text:
# CERN to Gran Sasso; An ideal distance for superbeam? Talk presented at 7th International Workshop on Topics in Astroparticle and Underground Physics (TAUP2001), Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso, Italy, September 8-12, 2001.

## 1 Introduction

Exploring the structure of lepton flavor mixing and the neutrino mass pattern is one of the most challenging goals of contemporary particle physics. Among other things, the least known is the (1-3) sector of the MNS matrix, the angle $`\theta _{13}`$, the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$, and the CP violating angle $`\delta `$. (See e.g., ref. .)

We have explored in a series of papers  the features of interplay between the CP phase and matter effect, and tried to develop strategies for measurement of lepton CP violation in long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments. See also ref.  for related works. Along the line of thought, we have introduced recently a powerful tool called “CP trajectory diagram in bi-probability space” which allows us a separate pictorial representation of the genuine CP and the matter effects . We pointed out that an ambiguity exists in determination of these parameters in a correlated way ($`\delta `$ $``$ sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$).

We address here the issue of an in situ simultaneous determination of $`\delta `$ and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$ in a single experiment. In a companion article , which is a contribution to Proceedings of NuFACT01, a concise summary of the idea of CP trajectory diagram and its use is given and the principle of optimizing beam energy is discussed.

Let us start with a brief remark on the more generic feature of the ambiguity problem.

## 2 Clover-leaf ambiguity

If the value of $`\theta _{13}`$ is unknown, there exists another ambiguity in a correlation ($`\delta \theta _{13}`$), as pointed out in ref. . Together with the ambiguity we have uncovered, there exists the combined ambiguity which can be as large as four-fold. We now demonstrate that it can be described in a simple picturesque way by using the CP trajectory diagram.

In fig. 1 drawn is the CP trajectory diagram for four values of the mixing parameters which are given in the caption of fig. 1 assuming, for simplicity, neutrino beam with the Gaussian type energy distribution as used in our recent work . The point of fig. 1 is that the four-fold solutions are possible for given oscillation probabilities of $`P(\nu )P(\nu _\mu \nu _e)`$ and $`P(\overline{\nu })P(\overline{\nu }_\mu \overline{\nu }_e)`$, both at about 1.1 % in fig. 1. One notices from fig. 1 that the name ”clover-leaf ambiguity” by which the ambiguity is referred at TAUP2001 is quite natural and appealing.

## 3 Optimal distance for measuring the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$

Now we turn to the discussion of our original question, i.e., how to resolve the ($`\delta `$ $``$ sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$) ambiguity. Since the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$ can be determined by measuring interference between the vacuum and the matter effects, it is natural to think about neutrino oscillation experiments which utilize longer baselines. One can think of these possibilities in the context of either

(i) a single detector experiment for in situ simultaneous determination of $`\delta `$ and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$, or

(ii) a two-detector experiment with second supplemental detector which is primarily devoted for determination of the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$.

The next question to ask is; what is the optimal baseline length for this purpose? It would be the best situation if we can tune the distance in such a way that the matter effect is relatively enhanced compared to the genuine CP violating effect. To quantify the request we define the asymmetry parameter defined by using the ratio $`R(P)P(\nu _\mu \nu _e)/P(\overline{\nu }_\mu \overline{\nu }_e)`$ as

$$A(R)\frac{R(P;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2>0)R(P;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2<0)}{R(P;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2>0)+R(P;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2<0)},$$
(1)
where the probabilities are averaged over Gaussian type energy distributions. By using the ratio in defining the asymmetry it is insensitive to the values of the mixing parameters, in particular to $`\delta `$.

In fig. 2, the asymmetry $`A(R)`$ is plotted for $`\delta =\pi /2`$ with the same mixing parameters as in fig. 1, apart from fixing $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$ to be 0.05. One notices that the asymmetry is large at $`L=600700`$ km, and at $`10001500`$ km for $`E1`$ GeV. It can be explicitly shown that the asymmetry is indeed very insensitive to $`\delta `$ . Therefore, the baselines $`L700`$ km, and at $`1000`$ km look promising. We take the former option and examine the feature of CP-matter interplay by using the CP trajectory diagram.

## 4 Longer baseline option; single vs. two-detector methods

In fig. 3, we present (a) CP trajectory diagram in bi-probability plane for neutrino beam with the Gaussian type energy distribution with averaged energy $`E=1.5`$ GeV and baseline distance $`L=700`$ km, and (b) CP trajectory diagram on number of events plane with the same baseline for appearance channels $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_\mu \overline{\nu }_e`$.

One can clearly see in fig. 3a that the two trajectories corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2>0`$ (solid line) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2<0`$ (dashed line) are well separated with each other. Therefore, it is in principle possible to carry out an in situ simultaneous measurement of $`\delta `$ and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$ in such a baseline length. It is amusing to note that the length just corresponds to either CERN $``$ Gran Sasso, or Fermilab $``$ Soudan mine distances.

In fig. 3b, we assume a water Cherenkov detector of fiducial volume 0.9 Mton, and 4 MW of proton beam power which is planned in the JHF experiment in its phase II . We use the narrow band (NB) 3 GeV beam whose neutrino energy peaks at $`E1.4`$ GeV considered in ref. , but with intensity multiplied by factor of 3. It is to mimic the off-axis (OA) beam which is designed for $`E1.4`$ GeV, a bit of higher energy than the one actually prepared for the JHF experiment. Two (six) years of running is assumed for neutrino (antineutrino) channel. We refer ref.  for a detailed explanation of how the computation of number of events is done.

As you see in fig. 3b, the numbers of events are sizable, some 1000 $``$ 2000, though not gigantic. Resultant 3 $`\sigma `$ contour is small enough so that simultaneous measurement of $`\delta `$ and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$ seems feasible, justifying the title of this talk.

If the detector at baseline $`L=700`$ km cannot be so massive by some reasons, or if the practical site requires much longer distance, then it can be viewed as a secondary (farthest) detector, assuming that the primary far detector (e.g., Hyper-Kamiokande  in the case of the JHF experiment) already exists. In this case, the secondary detector is primarily for measurement of the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2`$ and the requirement of statistics can be relaxed.

Finally, it was pointed out in the talk that while the present tunnel in the Gran Sasso Laboratory is too small to accommodate a megaton water Cherenkov detector, a 180 kton ”proto-type” is ready to be created upon filling water into the whole tunnel!

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Brazilian funding agency FAPESP, and by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research in Priority Areas No. 12047222, Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.


format: text

text:
# New black holes in the brane-world?

## Abstract

It is known that the Einstein field equations in five dimensions admit more general spherically symmetric black holes on the brane than four-dimensional general relativity. We propose two families of analytic solutions (with $`g_{tt}g_{rr}^1`$), parameterized by the ADM mass and the PPN parameter $`\beta `$, which reduce to Schwarzschild for $`\beta =1`$. Agreement with observations requires $`|\beta 1||\eta |1`$. The sign of $`\eta `$ plays a key role in the global causal structure, separating metrics which behave like Schwarzschild ($`\eta <0`$) from those similar to Reissner-Nordström ($`\eta >0`$). In the latter case, we find a family of black hole space-times completely regular.

PACS: 04.70.-s, 04.70.Bw, 04.50.+h

In recent years there has been a renewed interest in models with extra dimensions in which the standard model fields are confined to our four-dimensional world viewed as a (infinitely thin) hypersurface (the brane) embedded in the higher-dimensional space-time (the bulk) where (only) gravity can propagate. Of particular interest are cases where the extra dimensions are infinitely extended but “warped” by the presence of a non-vanishing bulk cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ related to the (singular) vacuum energy density of the brane  by the standard junction equations .

In $`D+1`$ space-time dimensions a vacuum solution must satisfy ($`\mu ,\nu =0,\mathrm{},D`$)

$`_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }.`$ (1)
On projecting the above equation on a time-like manifold of codimension one (the brane) and introducing Gaussian normal coordinates $`x^i`$ ($`i=0,\mathrm{},D1`$) and $`z`$ ($`z=0`$ on the brane), one obtains the constraints (at $`z=0`$)

$`_{iz}=0,R=\lambda ,`$ (2)
where $`R`$ is the $`D`$-dimensional Ricci scalar, $`\lambda `$ the cosmological constant on the brane (we shall set $`\lambda =0`$ from now on, equivalently to the fine tuning between $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and the brane tension ) and use has been made of the necessary junction equations . For static solutions, one can view Eqs. (2) as the analogs of the momentum and Hamiltonian constraints in the ADM decomposition of the metric and their role is therefore to select out admissible field configurations along hypersurfaces of constant $`z`$. Such field configurations will then be “propagated” off-brane by the remaining Einstein Eqs. (1). It is clear that the above “Hamiltonian” constraint is a weaker requirement than the purely $`D`$-dimensional vacuum equations $`R_{ij}=0`$ and, in fact, it is equivalent to $`R_{ij}=E_{ij}`$ where $`E_{ij}`$ is (proportional to) the (traceless) projection of the $`D+1`$-dimensional Weyl tensor on the brane .

In the present letter we investigate spherically symmetric solutions to Eqs. (2) with $`D=4`$ of the form

$`ds^2=N(r)dt^2+A(r)dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ (3)
with $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2=d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2`$, which might represent black holes in the brane-world . First of all, let us recall that the Schwarzschild four-dimensional metric (3) with

$`N=A^1`$ (4)
and $`N=12M/r`$ is ruled out as a physical candidate since its unique propagation in the bulk is a black string with the central singularity extending all along the extra dimension and making the AdS horizon singular . Further, this case is also unstable under linear perturbations . A few different cases have been recently investigated with the condition (4) . We stress that while Eq. (4) is accidentally verified in four dimensions, there is no reason for it to hold in this scenario as well. It is easy to show that the most general solution satisfying Eq. (4) is of the “Reissner-Nordström” (RN) type

$`N=1{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{r^2}},`$ (5)
where $`Q`$ can be interpreted as a “tidal charge”. If instead one insists on requiring the Schwarzschild metric on the brane but with a regular AdS horizon the price to pay is to have matter in the bulk .

We shall here present two new families of analytic solutions of the form (3) on the brane (at $`z=0`$) obtained by relaxing the condition (4). They are determined by fixing alternatively $`N`$ or $`A`$ as in Schwarzschild \[so to have the correct $`O(1/r)`$ behavior at large $`r`$\] and finding the most general solutions for the constraints (2). These solutions will be expressed in terms of the ADM mass $`M`$ and the parameterized post-newtonian (PPN) parameter $`\beta `$ which affects the perihelion shift and Nordtvedt effect . The momentum constraints are identically satisfied by the form (3) and the “Hamiltonian” constraint can be written out explicitly in terms of $`N`$ and $`A`$ as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\prime \prime }}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{N^{}}{N}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{N^{}}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{A^{}}{A}}{\displaystyle \frac{N^{}}{N}}\right)`$ (6)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(A1)=0.`$ (7)
Case I. By demanding that

$`N=1{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}},`$ (8)
the general solution to Eq. (7) is

$`A={\displaystyle \frac{\left(1\frac{3M}{2r}\right)}{\left(1\frac{2M}{r}\right)\left[1\frac{M}{2r}(4\beta 1)\right]}}.`$ (9)
The only other non-vanishing PPN parameter (which controls the deflection and time delay of light ) $`\gamma =\beta `$ and one knows that $`\beta \gamma 1`$ from solar system measurements . In particular the combination $`\eta 4\beta \gamma 3=3(\beta 1)`$ measures the difference between the inertial mass and the gravitational mass of a test body. We also note that the solution (9) depends on just one parameter and for $`M0`$ one recovers the Minkowski vacuum. The same is true for the solution (5) provided one defines $`Q=2M^2(\beta 1)`$, which yields

$`N={\displaystyle \frac{1}{A}}=1{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2M^2}{r^2}}(\beta 1).`$ (10)
As was noted in , for a (point-like) matter source located on the brane $`Q`$ should be related to $`M`$ through the brane tension, therefore measuring $`\beta `$ would give information on the vacuum energy of the brane-world (or, equivalently, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$). Finally, the metric (10) can be experimentally distinguished from the case presented here since the corresponding $`\gamma =1`$ and does not depend on $`\beta `$.

Case II. Upon setting

$`A^1=1{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma M}{r}},`$ (11)
one obtains

$`N={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\gamma ^2}}\left(\gamma 1+\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma M}{r}}}\right)^2,`$ (12)
where now $`\gamma =2\beta 1`$ and this case can be experimentally distinguished both from (10) and case I above. Finally, one has $`\eta =\gamma 1=2(\beta 1)`$.

We shall now explore the causal structure of the previous solutions by expressing the metric elements in terms of $`\eta \beta 10`$ (keeping in mind that $`|\eta |1`$ from experimental data ). In particular, we shall show that the sign of $`\eta `$ is of great relevance.

Case I. The metric components are given by Eq. (8) and

$`A={\displaystyle \frac{\left(1\frac{3M}{2r}\right)}{\left(1\frac{2M}{r}\right)\left[1\frac{3M}{2r}(1+\overline{\eta })\right]}},`$ (13)
where we have defined $`\overline{\eta }(4/9)\eta `$. As in Schwarzschild, the event horizon is at $`r=r_h2M`$ and the related Hawking temperature is

$`T_H={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{13\overline{\eta }}}{8\pi M}}.`$ (14)
We see that, with respect to the case $`\overline{\eta }=0`$, $`T_H`$ is either slightly reduced or augmented depending on the sign of $`\overline{\eta }`$. Inside the event horizon, the line element presents singularities in the metric for $`\overline{\eta }0`$ at

$`r=\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{3}{2}M(1+\overline{\eta })r_0\hfill \\ \\ \frac{3}{2}Mr_s.\hfill \end{array}`$ (18)
Note that for $`\overline{\eta }>0`$ it is $`r_s<r_0`$, whereas for $`\overline{\eta }<0`$ we have $`r_s>r_0`$. Calculation of the curvature invariants

$`R^2R_{\alpha \beta }R^{\alpha \beta },K^2R_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }R^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta },`$ (19)
shows the presence of a physical singularity at $`r_s`$, where $`R^2K^2\overline{\eta }^2/(rr_s)^4`$. Therefore as $`\overline{\eta }<0`$ the space-time ends at $`r=r_s`$ and the Penrose diagram, similar to that of Schwarzschild, is represented in Fig. 1.

The case $`\overline{\eta }>0`$ is, in a sense, more interesting and deserves further investigation. For $`r=r_0`$ the squared surface gravity

$`\kappa ^2={\displaystyle \frac{M^2}{r^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{rr_0}{rr_s}},`$ (20)
vanishes (an analogue surface is present in RN in the region between the two horizons) and the curvature invariants are regular \[they behave as $`1/(\overline{\eta }^2M^4)`$\]. Inspection of the equation for the geodesics of energy $`E`$ and angular momentum $`L`$,

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{dr}{d\tau }}\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{rr_0}{rr_s}}\left[E^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{r^2}}ϵ\right)\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{r_h}{r}}\right)\right],`$ (21)
shows that the space-like surface $`r=r_0`$ is a turning point for all types of curves ($`ϵ=0,\pm 1`$ respectively for null, time-like and space-like geodesics). A similar phenomenon occurs in RN, where all curves with $`L0`$ get reflected at some point $`r=r_f(E,L)<r_{}M\sqrt{M^2Q}`$. However, space-like and null curves with $`L=0`$ are able to reach the RN time-like “repulsive” singularity $`r=0`$. In our case no curve is able to enter the region $`r<r_0`$, where the signature of the metric is Euclidean. This makes a substantial difference since the true singularity at $`r_s<r_0`$ does not belong to the physical space. Furthermore, integration of Eq. (21) for $`rr_0`$ yields the proper time $`\tau \sqrt{(rr_0)(r_0r_s)}`$ and continuation of the physical trajectories across $`r=r_0`$ can be achieved, e.g., by introducing the coordinate $`x\sqrt{rr_0}`$ for $`r>r_0`$ and then going to negative values of $`x`$. In the $`(t,x,\theta ,\varphi )`$ coordinate frame, the metric is given by

$`ds^2=\left({\displaystyle \frac{x^2+r_0r_h}{x^2+r_0}}\right)dt^2`$ (22)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{4(x^2+r_0)(x^2+r_0r_s)}{x^2+r_0r_h}}dx^2+(x^2+r_0)^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.`$ (23)
Since the metric in Eq. (23) is even under $`xx`$, both sides of $`x=0`$ have the same causal structure. Indeed, in the region $`x<0`$ one can introduce a new radial coordinate $`r^{}`$ such that $`x=\sqrt{r^{}r_0}`$ for which the solution looks exactly like that in Eqs. (8) and (13). The full Penrose diagram is given in Fig. 2. Unlike RN, the space-time is completely regular (the geometry is that of a traversable wormhole with the minimal sphere inside the horizon) and continuation beyond the Cauchy horizon is determined solely by boundary conditions at asymptotically flat regions. Regular four-dimensional black holes were constructed in  by matching Schwarzschild with de Sitter along a space-like surface at $`r_j<r_h`$, and by gluing black hole with white hole metrics in  as candidate space-times where information is not lost during the evaporation process. Contrary to those cases, it is important to stress that the continuation of our solution across $`x=0`$ is smooth, as the extrinsic curvature is continuous in $`x`$ (and vanishes at $`x=0`$).

Case II. The metric elements can now be written

$`\begin{array}{c}N=\left[\frac{\eta +\sqrt{1\frac{2M}{r}(1+\eta )}}{1+\eta }\right]^2\hfill \\ \\ A=\left[1\frac{2M}{r}(1+\eta )\right]^1.\hfill \end{array}`$ (27)
We shall again distinguish between the two cases $`\eta <0`$ and $`\eta >0`$.

For $`\eta <0`$ the metric is singular at

$`r=\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{2M}{1\eta }r_h\hfill \\ \\ 2M(1+\eta )r_0,\hfill \end{array}`$ (31)
where $`r_h>r_0`$. $`r_h`$ defines the event horizon with formal Hawking temperature

$`T_H={\displaystyle \frac{(1\eta )^2}{8\pi M}}.`$ (32)
However, the null surface $`r=r_h`$ is singular since

$`R^2K^2{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^2}{M^3\left(\sqrt{rr_0}\sqrt{r_hr_0}\right)^2}}.`$ (33)
The corresponding Penrose diagram is represented by the left diagram in Fig. 3.

Turning to the case $`\eta >0`$, we note that the only singularity in the metric is at $`r=r_0`$, where all curvature invariants are regular. Similarly to the corresponding case I, the geodesic equation near $`r_0`$ is

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{dr}{d\tau }}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{rr_0}{r_0}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(1+\eta )^2}{\eta ^2}}E^2{\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{r_0^2}}+ϵ\right],`$ (34)
and $`r=r_0`$ is a turning point for all physical curves. Smooth continuation at $`r=r_0`$ is achieved by considering negative values of $`x\sqrt{rr_0}`$. In terms of the radial coordinate $`x`$ the line element is

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+\eta )^2}}\left(\eta +{\displaystyle \frac{x}{\sqrt{x^2+r_0}}}\right)^2dt^2`$ (36)
$`+4(x^2+r_0)dx^2+(x^2+r_0)^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2.`$
Unlike the corresponding case I, however, the two sides of $`x=0`$ are not symmetric and the metric for negative $`x`$ exhibits a singular event horizon at $`x_h\sqrt{r_hr_0}`$ \[$`r_h`$ is given in Eq. (31) and $`R^2K^2\eta ^2/(M^3(xx_h)^2)`$\]. The causal structure is described by the right diagram in Fig. 3. The difference with respect to the left diagram is that the physical radius $`r=x^2+r_0`$ reaches a minimum at the time-like surface $`r=r_0`$ ($`x=0`$) and then re-expands when $`x`$ turns to negative values.

An interesting aspect from the above analysis is that there seems to be a correlation between the sign of $`\eta `$ (a quantity measured at infinity) and the geometric structure of the solutions at small $`r`$ (i.e, of the order of the Schwarzschild radius for $`|\eta |1`$). For $`\eta <0`$, a typical trajectory approaching and possibly entering the horizon is such that the physical radius always decreases (as in Schwarzschild, i.e., $`\eta =0`$) and hits the singularity at $`r_s>0`$ (larger than $`r_s=0`$ for $`\eta =0`$). Considering positive values of $`\eta `$, there is always a turning point at $`r=r_0`$, as an anti-gravity effect occurring very close to $`r_h`$ in regions not yet experimentally tested. A similar feature is present for the metric (10),

$`N={\displaystyle \frac{1}{A}}=1{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta M^2}{2r^2}}.`$ (37)
For $`\eta <0`$ there is a single horizon at $`r_h=M(1+\sqrt{1\eta /2})`$ with the Hawking temperature

$`T_H={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi M}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1\eta /2}}{\left(1+\sqrt{1\eta /2}\right)^2}},`$ (38)
and a physical space-like singularity at $`r_s=0`$ (the Penrose diagram is the same as that in Fig. 1). If $`0<\eta <2`$ (RN), there are two horizons at $`r_\pm =M(1\pm \sqrt{1\eta /2})`$ \[the event horizon is $`r_h=r_+`$ and the Hawking temperature is still given by Eq. (38)\] and the time-like singularity at $`r_s=0`$ becomes “repulsive”. It would be interesting to inspect whether the sign of $`\eta `$ plays the same role in general. From a physical point of view, since anti-gravity effects on the brane are expected for negative brane vacuum energy $`\sigma `$ , we suspect that (at least for the cases considered here) the sign of $`\eta `$ is minus the sign of $`\sigma `$.

We also note that for finite values of $`\eta `$ each family of solutions possesses a zero temperature black hole: $`\overline{\eta }=1/3`$ for case I, $`\eta =1`$ for case II and the well-known extreme RN $`\eta =2`$ in Eq. (37). Contrary to the extreme RN which is singular at $`r=0`$, the first two solutions are instead completely regular and, although the corresponding values of $`\eta `$ are ruled out on atrophysical scales, they might be acceptable candidates as small black holes . We will give more details elsewhere.

Let us finally mention that it will be important to investigate the extension of our solutions into the bulk. For Schwarzschild, the singularity at $`r=0`$ on the brane extends into the bulk and makes the AdS horizon singular as well. However, for $`\eta >0`$ the solutions with (8) and (9) are remarkably free of singularities and one might hope that the bulk is regular as well. This study can be attempted either numerically or by Taylor expanding all five-dimensional metric elements in powers of the extra coordinate. The latter method is currently being investigated.

Note added. After completion of this work we learned that our case I was also derived in Ref.  as a possible metric outside a star on the brane. In  no attempt was made to study the causal structure of the space-time.

Acknowledgements. We wish to thank R. Balbinot, G. Clément, S. Farese, B. Harms, N. Kaloper and G. Venturi for useful discussions.


text:
# 1 Calculated filling fractions 𝑥_𝐴 and 𝑥_𝐵 of binary hard sphere liquids under gravity for various mass ratios. The length unit equals the container size used in the MD simulations of Ref. []. The BNP and RBNP are clearly recognized. With decreasing temperature the profiles are shifted to smaller hights 𝑧.

Comment on ”Reverse Brazil Nut Problem: Competition between Percolation and Condensation”

In a recent paper  the Brazil nut problem (BNP), where particles with large diameters rise to the top when exposed to vertical shaking and the reverse Brasil nut problem (RBNP) where the large particles segregate to the bottom were investigated. In realistic situations these effects are driven or at least accompanied by global convection. Convection rolls are observed already in mono-disperse systems: appearantly vibrations lead to temperature gradients with temperature defined through the average kinetic energy of the particles. In order to suppress convection the authors present Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulations for binary hard sphere mixtures at fixed temperature. It appears legitimate to first consider this simplified situation although it might be rather remote from reality. Depending on the mass and diameter ratios of the two hard sphere species, the simulations show pronounced BNP and RBNP behaviours. For an explanation a new condensation versus percolation driven segregation mechanism was put forward, which has attracted much attention in the press . The purpose of this comment is to show that the proposed mechanism is incorrect. All the effects observed in the MD simulations can be understood by simple conventional thermodynamics.

Because in the solid phase particles may no longer exchange positions , we conjecture that demixing must happen already in the fluid phase. Therefore we consider a binary hard sphere mixture with species $`A`$ and $`B`$ having masses $`m_A>m_B`$ and diameters $`d_A>d_B`$ in the liquid phase with an appropriate equation of state (EOS), e.g. the Mansoori-Carnahan-Starling-Leland equation , with $`\xi _i=(n_A/n)d_A^i+(n_B/n)d_B^i`$

$`P=nTZ(x_A,x_B),`$ $`Z(x_A,x_B)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1x}}+{\displaystyle \frac{3x}{(1x)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _1\xi _2}{\xi _3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{x^2(3x)}{(1x)^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _2^3}{\xi _3^2}},`$ (1)
where $`n=n_A+n_B`$ is the particle density and $`x=x_A+x_B=(\pi /6)d_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}n_A+(\pi /6)d_B^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}n_B`$ the packing fraction. It is then straightforward to compute the Helmholtz free energy  under gravity

$`F=ETS.`$ (2)
Variation of $`F`$ with respect to the particle densities $`n_A`$ and $`n_B`$ for fixed particle numbers $`N_A`$ and $`N_B`$ leads to two coupled nonlinear equations which are solved numerically. In the limit $`N_Ad_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}N_Bd_B^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}`$ and $`d_Ad_B`$ these equations respect Archimedes’ principle. Note however, that the initial condition of equal layer numbers $`N_Ad_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=N_Bd_B^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}`$ used in  is incompatible with this limit. Consequently Archimedes’ principle need not be obeyed in the presented MD simulations in contrast to our naïve expectation. Calculated filling fractions $`x_A(z)`$ and $`x_B(z)`$ as functions of the height $`z`$ are depicted in Fig. 1 for various mass ratios $`m_A/m_B`$ keeping the diameter ratio $`d_A/d_B=2`$ and particle number ratio $`N_A/N_B=1/4`$ fixed.

The density profiles compare very well with the MD simulations presented in . For $`m_A/m_B=2`$ we encounter the BNP with almost pure B-liquid at the bottom. The $`m_A/m_B=6`$ case corresponds to the RBNP with an incomplete demixing at the bottom. For $`m_A/m_B=4`$ the two liquids remain mixed. All these details agree with the corresponding MD simulations. But note that in our calculation the temperatures $`T>T_CT_A`$ lie above the temperature $`T_C`$ where the binary liquid begins to solidify: the total packing fraction lies sufficiently below close packing everywhere. In contrast the temperatures used in  are supposed to be quenched between $`T_B<T<T_A`$ ($`T_A`$ and $`T_B`$ represent the temperatures where condensation sets in for the separated species , see below) such that parts of the sample are ”frozen”.

We must conclude that demixing indeed occurs in the liquid phase. It is clearly due to the competition between gravity and entropy rather than to that of condensation and percolation. There is nothing mysterious or special going on and all the effects are understood by conventional thermodynamics. Finally, if the temperature is further decreased, the binary liquid eventually begins to condensate locally according to its filling fractions $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ in the fluid phase. In the RBNP this starts from the bottom whereas in the BNP, depending on the parameters, species $`A`$ in the middle may condensate first (cf. Fig. 1). However, there exists no condensation driven demixing.

In order to discuss the transition from the BNP to the RBNP and also to understand the effects on an even simpler basis, we may consider the two species separated: $`A`$ above $`B`$ for the BNP and $`B`$ above $`A`$ for the RBNP. The advantage is that we may then use the much simpler EOS for one-component hard sphere fluids e.g. the Carnahan-Starling expression

$`P=nTZ(x),`$ $`Z(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1+x+x^2x^3}{(1x)^3}}`$ (3)
obtained from (1) by setting $`d_A=d_B`$. The details of the EOS are unimportant here, in fact, every $`Z(x)`$ which grows sufficiently fast with $`x`$ (eigen-volume effect) leads to similar results. We assume that at a filling fraction $`x_00.637`$ equal to random close packing , instead of FCC or HCP close packing $`x_0=\pi /\sqrt{18}0.74048`$, condensation sets in, which leads to temperatures

$`T_A={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_Am_Ad_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}{x_0Z(x_0)}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\text{area}}},`$ $`T_B={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_Bm_Bd_B^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}{x_0Z(x_0)}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\text{area}}}`$ (4)
(gravity $`g`$) which exceed those in  by roughly a factor of $`3`$. We choose $`x_A(0)=x_0`$ at the bottom of the RBNP which corresponds to the temperature $`T_{RBNP}=T_A+(d_A/d_B)^3T_B>T_A+T_B`$ where this system is just still fluid. Then also the BNP configuration is fluid, because there ”freezing” sets in at lower temperatures (either at $`T_{BNP}=T_A`$ at the boundary of the two species or at $`T_{BNP}=(d_B/d_A)^3T_A+T_B`$ at the bottom, depending on the parameters used). With the above choice the filling fractions at the bottom and at the boundaries are fixed by the corresponding pressures and the Helmholtz free energies $`F_{BNP}`$ and $`F_{RBNP}`$ may be computed. For $`F_{BNP}<F_{RBNP}`$ the free energy favors the BNP and vice versa. We consider the curves $`F_{BNP}=F_{RBNP}`$ which separate BNP from RBNP for the following cases:

* equal number of particles $`N_A=N_B`$
* equal number of layers $`N_Ad_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=N_Bd_B^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}`$
* equal volumes $`N_Ad_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}=N_Bd_B^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}`$
* equal masses $`N_Am_A=N_Bm_B`$.

The last case is not explicitly shown in Fig.2 because it almost coincides with case (ii). The MD simulation results, case (ii), are also shown with circles (BNP), boxes (RBNP) and triangles (mixed). In the vicinity of the curves mixing is expected, demixing occcurs for parameter combinations lying sufficiently far away. We find that the particle numbers are of minor influence. This is expected: the BNP and RBNP should not be easily reversed by adding or subtracting a few particles of either species.

Lets contrast our results with the ”percolation-condensation” formula

$`{\displaystyle \frac{T_A}{T_B}}={\displaystyle \frac{N_Am_Ad_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}{N_Bm_Bd_B^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}}={\displaystyle \frac{d_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}{d_B^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}}`$ (5)
of Ref. . This formula seems to give reasonable results $`d_A/d_B=(m_A/m_B)^{1/2}`$ for the equal–number–of–layers case (ii), but certainly a straight line would not be worse. For equal volumes, case (iii), (5) leads to $`d_A/d_B=(m_A/m_B)^{1/3}`$ and the $`m_A/m_B=6,d_A/d_B=2`$ system is predicted BNP, which is incorrect. The calculated profiles look very similar to the corresponding ones of case (ii) (Fig. 1) with the only difference that $`x_B`$ is somewhat larger because of the relatively larger particle number $`N_B`$. An MD calculation certainly would confirm this. For equal particle numbers, case (i), the BNP is obtained for $`m_A<m_B`$ wheras the equal mass case (vi) is predicted to be always mixed. All these implications are wrong and we must conclude that the formula (5) works only approximately for case (ii) by pure accident.

Preparing this comment, I realized that J.A. Both together with one of the authors of Ref., D.C. Hong, have just submitted a paper to the archive , which treats the problem along similar lines. This paper, however, lacks the clear statement that the ”condensation - percolation theory” is incorrect. In view of the publicity given to this picture  such a statement would seem appropriate.

H. Walliser

Fachbereich Physik, Universität Siegen, D-57068 Siegen, Germany


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The unitary isobar model $`MAID`$ is a model for single pion photo- and electroproduction off protons and neutrons . It is based on a non-resonant background described by Born terms and vector meson exchange contributions and nucleon resonance excitations modeled by Breit-Wigner functions

$$t_{\gamma \pi }^\alpha =t_{\gamma \pi }^{B,\alpha }+t_{\gamma \pi }^{R,\alpha }.$$
(1)
Both parts, background and resonance are separately unitarized. This has been achieved by a K-matrix unitarization in the case of the background

$$t_{\gamma \pi }^{B,\alpha }(MAID)=\mathrm{exp}(i\delta _\alpha )\mathrm{cos}\delta _\alpha v_{\gamma \pi }^{B,\alpha }(W,Q^2),$$
(2)
and by introducing a unitary phase $`\varphi _R`$ for the resonance excitations

$$t_{\gamma \pi }^{R,\alpha }(W,Q^2)=\overline{𝒜}_\alpha ^R(Q^2)\frac{f_{\gamma R}(W)\mathrm{\Gamma }_RM_Rf_{\pi R}(W)}{M_R^2W^2iM_R\mathrm{\Gamma }_R}e^{i\varphi _R}.$$
(3)
The phases $`\delta _\alpha `$ are the elastic pion-nucleon scattering phases in a particular channel $`\alpha =\{l,j,t\}`$ below the inelastic threshold of two-pion production. In order to take account of inelastic effects, the factor $`\mathrm{exp}(i\delta _\alpha )\mathrm{cos}\delta _\alpha `$ is replaced by $`\frac{1}{2}[\eta _\alpha \mathrm{exp}(2i\delta _\alpha )+1]`$ with the inelasticity parameters $`\eta _\alpha `$ at higher energies. Additional background terms are included to account for S- and P-wave pion loop effects.

In the case of the Dynamical Model ($`DMT`$) , the background contribution is given by

$$t_{\gamma \pi }^{B,\alpha }(DMT)=e^{i\delta _\alpha }\mathrm{cos}\delta _\alpha \left[v_{\gamma \pi }^{B,\alpha }+P_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑q^{}\frac{q_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}R_{\pi N}^{(\alpha )}(q,q^{})v_{\gamma \pi }^{B,\alpha }(q^{})}{WE_{\pi N}(q^{})}\right]$$
(4)
with the full $`\pi N`$ scattering reaction matrix $`R_{\pi N}^{(\alpha )}`$. In this case the pion loop effects that are especially important near threshold are generated dynamically and show up as a principal value integral over the reaction matrix.

Presently, we have included 8 nucleon resonances, 3 Deltas: $`P_{33}(1232)`$, $`S_{31}(1620)`$ and $`D_{33}(1700)`$ and 5 $`N^{}s`$: $`P_{11}(1440)`$, $`D_{13}(1520)`$, $`S_{11}(1535)`$, $`S_{11}(1650)`$ and $`F_{15}(1680)`$. All of them are included with longitudinal and transverse electromagnetic couplings. The corresponding helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2}`$, $`A_{3/2}`$ and $`S_{1/2}`$ can be fitted to experimental data and can be freely changed in the $`MAID`$ program.

We will show results obtained with the Dynamical Model for the threshold region and present some recent fits to newer electroproduction data with $`MAID`$ for the resonance region with a discussion of the $`Q^2`$ evolution of the $`E/M`$ and $`S/M`$ ratios of the $`N\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$ transition.

## 2 Results in the threshold region

For $`\pi ^0`$ photoproduction, we first calculate the multipole $`E_{0+}`$ near threshold by solving the coupled channels equation within a basis with physical pion and nucleon masses. The coupled channels equation leads to the following expression for the pion photoproduction t-matrix in the $`\pi ^0p`$ channel:

$`t_{\gamma \pi ^0}(W)`$ $`=`$ $`v_{\gamma \pi ^0}(W)+v_{\gamma \pi ^0}(W)g_{\pi ^0p}(W)t_{\pi ^0p\pi ^0p}(W)`$ (5)
$`+`$ $`v_{\gamma \pi ^+}(W)g_{\pi ^+n}(W)t_{\pi ^+n\pi ^0p}(W),`$
where $`t_{\pi ^0p\pi ^0p}`$ and $`t_{\pi ^+n\pi ^0p}`$ are the $`\pi N`$ t-matrices in the elastic and charge exchange channels, respectively. They are obtained by solving the coupled channels equation for $`\pi N`$ scattering using the meson-exchange model of Ref. . Our results for $`ReE_{0+}`$ show that practically all of the final state interaction effects originate from the $`\pi ^+n`$ channel and mainly stems from the principal value integral of Eq. (5). In this approach the $`t_{\pi N}`$ matrix contains the effect of $`\pi N`$ rescattering to all orders. However, we have indeed found that only the first order rescattering contribution, i.e. the one-loop diagram, is important. This indicates that the one-loop calculation in ChPT is a reliable approximation for $`\pi ^0`$ production in the threshold region.

If the FSI effects are evaluated with the assumption of isospin symmetry (IS), i.e., with averaged masses in the free pion-nucleon propagator, the energy dependence in $`ReE_{0+}`$ in the threshold region is very smooth. Below $`\pi ^+`$ threshold the strong energy dependence (cusp effect)  only appears because of the pion mass difference and, as we have seen above, is related to the coupling with the $`\pi ^+n`$ channel. In most calculations, the effects from the pion mass difference below the $`\pi ^+`$ production channel are taken into account by using the K-matrix approach ,

$`ReE_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^0}=ReE_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^0}(IS)a_{\pi N}\omega _cReE_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^+}(IS)\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2}{\omega _c^2}}},`$ (6)
where $`\omega `$ and $`\omega _c`$ are the $`\pi ^0`$ and $`\pi ^+`$ c.m. energies corresponding to $`W=E_p+\omega _\gamma `$ and $`m_n+m_{\pi ^+}`$, respectively, and $`a_{\pi N}=0.124/m_{\pi ^+}`$ is the pion charge exchange threshold amplitude. $`E_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^{0,+}}(IS)`$ is the $`\pi ^{0,+}`$ photoproduction amplitude obtained with the assumption of isospin symmetry (IS), i.e., without the pion mass difference in Eq. (4). Such an approximation is often used in the data analysis in order to parametrize the $`E_{0+}`$ multipole below $`\pi ^+n`$ threshold in the form of $`E_{0+}(E)=a+b\sqrt{1(\omega /\omega _c)^2}`$. Numerically this approximation is very precise and differs only by 10% at the $`\pi ^0`$ threshold and becomes indistinguishable above the $`\pi ^+`$ threshold. In Fig. 1 the results obtained within this approximation scheme are represented by the solid curve and compared to the ChPT calculation (dash-dotted curve) . Over the whole energy range the difference is rather small and within the experimental uncertainties. Huge effects, however, arise if the cusp would be neglected or obviously if the FSI effects would be totally ignored (dotted curve).

In Fig. 1 we also compare the predictions of our model for the differential cross section with recent photoproduction data from Mainz . The dotted and solid curves are obtained without and with FSI effects, respectively. It is seen that both off-shell pion rescattering and cusp effect substantially improve the agreement with the data. This indicates that our model gives reliable predictions also for the threshold behaviour of the $`P`$-waves without any additional arbitrary parameters.

Pion electroproduction provides us with information on the $`Q^2=k^2`$ dependence of the transverse $`E_{0+}`$ and longitudinal $`L_{0+}`$ multipoles in the threshold region. The ”cusp” effects in the $`L_{0+}`$ multipole is taken into account in a similar way as in the case of $`E_{0+}`$,

$`ReL_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^0}=ReL_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^0}(IS)a_{\pi N}\omega _cReL_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^+}(IS)\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2}{\omega _c^2}}},`$ (7)
where all the multipoles are functions of total c.m. energy $`W`$ and virtual photon four-momentum squared $`Q^2`$. It is known that at threshold, the $`Q^2`$ dependence is given mainly by the Born plus vector meson contributions in $`v_{\gamma \pi }^B`$, as described in Ref. . Similar to pion photoproduction, the K-matrix approximation and full calculation agree with each other within a few percent. In Fig. 2 we show our results for the cusp and FSI effects in the $`E_{0+}`$ and $`L_{0+}`$ multipoles for $`\pi ^0`$ electroproduction at $`Q^2=0.1`$ (GeV/c)2, along with the results of the multipole analysis from NIKHEF and Mainz. Note that results of both groups were obtained using the $`P`$-wave predictions given by ChPT. However, there exist substantial differences between the $`P`$wave predictions of ChPT and our model at finite $`Q^2`$. To understand the consequence of these differences, we have made a new analysis of the Mainz data for the differential cross sections, using our $`DMT`$ prediction for the $`P`$-wave multipoles instead. The $`S`$-wave multipoles extracted this way are also shown in Fig. 2 by solid circles. We see that the results of such a new analysis gives $`E_{0+}`$ multipoles closer to the NIKHEF data and in better agreement with our dynamical model prediction. However, the results of our new analysis for the longitudinal $`L_{0+}`$ multipoles stay practically unchanged from the values found in the previous analyses. Note that the dynamical model prediction for $`L_{0+}`$ again agrees much better with the NIKHEF data. Further details are given in Ref.

In contrast to $`DMT`$, in $`MAID`$ the FSI effects are taken into account using the K-matrix approximation, namely without the inclusion of off-shell pion rescattering contributions (principal value integral) in Eq. (4). As a result, the $`S`$-, $`P`$-, $`D`$\- and $`F`$-waves of the background contributions are defined as

$`t_\alpha ^B(MAID)=\mathrm{exp}(i\delta _\alpha )\mathrm{cos}\delta _\alpha v_\alpha ^B(q_E,k).`$ (8)
However, as we have found above, dynamical model calculations show that pion off-shell rescattering is very important at low pion energies. The prediction of $`MAID`$ for $`E_{0+}(\pi ^0p)`$ at threshold, represented by the dotted curves in Fig. 1 lies substantially below the data. It turns out that it is possible to improve $`MAID`$, in the case of $`\pi ^0`$ production at low energies, by introducing a phenomenological term and including the cusp effect of Eq. (6). In this extended version of $`MAID2000`$, we write the $`E_{0+}(\pi ^0p)`$ multipole as

$$ReE_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^0}=ReE_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^0}(MAID98)+E_{cusp}(W,Q^2)+E_{corr}(W,Q^2),$$
(9)
where

$$E_{cusp}(W,Q^2)=a_{\pi N}\omega _cReE_{0+}^{\gamma \pi ^+}(MAID98)\sqrt{1\frac{\omega ^2}{\omega _c^2}}.$$
(10)
The phenomenological term $`E_{corr}`$ which emulates the pion off-shell rescattering corrections (or pion-loop contribution in ChPT) can be parameterized in the form

$$E_{corr}(W,Q^2)=\frac{A}{(1+B^2q_\pi ^2)^2}F_D(Q^2),$$
(11)
where $`F_D`$ is the standard nucleon dipole form factor. The parameters $`A`$ and $`B`$ are obtained by fitting to the low energy $`\pi ^0`$ photoproduction data: $`A=2.01\times 10^3/m_{\pi ^+}`$ and $`B=0.71fm`$.

## 3 Results in the resonance region

For pion photoproduction in the resonance region we have recently performed a fit of $`MAID`$ for both the low-energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ region and the medium-energy resonance region up to $`W=1700`$ MeV, where resonance parameters have been obtained as a part of the BRAG111Baryon Resonance Analysis Group, http://cnr2.kent.edu/$``$manley/BRAG.html partial wave benchmark analysis. In Fig. 3 we present a new fit of preliminary results on electroproduction, $`p(e,e^{}p)\pi ^0`$, measured by the JLab Hall A collaboration. The data has been taken at backward angles at $`Q^2=1.0`$ GeV2 in the c.m. energy range from $`0.95`$ GeV to $`2.0`$ GeV. With a dataset of 363 data points in 3 observables, $`d\sigma =d\sigma _T+ϵd\sigma _L,d\sigma _{LT}`$ and $`d\sigma _{TT}`$ and pion angles of $`146,151`$ and $`167`$ degrees we performed a data analysis with $`MAID`$.

From the 20 possible resonance parameters we have varied 18 by fixing $`E_2`$ and $`S_2`$ of the $`D_{13}(1520)`$ because we did not find enough sensitivity in the data which are only taken at backward angles. In table 1 we give the result of our fit both for the multipole and the helicity amplitudes. The multipole amplitudes are compared to the default values of $`MAID`$. For the $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$ resonance we give in addition the $`E/M`$ and the $`S/M`$ ratios. Both are consistent with the previous $`MAID`$ fits to photo- and electroproduction . The $`R_{SM}`$ ratio is very well determined by the $`d\sigma _{LT}`$ data and shows the tendency to larger negative values for increasing $`Q^2`$, while the $`R_{EM}`$ ratio is much more uncertain and also the model uncertainties are larger than for the $`S/M`$ ratio. From $`d\sigma _{LT}`$ we also find a large sensitivity to the $`S_{0+}`$ amplitude of the $`S_{11}(1535)`$ resonance in the minimum around $`W=1500`$ MeV as well as for the $`S_2`$ amplitude of the $`D_{33}(1700)`$ resonance in the second maximum around $`W=1650`$ MeV. Furthermore most of the structure in $`d\sigma `$ and in $`d\sigma _{TT}`$ above $`W=1700`$ MeV is explained by the $`M_2`$ amplitude of the $`D_{33}(1700)`$ resonance. However, the $`MAID`$ model does not include higher resonances so far.

In order to get information on resonance properties a careful analysis has to be taken. First of all, a partial wave decomposition in terms of multipoles is necessary to get information on quantum numbers as angular momentum, spin, parity and isospin. Second, a background separation is needed, as especially in pion production a large background is produced by the strong pion nucleon coupling. However, nucleon Born terms and vector meson exchange contributions are not the only source of background. Loop effects can give very large contributions especially for S- and P-waves, the most famous example is the $`E_{0+}`$ in $`\pi ^0`$ photoproduction at threshold. Our resonance extraction is based on the imaginary parts of the full multipoles in a specific spin-isospin channel at the resonance position. This minimizes the model dependence since resonance positions are mostly well known and this method can be applied to any given partial wave analysis. It is very similar to the method that has been applied for the $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$, however, as Watson’s theorem is no longer fulfilled for higher resonances, some uncertainties have to be accepted. The helicity amplitudes extracted by this way are “dressed” amplitudes and contain contributions from vertex corrections. They could be undressed by subtracting background contributions and unitarization corrections. By such a procedure they could be directly related to the Breit-Wigner couplings $`\overline{𝒜}_\alpha ^R(Q^2)`$ of Eq. (3), however, such a method will always be model dependent.

The helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2},A_{3/2}`$ and $`S_{1/2}`$ are determined from the pion electroproduction multipoles at the resonance position

$`A_{1/2}^\mathrm{}+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ac_I}}[(\mathrm{}+2)\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{}++\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{M}_\mathrm{}+]`$ (12)
$`A_{1/2}^{(\mathrm{}+1)}`$ $`=`$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ac_I}}[(\mathrm{}+2)\stackrel{~}{M}_{(\mathrm{}+1)}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{E}_{(\mathrm{}+1)}]`$ (13)
$`A_{3/2}^\mathrm{}+`$ $`=`$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ac_I}}\sqrt{\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+2)}[\stackrel{~}{E}_\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{M}_\mathrm{}+]`$ (14)
$`A_{3/2}^{(\mathrm{}+1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ac_I}}\sqrt{\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+2)}[\stackrel{~}{E}_{(\mathrm{}+1)}+\stackrel{~}{M}_{(\mathrm{}+1)}]`$ (15)
$`S_{1/2}^\mathrm{}+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}ac_I}}(\mathrm{}+1)\stackrel{~}{S}_\mathrm{}+`$ (16)
$`S_{1/2}^{(\mathrm{}+1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}ac_I}}(\mathrm{}+1)\stackrel{~}{S}_{(\mathrm{}+1)}`$ (17)
$$\text{with}a=\sqrt{\frac{1}{\pi }\frac{k_W^R}{q_\pi ^R}\frac{1}{2J+1}\frac{m_N}{M_R}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\pi }{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}^2}}\text{and}c_I=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \sqrt{1/3}:& I=1/2\hfill \\ \hfill \sqrt{3/2}:& I=3/2\hfill \end{array}.$$
(18)
The equivalent photon energy $`k_W^R`$ and the pion momentum $`q_\pi ^R`$ are given in the c.m. frame and evaluated at the resonance position, where also the pion electroproduction multipoles are obtained, $`\stackrel{~}{A}\text{Im}A(W=M_R)`$ for $`A=E,M,S`$. For the transverse amplitudes these formulas agree with PDG and Ref. . For longitudinal amplitudes we found different definitions in the literature, here we use a definition consistent with notations used in DIS.

In Fig. 4 we show our extracted values for the magnetic form factor $`G_M^{}/3G_D`$ and the ratios $`R_{EM}`$ and $`R_{SM}`$ together with other data determined in different ways in recent experiments and data analyses on a semi-log scale. For photoproduction the Mainz results are shown, around 0.125 GeV2 the values of the Bates analysis and the result of the Mainz measurement with recoil polarization, in the medium $`Q^2`$ range the preliminary data of Bonn and at high $`Q^2`$ our analysis of the JLab Hall C data with $`MAID`$ and the $`DMT`$. The main difference between our results and those of Ref.  is that our values of $`R_{EM}`$ show a clear tendency to cross zero and change sign as $`Q^2`$ increases. This is in contrast with the results obtained in the original analysis  of the data which concluded that $`R_{EM}`$ would stay negative and tend toward more negative values with increasing $`Q^2`$. Furthermore, we find that the absolute value of $`R_{SM}`$ is strongly increasing.

## 4 Summary

With the unitary isobar model $`MAID`$ and the dynamical model $`DMT`$ we have two very good tools available to analyze data of pion photo- and electroproduction and to plan new experiments with increased sensitivity to specific questions. While $`DMT`$ includes pion loop contributions that are especially important for low partial waves (S and P), $`MAID`$ originally was constructed only from tree diagrams, resonance excitations and K-matrix unitarization contributions. Therefore, to get better agreement for S-waves, $`MAID`$ has been extended phenomenologically by low-energy corrections and the unitary cusp effect. At higher energies the PS-PV mixing of $`MAID`$ that was already introduced from the beginning, also serves for this purpose to effectively taking into account of loop contributions.

With all parameters already fixed by $`\pi N`$ scattering and pion photoproduction in the resonance region, $`DMT`$ describes pion photoproduction at threshold very well, similar to the calculations in ChPT or with dispersion relations. For electroproduction at threshold we also find good agreement with the experiment at $`Q^2=0.1`$ GeV2, however, we also have problems describing the recent Mainz data at $`Q^2=0.05`$ GeV2 as it also appears in ChPT calculations. In the resonance region both models $`DMT`$ and $`MAID`$ can equally well describe photo- and electroproduction data up to $`W=1700`$ MeV by fitting the photon helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2},A_{3/2}`$ and $`S_{1/2}`$ of the individual resonances. Here, we have demonstrated this with the preliminary Hall A data of JLab at $`Q^2=1.0`$ GeV2. Even with a dataset limited to backward pion angles we are able to determine quite a few resonance parameters in satisfactory precision and can also give longitudinal couplings where previous information practically did not exist. For the $`E/M`$ and $`S/M`$ ratios of the Delta resonance we combine our previous fits of Mainz, Bates and JLab Hall C data with our new analysis and find a consistent $`Q^2`$ evolution of these ratios with a slowly rising $`R_{EM}`$ that crosses zero around $`Q^2=4`$ GeV2, and for the longitudinal coupling a $`R_{SM}`$ that significantly increases to larger negative values at high $`Q^2`$. If expectations from pQCD will be fulfilled, a sharp rise in the $`E/M`$ ratio towards 100% should be seen in the next generation of experiments above $`Q^2=5`$ GeV2 and a leveling of the $`S/M`$ ratio to a constant value.

Acknowledgments: We gratefully acknowledge financial support of this work in parts by the National Science Council of ROC under Grant No. NSC89-2112-M002-078, by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 443), and by a joint project NSC/DFG TAI-113/10/0.


text:
# Systematics of Charged Particle Production in Heavy-Ion Collisions with the PHOBOS Detector at RHIC

## 1 Introduction

Gold-gold collisions at RHIC provide the largest and potentially the densest partonic system available in the laboratory. The multiplicity of charged particles has been studied as a function of center-of-mass energy ($`\sqrt{s}`$), centrality, rapidity and azimuthal angle using the PHOBOS detector, which covers most of the available phase space. These studies provide an understanding of the basic properties of the initial state, such as the effects of the collision geometry and parton saturation. They also allow systematic comparisons of particle production in nuclear collisions with more elementary systems like proton-(anti)proton and proton-nucleus collisions.

## 2 Experimental Setup

The PHOBOS detector consists primarily of silicon pad detectors mounted close to the RHIC beampipe. Charged particle multiplicity is measured in $`4\pi `$ using a combination of the “Octagon” detector which covers $`|\eta |<3`$ (where $`\eta =\mathrm{log}\mathrm{tan}(\theta /2)`$) and a set of six “Ring” detectors that cover $`3<|\eta |<5.4`$ with pads sized such that they cover approximately equal bins in pseudorapidity. The vertex position is measured by two subdetectors, a high-precision vertex detector consisting of two silicon planes above and below the beampipe as well as a 16-plane spectrometer covering $`1<|\eta |<2`$.

To detect collisions and estimate centrality (here characterized as the number of nucleons that interact inelastically), we use a combination of two sets of 16 paddle counters and two zero-degree calorimeters (ZDCs) located along the beam-line at distances of 3.28m and 18m from the interaction point in either direction, respectively.

## 3 Charged Particle Distributions

PHOBOS has produced the first measurements of $`dN_{ch}/d\eta `$ near mid-rapidity at all RHIC energies to-date, as well as detailed studies of the centrality dependence of $`dN_{ch}/d\eta `$. These measurements are important for understanding the initial gluon density and are discussed elsewhere in these proceedings.

To measure $`dN_{ch}/d\eta `$ with the octagon and ring detectors, we use two different techniques. The first (“hit counting”) is based on a determination of the number of hits in the silicon as a function of $`\eta `$. We correct the raw hit multiplicity, as a function of $`\eta `$, for occupancy (assuming Poisson statistics), geometrical acceptance, and background expected from Monte Carlo simulations. The second method is based on associating the energy deposition in each pad with the charged particle multiplicity.

The data obtained at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}`$ = 130 GeV shows several interesting features. As can be seen in Fig.1a, while the multiplicity density scaled per participating nucleon pair increases at mid-rapidity for more central collisions, it decreases outside of $`|\eta |=34`$. Fig.1b shows that the HIJING model, which includes no additional parton cascading, does not reproduce the data near $`|\eta |=34`$, unlike models (e.g. AMPT) which include such effects. Finally, by comparing central events at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}`$ = 130 and 200 GeV as a function of $`\eta ^{}=\eta Y_{beam}`$ in Fig. 1b, we observe that the distributions obey “limiting fragmentation” for $`\eta ^{}>2`$ as seen in the UA5 $`p\overline{p}`$ data. The UA5 distribution at $`\sqrt{s}=200`$ GeV has a shape similar to the PHOBOS 200 GeV data but is 30-40% lower at all pseudorapidities.

## 4 Elliptic Flow

To look for effects from initial state pressure gradients in peripheral collisions, we have studied the second Fourier coefficient, $`v_2`$, of the azimuthal distribution relative to the reaction plane. We have measured $`v_2`$ vs. centrality and found that it is at a maximum (5-6%) in peripheral events and decreases to 2-3% in the 6% most central events. This maximum value scales with energy in a similar way to the charged-particle multiplicity, as shown in Fig. 2a. A preliminary analysis also indicates that $`v_2`$ vs. $`\eta `$ has a shape approximately similar to $`dN/d\eta `$, as shown in Fig. 2b. Both of these facts are consistent with the flow signal reflecting the asymmetry in the particle density, with no additional contribution from hydrodynamic evolution.

## Conclusions

The PHOBOS collaboration has studied charged particle distributions as a function of $`\sqrt{s}`$, centrality, rapidity, and azimuthal angle. The multiplicity studies provide information about the initial gluon density and provide a direct connection between high-energy $`pp`$ and $`AA`$ collisions. The elliptic flow results imply the presence of initial state pressure gradients but they are also broadly consistent with simple scaling with the rapidity density.

## Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by US DoE grants DE-AC02-98CH10886, DE-FG02-93ER40802, DE-FC02-94ER40818, DE-FG02-94ER40865, DE-FG02-99ER41099, W-31-109-ENG-38 and NSF grants 9603486, 9722606 and 0072204; KBN of Poland grant 2 P03B 04916; and NSC of Taiwan contract NSC 89-2112-M-008-024.


text:
# The Formation of Massive Stars through stellar collisions

## 1. Introduction

The formation of massive stars, due to their large chemical and energetic feedback, is an important issue not just for the field of star formation but also for many other areas of astronomy from the interstellar medium to galaxy formation. The difficulties in forming massive stars are two-fold. One, how does that much mass get accumulated by one star, and two, can the accumulation of this matter overcome the large radiation pressure from the star. The formation of low-mass stars appears trivial in comparison as the stellar masses are not vastly different from estimates of the Jeans mass in molecular clouds and as the stellar luminosities are not sufficiently large to affect the accretion process. Massive stars, in contrast, have masses up to 100 times the estimated Jeans mass in molecular clouds. This implies that the majority of their mass is probably due to subsequent accumulation rather than the initial collapse (see A. Maeder, this volume). Of potentially more of an impediment is the radiation pressure from stars more massive then $`10`$ M which can act on the infalling dust grains to reverse the infall and halt the accretion process (Yorke & Krugel 1977; Yorke 1993; Beech & Mitalas 1994). There are possible solutions to this impediment involving changing the properties of the dust grains (Wolfire & Cassinelli 1987) or perhaps a non-isotropic radiation flux such that matter can more easily accrete onto the star’s equator from an accretion disc (c.f. H. Yorke, this volume). In this paper, I consideran alternative model whereby the accumulation of mass comes from stellar collisions. The accumulation of such optically-thick, dust-free entities as stars elliminates any problem due to radiation pressure.

In constructing a theory for massive star formation, we should make use of all the available observational clues. One such clue is that massive stars are not generally found in isolation but appear to form in the central regions of rich young stellar clusters (Zinnecker, McCaughrean & Wilking 1993; Hillenbrand 1997; Clarke, Bonnell & Hillenbrand 2000; Mermilliod 2001). Even runaway OB stars are probably most easily explained as having been ejected from such a stellar cluster (Clarke & Pringle 1992). Testi et.al. (1997) have argued that there is a strong correlation between the mass of the most massive star in a cluster and the cluster’s mean stellar density. Although this data is still compatible with random pairing from an IMF (Bonnell & Clarke 1999), such a correlation would imply a potential causal relationship between cluster density and the mass of the most massive star.

In considering the clustered environment for massive star formation, there are a number of observations that need to be considered. In addition to the large number of accompanying low-mass stars, the relatively large stellar densities and that the mass spectrum is similar to a field star IMF, one feature that needs to be explained is the observed mass segregation (Hillenbrand 1997; Carpenter et.al. 1997; Hillenbrand & Hartmann 1998). For example, the Orion Nebula cluster (ONC) shows a segregation of massive stars towards the centre of the cluster. This appears to be the case not only for the most massive O stars but also for the intermediate-mass stars present in the cluster.

Lastly, but perhaps most importantly, the fact that massive stars form in stellar clusters implies that we need to consider a dynamical formation scenario. The dynamical time of the cluster as a whole is comparable to the formation time of the individual stars. That implies that the stars move around in the cluster while they are forming. We have to thus abandon a static formation scenario where the environment can be ignored. Although this causes significant complications, it can also provide simple physical processes that combine to determine the resultant stellar properties.

## 2. Fragment masses

The most straight forward solution for massive star formation would be that a massive clump of $`50`$ M collapses to form the star. This scenario is complicated by the dense cluster environment. As the massive stars are located in the cluster core, the pre-stellar clump would have to fit in between the neighbouring stars, which, in the core of the ONC are separated by $`5000`$ au. In order for the clump to be gravitationally bound, it must have a Jeans length smaller than this separation:

$$R_J=\left(\frac{5R_gT}{2G\mu }\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{4}{3}\pi \rho \right)^{1/2}\mathrm{¡}\mathrm{}5000A.U.,$$
(1)
where $`\rho `$ is the gas density and $`T`$ the temperature, $`R_g`$ is the gas constant, $`G`$ is the gravitational constant, and $`\mu `$ is the mean molecular weight. This implies that for typical temperatures in molecular clouds, the gas density must be very high. This also makes sense as one would expect the highest gas densities in the deepest part of the potential well (Zinnecker et.al. 1993).

The mass of the resultant star can then be estimated from the Jeans mass, the minimum mass to be gravitationally bound:

$$M_J=\left(\frac{5R_gT}{2G\mu }\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{4}{3}\pi \rho \right)^{1/2}.$$
(2)
In the core of the ONC, the Jeans mass is then of order $`0.3M_{}`$, much smaller then the most massive star of $`50M_{}`$, or the mean stellar mass of $`5M_{}`$ (Zinnecker et.al. 1993; Bonnell, Bate & Zinnecker 1998). Something else is needed in order to explain the observed masses. Furthermore, from the above equations it is obvious that the fragment mass should be smallest in the centre of clusters as the gas density is likely to be largest there. The initial masses from fragmentation in a stellar cluster should therefore result in an inverse mass segregation, with small stellar masses in the core (Bonnell, Bate & Zinnecker 1998).

Investigations of the dynamics of young stellar clusters have shown that dynamical mass segregation, the sinking of massive stars due to two-body relaxation, cannot explain the location of the massive stars (Bonnell & Davies 1998). Clusters such as the ONC are too young for the massive stars that form the Trapezium to have sunk from a significant distance from the cluster core. We are thus left with a formation process that occurs in situ but that does not reflect the initial fragment or Jeans mass.

## 3. Stellar collisions

If stellar collisions are responsible for the formation of massive stars (eg. Bonnell, Bate & Zinnecker 1998), then the timescale for multiple collisions has to be less than the observed age of the massive stars. Although it is difficult to ascertain the exact ages of massive stars, we know that in Orion, the massive stars are younger than a few million years and potentially as young as a few $`\times 10^5`$ years. The collisional timescale $`t_{coll}`$ is related to the stellar properties as (Binney & Tremaine 1987)

$$\frac{1}{t_{coll}}=16\sqrt{\pi }v_{\mathrm{disp}}R_{}^2\left(1+\frac{GM_{}}{2v_{\mathrm{disp}}^2R_{}}\right),$$
(3)
where $`n`$ is the density of stars in the cluster, $`v_{\mathrm{disp}}`$ is the velocity dispersion, and $`M_{},R_{}`$ are the mass and radius of the star undergoing the collision. Figure 1 plots the collisional timescale as a function of stellar density for collisions involving a 10 M star assuming a 10 R collisional radius. The velocity dispersion is assumed to be 2 km/s. We can see from Figure 1 that for densities typical of young stellar clusters ($`n10^3`$ stars pc-3), the collisional timescale is $`>10^{10}`$ years. In order to get a collisional timescale of order $`\mathrm{¡}\mathrm{}10^5`$ years, a stellar density of $`\mathrm{¿}\mathrm{}10^8`$ stars pc-3 is required.

Young stellar clusters are relatively dense agglomerations of stars. The Orion Nebula Cluster (ONC), for example, has a mean stellar density of $`n10^3`$ stars pc-3 (Hillenbrand 1997). The core of the ONC is considerably more dense with $`n2\times 10^4`$ stars pc-3 (McCaughrean & Stauffer 1994). From Figure 1 we see that the corresponding collisional timescale is $`7\times 10^8`$ years. Clearly collisions cannot play an important role in the present conditions of the ONC. If stellar mergers are an important process in massive star formation, then the required stellar density of $`n\mathrm{¿}\mathrm{}10^8`$ stars pc-3 implies that the ONC would have had to undergo a high density phase. The main question is then what process could have lead to such a short-lived but high-density phase. In the following sections we consider how accretion in stellar clusters may lead to such a scenario.

## 4. Accretion and the IMF

Observations of young stellar clusters reveal that they generally contain significant amounts of mass in the form of gas. This gas can amount up to 90 % of the total cluster mass (Lada 1991). Accretion of this gas can thus be an important factor in determining the masses of individual stars as well as the properties of the stellar cluster.

Numerical simulations of accretion in clusters have found that accretion naturally results in a mass segregated cluster (Bonnell et.al. 1997, 2001a). This occurs as the cluster potential funnels the gas down to the centre of the cluster where it is accreted by whatever stars happen to be there. The non-uniform accretion rates then result in the most massive stars being located in the centre of the cluster. In general, the resulting cluster demonstrates a degree of mass segregation comparable to that found in young stellar clusters.

Another finding of these numerical simulations is that there are two different physical regimes for the accretion, depending on whether the gas or the stars dominate the gravitational potential (Bonnell et.al. 2001a). When the gas dominates the potential, the motions of the stars and the gas are determined by the changing gravitational potential as the gas collapses. In this regime, the stellar and gas motions are similar and the accretion rate is determined by each star’s tidal radius relative to the cluster potential. Material that moves inside the tidal radius gets accreted by the star. This assumes that the gas is initially unsupported, as is expected if it is able to fragment to form the large number of stars in the cluster.

The second regime occurs when the stars dominate the gravitational potential. In this case, the stars virialise and have motions uncorrelated to those of the gas. The gas velocity relative to a star is therefore large such that it is the determining factor as to whether the gas is bound to the star. The accretion rate in this case is the common Bondi-Hoyle accretion which depends on the local gas velocity and the star’s mass, but not on the external potential.

Using these two different regimes for the gas accretion, Bonnell et.al. (2001b) showed how accretion in stellar clusters can result in a double power-law IMF where the low-mass stars have a shallow $`\gamma 1.5`$ (where Salpeter is $`\gamma =2.35`$) power-law due to the tidal lobe accretion while the high-mass stars have a steeper power-law ($`\gamma 2.5`$) due to the subsequent Bondi-Hoyle accretion. The high-mass stars accrete the majority of their mass in the stellar dominated regime as they form in the core of the cluster where the stars (due to their high accretion rates) first come to dominate the potential.

## 5. Accretion and Cluster Dynamics

The simulations in the previous section also found that accreting clusters tend to shrink as mass is added onto the stars (Bonnell et.al. 2001a). In order to understand why this happens let us consider the energy of the stars in the cluster potential (c.f. Bonnell, Bate Zinnecker 1998):

$$E_{stars}=\frac{p^2}{2M_{stars}}\frac{GM_{stars}M_{tot}}{R},$$
(4)
where $`p`$ is the total momentum of the stars, $`M_{stars}`$ is the mass in stars, $`M_{tot}`$ is the total mass in both stars and gas while $`R`$ is the size of the system. In what follows we assume that the accreting gas has no net momentum and that therefore the stellar momenta is conserved during accretion. This assumption is justified as in general the accreting gas will be spherically infalling and, once the stars are virialised, there is no correlation between gas motions and stellar motions.

As mass is added while momentum is conserved, the kinetic energy of the stars decreases at the same time as the stars become more bound to the potential. The stars are then no longer in virial equilibrium with the potential and thus shrink until they revirialise at a smaller radius. The new radius reflects the new, lower energy as:

$$R_{cluster}=\frac{GM_{tot}M_{stars}}{2E_{new}}.$$
(5)
As long as the accretion timescale is longer than the dynamical timescale, then the cluster can accrete and revirialise many times and thus shrink substantially. If, on the other hand, the accretion timescale is shorter than the dynamical timescale, then the cluster can only shrink by a factor of 2 after the accretion has finished. Under the condition of slow accretion, the rate of cluster shrinkage can be estimated by considering that accretion occurs at a constant radius and then shrinks to revirialise, reflecting the new energy. Thus

$$\left(\frac{E}{M_{stars}}\right)_R=\left(\frac{dE_{new}}{dM_{stars}}\right).$$
(6)
Solving the above equation yields (Bonnell et.al. 1998)

$$RM_{stars}^\alpha ,$$
(7)
where the value of $`\alpha `$ depends on whether the total mass is conserved ($`\alpha =2`$ or whether it is proportional to the mass in stars ($`\alpha =3`$). The latter possibility reflects the case when accretion occurs onto the core of the cluster and gas continues to infall from outside the core. Thus, the increase in the stellar density can be very large, given by

$$nM_{stars}^{3\alpha },$$
(8)
such that for $`\alpha =3`$ and an increase in the stellar mass by a factor of three results in an increase in the density as $`3^92\times 10^4`$.

We therefore take as our model the core of a cluster similar to the ONC. This core, containing $`100`$ initially low-mass stars within $`0.1`$ pc. The stars in the core accrete until they have reached intermediate masses ($`5M_{}`$) by which time they have attained a sufficiently high density that stellar collisions and mergers occur to form the massive stars. Figure 3 shows the evolution of such a system as the stars accrete at a constant accretion rate of $`2\times 10^6M_{}`$ year-1(from Bonnell et.al. 1998). The half-mass radius of the system is plotted as a function of time as are the collisional timescale and the accretion timescale. Once the cluster core has shrunk sufficiently such that the collisional timescale is shorter than the accretion timescale, stellar mergers dominate the mass buildup process. Two collisional timescales are plotted reflecting collisional radii of $`0.1`$ and $`0.01`$ au. The transition from accretion to mergers occurs after a few crossing times, corresponding roughly to $`4\times 10^5`$ years.

## 6. Stellar Collisions and Binaries

The actual cross sections for collisions depends on the dynamics and the presence of circumstellar material. One of the crucial factors is the formation of binaries as they then have a much larger cross section for further interactions. There are two ways in which binary systems can form. Firstly, they can form through tidal capture encounters. This is most important for near-equal mass encounters. Most encounters involving the more massive stars in the core are with lower-mass stars. These encounters do not generally result in tidal captures due to the disparate interior densities of the stars. Instead, the lower-mass star can be tidally disrupted to form a circumstellar disc. This results in the second binary formation mechanism as a subsequent encounter that passes through the disc gets captured due to the binding energy of the disc (Davies et.al., in preparation). Such binary systems will either merge on subsequent encounters or exchange in a higher-mass star to form a near equal-mass binary, that may itself merge in further encounters.

In either case, a high frequency of near-equal mass binary systems should result from a system where stellar collisions are occurring. This agrees with the finding that many O stars are members of short-period binary systems (Mason et.al. 1996). This is also the case in O-stars found in the centre of open clusters where they all appear to be in close binary systems with stars of comparable masses (Mermilliod 2001).

## 7. Accretion and Cluster Dynamics: the UKAFF simulation

In order to study the dynamics and evolution of an accreting cluster we have performed a numerical simulation of gas accretion in a cluster containing 1000 stars (Bonnell & Bate, in preparation). This simulation, performed on the UKAFF supercomputer with $`10^6`$ SPH particles, follows the gas and stellar dynamics as the stars accrete. The primary aims of this simulation were to investigate whether an actual stellar and gas dynamical system would react according to our simple prescription and to see if the stellar interactions would destroy the cluster core before the necessary densities for collisions occurs. The maximum density in the cluster, as well as the density at the half-mass radius are plotted as a function of time in Figure 4. We see that the density increases dramatically after about one free-fall time. The mean density of the cluster increases by a factor of $`20`$ while the peak density increases by over $`10^4`$ up to $`10^5`$. This large increase in stellar density implies a large decrease in the timescale for collisions and mergers. If we take the cluster’s initial conditions as being those present in the ONC, then we have an initial mean density of $`10^3`$ stars pc-3 and a peak density of $`2\times 10^4`$ stars pc-3 (McCaughrean & Stauffer 1994). In the UKAFF simulation the peak density increases by a factor of $`>10^5`$ times the initial mean density. This then corresponds to stellar densities of $`n\mathrm{¿}\mathrm{}10^8`$ stars pc-3. This stellar density is sufficient to produce significant numbers of stellar collisions in the cluster core.

Accretion results in a centrally condensed cluster with a $`nr^2`$ stellar density profile. Figure 5 plots the distribution of stellar densities calculated as the volume necessary to contain 10 stars. The maximum density is considerably higher than the mean density of $`n20`$, but is contained in a core which occupies only the innermost $`0.01`$ of the half-mass radius.

In the UKAFF simulation, collisions are assumed to occur when two stars pass within 1 au of each other. This value is much larger than the stellar radii but comparable to the binary separations considered above. In any case, as shown in Bonnell et.al. (1998), the actual collisional radius affects only the delay until the cluster has shrunk sufficiently for collisions. Using the above collisional radius, 15 collisions occur during the UKAFF simulation. About half of these involve the more massive stars including a near equal-mass collision which results in the most massive star having a mass of $`100`$ times the initial stellar masses. We thus can conclude that an accreting cluster can contract far enough such that significant stellar collisions occur which result in the formation of massive stars. The evolution of the mean and maximum masses during the simulation are plotted in Figure 6. We see that the maximum mass increases dramatically through both accretion (smooth increase) and collisions (jumps). As noted above, the maximum mass reaches a value $`100`$ times the initial stellar mass. At the same time the mean stellar mass only increases by $`70`$% during the evolution. Many of the mergers involving the most massive star involve lower-mass impactors as is expected. Two mergers near the end of the simulation involve near-equal mass components and thus significantly contribute to the mass. The mean stellar mass in the cluster core is also plotted in Figure 6. This mean mass in the core increases dramatically but is only half due to the most massive star. Thus the cluster has been mass segregated due to the accretion and collisions.

It is also worth noting that the cluster stars tend to be in small groups, and along filaments (see figure 7 below). These configurations increase collisional rates and thus the ability for collisions to form massive stars. Furthermore, if the absence of collisions, the maximum stellar densities would have been considerably higher.

## 8. Collimating Outflows

Massive stars are generally associated with energetic outflows. These outflows are often seen as evidence for a circumstellar disc which would most likely be destroyed in regions sufficiently dense to allow for stellar mergers. The implication of a stellar disc for these outflows is not at all certain as the outflows are generally poorly collimated and thus of a fundamentally different type than the well-collimated outflows from low-mass stars.

An alternative to disc collimation is that there is present some structure in the accretion flow or general circumstellar environment which tends to collimate (poorly) any outflow from the massive stars. Figure7 shows the configuration of the stars and the gas towards the end of the UKAFF run. The gas (and stars) are far from uniformly distributed. Instead, the gas displays filamentary shapes pointing towards the cluster centre. The stars are generally situated along the filaments and tend to be in small groups. Both the gas and the stars move along these filaments which increases the rate of collisions.

The filamentary structures present in the accretion flows in the cluster centre are due to gravitational instabilities. The gas initially contains some 1000 Jeans mass, in agreement with its previous fragmentation to form the 1000 stars. In such a system, gravity tends to increase any over densities and to reduce the dimensions of the structure. In this way, the over densities can grow and form into filamentary structures. Such structures are a possible source for the collimation of the massive stars’ outflows. Further numerical simulations will have to be performed in order to test this speculation. It should be noted, however, that any collimation that does result from this structure is likely to be fairly open and as such this mechanism is not likely to result in the formation of jet-like outflows. Any such highly collimated outflows around young O stars would thus be difficult to explain with this stellar merger mechanism.

## 9. Implications of collisions

There are many implications of this collisional formation mechanism for massive stars which need to be considered. The most significant of these is the effect of the energy involved in the collisions. As two $`10M_{}`$ stars collide, the energy involved is of order $`10^{49}`$ ergs. This much energy will puff up the stars which will contract on their Kelvin-Helmhotz timescale. The increased size of the star will make it more susceptible to further collisions. if we assume that the energy is radiated over some $`10^4`$ years, then the energy flux will be $`10^{38}`$ ergs s-1. Indeed, a fraction of the kinetic energy may be released on much shorter timescales and result in an x-ray flare. Such an event should be observable (see chapters by H. Zinnecker and J. Bally). It is alkso probable that the energy released in this way would contribute to the re-expansion of the cluster core.

## 10. Summary

The formation of massive stars is a complicated process in which the environment is likely to play a crucial role. Massive stars form in the cores of stellar clusters where the expected fragment mass is low. Accretion in clusters forms higher-mass stars from low mass stars and naturally results in a mass segregated cluster as the higher accretion rates in the core result in more massive stars there. This process also results in a two-slope IMF similar to that observed in stellar clusters and in the field.

The accretion onto the stars in the cluster forces it to shrink and revirialise at a smaller radius. if the accretion is slower or comparable to the local dynamical time (say of the cluster core), then accretion can force the core to continue shrinking until it has reached sufficient densities where stellar collisions occur. These collisions can then result in the formation of massive stars. A recent simulation using the UKAFF supercomputer has shown that an accreting cluster can indeed attain the required stellar densities and that mergers can play an important role in the formation of massive stars. The accretion flow is susceptible to the formation of filamentary structure which may play a crucial role in collimating any outflow from massive stars. It would be unlikely to be able to collimate a jet-like outflow.

## 11. Acknowledgments

The results presented here are partially based on numerical simulations performed with the United Kigndom’s Astrophysical Fluid Facility (UKAFF) supercomputer.

## References

Beech M., Mitalas R., 1994, ApJS, 95, 517

Binney J., Tremaine S., 1987, in Galactic Dynamics, Princeton University.

Bonnell I.A., Bate M.R., Clarke C.J., Pringle J.E., 1997, MNRAS, 285, 201

Bonnell I.A., Bate M.R., Clarke C.J., Pringle J.E., 2001a, MNRAS, 323, 785

Bonnell I.A., Bate M.R., Zinnecker H., 1998, MNRAS, 298, 93

Bonnell I.A., Clarke C.J., Bate M.R., Pringle J.E., 2001b, MNRAS, 324, 573

Bonnell I.A., Clarke C.J., 1999, MNRAS, 309, 461

Bonnell I.A., Davies M.B., 1998, MNRAS, 295, 691

Clarke C.J., Bonnell I.A., Hillenbrand L.A., 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, eds V. Mannings, A. P. Boss and S. S. Russell (Tucson: University of Arizona Press), in press

Clarke, C.J., Pringle J.E., 1992, MNRAS, 261, 190

Hillenbrand L. A., 1997, AJ, 113, 1733

Hillenbrand L. A., Hartmann L., 1998, ApJ, 492, 540

Lada C.J., 1991, in The Physics of Star Formation and Early Stellar Evolution, eds C. J. Lada, N. D. Kyfalis, Kluwer, p. 329

Mason B.D. et.al., 1996, in ASP conf series vol 90, eds E. Milone and J.C. Mermilliod. p. 40

McCaughrean M.J., Stauffer, J.R., 1994, AJ, 108, 1382

Mermilliod J.C., 2001, in IAU 200, eds H. Zinnecker and R. Mathieu

Testi L., Palla F., Prusti T., Natta A., Maltagliati S., 1997, AA, 320, 159

Wolfire M.G., Cassinelli J.P., 1987, ApJ, 319, 850

Yorke H.W. 1993, in Massive Stars: Their Lives in the interstellar Medium, eds. J. Cassinelli, E. Churchwell, ASP Conf. Ser. 35, p. 45

Yorke H. W., Krügel E., 1977, A&A, 54, 183