text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Correlations in the nuclear wave function beyond the mean-field approximation are very important to describe the basic properties of nuclear structure. The mean-field (MF) or Hartree-Fock (HF) approximation gives a good description of the bulk properties of nuclei if phenomenological nucleon-nucleon ($`NN`$) forces are used, but employing realistic $`NN`$ interactions it fails badly. The failure is a consequence of the strong and repulsive short-range components of a realistic $`NN`$ interaction. Thus, a careful evaluation of the short-range correlations (SRC), produced by the short-range components of the $`NN`$ interaction, is needed to describe the nuclear properties in terms of a realistic $`NN`$ interaction and provide profound insight into the structure of the hadronic interaction in a nucleus. The same is true for the tensor correlations (TC), which are induced by the strong tensor components of the $`NN`$ interaction. Moreover, it is necessary to consider also those processes beyond the MF approximation falling under the generic name of long-range correlations (LRC), which are related to the coupling between the single-particle (s.p.) dynamics and the collective excitation modes of the nucleus and which mainly represent the interaction of nucleons at the nuclear surface. These processes can be very important in finite nuclear systems. A consistent evaluation of these different types of correlations is needed.

Various theoretical methods have been developed to account for such correlation effects (see, e.g., ). Besides developing these methods, it has always been a challenge for nuclear physics to envisage experimental situations and observables, particularly sensitive to correlations, whose determination can give clear evidence for correlations, in particular for SRC. The hope is that the comparison between the predictions of different models and data can give detailed information on correlations and can allow one to distinguish the different models of the $`NN`$ interaction at short distance.

Electromagnetically induced one- and two-nucleon knockout reactions are powerful tools for this study (see, e.g., ). In one-nucleon knockout the conditions of individual nucleons in the nuclear medium can be explored. For an exclusive reaction, the coincidence cross section contains the one-hole spectral density function, i.e.

$$S(𝒑_1,𝒑_1^{};E_\mathrm{m})=\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}|a_{𝒑_1^{}}^+\delta (E_\mathrm{m}H)a_{𝒑_1}|\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i},$$
(1)
which in its diagonal form ($`𝒑_1=𝒑_1^{}`$) gives the joint probability of removing from the target a nucleon, with momentum $`𝒑_1`$, leaving the residual nucleus in a state with energy $`E_\mathrm{m}`$ with respect to the target ground state. In an inclusive reaction, integrating the spectral density over the whole energy spectrum produces the one-body density matrix (OBDM) $`\rho (𝒑_1,𝒑_1^{})`$, that in its diagonal form gives the nucleon momentum distribution.

Likewise two-nucleon knockout represents the preferential tool for exploring the conditions of pairs of nucleons in the nuclear medium. For an exclusive reaction, the coincidence cross section contains the two-hole spectral density function, i.e.

$$S(𝒑_1,𝒑_2,𝒑_1^{},𝒑_2^{};E_\mathrm{m})=\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}|a_{𝒑_2^{}}^+a_{𝒑_1^{}}^+\delta (E_\mathrm{m}H)a_{𝒑_1}a_{𝒑_2}|\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i},$$
(2)
which in its diagonal form ($`𝒑_1=𝒑_1^{}`$ and $`𝒑_2=𝒑_2^{}`$) gives the joint probability of removing from the target two nucleons, with momenta $`𝒑_1`$ and $`𝒑_2`$, leaving the residual nucleus in a state with energy $`E_\mathrm{m}`$ with respect to the target ground state. In an inclusive reaction, integrating the spectral density over the whole energy spectrum produces the two-body density matrix $`\rho (𝒑_1,𝒑_2,𝒑_1^{},𝒑_2^{})`$, that in its diagonal form and in the coordinate representation gives the pair correlation function, i.e. the conditional probability density of finding in the target a particle at $`𝒓_2`$ if another one is known to be at $`𝒓_1`$.

The cross sections of one- and two-nucleon knockout reactions contain information on $`NN`$ correlations in the spectral functions and in the density matrices. In order to extract this information, along with the experimental work, a reliable model for cross section calculations is needed, able to keep reasonably under control the reaction mechanism and all the theoretical ingredients contributing to the cross section.

The quasifree ($`e,e^{}p`$) reaction has extensively been used to investigate the s.p. properties of nuclei and to point out the validity and the limits of the independent-particle shell model (IPSM) . The fact that a pure MF picture is unable to give a precise quantitative description of ($`e,e^{}p`$) data is due to correlations and the discrepancy can give a measurement of correlation effects. More direct information on correlations, and in particular on SRC, is available from two-nucleon knockout reactions . First recent experiments have given clear evidence for SRC in the 16O($`e,e^{}pp`$)14C reaction .

In this contribution the attemps to investigate $`NN`$ correlations in exclusive knockout reactions are reviewed. The theoretical framework for cross section calculations is outlined and some results are presented and discussed for ($`e,e^{}p`$) in Sec. 2 and ($`e,e^{}pp`$) in Sec. 3.

## 2 One-nucleon knockout

### 2.1 The Plane-Wave Impulse Approximation

In the one-photon exchange approximation, where the incident electron exchanges a photon of momentum $`𝒒`$ and energy $`\omega `$ with the target, the most general form of the coincidence ($`e,e^{}N`$) cross section involves the contraction between a lepton tensor $`L_{\mu \nu }`$ and a hadron tensor $`W^{\mu \nu }`$. The lepton tensor is produced by the matrix elements of the electron current and, neglecting the effect of the nuclear Coulomb field on electrons, contains only electron kinematics. The components of the hadron tensor are given by bilinear combinations of the Fourier transforms of the transition matrix elements of the nuclear current operator between initial and final nuclear states, i.e.

$$J^\mu (𝒒)=\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{f}|\widehat{J}^\mu (𝒓)|\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}𝒒𝒓}d𝒓.$$
(3)
In the plane-wave impulse approximation (PWIA), i.e. neglecting final-state interactions (FSI) of the ejected particle, the ($`e,e^{}p`$) cross section is factorized as a product of a kinematical factor, the (off-shell) electron-proton cross section and, for an exclusive reaction, the one-hole diagonal spectral density function

$$S(𝒑_\mathrm{m},E_\mathrm{m})=\underset{\alpha }{}S_\alpha (E_\mathrm{m})|\varphi _\alpha (𝒑_\mathrm{m})|^2,$$
(4)
where the missing momentum $`𝒑_\mathrm{m}`$ is the recoil momentum of the residual nucleus. At each value of $`E_\mathrm{m}`$, the momentum dependence of the spectral function is given by the momentum distribution of the quasi-hole states $`\alpha `$ produced in the target nucleus at that energy and described by the normalized overlap functions (OF) $`\varphi _\alpha `$ between the target ground state and the states of the residual nucleus. The (normalization) spectroscopic factor (s.f.) $`S_\alpha `$ gives the probability that the quasi-hole state $`\alpha `$ is a pure hole-state in the target. In an IPSM $`\varphi _\alpha `$ are the s.p. states of the model and $`S_\alpha =1(0)`$ for occupied (empty) states. In reality, the strength of a quasi-hole state is fragmented over a set of s.p. states, and $`0S_\alpha <1`$. The fragmentation of the strength is due to correlations and the s.f. can thus give a measurement of correlation effects.

The PWIA is a simple and clear picture that is able to describe the main qualitative features of ($`e,e^{}p`$) cross sections, but is unable to give a precise quantitative description of data. For the analysis of data a more refined theoretical treatment is needed. The calculations for this analysis were carried out with the program DWEEPY , within the theoretical framework of a nonrelativistic distorted-wave impulse approximation (DWIA), where FSI and Coulomb distortion of the electron wave functions are taken into account.

### 2.2 The Distorted-Wave Impulse Approximation

The DWIA treatment of the matrix elements in Eq. (3) is based on the following assumptions :
i) An exclusive process is considered, where the residual nucleus is left in a discrete eigenstate $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^\mathrm{B}(E)`$ of its Hamiltonian, with energy $`E`$ and quantum numbers $`\alpha `$.
ii) The final nuclear state is projected onto the channel subspace spanned by the vectors corresponding to a nucleon, at $`𝒓_1`$, and the residual nucleus in the state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^\mathrm{B}(E)`$. This assumption neglects effects of coupled channels and is justified by the considered asymptotic configuration of the final state.
iii) The (one-body) nuclear-current operator does not connect different channel subspaces. Thus, also the initial state is projected onto the selected channel subspace. This assumption is the basis of the direct knockout (DKO) mechanism and is related to the IA.

The transition matrix elements in Eq. (3) can thus be written in a one-body representation as

$$J^\mu (𝒒)=\chi _{E\alpha }^{()}(𝒓_1)\widehat{J}^\mu (𝒓,𝒓_1)\varphi _{E\alpha }(𝒓_1)\left[S_\alpha (E)\right]^{1/2}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}𝒒𝒓}d𝒓d𝒓_1,$$
(5)
where

$$\chi _{E\alpha }^{()}(𝒓_1)=\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^\mathrm{B}(E)|a_{𝒓_1}|\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{f}$$
(6)
is the s.p. distorted wave function of the ejectile and the overlap function

$$\left[S_\alpha (E)\right]^{1/2}\varphi _{E\alpha }(𝒓_1)=\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^\mathrm{B}(E)|a_{𝒓_1}|\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}$$
(7)
describes the residual nucleus as a hole state in the target. The spectroscopic strength $`S_\alpha (E)`$ is the norm of the overlap integral in the right-hand side of (7) and gives the probability of removing from the target a nucleon at $`𝒓_1`$ leaving the residual nucleus in the state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha ^\mathrm{B}(E)`$.

The scattering state in Eq. (6) and the normalized bound state $`\varphi _{E\alpha }(𝒓_1)`$ in Eq. (7) are consistently derived in this model from an energy-dependent non-Hermitean optical model Feshbach Hamiltonian. In standard DWIA calculations, however, phenomenological ingredients are employed. The nucleon scattering state is eigenfunction of a phenomenological optical potential, determined through a fit to elastic nucleon-nucleus scattering data including cross sections and polarizations. Phenomenological bound-state wave functions are usually adopted for the OF, which thus do not include correlations. In the analysis of data these functions were calculated in a Woods-Saxon well, where the radius was determined to fit the experimental momentum distributions and the depth was adjusted to reproduce the experimentally observed separation energy of the bound final state. The normalization of the wave function was fitted to the data. In order to reproduce the magnitude of the experimental cross sections, a reduction factor was applied to the calculated results. This factor was then identified with the s.f.

The “experimental” s.f. extracted in these DWIA analyses indicate that the removal of the s.p. strength for quasi-hole states near the Fermi energy is about 60-70%. The s.f. gives a measurement of correlation effects, but, since in the ($`e,e^{}p`$) analyses it is obtained through a fit to the data, in practice it can include besides correlations also the effect of other contributions which are neglected or not adequately described in the model. It can be identified with the s.f. only if all the theoretical ingredients contributing to the cross section are reasonably under control. On the other hand, the fact that this model, with phenomenological ingredients, was able to give an excellent description of ($`e,e^{}p`$) data, in a wide range of nuclei and in different kinematics (see, e.g., ), gives support and consistency to this whole picture and to the interpretation of the s.f. extracted in comparison with data.

### 2.3 Overlap Functions and Correlations

Explicit calculations of the hole spectral function and the associated fully correlated OF for complex nuclei are very difficult. Only recently the first successful parameter-free comparison of experiment and theory including the absolute normalization in $`p`$-shell nuclei has been performed for the 7Li($`e,e^{}p`$) reaction . For heavier nuclei a calculation able to account for the effects due to all types of correlations appears extremely difficult, since it requires excessively large model space. The effects of a spectral function containing only SRC and TC  and only LRC  have been investigated in the 16O($`e,e^{}p`$) reaction. A method to deal with SRC and LRC consistently has been proposed and applied in ref.  to 16O. In this application, however, only the s.f. and not the OF have been calculated.

Recently, a general procedure has been adopted  to extract the OF and the associated s.f. on the base of the OBDM. The advantage of this procedure is that it avoids the complicated task of calculating the nuclear spectral function, but its success depends on the availability of realistic calculations of the OBDM.

This procedure has been applied  to OBDM of 16O and 40Ca constructed within different correlation methods, such as the Jastrow Correlation Method (JCM) , the Correlated Basis Function (CBF) theory , the Green’s Function Method (GFM) , and the Generator Coordinate Method (GCM) . The OF and the s.f. have then been used to calculate the cross section of one-nucleon removal reactions .

An example is displayed in Fig. 1 for the 16O($`e,e^{}p`$) reaction . Calculations have been done with same code DWEEPY  used in the original analysis of the NIKHEF data , in the same conditions and with the same optical potential , but the phenomenological s.p. bound state wave functions have been replaced by the theoretically calculated OF. The results are presented in terms of the reduced cross section , defined as the cross section divided by a kinematical factor and the elementary off-shell electron-proton scattering cross section, which is the quantity that in PWIA gives the momentum distribution of the quasi-hole state. The experimental data were taken in the so-called parallel kinematics, where the momentum of the outgoing nucleon is fixed and is taken parallel or antiparallel to the momentum transfer. Different values of $`𝒑_\mathrm{m}`$ are obtained by varying the electron scattering angle and therefore the magnitude of the momentum transfer. In Fig. 1 the calculated reduced cross sections are able to reproduce with a fair agreement the experimental distributions. They are anyhow sensitive to the shape of the various functions. The differences are larger at large values of $`p_\mathrm{m}`$, where correlation effects are more sizable. The best agreement with data, for both transitions, is obtained with the OF emerging from the OBDM calculated within the GFM  and corresponding to the most refined calculation of the OBDM.

The results obtained with the different OF are compared in the figure with those given by the HF wave function, which is calculated in a self-consistent way using the Skyrme-III interaction. Besides the HF wave function, whose norm is equal to one, all the OF contain a s.f. These factors are listed in Table I (column I). They account for the contribution of correlations included in the OBDM, which cause a depletion of the quasi-hole states. Only SRC are included in the OBDM of refs. , whereas also TC are taken into account in refs. . Indeed the s.f. are lower for the functions including also TC. These OF, however, do not include LRC, which should produce further depletion of the quasi-hole states . In order to reproduce the size of the experimental cross section, a reduction factor has been applied in Fig. 1 to the calculated results. These factors are also listed in Table I (column II). They can be considered as additional s.f. reflecting the depletion of the quasi-hole state produced by the correlations not included in the OBDM, namely LRC for the OBDM of refs. , LRC and TC for those of refs. , and all the correlations for the HF wave function. The product of the two factors, in column III, can thus be considered as the total s.f. accounting for the combined effect of all the correlations. Indeed for $`1p_{1/2}`$ these factors are in reasonable agreement with the s.f. (0.77) obtained in the calculation of ref. , where both SRC and LRC are consistently included. The fact that for $`1p_{3/2}`$ these factors are lower than the one found in  (0.76) is presumably due to the approximations used in that calculation, which is unable to reproduce the experimentally observed splitting of the $`3/2^{}`$ state. Further work is currently in progress to account for the complexity of the low-energy structure of 16O .

The DWIA calculations with the different OF for the 16O($`\gamma ,p`$)15Ng.s. reaction at $`E_\gamma =60`$ MeV are displayed in Fig. 2 . The same theoretical ingredients, i.e. OF, s.f., and consistent optical potentials, have been adopted as in ($`e,e^{}p`$). Moreover, the reduction factor determined in comparison with the ($`e,e^{}p`$) data has been applied, in order to allow a consistent comparison of ($`e,e^{}p`$) and ($`\gamma ,p`$) results. In photon-induced reactions a different kinematics is explored. In fact in this case the energy and momentum transfer cannot be independently varied. They are constrained by the condition $`\omega =|𝒒|=E_\gamma `$, and only the high-momentum components of the nuclear wave function are probed, higher values than in the usual kinematics of ($`e,e^{}p`$) experiments. Thus, it is not strange that the differences given by the different OF are so large, in particular at backward angles, which correspond to higher values of $`p_\mathrm{m}`$. The agreement of the DWIA calculations with data is poor. For the ($`\gamma ,p`$) reaction the validity of the DKO mechanism related to the DWIA, which is clearly stated for ($`e,e^{}p`$), is much more questionable and large contributions are expected also by two-nucleon processes, such as those involving two-body meson-exchange currents (MEC). Indeed a better agreement with data is obtained in Fig. 2 when MEC are added. Here MEC have been added to the DKO mechanism within the theoretical framework of ref. , in a microscopic and unfactorized calculation. In order to reduce the complexity of the calculation, however, only the contribution due to the seagull diagrams with one-pion exchange has been included. This is certainly an approximation, but the seagull current here considered should give the main contribution of the two-body current in the photon-energy range above the giant resonance and below the pion production threshold. MEC give an important contribution and bring the results closer to data. The differences for the various OF are however still large and for some functions the agreement with data is still poor. The best agreement and a fair description of data is given by the OF from GFM , which is able to give also the best description of ($`e,e^{}p`$) data and with the same s.f. This result, that has been confirmed also in different situations , is a strong indication in favour of a consistent description of the two reactions and gives further support to our results for ($`e,e^{}p`$), where the contribution to the depletion of the quasi-hole states produced by the different types of correlations has been established. A part of this contribution, however, is still obtained as a reduction factor in comparison with data. Thus, also in this analysis the s.f. can be affected by other effects not included or not adequately decribed in the theoretical model.

### 2.4 Spectroscopic Factors and Relativistic Effects

Various contributions and their effect on the extracted s.f. have been studied in recent years. Only a small contribution is expected from two-body currents in ($`e,e^{}p`$) . A proper treatment of the c.m. motion leads to an enhancement of the extracted s.f. by about 7% . A further enhancement is obtained in relativistic DWIA (RDWIA) analyses with relativistic optical potentials .

Fully relativistic models based on the RDWIA have been developed by different groups . In these approaches the bound nucleons are described by s.p. Dirac wave functions in the presence of scalar and vector potentials fitted to the ground-state properties of the nucleus, and the scattering wave function is solution of the Dirac equation with relativistic optical potentials obtained by fitting elastic proton-nucleus scattering data. Also RDWIA analyses are able to give a good description of ($`e,e^{}p`$) data. RDWIA calculations are necessary for the analyses of the new ($`e,e^{}p`$) data from Jlab  in kinematic conditions inaccessible in previous experiments, where the four-momentum transfer squared $`Q^2`$ was less than 0.4 (GeV/$`c`$)2 and the outgoing proton energy generally around 100 MeV. It is anyhow important to check the relevance of relativistic effects also in the kinematics at lower energies of the previous experiments, whose data were analyzed with a nonrelativistic DWIA treatment.

Relativistic effects as well as the differences between relativistic and nonrelativistic calculations have been investigated in different papers where RDWIA treatments have been developed. The differences, however, are usually evaluated starting from the basis of a relativistic model where terms corresponding to relativistic effects are cancelled or where nonrelativistic approximations are included. Although very interesting, these investigations do not correspond to the result of a comparison between RDWIA and the DWIA calculations carried out with the program DWEEPY. In fact, DWEEPY is based on a nonrelativistic treatment where some relativistic corrections are introduced in the kinematics and in the nuclear current operator. On the other hand, only indirect comparison between relativistic and nonrelativistic calculations can be obtained from the available data analyses carried out with DWEEPY and in RDWIA. In fact, the two types of calculations make generally use of different optical potentials and bound state wave functions, and the difference due to the different theoretical ingredients cannot be attributed to relativity.

In order to investigate the relevance of genuine relativistic effects through a direct comparison between RDWIA calculations and the results of DWEEPY, a fully relativistic RDWIA model for the ($`e,e^{}p`$) reaction has been developed and its numerical results have been compared with the corresponding results given by DWEEPY . In order to make the comparison as consistent as possible, in the nonrelativistic calculations the bound state is the normalized upper component of the Dirac spinor and the scattering state is the solution of the same Schrödinger-equivalent optical potential of the relativistic calculation. This is not the best choice for DWEEPY, but the same theoretical ingredients are to be used for a clear comparison between the two approaches.

An example is shown in Fig. 3, for the 16O($`e,e^{}p`$) reaction in comparison with the NIKHEF data . Only small differences are found between the two calculations in this kinematics. The reduction (spectroscopic) factor applied to the calculated reduced cross sections in order to reproduce the size of the experimental results is 0.7 for RDWIA and 0.65 for DWIA, for both the transitions, which confirms that somewhat higher spectroscopic factors are obtained in RDWIA.

The systematic investigation carried out in ref.  indicates that relativistic effects increase with the energy and in particular with the energy of the outgoing proton. The DWIA approach can be used with enough confidence at the energies around 100 MeV of previous ($`e,e^{}p`$) experiments, and, with some caution, up to about 200 MeV. This confirms the validity of the analyses carried out with DWEEPY at lower energies. A fully relativistic calculation is anyhow convenient at 200 MeV and necessary above 300 MeV. Thus, RDWIA must be used in comparison with the recent data from JLab , at $`Q^2`$ = 0.8 (GeV/$`c`$)2 and $`T_1^{}=433`$ MeV. Here the RDWIA model gives an excellent description of data keeping the same spectroscopic factor (0.7) extracted in the comparison with the NIKHEF data of Fig. 1 .

### 2.5 Conclusions

The results of the study of $`NN`$ correlations in the ($`e,e^{}p`$) reaction on complex nuclei can be summarized as follows. The s.f. account for the depletion of the quasi-hole states produced by $`NN`$ correlations. The depletion found in the DWIA analyses is $`3040`$%. The s.f. are usually extracted from the comparison between data and DWIA results and can be affected by all the uncertainties of the model. Theoretical investigations within different correlation methods indicate that only a few percent of the depletion is due to SRC (see also ). When TC are added to SRC the depletion amounts to $`10`$%, at most $`15`$% in heavy nuclei. Further depletion is given by LRC. A full and consistent calculation of the OF and of the s.f. including SRC, TC and LRC is still unavailable.

If we want to study more specifically SRC, we have seen that they account for only a small part of the depletion of the quasi-hole states. This depletion is compensated by the admixture of high-momentum components in the nuclear wave function. Thus, one might think to investigate SRC studying the high-momentum components of the s.p. wave functions in exclusive one nucleon knockout experiments. Indeed we have found large differences for the cross sections calculated with the different OF at high values of the missing momentum. It is not clear, however, if these differences are due to correlations or to the different methods used in the calculations of the OBDM. Microscopic calculations of the momentum distribution  give indeed a strong enhancement of the high-momentum components due to SRC, but this enhancement shows up at large values of $`E_\mathrm{m}`$. In exclusive ($`e,e^{}p`$) experiments one does not measure the whole momentum distribution, but the spectral function at the energy corresponding to the specific final state that is considered. In general low-lying discrete states of the residual nucleus are considered, corresponding to low values of the energy, while the missing strength due to SRC is found at high values of the momentum but also at large values of the excitation energy, well above the continuum threshold, where other competing processes are present. This makes a clear-cut identification of SRC in ($`e,e^{}p`$) very difficult.

This identification appears possible in two-nucleon knockout reactions. Here particular situations can be envisaged where the knockout of the two nucleons is entirely due to correlations. These situations appear very well suited to study SRC.

## 3 Two-Nucleon Knockout

Since a long time electromagnetically induced two-nucleon knockout reactions have been devised as the preferential tool for investigating SRC. In fact, direct insight into SRC can be obtained from the situation where the electromagnetic probe hits, through a one-body current, either nucleon of a correlated pair and both nucleons are then ejected from the nucleus. This process is entirely due to correlations. But two nucleons can also and naturally be ejected by two-body currents due to meson exchanges and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ isobar excitations. These two competing processes, both produced by the exchange of mesons between nucleons, require a careful and consistent treatment. Their role and relevance, however, is different in different reactions and kinematics. It is thus possible, with the help of theoretical predictions, to envisage appropriate situations where various specific effects can be disentangled and separately investigated.

Interesting and complementary information is available from electron and photon-induced reactions, but the electron probe is preferable to study SRC. In fact, two-body currents predominantly contribute to the transverse components of the nuclear response. Only these components are present in photon-induced reactions that appear thus generally dominated by two-body currents. Also the longitudinal component, dominated by correlations, is present in electron-induced reactions. The possibility of independently varying the energy and momentum transfer of the exchanged virtual photon allows one to select kinematics where the longitudinal response and thus SRC are dominant.

A combined study of $`pp`$ and $`np`$ knockout is needed for a complete information. Correlations are different in $`pp`$ and $`np`$ pairs. They are stronger in $`np`$ pairs and thus in $`np`$ knockout due to the tensor force, that is predominantly present in the wave function of a $`np`$ pair. But also two-body currents are much more important in $`np`$ knockout, while they are strongly suppressed in $`pp`$ knockout, where the charge-exchange terms of the two-body current do not contribute. Therefore, the ($`e,e^{}pp`$) reaction was devised as the preferential process for studying SRC in nuclei. It is however clear that, since different effects can be emphasized in suitable conditions for different reactions, a combined study of $`pp`$ and $`np`$ knockout induced by real and virtual photons is needed to unravel the different contributions and obtain clear and complete information on $`NN`$ correlations.

Exclusive reactions, for transitions to specific discrete eigenstates of the residual nucleus, are of particular interest for this study. One of the main results of the theoretical investigation is the selectivity of exclusive reactions involving different final states that can be differently affected by one-body and two-body currents . Thus, the experimental resolution of specific final states may act as a filter to disentangle the two reaction processes. 16O is a suitable target for this study, due to the presence of discrete low-lying states in the experimental spectrum of 14C and 14N well separated in energy. From this point of view, 16O is better than a light nucleus, which lacks specific final states.

### 3.1 The Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for two-nucleon knockout is formally similar to the model for one-nucleon knockout outilned in Sec. II. The transition matrix elements in Eq. (3), whose bilinear combinations give the components of the hadron tensor $`W^{\mu \nu }`$, represent the basic ingredients of the calculation. The model  is still based on the two assumptions of an exclusive process, for the transiton to a discrete eigenstate of the residual nucleus, and of the DKO mechanism, but a different final nuclear state must be considered, with two outgoing nucleons and the residual nucleus, and the nuclear-current operator is the sum of a one-body and a two-body part, corresponding to the two competing reaction processes already mentioned. The two-body current includes terms due to the lowest order diagrams with one-pion exchange, namely seagull, pion-in-flight and diagrams with intermediate $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ isobar configurations . All these terms contribute to $`pn`$ knockout while only the non charge-exchange terms in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ current operator contribute to $`pp`$ knockout.

The matrix elements of Eq. (3) can be written as

$$J^\mu (𝒒)=\psi _\mathrm{f}^{}(𝒓_1,𝒓_2)J^\mu (𝒓,𝒓_1,𝒓_2)\psi _\mathrm{i}(𝒓_1,𝒓_2)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}𝒒𝒓}d𝒓d𝒓_1d𝒓_2,$$
(8)
where the two-nucleon overlap integral $`\psi _\mathrm{i}`$ and the two-nucleon scattering state $`\psi _\mathrm{f}`$ are consistently derived from an energy-dependent non-Hermitean Feshbach-type Hamiltonian for the considered final state of the residual nucleus. In practice, since it would be extremely difficult to achieve this consistency, the treatment of initial and final states proceeds separately with different approximations.

In the scattering state the mutual interaction between the two outgoing nucleons is neglected and only the interaction of each of the outgoing nucleons with the residual nucleus is considered by means of a phenomenological optical potential.

For the 16O($`e,e^{}pp`$)14C reaction the two-nucleon overlap functions are taken from the calculation of the spectral function , where both LRC and SRC are included. A two-step procedure has been applied in this calculation where LRC and SRC are treated in a separate but consistent way. The calculation of LRC is performed in a SM space large enough to incorporate the corresponding collective features which influence the pair removal amplitudes. The s.p. propagators used for this dressed Random Phase Approximation (RPA) description of the two-particle propagator also include the effect of both LRC and SRC. This yields s.f. for low-lying states of 15N which represent the closest agreement with ($`e,e^{}p`$) data to date . In the second step that part of the pair removal amplitudes which describes the relative motion of the pair is supplemented by defect functions obtained from the same G-matrix which is also used as the effective interaction in the RPA calculation.

The two-nucleon OF for a discrete final state of 14C, with angular momentum quantum numbers $`JM`$, is expressed in terms of a combination of relative and c.m. wave functions . The combination coefficients contain contributions from a SM space which includes the $`0s`$ up to the $`1p0f`$ shells. The c.m. radial wave function is that of a harmonic oscillator (h.o.). SRC are included in the radial wave function $`\varphi `$ of relative motion through a defect function defined by the difference between $`\varphi `$ and the uncorrelated relative h.o. wave function. These defect wave functions depend on the quantum numbers of the relative motion. Thus, SRC depend on the relative state and, since different components of relative and c.m. motion contribute to each transition, the role of SRC can be different for different final states.

### 3.2 Evidence for SRC in the 16O($`e,e^{}pp`$)14C Reaction

A numerical example is shown in Fig. 4, where the cross sections of the 16O($`e,e^{}pp`$)14C reaction are displayed for the transitions to the $`0^+`$ ground state and to the $`1^+`$ state at 11.31 MeV. Results are shown for two kinematical settings considered in the experiments performed at NIKHEF  and MAMI .

Different components of relative and c.m. motion contribute to the two final states : $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{1}^{}`$ relative waves (the notation $`{}_{}{}^{2S+1}l_{j}^{}`$, for $`l=S,P,D,`$ is used here for the relative states), which are combined with a c.m. orbital angular momentum $`L=0`$ and $`1`$, respectively, for the $`0^+`$ state, and $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$, $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{1}^{}`$, $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{2}^{}`$, all combined with $`L=1`$, for the $`1^+`$ state. The value of $`L`$ determines the shape of the recoil-momentum distribution. Indeed in Fig. 4 for the $`1^+`$ state, where only components with $`L=1`$ are present, the momentum distributions have a typical $`p`$-wave shape, while the $`s`$-wave shape obtained for the $`0^+`$ state indicates that in the two considered kinematics the cross section is dominated by the component with $`L=0`$ and thus by $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ $`pp`$ knockout. The component with $`L=1`$, due to $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{1}^{}`$, becomes meaningful only at large values of $`p_\mathrm{m}`$, where the contribution of the $`s`$ wave gets lower.

The comparison between correlated and uncorrelated relative wave functions  indicates that SRC play a different role in different relative states: they are quite strong for the $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ state and much weaker for $`{}_{}{}^{3}P`$ states. Moreover, also the role of the isobar current is strongly reduced for $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ $`pp`$ knockout, since there the generally dominant contribution of that current, due to the magnetic dipole $`NNN\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition, is suppressed . Thus, the role of SRC is emphasized in $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ knockout, while the role of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ current is emphasized in $`{}_{}{}^{3}P`$ knockout. This explains the different role of the two reaction processes for the two final states in Fig. 4: the transition to the $`1^+`$ state is dominated by the two-body current, while for the $`0^+`$ state, where $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ $`pp`$ knockout plays the main role, the cross section is dominated by the one-body current and thus my SRC.

The final result is determined by all the ingredients of the model, but it is clear that the two reaction processes play a different role for the two final states. Thus, the experimental resolution of different states may act as a filter to disentangle and separately investigate the contributions due to SRC and two-body currents.

Data have confirmed the predictions of this model. A reasonable and in some cases an excellent agreement with the available data  has been obtained. The comparison has clearly shown the validity of the DKO mechanism for transitions leading to the lowest-lying states of 14C and has confirmed the predicted selectivity of the exclusive reaction involving discrete final states, which are differently affected by SRC and two-body currents. In particular, clear evidence for SRC has been obtained for the transition to the ground state .

This important result means that two-nucleon knockout reactions can be used to study and hopefully determine SRC. More theoretical and experimental work is however needed for this study. More data are expected from MAMI for all the exclusive 16O($`e,e^{}pp`$)14C, 16O($`e,e^{}np`$)14N, 16O($`\gamma ,pp`$)14C, and 16O($`\gamma ,pn`$)14N knockout reactions . A combined study of different reactions is needed for a complete information on $`NN`$ correlations.

Good opportunities to increase the richness of information available from two-nucleon knockout reactions are also offered by polarization measurements . Reactions with polarized particles give access to a larger number of observables, hidden in the unpolarized case, whose determination can impose more severe constraints on theoretical models. Thus, a combined analysis of cross sections and polarization observables would make possible it to disentangle the different contributions and shed light on the genuine nature of correlations in nuclei.

##

I want to thank all the colleagues who contributed to this work, in particular A.N. Antonov, M.K. Gaidarov, A. Meucci and F.D. Pacati.


format: text

text:
# Strange stars as persistent sources of gravitational waves

## 1 Introduction

Quite plausibly, the most stable form of matter at supranuclear densities is a conglomerate of deconfined strange, up and down quarks. This could have important consequences for compact stars, with central densities several time the nuclear saturation density, that are born following supernova explosions . It has, in fact, been suggested that if the strange matter hypothesis is correct then all the observed neutron stars may be strange stars . If it could be established that strange stars exist in the Universe it would have obvious implications for our understanding of pulsars. In addition it would put severe constraints on the QCD parameters \[eg. the bag constant in the MIT model \]. It is thus important to establish whether observations can distinguish a strange star from a neutron star. Unfortunately, this turns out to be a delicate problem.

Strange stars are held together by both the strong nuclear interaction and gravity, and the corresponding equation of state is quite accurately described by uniform density models (see Madsen \[1998b\] for an exhaustive review). A consequence of this is that, in contrast to the neutron star case, very small strange “dwarfs” (with mass $`MR^3`$) can form. However, for the canonical mass of $`1.4M_{}`$ gravity dominates the strong interaction which leads to strange stars and neutron stars being similar in size . In other words, it is not clear that one would be able to distinguish between the two cases given observed masses and radii.

One consequence of the extreme stiffness of the strange matter equation of state is that strange stars can reach higher rotation frequencies than typical neutron stars. However, to date the fastest observed pulsar is the 1.56 ms PSR1937+21 which spins at a rate significantly below the breakup limit for most proposed supranuclear equation of state. In order to indicate the presence of a spinning strange star the period would have to be significantly shorter than 1 ms. Thus the claimed observation of a 0.5 ms pulsar in the remnant of SN1987A caused considerable excitement but, of course, it turned out to be flawed. Despite several searches \[see for example \] no submillisecond pulsars have yet been discovered.

It has been argued that strange stars might be distinguished by the fact that they cool faster than a neutron star would, but it is now accepted that the direct Urca mechanism may be operating \[either by the proton fraction rising above $`10`$ %  or by hyperons being present \] in the core of a neutron star. This would cool the neutron star very rapidly, which would make it difficult to identify a strange star from cooling data.

Another possible indication of a strange star would be thermonuclear flashes from the surface as accreted material is converted into strange matter. This mechanism would, however, only operate if the strange star was bare. It is generally anticipated that strange stars will be covered by a thin crust of “normal” nuclear matter . This crust is suspended above the strange matter core by the electromagnetic field. This means that the crust density cannot exceed that of neutron drip . As neutrons begin to drip out of the crust nuclei they will migrate into the core and be converted into strange matter. The presence of such a crust would allow accretion to proceed without necessarily leading to flashes from the surface.

The sole observational indication against strange stars is provided by the glitching pulsars . The standard model for explaining the large glitches in for example the Vela pulsar relies on the transfer of angular momentum between the neutron star crust and a superfluid component. It is not easy to see how to construct an analogous model for glitches in a strange star.

Following the discovery that the r-modes in a rotating perfect fluid star would be driven unstable via the emission of gravitational waves \[see  for detailed reviews\], Madsen \[1998a, 2000\] suggested that this mechanism would provide the means for distinguishing between neutron stars and strange stars. The gist of Madsen’s argument is that the bulk viscosity of strange matter is several orders of magnitude stronger than that of normal neutron star matter, which essentially shifts the window in which the r-modes are unstable to significantly lower temperatures. As a consequence one would not expect a newly born strange star to be immediately affected by the r-mode instability, while a neutron star might spin down significantly in the first few months. An observation of a newly born pulsar spinning near the Kepler limit might thus provide evidence for the presence of a strange star.

The realisation that the r-modes in a spinning compact star are generically unstable has led to a considerable effort aimed at understanding the possible astrophysical relevance of this mechanism. In the last two years several crucial issues have been investigated. Key results concern the interaction between oscillations in the core fluid and the crust , the role of the magnetic field , superfluidity , and the effect of exotic particles that are thought to exist in the deep neutron star core . Of similar importance has been attempts to understand the nonlinear saturation of an unstable mode via hydrodynamical simulations . For a more complete set of references, see recent review articles  .

In parallell with the various attempts to implement more detailed physics into the r-mode model, there have been discussions regarding possible ways that the instability may manifest itself in current observational data. The original r-mode spin-evolution models led to results that accord well with the inferred initial spin period of about 20 ms for the Crab pulsar . However, the discovery of the 16 ms PSR 0537-6910 that is thought to have been born spinning significantly faster (at 6-9 ms assuming a reasonable braking index) indicates that the naive r-mode model needs refinement. Furthermore, one can readily show that external agents like the fallback of supernova debris and an acting magnetic propeller torque are of utmost importance in determining the spin of a newly born neutron star .

Adopting a scenario first suggested by Papaloizou & Pringle  and Wagoner , it has been suggested that the r-mode instability may be active in mature accreting neutron stars . This could provide an explanation for the apparent clustering of spin rates (in the range 260-590 Hz) inferred from kHz QPO data for Low-Mass X-ray Binaries (LMXB). The original ideas were based on the notion that the angular momentum lost through gravitational waves radiated by the r-modes would balance the accretion torque and prevent the star from spinning up. This would lead to a persistent gravitational-wave signal. However, as was pointed out by Spruit  and Levin , the onset of instability is likely to trigger a thermo-gravitational runaway. This leads to a brief period (a few months) of r-mode spin-down followed by a long period (millions of years) of accretion driven spin-up. Even though the r-mode instability would still be able to cause the observed clustering of LMXBs , the associated gravitational waves would likely not be detected (as the event rate would be too low).

As we will show in the following, the r-mode instability acts rather differently in a strange star. We will argue that unstable r-modes in an accreting strange star in a LMXB may, in fact, provide a persistent source of gravitational radiation. We will also consider the evolution of young strange stars. We will show how the r-mode driven spin-evolution of a strange star differs significantly from the neutron star case. Most significantly, we find that the r-modes never grow to large amplitudes in a strange star. The veracity of our results should be testable with large scale laser interferometers such as LIGO, VIRGO and GEO600 that are about to come on-line. We thus propose that gravitational-wave astronomy might soon be able to establish whether the accreting compact stars in LMXBs are, indeed, strange and perhaps even constrain the parameters of current theoretical models.

We need to model the evolution of the spin rate, temperature and r-mode amplitude in an accreting strange star. The essential elements of our solution to this problem are discussed in sections 2–3, and we present our results for recycled strange stars in Section 4. In section 5 we discuss the evolution of young strange stars. Our conclusions are in Section 6. In an Appendix, we discuss possible refinements to the model. In particular, we consider the deconfinement of the strange star crust as the spin of the star changes and how nonlinear contributions to a strong viscous dissipation may serve to saturate an unstable r-mode.

## 2 Modelling unstable r-modes in strange stars

The aim of this section is to collect results from the literature that will enable us to assess the relevance of the r-mode instability for, possibly accreting, strange stars. We have attempted to parameterise all relevant relations in order to make the dependence on the stellar (and QCD) parameters clear. The various parameterisations are summarised in Table 1.

### 2.1 R-mode estimates

In the rotating frame of reference the r-modes have frequency

$$\omega _r=\frac{2m\mathrm{\Omega }}{l(l+1)}$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the rotation frequency of the star.

For simplicity we will assume that the star is described as an $`n=1`$ polytrope. The main reason for this is that the corresponding r-mode timescales have already been summarised by Andersson & Kokkotas . A more realistic strange star equation of state will be stiffer than our model, but we do not expect this to affect our results significantly.

Due to the emission of gravitational waves the $`l=m=2`$ r-mode (which is expected to lead to the strongest instability) grows on a timescale

$$t_g47M_{1.4}^1R_{10}^4P_3^6\text{ s}$$
(2)
(the minus sign indicates that the mode is unstable). We include only the contribution from the leading current multipole here.

Viscous dissipation tends to suppress the growth of an unstable mode, and we find

$$t_s7.4\times 10^7\alpha _{0.1}^{5/3}M_{1.4}^{5/9}R_{10}^{11/3}T_9^{5/3}\text{ s}$$
(3)
for the shear viscosity. For the bulk viscosity (which is due to the change in concentration of down and strange quarks caused by the mode oscillation) the viscosity coefficient takes the form

$$\zeta =\frac{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }T^2}{\omega _r^2+\beta T^4}$$
(4)
where the coefficients $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ and $`\beta `$ are given by Madsen . From this we see that the bulk viscosity gets weaker at both very low and very high temperatures, cf. Fig. 1 of Madsen . For low temperatures we find that

$$t_b^{\mathrm{low}}7.9M_{1.4}^2R_{10}^4P_3^2T_9^2m_{100}^4\text{ s}.$$
(5)
Meanwhile, at high temperatures we cannot readily write down a parameterised expression for the bulk viscosity timescale. The relevant timescale has to be calculated numerically for each given stellar model. However, this has little impact on our present study since the star would likely not remain in the high temperature part of the instability window long enough for an unstable mode to grow significantly. Hence, we do not consider the high-temperature case (above say $`10^9`$ K) further in this paper.

Given the above estimates one can readily construct a critical curve in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }T`$ plane above which the r-mode will be unstable. The mode is unstable whenever

$$\tau ^1=t_g^1+t_b^1+t_s^1$$
(6)
where $`t_{g,b,s}`$ are the timescales given in Eqns. (2), (3) and (5), is negative. If we assume canonical values for the various parameters we obtain the results shown in Figure 1 \[cf. Fig. 1 of Madsen \].

From this figure we immediately see that the r-mode instability would not become active (apart from a brief initial period expected to last a few tens of seconds when the star is significantly hotter than $`10^9`$ K) until the star has cooled to a temperature of a few times $`10^8`$ K. A young strange star would therefore not be spun down significantly by the r-mode instability during its first few months of existence. But after a year or so the star will enter the “low-temperature” instability window and undergo a phase of r-mode spin-down.

### 2.2 Temperature evolution

Given that the viscous damping timescales are strongly dependent on the temperature we obviously need to model the thermal evolution of the star. To do this we first of all assume that the stellar core is isothermal.

For a strange star, one can estimate that the (integrated) heat capacity is

$$C_V1.5\times 10^{38}M_{1.4}^{2/3}R_{10}T_8\text{erg/K}$$
(7)
From this we readily infer that the thermal energy of core is

$$E_{\mathrm{thermal}}=7.7\times 10^{45}R_{10}M_{1.4}^{2/3}T_8^2\text{ erg}.$$
(8)
At the temperatures that we will consider, the star cools mainly due to neutrino emission. Pizzochero  gives a formula for the corresponding luminosity per unit volume, which, when multiplied by the volume of a spherical star, gives:

$$\dot{E}_{\mathrm{neutrino}}=3.77\times 10^{37}R_{10}^3T_8^6\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(9)
We can define a cooling rate for an isolated star as

$$t\frac{2E_{\mathrm{thermal}}}{\dot{E}_{\mathrm{neutrino}}}$$
(10)
(with the factor of 2 included since the thermal energy is quadratic in the temperature). Combining equations (8) and (9) we obtain

$$t4.1\times 10^8M_{1.4}^{2/3}R_{10}^2T_8^4\text{ s}$$
(11)
(where we have assumed that the initial temperature is high enough to make its contribution to the formula insignificant). From this formula we see that it would take the star roughly 10 years to cool down to a temperature of $`10^8`$ K. A canonical strange star spinning at the Kepler limit enters the main r-mode instability window in Figure 1 at $`T6\times 10^8`$ K. Given the above cooling timescale, this would happen roughly three days after the star was born. The star then evolves through the instability phase for the next $`10^5`$ years or so, until the core temperature has fallen below $`10^7`$ K.

If the star is accreting we must also account for heating due to the accreted material. In the case of strange stars, the main heating source is likely to be due to the conversion of accreted nucleons into strange matter. Alcock et al.  estimate a release of $`e=20`$ MeV of heat per nucleon due to this conversion. This then gives

$$\dot{E}_{\mathrm{accretion}}=\dot{n}e,$$
(12)
where $`\dot{n}`$ is the rate as which nucleons *enter the strange matter core*. As we will discuss in the Appendix this is not necessarily the same as the accretion rate of nucleons onto the star. In the case where all accreted nucleons are immediately converted we get

$$\dot{E}_{\mathrm{accretion}}=1.19\times 10^{37}\dot{M}_8e_{20}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(13)
Finally, a detailed study should also account for the fact that the shear viscosity will contribute to the heating of the fluid. We estimate the associated heating rate as

$$\dot{E}_{\mathrm{viscosity}}=1.1\times 10^{45}\alpha ^2M_{1.4}^{14/9}R_{10}^{5/3}P_3^2\alpha _{0.1}^{5/3}T_8^{5/3}$$
(14)
where $`\alpha `$ represents the amplitude of the r-mode (see below).

It is easier to evolve the thermal energy $`E_{\mathrm{thermal}}`$ rather than the temperature. The relevant differential equation is:

$$\dot{E}_{\mathrm{thermal}}=\dot{E}_{\mathrm{accretion}}+\dot{E}_{\mathrm{viscosity}}\dot{E}_{\mathrm{neutrino}},$$
(15)
In the absence of an r-mode, the temperature is determined by a balance between accretion heating and neutrino cooling. Equations (13) and (9) then lead to

$$T=8.25\times 10^7\left[\dot{M}_8e_{20}R_{10}^3\right]^{1/6}\mathrm{K}.$$
(16)
For temperatures of this order, shear viscosity dissipation is much smaller than bulk viscosity dissipation, so that the r-mode instability sets in when $`|t_g|=t_b`$. Equations (5) and (2) combine to give the corresponding critical rotation period:

$$P2T_8^{1/2}M_{1.4}^{3/4}m_{100}^1\mathrm{ms}.$$
(17)
It is illuminating to compare these predictions to the inferred clustering in the LMXB data. We predict that stars with accretion rates in the range $`10^2\dot{M}_81`$ should be confined to spin frequencies in the range $`300450`$ Hz. Given the many uncertainties in our simple model, this compares quite favourably with the $`260590`$ Hz range suggested by observations. Conversely, it is clear that the current observational data cannot be used to rule out the possibility that the LMXBs harbour strange stars.

## 3 The spin-evolution of accreting strange stars

In order to investigate the way in which a strange star evolves under influence of both accretion and an unstable r-mode we use a phenomenological spin evolution model similar to that of Owen et al . We assume that we can model the star’s angular momentum as the sum of the bulk angular momentum $`J`$ and the canonical momentum of the r-mode $`J_c`$. The total torque on the star $`\dot{J}`$ can then be written as

$$\dot{J}=\dot{I}\mathrm{\Omega }+I\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}+\dot{J}_c$$
(18)
where the dots indicate time-derivatives. In the following we will write the moment of inertia as $`I=\stackrel{~}{I}MR^2`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{I}=0.261`$ for an $`n=1`$ polytrope.

Note that, since we are modelling the star as an $`n=1`$ polytrope, accretion leads to a change in the mass $`M`$ while the radius $`R`$ remains constant. This is a peculiarity associated with our particular stellar model, but it has no effect on the outcome of our evolutions. We have verified that this is the case by considering other polytropes, and also including the effect of the centrifugal flattening in our model. This more general study leads to results that are virtually identical to the ones obtained from the model described here so we will discuss only this simple case.

For the $`l=m=2`$ r-mode one can show that the canonical angular momentum is

$$J_c=\frac{3\mathrm{\Omega }\alpha ^2\stackrel{~}{J}MR^2}{2}$$
(19)
where $`\alpha `$ is the mode amplitude (as defined by Owen et al) and $`\stackrel{~}{J}=1.635\times 10^2`$ for an $`n=1`$ polytrope.

The r-mode is driven by gravitational radiation and damped by viscosity. We thus assume that the canonical angular momentum evolves according to

$$\frac{\dot{J_c}}{2J_c}=\frac{1}{\tau }$$
(20)
(the factor of 2 is included since $`\dot{J_c}`$ is proportional to the square of the perturbation).

The total torque on the star is the sum of torques due to gravitational radiation and accretion. Throughout the main part of the paper we neglect magnetic dipole radiation. There are two simple reasons for this. Firstly, such radiation is likely to be suppressed in an accretion environment, especially since the magnetic field of the LMXBs are unlikely to be stronger than $`10^9`$ G. Secondly, in the case of young isolated strange stars one can argue that the main r-mode spindown torque will dominate the magnetic dipole torque. We will comment on this further in Section 7. It is, of course, possible that the interplay between the r-mode and the interior magnetic field will affect the development of the instability (as suggested by, for example Spruit  and Rezzolla et al ). We do not account for this possibility in our study.

The torque from the gravitational wave emission from the $`l=m=2`$ current multipole is

$$\dot{J}_g=3\stackrel{~}{J}\mathrm{\Omega }\alpha ^2MR^2t_g^1$$
(21)
while we assume accretion to lead to a torque

$$\dot{J}_a=\dot{M}\sqrt{GMR}.$$
(22)
This expression is, of course, likely to be a serious simplification of the true accretion torque, but it should be sufficient for the rather qualitative considerations of the present paper.

Equations (18)-(22) combine to give equations for the evolution of $`\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

$$\dot{\alpha }=\alpha \left[\frac{1}{t_g}+\left(1\frac{3\alpha ^2\stackrel{~}{J}}{2\stackrel{~}{I}}\right)\left(\frac{1}{t_s}+\frac{1}{t_b}\right)+\frac{\dot{M}}{2\stackrel{~}{I}\mathrm{\Omega }}\left(\frac{G}{MR^3}\right)^{1/2}\right]$$
(23)
$$\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}=\frac{\dot{M}}{\stackrel{~}{I}}\left(\frac{G}{MR^3}\right)^{1/2}\frac{\dot{M}\mathrm{\Omega }}{M}3\mathrm{\Omega }\alpha ^2\frac{\stackrel{~}{J}}{\stackrel{~}{I}}\left(\frac{1}{t_{\mathrm{sv}}}+\frac{1}{t_{\mathrm{bv}}}\right)$$
(24)
The differential equations (23) and (24) can be integrated to give trajectories in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }T`$ plane along which an accreting strange star would be expected to evolve.

Note that (23) indicates that the r-mode is unstable, in the sense that $`\dot{\alpha }>0`$, whenever

$$\frac{1}{\tau }+\frac{\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}}{2\mathrm{\Omega }}+\frac{\dot{M}}{2M}<0$$
(25)
This is notably different from (6). The difference is, however, easily explained. Eqn (25) follows since $`J_c`$ is conserved for an isolated star, cf. Ho & Lai . Eqn (25) is the appropriate criterion for onset of instability in a star that is spun up by accretion. In our evolutions the r-mode instability is consequently active whenever (25) holds.

Equations (23) and (24) only apply as long as $`\alpha `$ remains “small”. As an unstable r-mode grows exponentially one would expect the equations to remain valid only for a very limited period of time. Intuitively, one would expect to growth of the mode to be halted once nonlinear effects become relevant. Recent attempts to model the evolution of large amplitude unstable modes in numerical hydrodynamical simulations suggest that the r-modes may not saturate until $`\alpha `$ has grown to values of order unity . As we will demonstrate below, the r-modes are unlikely to ever grow to such amplitudes in a strange star. Thus we assume that the r-mode does not saturate due to nonlinear effects, and consider equations (23) and (24) to be relevant throughout our evolutions.

## 4 LMXBs as a source for persistent gravitational waves

As long as the r-mode remains stable an accreting star will spin up, and its core temperature should be well approximated by (16). As is clear from Figure 1 this means that the star will enter the r-mode instability window on the branch where bulk viscosity provides the main damping mechanism. The subsequent evolution will therefore be manifestly different from the neutron star case where the star would undergo a thermo-gravitational runaway once it reached the instability limit. We shall now show that in the case of strange stars the subsequent evolution may well proceed extremely slowly (on the accretion timescale) and lead to emission of persistent gravitational waves.

As soon as the star enters the instability window the r-mode will grow and lead to both shear viscosity heating and a spin-down torque. Intuitively, one would expect the star to continue spinning up until the r-mode amplitude becomes sufficiently large to balance the accretion torque. However, the situation will not be stable unless this balance occurs for a star residing on the instability curve, i.e. for which we have $`\dot{\alpha }=0`$. This situation is well approximated by $`|t_g|t_b`$. Use equation 23) and assume that i) the mode amplitude is small (such that $`1>>3\alpha ^2\stackrel{~}{J}/2\stackrel{~}{I}`$) and ii) the temperature is high enough that the shear viscosity dissipation can be neglected.

In order for the situation to correspond to a quasiequilibrium the mode-amplitude required to balance the accretion torque is equal to:

$$\alpha ^26.7\times 10^{11}\dot{M}_8M_{1.4}^{15/4}R_{10}^{11/2}m_{100}^7T_8^{7/2},$$
(26)
while the mode amplitude required for the shear viscosity heating to prevent the star from cooling down is equal to:

$`\alpha ^2`$ $``$ $`3.6\times 10^8M_{1.4}^{1/18}\alpha _{0.1}^{5/3}R_{10}^{5/3}m_{100}^2T_8^{2/3}`$ (27)
$`\times `$ $`\left[3.77R_{10}^3T_8^61.19\dot{M}_8e_{20}\right]`$
In obtaining these relations we have made use of (17) to express $`P`$ in terms of $`T`$.

Now we could in principle equate the two expressions (26) and (27) and solve for the “equilibrium” temperature. However, because this leads to a nonlinear equation it is non-trivial. In order to get an algebraic answer we instead assume that the star remains close to the equilibrium temperature (16). Linearising the equation with $`T=T_{\mathrm{eq}}+\delta T`$ it is easy to estimate that the required solution corresponds to

$$\frac{\delta T}{T_{\mathrm{eq}}}=\frac{0.24}{1+942T_8^{25/6}R_{10}^{43/6}\alpha _{0.1}^{5/3}m_{100}^5e_{20}M_{1.4}^{137/36}}$$
(28)
From this we can deduce that once the star enters the instability regime it never evolves far away from the equilibrium temperature given by (16). In other words, gravitational waves halt the accretion spin-up once the star reaches the r-mode instability curve.

To complete this picture it is necessary to demonstrate that the equilibrium described above is a stable one, i.e. that for small departures from the equilibrium values $`(\alpha ,T,P)`$ the star returns to the original state. This is straightforwardly achieved by assembling our three differential equations for these quantities, obtaining linearised equations for the departure from equilibrium, and writing the time dependence of this small departure as $`e^{wt}`$. The solution to the eigenvalue problem so obtained shows that the configuration is indeed stable (the real part of $`w`$ is negative), with departures from equilibrium being damped on a timescale intermediate between the temperature evolution timescale and the gravitational radiation reaction one. This result will be of interest should such wandering behaviour ever be seen in an accreting system.

Numerical results supporting these analytic estimates are shown in Figure 2. As is readily apparent, after a brief interval in which $`\alpha `$ and $`T`$ vary sharply on a timescale close to the thermal one, the system settles down to a steady state. All subsequent evolution occurs on the accretion timescale.

Having established that the spin-up of an accreting strange star will be halted by the r-mode instability we can readily assess the detectability of the resultant gravitational waves. Following Andersson, Kokkotas and Stergioulas  (see also Bildsten ) we use

$$h^2\frac{4G}{c^3}\left(\frac{1}{\omega r}\right)^2|\dot{E}|$$
(29)
and $`\dot{E}=\omega \dot{J}_{\mathrm{acc}}/m`$, where $`\omega `$ is the mode frequency measured in the inertial frame to give:

$$h2.3\times 10^{27}P_3^{1/2}M_{1.4}^{1/2}R_{10}^{1/4}\dot{M}_8^{1/2}d_{10}.$$
(30)
Since the detectability of the source increases roughly as the square-root of the number of observed cycles we find that the effective amplitude is

$$h_{\mathrm{eff}}\sqrt{\frac{\omega t_{\mathrm{obs}}}{2\pi }}h10^{21}$$
(31)
after a few months of observation. In other words: this signal should easily be detected by a large scale interferometric detector.

## 5 The spin-down of young strange stars

We next want to investigate whether the spin-evolution of a young strange star is also distinct from that of a nascent neutron star. To do this we simply assume that $`\dot{M}=0`$ in the various evolution equations from Section 3 and initialize the integration with $`P=P_K`$, i.e. the star is spinning at the break-up limit when it cools to the temperature at which the r-mode first goes unstable. A typical result of this calculation, corresponding to the first year of the evolution, is shown in Figure 3.

At first sight, the result shown in Figure 3 may be a bit surprising. A strange star clearly evolves in a way that is rather different from the familiar results for hot young neutron stars, cf. Owen et al . In particular, the strange star never evolves far into the instability window for the $`l=m=2`$ r-mode. This is essentially because the main r-mode instability phase does not begin until a strange star has cooled to a temperature below $`10^9`$ K. At that temperature the cooling time is considerably longer than the spindown time due to an r-mode of sizeable amplitude. This means that, once the r-mode begins to grow it efficiently spins the star down through the bulk viscosity part of the instability curve. Once stable, the mode dies away exponentially and cooling will again govern the evolution of the star. Eventually the mode is again unstable and the cycle is repeated. After a few years the system reaches a quasi-equilibrium where the mode amplitude evolves on the cooling time scale, and the star spins down along the bulk-viscosity branch on the instability window. That this would be the case has previously been suggested by Madsen .

This result has considerable repercussions for the r-modes as a gravitational-wave source. In Figure 4 we show the evolution of the r-mode amplitude corresponding to the case shown in figure 3. Here it is interesting to note that the mode amplitude varies greatly during the initial phase of r-mode spindown. Furthermore, it is clear that the evolution never leads to $`\alpha `$ reaching values of order unity. This is intriguing given the results of recent hydrodynamical simulations that seem to suggest that an unstable r-mode will not saturate due to nonlinear effects until $`\alpha 3`$. In other words, the r-modes in a strange star may never actually reach the truly nonlinear regime. If this is, indeed, the case our spindown model may be better than we initially had any reason to expect.

We now consider the implications of the above results for the r-modes as a source of detectable gravitational waves. We estimate the gravitational-wave strain using \[cf. Andersson & Kokkotas \],

$$h7.54\times 10^{23}\alpha \stackrel{~}{J}P_3^3M_{1.4}R_{10}^3\frac{15\text{ Mpc}}{D}$$
(32)
where $`D`$ is the distance to the source (here taken to be in the Virgo cluster). Typical results are shown in Figure 4. The oscillatory evolution of the r-mode amplitude would, obviously, imprint a unique signature on the emerging gravitational waves. In contrast to the neutron star case, where the r-mode signal evolves slowly on the cooling timescale, the signal from a strange star would be concentrated in relatively brief “bursts”. Even though one must recognize the difficulties in providing a detailed model for this behaviour (given the need for a detailed, probably nonlinear, understanding of for example the viscosities) it seems clear that observations ought to make it quite easy to distinguish a strange star from a neutron star.

We will not attempt to assess the detectability of the early phase of the gravitational-wave signal shown in Figure 4. The rapid (model dependent!) variations in the mode amplitude implies that this problem requires a more detailed signal processing discussion. However, this initial phase last only for a few years. Once the star reaches the quasi-adiabatic phase where $`\alpha `$ remains constant over long periods in time we can easily estimate the detectability of the gravitational waves. To do this we consider the data in Figure 4. From the figure which we infer that $`h10^{27}`$ and $`f900\text{Hz}`$ at $`t10^8\text{s}`$ . Then, knowing that the effective amplitude improves roughly as the squareroot of the number of detected cycles, i.e. that $`h_{\mathrm{eff}}\sqrt{ft_{\mathrm{obs}}}h`$, we find that one would need an integration time of $`t_{\mathrm{obs}}40`$ years to achieve an effective amplitude of order $`10^{21}`$. This is clearly not feasible, and we can conclude that the late part of the signal shown in Figure 4 is unlikely to be detected from sources in the Virgo cluster.

The usual rationale for considering sources in the Virgo cluster is that we need a reasonable event rate to make a strong case that a certain model leads to detectable gravitational waves. In the present case, it may be sufficient to focus on sources in our own Galaxy. After all, the gravitational-wave signal from a strange star lasts considerably longer than that from a young neutron star. From Figure 4 we can see that the signal remains above $`h10^{29}`$ for more than 300 years. Taking the corresponding wave frequency to be 600 Hz (again extrapolated from the figure), we find that the effective amplitude would reach $`10^{21}`$ after two weeks of integration if the source was located at a distance of $`10`$ kpc, i.e. at the centre of the Galaxy. Finally combining the expected supernova rate on 3/yr/galaxy with a lifetime of the gravitational wave signal of 300 years or so, we deduce that there could be as many as 10 or so systems active in the Galaxy at any given time. At least if all compact stars born in supernovae are strange.

The above results offer exciting possibilities given the fact that new large scale interferometers are about to come into operation. Our study suggests that these detectors should be able to test the idea that “all neutron stars are strange stars” in the near future.

Before we conclude our discussion of young strange stars, it is worthwhile making two remarks. Firstly, one might wonder whether the r-mode driven spin-down would have observational effects in addition to the generated gravitational waves. It could, for example, leave a distinct imprint on the electromagnetic pulsar signal. After all, the r-mode phase may last for thousands of years in a young strange star born spinning at, or near, the Kepler limit and it is possible that the presence of the gravitational-wave torque could lead to some anomalous spin-down behaviour. Unfortunately, one can argue that this is unlikely to be the case, unless the star is observed in the first 10 years or so. One can easily show that the r-mode spin-down torque is dominated by the standard contribution from an electromagnetic dipole,

$$\dot{J}_{\mathrm{em}}=\frac{2B^2R^6\mathrm{\Omega }^3}{3c^3},$$
(33)
whenever

$$B>1.7\times 10^{15}\alpha M_{1.4}P_3^2G$$
(34)
Taking the spin-period to be 2 ms and assuming a magnetic field of $`10^{12}`$ G (fairly typical for a young pulsar) we find that the spin-down will be mainly electromagnetic once the mode-amplitude falls below $`\alpha 10^3`$. From Figure 4 we can see that this will happen after the first ten years or so. In other words, we should not necessarily expect the presence of a small amplitude r-mode to make an imprint on the electromagnetic signal from a young pulsar.

Secondly, we note a recent paper by Middleditch et al  which provides possible evidence for the existence of a 2.14 ms pulsar in the remnant of SN1987A. The observations were made over several years between 1992 and 1996, and the data indicate a surprisingly large, and highly variable spin-down rate. It is interesting to note that these suggestions agree qualitatively with the results of our simple spin-evolution model for a newly born strange star. In particular, it is clear that one would expect to find a highly variable $`\dot{P}`$ during the phase where the r-mode amplitude oscillates on the cooling timescale. Should the Middleditch observations prove to be reliable, they may thus indicate that a strange star was born in SN1987A.

## 6 Summary

In this paper we have studied the r-mode instability in the context of strange stars. We have shown that unstable r-modes affect strange stars in a way that is quite distinct from the neutron star case. For accreting strange stars, the onset of r-mode instability does not lead to a thermo-gravitational runaway. Instead, the strange star evolves towards a quasi-equilibrium on a timescale of about a year. This could explain the clustering of spin-frequencies inferred from kHz QPO data in Low-mass X-ray binaries. For young strange stars we showed that the r-mode driven spin-evolution is also distinct from the neutron star case. In a young strange star the r-mode undergoes short cycles of instability during the first few months. This is followed by a quasi-adiabatic evolution where the r-mode remains at a small, roughly constant, amplitude for perhaps as long as $`10^5`$ years. Another interesting feature of these evolutions is that the r-modes in a strange star never grow to large amplitudes. This could prove to be a crucially important observation since recent hydrodynamical simulations  indicate that the r-modes will not be significantly affected by nonlinear effects until at much larger amplitudes than those reached in our study.

The main conclusion of this study is that the r-modes in a strange star should emit a persistent gravitational-wave signal that ought to be detectable with large-scale interferometers given an observation time of weeks to months. If detected, these signals would provide unique evidence for the existence of strange stars in the Universe, which would put useful constraints on the parameters of QCD.

## Acknowledgements

We thank John Miller and Nick Stergioulas for enlightening discussions. NA is a Philip Leverhulme prize fellow. NA and DIJ acknowledge support from PPARC via grant number PPA/G/S/1998/00606. This work was also supported by the EU programme “Improving the Human Research Potential and the Socio-Economic Knowledge Base” (research training network contract HPRN-CT-2000-00137).

## Appendix: Two complicating issues

In this Appendix we discuss briefly two issues that could prove to be relevant for the spin-evolution of a strange star. A preliminary study shows that these effects will not alter the conclusions drawn in this paper qualitatively, but that they must be considered in any attempt to obtain reliable quantitative estimates.

### 6.1 Deconfinement of the crust

As mentioned in the Introduction, a strange star is likely to have a thin crust of normal nuclear matter. The inner edge of this crust is sharply defined by the nuclear drip density, since the crust relies on the electromagnetic field to suspend it above the strange matter core and save it from deconfinement. Neutrons are obviously not affected by the magnetic field and will fall into the strange core as soon as they begin to drip out of the nuclei. For a given equation of state, one can determine the maximum mass of the crust. This has been done by Glendenning and Weber . Not very surprisingly, the maximum mass depends also on the rotation rate of the star. Yuan and Zhang  have provided a simple analytic calculation of the maximum crust mass, which agrees reasonably well with the numerical results of Glendenning and Weber. For simplicity, we will use the analytic result here, i.e. we assume that

$$M_{\mathrm{crust},\mathrm{max}}[2.2+2.9R_{10}^5M_{1.4}^1(\mathrm{\Omega }/\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K})^2]\times 10^5M_{}.$$
(35)
Clearly, this estimate may have impact on a discussion of accreting strange stars.

Strange star accretion can be seen as a two-stage process. First, the accreted matter, of mass say $`dM`$, is added to the crust. If $`M_{\mathrm{crust}}<M_{\mathrm{crust},\mathrm{max}}`$ the increment $`dM`$ can be added to the crust without any matter migrating into the core and thus no significant accretion heating. This is particularly relevant since accretion leads to spin-up and an increase in $`M_{\mathrm{crust},\mathrm{max}}`$

Conversely, in the case of a rapidly spinning down star (perhaps due to an unstable r-mode), a substantial portion of the crust will ‘fall’ into the core on the spindown timescale. This may then rapidly heat the core. Consider the case of spindown due to a saturated r-mode, for which

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}\frac{3\alpha ^2\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{~}{J}}{\stackrel{~}{I}t_g}.$$
(36)
Taking the time-derivative of (35) we have

$$\dot{M}_c5.85\times 10^5R_{10}^8M_{1.4}^1\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}}{\mathrm{\Omega }_K^2}M_{}/\text{s}$$
(37)
or, after using (36),

$$\dot{M_c}=1.5\times 10^7\alpha ^2R_{10}^1M_{1.4}^1P_3^8M_{}/\text{s}$$
(38)
For large mode amplitudes and a spin-rate near the Kepler limit, this would correspond to a huge rate of deconfinement of the crust. The effect of this on the temperature of the star, and the evolution of the unstable r-mode could clearly be significant.

The above discussion does, however, come with a few caveats. The electromagnetically supported gap between the crust and core is *incredibly* thin: Alcock et al. (1986) suggest $`10^{13}`$ m, which is of order $`10^3`$ atomic diameters, or 10 nuclear diameters. This means that, unless the crust and core execute nearly exactly the same oscillation the two will overlap with part of the crust “dissolving” into the core. In the limit where the crust is infinitely rigid and so does not partake in the oscillation, we can imagine the interior oscillating core dissolving the inner part of the crust, in a shell of thickness corresponding to the radial motion of the strange core. The crust would then presumably rapidly contract, with another shell being dissolved, and so on. Of course, in reality the crust is far from rigid. Being much thinner and less massive than a neutron star crust, its modulus of rigidity is very small. It follows that the crust may participate in a fluid oscillation mode to a considerable extent, \[as discussed in the neutron star case by Levin & Ushomirsky (2000)\]. We have not attempted to quantify the extent to which the crust of a strange star participates in (say) a core r-mode, but it is an interesting question that may be worth further consideration.

Finally, the fact that the core-crust boundary corresponds to the density at which neutrons being to drip out of the nuclei implies that possible viscous Ekman layers will be much less significant than in the neutron star case, cf. the comments by Madsen . In view of this, we have not included effects due to viscous rubbing at the crust interface in our analysis.

### 6.2 Nonlinear viscosity saturation

The possibility that nonlinear contributions to the viscosity coefficients may saturate an unstable mode has been suggested by Reisenegger (private communication). However, in the case of a “normal” neutron star fluid the standard bulk viscosity is too weak for this effect to be relevant (the mode does saturate, but only at unphysical amplitudes). In the case of strange stars, the bulk viscosity is significantly stronger and thus it could well be that the nonlinear contributions to the viscosity turn out to be relevant. Incidentally, it may be worth pointing out that a similar effect may be highly relevant in the case of strong hyperon induced bulk viscosity .

We want to investigate the consequences of the fact that the low temperature bulk viscosity coefficient can be written (cf. eqn. (21) of Madsen )

$$\zeta =\frac{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }T^2}{\omega _r^2}\left[1+\frac{3}{16\pi ^2}\left(\frac{m_s^2\mathrm{\Delta }v}{3\mu _dv_0T}\right)^2\right]$$
(39)
In the estimate used earlier in the paper (eg. to create the data displayed in Figure 1) the $`\mathrm{\Delta }v/v_0`$ term was neglected. The bulk viscosity calculation could, of course, be generalised in order to include this compression term but before doing this it is useful to estimate whether this contribution will ever be relevant. To do this we use

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }v}{v_0}\frac{\delta r}{R}$$
(40)
where $`\delta r`$ is the radial component of the r-mode displacement vector. The two terms in the bracket of (39) contribute equally when

$$\frac{\delta r}{R}0.07\alpha \left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mathrm{\Omega }_K}\right)^27.5\times 10^2\mu _{400}m_{100}^2T_9$$
(41)
where we have used the estimate of the height of the r-mode at the surface of the star provided by Andersson and Kokkotas . Parameterising to typical values we can use this result to get an estimate of the r-mode amplitude at which the nonlinear contribution to the bulk viscosity should not be neglected. We then get

$$\alpha 1.07T_9\mu _{400}m_{100}^2\left(\frac{P}{P_K}\right)^2$$
(42)
from which we can deduce that the contribution may be important in stars cooler than (say) $`10^9`$ K, i.e. in the main instability of Figure 1.

We can also estimate the amplitude at which the r-mode saturates because of the nonlinear contribution to the viscosity. To do this (in a suitably simple way that avoids volume integration over eigenfunctions etc) we use

$$\frac{3}{16\pi ^2}\left(\frac{m_s^2}{3\mu _dT}\frac{\delta r}{R}\right)^20.36\alpha ^2P_3^4m_{100}^4\mu _{400}^2T_9^2$$
(43)
and modify the bulk viscosity timescale to

$$t_b^{\mathrm{new}}=t_b\left[1+0.36\alpha ^2P_3^4m_{100}^4\mu _{400}^2T_9^2\right]^1$$
(44)
Assuming that the mode amplitude is large (such that we can neglect the first term in the bracket of the denominator), and that the shear viscosity is suitably weak, we arrive at a saturation amplitude (by setting $`\dot{\alpha }=0`$ the evolution equation for the mode amplitude)

$$\alpha _s^219.4\mu _{400}^2P_3^6T_8^4M_{1.4}^3$$
(45)
Although this is a rough estimate that may be far from the detailed answer it shows that the effect could, in principle, be relevant and that nonlinear viscosity saturation should be taken seriously for strange stars.

However, as is clear from Figure 3 a young strange star never evolves into the regime where the nonlinear contribution to the bulk viscosity dominates. Hence, although it is conceptually interesting, we do not expect this effect to play a role in saturating an unstable r-mode in a young strange star that enters the instability window spinning at or near the breakup limit.