$$
(5)
Therefore, $`R_A`$ is the rate of $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$-induced events in the Super-Kamiokande experiment, relative to the $`\nu _e`$-induced rate predicted by the SSM.

Considering the data of the Super-Kamiokande experiment above the energy threshold $`T_e^{\mathrm{SK}}=8.60\mathrm{MeV}`$ and the BP2000 Standard Solar Model Bahcall et al. (2001), the measured values of $`R_{\mathrm{SNO}}`$ and $`R_{\mathrm{SK}}`$ are:

$`R_{\mathrm{SNO}}^{\mathrm{exp}}=0.347\pm 0.029\text{Ahmad et al. (2001)},`$ (6)
$`R_{\mathrm{SK}}^{\mathrm{exp}}=0.451\pm 0.017\text{Fukuda et al. (2001); Fogli et al. (2001a)}.`$ (7)
Adding in quadrature the uncertainties of $`R_{\mathrm{SNO}}`$ and $`R_{\mathrm{SK}}`$, for $`R_A`$ we obtain:

$$R_A^{\mathrm{exp}}=0.104\pm 0.034.$$
(8)
The standard deviation of $`R_A^{\mathrm{exp}}`$ is

$$\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}=0.034,$$
(9)
and we have

$$\frac{R_A^{\mathrm{exp}}}{\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}}=3.06\pm 1.$$
(10)
Hence, the central value of $`R_A`$ is $`3.06\sigma `$ away from zero, implying an evidence of solar $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ transitions Ahmad et al. (2001); Fogli et al. (2001a). Our purpose is to quantify the probability of these transitions and possibly derive a lower limit.

The authors of Ref. Ahmad et al. (2001) calculate the probability of a fluctuation larger than the observed one assuming $`R_A=0`$: for normally distributed errors the probability of a fluctuation larger than 3.06$`\sigma `$ from the mean is 0.11%.

Recently some frequentist methods have been proposed that allow to obtain always meaningful confidence intervals with correct coverage for quantities like $`R_A`$ that are bound to be positive by definition Feldman and Cousins (1998); Ciampolillo (1998); Giunti (1999); Mandelkern and Schultz (2000). In particular, the Unified Approach proposed in Ref. Feldman and Cousins (1998) has been widely publicized by the Particle Data Group Groom et al. (2000) and used by several experimental collaborations.

Using the Unified Approach we can derive confidence intervals for $`R_A`$. Figure 1 shows the confidence belts in the Unified Approach for a normal distribution with unit standard deviation for 90% ($`1.64\sigma `$), 99% ($`2.58\sigma `$), 99.73% ($`3\sigma `$) and 99.89% ($`3.06\sigma `$) CL. One can see that the measured value (10) of $`R_A^{\mathrm{exp}}/\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}`$ implies that

$$0<\frac{R_A}{\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}}<6.32\text{at}99.89\%\mathrm{CL},$$
(11)
i.e. active $`\nu _\mu `$ or $`\nu _\tau `$ are present in the solar neutrino flux on Earth at 99.89% CL. Equation (11) implies that there is a 0.11% probability that the true value of $`R_A/\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}`$ is zero or larger than 6.32. This probability is the same as the probability of a fluctuation larger than 3.06$`\sigma `$ calculated in Ref. Ahmad et al. (2001) assuming $`R_A=0`$. However, our result have been derived without making any assumption on the true unknown value of $`R_A`$ and has a well defined meaning in the framework of Frequentist Statistics: whatever the true value of $`R_A`$, the interval (11) belongs to a set of intervals that could be obtained in the same way from repeated measurements and have the property that 99.89% of these intervals cover the true value of $`R_A/\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}`$.

In order to derive a lower limit for the averaged flux of $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ on Earth, we consider in the following 99% confidence intervals. From Fig. 1 we obtain

$$0.74<\frac{R_A}{\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}}<5.63(99\%\mathrm{CL}),$$
(12)
whose meaning is that there is a 99% probability that the interval (12) covers the true unknown value of $`R_A/\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}`$.

For $`f_\mathrm{B}P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}`$, that gives the flux of active $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ averaged over the common Super-Kamiokande and SNO response function, relative to the SSM $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ $`\nu _e`$ flux, we find

$$0.17<f_\mathrm{B}P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}<1.26(99\%\mathrm{CL}).$$
(13)
Hence, we can say that the averaged flux of $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ on Earth is larger than 0.17 times the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ $`\nu _e`$ flux predicted by the Standard Solar Model at 99% CL. This is an evidence in favor of relatively large $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ transitions if $`f_B`$ is not too large.

One could argue that it is possible to derive a more stringent lower limit for $`f_\mathrm{B}P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}`$ by calculating a confidence belt without left edge, instead of the one in Figure 1 calculated in the Unified Approach. Such a procedure is not acceptable, because it would lead to undercoverage if not chosen a priori, independently from the data, as shown in Ref. Feldman and Cousins (1998) for the case of upper limits. The correct procedure is to choose a priori a method like the Unified Approach that gives always sensible results and apply it to the data, as we have done here. A priori one could have chosen another method, as those presented in Refs. Ciampolillo (1998); Giunti (1999); Mandelkern and Schultz (2000), that may have even better properties than the Unified Approach Giunti and Laveder (2001a, b), but we have verified that the intervals (11)–(13) do not change significantly.

Unfortunately, we cannot derive a model independent lower limit for the averaged $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ probability $`P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}`$, because $`f_\mathrm{B}`$ could be large. However, from Figure 1 we can say that $`R_A/\sigma _A^{\mathrm{exp}}>0`$ at 99.89% CL (see Eq. (11)), and hence

$$P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}>0\text{at}99.89\%\mathrm{CL}$$
(14)
in the range of neutrino energies covered by the common SNO and Super-Kamiokande response function presented in Ref. Fogli et al. (2001a).

On the other hand, it is interesting to note that the relations (1) and (2) allow to derive a model-independent lower limit for $`f_\mathrm{B}`$, taking into account that

$$P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}1P_{\nu _e\nu _e}.$$
(15)
Using this inequality, from Eqs. (1) and (2) we obtain

$$f_\mathrm{B}\frac{\sigma _{\nu _e}}{\sigma _{\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}}R_{\mathrm{SK}}\left(\frac{\sigma _{\nu _e}}{\sigma _{\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}}1\right)R_{\mathrm{SNO}}f_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{min}}.$$
(16)
From Eqs. (3), (6) and (7), the experimental value of $`f_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{min}}`$ is

$$f_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{min}}^{\mathrm{exp}}=1.031\pm 0.197.$$
(17)
Since the central value of $`f_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{min}}^{\mathrm{exp}}`$ is $`5.2\sigma `$ away from zero, we can calculate the resulting 99% CL interval for $`f_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{min}}`$ using the Central Intervals method (see Groom et al. (2000)), that gives the same result as the Unified Approach far from the physical boundary $`f_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{min}}>0`$. Since in the Central Intervals method 99% CL corresponds to $`2.58\sigma `$, we obtain the confidence interval

$$0.52<f_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{min}}<1.54(99\%\mathrm{CL}).$$
(18)
Therefore, we can conclude that the SNO and Super-Kamiokande data imply the model-independent lower limit

$$f_\mathrm{B}>0.52(99\%\mathrm{CL}).$$
(19)
This is a very interesting information for the physics of the Sun.

So far we have not considered the possible existence of exotic mechanisms that produce $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$ or $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_e`$ transitions333 We would like to thank a referee of the first version of this paper for pointing out the possibility of $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$ transitions of solar neutrinos.  (in addition or alternative to $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ transitions), such as resonant spin-flavor precession of Majorana neutrinos444 In the case of Majorana neutrinos the right-handed states are conventionally called antineutrinos.  Lim and Marciano (1988); Akhmedov (1988). In this case, Eq. (2) must be replaced with

$$R_{\mathrm{SK}}=f_\mathrm{B}P_{\nu _e\nu _e}+f_\mathrm{B}\left[\frac{\sigma _{\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}+\frac{\sigma _{\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}P_{\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }}+\frac{\sigma _{\overline{\nu }_e}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}P_{\nu _e\overline{\nu }_e}\right],$$
(20)
and Eq. (5) with

$$R_A=f_\mathrm{B}\left[\frac{\sigma _{\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}+\frac{\sigma _{\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}P_{\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }}+\frac{\sigma _{\overline{\nu }_e}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}P_{\nu _e\overline{\nu }_e}\right].$$
(21)
Using the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ neutrino spectrum given in Ref. Bahcall et al. (1996), the neutrino-electron elastic scattering cross section calculated in Ref. Bahcall et al. (1995) taking into account radiative corrections, and the Super-Kamiokande energy resolution given in Ref. Nakahata et al. (1999), we obtain the following values for the ratios of the averaged cross sections in the Super-Kamiokande experiment for the threshold energy $`T_e^{\mathrm{SK}}=8.60\mathrm{MeV}`$:

$$\frac{\sigma _{\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}=0.114,\frac{\sigma _{\overline{\nu }_e}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}=0.120.$$
(22)
Hence, we have the useful inequalities

$$\frac{\sigma _{\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}<\frac{\sigma _{\overline{\nu }_e}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}<\frac{\sigma _{\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}}{\sigma _{\nu _e}}.$$
(23)
The lower bound in Eq. (11) implies the existence of solar $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ or $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$ or $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_e`$ transitions at 99.89% CL. The inequalities in Eq. (12) imply that the quantity on the right-hand side of Eq. (21) is limited in the interval $`(0.025,0.19)`$ at 99% CL. Using the inequalities (23), we obtain

$$0.17<f_\mathrm{B}\left[P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}+P_{\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }}+P_{\nu _e\overline{\nu }_e}\right]<1.67(99\%\mathrm{CL}).$$
(24)
Therefore, the averaged flux of $`\nu _\mu `$, $`\nu _\tau `$, $`\overline{\nu }_\mu `$, $`\overline{\nu }_\tau `$ and $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ on Earth is larger than 0.17 times the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ $`\nu _e`$ flux predicted by the BP2000 Standard Solar Model at 99% CL.

Let us derive now the most general model-independent lower limit for $`f_\mathrm{B}`$ (assuming only that the Super-Kamiokande and SNO events are produced by neutrinos or antineutrinos generated as $`\nu _e`$ from $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ decay in the Sun). Using the inequality

$$P_{\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }}+P_{\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }}+P_{\nu _e\overline{\nu }_e}1P_{\nu _e\nu _e}$$
(25)
and those in Eq. (23), from Eqs. (1) and (20) we obtain again the limit in Eq. (16). Therefore, Eq. (19) gives the most general model-independent lower limit for $`f_\mathrm{B}`$ following from the SNO and Super-Kamiokande data.

In conclusion, we have considered the model independent relations (1), (2) Villante et al. (1999); Fogli et al. (2001b, a) (and (1), (20)) and the rates measured in the SNO Ahmad et al. (2001) and Super-Kamiokande Fukuda et al. (2001) solar neutrino experiment in the framework of Frequentist Statistics. We have shown that the probability of $`\nu _e\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ (and $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$, $`\nu _e\overline{\nu }_e`$) transitions is larger than zero at 99.89% CL in the range of neutrino energies covered by the common SNO and Super-Kamiokande response function. We have found that the flux of $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ (and $`\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$, $`\overline{\nu }_e`$) on Earth averaged over the common SNO and Super-Kamiokande response functions is larger than 0.17 times the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ $`\nu _e`$ flux predicted by the BP2000 Standard Solar Model at 99% CL. We have derived a model-independent lower limit of $`0.52`$ at 99% CL for the ratio $`f_\mathrm{B}`$ of the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ $`\nu _e`$ flux produced in the Sun and its value in the BP2000 Standard Solar Model Bahcall et al. (2001).


text:
# Density waves in the central regions of galaxies

## 1. Introduction

Density waves are now recognised as important actors in the evolution of the internal structures of galaxies. This is often emphasized via their role in the redistribution of angular momentum. Since the contributions of Lindblad, Lin and Shu, astronomers have gradually associated observed spirals, bars and (more seldom) warps to (kinematic) density waves. Lopsidedness has however been mostly overlooked as a possible mode for density waves (but see e.g. Rudnik & Rix 1998, Swaters et al. 1999, Tremaine 2001). In this paper, we will present kinematical evidences for so-called $`m=2`$ (spirals and bars) and azimuthal $`m=1`$ modes in the central part of galaxies, thus occuring at scales from a few parcsecs to a few hundreds of parsecs.

## 2. Nuclear spirals …

A number of nuclear spiral-like dust and/or gas structures were recently observed in disc galaxies mostly using the high resolution imaging capabilities of HST (e.g. Regan & Mulchaey 1999; Martini & Pogge 1999; Laine et al. 1999; Chapman, Morris & Walker 2000). These are however usually low-contrast features for which, until now, only weak streaming motions were registred. Emphasizing the fact that gas spiral density waves can be present at all radii (contrarily to stellar density waves), Englmaier & Shlosman (2000) presented two-dimensional numerical simulations which, they argue, could account for these low arm-interarm contrast spirals in the central parts of galaxies. These would then represent the central extension of large-scale spirals through the Inner Lindblad Resonance.

In the course of a limited observational program aimed at studying the coupling between the stellar and gaseous components in early-type galaxies, Paul Goudfrooij and I have discovered a two-arm gas spiral within the central 250 pc of an elliptical, NGC 2974, using two-dimensional TIGER/CFHT spectroscopic data and subsequent WFPC2/HST images. The integral field datacubes allowed us to build the full stellar and gas velocity and dispersion maps (Emsellem & Goudfrooij, 2001, in preparation): the observed gas kinematics reveals very strong streaming motions and hints for shocks on the back side of the trailing spirals (Fig. 1). We have modeled the gravitational potential using the photometry and stellar kinematics as constraints, and then attempted to fit the observed gas velocities by using the formalism developed by Shu et al. 1973. Our best fit model requires the ILR to be within $`70`$ pc of the centre, which coincidently corresponds to the last radius until which we can follow the spiral. This nuclear spiral is not self-gravitating, but it is not of the same nature than the ones described in Englmaier & Shlosman (2000). Refined models and accurate infrared photometry should now be used to more accurately determine the characteristics of this density wave and the triggering source (tumbling potential).

## 3. Double bars …

Didier Greusard, Daniel Friedli and I have also embarked in a program to retrieve the kinematics of nuclear bars in double barred systems, with the aim of asserting the physical reality of such structures, and of understanding their role in the redistribution of the dissipative component. We have observed a number of double bars using the integral field spectrograph OASIS at the CFHT. We derived the gas and stellar kinematics of a few nuclear bars, to be compared with original section N body $`+`$ SPH simulations by Daniel Friedli. In the case of NGC 2859, we could fit the kinematical maps only by including a secondary decoupled nuclear bar in the model. We can now use these models to constrain the pattern speed of the two bars as well as the gas inflow rate.

We have also conducted, via a larger collaboration (including Françoise Combes, Stéphane Leon, Emmanuel Pécontal and Hervé Wozniak), a similar study this time using near-infrared long-slit spectroscopy to trace the stellar kinematics in later type barred spirals, and examine the link between the bar and the nuclear activity (Emsellem et al. 2001). We have obtained the kinematical profiles for 3 active and 1 starburt galaxies along the major and minor axes of the secondary bar. These data reveals a clear kinematical decoupling at the outer edge of the inner bar, thus confirming that the nuclear bars revealed in the photometry are truly decoupled dynamical entities. But the most surprising result comes from the stellar velocity dispersion (Fig. 2): 3 out of the 4 galaxies exhibit a significant drop in the central $`\sigma `$ profiles (the Seyfert 1 nucleus of the fourth galaxy prevented us to derive any meaningful stellar kinematics within the central half arcsecond). We interpret this as evidence for the presence of a cold transient component, recently formed via accretion of gas. This scenario is supported by our study of the luminosity weighted mean stellar population (Greusard et al., in preparation), and new N body + SPH simulations including star formation (Wozniak et al., in preparation). In order to further comment on the link between this late accretion and the nuclear activity new ISAAC/VLT data on inactive and/or unbarred galaxies are required.

## 4. … and $`m=1`$ modes

Lopsided luminosity/mass distribution are often apparently superimposed on $`m=2`$ modes (see e.g. Kamphuis et al. 1991). But as for $`m=2`$ modes, these should be confirmed via some kinematical signatures. An example of such a detection is illustrated in panel d of Fig. 2 where the radial surface brightness and velocity profiles of NGC 1808 are shown: there is a clear difference between the two sides both in the photometry and in the kinematics. Another beautiful illustration of such asymmetries is present in the central part of the double barred galaxy NGC 3504: the apparent asymmetric luminosity distribution corresponds to a real offset as emphasized in the adaptive optics K band image obtained by Combes and collaborators. In the visible, this appears as a one arm spiral, clearly delineated in the gas distribution derived from OASIS/CFHT datacubes (Fig. 3). The higher density gas traced by the \[OI\] emission line exhibits a different distribution, with large streaming motions between the centre and the edge of the spiral. This could be the signature of infalling gas, although this should be confirmed by proper hydrodynamical simulations.

A final example at a much smaller scale (of a few pc) is provided by the nucleus of M 31. We direct the reader to our recent paper (Bacon et al. 2001) for details on this object. The main issue is the observed asymmetry in the photometry, which exhibits an extra luminosity peak called P1, offset from the apparent centre P2 of the outer isophotes. Tremaine (1995) endorsed the presumed presence of a supermassive black hole near P2, then suggesting that the dynamical cold P1 could be explained if eccentric keplerian orbits are gradually aligned via the dynamical friction onto the slowly rotating bulge stars. Dynamical friction was found to be negligible (Emsellem & Combes 1997, Bacon et al. 2001), but we managed to beautifully fit the lopsided surface brightness distribution by self-consistent N body simulations of a nuclear stellar disk suffering an $`m=1`$ mode. This is a very slow mode with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p3`$ km.s-1.pc-1, a factor of about one hundred slower than the local circular velocity, and it can remain for hundreds of dynamical times. Such a mode seems to grow spontaneously, given that the disk is about 20-40% of the mass of the central black hole, or could be triggered by some perturbers (infalling gas cloud). This may thus be a recurrent process, and could well be a common phenomenon among galaxy nuclei.

## 5. Conclusion

In this paper, we have shown a few illustrations of $`m=2`$ and $`m=1`$ modes in the central part of galaxies, with some hints of their role in the redistribution of angular momentum, and more specifically in the triggering of gas infall towards the centre. The main points to be remembered from this paper are then:

* Density waves are present in the central part of galaxies, and do have an important role in the evolution of the central structures.
* Gas is a critical component for these modes to persist, as they tend to dynamically heat the system, with timescales obviously much shorter than for similar modes in the outer parts of galaxies.
* $`m=1`$ may be common, at scales of a few hundreds of pc, and superimposed on central spirals and/or bars, but also at scales of a few pc where the potential is dominated by the central mass concentration.

## References

Bacon, R., Emsellem, E., Combes, F., Copin, Y., Monnet, G., Martin, P., 2001, A&A, 371, 409

Emsellem, E., Combes, F., 1997, A&A, 323, 674

Emsellem, E., Greusard, D., Combes, F., Friedli, D., Leon, S., Pécontal, E., Wozniak, H., 2001, A&A, 368, 52

Englmaier, P., Shlosman, I., 2000, ApJ, 528, 677

Kamphuis, J. Sancisi, R., van der Hulst, T., 1991, A&A, 244, L29

Laine, S., Knapen, J. H., Pérez-Ramirez, D., Doyon, R., Nadeau, D., 1999, MNRAS, 302, 33

Martini, P., Pogge, R. W., 1999, AJ, 118, 2646

Chapman, S. C., Morris, S. L., Walker, G. A. H., 2000, MNRAS, 319, 666

Regan, M. W., Mulchaey, J. S., 1999, AJ, 117, 2676

Rudnik, G., Rix, H.-W., 1998, AJ, 116, 1163

Shu, F., Milione, V., Williams, W. Jr., 1973, ApJ, 183, 819

Swaters, R. A., Schoenmakers, R. H. M., Sancisi, R., van Albada, T. S., 1999, MNRAS, 304, 330

Tremaine, S., 1995, AJ, 110, 628

Tremaine, S., 2001, AJ, 121, 1776