text:
# 1 Meson-meson scattering in a chiral unitary approach

## 1 Meson-meson scattering in a chiral unitary approach

We study the $`\rho `$ propagation properties by obtaining the $`\pi \pi \pi \pi `$ scattering amplitude in the $`(I,J)=(1,1)`$ channel. The model for meson-meson scattering in vacuum is fully explained in . We start from the $`(I=1)`$ $`\pi \pi `$, $`K\overline{K}`$ states in the isospin basis:

$`|\pi \pi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$
$`|K\overline{K}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}|K^+K^{}K^0\overline{K}^0.`$ (1)
Tree level amplitudes are obtained from the lowest order $`\chi PT`$ lagrangians  including explicit resonance fields . We collect these amplitudes in a $`2\times 2`$ symmetric $`K`$ matrix and work in a coupled channel approach.

The final expression of the $`T`$ matrix is obtained by unitarizing the tree level scattering amplitudes. To this end we follow the N/D method, which was adapted to the context of chiral theory in ref. . We get

$$T(s)=\left[I+K(s)G(s)\right]^1K(s),$$
(2)
where $`G(s)`$ is a diagonal matrix given by the loop integral of two meson propagators. In dimensional regularization its diagonal elements are given by

$$G_i^D(s)=\frac{1}{16\pi ^2}\left[2+d_i+\sigma _i(s)\mathrm{log}\frac{\sigma _i(s)+1}{\sigma _i(s)1}\right],$$
(3)
where the subindex $`i`$ refers to the corresponding two meson state (1 for $`K\overline{K}`$, 2 for $`\pi \pi `$) and $`\sigma _i(s)=\sqrt{14m_i^2/s}`$ with $`m_i`$ the mass of the particles in the state $`i`$. The $`d_i`$ constants in eq. (3) are chosen to obey the low energy chiral constraints, and they are obtained by a matching to one loop $`\chi PT`$.

At this stage, the model successfully describes $`\pi \pi `$ P-wave phase shifts and $`\pi `$, $`K`$ electromagnetic vector form factors up to $`\sqrt{s}1.2`$ GeV. The results for the $`\pi \pi \pi \pi `$ scattering amplitude show that the inclusion of the $`K\overline{K}`$ channel introduces minimum changes compared to the calculation including only pion loops. Keeping this in mind, the calculations in nuclear matter are performed ignoring the contribution of kaon loops.

By using dimensional regularization it is possible to establish connection with other approaches where tadpole terms are explicitly kept in the lagrangian . One can prove that the formalism keeping tadpoles and full off shell dependence of the $`\rho \pi \pi `$ vertex is equivalent to the one we have followed where only the on shell part of the $`\rho \pi \pi `$ vertex is kept. In the medium, however, the pion propagator in the tadpole term will change. Hence, in order to stick to the gauge invariance of the vector field formalism the tadpole term is kept.

## 2 $`(I,J)=(1,1)`$ $`\pi \pi `$ scattering in the nuclear medium

The basic input for the calculation in nuclear matter is the pion selfenergy. It is written as usual in terms of the Lindhard functions accounting for both $`ph`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }h`$ excitations. Short range correlations are also accounted for with the Landau-Migdal parameter $`g^{}`$, set to $`0.7`$. The final expression is

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi (q,\rho )=f(\stackrel{}{q}^2)^2\stackrel{}{q}^2{\displaystyle \frac{(\frac{D+F}{2f})^2U(q,\rho )}{1(\frac{D+F}{2f})^2g^{}U(q,\rho )}},`$ (4)
where here $`q`$ is the four-momentum of the pion and $`U=U_N+U_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the Lindhard function for $`ph`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }h`$ excitations . We use a monopole form factor $`f(\stackrel{}{q}^2)=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+\stackrel{}{q}^2}`$ for the $`\pi NN`$ and $`\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ vertices with the cut-off parameter set to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$ GeV.

In accordance to the gauge invariance of the theory, a $`\rho `$-meson-baryon contact term must be considered . Its contribution can be derived from the set of gauge invariant diagrams in Fig. 1 (left), and together with the single insertion of a pion selfenergy, it provides the set of medium correction graphs shown in Fig. 1 (right) . Their contribution is readily incorporated in the $`T`$ matrix by a proper substitution and redefinition of the $`G`$ two meson loop function of eq. (2), and using fully dressed pion propagators. A subtraction of the contribution in vacuum is performed to cancel quadratic divergences and convergence is achieved by means of the form factors.

In the same fashion the tadpole diagram in nuclear matter is calculated, and by subtracting the contribution in vacuum quadratic divergences are removed.

In addition to the contact interactions mentioned above there are other medium corrections that arise if one sticks to the gauge vector field formalism and generate interactions via minimal coupling scheme . Because of this a set of diagrams involving $`\rho NN`$ and $`\rho \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }`$ vertices also contribute to the $`\rho `$ meson selfenergy in nuclear matter. The relevant ones are shown in Fig. 2.

A step forward is done by considering the coupling of the $`\rho `$ meson to the $`N^{}(1520)`$ resonance. A much detailed work along these lines has been done in , where many other resonances are included. This correction manifests as an extra selfenergy term in the $`\rho `$ propagator. The basic vertex involved in this effect is shown in Fig. 3a, and the lagrangian describing the interaction reads

$`_{N^{}N\rho }=g_{N^{}N\rho }\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_NS_i\stackrel{}{\varphi _i}\stackrel{}{\tau }\mathrm{\Psi }_N^{}+h.c.,`$ (5)
and the contribution of the selfenergy diagram of Fig. 3b can be written as

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\rho ^{N^{}h}(P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}g_{N^{}N\rho }^2U_N^{}(P),`$ (6)
in terms of a Lindhard function for the $`N^{}h`$ excitation, $`U_N^{}(P)`$.

## 3 Results and discussion

We calculated in this approach the real and imaginary parts of $`T_{22}`$, the $`\pi \pi \pi \pi `$ scattering amplitude matrix element. The imaginary part shows a clear broadening of the resonance and the peak position is slightly shifted upwards by about 30 MeV, which is also observed in the position of the zero of the real part. The coupling to the $`N^{}h`$ components manifests as a visible bump at lower energies. As a whole much strength is spread below the resonance mass.

In order to test the model dependence on the phenomenological parameters we performed variations of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the range 0.9-1.1 GeV, and of $`g^{}`$ in the range 0.6-0.8. The results are rather stable under the first of the variations, showing uncertainties in the position of the $`\rho `$ meson peak of about 10-15 MeV. Variations of $`g^{}`$ are relevant close to the resonance maximum, and lead to uncertainties in the position of the resonance of about 20-25 MeV. This was expected since the pion selfenergy, which is one of the basic ingredients of the medium corrections, is strongly modified by the short range correlations which directly depend on $`g^{}`$.

In considering the coupling to baryonic resonances our model does not try to be complete since many other resonances should be included, but this allows us to have an estimate of how these new channels affect the results. The calculation could be improved by following a self-consistent treatment as done in .


format: text

text:
# The Adsorption and Collapse Transitions in a Linear Polymer Chain near an Attractive Wall

## I Introduction

The behaviour of flexible polymers in solution at large length scales is independent of the chemical nature of the polymer and the solvent, and these universal scaling properties are well understood in terms of the renormalisation group approach . The polymer chain is known to undergo a transition from a random-coil phase to a globular phase as the temperature, or the pH of the solution is varied. The model of a self-avoiding walk on a lattice with nearest-neighbour attractive or repulsive interactions provides a simple model to understand the collapse transition in polymers .

When the chain interacts with an impenetrable surface its conformational properties are strongly modified . There is a competition between the lowering of internal energy near an attractive wall, and the loss of entropy due to constraints imposed by the impenetrable surface. For a strongly attractive surface, the polymer sticks to the surface, and for weak attraction, the preferred state is away from the surface. Thus, there is a transition from the state when the chain is mostly attached to the surface to a detached state, when the temperature is increased. This behaviour finds applications in lubrication, adhesion, surface protection, etc .

If there is self-attraction as well as attraction to the surface, there is the possibility of a collapse transition in the desorbed polymer, or in the polymer adsorbed on the surface. In addition, there is a surface-attached globular (SAG) phase, in which the polymeric globule gets attached to the attractive surface . In the thermodynamic limit, the SAG phase has the same free energy per monomer as the bulk globular phase, and the transition between them is a surface transition. In earlier papers , we had discussed the phase diagram in this case, and investigated the phase diagram in a lattice model using extrapolation of exact series expansions. This scheme has been found to give satisfactory results as it can take into account the corrections to scaling. To achieve the same accuracy by the Monte Carlo method, a chain of about two orders of magnitude longer than in the exact enumeration method has to be considered .

In this paper, we show that the qualitative features of the phase diagram in three dimensions can be determined by simple phenomenological arguments. In the case of a partially directed polymer in two dimensions, we determine the exact phase diagram of the SAG phase. In this case, the polymer has different behaviour depending on whether it is near the wall perpendicular to the preferred direction (SAG1) or the wall parallel to the preferred direction (SAG2). We determine the phase boundaries of SAG1 and SAG2 phases by calculating their orientation dependent surface energy. We also determine the transition between SAG1 and SAG2 phases when both walls are present. We also summarise our results of analysis of exact series expansion in three dimensions which we have extended by two more terms.

The paper is organised as follows. Sec. II contains the definition of the model and of the various phases. In Sec. III, we briefly review earlier work before providing arguments for the qualitative nature of the phase diagram in two and three dimensions. The phase diagram obtained is compared with numerical results from series expansion in Sec. IV. Sec. V contains the analytical results obtained for the partially directed model.

## II Model and Definitions

A simple lattice model for a linear polymer in a poor solvent is a self avoiding walk (SAW) on a regular lattice with an attractive interaction energy $`ϵ_u`$ between pairs of sites of the walk which are unit distance apart but not joined by an step of the walk. The adsorbing surface is modelled by restricting the walk to lie in a upper half plane and by associating an attractive energy $`ϵ_s`$ with each monomer \[site of the walk\] lying on the surface. In the partially directed self-avoiding walk (PDSAW) in two dimensions, there is an additional restriction that the walk cannot take steps in the negative $`x`$-direction.

We will work with the reduced variables $`\omega =e^{\beta ϵ_s}`$ and $`u=e^{\beta ϵ_u}`$, where $`\beta `$ is the inverse temperature. For the sake of easy reference, we now define all the phases that we will encounter later on, at one place. Consider a polymer consisting on $`N`$ monomers whose one end is attached to a fixed site on the surface. If $`ϵ_s`$ and $`ϵ_u`$ are small in magnitude, the polymer exists in the swollen random-coil phase, away from the surface. In this phase, the mean radius of gyration varies as $`N^\nu `$ where $`\nu `$ takes the self avoiding walk value \[$`\nu 0.588`$ in 3D and $`\nu =3/4`$ in 2D\]. The number of monomers in contact with the surface is of order one in this case. We shall call this phase the desorbed extended (DE) phase. If $`ϵ_u`$ is large and $`ϵ_s`$ is small, the polymer exists away from the wall as a compact ball of finite density. In this case, the radius of gyration of the polymer varies as $`N^{1/d}`$ in $`d`$-dimensions. We shall call this phase the desorbed collapsed (DC) phase. If the surface attraction $`ϵ_s`$ is sufficiently large, the polymer sticks close to the surface. In this case, a finite fraction of monomers are on the surface, and the extent of the polymer perpendicular to the surface is finite. Along the surface the polymer roughly acts as a polymer chain in $`(d1)`$-dimensions. Depending on whether the attractive self-interaction is large or small, the polymer is in a collapsed phase, with its transverse size varying as $`N^{1/(d1)}`$, or in the extended phase with the transverse size varying as $`N^\nu ^{}`$, where $`\nu ^{}`$ is the self avoiding walk exponent in $`(d1)`$-dimensions. We shall call these phases the adsorbed collapsed (AC) and the adsorbed extended (AE) phases respectively. In addition to these phases, the polymer may exist as a collapsed globule of finite density which sticks to the surface. In this case, the size of the polymer in the directions transverse and perpendicular to the surface varies as $`N^{1/d}`$ and the number of monomers in contact with the surface varies as $`N^{(d1)/d}`$. We shall call this phase the surface adsorbed globule (SAG) phase. Note that in $`2`$-dimensions, the AC and the AE phases cannot be distinguished from one another.

The polymer undergoes a transition from the extended to the collapsed phase when the temperature is varied. At the transition temperature between the DC and the DE phases, called the $`\theta `$-point, the critical behaviour is described by a tricritical point of the $`O(n)`$ ($`n0`$) spin system. At the $`\theta `$-point, $`R_bN^{\nu _\theta }`$ with $`\nu _\theta =4/7`$ for 2D  and $`1/2`$ for 3D . The transition from AE to AC is described by $`\nu _\theta `$ corresponding to one lower dimension.

## III Qualitative phase diagram

We first briefly review earlier results obtained for the model when both the monomer-monomer interaction as well as the interaction with the wall are attractive. One of the earlier papers on such systems was by Bouchaud and Vannimenus , in which the the phase diagram of a polymer living on a Sierpinski gasket was analytically derived. The phase diagram consisted of the AE, DE and the DC phases. In , the phase diagram in $`2`$-dimensions was obtained approximately by series expansions and it was found to be qualitatively similar to that for the gasket. In , the possibility of the existence of the SAG phase in $`2`$-dimensions was pointed out based on analysis of series expansions. Evidence for the existence of a surface transition from the SAG to DC phase was also presented. A variant of the model, the PDSAW model in $`2`$-dimensions, has been more amenable to analytical calculations. For PDSAW, in $`2`$-dimensions, the exact calculation of the phase boundary between the collapsed and the extended phases  has been numerically confirmed in . The phase diagram thus obtained is qualitatively similar to the undirected $`2`$-dimensional model. In , the existence of the SAG phase in the PDSAW has been argued for, based on series expansion analysis.

The model is less studied in $`3`$-dimensions. Monte Carlo simulations  and series expansion analysis  on the cubic lattice showed the existence of four phases: AE, AC, DE and DC. While  claimed the existence of two multicritical points, the earlier preliminary results  obtained from series expansion seemed to support one multicritical point. More careful analysis of the series, reported later in the paper, shows that there are indeed two multicritical points. The question of whether an SAG phase exists in $`3`$-dimensions or not has not been addressed so far. Also, the possibility of surface transitions among the collapsed phases has not been explicitly dealt with. Thus, in spite of many earlier studies, the qualitative behaviour of the system is not fully established.

We now determine the qualitative nature of the phase diagram from phenomenological considerations. Consider the case when the interaction with the wall is repulsive, i.e., $`\omega 1`$. The polymer will be in a desorbed state because proximity to the surface results in increase of internal energy as well as loss of entropy. As $`u`$ is increased from $`1`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$, the polymer undergoes a collapse transition from a desorbed expanded state (DE) to a desorbed collapsed state (DC) at a critical value $`u_{3d}^{}`$ (see Fig. 1). When the interaction with the wall is attractive, there is a competition between lowering of free energy and loss of entropy as the wall is approached. For $`ϵ_s0`$, the loss of entropy is more dominant and hence the polymer remains desorbed. Now, as $`u`$ is varied, the polymer undergoes a transition from DE to DC at the same critical value $`u_{3d}^{}`$. Therefore, in the lower part of the phase diagram, there is a vertical phase boundary $`u=u_c`$ separating the DE and the DC phases.

Consider now the case when the interaction between nearest neighbour monomers is close to zero, i.e., $`u1`$. Clearly, the polymer will be in the DE phase. Now, as $`\omega `$ is varied from $`1`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$ the polymer undergoes a transition from DE to one in which it is adsorbed onto the wall and extended, i.e., the AE phase. Let this transition occur at a critical curve $`\omega _c(u)`$ that intersects the $`\omega `$-axis at $`\omega ^{}`$.

Now, consider possible phases of the system for large $`\omega `$ and $`u`$. At $`T=0`$, the polymer has the maximum possible density. It can then be modelled as a Hamiltonian walk. The attractive energy per site is $`(d1)ϵ_u`$. In addition, for a finite polymer of $`N`$ monomers, there is a surface energy cost which is easily seen to be $`dϵ_uN^{(d1)/d}`$. Then the free energy of the DC phase at $`T=0`$ is

$$\text{E}_{\text{DC}}=(d1)ϵ_uN+dϵ_uN^{\frac{d1}{d}}.$$
(1)
At $`T=0`$, for $`\omega _{c1}<\omega <\omega _{c2}`$ (see Fig. 1) the polymer exists in the SAG phase as a rectangular parallelepiped of size $`L_{}`$ and $`L_{}`$ in directions parallel and perpendicular to the surface. Its bulk energy is the same as in the DC phase and the surface energy is $`(ϵ_uϵ_s)L_{}^{d1}+(d1)ϵ_uN/L_{}`$. Minimising the surface energy with respect to $`L_{}`$, we obtain

$$\text{E}_{\text{SAG}}=(d1)ϵ_uN+dϵ_u^{\frac{d1}{d}}(ϵ_uϵ_s)^{\frac{1}{d}}N^{\frac{d1}{d}}.$$
(2)
In the AC phase, we have $`L_{}=1`$, $`L_{}=N^{1/(d1)}`$ and the free energy at $`T=0`$ is

$$\text{E}_{\text{AC}}=(d2)ϵ_uNϵ_sN+(d1)ϵ_uN^{\frac{d2}{d1}}.$$
(3)
From Eqs. 1 and 2, it follows that the surface energies become equal when $`ϵ_s=0`$, i.e., $`\omega _{c1}1`$ as $`u\mathrm{}`$. Also, the bulk free energy term for the AC phase has lower value than that of the SAG phase when $`ϵ_s>ϵ_u`$. Thus, $`\omega _{c2}u`$, as $`u\mathrm{}`$.

Consider now the case when $`\omega =\mathrm{}`$. Then the polymer is adsorbed onto the $`(d1)`$-dimensional surface. In $`d>2`$, there is the additional possibility of the AC phase. As $`u`$ is increased from $`1`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$, the polymer will undergo a collapse transition, while still remaining adsorbed, from AE to AC. This transition occurs at the critical value of $`(d1)`$-dimensional collapse $`u_{d1}^{}`$. Since the critical temperature for collapse transition increases with dimension, $`u_{d1}^{}>u_d^{}`$. We will now argue that the curve $`\omega _{c3}`$ originating from $`(u_{2d}^{},\mathrm{})`$ bends to the right when $`\omega `$ is decreased to a finite but large value. The partition function, when written as perturbation series in $`\omega ^1`$, is

$$Z(u,\omega )=Z_0(u)\omega ^N[1+\frac{N}{\omega ^2}\left(n_0+\frac{n_1}{u}+\frac{n_2}{u^2}\right)+\mathrm{}],$$
(4)
where $`n_j`$ is the fraction of bonds such that their end points have exactly $`j`$ nearest neighbour monomers. Clearly, $`n_0`$ is larger in the AE phase as compared to the AC phase, while $`n_1`$ and $`n_2`$ are smaller. Using $`n_0=1n_1n_2`$ in Eq. 4, it follows that for large but finite $`\omega `$, the free energy is lower for the AE phase. Hence, the phase boundary $`\omega _{c3}`$ curves to the right.

The phase diagram for the $`2`$-dimensional problem is qualitatively the same as that of the $`3`$-dimensional problem except that there is no AC phase, and hence no $`\omega _{c3}`$ phase boundary. We now argue that the phase boundaries $`u_c`$, $`\omega _c`$, $`\omega _{c1}`$ and $`\omega _{c2}`$ meet at one point. For the sake of clarity, we will illustrate the arguments for the $`2`$-dimensional problem. In the DC and the SAG phases, the polymer is a compact two dimensional object with finite density. We define $`\sigma (\theta )`$ as the surface tension between the surface of this object and the liquid, where $`\theta `$ is the angle the surface makes with the horizontal. For a shape $`r(\theta )`$, the free energy is a sum of two terms: the bulk term which depends on $`u`$ alone and a surface term, which can be written as an integral over the angle dependent $`\sigma (\theta )`$.

Near the phase boundary $`\omega _{c2}`$ separating the AE and the SAG phases, the shape is highly anisotropic and $`R_sR_b`$, where $`R_s`$ and $`R_b`$ are the extent of the polymer along and perpendicular to the surface. $`R_s`$ diverges as we approach the phase boundary from within the SAG phase. Additional cost of creating two surfaces of orientation $`\theta =0`$ should be zero. Hence, along the phase boundary $`\omega _{c2}`$, we have

$$\sigma (0)+\sigma _w=0,$$
(5)
where $`\sigma _w`$ is the free energy cost per unit length when the polymer is along the wall. Near the phase boundary $`\omega _{c1}`$ separating the DC and the SAG phases, the shape of SAG is such that the part in contact with the wall has orientation $`\theta =0`$. Clearly, this configuration becomes unfavourable in comparison to the DC phase when

$$\sigma (0)=\sigma _w.$$
(6)
For the DE — DC transition, clearly the surface tension must vanish at the collapse point. Thus, along $`u_c`$ we have

$$\sigma (0)=0.$$
(7)
From Eqs. 5-7, it is clear that if any two of the phase boundaries intersect at some point, then the third will also pass through that point.

It still remains to be shown that $`\omega _c`$ will also pass through the same point as the other phase boundaries. Let $`u`$ and $`\omega `$ get transformed to $`u^{}`$ and $`\omega ^{}`$ under a scale transformation as

$`u^{}`$ $`=`$ $`f(u),`$ (8)
$`\omega ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`g(u,\omega ).`$ (9)
The function $`f(u)`$ is independent of the surface parameter $`\omega `$ because $`u`$ is a bulk parameter. There will be three fixed points for Eq. 8 namely $`u=0,u=u^{}`$ and $`u=\mathrm{}`$ where $`u^{}`$ is the only repulsive fixed point. Consider Eq. 9 when $`u`$ is fixed at each of its three fixed points. In the simplest scenario, for each value of $`u`$, there will be three fixed points of Eq. 9, one corresponding to no attraction, one to very strong attraction and the third a repulsive fixed point. After fixing the flow directions, the final flow diagram looks schematically as shown in Fig. 2. The fixed points $`A_1,A_2,C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ correspond to the four phases. The fixed points $`A,B_1,C`$ and $`B_2`$ correspond to the four critical phases corresponding to the phase boundaries and the point $`B`$ corresponds to the repulsive multicritical point.

## IV Series Expansion Results

We enumerated all SAWs up to a certain length on the cubic lattice in which the first site of the walk lies at the origin and all other sites are confined to the half plane $`y0`$. Let $`C_N(N_s,N_u)`$ be the number of SAWs of $`N`$ sites having $`N_s`$ monomers on $`y=0`$ and $`N_u`$ nearest neighbour monomer pairs. In , we reported the enumeration and analysis of the series $`C_N(N_s,N_u)`$ up to $`N=17`$ for the cubic lattice. We have now extended the series for $`3`$-dimensions by two terms and reanalysed the data to obtain a better estimate of the phase boundaries.

For fixed $`u`$, we identify the position of the phase boundary separating the desorbed phase from the adsorbed or attached phases as that value of $`\omega `$ at which $`\frac{N_s}{ϵ_s}`$ is a maximum. Fig. 3 shows the variation of $`\frac{N_s}{ϵ_s}`$ for two values of $`u`$ for $`N=19`$.

For fixed $`\omega `$, we identify the position of the phase boundary separating the extended phase from the collapsed phase as that value of $`u`$ at which $`\frac{N_u}{ϵ_u}`$ is a maximum. Fig. 4 shows the variation of $`\frac{N_u}{ϵ_u}`$ for two values of $`\omega `$ for $`N=19`$.

The values of $`u_{3d}^{}`$ and $`\omega ^{}`$ obtained by this method is $`2.00`$ and $`1.49`$ respectively. The previous results were $`u_{3d}^{}=1.76`$ by series expansion method  and $`\omega ^{}=1.45`$ by Monte Carlo method  and $`\omega ^{}=1.5`$ by series expansion method . It is possible to obtain better estimates of $`u_{3d}^{}`$ as well as the phase boundaries by extrapolating for large $`N`$. Let

$$Z_N(\omega ,u)=\underset{N_s,N_u}{}C_N(N_s,N_u)\omega ^{N_s}u^{N_u},$$
(10)
be the partition function. Then, the reduced free energy per monomer can be written as

$$G(\omega ,u)=\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{log}Z_N(\omega ,u).$$
(11)
We refer to  for details of the methods used for extrapolating to large $`N`$ in Eq. 11. The phase boundaries are then found from the maxima of $`\frac{^2G(\omega ,u)}{ϵ_s^2}`$ ($`=\frac{N_s}{ϵ_s}`$) and $`\frac{^2G(\omega ,u)}{ϵ_u^2}`$ ($`=\frac{N_u}{ϵ_u}`$).

The phase diagram thus obtained is shown in Fig. 5. We obtain $`u_{3d}^{}=1.76`$ and $`\omega ^{}=1.48`$ which accords fairly well with the previously obtained results. The phase diagram obtained from series analysis agrees qualitatively with the phase diagram proposed in Sec. III.

## V Analytic calculation for the two dimensional directed polymer

In this section, we determine the phase boundary separating the SAG phase from the DC and the AE phases in the PDSAW model. We do so by calculating the macroscopic shape of the collapsed phases at low temperatures. At zero temperature, it is easy to see that the configurational energy of the polymer is minimised if it assumes a square shape of size $`\sqrt{N}`$ by $`\sqrt{N}`$. For small nonzero temperatures, the polymer assumes a shape which is slightly perturbed from this zero temperature square shape. We will derive an effective surface energy for these fluctuations in Sec. V A. Using these results, we determine the shape of SAG1 and SAG2 in Sec. V B. In Sec. V C, we calculate the phase boundary between the various phases.

### A Effective surface energy

For the directed polymer in the collapsed or the SAG phases, the density in the bulk is exactly one and the configuration is “frozen”. Only the position of the boundary can change, as there is some fluctuation of height allowed at the boundary. Thus $`f_{\text{bulk}}(\text{SAG})=f_{\text{bulk}}(\text{DC})=ϵ_u`$, independent of $`\omega `$. Consider a polymer shape as shown in Fig. 6.

The energy of the configuration is

$$E=ϵ_uN+\frac{ϵ_u}{2}(a_1+a_2+2b)+\frac{ϵ_u}{2}\underset{j=0}{\overset{b2}{}}|y_{j+2}y_j|.$$
(12)
By a redefinition of $`E`$, we drop the bulk term proportional to $`N`$. The shape of the polymer is determined by the rest of the terms which are all proportional to $`\sqrt{N}`$. We replace the terms under the summation by an integral over an effective orientation dependent surface energy $`f(\theta )`$, where $`\theta `$ is the angle the surface makes with the horizontal. In this case, it is straightforward to calculate $`f(\theta )`$. Consider all possible walks with an average slope $`\mathrm{tan}(\theta )=y/x`$. Then, the sum over all weighted paths is

$$e^{\beta x\mathrm{sec}(\theta )f(\theta )}=\underset{y_1,\mathrm{},y_x}{}\delta \left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{x}{}}y_iy\right)\underset{i=1}{\overset{x}{}}p^{|y_i|},$$
(13)
where $`p=e^{\frac{\beta ϵ_u}{2}}`$ and $`\delta `$ is the usual Kronecker delta function. Taking Laplace transform with respect to $`y`$, we obtain independent summations over $`y_i`$. These are easily done giving

$$f(\theta )=\frac{1}{\beta }\left[\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{log}(z_0)+\frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{(z_0p)(1pz_0)}{z_0(1p^2)}\right],$$
(14)
where

$$z_0=\frac{(1+p^2)\mathrm{tan}\theta +\sqrt{(1p^2)^2\mathrm{tan}^2\theta +p^2}}{p(1+2\mathrm{tan}\theta )}.$$
(15)
We also need to calculate the energy cost $`\sigma _w`$ of adsorbing onto the wall unit length of the polymer. For SAG1, it is trivially equal to $`\sigma _{w1}=ϵ_s`$. We calculate $`\sigma _{w2}`$ for SAG2 by the transfer matrix method. If $`\psi _i`$ denotes the $`y`$-coordinate of the lowest portion of the polymer at site $`i`$, then the weight of obtaining $`\psi _{i+2}`$ from $`\psi _i`$ is $`\psi _i|T|\psi _{i+2}=\left[1+(\omega ^21)\delta _{\psi _{i+2},0}\right]u^{|\psi _i\psi _{i+2}|/2}`$. By trying out an ansatz $`\psi _l=\alpha ^l+\delta _{l,0}\psi _0`$ for the eigenfunction, it is not difficult to verify that the largest eigenvalue of the transfer matrix T is

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{\omega ^2(\omega ^21)(u1)}{\omega ^2(u1)u}.$$
(16)
Then, $`\sigma _{w2}=\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{\Lambda })/(2\beta )`$. Clearly, as $`u\mathrm{}`$, $`\sigma _{w2}`$ has the correct limit $`ϵ_s`$.

### B Calculation of the macroscopic shape

In this subsection we describe the shape determined by minimising the surface energy of the collapsed phases. Given the expression for the temperature and orientation dependent $`f(\theta )`$, and also the value of surface energy of polymer attached to the wall, it is straightforward to determine the globular shape which minimises the surface energy given a fixed volume. This is the classical Wulff construction. The result is that the macroscopic shape of the polymer is given by

$$e^{2\beta \lambda y}=c_2e^{\beta \lambda x}(1pc_1e^{\beta \lambda x})(c_1e^{\beta \lambda x}p),$$
(17)
where the two constants $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are fixed by the two boundary conditions. The Lagrange multiplier $`\lambda `$ is determined by the constraint that the total area under the curves is $`N`$. The constants $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are now varied to obtain the shape with the lowest surface energy.

Fig. 7 shows the shape of the SAG polymer for different values of $`\omega `$. All the shapes lie on top of each other if we scale the coordinates as $`X=\beta \lambda x`$ and $`Y=\beta \lambda y`$.

### C Phase Diagram

We calculate the phase diagram for the directed polymer from Eqs. 5-7. These equations give most of the phase boundaries except the transition between SAG1 and DC and the transition between SAG1 and SAG2. The SAG1-DC transition is not given by Eq. 6 because the shape in contact with the surface does not have orientation $`\theta =0`$. This anomaly arises due to the constraint of directedness. The surface transition from SAG1 to SAG2 is one in which the globule would have lower free energy if attached to the $`x`$\- wall rather than the $`y`$-wall.

Transition from DC to DE $`(u_c)`$:  The critical value $`u_c`$ is obtained from Eq. 7, i.e, $`\sigma (0)=0`$. This is equivalent to the $`2f(0)+ϵ_u=0`$. Substituting for $`f(0)`$, we obtain

$$\frac{\sqrt{u}1}{\sqrt{u}+1}=\frac{1}{u},$$
(18)
which has the solution

$$u_c=3.38298\mathrm{}.$$
(19)
Note that this result matches exactly with the result for DC-DE transition obtained by the transfer matrix method .

Transition from SAG1 to AE $`(\omega _{c2})`$ :  This phase boundary is determined by equating the perpendicular extent of the SAG1 phase above the wall, to zero. This condition gives rise to the phase boundary

$$\omega _{c2}=\frac{1+u^2+\sqrt{(1+u^2)^24u^3}}{2u}.$$
(20)
This solution has a natural boundary at $`u=u_c`$ at which value the expression under the square root sign becomes equal to zero.

Transition from SAG1 to DC $`(\omega _{c1})`$ :  The transition from SAG1 to DC occurs when the energy cost of creating a globule sticking to the wall becomes equal to the energy of a DC polymer. We omit the algebra and state the final result

$$\omega _{c1}(u)=\frac{1+u^2\sqrt{(1+u^2)^24u^3}}{2u}.$$
(21)
Previous analytical studies on the PDSAW  had considered the case when the wall was only along the $`x`$-direction. The results obtained above for SAG1 are for a wall along the $`y`$-direction. While the numerical values for the phase boundary differ, the phase diagrams are qualitatively similar.

Transition from SAG2 to AE $`(\omega _{c2})`$ :  From Eq. 5, the phase boundary $`\omega _{c2}`$ is given by $`\sigma (0)+\sigma _w=0`$. Substituting the values of the surface energies and solving for $`\omega `$, we obtain

$$\omega _{c2}^2=\frac{\alpha +\sqrt{\alpha ^24u^3}}{2(1+\sqrt{u})},$$
(22)
where $`\alpha =1+\sqrt{u}u^2+u^{5/2}`$. The phase boundary $`\omega _{c2}`$ has a natural boundary at $`u=u_c`$, at which value the expression under the square root sign becomes equal to zero. The result differs from the transfer matrix result , $`\omega _{c2}=\frac{u+1}{2}+\frac{\sqrt{(u^2+1)^24u^3}}{2(u1)}`$. However, this discrepancy is solely due to the fact that we consider only wall, while the transfer matrix approach required two parallel walls. This corresponds to changing Eq. 5 to $`2\sigma _{w2}+ϵ_u=0`$.

Transition from SAG2 to DC $`(\omega _{c1})`$ :  From Eq. 6, this transition occurs when $`\sigma (0)=\sigma _w`$. The resulting equation can be solved to obtain

$$\omega _{c1}^2=\frac{\sqrt{u}}{\sqrt{u}1}.$$
(23)
This covers all the transitions when we consider SAG1 and SAG2 separately. But if we consider the scenario where the possibility of both SAG’s are allowed, then there is a surface transition from one to the other when $`u`$ and $`\omega `$ are varied.

Transition from SAG1 to SAG2 :  This transition is determined by equating the surface energies of SAG1 and SAG2. However, it turns out that we cannot obtain a closed form expression for the phase boundary. Instead, we solved for it numerically using MATHEMATICA.

In Fig. 8, we plot the phase diagram when both SAG1 and SAG2 are allowed to exist. Note that the phase diagram obtained is qualitatively similar to the phase diagram proposed in Sec. III. The additional transition between the SAG’s is a consequence of the directed nature of the PDSAW model.

The work at B. H. U. was supported by the Department of Science and Technology (India) through a project grant.


text:
# Multi-particle excitations and spectral densities in quantum spin-systems

## Abstract

The excitation spectrum of the 2-leg S=1/2 Heisenberg ladder is examined perturbatively. Using an optimally chosen continuous unitary transformation we expand the Hamiltonian and the Raman operator about the limit of isolated rungs leading to high order series expansions allowing to calculate spectral densities quantitatively. The 2-particle sector is examined for total momentum $`k=0`$. We show that triplet-triplet interaction gives rise to a band splitting.

PACS numbers: 75.40.Gb, 75.50.Ee, 75.10.Jm

Antiferromagnetic quantum spin systems are investigated intensively both in theory and experiment. At $`T=0`$, the so called spin liquids exhibit a non magnetic short ranged ground state and gapped excitations with unusual dynamics. The spin liquid phase is favoured by frustration, low dimensionality and low spin.

Perturbation theory directly allows to obtain information in the thermodynamic limit and is not afflicted by finite size effects. The perturbative Continuous Unitary Transfomation Method (CUT) introduced previously  proved to be a versatile tool to calculate high order series expansions of low lying excitation energies in spin systems (see e.g. ). In this article, we present quantitative results for the spectral densities of multi-particle excitations.

The system considered is the 2-leg S=1/2 Heisenberg ladder of which the Hamiltonian reads

$$H(J_1,J_2)=\underset{i}{}\left[J_1𝐒_{1,i}𝐒_{2,i}+J_2\left(𝐒_{1,i}𝐒_{1,i+1}+𝐒_{2,i}𝐒_{2,i+1}\right)\right],$$
(1)
where $`i`$ denotes the rung (coupling $`J_1`$) and 1,2 the leg (coupling $`J_2`$). This system is realized in a number of substances  one of them being the superconducting compound Sr0.4Ca13.6Cu24O41.84 .

For a given observable $`𝒪`$ the $`T=0`$ spectral density is given by

$$S_𝒪(\omega )=\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{Im}\psi _0|𝒪^{}(\omega H(J_1,J_2)+i0^+)^1𝒪|\psi _0,$$
(2)
$`\psi _0`$ is the system’s ground state. Using the limit of isolated rungs $`x=J_2/J_1=0`$, we map the full Hamiltonian $`H(J_1,J_2)`$ continuously and unitarily onto an effective Hamiltonian $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$, $`x>0`$, which conserves the number of triplets on the rungs $`[H_{\mathrm{eff}}(x),H(J_1,0)]=0`$. The effective Hamiltonian $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ is given as an exact operator series in $`x`$ truncated after order 14 in the 0- and 1-triplet and after order 13 in the 2-triplet sector. For more details see Ref. . The same transformation used to derive $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is applied to observables resulting in effective observables $`𝒪_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, also given as an operator series truncated after 10th order acting on $`|0`$, the ground state of the effective model (details in Ref. ).

With the triplet vacuum $`|0`$ the ground state energy $`E_0`$ is a series in $`x`$, $`E_0(x)=0|H_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)|0`$. Similarly the 1-(2-)triplet energies are obtained from the states $`|i`$ ($`|i,j`$) denoting the eigenstates of $`H(J_1,0)`$ with one (two) triplet(s) on rung $`i`$ (and $`j`$. Result for the energies have also been obtained by cluster techniques . To calculate the Greens function in Eq. (2) for the effective operators we utilize the continued fraction technique  with proper termination . In combination with standard series approximations our method allows an accuracy within 5% for $`x1`$

In Ref.  we show the $`k`$-resolved spectra for various observables at $`x=1`$ in great detail. Relevant for Raman scattering  is the $`S=0`$ operator $`𝒪_\mathrm{R}=𝐒_{1,i}𝐒_{2,i}`$, locally exciting two triplets from the ground state $`|0`$ on rung $`i`$, at total momentum $`k=0`$ depicted as solid black line in Fig. 1 for $`x=1`$. Particularly surprising is the appearance of a mid band singularity (MBS) at an energy of about 3.4$`J_1`$ splitting the 2-triplet continuum into two bands. The CUT method allows to identify the parts of the 2-triplet energies that solely arise from 1-triplet kinetics . The remaining part is the pure triplet-triplet interaction energy. The dashed black and gray lines in Fig. 1 (denoted by “no I”) depict the spectral density of $`𝒪_\mathrm{R}`$ at $`k=0`$ with the interaction part set to zero. In both cases the MBS disappears, whereas it appears when the interaction is switched on (solid lines “with I”). Hence the band splitting is due to the 2-triplet interaction. To rule out a possible matrix element effect we calculate Eq. (2) for an artificial $`S=0`$ test operator at total momentum $`k=0`$ which creates the two triplets on adjacent sites. The gray (“naive”) lines in Fig. 1 show the results with / without interaction (solid / dashed). Comparing with the corresponding black lines (results for the “true” operator $`𝒪_\mathrm{R}`$) one finds that $`𝒪_\mathrm{R}`$ merely shifts weight towards the lower band edge, being clearly not responsible for the MBS. The inset of Fig. 1 shows the 1-triplet dispersion $`\omega (k)`$  which has a shallow dip at small $`k`$-values. This leads to a high density of states in the 2-triplet sector at an energy of $`2\times \omega (0)=3.6J_1`$. Here the dashed gray line displays a van-Hove singularity reduced to a finite value due to the remaining intrinsic hard-core interaction: two triplets cannot occupy the same rung. Due to this large DOS the system becomes extremely sensitive to an interaction induced orthogonality between $`𝒪|0`$ and eigenstates $`|\omega `$ with energy $``$ 3.6 $`J_1`$. Indeed, the MBS remains detectable even if the interaction is lowered to 1% of its full strength. In summary we note that the CUT method allows to compute spectral densities of quantum multi-particle excitations in great detail. The nature of the structures revealed can be explained giving insight in the complex dynamics of the spin ladder system.


text:
# Velocity dispersions of dwarf spheroidal galaxies: dark matter versus MOND

## 1 Introduction

Dwarf spheroidal (dSph) galaxies provide a unique testing field for the theories of structure formation. Due to their large velocity dispersions they are believed to be dominated by dark matter (hereafter DM, for a review see Mateo 1997). Because of their small masses they also lie in the regime of small accelerations, where, according to an alternative theory of Milgrom (1983a), the Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) may operate causing a similar increase of velocity dispersions.

Until recently the measurements of velocity dispersion in dwarfs were restricted to a single value, the central velocity dispersion, on which all of the dynamical modelling was based. In order to estimate the mass-to-light ratio in such case a simplifying assumption of isotropic velocity distribution was usually made. Using this approach many authors (see Mateo 1998 and references therein) estimated mass-to-light ratios in dwarfs to be much larger than stellar values and interpreted this as a signature of the presence of DM. However, Milgrom (1995) analysed the data concerning seven well known dSph galaxies and concluded that when MOND is applied their mass-to-light ratios are consistent with stellar values if all the observational errors are properly taken into account.

Given the velocity dispersion data as a function of distance, which are becoming available now, we are able to extract much more information from the observations. Our conclusions do not have to rely on the assumed velocity anisotropy model, but the best-fitting model can actually be found. On the theoretical side some progress has also been achieved. The DM distribution in haloes can now be reliably modelled using the results of $`N`$-body simulations (e.g. Navarro, Frenk & White 1997, hereafter NFW).

The purpose of this work is to explore the two hypotheses, based on DM and on MOND, by calculating the predicted velocity dispersion profiles and comparing them to available data. In the case of DM our analysis is somewhat similar to an earlier study of Pryor & Kormendy (1990) who also considered two-component models involving stars and DM. In the case of MOND, our approach here is related to that of Milgrom (1984) who applied the Jeans equation to study density profiles of equilibrium systems with isotropic and isothermal velocity distributions. Here we assume instead the observed density distribution of stars to obtain the velocity dispersions in MOND for different velocity anisotropy models.

## 2 Velocity dispersion profile

The radial velocity dispersion $`\sigma _\mathrm{r}(r)`$ of stars can be obtained by solving the Jeans equation (Binney & Tremaine 1987)

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}r}(\nu \sigma _\mathrm{r}^2)+\frac{2\beta }{r}\nu \sigma _\mathrm{r}^2=\nu g,$$
(1)
where $`\nu (r)`$ is a 3D density of stars, $`g(r)`$ is the gravitational acceleration associated with the potential $`\mathrm{\Phi }(r)`$, $`g=\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Phi }/\mathrm{d}r`$, and $`\beta =1\sigma _\theta ^2(r)/\sigma _\mathrm{r}^2(r)`$ is a measure of the anisotropy in the velocity distribution.

In the absence of direct measurements of velocity anisotropy in dSph galaxies we have to consider different models for $`\beta `$. Our choice here is guided by the results of $`N`$-body simulations of DM haloes and observations of elliptical galaxies. For DM haloes Thomas et al. (1998) find that, in a variety of cosmological models, the ratio $`\sigma _\theta /\sigma _\mathrm{r}`$ is not far from unity and decreases slowly with distance from the centre to reach $`0.8`$ at the virial radius. Observations of elliptical galaxies are also consistent with the orbits being isotropic near the centre and somewhat radially anisotropic farther away, although cases with tangential anisotropy are also observed (Gerhard et al. 2001).

Our fiducial anisotropy model will therefore be that of isotropic orbits: $`\sigma _\theta (r)=\sigma _\mathrm{r}(r)`$ and $`\beta =0`$. A more realistic approximation is provided by a model proposed by Osipkov (1979) and Merritt (1985) with $`\beta `$ dependent on distance from the centre of the object

$$\beta _{\mathrm{OM}}=\frac{r^2}{r^2+r_\mathrm{a}^2},$$
(2)
where $`r_\mathrm{a}`$ is the anisotropy radius determining the transition from isotropic orbits inside to radial orbits outside. This model covers a wide range of possibilities from isotropic orbits ($`r_\mathrm{a}\mathrm{}`$) to radial orbits ($`r_\mathrm{a}0`$). Another possibility is that of tangential orbits with the fiducial case of circular orbits when $`\beta \mathrm{}`$. To cover intermediate cases between the isotropic and circular orbits we will consider a simple model of $`\beta =`$const$`<0`$.

The solution of the Jeans equation (1) with the boundary condition $`\sigma _\mathrm{r}0`$ at $`r\mathrm{}`$ for $`\beta _{\mathrm{OM}}`$ anisotropy is

$$\nu \sigma _\mathrm{r}^2(\beta =\beta _{\mathrm{OM}})=\frac{1}{r^2+r_\mathrm{a}^2}_r^{\mathrm{}}(r^2+r_\mathrm{a}^2)\nu gdr,$$
(3)
while for $`\beta `$=const we find

$$\nu \sigma _\mathrm{r}^2(\beta =\mathrm{const})=r^{2\beta }_r^{\mathrm{}}r^{2\beta }\nu gdr.$$
(4)
From the observational point of view, an interesting, measurable quantity is the line-of-sight velocity dispersion obtained from the 3D velocity dispersion by integrating along the line of sight (Binney & Mamon 1982)

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{los}}^2(R)=\frac{2}{I(R)}_R^{\mathrm{}}\left(1\beta \frac{R^2}{r^2}\right)\frac{\nu \sigma _\mathrm{r}^2r}{\sqrt{r^2R^2}}dr,$$
(5)
where $`I(R)`$ is the surface brightness. For circular orbits, $`\sigma _\mathrm{r}=0`$, and one has

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{los}}^2(R)=\frac{1}{I(R)}_R^{\mathrm{}}\left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^2\frac{\nu V^2r}{\sqrt{r^2R^2}}dr,$$
(6)
where $`V=(rg)^{1/2}`$ is the circular velocity associated with the gravitational acceleration $`g(r)`$.

Introducing results (3) or (4) into equation (5) and inverting the order of integration the calculations of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{los}}`$ can be reduced to one-dimensional numerical integration of a formula involving elementary functions in the case of $`\beta _{\mathrm{OM}}`$ (see Mamon & Łokas, in preparation) and special functions for arbitrary $`\beta =`$const.

We will now discuss different factors entering in the calculations of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{los}}`$, namely the density distribution of stars $`\nu `$, the mass distributions contributed by stars and DM to gravitational acceleration $`g`$ and how this acceleration is changed in MOND.

### 2.1 Stars

The distribution of stars is well known in a number of dSph galaxies from surface brightness measurements and is usually well fitted by the exponential law or its generalization i.e. the Sérsic profile (Sérsic 1968, see also Ciotti 1991)

$$I(R)=I_0\mathrm{exp}[(R/R_\mathrm{S})^{1/m}],$$
(7)
where $`I_0`$ is the central surface brightness and $`R_\mathrm{S}`$ is the characteristic projected radius of the Sérsic profile. The Sérsic profile with parameter $`m`$ varying in the range $`1m10`$ has been found (Caon, Capaccioli & D’Onofrio 1993) to fit surface brightness profiles of elliptical galaxies in large mass range better than the standard de Vaucouleurs law (corresponding to $`m=4`$). For dSph systems the fits are usually performed with $`m=1`$, although is some cases other values of $`m`$ are found to provide better fits (e.g. Caldwell 1999).

The 3D luminosity density $`\nu (r)`$ is obtained from $`I(R)`$ by deprojection

$$\nu (r)=\frac{1}{\pi }_r^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}I}{\mathrm{d}R}\frac{\mathrm{d}R}{\sqrt{R^2r^2}}.$$
(8)
In the case of $`m=1`$ we get $`\nu (r,m=1)=I_0K_0(r/R_\mathrm{S})/(\pi R_\mathrm{S})`$, where $`K_0(x)`$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind. For other values of $`m`$ in the range $`1/2m10`$ an excellent approximation for $`\nu (r)`$ is provided by (Lima Neto, Gerbal & Márquez 1999)

$`\nu (r)`$ $`=`$ $`\nu _0\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{R_\mathrm{S}}}\right)^p\mathrm{exp}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{R_\mathrm{S}}}\right)^{1/m}\right]`$ (9)
$`\nu _0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I_0\mathrm{\Gamma }(2m)}{2R_\mathrm{S}\mathrm{\Gamma }[(3p)m]}}`$
$`p`$ $`=`$ $`1.00.6097/m+0.05463/m^2.`$
The mass distribution of stars following from (9) is

$$M_{}(r)=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}L_{\mathrm{tot}}\frac{\gamma [(3p)m,(r/R_\mathrm{S})^{1/m}]}{\mathrm{\Gamma }[(3p)m]},$$
(10)
where $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$=const is the mass-to-light ratio for stars, $`L_{\mathrm{tot}}`$ is the total luminosity of the galaxy and $`\gamma (\alpha ,x)=_0^x\mathrm{e}^tt^{\alpha 1}dt`$ is the incomplete gamma function.

### 2.2 Dark matter

We assume that the density distribution of DM is given by the so-called universal profile (NFW, see also Łokas & Mamon 2001)

$$\frac{\rho (r)}{\rho _{\mathrm{crit},0}}=\frac{\delta _{\mathrm{char}}}{(r/r_\mathrm{s})(1+r/r_\mathrm{s})^2}$$
(11)
with a single fitting parameter $`\delta _{\mathrm{char}}`$, the characteristic density. The scale radius $`r_\mathrm{s}`$ is defined by $`r_\mathrm{s}=r_\mathrm{v}/c`$ where $`r_\mathrm{v}`$ is the virial radius (the distance from the centre of the halo within which the mean density is $`200`$ times the present critical density, $`\rho _{\mathrm{crit},0}`$) and $`c`$ is the concentration parameter related to the characteristic density by $`\delta _{\mathrm{char}}=200c^3g(c)/3`$ with $`g(c)=1/[\mathrm{ln}(1+c)c/(1+c)]`$. The value of $`c`$ is known to depend on mass and will be extrapolated here to small masses characteristic of dwarf galaxies assuming the following formula fitted to $`N`$-body results for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM cosmology of Jing & Suto (2000)

$$c=10.23\left(\frac{hM_\mathrm{v}}{10^{12}M_{\mathrm{}}}\right)^{0.088},$$
(12)
where $`M_\mathrm{v}=800\pi r_\mathrm{v}^3\rho _{\mathrm{crit},0}/3`$ is the mass within virial radius and $`h`$ is the Hubble constant in units of 100 km s-1 Mpc-1. In the following we will use $`h=0.7`$.

The mass distribution associated with the NFW profile (11) is

$$M_{\mathrm{NFW}}(r)=g(c)M_\mathrm{v}\left[\mathrm{ln}(1+cs)\frac{cs}{1+cs}\right],$$
(13)
where $`s=r/r_\mathrm{v}`$ and for $`h=0.7`$ the virial radius scales with the virial mass so that $`r_\mathrm{v}=206[M_\mathrm{v}/(10^{12}M_{\mathrm{}})]^{1/3}`$ kpc.

### 2.3 MOND

In the case of MOND the gravitational acceleration is changed so that (Milgrom 1984)

$$g_\mathrm{M}=\frac{g_\mathrm{N}}{\mu (g_\mathrm{N}/a_0)},$$
(14)
where $`g_\mathrm{M}`$ and $`g_\mathrm{N}`$ are the modified and Newtonian gravitational accelerations, respectively. $`a_0`$ is the characteristic acceleration scale of MOND estimated to be of the order of $`10^8`$ cm/s2. The function $`\mu (x)`$ has to reproduce Newtonian dynamics at large accelerations, i.e. $`\mu (x)1`$ for $`x\mathrm{}`$, and is supposed to be $`\mu (x)x`$ for $`x0`$. A good approximation is then provided by e.g. $`\mu (x)=x(1+x^2)^{1/2}`$ (Milgrom 1983b). Using this approximation we find from equation (14)

$$g_\mathrm{M}=\left[\frac{g_\mathrm{N}^2+g_\mathrm{N}(4a_0^2+g_\mathrm{N}^2)^{1/2}}{2}\right]^{1/2}.$$
(15)
## 3 Results for the Fornax dwarf

The structural parameters of the Fornax dwarf needed in the following computation were taken from Irwin & Hatzidimitriou (1995, hereafter IH). They fitted the surface brightness profile of Fornax with the exponential distribution ($`m=1`$ in equation ) finding the Sérsic radius ($`r_\mathrm{e}`$ in their notation) $`R_\mathrm{S}=9.9`$ arcmin $`=0.35`$ kpc assuming the distance modulus $`mM=20.4`$. The brightness of Fornax in V-band is $`M_\mathrm{V}=13.0`$ mag so the total luminosity needed in equation (10) is $`L_{\mathrm{tot},\mathrm{V}}=1.4\times 10^7L_{\mathrm{}}`$. We also adopt the mass-to-light ratio for stars in this band to be $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_\mathrm{V}1M_{\mathrm{}}/L_{\mathrm{}}`$ (Mateo et al. 1991).

Figure 1 shows the predicted line-of-sight velocity dispersion profiles for the Fornax dwarf together with the data from Mateo (1997). The two panels present results for different velocity anisotropy models. The upper panel gives the results in the case of isotropic orbits obtained from equations (3) and (5) in the limit of large $`r_\mathrm{a}`$. The lower panel is for circular orbits showing results from (6). The three types of curves in each panel correspond to the three possibilities of the velocity dispersion profile being generated 1) by stars moving under Newtonian gravitational acceleration generated by stars only (dotted curves), 2) by stars moving under Newtonian gravitational acceleration generated by stars and DM (solid lines), 3) by stars moving under modified (MONDian) acceleration generated by stars (dashed lines).

For all cases the 3D distribution of stars $`\nu (r)`$ is given by (9). The gravitational acceleration for the Newtonian cases 1) and 2) is $`g=g_\mathrm{N}=GM(r)/r^2`$ with $`M(r)=M_{}(r)`$ for 1) and $`M(r)=M_{}(r)+M_{\mathrm{NFW}}(r)`$ for 2), where $`M_{}(r)`$ and $`M_{\mathrm{NFW}}(r)`$ are given by equations (10) and (13), respectively. In the case of MOND we have $`g=g_\mathrm{M}`$ from equation (15) with $`g_\mathrm{N}=GM_{}(r)/r^2`$. The three solid curves in each panel correspond from bottom to top to the virial masses of the dark halo $`M_\mathrm{v}=10^8`$, $`10^9`$ and $`10^{10}`$ $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$. The three dashed lines show from bottom to top results obtained with different characteristic MOND acceleration scales $`a_0`$ = 1, 3, 6 $`\times 10^8`$ cm/s2.

Figure 1 clearly shows that the stars alone cannot reproduce the observed velocity dispersion profile of Fornax, unless the stellar mass-to-light ratio is much larger than assumed. In the following we will farther analyse the cases 2) and 3) trying to find the best-fitting models. Comparing the predictions shown in Figure 1 with the data we find that a certain amount of tangential anisotropy is needed to reproduce the shape of the observed velocity dispersion profile. Indeed, trying more radial anisotropy than in the case of isotropic orbits by using small values of $`r_\mathrm{a}`$ (comparable to $`R_\mathrm{S}`$ or $`r_\mathrm{v}`$) in (3) and (5) makes the curves in the upper panel of Figure 1 decrease even more steeply with distance, contrary to the trend observed in the data. Therefore in what follows we adopt the velocity anisotropy model of $`\beta =`$const$`<0`$ and treat $`\beta `$ as a free parameter.

To find the best models we performed a two-parameter fitting for each case. The fitting parameters were $`(M_\mathrm{v},\beta )`$ for stars+DM case and $`(a_0,\beta )`$ for MOND. The results of minimizing $`\chi ^2`$ weighted by the variances of the data points are shown in Figure 2. It turns out that the DM model fits the data best for $`\beta =1.4`$ and $`M_\mathrm{v}=1.5\times 10^9M_{\mathrm{}}`$. This virial mass is more than two orders of magnitude larger than the stellar mass ($`1.4\times 10^7M_{\mathrm{}}`$ for $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_\mathrm{V}=1M_{\mathrm{}}/L_{\mathrm{}}`$). In the case of MOND the best-fitting parameters are $`\beta =1`$ and $`a_0=2.1\times 10^8`$ cm/s2. This value of $`a_0`$ is consistent with other estimates (Milgrom 1983b).

Figure 3 shows the combined mass-to-light ratio in V-band for Fornax calculated from

$$M/L_\mathrm{V}=\frac{M_{\mathrm{NFW}}(r)+M_{}(r)}{L_\mathrm{V}(r)},$$
(16)
where $`M_{\mathrm{NFW}}(r)`$ and $`M_{}(r)`$ are given by equations (13) and (10) respectively, and $`L_\mathrm{V}(r)=M_{}(r)/\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_\mathrm{V}`$ is the luminosity distribution. The shape of the curve reflects the fact that DM dominates both at small and large distances. The divergence of $`M/L`$ at the centre of the galaxy is due to the fact that the luminosity density (9) increases towards the centre more slowly than the DM cusp of $`r^1`$ in (11). The growth of $`M/L`$ at large distances is due to the behaviour of $`M_{\mathrm{NFW}}(r)`$ which diverges logarithmically while the mass in stars is finite. The minimum of $`M/L_\mathrm{V}11`$ appears at a scale of the order of the Sérsic radius and is consistent with the values of the central mass-to-light ratio estimated by Mateo et al. (1991).

## 4 Discussion

We have found that the predictions based on MOND with $`a_0=2.1\times 10^8`$ cm/s2 fit the Fornax data equally well as models based on DM with virial mass of $`M_\mathrm{v}=1.5\times 10^9M_{\mathrm{}}`$. In both cases a certain amount of tangential anisotropy is needed to reproduce the shape of the observed velocity dispersion profile. It turned out that the MOND predictions in the case of Fornax dwarf need less tangential anisotropy than DM predictions to reproduce the shape of the velocity dispersion profile. It remains to be checked how the DM predictions depend on the particular shape of DM distribution.

The particular fitted values of $`a_0`$ and $`M_\mathrm{v}`$ are of course sensitive to the observational parameters assumed. The measured luminosity, distance and structural parameters of the dwarfs are all known with limited accuracy, but the detailed analysis of the errors in them is beyond the scope of this paper. In the case of MOND the most doubtful input parameter is the stellar mass-to-light ratio in V-band. We have assumed here $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_\mathrm{V}1M_{\mathrm{}}/L_{\mathrm{}}`$ characteristic for a relatively young stellar population of Fornax, however this value may well be different by a factor of two (Mateo et al. 1991). To estimate its effect we performed a similar MOND fitting as described in the previous section with $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_\mathrm{V}=0.5`$ and $`2M_{\mathrm{}}/L_{\mathrm{}}`$, obtaining respectively $`a_0=4.3`$ and $`1.1\times 10^8`$ cm/s2 with the same best-fitting $`\beta `$. If $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_\mathrm{V}=0.5M_{\mathrm{}}/L_{\mathrm{}}`$ is indeed the lower limit of mass-to-light ratio, then $`a_0=4.3\times 10^8`$ cm/s2 is the upper limit for $`a_0`$.

In the case of DM the stellar mass-to-light is not likely to influence much the results since the input from stars to the velocity dispersion is small. Here the most doubtful parameter is the concentration of DM haloes, which we adopted to follow the same dependence on mass as larger haloes actually studied in $`N`$-body simulations. Given, however, that this dependence is weak in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM Universe, the possible error associated with this factor is rather small.

One more reason to worry are the tidal interactions that may affect the dynamics of some dwarfs and our interpretations of their velocity dispersions. Piatek & Pryor (1995) have performed numerical simulations of such effects and concluded that in Newtonian dynamics they should not affect much the inferred mass-to-light ratios (but see Kroupa 1997). However, Brada & Milgrom (2000) found that in MOND, due to its non-linearity, a galaxy system can be more affected by an external field.

One may ask if similar results hold for other dSph galaxies as well. Of those studied by IH the velocity dispersion profiles with a few data points are available only for Sextans, Ursa Minor and Draco dwarfs (Hargreaves et al. 1994a, 1994b, 1996; Armandroff, Olszewski & Pryor 1995; Armandroff, Pryor & Olszewski 1997). Applying the same analysis as we did for Fornax to the 5 data points for Draco and Ursa Minor from Armandroff et al. (1997) (with $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_\mathrm{V}=1M_{\mathrm{}}/L_{\mathrm{}}`$) we find that again the MOND and DM models can fit the data equally well. For Draco the best-fitting models have tangential anisotropy, we get $`\beta =0.9`$, $`M_\mathrm{v}=4.2\times 10^9M_{\mathrm{}}`$ ($`2\times 10^4`$ the mass in stars) for DM and $`\beta =1.5`$, $`a_0=50\times 10^8`$ cm/s2 for MOND. For Ursa Minor the best fits require a certain amount of radial anisotropy which we model with (2). We get $`r_\mathrm{a}=0.014r_\mathrm{v}=0.86R_\mathrm{S}=0.16`$ kpc, $`M_\mathrm{v}=1.9\times 10^8M_{\mathrm{}}`$ ($`10^3`$ the mass in stars) for DM and $`r_\mathrm{a}=0.012r_\mathrm{v}=0.76R_\mathrm{S}=0.14`$ kpc, $`a_0=12\times 10^8`$ cm/s2 for MOND. The predictions of the best-fitting models together with the data are shown in Figure 4.

The case of Ursa Minor is doubtful since it has been recently observed to possess tidal tails (Martínez-Delgado et al. 2001) and therefore may not be in virial equilibrium. The high value of $`a_0`$ estimated for Draco can, however, pose a serious problem for MOND (we agree on this point with Gerhard & Spergel 1992) since $`a_0`$ is supposed to be a universal constant. Bringing the value down by an order of magnitude would require very high stellar mass-to-light ratio $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_\mathrm{V}10M_{\mathrm{}}/L_{\mathrm{}}`$ or we would have to believe that the measurements seriously overestimate the velocity dispersion.

## Acknowledgements

I wish to thank A. Graham, P. Kroupa, G. Mamon, C. Pryor, P. Salucci and the referee, M. Mateo, for useful comments and suggestions which helped to improve the paper. I am also grateful to Y. P. Jing for providing the results for the concentration of DM haloes in numerical form. This research was partially supported by the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research grant No. 2P03D02319.


text:
# Are High-Velocity Clouds the Building Blocks of the Local Group?

## 1. Introduction

A natural byproduct of hierarchical clustering galaxy formation scenarios - perhaps best represented by the currently favoured $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-dominated Cold Dark Matter ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM) paradigm - is that our Local Group of galaxies should be populated by $``$500 satellite objects (e.g. Klypin et al. 1999). This prediction is in (apparent) stark contradiction with the observed Local Group census ($``$30 satellites).

While the above dichotomy makes it tempting to pursue alternatives to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM, it would be prudent to at least consider the more conservative hypothesis - $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM is correct and we have simply “misplaced” the satellites. Two obvious mechanisms consistent with this hypothesis would be to 1. make the satellites invisible, or 2. disguise the satellites. Options under mechanism 1 include stripping/ejecting any baryons associated with the CDM halo, perhaps through feedback (Chiu, Gnedin & Ostriker 2001), and/or ionising any residual gas therein, or perhaps through re-ionisation of the Universe not allowing gas to cool into the smallest CDM halos (Moore 2001). In both cases, little accompanying stellar component can exist (or else the satellites would become “visible”). In some sense, mechanism 2 represents the least “radical” of the options and forms the basis of much of the subsequent discussion.

To date, the best suggested “disguise” for these supposed missing satellites is that worn by the population of High-Velocity Clouds (HVCs). HVCs are traditionally classified as HI gas clouds whose velocities are inconsistent with that of Galactic rotation (e.g. Wakker, van Woerden & Gibson 1999). Since their discovery 40 years ago, debate concerning their origin has ranged from the local (Galactic fountain), to the intermediate (tidal disruption of accreting dwarfs), to the distant ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM building blocks left over from the formation of the Local Group). Blitz et al. (1999) and later Braun & Burton (1999), revived this extragalactic scenario,111In contrast with Blitz et al. (1999), Braun & Burton (1999) eliminate all extended ($`\mathrm{}>`$1) HVCs, and consider only Compact HVCs (CHVCs) to be associated with residual $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM halos. and have both provided persuasive arguments to support their cases (see also Blitz 2001; Burton et al. 2001). With $``$2000 HVCs now catalogued (Putman et al. 2001), their numbers are certainly a good match to the predicted number of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM halos. Shortcomings to this picture have been highlighted by Gibson et al. (2001ab), Weiner et al. (2001), Zwaan (2001), Charlton et al. (2000), and Combes & Charmandaris (2000), amongst others.

In what follows, we discuss several arguments which have been employed to support (or refute) the extragalactic HVC scenario, drawing attention to ongoing (and future) programs designed to shed light on this contentious issue.

## 2. The Evidence …

In terms of discriminating between the extragalactic ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM) and Galactic (fountain or dwarf galaxy tidal disruption) origin scenarios for HVCs, any number of indirect arguments can be made, but in actuality, only one, clean, direct discriminant exists - HVC distance.

### 2.1. Distances

Under the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM scenario, HVCs are presumed to populate the Local Group, with typical distances of $``$700 kpc; in contrast, both the Galactic fountain and dwarf galaxy disruption scenarios favour distances of order $``$10 kpc. In theory, this (approximate) two orders-of-magnitude difference offers a clean discriminant between the models. In practice, despite distance being this “Holy Grail”, its determination is extremely challenging.

The only bona fide mechanism for setting a useful HVC distance bracket (or an upper limit) is via absorption line spectroscopy towards background halo stars of known distance. As stressed by Wakker (2001) and Gibson et al. (2001a), the dearth of suitably bright and distant, blue-horizontal branch halo stars aligned with the high HI column density cores of HVCs,222We are undertaking a program at the United Kingdom Schmidt Telescope, in an attempt to rectify this shortcoming. We (in collaboration with Mike Bessell, Tim Beers, Norbert Christlieb, John Norris, and Joss Bland-Hawthorn) are employing the 6dF facility to take intermediate-resolution spectra of Hamburg/ESO Survey and Beers/Preston HK Survey candidate B-HB halo stars, prior to followup high-resolution work for the best HVC probes. has limited the successful333“Success” defined here as a clear halo vs non-halo residency determination for the given HVC. application of this technique to just five HVCs.444The marginal detection of an HVC in Complex WD, seen in absorption against a halo RR Lyrae at 5 kpc (Comeron 2000, priv comm), needs confirmation, particularly in light of its projected location near the Local Group’s anti-barycentre. All five of these HVCs lie clearly in the Galactic halo555Despite Blitz’s (2001) protestations, HVC 100$``$7$`+`$100 is both an HVC - its positive velocity is significantly inconsistent with that expected by Galactic rotation in this quadrant - and its existence confirmed in both HI (Bates et al. 1991) and the ultraviolet (Bates et al. 1990). Its low column density - N(HI)= 3$`\times `$1018 cm-2 \- is what makes it difficult to extract from the Leiden-Dwingeloo Survey data, and not its non-existence! Gibson et al. (2001a; Table 1).

While it might be tempting to succomb to hyperbole and claim the HVC mystery solved, since all five for which a halo vs non-halo status could be determined clearly reside in the Galactic halo, it’s crucial to bear in mind that (i) we are still only talking about $``$1% of the known HVCs, and (ii) an unavoidable selection effect plagues this interpretation, in the sense that there simply aren’t any background halo stars out at $`\mathrm{}>`$500 kpc with which to probe HVCs at (putative) comparable distances. If it could be shown that gaseous HVCs are accompanied by an associated stellar population, it is not inconceivable that deep, targeted, searches for the tip of the red giant branch (or maybe RR Lyrae) might provide a useful distance determination for intra-Local Group HVCs. Using the LCO and KPNO, Grebel et al. (2000) are searching for RGB stars in several CHVCs, and while they have several candidates, the data do not show convincing evidence for the presence of significant numbers of stars. Unequivocal conclusions are complicated by the potential confusion with unresolved, background, starburst galaxies. 8-10m class spectroscopic confirmation for all candidates is a necessity. Josh Simon, as part of his PhD at Berkeley, has also been cross-correlating hundreds of HVCs with POSS-II plates.666We are involved in several deep searches for stars in CHVCs, involving the 6.5m Baade Telescope and (hopefully!) the 4m Anglo-Australian Telescope. Those involved in the collaborations include Dan Kelson, Wendy Freedman, Geraint Lewis, Rodrigo Ibata, and Joss Bland-Hawthorn.

While the absorption line and tip of the RGB techniques are classified as direct, they are applicable to only a handful of HVCs. That said, there are several indirect methods which can be applied to (potentially) hundreds of HVCs.

The indirect technique which has received the most attention over the past few years is that based upon H$`\alpha `$ emission (Bland-Hawthorn & Maloney 1999). As shown by Bland-Hawthorn et al. (1998), Tufte et al. (1998), and Weiner et al. (2001), HVCs are detected regularly in H$`\alpha `$ emission, with a subset seen in low ionisation lines. Under the (reasonable) assumption that $`\mathrm{}>`$1% of the Galaxy’s ionising photons escape the disk, coupled with models governing the distribution of this ionising field, covering fraction, topology, and line-of-sight orientation, an HI screen at a given distance will result in a specific H$`\alpha `$ emission measure. The original halo radiation field of Bland-Hawthorn & Maloney assumed an underlying exponential disk for the Galaxy. While valid in the far-field limit, this model broke down within $``$10 kpc of the disk, where the proximity to spiral arms is important (and where we know many HVCs lie). However, as reported at this meeting, most failings of the preliminary model have been rectified by incorporating a proper treatment of spiral arms (Bland-Hawthorn et al. 2001). All known HVCs, with both measured H$`\alpha `$ emission and absorption line distance constraints, are now consistent with the predictions of this spiral arm H$`\alpha `$ model, and appear to lie within $``$100 kpc of the Galaxy; to date, this indirect technique does not support the intra-Local Group predictions of Blitz et al. (1999) and Braun & Burton (1999). What remains true however, is that H$`\alpha `$ detections of the Magellanic Stream are perplexingly bright, and require at least one additional (unidentified) ionising source (Weiner et al. 2001; Bland-Hawthorn et al. 2001).

Employing thermal pressure arguments pertaining to CHVCs,777Specifically, the physical conditions necessary for the establishment (and maintenance) of cold neutral cores embedded within warm neutral halos. Burton et al. (2001) claim that CHVCs lie at a distance of 400$`\pm `$280 kpc. As emphasised to us by Amiel Sternberg (2001, priv comm)888Details are provided in their forthcoming paper (Sternberg et al. 2001). though, distance estimates based upon eqn 4 of Burton et al. are technically only upper limits. Their argument is predicated upon the assumption that the thermal pressure (P) equates to the minimum pressure (Pmin) required at the core/halo interface. However, the condition for a multiphased mixture is that Pmin$`<`$P$`<`$Pmax; P could be significantly larger than Pmin and still be consistent with cold and warm neutral media (provided, of course, that P$`<`$Pmax). Even these upper limits are uncertain, since the value of Pmin depends upon the assumed shielding column and there is no a priori reason to adopt 1$`\times `$1019 cm-2 (as was used by Burton et al.).

HVC 165$``$43$``$120 is part of the Anti-Centre High-Velocity complex mapped in HI by Cohen (1981), and H$`\alpha `$ by Weiner et al. (2001). The Cohen “Stream” at $``$110 km/s spans 25 on the sky and traces a parallel filament clearly associated with the local ISM at $``$13 km/s. Cohen suggests the $``$110 km/s must therefore be colliding with the Galactic disk at a distance of $``$300 pc. This Stream is akin to the family of HVCs which show direct connections to Galactic gas (Putman & Gibson 1999), and therefore must be relatively nearby.

Building upon the observation that a large number ($``$20%) of CHVCs show compression-front and tail-shaped features, suggestive of interaction with an external medium, Quilis & Moore (2001) have performed 3D-hydro simulations which are consistent with the data, but only for ambient densities $`\mathrm{}>`$10-4 cm-3. Such densities are not consistent with that expected in the intergalactic medium. These simulations suggest that $`\mathrm{}>`$20% of CHVCs reside in the halo of our Galaxy.

In summary, those HVCs which possess useful direct distance constraints all reside within the halo of the Milky Way. Similarly, indirect distance measurements based upon H$`\alpha `$ emission, relation to Galactic disk HI, and head-tail substructure, are also consistent with a halo residency.

### 2.2. Metallicities

While HVC distance is the cleanest discriminant between Galactic fuel and galactic waste scenarios, metallicity also offers a potentially useful, albeit indirect, indicator. Under the Blitz et al. (1999) and Braun & Burton (1999) scenarios, HVCs (or at least CHVCs) can be considered to be remnants (or building blocks, or perhaps “failed” dwarfs) of the formation of the Local Group. Blitz et al. suggest that metallicities $`\mathrm{}<`$0.2 Z are consistent with their model. If HVCs really are failed dwarfs, though (or accreting remnants of the early phases of the Local Group), one might expect their metallicities to be $`\mathrm{}<`$0.01 Z, since such metallicities are encountered in the dwarf spheroidals (dSphs) of the Local Group. However, as summarised by Gibson et al. (2001a), the majority of HVCs appear to have metallicities of $``$0.3 Z, subject to the usual caveats concerning ionisation and dust corrections, as well as small-scale HI sub-structure.

Inspection of Figure 1 illustrates dramatically the discrepancy between HVC metallicities (upper boxed region) and metallicities of the lowest luminosity components of the Local Group (lower boxed region). If HVCs really are Local Group building blocks, they are clearly very different from the dSphs we currently see.

HVC Complex C deserves a few words, as it has been put forth as the most likely candidate to be the low-metallicity infalling Galactic fuel required by chemical evolution models aiming to avoid the so-called “G-dwarf problem”. This problem is the (generally) unavoidable overproduction of low-metallicity stars in closed-box models of the Galaxy’s evolution. Wakker et al. (1999) derived a metallicity of 0.09 Z based upon the Mrk 290 sightline through Complex C, and suggested this HVC was this infalling Galactic star formation fuel. This interpretation has since been clouded by the analysis of Gibson et al. (2001b), who show that abundances as high as $``$0.3 Z are encountered along the Mrk 817 sightline. As noted by Tosi (1988), infalling gas metallicities $`\mathrm{}>`$0.2 Z lead to a present-day disk gas-phase oxygen gradient which is inconsistent with that observed. We have returned to this issue with our new dual-infall model for Galactic chemical evolution, employing GEtool, a new Galaxy Evolution tool under development at Swinburne (Fenner & Gibson 2002). Our results strengthen the conclusions of Tosi, not only through the oxygen gradients, but also the G-dwarf distribution, age-metallicity relation, and gas surface density constraints. Preliminary results are shown in Figure 2, with full details to be provided in Chiappini et al. (2002).

The fact that most HVCs have metallicities of $``$0.3 Z led Gibson et al. (2001a) to conclude that not only was this inconsistent with the Blitz et al. (1999) and Braun & Burton (1999) pictures, but also with the classical Galactic Fountain picture (in which metallicities near solar might be expected). While we are still of that opinion, the conclusion should perhaps be tempered by the bottom panel of Figure 2. If HVCs originate from a fountain at a Galactocentric distance $``$5 kpc (location of the disk’s present-day star formation maximum), metallicities in the range $``$0.6$``$1.3 Z would be expected (“solar” being log(O/H)$`+`$12=8.9); if HVCs originate near the solar circle ($``$6$``$12 kpc), the range would extend to $``$0.2$``$1.2 Z. These ranges are, technically, upper limits, as dilution from near-pristine halo gas will push the values down somewhat. The point we wish to make here is that the occasional metallicity as low as $``$0.2 Z does not sound the death-knell for the Galactic Fountain; that said, persistent values this low are difficult to reconcile with a Galactic origin, unless dilution by metal-poor halo gas is extremely efficient.

The next 12 months will see Complex WD (toward the Local Group’s anti-barycentre) come under scrutiny,999Including our FUSE Cycle 2 GI program, in collaboration with Mark Giroux. lengthy revisits to Complex C,101010Including several HST GI programs led by Bart Wakker and David Bowen, as well as the FUSE Science Team’s ongoing analyses. the Mrk 205 HST/STIS analysis of Bowen et al. (HST PID#8625),111111Mrk 205 intersects both Complex C and CHVC 125$`+`$41$``$207; the Bowen et al. data should provide the first useful metallicity determination for a CHVC. and the first useful upper limit on the metallicity of a CHVC (Sembach et al. 2001).

### 2.3. Kinematics

As discussed in Gibson et al. (2001a), arguments in support of an intra-Local Group residency for HVCs, based upon the velocity distribution (both its centroid and dispersion) being more “favourable” in the Galactic or Local Group Standard of Rest (as opposed to the Local Standard of Rest) are somewhat specious. This is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition; any model which results in the appropriate sinusoidal behaviour in the $`\mathrm{}`$-$`v_{\mathrm{LSR}}`$ plane, which includes many Galactic fountain and Magellanic Cloud disruption scenarios, will result in a decreased velocity dispersion in the GSR and LGSR frames.

The number of catalogued HVCs below $`\delta =+0^{}`$ has now grown to $``$2000, with $``$10% alone classified as CHVCs (Putman et al. 2001). It should be noted though, that approximately half of the original Braun & Burton (1999) CHVCs which lie in the Putman et al. overlap region have lost their “compact” status, and have been reclassified (due to the improved spatial resolution used by Putman et al., and a stricter classification scheme). Of futher interest, the 179 Putman et al. CHVCs are not distributed randomly, but are in fact clustered into three primary groups which lie within $`\pm `$25 of the Galactic Plane, or near the South Galactic Pole. The Putman et al. HVCs and CHVCs have nearly identical $`v_{\mathrm{GSR}}`$ and $`v_{\mathrm{LGSR}}`$ centroids. Whether that means both HVCs and CHVCs therefore have the same origin remains unresolved.

We wish to comment upon the size-linewidth analysis of Combes & Charmandaris (2000). These authors show that those HVCs which are known to reside in the Galactic halo, adhere to the molecular cloud size-linewidth relation. Further, they note that the Braun & Burton (1999) CHVCs would also follow this relation, if they had typical distances of 20 kpc. Invoking Occam’s Razor, Combes & Charmandaris suggest therefore that most CHVCs are not of an extragalactic nature. While interesting, and possibly correct, this conclusion should be tempered with the knowledge that dark matter dominated Local Group objects (such as the aforementioned dSphs) do not follow this self-same relationship. Taken one step further, if CHVCs are also in fact dark matter dominated entities (as both Blitz et al. 1999 and Braun & Burton 1999 argue), then there would be no a priori reason to force them to follow the Galactic molecular cloud size-linewidth relation.

### 2.4. Association with Extra-Local Group Systems

Some of the more compelling arguments against the Blitz et al. (1999) and Braun & Burton (1999) scenarios are due to Zwaan (2001) and Charlton et al. (2000). Both teams surveyed nearby Local Group analogs in an attempt to ascertain how common intragroup gas clouds are elsewhere. Charlton et al. show that the statistics of MgII and Lyman limit absorbers in the spectra of background QSOs are in disagreement with the extragalactic HVC scenarios. Zwaan surveyed $``$4 Mpc2 of five nearby Local Group analogs, down to an HI mass of 7$`\times `$106 M (4.5$`\sigma `$), also finding no intragroup clouds. 121212Counter-arguments have been presented by Blitz (2001). The proposed HIPARK Survey at Parkes (led by Frank Briggs, with Martin Zwaan, David Barnes, and us) would have a 6$`\sigma `$ detection limit at 6 Mpc of 1$`\times `$106 M, covering $``$200 deg2, and would offer more than an order of magnitude improvement over any of the existing extra-Local Group surveys.

An issue which has not received fair attention, but one which remains a tantalising one nevertheless, is the observation that the incidence HVC “activity” in isolated spirals is directly related to the underlying star formation rate (Schulman et al. 1997). This certainly seems to be an important clue in the HVC “mystery”, but one which has received scant attention in the recent literature.

### 2.5. Magellanic Stream

The disruption of the Magellanic Clouds has long been recognised as a potentially crucial component of any complete HVC origin theory (e.g. Wakker 1990; Ch. 5). The discovery of the Leading Arm Feature (LAF), counterpart to the trailing Magellanic Stream, demonstrates that strong tidal forces are involved in disrupting our nearest neighbours (Putman et al. 1998). Of further interest is the discovery that the Magellanic Stream is not confined to the canonical linear HI stream. As Gibson et al. (2000) show, gas associated with the Stream is seen in MgII along the III Zw 2 sightline; this has since been supplemented by the detection of the Stream in Ly$`\beta `$ in FUSE observations of Mrk 335. Coupled with NGC 7469, we now have three clear detections of the Stream in the vicinity of the MS V concentration (Figure 3). FUSE has observed many other sightlines which project onto Figure 3 (and elsewhere in the vicnity of the Stream); examining these data for other Ly$`\beta `$ Stream “signatures” will be necessary in order to assess the true extent of disrupted gas from the Magellanic Clouds. We are currently pursuing high-resolution N-body $`+`$ SPH simulations of the formation and evolution of the Stream, LAF, and associated “disrupted” gas from the Clouds.

### 2.6. Alternatives to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM

When all else fails, should the HVCs and CHVCs not correspond to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM halos, we may be faced with the prospect of venturing outside the confines of standard hierarchical clustering scenarios. Both Warm Dark Matter (WDM) and Self-Interacting Dark Matter (SIDM) offer potentially viable mechanisms for suppressing power at small scales. That said, two of the best related analyses invoking WDM (Bode et al. 2001) and SIDM (Davé et al. 2001) show that low-mass halo suppression is limited to factors of a few, as opposed to the orders-of-magnitude required to reconcile theory with the Local Group galaxy distribution. Perhaps the solution retains $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM, but involves an efficient treatment of feedback, a là Chiu et al. (2001). The latter suppress low-mass gas halo production with “physics”, without suppressing the number of dark halos.131313This simulation was not evolved beyond redshift $`z`$=4, and so questions remain concerning the clustering properties at redshift $`z`$=0.

#### Acknowledgments.

We wish to thank Mary Putman, Amiel Sternberg, Mark Giroux, Ken Sembach, Joss Bland-Hawthorn, Dan Kelson, Josh Simon, and Bart Wakker, for many helpful correspondences.

## References

Bates, B, Catney, M.G., Keenan, F.P. 1990, MNRAS, 242, 267

Bates, B, Catney, M.G., Gilheany, S., et al. 1991, MNRAS, 249, 282

Bland-Hawthorn, J. & Maloney, P.R. 1999, ApJ, 510, L33

Bland-Hawthorn, J., et al. 1998, MNRAS, 299, 611

Bland-Hawthorn, J., et al. 2001, in preparation

Blitz, L. 2001, preprint (astro-ph/0105134)

Blitz, L., Spergel, D.N., et al. 1999, ApJ, 514, 818

Bode, P., Ostriker, J.P. & Turok, N. 2001, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0010389)

Braun, R. & Burton, W.B. 1999, A&A, 341, 437

Burton, W.B., Braun, R. & Chengalur, J.N. 2001, A&A, 369, 616

Charlton, J.C., Churchill, C.W. & Rigby, J.R. 2000, ApJ, 544, 702

Chiappini, C., Fenner, Y., Gibson, B.K. & Matteucci, F. 2002, in preparation

Chiu, W.A., Gnedin, N.Y. & Ostriker, J.P. 2001, ApJ, submitted (astro-ph/0103359)

Cohen, R.J.1981, MNRAS, 196, 835

Combes, F. & Charmandaris, V. 2000, A&A, 357, 75

Davé, R., Spergel, D.N., Steinhardt, P.J., Wandelt, B.D. 2001, ApJ, 547, 574

Fenner, Y. & Gibson, B.K. 2002, in preparation

Gibson, B.K. 1997, MNRAS, 290, 471

Gibson, B.K., Giroux, M.L., Penton, S.V., et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 1830

Gibson, B.K., et al. 2001a, preprint (astro-ph/0009050)

Gibson, B.K., Giroux, M.L., Penton, S.V., et al. 2001b, AJ, submitted

Grebel, E.K., Braun, R. & Burton, W.B. 2000, BAAS, 196, #28.09

Klypin, A., Kravtsov, A.V., Valenzuela, O. & Prada, F. 1999, ApJ, 522, 82

Moore, B. 2001, preprint (astro-ph/0103100)

Putman, M.E. & Gibson, B.K. 1999, PASA, 16, 70

Putman, M.E., et al. 2001, AJ, submitted

Putman, M.E., Gibson, B.K., Staveley-Smith, L., et al. 1998, Nature, 394, 752

Quilis, V. & Moore, B. 2001, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0106253)

Schulman, E., et al. 1997, AJ, 113, 1559

Sembach, K.R., Putman, M.E., Fenner, Y. & Gibson, B.K. 2001, in preparation

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

Tosi, M. 1988, A&A, 197, 47

Tufte, S.L., Reynolds, R.J. & Haffner, L.M. 1998, ApJ, 504, 773

Wakker, B.P. 1990, PhD Dissertation, Groningen

Wakker, B.P. 2001, ApJS, in press (astro-ph/0102147)

Wakker, B.P., van Woerden, H. & Gibson, B.K. 1999, in Stromlo Workshop on High-Velocity Clouds, ed. B.K. Gibson & M.E. Putman (ASP), 311

Wakker, B.P., Howk, J.C., Savage, B.D., et al. 1999, Nature, 402, 388

Weiner, B.J., Vogel, S.N. & Williams, T.B. 2001, preprint (astro-ph/0008263)

Wolfire, M.G., McKee, C.F., Hollenbach, D., et al. 1995, ApJ, 453, 673

Zwaan, M.A. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 1142