text:
# PROBING THE PHYSICS OF AGN – A SUMMARY

## 1 Introduction

There is an analogy, which is sometimes drawn, between the unfolding of our understanding of the structure of atoms and of galaxies. In 1909, Geiger & Marsden, working under Rutherford’s direction, discovered that atoms contain compact, positively charged nuclei occupying $`10^{15}`$ of their volume. The path through Bohr theory, non-relativistic quantum mechanics, spin, the exclusion principle, relativistic quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamics is well-trodden by physics and astronomy students. In less than two decades physicists had assembled an elegant and precise set of rules for describing atoms that has only changed by quantitatively tiny (though still immensely important) corrections. One year prior to the work of Geiger & Marsden, Edward Fath, then working at the Lick observatory, obtained the first evidence that galaxies too contain compact nuclei, in this case, as we now know, occupying $`10^{30}`$ of their volume. However, it took astronomers over fifty years to associate these nuclei with black holes and another twenty years to assemble the evidence that convinced doubters that black holes were generically present in most normal galaxies.

My reason for bringing this up is to take issue with the title. The understanding of atoms required new and fundamental physical principles. It is probably the case that no such principles are needed to describe AGN. The main ingredients, Newtonian physics, electromagnetic theory, atomic astrophysics, hydrodynamics, radiative transfer, QED etc are so well tested that it is hard to imagine that AGN observations could cause any of them to be cast into doubt. Even general relativity, although only tested in the weak field regime, is so strongly ensconced in our discipline that the Kerr metric will continue to be used to set the stage for black hole astrophysics unless some truly compelling, quantitative discrepancy is reported. The one subject where we really are quite ignorant of many relevant, fundamental principles is magnetohydrodynamics, but this is probably not what the organisers had in mind! (I would comment that, with the advent of high dynamical range 3D MHD simulations and with the availability of superb observations of the solar corona and terrestrial magnetosphere, the prospect for understand how magnetic reconnection, strong hydromagnetic shocks and so on actually operate are pretty good and AGN studies ought to be the grateful beneficiary.)

In fact, I really think what we need to be discussing is the *engineering* of AGN. Quasars, Seyfert galaxies and so on are sleek machines. They take gaseous fuel, organize it into a disk and, when conditions are right, convert its mass into radiant energy and its exhaust into jets with an efficiency that would win accolades in the automotive industry. However, despite the growth in our observational understanding over the past decade, that has made AGN studies much more quantitative, we still have not had a good look “under the hood”. We really do not have a common, agreed description of how AGN function – what roles are played by the hole, the disk, the stars and so on and how the different elements, emission line regions, narrow line regions, jets, winds, disk coronae are geometrically arranged. This is where the techniques that have been discussed over the past three days come in. What they promise is to answer some of these outstanding questions by direct measurement.

What I have been asked to do is to provide a critique of the field as it has been described as opposed to a traditional conference summary. I have tried to be provocative and raise, in advance, some of the questions that will be asked of the large observing and mission proposals on which the future of this field depends. I hope I can be excused preparing a bibliography, referring instead by name to the accompanying articles where contemporary references can be found.

## 2 The Bigger Picture

Most of this meeting has been concerned with attempts to understand AGN variability in the optical and X-ray emission lines and in relativistic jets (Peterson). In practice, these are three rather distinct research communities, at least observationally and I am not sure how much they have to learn from each other in terms of technique. Where there is much common ground, and where the discussion has been relatively parochial, is in understanding how AGN engineering fits into a much larger astronomical enterprise. I believe that the context under which AGN are studied is changing quite rapidly in several different ways.

### 2.1 Galaxy Formation

This is an exciting time in the study of galaxy formation. Although theory plays a crucial role here, this is fundamentally an empirical business. HST and 10m class telescopes, used in conjunction, are enabling detailed observations of galaxies that were formed when the universe was less than three billion years old and finding galaxies out to $`z>5`$. Quasar observers, not to be outdone, are matching them in redshift. This is significant. As far as we can tell, the formation of a central nuclear black hole is an essential concomitant of galaxy formation. There is a growing acceptance of the notion that active nuclei could have provided a crucial feedback that limited the growth of galaxies, long before most of their stars were born. We do not know if galaxies form from the inside out or the outside in. Furthermore, as I have speculated elsewhere, it is possible that massive black holes make elliptical galaxies (through preventing disk formation) rather than the other way around as is generally supposed. Clearly, such speculations cannot be addressed until we have a better understanding of how black holes grow and this will require being able to mass them at large redshift from their spectra and luminosities. This, in term, requires that we understand how they work.

To be more specific, most effort has been concentrated on studying local AGN, where our diagnostics are the best and where some promising correlations are emerging between the mass of the hole and the properties of the surrounding galaxy \[Wandel\]. What we really need to do now is to focus on some attainable goals like measuring the mass accretion rate (in units of the Eddington rate), the spin angular frequency of the hole (in units of the inverse mass) and relating these to the character of the immediate environment (both stellar and gaseous). We then need to understand the associated, radiative efficiencies and the strength and type of outflow. If techniques like reverberation mapping can supply the rules for measuring these quantities \[Wandel, Netzer\], then we would be in a very good position to apply them to distant galaxies, where we cannot make dynamical measurements of the hole mass. This allows us to undertake quantitative, demographic studies of young galaxies and their nuclei to replace the guesswork with which we have to make do at the moment.

### 2.2 Genesis of Black Holes

Just as it has proven far more difficult to explain how stars form as opposed to how they function, so we must expect discussions of the origin of black holes to be relatively speculative. Are black holes formed on a dynamical timescale with masses larger than $`10^6`$ M or do they grow critically from much smaller masses in situ? Alternatively, are they formed as an end product of intergalactic “Population III” stars at even earlier epochs? Again, understanding the rules which determine how fast black holes grow as a function of their mass and mass supply and environment will be necessary to rule out false accounts.

### 2.3 Ionization of the Intergalactic Medium

A crucial question is “When and how was the intergalactic medium ionized?”. The answer almost surely involves both hot young stars and quasars, but it is proving hard to be quantitative. The particular importance of quasars is that they produce hard, penetrating photons. In order to test this quantitatively, we need to know how to interpret the observations of high redshift quasars, take out the beaming effects and estimate their average ionizing flux, when we cannot determine this directly on account of the very absorption that we are trying to explain.

### 2.4 Scale-Free Accretion

This raises the question of the scaling of black hole properties with mass; in particular the comparison of stellar mass black hole accretors with massive black holes in AGN. On the one hand, the dynamics and two body processes associated with optically thin accretion are essentially scale free (Quataert, Narayan). However, what is not scale-free is the effective temperature of the radiation when it is absorbed and re-radiated. We do not really have a good understanding of how much this influences the dynamics of accretion. Studying matched Galactic and AGN systems (Livio) should be very helpful. In addition, if there is a large population of intermediate mass black holes as suggested by recent Chandra observations then we shall have another important point of comparison

### 2.5 The Advantage of Monitoring X-ray Binaries

This leads us naturally to the question raised by a couple of speakers. “Why put so much effort into monitoring AGN when you can get so much better sampling of Galactic black hole transients?” In the most naive interpretation, all timescales should scale with mass and a year in the life of a quasar is lived in a second by an X-ray binary. Isn’t this the best way to find out how AGN work? The RXTE observations of GRS 1915+105 provide graphic illustration of the quality of the data that can be procured in a short time.

The best answer that I can give to this question, and the best defense of a major effort in AGN monitoring is that, despite the appeal of the scaling laws, X-ray binaries and AGN exhibit important differences. The former do not exhibit ultrarelativistic jets or prominent broad emission (or absorption) lines. In addition, X-ray binaries do not, as yet, display broad iron lines in the X-ray part of the spectrum. Making the inverse comparison, we haven’t really found a massive counterpart to SS433. The environments are also quite different - a single, binary companion versus a star cluster.

Comparison of the two types of black hole will probably turn out to be pretty important as we sort out the details.

### 2.6 $`\gamma `$-ray Bursts

Another under-represented point of comparison is $`\gamma `$-ray bursts. After thirty years hard work, radio astronomers have assiduously built up a picture of relativistic jets and tentatively pushed up the Lorentz factors to 15. More recently, the gamma ray burst community has recapitulated much of the history of the study of compact radio sources and added several new ingredients, the most important of which is the deduction that the Lorentz factors initially exceed several hundred. They too have found some evidence that bursts may be beamed. To me, the similarities between these two classes of object are more impressive than the differences. The mysteries of putative $`\gamma `$-ray jets provide a larger justification for the study of their counterparts in AGN.

### 2.7 The Intergalactic Infrared Background

My last example of the wider importance of AGN monitoring concerns TeV observations of blazars. As is well known TeV $`\gamma `$-rays are susceptible to absorption by infrared photons with the production of electron-positron pairs. As such, they provide a splendid probe of intergalactic infrared emission and, by extension the rate of star formation in the Universe. Observations with decreasing energy can probe to greater redshifts. However, to make these measurements, usefully quantitative, we have to understand what is happening in the sources.

## 3 How does the Gas Flow, Blow and Glow?

As a pragmatic matter, it is sensible to accept “old” physics uncritically and just focus on trying to understand the dynamics of the various AGN components - disks, jets, clouds and so on. Impressive progress was reported here.

### 3.1 Round the Clock Surveillance

It requires very little thought to write a proposal to monitor the flux from a set of variable sources with the hope that something useful will be learned as a consequnce. Even if this is ever a sound strategy, it is certainly not acceptable for AGN where we know far too much to be excused from devising an optimal strategy for using the considerable amounts of telescope time that are needed. sampling is crucial. Early variability studies, based on overestimates of the size of the emission line region, were often seriously undersampled. (Some contemporary studies, despite heroic efforts, remain so \[Balonek\].) In addition, it is necessary to observe for long enough that the characteristic variation and light crossing timescales are well covered. It was therefore a welcome surprise that a study of quasars \[Kaspi\] should have yielded such promising results. The far more analytic approach, advocated here by Horne, Peterson and others, will surely be necessary to justify a large space mission.

In a quite different approach, recent ideas in describing self-organized criticality were applied to AGN light curves (Mineshige, Kawaguchi). From a physics perspective, these ideas are very attractive, but as an astronomer, I personally hope that their application here turns out to be unsuccessful because if they are right, they give us little hope for using variability for understanding how black holes accrete.

### 3.2 Microvariability

We heard impressive reports of high precision photometry at the 0.05m level \[Miller, Ferrara\]. This is apparently detectable in 85 percent of the radio-loud quasars but a smaller fraction of their radio-quiet counterparts. There seem to be associated color changes. Although several models involving disks and outflows, were discussed, it will be quite hard to decide between them unless the variation can be tied to similar changes in other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum.

### 3.3 In, Out, Round and About

The first task in reverberation mapping is surely kinematic - to determine the state of motion of the emission line gas. Four general types of flow have generally been distinguished and advocated.

* We may be witnessing gas as it flows onto the hole \[Welsh\]. This is surely the most natural expectation.
* Most of the illuminated gas may be in a wind, which is surely present in the case of the broad absorption line quasars \[Everett\].
* The emission line clouds may be part of the disk. However, this can be quite complicated. The disk may be shadowed by an inner torus or warped so that illumination can be quite irregular \[Shields\].
* The motion may be so chaotic that it is most useful to describe as locally isotropic at all points around the continuum source \[Fromerth, Collier\].

Distinguishing these four generic possibilites unambiguously has not, been easy, although considerable progress has been reported here. I think it safe to conclude that the accretion flow is not simple!

### 3.4 Some Systematics

Enough AGN have been monitored that patterns are starting to emerge. Some of these were expected; others are more of a surprize \[Alexander, Sun, Mathur, Korista, de Salamanca\].

* Certain optical emission lines are proving to exhibit far stronger echo responses than others. There does not appear to be a very good understanding of why this is so.
* The ionization parameters that are measured, particularly in objects like NGC 5548, turned out to be nearly an order of magnitude larger than anticipated \[Netzer\]. This makes life more interesting for the observer.
* There is clear evidence for ionization stratification with the higher ionization states being located closer to the continuum source. This is even reported in the UV with the OVI being co-spatial with the HeII \[Kollatschny\].
* The ionization parameter seems to decrease with increasing luminosity.

### 3.5 Narrow Line Seyfert 1 Galaxies

There has been much attention paid lately and at this meeting to the so-called Narrow Line Seyfert 1 Galaxies \[Leighly, Turner, Edelson\]. In addition to narrow emission lines these also exhibit warm absorbers with high ionization states and steep X-ray spectra. It is tempting to suggest that these may be the low luminosity counterparts of broad absorption line quasars.

### 3.6 Dynamics of the Emission Line Gas

Frequently this gas is characterized as being in the form of tiny clouds moving hypersonically ($`M>1000`$) through a dense, confining medium. This is absurd. Nonetheless this model provides a fair representation of the observed emission line strengths. From a dynamical perspective, it makes much more sense to regard the gas as part of a flow, possibly driven by radiative or magnetic stresses (Bottorff). The challenge is to reconcile the radiative description with the dynamical.

### 3.7 The Inner Disk

One of the most impressive astronomical results over the past few years was the measurement of broadened iron lines from the several low power Seyfert galaxies and LINERs \[Nandra, Reynolds\]. These have been interpreted as arising through fluorescence from thin accretion disk photospheres illuminated by an X-ray continuum source at high latitude. Alternative explanations have been patiently explored, but seem generally unconvincing, although the influence of Compton scattering may yet turn out to be unimportant. This is all fitting in well with an encouragingly ordered view of X-ray emission from this type of AGN. Specifically, this model requires there to be an extended, active corona maintained at a temperature $`100`$ keV, presumably by magnetic activity derived from the underlying accretion disk. The hot electrons scatter soft photons from the disk producing a power law X-ray spectrum, half of which irradiates the disk producing the characteristic reflection spectrum as well as the iron lines. This X-ray emission exhibits fast and slow variation. It is tempting to attribute the former to magnetic activity and the latter to variations in the soft photon flux. If this model is correct, then the observed X-ray spectrum ought to turn over above $`100`$ keV as now appears to be the case.

There were some serious concerns raised here about the reliability of the observed line profiles and their apparent lack of variation (Nandra, Reynolds, Edelson). However if we look on the positive side then these observations have opened the door to a much richer spectroscopy of accretion disk surfaces and to reverberation mapping which offers the promise of filling in many of the details of gas flow around black holes.

### 3.8 The Outer Disk

There were also encouraging reports of patterns in the behavior of gas in the outer disk with variability timescales varying with wavelength $`\lambda ^{4/3}`$ (Peterson) as well as slower variation attributable to disk dynamics \[Maoz, McHardy\]. Fairall 9 and Mrk 744 exhibit infrared reverberation presumably associated with hot dust located decently outside the sublimation radius \[Nelson,Oknyanski\]. Probing the radial variation of the dust temperature is becoming increasingly promising.

### 3.9 What Happens to Binding Energy?

Narayan and Quataert presented two very clear summaries of the prodigious number of papers written on ADAF models of slow accretion onto black holes. I cannot pass up the opportunity to present, once gain, a contrary view. The simple ADAF models are predicated on three dynamical assumptions, that gas cannot radiate, that the flow is mass-conservative and that the flow is stationary. On this basis it is concluded that the gas supplied crosses the event horizon advecting the released binding energy with it. The first hypothesis depends upon microphysical considerations that have always been a bit problematic but it has certainly become more plausible recently that it is correct and is definitely worth entertaining. The second hypothesis is the one with which I have the greatest difficulty. Put simply, when gas accretes rotationally onto a black hole, there must either be a torque that transports angular momentum out through the disk or one that carries it up to the disk surface and off in a hydromagnetic wind. In the former case there is an unavoidable transport of energy out through the disk from small radius to large radius. (It is this effect that is responsible for accreting gas in a radiative disk emitting three times the binding energy that it releases.) The transported energy must go somewhere and if the disk cannot radiate, the energy must be carried off in a wind. I do not believe that it is possible for it all to cross the event horizon. Under most circumstances, we expect that there is a powerful wind although this is not necessary. The energy may be extracted by magnetic torques. Either way, the flow does not look like the original ADAF proposal.

To go beyond these general principles requires understanding the microphysical details. One longstanding possibility, borne out by recent numerical simulation, is that the flow becomes convective and establishes a net mass inflow that increases with radius. However, this does not solve the problem. Most of the mass supplied must still be lost. The differences are not small. In the case of the Galactic center, we might estimate that the rate of gas supply is $`10^{22}`$ g s-1. In the ADAF model, almost all of this goes down the hole with a radiative efficiency $`10^7`$. By contrast, if there is a wind, simple mass loss models suggest that the rate of gas accretion is only $`10^{18}`$ g s-1 \- one proton out of ten thousand altruistically sacrifices itself to enable the remainder to escape - and the radiative efficiency is $`10^3`$.

An alternative possibility is that the third assumption is incorrect and the flow is cyclical, building up a reservoir until the gas can accrete radiatively. If this is happening, then we should see evidence for past radiative phases, a possibility that can be dismissed in the case of the Galactic center.

There is an additional concern. The basic ADAF models suppose that the electrons maintain a Maxwellian distribution function with the minimum temperature permitted by by Coulomb interactions. However, we are probably dealing here with a trans-relativistic, trans-sonic, trans-Alfvénic rapidly shearing, hydromagnetic flow. Whenever we observe mildly shearing hydromagnetic flows in the heliosphere, they are accompanied by particle acceleration. In the case of accretion onto a black hole, a comparatively small admixture of MeV electrons can boost the radiative efficiency by orders of magnitude. Furthermore, in the case of the Galactic center, the X-ray spectrum changes from flat (free-free) to steep (nonthermal). Another way of expressing this puzzle is to observe that then the assumption that the energy dissipated is channelled into the ions, is in stark contrast with the assumption made in discussing X-ray emitting coronae where we require that electrons are efficiently heated. It is possible that the character of the dissipation depends upon the $`\beta `$ of the plasma, being low in a corona and high in a disk. This deserves further study.

## 4 Jet Lag

### 4.1 The Diversity of Jets

This meeting has also been concerned with the behavior of jets. We still lack a comprehensive and generally accepted theory of their formation, collimation and radiative properties. What is increasingly apparent is that bipolar outflow is a very common accompaniment of accretion (Livio). Indeed, it may even be necessary to carry off surplus angular momentum. Having said this, I am somewhat mistrustful of assertions that one mechanism will fit all jets. This is not the case for stars, for supernovae, or for X-ray or $`\gamma `$-ray bursts, although all mechanisms have to satisfy fundamental conservation laws for mass, momentum, angular momentum and, as I have just emphasized, energy. Blazar etc jets are ultrarelativistic, Seyfert jets are not yet both originate from accretion disks around black holes. Some outflows escape from radiation-dominated environments where the magnetic stresses might be comparatively weak; others probably emerge from hot, optically thin plasmas which may be strongly magnetized. The former may well be poorly collimated and subrelativistic, like the Seyfert outflows and perhaps some of the Galactic sources. The latter may be the ultrarelativistic “superluminal sources” and subject to quite different dynamical rules.

### 4.2 X-ray Jets

Chandra, with its arcsecond angular resolution is proving to be a boon to this subject. The first X-ray jets to be reported, Cen A, 3C 273 and 3C371 etc, are suprisingly intense and well-collimated. They show X-ray all along their lengths, strongly suggesting that particle acceleration can proceed efficiently without relying on occasional strong shocks.

Even more surprising are the jets that we did not expect to find, specifically those associated with the Crab and Vela pulsars. These are presumably formed without the assistance of accretion disks. Perhaps the common element is not a disk, but a spinning source of organized, poloidal field.

### 4.3 Blazars

Although high frequency VLBI can probe the jets in a few selected sources, like M87 down to size scales $`100m`$, most blazars cannot be so well-probed, especially after de-projection. We must therefore rely on indirect methods including, especially, multi-wavelength monitoring to understand their structure. It is to be hoped that these will ultimately lead to a correct identification of the source of the high frequency emission.

We have learned a lot observationally \[Sambruna, Marscher, Steinle, Marchenko-Jorstad\]. We are mostly confident that these source are embodiments of the traditional “inverse Compton catastrophe” within a relativistic outflow. A broad low frequency hump is apparent associated with synchrotron radiation, At high frequencies, there is a larger, more luminous hump, peaking in the $`\gamma `$-rays. There are several proposals as to how these humps are produced. The first question is the origin of the soft photons that are scattered.

The traditional answer is that they are the synchrotron photons from the low frequency hump, presumably emitted at the same radius in the jet outflow as the $`\gamma `$-rays with both components being Doppler-beamed by the relativistic outflow. However, an alternative possibility is that the soft photons have an external origin. Specifically, we expect that the black hole will have a luminous accretion disk and that a fraction, perhaps ten percent, of these photons will be scattered by the outer disk, emission line clouds or the general intercloud medium at the emission radius. As the inverse Compton power of an ultrarelativistic electron of energy $`\gamma m_ec^2`$, measured in the blazar frame, is $`\gamma ^2<(1\mathrm{cos}\theta )^2>`$, where $`\theta `$ is the angle between the direction of the electron motion and the photons. There is clearly a radiative advantage in external scattering models. Correlating the variability in the synchrotron bands is probably the best way to decide between these two general models. We will probably have to wait for GLAST to be sure, (although I think that current indications favor the self-Compton model, in most cases).

This is not the only issue. We also need to understand where and how the relativistic electrons are accelerated. There is good circumstantial evidence, and even stronger theoretical expectation that the jet power derives from close to the black hole. If so, we must reject what is perhaps the most natural possibility – that it be released as a pair plasma. This is because the radiative (and momentum) losses close to the hole are inevitably catastrophic and the outflows could never maintain the ultrarelativistic speeds that are directly observed by radio astronomers at much greater radii, where there is no objection to the plasma being pair-dominated and where there is some indication that it actually does have this character. There must be an alternative carrier of momentum close to the black hole. The two candidates are relativistic protons and Poynting flux. (In the case of relativistic protons, though, it is hard to see how tightly collimated beams could be formed without strong magnetic field being present and magnetic energy transport being at least competitive with particle transport.) If the energy flux is electromagnetic from the start, organized, rotational kinetic energy is tapped by electromagnetic field and transported to large distance where it is used up in electron (and positron) acceleration.This is what happens in the case of pulsars and, arguably, $`\gamma `$-ray bursts.

It is not clear if all this conversion of Poynting flux to particle energy happens at a single location – the one zone model – or if the dissipation occurs continuously along the jet. What is clear is that the highest energy $`\gamma `$-rays must be created outside an energy-dependent “gammasphere” where the optical depth to pair production on the ambient soft UV/X-ray background falls to unity. This suggested the possibility that the emission always originates from the gammasphere. On this basis, it was predicted that the higher energy $`\gamma `$-ray emission would vary more slowly than lower energy emission and might exhibit lags, in contrast to what is expected from the one zone model. (One problem with this explanation is that the cooling pairs, both primary and secondary, will emit more X-rays than are observed.) There is as yet not much evidence for these effects, but again, the data are sparse. Sorting all of this out is an exceelent goal for future multi-wavelength monitoring.

Another key question is how to model the outbursts. Are they best described as essentially stationary jets perturbed by traveling shock fronts that increase the emissivity, or should we think of them more as independent explosions occuring in a previously evacuated channel? Tracing circuits in the $`S\alpha `$ plane looks like a particularly useful way to address the geometrical relationships indirectly \[Sambruna, Marscher\]. The difference is not just important dynamically but also affects the radiative properties.

### 4.4 Jet Velocity

What is the jet velocity? The reason why this is so crucial is that relativistic beaming is such a powerful amplifier. The volume emissivity of a stationary flow is $`𝒟^{2+\alpha }`$, where $`𝒟`$ is the Doppler factor and $`\alpha `$ is the spectral index. (In computing the flux from a moving component, an extra power of $`calD`$ must be included.) This means that relatively insignificant parts of the source that are directed towards us may dominate the observed intensity.

Now it is quite unlikely that the jet is characterized by a single speed. There are good reasons for it to accelerate and decelerate along its length and even more reasons for it to establish a transverse velocity profile. Furthermore, the parts that we see are probably shock waves and this introduces additional kinematic complexity. In particular, the direction and the speed of the emitting plasma behind a shock front must differ from the kinematic speed of the shock. Higher angular resolution VLBI observations will be necessary to sort all this out in individual sources.

Most models have assumed, adopted or argued for jet Lorentz factors $`\gamma 10`$. However the observation of intraday variability, and especially the direct observations of the source sizes are suggesting that the Lorentz factors could be much larger. (If we can measure the source size, then we have a direct determination of the brightness temperature which is boosted by a factor $`2\gamma `$ from its value in the comoving frame which, in turn, cannot be much larger than the traditional inverse Compton value of $`10^{12}`$ K; hence the minimum Lorentz factor.) Now, it might be thought that the solution is just to keep increasing the Lorentz factor. After all values of $`\gamma 300`$ are routinely invoked in $`\gamma `$-ray burst models. However, this causes a problem with blazars because when the Lorentz factor becomes too large, typically larger than $`30`$, the radiative efficiency becomes unreasonably small. The observations have not yet driven us to this conclusion, but they may soon do so. If so, the best outcome may be that we should abandon synchrotron radiation and turn to some coherent process like a cyclotron maser, that might be pumped behind a shock front. We are, however, not allowed to adopt unlimited brightness temperature in the emission region because the radio waves have to escape and a relatively small quantity of plasma renders the emission susceptible to nonlinear effects like induced Compton scattering and stimulated Raman scattering. I suspect that VLBI circular polarization observations may be crucial in determining what is happening.

### 4.5 TeV Emission

One of the most pleasing developments in high energy astrophysics in recent years is that rapidly (as short as half an hour) variable TeV emission is detectable from closeby blazars. This places a lower bound on the emission radius inorder that the optical depth to pair production be less than unity. If there is a component of infrared/optical emission at wavelength $`2\theta ^2\mu `$ with luminosity $`L=10^{43}L_{43}\mathrm{ergs}^1`$, making an angle $`\theta `$ with the jet, then $`\theta <3^{}(L_{43}/t_{\mathrm{hr}})^{1/4}`$. This is an important constraint which limits the amount of external irradiation and places a lower bound on the jet Lorentz factor. Future TeV variability studies, coupled with studies of the unbeamed parent population – source like M87 – should be very interesting.

### 4.6 Spin and Jet Formation

As I emphasized, there is as yet no widely accepted theory of jet formation. However, there is much more interest now in this question, both observationally and theoretically. It seems to be generally acknowledged on observational grounds that AGN jets arise fairly close to the central black hole and that there are some sources (eg M87) where they cannot be confined and collimated by gas pressure alone and where the jet luminosity almost certainly exceeds the bolometric luminosity of the nucleus and the Eddington luminosity by several orders of magnitude so that radiation pressure is also irrelevant. (This may not be true of all jets, but it at least defines a class of sources that we can hope to understand.) This leaves magnetic field as the most likely agency for launching and sustaining jets, a notion which is very welcome theoretically because of the discovery of powerful, dynamical MHD instabilities that rapidly build strong field in accretion disks. However, there are interesting alternatives including proton cascades \[Falcke\] that have been proposed.

There are several choices that have to be made before making a model. Firstly there is the choice of the prime mover. Does jet power originate from the released binding energy of gas as it accretes through a disk \[Falcke\] or does it come from the spin of a black hole? The former is sometimes argued to produce more power than the latter, which is probably the case for a thin disk, though not necessarily for a thick one. The latter, however, is more likely to lead to an ultrarelativistic outflow as the ratio of the electromagnetic energy density to the baryon density is likely to be maximized above the event horizon. There is also probably a region between the inner disk and the event horizon in the equatorial plane where accreting gas falls supersonically onto the hole. This is likely to lie within the ergosphere where there exist orbits of total negative energy. In principle, magnetic field can drag matter onto these orbits and consequently extract spin energy from the hole without the magnetic field threading the event horizon although it is not clear if there is enough time for this to happen in practice. (This is especially important if holes spin at nearly their maximal rates as they will then diamagnetically exclude the flux.)

Independent of the source of the power for ultrarelativistic jets, it is generally envisaged that jets are surrounded and collimated by a magnetic sheath derived from an orbiting accretion disk. Here the debate concerns whether the collimating magnetic field is basically large scale and organized, like that measured in the solar wind, or if it comprises disorganised loops that achieve the same effect. This hinges in turn on whether disks can maintain a large scale polarity in the open field lines that leave their surfaces, as happens with the sun (and I believe to be the case), or whether there is no large scale poloidal field beyond that created stochastically by local, small scale instability. Theoretically, I expect that numerical simulation will be of considerable interest. Observationally multiwavelength radio and mm monitoring is the key to understanding the jet composition and drawing strong inferences concerning the jet origin.

## 5 Telescopes and Space Missions

I will conclude with a few remarks on the observational prospects.

### 5.1 Small Colleges

Many of the most variable AGN are quite bright and accessible to small telescopes at good sites equipped with CCDs \[Balonek, Nelson\]. It is gratifying that this has enabled faculty at small colleges to involve enthusiastic undergraduates in invaluable monitoring efforts. I wonder if there is an opportunity to widen this approach to include selected, and strategically located international institutions. This could be an important educational outreach component of a space facility proposal.

### 5.2 XMM-Newton

It was encouraging to hear that XMM-Newton is performing so well on orbit \[O’Brien\]. With its large effective area, this should complement Chandra splendidly. It’s optical monitor is ideal for AGN monitoring studies. Of course, its major contribution will be to the unexpected, but we can anticipate even more accurate iron (and associated line) profiles from nearby Seyferts and LINERs that will, I hope, assuage some of the doubts that have been cast upon the ASCA results. I hope that it will also feasible to demonstrate the feasibility of X-ray reverberation studies. At the same time, it should produce higher dispersion spectra, with superior signal to noise of the so-called warm absorption component which appears to be a large component of an AGN gas flow. In addition, it should contribute to X-ray blazar studies, not just by monitoring the continuum, but also by seeking broadened, high ionization state lines associated with outflowing gas, just like SS433.

### 5.3 FUSE

The hopes for FUSE are no less \[Kriss\]. The major goal is surely to provide more accurate measurements of the UV fluxes and resolve the arithmetical discrepancy in the ratio of the photoionizing input to the emission line output. Clearly absorption, beaming and aspect are playing a role here, but it may be possible to remove these effects statistically by averaging over a large sample. I hope it will also contributed to the larger goals listed above by producing more accurate measurements of the quasar contribution to the metagalactic ionizing radiation field. FUSE is also proving to be effective at measuring the high ionization UV lines that originate from closest to the continuum source. In combination with X-ray observations, it should help interpret the somewhat puzzling features of the so-called warm absorber region. Finally, it promises to address the ionization structure of the intergalactic medium, at least those phases with temperature of a few times $`10^5`$ K, as discussed above.

### 5.4 KRONOS

A major reason for holding this meeting was to assess the scientific prospects and, implicitly, the design criteria for KRONOS (Peterson, Horne, Collier). This is conceived as an explorer class space mission specialized to obtaining well sampled, multiwavelength continuum and line emission from the near infrared to the soft X-ray bands from the brighter objects. The sampling of the response functions that it promises will be far superior to anything that currently exists and the mission seems ideally suited to making “engineering drawings” of AGN.

### 5.5 $`\gamma `$-rays

The contribution of $`\gamma `$-ray observations over recent years to our understanding of AGN has been much greater than most of us anticipated. With the unfortunate, though understandable, demise of Compton Gamma Ray Observatory, it is important that AGILE (due for launch in 2003) and GLAST (2006) will continue the excellent discoveries of EGRET \[Hartmann\] in the GeV energy range \[Vercellone\]. INTEGRAL due for launch in 2001, will tackle the instrumentally challenging MeV part of the spectrum (Paltarni). It should be able to measure the temperatures of Comptonizing coronae as well as search for annihilation lines. Turning to even higher energies, VERITAS and its associated projects should be able to monitor hundreds of nearby BL Lacs with their reported half hour variation and probe the innermost regions of relativistic jets. They will also be able to perform an invaluable service for a larger community by measuring indirectly the intergalactic infrared flux, a key tracer of star formation.

### 5.6 Constellation-X and XEUS

Perhaps the greatest long term hope for this field lies with the next generation of X-ray observatories \[Mushotzky\]. One of the major goals of Constellation-X is to carry out the reverberation mapping program of KRONOS at X-ray wavelengths. In this way it aspires to inspect the architecture of accretion disks as they approach the black hole ergosphere and, most importantly, to produce indirect images that include the warped Kerr spacetime (Reynolds).

We are entering a new phase of our quest to make AGN as commonplace a part of astronomy as stars are today. What is clear is that, unlike stars, black holes need and use the total electromagnetic spectrum to get rid of the radiative by products of their nourishment. It is good that this spectral breadth is matched by the range of observational proposals that we have heard about here and, consequently, we must work collectively to achieve our underlying goal of understanding how black holes accrete. This was the rationale for and is the principal message of this meeting.

## Acknowledgements

I thank Brad Peterson for the invitation to attend this meeting, his patience and for constructive critique of the first draft of this summary. Support under NSF contract AST 99-00866 is gratefully acknowledged.


format: text

text:
# Earth effects on supernova neutrinos and their implications for neutrino parameters

## 1 Introduction

A type II supernova is a prodigious source of neutrinos. Almost all of the binding energy, $`E_b10^{53}`$erg, is radiated away as neutrinos. These neutrinos carry information about both the core collapse process and intrinsic properties of the neutrinos. In fact, the detection of the neutrino burst from SN1987A  induced a number of studies on these areas .

Neutrino oscillation, which is confirmed by the observations of solar and atmospheric neutrinos, can affect the energy spectrum of supernova neutrino drastically. Neutrinos of all flavors are produced in the high dense region of the iron core  and interact with matter before emerging from the supernova. The presence of non-zero masses and mixing in vacuum among various neutrino flavors results in strong matter dependent effects, including conversion from one flavor to another. Hence, the observed neutrino flux in the detectors may be dramatically different for certain neutrino flavors and for certain values of mixing parameters, due to neutrino oscillation. Similar matter effect occurs in the Earth, too.

These oscillation effects on neutrino spectra depend strongly on neutrino oscillation parameters: mixing angles and mass spectrum. Some of them are firmly established but others are not. All the existing experimental results on the atmospheric neutrinos can be well described in terms of the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ vacuum oscillation with mass squared difference and the mixing angle given by ,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{atm}}^27\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta 1.$$
(1)
In contrast, for the observed $`\nu _e`$ suppression of solar neutrinos four solutions are still possible : large mixing angle (LMA), small mixing angle (SMA), low $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ (LOW), and vacuum oscillation (VO).

$`(\mathrm{LMA})\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ $``$ $`(110)\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{}0.70.95`$ (2)
$`(\mathrm{SMA})\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ $``$ $`(410)\times 10^6\mathrm{eV}^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{}(210)\times 10^3`$ (3)
$`(\mathrm{LOW})\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ $``$ $`(0.52)\times 10^7\mathrm{eV}^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{}0.91.0`$ (4)
$`(\mathrm{VO})\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ $``$ $`(0.66)\times 10^{10}\mathrm{eV}^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{}0.81.0`$ (5)
For $`\theta _{13}`$, the mixing angle between mass eigenstate $`\nu _1,\nu _3`$, only upper bound has been known from reactor experiment  and combined three generation analysis . Also the nature of neutrino mass hierarchy (normal or inverted) is still a matter of controversy.

Supernova is a completely different system from solar, atmospheric, accelerator, and reactor neutrinos in regard to neutrino energy and flavor of produced neutrinos, propagation length and so forth. Then neutrino emission from a supernova is expected to give valuable information that can not be obtained from neutrinos from other sources.

There have been some studies on the supernova neutrino as an oscillation parameter prober. Dighe and Smirnov  have studied the role the supernova neutrinos can play in the reconstruction of the neutrino mass spectrum. Dutta et al.  showed numerically that the events involving oxygen targets increase dramatically when there is neutrino mixing. We have shown in our previous work  that the degeneracy of the solutions of the solar neutrino problem can be broken by the combination of the SK and SNO detections of a future Galactic supernova.

The Earth effects have also been studied by several authors. In our previous work , we analyzed numerically the time-integrated energy spectra in a simple case and found the possibility to probe the mixing angle $`\theta _{13}`$. Lunardini and Smirnov  performed a study of the Earth effects taking the arrival directions of neutrinos into account and showed that studies of the Earth effects will select the solution of the solar neutrino problem, probe the mixing $`U_{e3}`$ and identify the hierarchy of the neutrino mass spectrum.

In this paper, we perform a detailed study of the Earth matter effects on supernova neutrinos and show that the detection of Earth matter effects allows us to probe $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ more accurately than by solar neutrino observations.

## 2 Three-flavor formulation

In the framework of three-flavor neutrino oscillation, the time evolution equation of the neutrino wave functions can be written as follows:

$$i\frac{d}{dt}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\nu _e& & \\ \nu _\mu & & \\ \nu _\tau & & \end{array}\right)=H(t)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\nu _e& & \\ \nu _\mu & & \\ \nu _\tau & & \end{array}\right)$$
(6)
$`H(t)U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2/2E& 0\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2/2E\end{array}\right)U^1+\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A(t)& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),`$ (13)
where $`A(t)=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_e(t)`$, $`G_F`$ is Fermi constant, $`n_e(t)`$ is the electron number density, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{ij}^2`$ is the mass squared differences, and $`E`$ is the neutrino energy. In case of antineutrino, the sign of $`A(t)`$ changes. Here U is a unitary 3 $`\times `$ 3 mixing matrix in vacuum:

$$U=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c_{12}c_{13}& s_{12}c_{13}& s_{13}\\ s_{12}c_{23}c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}& c_{12}c_{23}s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}& s_{23}c_{13}\\ s_{12}s_{23}c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}& c_{12}s_{23}s_{12}c_{23}s_{13}& c_{23}c_{13}\end{array}\right),$$
(14)
where $`s_{ij}=\mathrm{sin}\theta _{ij},c_{ij}=\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij}`$ for $`i,j=1,2,3(i<j)`$. We have here put the CP phase equal to zero in the CKM matrix.

In $`H(t)`$, the first term is the origin of vacuum oscillation, and the second term A(t), which is the only time-dependent term in H(t), is the origin of MSW effect.

## 3 Determination of neutrino oscillation parameters

In this section we summarize our previous studies on the effects of neutrino oscillation on supernova neutrino and show that future detection of neutrino from Galactic supernova allows us to break the degeneracy of the solutions of the solar neutrino problem and to probe $`\theta _{13}`$.

In , three-flavor neutrino oscillation in the star is studied. We calculated the expected event rate and energy spectra, and their time evolution at the SuperKamiokande(SK) and the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory(SNO). For the calculations of them, we used a realistic neutrino burst model based on numerical simulations of supernova explosions  and employed a realistic density profile based on a presupernova model . The distance between the supernova and the Earth was set to 10kpc.

By solving numerically the differential equations (6) from the center of supernova to the outside of supernova, we obtained conversion probabilities $`P(\nu _{\alpha \beta })`$, i.e., probabilities that a neutrino of flavor $`\alpha `$ produced at the center of supernova is observed as a neutrino of flavor $`\beta `$.

We assumed normal mass hierarchy and used four sets of mixing parameters shown in table 1. Here $`\theta _{12}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ correspond to the solutions of solar neutrino problem and $`\theta _{23}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$ correspond to the solution of atmospheric neutrino problem. The value of $`\theta _{13}`$ is taken to be consistent with current upper bound from reactor experiment . These models are named after their values of mixing angle: LMA-L means that $`\theta _{12}`$ is set to be LMA of solar neutrino problem and $`\theta _{13}`$ is large.

We then found that when there is neutrino oscillation, neutrino spectra are harder than those in absence of neutrino oscillation. This is because average energies of $`\nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ are smaller than those of $`\nu _x`$(either of $`\nu _\mu `$, $`\nu _\tau `$, and their antineutrinos), and neutrino oscillation produces high energy $`\nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ which was originally $`\nu _x`$. This feature was used as a criterion of magnitude of neutrino oscillation. We calculated the following ratio of events at both detectors:

$$R_{\mathrm{SK}}\frac{\text{number of events at }30<E<70\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}}{\text{number of events at }5<E<20\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}}$$
(15)
$$R_{\mathrm{SNO}}\frac{\text{number of events at }25<E<70\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}}{\text{number of events at }5<E<20\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}}$$
(16)
The plots of $`R_{\mathrm{SK}}`$ vs. $`R_{\mathrm{SNO}}`$ are shown in Fig.1. The errorbars include only statistical errors. The difference among the following three groups is clear: (1)LMA-L and LMA-S, (2)SMA-L, and (3)SMA-S and no oscillation.

In , the Earth effects on the energy spectra are studied using the result of . For mass squared differences in table 1, the supernova neutrinos arrive at Earth in mass eigenstates. This is because neutrino eigenstates with different masses lose coherence on the way from the supernova to the Earth. Since the eigenstates of Hamiltonian in matter differ from the mass eigenstates in vacuum, supernova neutrinos begin to oscillate again in the Earth. The numbers of neutrinos of each mass eigenstates at the surface of the Earth are determined by neutrino oscillation in the supernova .

We analyzed numerically the time-integrated energy spectra of neutrino in a mantle-core-mantle step function model of the Earth’s matter density profile. We assumed that neutrino arrived at the detectors after traveling through the Earth along its diameter. We then found that the Earth matter affects the $`\nu _e`$ spectrum significantly in model LMA-S and $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ spectrum slightly in model LMA-S and LMA-L. In other models, there are no significant Earth effects. We concluded that we can differentiate LMA-L from LMA-S, by observing the Earth matter effect in $`\nu _e`$.

Thus we can distinguish all the four models in table 1. But there are some ambiguities besides statistical errors. One is the mass of the progenitor star. Supernovae with different progenitor masses may result in different original neutrino spectra and neutrino oscillation effects. Studies on this point are now in progress. But dependence of shape of neutrino spectra on progenitor mass is not so large  and we would still be able to distinguish the models.

Supernova model which we use does not consider rotation of the progenitor star. In general, however, stars rotate through their lives and recent numerical simulation indicates that the rotation facilitate supernova explosion . Rotation of the progenitor star can affect its density profile and the dynamics of the neutrino oscillation in supernova.

Another ambiguity is the direction of supernova. The trajectories of neutrinos change according to the location of the supernova, the position of the detector and the time $`t`$ of the day at which the burst arrives at the Earth . Fig 2 shows the dependence of the length $`d`$ of neutrino trajectory on the time $`t`$ for the three detectors, SK, SNO and LVD. $`d`$ is in unit of the diameter of the Earth. Neutrino trajectory can also be described by the nadir angle $`\theta _n`$ of the supernova with respect to the detector. In the next section, we perform a detailed study of the Earth matter effect.

## 4 Detailed study of the Earth matter effect

In this section, we concentrate on model LMA-S and discuss the dependence of the Earth matter effect on the distance which neutrinos travel in the Earth and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. We consider three detectors: SK, SNO and LVD. But energy spectra at SK and LVD in model LMA-L are the same as in model LMA-S, since most of the events at SK and LVD are induced by $`\overline{\nu }_e`$s which are influenced by the Earth matter in both LMA-L and LMA-S. The dependence on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ is expected because the oscillation length in the Earth between mass eigenstates $`\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _2`$ is comparable $`(1000\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m})`$ to the diameter of the Earth in LMA-S model .

Here we use the realistic Earth density profile , while we used step-like model in our previous work . By solving (6) along the Earth density profile numerically, we obtain conversion probability $`P_{\nu _i\nu _\alpha }`$, i.e. probability that $`i`$th mass eigenstate at the surface of the Earth is detected as neutrino of flavor $`\alpha `$. Then combining these probabilities with the result of neutrino oscillation in supernova , we obtain neutrino flux and at each detector.

### 4.1 neutrino events at SuperKamiokande

SuperKamiokande (SK) is a water Cherenkov detector with 32,000 ton pure water based at Kamioka in Japan. The relevant interactions of neutrinos with water are as follows:

$`\overline{\nu _e}+p`$ $``$ $`n+e^+(\mathrm{CC})`$ (17)
$`\nu _e+e^{}`$ $``$ $`\nu _e+e^{}(\mathrm{CC}\mathrm{and}\mathrm{NC})`$ (18)
$`\overline{\nu _e}+e^{}`$ $``$ $`\overline{\nu _e}+e^{}(\mathrm{CC}\mathrm{and}\mathrm{NC})`$ (19)
$`\nu _x+e^{}`$ $``$ $`\nu _x+e^{}(\mathrm{NC})`$ (20)
$`\nu _e+\mathrm{O}`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{F}+e^{}(\mathrm{CC})`$ (21)
$`\overline{\nu _e}+\mathrm{O}`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{N}+e^+(\mathrm{CC})`$ (22)
where CC and NC stand for charged current and neutral current interactions, respectively. For the cross sections of these interactions, we refer to .

SK is not available now due to the unfortunate accident  but is expected to be restored within the year. Since the number of PMTs will decrease to half the original, energy threshold and energy resolution will become worse. The detection efficiency is expected to be 90% at 8MeV. In the above interactions, the $`\overline{\nu _e}p`$ CC interaction \[Eq.(17)\] has the largest contribution to the detected events at SK. Hence the energy spectrum detected at SK (including all the reactions) is almost the same as the spectrum derived from the interaction Eq.(17) only.

### 4.2 neutrino events at SNO

Sudbury Neutrino Observatory(SNO) is a water $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{C}}`$herenkov detector based at Sudbury, Ontario. SNO is unique in its use of 1000 tons of heavy water, by which both the charged-current and neutral-current interactions can be detected. The interactions of neutrinos with heavy water are as follows,

$`\nu _e+d`$ $``$ $`p+p+e^{}(\mathrm{CC})`$ (23)
$`\overline{\nu _e}+d`$ $``$ $`n+n+e^+(\mathrm{CC})`$ (24)
$`\nu _x+d`$ $``$ $`n+p+\nu _x(\mathrm{NC})`$ (25)
$`\overline{\nu _x}+d`$ $``$ $`n+p+\overline{\nu _x}(\mathrm{NC})`$ (26)
The two interactions written in Eqs.(23) and (24) are detected when electrons emit $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{C}}`$herenkov light. These reactions produce electrons and positrons whose energies sensitive to the neutrino energy, and hence the energy spectra of electrons and positrons give us the information on the original neutrino flux. In this work, we mainly take into account these two charged current interactions, since the number of neutral current events does not change by neutrino oscillation. For the cross sections, we refer to . The efficiency of detection is set to be one, because we have no information about it.

The SNO detector has also 7,000 tons of light water which can be used to detect neutrinos. This can be considered to be a miniature of SuperKamiokande (32,000 tons of light water). Then the number of events detected by light water at SNO is 7/32 of that at SuperKamiokande.

### 4.3 neutrino events at LVD

The Large Volume Detector (LVD) in the Gran Sasso Underground Laboratory is a $`\nu `$ observatory mainly designed to study low energy neutrinos from gravitational stellar collapse. LVD consists of 2 kinds of detectors, namely: liquid scintillator, for a total mass of 1840 tons, and streamer tubes for a total surface of about $`7000\mathrm{m}^2`$.

The bulk of events is due to the capture reaction:

$$\overline{\nu }_e+pn+e^+n+pd+\gamma _{2.2\mathrm{MeV}}$$
(27)
Further, about $`5\%`$ of the events are due to neutral current interactions with 12C which deexcites emitting a 15.1 MeV $`\gamma `$. Moreover, $`3\%`$ of events are due to elastic scattering of all neutrino flavours on electrons, and less than $`1\%`$ to charged current interactions of $`\nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ with 12C nuclei. For the cross sections, we refer to . The appropriate detection efficiency curve is also taken into account .

### 4.4 nadir angle dependence of energy spectra

Fig.3, 4 and 5 shows the nadir angle dependence of neutrino spectrum at SK, SNO and LVD, respectively. Neutrino oscillation parameters are set to the values in model LMA-S except $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=2\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$. Since the oscillation lengths are comparable to the radius of the Earth, the Earth effects are strongly dependent on the nadir angle.

## 5 $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ dependence of energy spectra and determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$

### 5.1 method

Fig.6, 7 and 8 shows the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ dependence of energy spectrum at SK, SNO and LVD. Neutrino oscillation parameters are set to the values in model LMA-S except $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. Nadir angle is set to 0 degree. The larger $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ results in higher-frequency oscillation in the energy spectra with respect to the energy. This is because the neutrino oscillation length is proportional to the inverse of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$.

As can be seen, there is significant dependence of the Earth effect on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. Making use of this dependence, we can probe $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ by the observations of the supernova neutrino spectra more accurately than by the observations of solar neutrino, if neutrino oscillation parameters are as in model LMA-S.

We assume that the direction of the supernova is given by direct optical observations or by the experimental study of the neutrino scattering on electrons . Other parameters of neutrino oscillation except $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ are also assumed to be known with enough accuracy. But in fact, $`\theta _{23}`$ does not affect the Earth matter effects and $`\theta _{13}`$ affects only the magnitude of the Earth matter effects through the adiabaticity of the H-resonance in supernova envelope. If $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}\stackrel{<}{}10^5`$, the H-resonance is completely nonadiabatic for broad range of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$ and in this case the Earth matter effects do not depend on the value of $`\theta _{13}`$. So what we need with enough accuracy is $`\theta _{12}`$ only if we assume the H-resonance is completely nonadiabatic.

Comparing the observed neutrino spectra to the predicted spectra of various values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$, we can determine the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. We perform Monte Carlo simulation to obtain the expected observed spectra at each detector. Here we take statistical fluctuation in number of neutrino events and energy resolution of each detector into account. Energy spectra are then binned according to the energy resolution. For the value of the energy resolution, we refer to  but that of SK after restoration is expected to be $`\sqrt{2}`$ times as bad as before the accident. The energy resolution of each detector is shown in Fig.9.

The simulated spectrum is compared to the predicted spectrum with a $`\chi ^2`$ method. The definition of the reduced $`\chi ^2`$, which is a function with respect to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$, is,

$$\chi ^2(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2)=\frac{1}{d}\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\frac{(N_i^{\mathrm{sim}}N_i^{\mathrm{pre}}(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2))^2}{N_i^{\mathrm{pre}}(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2)},$$
(28)
where $`d`$ is the number of bins and $`N_i^{\mathrm{sim}}`$ and $`N_i^{\mathrm{pre}}(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2)`$ are the simulated and predicted number of events in $`i`$th bin, respectively. The $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ with the least $`\chi ^2(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2)`$ is considered to be the value determined by this method.

### 5.2 representative results

We make 1000 “supernovae” and “observe” the neutrino spectra assuming that the true value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ is $`4\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$. Fig.10 show the representative results of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ determination by the method described above. These are relative frequencies that the observed spectrum is identified with the theoretical spectrum with the various values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. The nadir angle is set to be 0 degree at each detector and the $`\chi ^2`$ method is performed with the data of each detector only.

As can be seen, if the supernova occur at the direction which the nadir angle is 0 degree at SK or SNO, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ can be determined with a high accuracy $`(4.00\pm 0.07)\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$ or $`(4.00\pm 0.20)\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$ in case of SK and SNO, respectively. However, in case of LVD, it is difficult to determine $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. The difference in the accuracy of determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ is due to the difference in the properties of the detectors. Here the properties of the detectors mean the energy resolution, the detectability of $`\nu _e`$ and the number of events.

Since the Earth effects are large in $`\nu _e`$ channel and relatively small in $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ channel, SK and LVD, at which most of events are $`\overline{\nu }_e`$, are disadvantageous. But the statistical error is very small at SK due to the large event number, $`10000`$ (10 kpc), and SK is the most efficient to identify the Earth effects. SNO is also efficient due to its high energy-resolution and detectability of $`\nu _e`$ although the number of events is small. Then LVD is not favorable for detecting the Earth effects. The properties of the detectors are summarized in the Table 2.

It should be noted that the effectiveness of determining $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ depend on the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ itself and nadir angle. These dependences are discussed in the following subsection.

### 5.3 determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$

Fig.11 shows the relative frequencies at SNO that the simulated spectrum based on the theoretical spectrum with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=2(\mathrm{solid}),4(\mathrm{dashed}),6(\mathrm{long}\mathrm{dashed})\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$ is identified with the theoretical spectrum with the various values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. The nadir angle is set to be 0 degree. When $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ is large, the oscillation in energy spectrum becomes rapid and then statistical errors make it difficult to identify the Earth effect and determine $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. However at SK, its large number of events allows us to determine $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ rather accurately irrespective of the true value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ (Fig.12).

Fig.13 shows the relative frequencies at SNO at various nadir angles: 15 (solid), 80 (dashed) and 85 (long-dashed). The value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ is set to be $`4\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$. Since the oscillation length of 60 MeV $`\nu `$ in Earth matter is $`6000`$km , the Earth effects do not appear unless nadir angle is smaller than $`80`$ degree.

Now we consider the problem, ’How accurately can we determine $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ when the true value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ and the arrival time of neutrinos are given?’

As is discussed above, when the nadir angle at SK is smaller than 80 degree (time $`=08`$ and $`1924`$ hour), the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ can be determined accurately using only the SK data irrespective of the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ in the allowed region of the solar neutrino problem. When the nadir angle is smaller than 80 degree at SNO and greater than 80 degree at SK (time $`=1019`$ hour), the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ can be determined accurately using only the SNO data if the true value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ is smaller than $`4\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$. However, if $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2>4\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, the single data of SNO is not sufficient. We performed then a $`\chi ^2`$ method combining data of various detectors for time $`=819`$ hour.

Fig.14 is the contour map of the probability that the value $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ can be determined with an accuracy equal to or better than $`\pm 0.5\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$. The probability is more than 0.7 for three fifths of the time-$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ plane.

## 6 Discussion and conclusion

In this paper, we performed a detailed study of the Earth matter effects on supernova neutrinos with neutrino oscillation parameter LMA and small $`\theta _{13}`$. We showed that we can probe $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ accurately by comparing the observed energy spectra to the predicted one. In much of the time-$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ plane, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ can be determined with an accuracy equal to or better than $`\pm 0.5\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$. When SK detect neutrinos from supernova at 10kpc which traveled through the Earth (nadir angle $`<`$ 80 degree), $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ can be determined with an accuracy of $`10\%`$. This accuracy is amazing compared to that from current solar neutrino experiments, which determine only the order of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. But as we stated before, $`\theta _{12}`$ and the direction of the supernova need to be known with enough accuracy. How much our results are affected by the uncertainties of the other parameters will be our future work.

$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ can also be probed by KamLAND experiment. If the solution of solar neutrino problem is LMA, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ is expected to be known by three-year data-taking as precisely as by supernova neutrino discussed above. There is some possibility that we can know it from a Galactic supernova before the completion of the KamLAND experiment. Even if the results of KamLAND experiment is earlier than future galactic supernova, it is important to cross-check the results of ground-based experiments by astrophysical observations. Furthermore, it is meaningful itself to notice that we can obtain implication for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ from supernova neutrino.

We assumed in this paper that the neutrino spectra at the surface of the Earth were given. But since the original fluxes based on the numerical supernova model have some ambiguities, the sensitivity to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ might be worse than our estimation. Estimation of uncertainties of the numerical supernova model is hard because there is currently no successful simulation other than that by the Lawrence Livermore group . There are, however, some studies about the temperatures of the produced neutrinos. According to them, they are typically,

$$E_{\nu _e}=1012\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V},E_{\overline{\nu }_e}=1417\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V},E_{\nu _x}=2427\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}.$$
(29)
On the other hand, in the model that we used, they are

$$E_{\nu _e}13\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V},E_{\overline{\nu }_e}16\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V},E_{\nu _x}23\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V},$$
(30)
although the spectra are not exactly the Fermi-Dirac distribution. These values seem close to the typical values and the analysis taking these uncertainties into account will be performed in our future work.

Furthermore, supernova neutrino spectra depend on the mass of the progenitor star. However, we will be able to reconstruct the neutrino fluxes at the surface of the Earth from the data from the detector which detect the neutrinos directly from the supernova. Although the statistical errors then become larger and the accuracy of the determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ becomes worse, the Earth effects on the supernova neutrinos will still give valuable information which cannot be obtained from the other neutrino sources.

## 7 Acknowledgments

We would like to thank A.Suzuki for advice on cross sections of neutrino interaction in scintillator experiment. We also thank Super Kamiokande people including Y. Totsuka, Y. Suzuki, T.Kajita, M. Nakahata and Y. Fukuda for showing the most recent SK data, and fruitful discussion. This work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research provided by the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture of Japan through Research Grant No.07CE2002.


text:
# Pair Phase Fluctuations and the Pseudogap

## Abstract

The single-particle density of states and the tunneling conductance are studied for a two-dimensional BCS-like Hamiltonian with a $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-gap and phase fluctuations. The latter are treated by a classical Monte Carlo simulation of an $`XY`$ model. Comparison of our results with recent scanning tunneling spectra of Bi-based high-$`T_c`$ cuprates supports the idea that the pseudogap behavior observed in these experiments can be understood as arising from phase fluctuations of a $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ pairing gap whose amplitude forms on an energy scale set by $`T_c^{MF}`$ well above the actual superconducting transition.

Intensive research has focused on the pseudogap regime, which is observed in the high-$`T_c`$ cuprates below a characteristic temperature that is higher than the transition temperature $`T_c`$. It occurs in a number of different experiments as a suppression of low-frequency spectral weight Loe96 ; Din96 ; Lor93 ; Tak91 ; Ore99 ; Ren98M ; Kug01 ; Wan02 . This striking pseudogap behavior initiated a variety of proposals as to its origin Cha01 ; SK95 ; Pin97 ; EK95 ; Ran92 ; Fra98 ; Kwo99 ; VTxx , since the answer to this question may be a key ingredient for the understanding of high-$`T_c`$ superconductivity. At present, there is no agreement as to which of these proposals is correct. In part, this reflects the possibility that there may be different pseudogap phenomena operating in different temperature and doping regimes. In part, this is because of the difficulty in determining the experimental consequences of the various theoretical proposals. In this paper, we focus on the pseudogap phenomena observed in scanning tunneling spectroscopy measurements Ren98M ; Kug01  on $`Bi_2Sr_2CaCu_2O_{8+\delta }`$ (Bi2212) and $`Bi_2Sr_2CuO_{6+\delta }`$ (Bi2201). We provide a detailed numerical solution of a minimal model which, however, contains the key ideas of the cuprate phase fluctuation scenario: that is, we explore the notion that the pseudogap observed in these experiments arises from phase fluctuations of the gap Ran92 ; EK95 ; Fra98 ; Kwo99 ; Ren98M ; Kug01 . In this scenario, below a mean field temperature scale $`T_c^{MF}`$, a $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-wave gap amplitude is assumed to develop. However, the superconducting transition is suppressed to a considerably lower temperature $`T_c`$ by phase fluctuations EK95 . In the intermediate temperature regime between $`T_c^{MF}`$ and $`T_c`$, the phase fluctuations of the gap give rise to pseudogap phenomena.

We will study as a model for phase fluctuations a two-dimensional BCS Hamiltonian

$$H=t\underset{ij,\sigma }{}(c_{i\sigma }^{}c_{j\sigma }+c_{j\sigma }^{}c_{i\sigma })\frac{1}{4}\underset{i\delta }{}(\mathrm{\Delta }_{i\delta }\mathrm{\Delta }_{i\delta }^{}+\mathrm{\Delta }_{i\delta }^{}\mathrm{\Delta }_{i\delta }),$$
(1)
where $`c_{i\sigma }^{}`$ creates an electron of spin $`\sigma `$ on the $`i^{th}`$ site and $`t`$ denotes an effective nearest-neighbor hopping. The $`ij`$ sum is over nearest-neighbor sites of a 2D square lattice, and in the second term $`\delta `$ connects $`i`$ to its nearest-neighbor sites. In Eq. (1) one could, of course, add a next-near-neighbor hopping $`t^{}`$ and a chemical potential term. Here, for simplicity and to refrain from further approximations, we have set $`t^{}`$ and the chemical potential equal to zero comm . We will assume that below a mean field temperature $`T_c^{MF}`$, a $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-gap amplitude forms with $`\mathrm{\Delta }2T_c^{MF}`$. The detailed temperature dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is not central, as we are not interested in the region around $`T_c^{MF}`$ where the pseudogap closes. The important point for our calculations is simply that a $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-gap amplitude of order $`2T_c^{MF}`$ in magnitude forms as $`T`$ drops below $`T_c^{MF}`$ so that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{i\delta }^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}c_i^{}c_{i+\delta }^{}c_i^{}c_{i+\delta }^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_{i\delta }},$$
(2)
with

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{i\delta }=\{\begin{array}{cc}(\phi _i+\phi _{i+\delta })/2\mathrm{for}\hfill & \delta \text{ in x-direction,}\hfill \\ (\phi _i+\phi _{i+\delta })/2+\pi \mathrm{for}\hfill & \delta \text{ in y-direction.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(3)
We then determine the fluctuating phases from a Monte Carlo calculation using an effective 2D $`XY`$-free energy

$$F\left[\phi _i\right]=E_1\underset{ij}{}\mathrm{cos}\left(\phi _i\phi _j\right),$$
(4)
with $`E_1`$ adjusted to set the Kosterlitz-Thouless KTxx  transition temperature $`T_{KT}`$ equal to some fraction of $`T_c^{MF}`$. Specifically, for the present calculation we will set $`T_{KT}T_c^{MF}/5`$. Here, we have the recent scanning tunneling results Kug01  for $`Bi_2Sr_2CuO_{6+\delta }`$ in mind, where $`T_c10K`$ and the pseudogap regime extends to 50 or 60K, which we take as $`T_c^{MF}`$.

In principle, the $`XY`$ action, which determines the fluctuations of the phases, arises from integrating out the shorter wavelength fermion degrees of freedom including those responsible for the local pair amplitude and the internal $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ structure of the pairs. In general this leads to a $`\tau `$-dependent quantum action as well as a coupling energy $`E_1`$, whose temperature dependence is determined by the many-body interactions of the microscopic system. There have been various discussions regarding the regime over which a classical action is appropriate for the cuprates Eme95 ; Par00 ; Ben01 . Here, however, we will proceed phenomenologically using the classical action, Eq. (4), and neglecting the temperature dependence of $`E_1`$. Furthermore, we will use the 2D form of Eq. (4). One knows that for the layered cuprates there is a crossover from 2D to 3D $`XY`$ behavior near $`T_c`$ Ref1 . Our point of view is that away from this crossover regime, a 2D model is certainly suitable and on the finite size lattice that we will study, the system becomes effectively ordered as $`T`$ approaches $`T_{KT}`$ and the correlation length exceeds the lattice size. So $`E_1`$ will simply be used to set $`T_{KT}T_c`$. A crucial physical point that will be taken into account in our analysis is that the basic length scale of the $`\phi `$-field is larger than the Cooper-pair size $`\xi _0`$. Thus, although this is a clearly simplified model, we believe that its solution provides useful insight into the experimental consequences of the phase fluctuation pseudogap scenario. It is the central aim of this paper to verify this by comparison with the STM experiments and reproduction of some of their characteristic and salient features.

The calculation of the density of states for an $`L\times L`$ periodic lattice now proceeds as follows Ref ; Dag98 . A set of phases $`\{\phi _i\}`$ is generated by a Monte Carlo (MC) importance sampling procedure, in which the probability of a given configuration is proportional to $`\mathrm{exp}(F[\phi _i]/T)`$ with $`F`$ given by Eq. (4). With $`\{\phi _i\}`$ given, the Hamiltonian of Eq. (1) is diagonalized and the single particle density of states $`N(\omega ,T,\{\phi _i\})`$ is calculated. Further MC $`\{\phi _i\}`$ configurations are generated and an average density of states $`N(\omega ,T)=N(\omega ,T,\{\phi _i\})`$ at a given temperature is determined.

As noted above, our point of view is that the $`XY`$ action, used in the MC simulations, in principle arises from integrating out the shorter wavelength fermion degrees of freedom up to the scale of the Cooper-pair size, so that only the center of mass pair phase fluctuations are important. Thus, the scale of the lattice spacing for $`F[\phi _i]`$ is set by the pair size coherence length $`\xi _0v_F/\pi \mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ and is of order 3 to 4 times the basic $`Cu`$-$`Cu`$ lattice spacing of the fermion Hamiltonian Eq. (1). Now the computationally intensive part of the calculation is the diagonalization of $`H`$ and in order to get meaningful results as $`T`$ approaches $`T_{KT}`$, we found it necessary to average over a large number of Monte Carlo $`\{\phi _i\}`$ configurations. This requires that some compromise be made with respect to the lattice size. The results, we will present, are for a $`32\times 32`$ Hamiltonian lattice. However, if we were to take $`\xi _04`$ lattice spacings, this would lead to only an $`8\times 8`$ lattice for the $`\phi _i`$ simulations. This would not allow a sufficient range for the Kosterlitz-Thouless phase coherence length to grow as $`T`$ approaches $`T_{KT}`$. Thus, we have chosen to set $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1.0t`$ giving $`\xi _01`$ so that the $`\phi _i`$ simulation can be carried out on the same $`L\times L`$ lattice that is used for the diagonalization of $`H`$. The important physical point is that this procedure effectively cuts off phase fluctuations on a scale less than the Cooper-pair size, $`\xi _0`$. Thus, the phase coherence length is always larger than the Cooper-pair size when $`T`$ is less than $`T_c^{MF}`$. Consequently, our results differ from earlier work Lam01 , which found that the pseudogap regime due to fluctuating phases extended only about 20% above $`T_c`$, in contrast to the Bi tunneling experiments Ren98M ; Kug01  and the recent Nernst-effect results Wan02 . In the work of Ref. Lam01 , parameters were used which set the basic scale of the phase correlation length to be much smaller than $`\xi _0`$ and, therefore, the phase correlation length exceeded $`\xi _0`$ only in a narrow temperature region set by a fraction of $`T_{KT}`$. We believe that this is not the correct phenomenology.

Results for $`N(\omega ,T)`$ are shown in Fig. 1.

For each temperature we have generated up to $`25,000`$ independent MC $`\{\phi _i\}`$ configurations, diagonalized $`H`$ for each of these configurations, and computed $`N(\omega ,T,\{\phi _i\})`$. In these calculations, as discussed above, we have set $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1.0t`$ corresponding to $`T_c^{MF}0.5t`$ and selected $`E_1`$ so that $`T_{KT}=0.1t`$ Tkt . In order to reduce finite-size effects, we employ a very effective scheme recently suggested by F. F. Assaad assaad .

For $`T>T_c^{MF}`$, the gap amplitude vanishes and the density of states exhibits the usual Van Hove peak at $`\omega =0`$. For $`T<T_c^{MF}`$, the presence of a finite gap amplitude gives rise to a pseudogap whose size is set by $`2\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then, as $`T`$ approaches $`T_{KT}`$ and the $`XY`$ phase correlation length rapidly increases, coherence peaks evolve, the separation of which is determined by $`2\mathrm{\Delta }`$. An important point is that the scale in temperature over which the evolution of the coherence peaks occurs, is set by some fraction of $`T_{KT}`$ which means that it appears suddenly on a scale set by $`T_c^{MF}`$.

An effective correlation length $`\xi (T)`$, extracted by fitting an exponential form to the correlation function

$$C(\mathrm{})=e^{i\phi _{i+\mathrm{}}}e^{i\phi _i}$$
(5)
is plotted versus $`T`$ in Fig. 2 for our $`32\times 32`$ lattice.

The rapid onset of $`\xi (T)`$ as $`T_{KT}`$ is approached is clearly seen. It is this sudden increase of $`\xi (T)`$ that is responsible for the appearance of the coherence peaks as $`T`$ approaches $`T_{KT}`$. This effect is further enhanced by the $`2D`$ to $`3D`$ crossover that occurs in the actual materials.

In order to compare these results for $`N(\omega ,T)`$ with scanning tunneling spectra $`dI/dV`$, we have calculated $`dI(V,T)/dV`$ using the standard quasi-particle expression for the tunneling current,

$$\frac{dI(V,T)}{dV}N(\omega )\frac{f(\omega V)}{V}𝑑\omega .$$
(6)
Here, $`f(\omega )=(\mathrm{exp}(\omega /T)+1)^1`$ is the usual Fermi factor. Results for $`dI(V,T)/dV`$ are displayed in Fig. 3.

The effect of the Fermi factors is to provide a thermal smoothing of the quasi-particle density of states over a region of order $`2T`$. This becomes significant at the higher temperatures and the prominent pseudogap dependence of $`N(\omega ,T)`$ seen in Fig. 1 is smoothed out in $`dI/dV`$. In Fig. 4, $`dI/dV`$ results are shown as solid curves for $`T=0.75T_{KT}`$ (Fig. 4a), $`T=T_{KT}`$ (Fig. 4b) and $`T=2T_{KT}`$ (Fig. 4c).

The dashed curve is for $`T=T_c^{MF}5T_{KT}`$. One sees that the size of the pseudogap scales with the spacing between the coherence peaks and evolves continuously out of the superconducting state. The pseudogap persists over a large temperature range measured in units of $`T_{KT}`$, becoming smoothed out by the thermal effects as $`T`$ approaches $`T_c^{MF}`$ and vanishing above $`T_c^{MF}`$.

Our numerical results for $`dI(V,T)/dV`$ are similar to recent scanning tunneling measurements of Bi2212 and Bi2201 Ren98M ; Kug01 . Also in these experiments the superconducting gap for $`T<T_{KT}`$ evolves continuously into the pseudogap regime, which extends up to $`T=T_c^{MF}`$. The coherence peaks appear suddenly as $`T_{KT}`$ is approached. At higher temperatures, the pseudogap fills in rather than closing and the temperature range associated with the pseudogap regime can be large compared with the size of the superconducting regime.

Summarizing, in order to develop a more quantitative understanding for the role of phase fluctuations, we have provided a numerical solution of a simplified model which, nevertheless, contains the key ideas of the cuprate phase fluctuation pseudogap scenario. Here the center of mass pair-phase fluctuations of a BCS $`d`$-wave model were determined from a classical 2D $`XY`$ action by means of a Monte Carlo simulation. The resulting tunneling conductance ($`dI/dV`$) reproduces characteristic and salient features of recent STM studies of Bi2212 and Bi2201 suggesting that the pseudogap behavior observed in these experiments arises from phase fluctuations of the $`d_{x2y2}`$-pairing gap.

We would like to acknowledge useful discussions with S. A. Kivelson and A. Paramekanti. This work was supported by the DFG under Grant No. Ha 1537/16-2 and AR 324/3-1, by the Bavaria California Technology Center (BaCaTeC), the superconducting project KONWHIR OOPCV and by the U. S. Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG03-85ER45197. The calculations were carried out at the high-performance computing centers HLRS (Stuttgart) and LRZ (München).


text:
# Can X-Ray Jets Be Cosmic Beacons?

## 1 Introduction

PKS 0637–752, the first celestial X-ray target of the Chandra X-ray Observatory, revealed a surprisingly strong X-ray jet coincident with the previously known radio jet (Schwartz et al., 2000). The great difficulty in explaining the X-ray emission *and* allowing the magnetic field and relativistic electrons to be near equipartition, led to suggestions (Celotti et al., 2001; Tavecchio et al., 2000) that the extended jet structure was in bulk relativistic motion with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ 10 on scales greater than 100 kpc. With Chandra detection of X-ray jets soon to be in the tens of objects, models for at least 3C 273 (Sambruna et al., 2001), and 3C 371 (Pesce et al., 2001) also call for large scale relativistic motions.

We point out here that if relativistic beaming is common, we should see X-ray jets from those sources pointed toward us *anywhere in the universe*. Even powerful unbeamed sources may be seen at all redshifts, if their intrinsic magnetic fields are somewhat less than the typical values $`2\times 10^4`$. This follows from the standard relation that the ratio of IC power to synchrotron power is the ratio of the energy density of target photons to the magnetic field energy density (Felten and Morrison, 1966). The CMB energy density increases with redshift according to $`(1+z)^4`$, (Fig. 2). This factor compensates for the decrease of surface brightness due to the expanding universe. X-ray jets are resolved by Chandra and will always be resolved (on-axis) anywhere in the universe (Fig. 2).

As the jets maintain their apparent surface brightness, they can even outshine the quasar cores. Such a case might be speculated for PKS 2215+020, at z=3.572, where ROSAT detects an unusually high X-ray to optical flux ratio (Siebert and Brinkmann, 1998). Other cases should occur among the distant radio emitting Sloan Survey quasars (Fan et al., 2001).

## 2 Observational Implications

Jets may be displaced by $`5^{\prime \prime }`$ to $`10^{\prime \prime }`$ from the optical object which emits them. They may therefore be blank fields within the best location capability of ROSAT, Chandra, and XMM/Newton. They might also be incorrect identifications of chance coincidences with optical objects. Jets require $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}^{\prime \prime }`$ angular resolution for clear identification. If resolved, the jet should point toward the AGN. Algorithms to detect extended sources for telescopes with poorer resolution, e.g. when more than $`5^{}`$ offaxis in Chandra, must fit to a linear shape, *not* to a circularly symmetric shape, for optimum efficiency.

## 3 What Can We Learn?

* Cosmogony and Jet Physics

+ Discover distant, early activity in the universe.
    + Verify the common occurrence of relativistic beaming on 100 kpc scales. If this occurs, X-ray jets from such objects are certain to be seen at any redshift at which they exist.
    + Is the CMB the limiting dynamical factor in radio lobe and jet formation? The X-rays are produced with electrons of $`\gamma 1000/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, which will have lifetimes decreasing from $`10^8\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`10^5\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ years, for redshifts z=1 to 10, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the bulk Lorentz factor of the jet.
    + Are jets established before the accretion luminosity in the core becomes significant? (In this case there might be no optical counterpart to an X-ray jet.)
    + Are there radio quiet X-ray jets? This could happen if “radio” electrons at higher $`\gamma `$ have lost their energy to gamma rays, or if larger jet structures can transport upwards of $`10^{46}`$ erg s<sup>-1</sup> while $`B10^5`$ Gauss.
    + Do jets produce an appreciable component of the X-ray background? Although the diffuse X-ray background clearly arises from AGN, there are significant implications for producing the observed spectral shape, and for the mix of absorbed and unabsorbed AGN.
* Cosmology

+ Measure the temperature of the cosmic microwave background *in situ*.
    + Verify the decrease of surface brightness according to $`(1+z)^4`$ (Tolman effect; (Sandage, 1961; Sandage and Lubin, 2001)).

## 4 Conclusions

We should vigorously search for distant X-ray jets in both wide field and deep field surveys. Wide field surveys will discover the relatively rare but bright objects such as PKS 0637-752, if the explanation of relativistic beaming with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }10`$ occurs in Nature. If relativistic beaming is not common, then deep surveys will detect weak X-ray jets from *all* radio jet sources at redshifts 3 to 10, *if* they exist!

We acknowledge NASA contract NAS8-39073 to the Chandra X-ray Center.