text:
# A note on the baryonic 𝐵→Λ̄𝑝𝜂' decay

## Abstract

In this short note we examine the exclusive three-body $`B\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\eta ^{}`$ decay using a simple pole model involving a scalar intermediate resonance state. Our aim is to test the recently formulated hypothesis that charmless baryonic $`B`$ decays could occur mainly in association with $`\eta ^{}`$ or $`\gamma `$.
Pacs numbers: 13.25.Hw, 12.39.-x, 14.40.Cs
CERN-TH/2001-379; FNT/T 2001/24; hep-ph/0112294

In a recent paper by Hou and Soni , the general problem of searching new ways to estimate charmless baryonic $`B`$ decays is addressed. The thesis is that charmless baryonic $`B`$ decays may be more prominent in association with $`\eta ^{}`$ or $`\gamma `$. In particular, the attention is posed on the exclusive process $`B\eta ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p`$, taking the cue from the experimental observation of the unexpectedly large modes $`B\eta ^{}X_s`$ and $`B\eta ^{}K`$ .

Since the enhancement ($`Br(B\eta ^{}K)8\times 10^5`$) was established by the CLEO collaboration, many studies aimed at investigating its nature have appeared. An interesting proposal to explain the phenomenon is that based on the subprocess $`bsg^{}s\eta ^{}g`$, where the virtual gluon $`g^{}`$ emerging from the standard model penguin couples to $`\eta ^{}`$ via an effective $`gg^{}\eta ^{}`$ vertex related to the gluonic triangle anomaly . The structure of this vertex was reexamined in ref. , where the running of the effective coupling of $`\eta ^{}`$ to gluons, assumed to be constant in ref. , is also taken into account. The possibility that the $`gg^{}\eta ^{}`$ vertex could be dangerously affected by out of control nonperturbative effects was discussed in ref. . Some further criticism can be found in ref. . The emergence of a $`g^{}g\eta ^{}`$ coupling in the $`BD\eta ^{}`$ decay has been explored in ref. . In ref.  a ‘non-spectator model’ involving a gluon fusion process has been introduced to study the inclusive $`B\eta ^{}X_s`$ and the exclusive $`BK^{()}\eta ^{}`$ decays: the gluon $`g`$ of the $`gg^{}\eta ^{}`$ vertex is supposed to be emitted by the light quark inside the $`B`$ meson, while the $`g^{}`$ comes from the $`bs`$ penguin.

Taking advantage from the latter mechanism, we estimate the $`B\eta ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p`$ branching ratio using a simple pole model according to which this decay proceeds via an intermediate scalar meson. A pole model is used also in ref.  to gain a quantitative estimate of $`B\eta ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p`$, but the intermediate state there assumed is a $`K`$ meson which makes the pole approximation questionable because the $`K`$ is clearly quite off its mass shell. As it’s already noted in  it would be preferable to exploit the idea of a $`g^{}`$ emerging from the penguin and fragmenting into a diquark pair rather than rely on the simple picture of an intermediate state mediating the baryonic decay. The former approach takes care of the short distance dynamics which is instead completely lost when considering only the long distance contribution due to the intermediate state. Diquark models and sum rules are certainly the most complete approaches to baryonic decays (see the discussion in , see also ), anyway, in many cases, simple pole ideas have provided reasonable estimates of several exclusive processes.

In this note we will consider a pole model of the $`B\eta ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p`$ interaction involving as intermediate meson state the $`K_0^{}(1430)`$ scalar resonance ; in other words we will assume that the decay proceeds as follows $`B\eta ^{}K_0^{}\eta ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p`$. The effective couplings $`K\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p`$ and $`K_0^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p`$ have been computed in ref.  in the framework of a Nuclear-Soft-Core model. It is interesting to observe that the latter coupling is suggested to be almost ten times bigger than the former (see Tables VI and VII in ref. ), suggesting that the $`K_0^{}(1430)`$ state is a quite better candidate for being considered as the intermediate state in $`B\eta ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p`$.

In Fig. 1 it is shown the diagram we are considering while in Fig. 2 we report the gluon fusion mechanism supposed to be responsible for the $`\eta ^{}`$ coupling to the $`B`$ meson . The penguin interaction and the $`\eta ^{}gg`$ vertices are depicted effectively as two black spots, while the interaction of the almost-on-shell gluon (carrying momentum $`p`$) with the light quark line is represented with a smaller spot. This ‘non-spectator-mechanism’ has been used in ref.  to predict the $`Br(BK\eta ^{})`$ branching ratio. In this note we merely use the model to fit $`BK\eta ^{}`$ and afterwards to predict $`BK_0^{}\eta ^{}`$. Once the $`BK_0^{}\eta ^{}`$ coupling is known, using the pole model we estimate the $`Br(B\eta ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p)`$ with the Breit-Wigner approximation for the intermediate $`K_0^{}`$.

The effective $`\eta ^{}gg`$ vertex is given by:

$$A^{\mu \sigma }(gg\eta ^{})=iH(q^2,p^2,m_\eta ^{}^2)ϵ^{\mu \sigma \alpha \beta }q_\alpha p_\beta ,$$
(1)
where the form factor $`H(0,0,m_\eta ^{}^2)`$ is estimated to be approximately $`1.8`$ GeV-1 . Here we consider the $`q^2`$ dependence of $`H`$ described in ref.  (see Fig. 13 in ref. ), where $`q^2=m_\eta ^{}^2+2p_0E_\eta ^{}`$ (see Fig. 2). Our starting point is the expression for the amplitude of $`BK\eta ^{}`$ obtained in ref. :

$`\eta ^{}K|H_{\mathrm{eff}}|B`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{2CHf_Bf_K}{9\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}(p_Bqp_Kpp_Bpp_Kq)`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{2CHf_Bf_K}{9\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}m_Bp_0\left[(m_BE_K)E_K{\displaystyle \frac{(m_B^2m_\eta ^2m_K^2)}{2}}\right],`$ (3)
where:

$$H_{\mathrm{eff}}=iCH(\overline{s}\gamma _\mu (1\gamma _5)T^ab)(\overline{q}\gamma _\sigma T^aq)\frac{1}{p^2}ϵ^{\mu \sigma \alpha \beta }q_\alpha p_\beta .$$
(4)
The $`C`$ constant is built with the Inami-Lim function $`E`$  according to:

$$C=\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }V_{tb}V_{td}^{}[E(x_t)E(x_c)],$$
(5)
where:

$`E(x_i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\mathrm{ln}(x_i)+{\displaystyle \frac{x_i^2(1516x_i+4x_i^2)}{6(1x_i)^4}}\mathrm{ln}(x_i)`$ (6)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{x_i(1811x_ix_i^2)}{12(1x_i)^3}},`$ (7)
$`x_i=m_i^2/m_W^2`$, $`m_i`$ being the internal quark mass and we assume $`\alpha _s=0.2`$, $`f_B=0.2`$ GeV, $`f_K=0.167`$ GeV.

The second equation in eq. (3) is obtained in the center of mass frame of the decaying $`B`$ and averaging on the directions of the gluon radiated by the light quark in the $`B`$ system (see Fig. 2). Obviously:

$`E_K`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{m_K^2+𝐩_K^2}`$ (8)
$`|𝐩_K|`$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{m_B^2+m_K^2m_\eta ^{}^2}{4m_B^2}}m_K^2\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ (9)
Assuming the cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.23`$ GeV in (3) ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$), and considering also $`p_0`$, the energy of the almost-on-shell gluon emitted softly by the light quark, $`p_0\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we reproduce fairly well the experimentally observed central value of $`Br(BK\eta ^{})=7.8\times 10^5`$.

Having fitted the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (see Fig. 3) on the observed rate for $`BK\eta ^{}`$, once $`p_0`$ is chosen to be $`p_00.25`$ GeV, we can now consider the case of the $`BK_0^{}\eta ^{}`$ process writing, after ref. , the expression for its amplitude as:

$$\eta ^{}K_0^{}|H_{\mathrm{eff}}|B=+i\frac{2CHf_Bf_{K_0^{}}}{9\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}(p_Bqp_{K_0^{}}pp_Bpp_{K_0^{}}q).$$
(11)
We take the definition and the value of the leptonic decay constant $`f_{K_0^{}}`$ in ref. :

$$f_{K_0^{}}m_{K_0^{}}^2=0.0842\pm 0.0045\mathrm{GeV}^3.$$
(12)
Using the amplitude given in eq. (11) we readily compute the branching ratio:

$$Br(BK_0^{}\eta ^{})=3.4\times 10^6.$$
(13)
To perform this estimate we use a value for the $`H`$ form factor given by $`H=1.5`$ GeV-1 instead of the $`H(0,0,m_\eta ^{}^2)=1.8`$ GeV-1. This is because we take into account the form factor suppression extensively described in ref.  (see Fig. 13 of ref. ).

The latter prediction is functional to compute the $`Br`$ for the process $`B\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\eta ^{}`$ using the coupling

$$\frac{g_{K_0^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }p}^{(\mathrm{eff})}}{\sqrt{4\pi }}=2.83,$$
(14)
computed in ref. . (In ref.  it is used the symbol $`\kappa `$ rather than $`K_0^{}`$; see note ). The expression for the width is given by:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(B\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\eta ^{})_{K_0^{}}=`$ (15)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{G_1G_2}{8(2\pi )^3m_B^3}}\times {\displaystyle _{(m_\mathrm{\Lambda }+m_p)^2}^{(m_Bm_\eta ^{})^2}}𝑑q^2\lambda ^{\frac{1}{2}}(m_B^2,q^2,m_\eta ^{}^2){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(m_{K_0^{}}^2q^2)^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{K_0^{}}^2m_{K_0^{}}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q^2}}\lambda ^{\frac{1}{2}}(q^2,m_\mathrm{\Lambda }^2,m_p^2),`$ (16)
where $`G_2`$ and $`G_1`$ are respectively $`(g_{\kappa \mathrm{\Lambda }p}^{(\mathrm{eff})})^2`$ and $`|\eta ^{}K_0^{}|H_{\mathrm{eff}}|B|^2`$. The couplings $`BK_0^{}\eta ^{}`$ and $`B(K_0^{})_{\mathrm{off}\mathrm{shell}}\eta ^{}`$ are assumed to be the same and the Breit-Wigner formula is implemented. Eq. (16) allows for a prediction of the branching ratio:

$$Br(B\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\eta ^{})=1.2\times 10^6,$$
(17)
which is sensibly lower than what expected in ref. , namely $`Br(B\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\eta ^{})=2.4\times 10^5`$. Varying smoothly the value of $`p_0`$ and selecting accordingly the value of the form factor $`H`$ from ref.  and the value of the cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in order to fit $`BK\eta ^{}`$, we find a nice stability of the $`Br`$ obtained in eq. (17). Even more stable against variation of the parameters is the value of $`Br(B\eta ^{}K_0^{})`$. It is worth noting that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(B\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\eta ^{})_{K_0^{}}/\mathrm{\Gamma }(BK_0^{}\eta ^{})0.36`$. However, it should be stressed that, due to the intrinsic model dependence of our approach and due to the complexity of the baryonic decays, these results have to be understood as order-of-magnitude estimates. Interestingly, what emerges here is that a simple pole model, suggests a quite reasonable rate for a charmless baryon-antibaryon final state produced in association with $`\eta ^{}`$ in a $`B`$ decay.

This exclusive mode could be soon reconstructed by the BaBar and Belle collaborations and our straightforward calculation provides the possibility to test the non-spectator model in ref. , the Nuclear-Soft-Core model in ref.  and, more basically, the anomaly picture in ref. .

Once observed, $`B`$ meson baryonic modes could also offer new paths to explore fundamental topics such as the extraction of CP violating phases.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank M.L. Mangano, Th.A. Rijken and D.O. Riska for useful discussions. ADP acknowledges support from the Marie Curie fellowship programme, contract HPMF-CT-2001-01178.


format: text

text:
# Chandra on Millisecond Pulsars in Globular Clusters

## 1. Introduction

X-ray studies of millisecond pulsars (MSPs) can constrain fundamental properties of their emission regions and, when combined with radio timing studies, their underlying neutron stars (NSs). In globular clusters both MSPs and low mass x-ray binaries (LMXBs), their likely progenitors, are significantly enhanced (per unit mass) over their values in the galactic disk by stellar and binary interactions. The dense cluster (core) environment needed for their excess formation may also alter their evolution. Thus cluster vs. field MSPs, as studied in x-rays and radio, can constrain intrinsic vs. extrinsic (evolutionary) properties of these oldest NS systems.

We have conducted a deep Chandra survey for MSPs as well as quiescent LMXBs and cataclysmic variables (CVs) in the globular clusters 47 Tuc (Grindlay et al. 2001a; GHE01a) and NGC 6397 (Grindlay et al. 2001b; GHE01b). The full details of the MSP survey are given in Grindlay et al. (2001c; GCH01). Here we present the highlights of this study, focusing on just the x-ray properties of the 16 MSPs with radio timing positions in 47 Tuc (Freire et al. 2001a, Freire 2001) and the one in NGC 6397 (D’Amico et al. 2001; DPM) as well as their comparison with the field MSP population (cf. Becker & Trumper 1997, 1999; BT97, BT99). We defer to the full paper the discussion of the total MSP populations and spatial distributions, which probe cluster dynamics.

## 2. X-ray Colors and Emission Models

The 47 Tuc MSPs were found initially (GHE01a) to be soft sources. In GCH01 we give the detected counts in 3 bands: softcts (0.2–1 keV), mediumcts (1–2 keV) and hardcts (2–8 keV) for each of the 14 resolved MSPs, with counts for 47 Tuc-G and -I (unresolved) estimated. From these bands, we form the hardness ratios HR1 = mediumcts/softcts and HR2 = hardcts/mediumcts and plot the MSPs, with counting statistics errors, in the color-color diagram shown in Figure 1 (left). The MSP colors are clustered in a relatively narrow range of HR1 and HR2 with 47 Tuc-J clearly harder, as was evident in the Xcolor distributions in GHE01a.

Using the PIMMS tool, we construct values of HR1 and HR2 for 3 simple models: thermal bremsstrahlung (TB), blackbody (BB) and power law (PL), with index values (kT or photon index) given in the caption of Figure 1 (left). The observed range of HR1-HR2 is roughly consistent with TB spectra with kT $``$1 keV, BB spectra with kT $``$0.2–0.3 keV (except for 47 Tuc-J) or PL spectra with photon index $``$3. The weighted mean colors for all but 47 Tuc-J are consistent with a BB spectrum with kT $``$0.22 keV, giving x-ray luminosities Lx (0.5-2.5keV) $``$1-4 $`\times `$1030 erg s-1and thus mean bolometric Lx-bol = 2.6 $`\times `$1030 erg s-1.

The x-ray colors rule out TB models (surrounding column densities inconsistent with the MSP dispersion measures; DM) and PL fits (spectral indices implausible). Simple BB fits for Lx-bol give emission radii of only $``$0.1km whereas H (or He)-atmosphere models (Rajagopal & Romani 1996) typically give temperatures reduced (from BB) by a factor of $``$2 and thus radii increased to $``$0.4km. Either case suggests soft x-ray emission from a region smaller than the entire polar cap, as predicted in recent models of Harding & Muslimov (2001) for polar cap heating. Although the 3.2s temporal resolution of Chandra-ACIS prevents a pulsation analysis, the small thermal emission area suggests the emission would be pulsed, with a sinusoidal pulse shape appropriate to the fractional visibility of the isotropically radiating thermal polar cap. In contrast, the narrower pulse duty cycles of $``$10% for some field MSPs (and one in the globular cluster M28; BT99) are probably due to non-thermal beamed emission.

## 3.  X-ray vs. Pulsar Spin Properties

A key question for this rich Chandra dataset is the correlation of x-ray luminosity and pulsar spindown luminosity $`\dot{E}`$, which is found for field MSPs (with much more uncertain distances) to scale as Lx (0.1-2.4keV) $``$10-3 $`\dot{E}`$ (BT97) and with a possibly steeper logarithmic slope (1.4) for Lx in the 2-10keV band (Possenti et al. 2001; PCC). We derive instrinsic period derivatives, $`\dot{P}_i`$, corrected for the cluster acceleration by estimating the 3D positions of each MSP in the cluster from the observed DM value and the observed hot gas and thus electron density in the cluster (Freire et al. 2001b) and then subtracting the cluster acceleration using a King model with cluster parameters derived by Meylan & Mayor (1986). Using a standard NS moment of inertia $`I=10^{45}`$ g cm2, we then derive $`\dot{E}`$ = $`4\pi ^2I\dot{P}_i/P^3`$ for each MSP and plot them vs. Lx (0.5-2.5keV) in Figure 1 (right). Uncertainties in the $`\dot{E}`$ values are typically 0.2–0.5 in the log but are not shown for clarity; uncertainties in log(Lx) are typically 0.2, and extrapolating to the ROSAT band, 0.1-2.4keV, would increase log(Lx) only by 0.1. For comparison with 47 Tuc, we plot the MSP in NGC 6397 (GHE01b), for which the $`\dot{E}`$ uncertainty is small, and updated values (cf. GCH01) for the 10 field MSPs previously detected in x-rays as well as in the globular cluster M28.

Whereas the MSPs in the field and M28 show (Figure 1, right) a correlation logLx (0.1-2.4keV) = (1.13$`\pm 0.15`$)log$`\dot{E}`$ \- 7.5$`\pm 5`$, the MSPs in 47 Tuc appear to have a weaker dependence: logLx (0.5-2.5keV) = ($`0.47\pm 0.10`$)log$`\dot{E}`$ \+ $`14.2\pm 3.4`$ for the nominal cluster model with central velocity dispersion $`\sigma _{v0}`$= 11.6 km s-1, where the errors ($`\pm `$1$`\sigma `$) in both correlations are due to just the scatter in the points. Allowing for uncertainties in the cluster model and distance gives slope $`0.48\pm 0.21`$ and intercept $`13.8\pm 7.5`$. Including the errors for the $`\dot{E}`$ values estimated for the 47 Tuc MSPs, but with the approximation that unequal errors (on $`\dot{E}`$) are simply averaged (which biases the slope to steeper values, since the unequal errors are much larger for smaller values of $`\dot{E}`$), increases the logarithmic slope to $`\beta =0.62\pm 0.29`$ and offset to $`9.0\pm 10.8`$. The best (median) estimate for the 47 Tuc MSPs alone is thus $`\beta `$ $``$$`0.55\pm 0.2`$. Apart from the uncertain detection of 47 Tuc-C (GCH01), the MSPs in 47 Tuc have Lx (0.5–2.5 keV) values within a factor of $``$4 despite a range of $``$25 in $`\dot{E}`$. Figure 1 (right) shows that 6397-A, the MSP in NGC 6397, is consistent with the Lx \- $`\dot{E}`$ correlation shown by the 47 Tuc MSPs. Including 6397-A in the fit yields $`\beta =0.50\pm 0.08`$ (scatter only) or 0.55$`\pm 0.15`$ (with averaged $`\pm 1\sigma `$ errors for the 47 Tuc $`\dot{E}`$ values).

The smaller $`\beta `$ values for 47 Tuc and NGC 6397 may be due to the different formation histories and possibly different physical parameters of their MSPs vs. the field objects. In Figure 2 (left) we plot Lx vs. spindown ages, $`P/2\dot{P}_i`$, for MSPs in the field (and M28) vs. the 47 Tuc and NGC 6397 sample. Error bars on the age parameter are not shown, for clarity, but are typically $`_{0.1}^{+0.3}`$ in the log and primarily due to the 47 Tuc acceleration model. Despite the uncertainties, the correlation is striking: the field MSPs show a declining Lx with “age,” and the 47 Tuc MSPs appear to fall on this trend but with a flatter Lx vs. age slope. However, spindown ages correspond only approximately to actual ages, and while these estimates are consistent with the formation of most 47 Tuc MSPs early in the cluster history, this would not by itself provide an explanation for the different Lx vs. $`\dot{E}`$ correlations found for MSPs in 47 Tuc and NGC 6397 vs. the field.

Another possible physical difference between the 47 Tuc and field MSPs might be magnetic field strength at the light cylinder (at which the corotation speed equals $`c`$), since this likely affects the relative importance of non-thermal (magnetospheric) emission. For an assumed dipole field, this is given by $`B_{\mathrm{lc}}=9.35\times 10^5\dot{P}_i^{1/2}P_{\mathrm{msec}}^{5/2}`$ G, with $`\dot{P}_i`$ in units of 10-20. In Figure 2 (right) we plot Lx vs. $`B_{\mathrm{lc}}`$. Again, considered as a homogeneous group, the MSPs in the field (and M28) lie on a steeper slope than the 47 Tuc MSPs. In support of the hypothesis that $`B_{\mathrm{lc}}`$, rather than the field $`B_{\mathrm{surf}}=3.2\times 10^{19}`$ ($`P\dot{P}`$)1/2 G at the NS surface, is more closely related to Lx is the fact that the correlation of Lx with $`B_{\mathrm{surf}}`$ is less defined and with larger scatter, and with logarithmic slopes differing even more: 0.05$`\pm 0.27`$ for the 47 Tuc MSPs vs. 2.80$`\pm 0.99`$ for the field MSPs. We note that 3 out of the 4 MSPs with $`B_{\mathrm{lc}}>10^{5.5}`$ G display x-ray emission that is seemingly magnetospheric, with the nature of emission from the 4th (the eclipsing MSP B1957+20) indeterminate (BT99; Takahashi et al. 2001). Conversely, field pulsars with $`B_{\mathrm{lc}}<10^5`$ G have x-ray emission that is typically either thermal or of indeterminate character (BT99). Considering the small numbers of such pulsars studied, and that most of them have highly uncertain distances, it seems possible that field pulsars with $`B_{\mathrm{lc}}<10^5`$ G may show an Lx$`B_{\mathrm{lc}}`$ trend that is fairly flat and roughly consistent with the better determined relation for the 47 Tuc MSPs. However for this interpretation to hold, a few field MSPs with relatively well determined distances (e.g. 0437$``$4715 and 1744$``$1134; cf. GCH01) must be accounted for and the even larger deviations of 0751+1807 and 1024$``$0719 from the 47 Tuc correlation line would require factor $`\stackrel{>}{}`$3 adjustments in these MSP distances.

## 4. Conclusions

The MSPs in 47 Tuc are primarily very soft x-ray sources, consistent with thermal emission from the pulsar polar caps. The MSPs in both 47 Tuc and NGC 6397 seem to have a less efficient conversion of rotational spindown energy ($`\dot{E}`$) into soft x-rays (Lx) than most field MSPs, even those with correspondingly low values of their magnetic field at the light cylinder. For Lx $``$ $`\dot{E}`$ β, the 47 Tuc-NGC 6397 samples are fit by $`\beta =0.5\pm 0.15`$ whereas the updated (GCH01) field (and M28) sample are consistent with the value $`\beta 11.4`$ found previously (BT97; PCC and references therein).

The soft colors for the 47 Tuc MSPs and the extended emission from 6397-A (GCH01) indicate a lack of beamed magnetospheric emission, which may suggest they have different $`B_{\mathrm{lc}}`$ values or configurations. We speculate their B fields may have a multipole field geometry (and thus lower dipole component) and be less efficient particle accelerators. Unlike MSPs in the field, those in dense cluster cores have a possibility of being driven back into contact and an accretion phase, as a re-cycled LMXB (from a MSP)! Renewed accretion (and 6397-A is presently close to filling its Roche lobe; cf. DPM) would likely continue the B-field burial process thought to be responsible (e.g. Romani 1990) for field decay from the $`>10^{11}`$ G fields at NS birth to the $`<10^9`$ G values typical of MSPs. The 47 Tuc MSPs have spent their $`\tau >1`$ Gyr lifetime in a dense ($`n10^5\mathrm{pc}^3`$) cluster core, where they undergo scattering interactions with both single stars and other binaries. Such scattering causes the binding energy $`x`$ of a hard binary to secularly increase. Thus, while angular momentum transfer to the secondary acts to detach the binary, scattering events tend to drive it back toward contact.

A complication in this picture is that since MSPs are extremely hard binaries, the secular increase in $`x`$ is largely the result of infrequent strong scattering events, which are likely to eject the binary from the cluster core or even the cluster. Nevertheless, it appears plausible that a typical old ($`\tau >1`$ Gyr) MSP in a *dense* cluster core might undergo one or more MSP-LMXB transformation cycles. Thus a few percent of the MSPs at any one time may be in (or near) this recurrent LMXB phase. This might explain the puzzling luminous qLMXBs X5 and X7 (GHE01a and Heinke et al. 2002) in 47 Tuc: they might be recently ($`10^{56}`$ yr) detached LMXBs, in which their underlying MSP nature is hidden by their evaporating (from MSP-driven winds?) fossil disks, thus explaining their lack of any detectable low-level accretion signatures.

The younger system in NGC 6397 has the advantages of having been recently scattered out of a still higher density ($``$106 pc-3) core collapsed cluster core and possibly having exchanged its companion (Ferraro et al. 2001, GHE01b). Either or both would likely have restored an accretion phase. Thus 6397-A need not be just “born,” as suggested by Ferraro et al. (2001); it may instead have just been reborn. In contrast, the MSP in M28 is both $``$10$`\times `$ younger, single and in a lower density core and so is unlikely to have gone through a renewed accretion phase.

### Acknowledgments.

We thank H. Cohn and P. Lugger for discussions of MSP recycling, described in GCH01. This work was supported in part by NASA grants GO0-1098A and HST-AR-09199.01-A (JG) and NAG5-9095 (FC).

## References

Becker, W., & Trumper, J. 1997, A&A, 326, 682 (BT97)

Becker, W., & Trumper, J. 1999, A&A, 341, 803 (BT99)

D’Amico, N., Possenti, A., Manchester, R. N., Sarkissian, J., Lyne, A. G., & Camilo, F. 2001, ApJ, 561, L89 (DPM)

Ferraro, F. R., Possenti, A., D’Amico, N., & Sabbi, E. 2001, ApJ, 561, L93

Freire, P. C. 2001, Ph.D. thesis, Univ. Manchester

Freire, P. C., Camilo, F., Lorimer, D. R., Lyne, A. G., Manchester, R. N., & D’Amico, N. 2001a, MNRAS, 326, 901

Freire, P. C., Kramer, M., Lyne, A. G., Camilo, F., Manchester, R. N., & D’Amico, N. 2001b, ApJ, 557, L105

Grindlay, J. E., Heinke, C. O., Edmonds, P. D., & Murray, S. S. 2001a, Science, 292, 2292 (GHE01a)

Grindlay, J. E., Heinke, C. O., Edmonds, P. D., Murray, S. S., & Cool, A. M. 2001b, ApJ, 563, L53 (GHE01b)

Grindlay, J. E., Camilo, F., Heinke, C. O., Edmonds, P. D., Cohn, H. & Lugger, P. 2001c, ApJ, submitted (GCH01)

Harding, A. K. & Muslimov, A. G. 2001, ApJ, submitted

Heinke, C. O., Grindlay, J. E., Lloyd, D. A., & Edmonds, P. D. 2002, ApJ, submitted (see also Heinke et al., these proceedings)

Meylan, G., & Mayor, M. 1986, A&A, 166, 122

Possenti, A., Cerutti, R., Colpi, M. and Mereghetti, S. 2001, A&A, submitted (http://xxx.lanl.gov/archive/astro-ph/0109452) (PCC)

Rajagopal, M. & Romani, R. 1996, ApJ, 461, 327

Romani, R. 1990, Nature, 347, 741

Takahashi, M. et al. 2001, ApJ, 554, 316


text:
# REFERENCES

DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS EXTENDED TO SUPERSPACE

J. Torres1 and H.C. Rosu1,2

1 Instituto de Física, Universidad de Guanajuato,

Apdo Postal E-143, León, Guanajuato, México

2 Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica,

Apdo Postal 3-74 Tangamanga, San Luis Potosí, S.L.P., México

We present a simple SUSY $`𝒩_S`$=2 superspace extension of the differential equations in which the sought solutions are considered to be real superfields but maintaining the common derivative operators and the coefficients of the differential equations unaltered. In this way, we get selfconsistent systems of coupled differential equations for the components of the superfield. This procedure is applied to the Riccati equation, for which we obtain in addition the system of coupled equations corresponding to the components of the general superfield solution.

Introduction

In the framework of quantum cosmology, Obregon et al  developed a formalism to find supersymmetric actions based on local $`𝒩_S`$=2 SUSY transformations and the concept of superfield. In particular, they generalized the local time transformations, $`\delta t=a(t)`$ that leave invariant the action, to local grassmannian transformations involving the Grassmann time variables $`\eta `$ and $`\overline{\eta }`$

$$\delta t=a(t)+\frac{i}{2}\eta \beta (t)+\frac{i}{2}\overline{\eta }\overline{\beta }(t)$$

$$\delta \eta =\frac{1}{2}\overline{\beta }(t)+\frac{1}{2}(\dot{a}(t)+ib(t))\eta +\frac{i}{2}\dot{\overline{\beta }}\eta \overline{\eta },$$

$$\delta \overline{\eta }=\frac{1}{2}\overline{\beta }(t)+\frac{1}{2}(\dot{a}(t)ib(t))\overline{\eta }\frac{i}{2}\dot{\beta }(t)\eta \overline{\eta },$$

where $`\eta `$ is a grassmannian time coordinate and $`\overline{\eta }`$ is its complex conjugate (we actually take $`\eta \theta _1+i\theta _2`$ and $`\overline{\eta }\theta _1i\theta _2`$). The parameter $`\beta (t)`$ is the Grassmann complex parameter corresponding to the local SUSY $`𝒩_S`$=2 whereas $`b(t)`$ is the parameter of the local U(1) rotation group of $`\eta `$. Because of these generalized transformations the ordinary fields turn into superfields, i.e., $`f(t)(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })`$. We shall consider only real superfields, $`^{}=`$, where the dagger operation is defined for grassmannian variables as $`(\eta \overline{\eta })^{}=\overline{\eta }^{}\eta ^{}`$. Thus, for an arbitrary superfield

$$𝒩(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=N(t)+i\eta \overline{\psi }(t)+i\overline{\eta }\psi (t)+\eta \overline{\eta }V(t)$$

one has

$$𝒩^{}(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=N^{}(t)i\overline{\psi }^{}(t)\eta ^{}i\psi ^{}(t)\overline{\eta }^{}+\overline{\eta }^{}\eta ^{}V^{}(t).$$

The condition of reality implies

$$N^{}=N,\overline{\psi }^{}=\psi ,V^{}=V,\eta ^{}=\overline{\eta }.$$

Differential equations extended to superspace

There are many works on superspace extensions of differential equations . We consider here one of the simplest possible extensions by turning the dependent variable of any differential equation of arbitrary order $`n`$ into a superfield but without changing the derivative operator as performed in the literature. Moreover, we maintain unchanged the coefficients of the superextended equation because in this way we get selfconsistent differential systems of coupled equations for the superfield components.

Thus, what we are doing is to take the general equation

$$a_n(t)y^{(n)}(t)+\mathrm{}+a_0(t)y(t)=F(t)$$

and change it into

$$a_n(t)𝒴^{(n)}(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })+\mathrm{}+a_0(t)𝒴(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=F(t),$$

where the superscript $`(n)`$ means the $`n`$th order derivative $`\frac{d^n}{dt^n}`$.

Riccati equation

Our preferred example is the Riccati equation

$$\frac{dy}{dt}=a(t)y^2+b(t)y+c(t).$$

It is well known that the theory of Riccati equation is equivalent to the theory of the linear differential equations of the second order. This is due to the connection between the two through the direct transformation

$$y(t)=\frac{1}{a(t)}\frac{\dot{w}}{w}$$

leading to

$$\ddot{w}(t)\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}+b(t)\right)\dot{w}(t)+a(t)c(t)w(t)=0$$

and the inverse one

$$w(t)=\mathrm{exp}\left(a(t)y(t)𝑑t\right)$$

by which one goes back to the Riccati equation. Another important result is the possibility to construct the general Riccati solution once one knows a particular solution through the famous Bernoulli ”ansatz”

$$y_g=y_p+\frac{1}{f},$$

which introduced in the Riccati equation turns it into the following linear equation

$$\dot{f}=\left[b(t)+2a(t)y_p(t)\right]fa(t).$$

The solution of the latter is

$$f(t)=\frac{1}{I(t)}\left[^ta(x)I(x)𝑑x+C\right],$$

where $`I(t)=\mathrm{exp}\left(^t(b(x)+2a(x)y_p(x))𝑑x\right)`$.

Extended Riccati equation

We now write the superspace extended Riccati equation as follows

$$\frac{i}{2}\{D_\eta ,D_{\overline{\eta }}\}𝒴(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=a(t)𝒴^2(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })+b(t)𝒴(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })+c(t)$$
(1)
where

$$\frac{i}{2}\{D_\eta ,D_{\overline{\eta }}\}=\frac{d}{dt}$$

and

$$D_\eta =\frac{}{\eta }+i\overline{\eta }\frac{}{t},D_{\overline{\eta }}=\frac{}{\overline{\eta }}i\eta \frac{}{t},$$

with $`D_\eta `$ and $`D_{\overline{\eta }}`$ the supercovariant derivatives.
We write the superfield $`𝒴`$ in the form

$$𝒴(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=y(t)+i\eta \overline{\lambda }(t)+i\overline{\eta }\lambda (t)+\eta \overline{\eta }G(t)$$
(2)
Introducing (2) in (1) and identifying the corresponding components one gets the following system

$`\dot{y}`$ $`=`$ $`ay^2+by+c`$ (3)
$`\dot{\lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`(2ay+b)\lambda `$ (4)
$`\dot{\overline{\lambda }}`$ $`=`$ $`(2ay+b)\overline{\lambda }`$ (5)
$`\dot{G}`$ $`=`$ $`(ay+b)G+2a\overline{\lambda }\lambda `$ (6)
Since the two equations for the fermionic components are conjugate to one another it is sufficient to solve only one of them.

In parallel with the ordinary procedure we propose the generalized transformation

$$𝒴=\frac{1}{a}\frac{\dot{𝒩}}{𝒩}=\frac{1}{a}𝒩^1\dot{𝒩}$$
(7)
where $`𝒩^1`$ is defined by $`𝒩^1𝒩=𝒩𝒩^1=1`$. Considering $`𝒩(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=N(t)+i\eta \overline{\psi }(t)+i\overline{\eta }\psi (t)+\eta \overline{\eta }V(t)`$ how can one obtain the superfield $`𝒩^1`$ ? To answer this question, we write $`𝒩`$ as $`𝒩=N+\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=i\eta \overline{\psi }(t)+i\overline{\eta }\psi (t)+\eta \overline{\eta }V(t)`$. Since $`𝒩^1=\frac{1}{𝒩}=\frac{1}{N+\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\frac{1}{N(1+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{N})}`$, expanding the latter expression we get

$$\frac{1}{N(1+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{N})}=\frac{1}{N}\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{supercharges}}{}}(1)^k\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{N}\right)^k=\frac{1}{N}\left(1\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{N}+\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{N}\right)^2\right).$$
(8)
Substituting $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the latter formula one eventually gets

$$𝒩^1=\frac{1}{N}i\eta N^2\overline{\psi }i\overline{\eta }N^2\psi +\eta \overline{\eta }(2N^3\overline{\psi }\psi N^2V).$$
(9)
Using (9) and (7) in (1) one can get after some tedious algebra the second order linear differential equations for all the componets of the superfield $`𝒩`$. For the first bosonic component we obtain naturally the standard equation

$$\ddot{N}\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}+b\right)\dot{N}+acN=0.$$
(10)
For the $`\psi `$ component we get

$$\ddot{\psi }+\left(a^1\dot{a}N^2\dot{N}+N^1\dot{N}b\right)\dot{\psi }+\left(a^1\dot{a}N^1\dot{N}N^1\ddot{N}+b\right)=0,$$
(11)
and identically for the $`\overline{\psi }`$ component in view of the reality condition. On the other hand, the equation for the $`V`$ component is more complicated and we do not include it here. We mention that it is possible to write the inverse generalized transformation to recover from these equations the extended Riccati one. One should write

$$𝒩=e^{^ta𝒴𝑑t}$$
(12)
and using $`𝒴=y+\mathrm{\Gamma }(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })`$ we have

$$𝒩=e^{^tay𝑑t}\left[1^ta\mathrm{\Gamma }𝑑t+\frac{1}{2}^t^ta(u)a(v)\mathrm{\Gamma }(u,\eta ,\overline{\eta })\mathrm{\Gamma }(v,\eta ,\overline{\eta })𝑑u𝑑v\right].$$
(13)
The general superfield solution of the extended Riccati equation

For the general superfield we proceed again by analogy with the standard calculus. We write

$$𝒴=+𝒟^1,$$
(14)
where $``$ is a superfield satisfying the extended Riccati equation

$$\frac{i}{2}\{D_\eta ,D_{\overline{\eta }}\}(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=a(t)^2(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })+b(t)(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })+c(t)$$
(15)
Which is the superequation $`𝒟`$ satisfies ? Substituting (14) in the extended Riccati equation we get

$$\frac{i}{2}\{D_\eta ,D_{\overline{\eta }}\}(+𝒟^1)=a(t)(^2+2𝒟^1+𝒟^2)+b(t)(+𝒟^1)+c(t),$$
(16)
where we have used the fact that two superfields commute. Since $``$ satisfies the Riccati superequation we can simplify (16) to the form

$$𝒟^2\dot{𝒟}=2a𝒟^1+b𝒟^1+a𝒟^2.$$
(17)
Multiplying by $`𝒟^2`$ we obtain

$$\dot{𝒟}=(2a+b)𝒟a,$$
(18)
which is completely equivalent to the ordinary case. We used $`\frac{d}{dt}𝒟^1=𝒟^2\dot{𝒟}`$.

A case of special interest is $`b=0`$ that corresponds to the Riccati-Schroedinger connection in supersymmetric quantum mechanics. For this case we get the system

$`\dot{B}`$ $`=`$ $`aB^2+c`$ (19)
$`\dot{\phi }`$ $`=`$ $`2aB\phi `$ (20)
$`\dot{\overline{\phi }}`$ $`=`$ $`2aB\overline{\phi }`$ (21)
$`\dot{A}`$ $`=`$ $`2aBA+2a\overline{\phi }\phi `$ (22)
$`\text{}\dot{D}`$ $`=`$ $`2aBDa`$ (23)
$`\dot{\psi }`$ $`=`$ $`2a(B\psi +D\phi )`$ (24)
$`\dot{\overline{\psi }}`$ $`=`$ $`(B\overline{\psi }+D\overline{\phi })`$ (25)
$`\dot{U}`$ $`=`$ $`2a(BU+\overline{\phi }\psi +\overline{\psi }\phi +AD)`$ (26)
where

$$(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=B+i\eta \overline{\phi }+i\overline{\eta }\phi +\eta \overline{\eta }A,$$

$$𝒟(t,\eta ,\overline{\eta })=D+i\eta \overline{\psi }+i\overline{\eta }\psi +\eta \overline{\eta }U.$$

Conclusion

Although the procedure of superspace extension presented here is quite simple, it appears to be quite interesting for physical applications related to supersymmetric quantum mechanics and other fields of physics. Recently, we have used this scheme for the Riccati equation of constant coefficients that appears in FRW barotropic cosmologies for which we have solved explicitly the system of coupled differential equations generated by our procedure . In addition, we have interpreted the obtained solutions as the components of a Hubble superfield parameter.


text:
# CPT RESULTS FROM KTEV

## 1 Introduction

Neutral kaons have long been recognized as a superb laboratory for the study of CPT symmetry. The $`K_L`$ wavefunction is a coherent superposition of a particle and antiparticle:

$$K_L(1+ϵ_L)K^0(1ϵ_L)\overline{K^0}$$
(1)
The powerful probe of CPT symmetry originates from this coherent superposition. There is also a fortunate conspiracy of the kaon masses, lifetimes, and decay widths, allowing one to look experimentally for very small CPT violating effects that may be present. While many probes in the neutral kaon sector are available, I will mention only ones relevant to KTeV. Table 1 shows the experimental observables (and their definitions) that are sensitive to possible CPT violating effects.

The traditional framework to parameterize possible neutral kaon CPT violation can be found in the literature . It is a phenomological approach: one which spells out all possible CPT effects without much consideration to the microscopic details of the theory. Nevertheless, one can derive the experimental signatures that would imply CPT violation.

CPT violating effects in the $`K^02\pi `$ and $`\overline{K^0}2\pi `$ amplitudes can reveal themselves in the $`K_L2\pi `$ decay mode. This is possible since the latter is the coherent superposition of those 2 amplitudes. CPT violation of this type is called “direct” since it is tied to a decay amplitude. Indirect CPT violating effects such as the difference between $`M_{K^0}`$ and $`M_{\overline{K^0}}`$ could be seen in the comparison of $`\varphi _+`$ to $`\varphi _{SW}`$. Direct CPT violating effects may also show up in the semileptonic decay modes $`K_Le^\pm \pi ^{}\nu `$ (Ke3). The two Ke3 final states, in the limit of $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=\mathrm{\Delta }Q`$ and CPT conservation, would measure $`2Reϵ_L`$, the CP violation in kaon mixing. Therefore, a comparison of the semileptonic charge asymmetry $`\delta _L`$ to the 2$`\pi `$ observables might reveal CPT violating effects in the Ke3 or 2$`\pi `$ decay amplitudes.

The following are CPT tests in the traditional framework:

$`\varphi _+\varphi _{00}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ReB_2}{ReA_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{ReB_0}{ReA_0}}`$ (2)
$`\varphi _+\varphi _{SW}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}|\eta _+|}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{M_{K^0}M_{\overline{K^0}}}{\mathrm{\Delta }m}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ReB_0}{ReA_0}}\right]`$ (3)
$`Re({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\eta _++{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\eta _{00}){\displaystyle \frac{\delta _L}{2}}`$ $`=`$ $`Re\left(Y+X_{}+{\displaystyle \frac{ReB_0+iImA_0}{ReA_0+iImB_0}}\right)`$ (4)
In the equations above, the parameters $`B_0`$ and $`B_2`$ ($`Y`$ and $`X_{}`$) parameterize direct CPT violating effects in the 2$`\pi `$ (Ke3) amplitudes.

A significantly new approach called the ’standard-model-extension’ has been advocated by A. Kostelecky and collaborators in recent years . It is based on a theory with spontaneously broken CPT/Lorentz symmetry, which might happen at the Planck scale in certain string and quantum gravity theories. It appears to be compatible with the basic tenets of quantum field theory, and retains the property of gauge invariage and renormalizability needed for the Standard Model.

The CPT violating phenomenology is significantly simpler than the traditional approach. The direct CPT violating effects vanish at lowest order, so that the lowest order effect appears in indirect CPT violating observables such as $`M_{K^0}M_{\overline{K^0}}`$. An unexpected prediction is a Lorentz violating effect such that the observables depend on the meson momentum ($`\gamma `$, $`\beta `$) and its orientation in space.

For a fixed target experiment such as KTeV, one would have:

$`\varphi _+`$ $``$ $`\varphi _{SW}+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{sin\varphi _{SW}}{|\eta _+|\mathrm{\Delta }m}}\gamma \left[\mathrm{\Delta }a_0+\beta \mathrm{\Delta }a_3cos\chi +\beta sin\chi (\mathrm{\Delta }a_1cos\mathrm{\Omega }t+\mathrm{\Delta }a_2sin\mathrm{\Omega }t)\right]`$
The angular frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, time $`t`$, angle $`\chi `$ are needed to fully describe the orientation of the $`K_L`$ with respect to $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_\mu `$, which are the Lorentz violating parameters in this theoretical framework. For KTeV, $`\gamma 100`$ and cos$`\chi 0.6`$.

We present preliminary results from the data taken with the KTeV detector at Fermilab during 1996-1997. It represents half of all data collected by KTeV.

## 2 Beam and Detector

The KTeV beamline and detector at Fermilab have been described elsewhere in the literature. For these preliminary results, the detector was configured for the measurement of Re($`ϵ^{}/ϵ`$). As shown in Fig. 1, two approximately parallel neutral $`K_L`$ beams enter a long vacuum tank, which defines the fiducial volume for accepted decays. One of the beams strikes an active absorber (regenerator), which serves to tag the coherent regeneration of $`K_S`$. The regenerator position was moved to the other beam in between Tevatron spill cycles. Behind the vacuum tank, the charged decay products are analyzed by 4 planar drift chambers and an analysis magnet that imparted a 411 MeV/c horizontal transverse kick to the particles. A high precision 3100-element pure Cesium Iodide calorimeter (CsI) is used primarily to measure the energy of $`e^\pm `$ and photons. Photon veto detectors surrounding the vacuum decay volume, drift chambers, and CsI serve to reject events with particles escaping the calorimeter.

## 3 2$`\pi `$ Parameters

The 2$`\pi `$ parameters $`\tau _S`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$, $`\varphi _+`$ and $`\varphi _{00}`$ are extracted from data taken with the beam transmitting through the regenerator. The regenerator is “active”, allowing the suppression of all but the coherent regeneration of $`K_S`$. With coherent regeneration, the kaon wavefunction is the mixture $`\rho K_S+K_L`$, where $`\rho `$ is the (momentum and material dependent) regeneration amplitude. Hence the 2$`\pi `$ parameters can be extracted from the $`K_S`$-$`K_L`$ interference present in the subsequent time evolution of the kaon wave function. The propertime dependence of the 2$`\pi `$ event rate behind the regenerator is:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dN_{2\pi }}{d\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`|{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\eta }}|^2e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_S\tau }+e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\tau }+2|{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\eta }}|e^{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_S+\mathrm{\Gamma }_L}{2}\tau }cos(\mathrm{\Delta }m+\varphi _\rho \varphi _\eta )`$ (6)
Figure 2 shows the $`K_LK_S`$ interference evident in the 2$`\pi `$ event rate behind the regenerator. In practice, one has to subtract the incoherent scattering background (inelastic and diffractive), as they would have a different time evolution.

These measurements share many common systematics with the analysis of Re($`ϵ^{}/ϵ`$) in the same dataset. The latter will be detailed in an upcoming publication.333The preliminary KTeV result from 1996-97 is Re($`ϵ^{}/ϵ`$) = $`(20.7\pm 2.8)10^4`$. To determine the event rate as a function of propertime, one has to reconstruct the parent kaon momentum $`p_K`$ and its decay vertex position. The determination of $`p_K`$ relies on a good understanding of the detector energy scale and its nonlinearities. In addition, one has to account for the detector geometrical acceptance varying with the decay vertex position and $`p_K`$.

Another necessary ingredient is the understanding of the regeneration amplitude $`\rho `$. As the data contains inherently only the combination $`\varphi _\rho \varphi _\eta `$, we need a model of $`\varphi _\rho `$ inorder to extract $`\varphi _\eta `$. Our theoretical understanding of $`\varphi _\rho `$ and its dependence on $`p_K`$ includes coherent scattering from lead as well as carbon444The regenerator contains mostly plastic scintillator (i.e. carbon) and a lead converter module., analyticity, nuclear screening, and attenuation. In the extraction of $`\varphi _{\eta _+}`$, we assign a systematic uncertainty of $`0.78^{}`$ due to our understanding of $`\varphi _\rho `$. We present below a cross check of this in section 4.1.

The preliminary results are based on the entire 1996-97 KTeV and is approximately 25M $`K2\pi `$ events in the regenerator beam.

### 3.1 $`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$ and $`\tau _S`$

We perform a simultaneous fit of the data for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$ and $`\tau _S`$, under the assumption of CPT symmetry. That is to say, we fit with the constraint $`\varphi _\eta =\varphi _{SW}`$. We extract a value of:

$`\tau _S`$ $`=`$ $`89.67\pm 0.03_{stat}\pm 0.04_{sys}\mathrm{psec}`$ (7)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$ $`=`$ $`52.62\pm 0.07_{stat}\pm 0.13_{sys}10^8\mathrm{}s^1`$ (8)
These are consistent with the PDG average at only the 2.5 $`\sigma `$ level. However, it is more consistent with the published values from the previous decade. Figure 3 shows a compilation of previous results including ours.

### 3.2 $`\varphi _+\varphi _{00}`$

To extract $`\varphi _+\varphi _{00}`$, we perform a simultaneous fit of the data to all the 2$`\pi `$ parameters relaxing the constraint of CPT symmetry. However, since the regeneration phase $`\rho `$ is common in both the $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\pi ^0\pi ^0`$ mode, the phase difference is immune to the regeneration phase uncertainty. We find a phase difference that is consistent with no direct CPT violation:

$$\varphi _+\varphi _{00}=0.41^{}\pm 0.22_{stat}^{}\pm 0.53_{sys}^{}$$
(9)
### 3.3 $`\varphi _+`$ and Sidereal Time Dependence

The extraction of $`\varphi _+`$ and its comparison to $`\varphi _{SW}`$ is the search for indirect CPT violation (i.e. it is sensitive to a nonvanishing value of $`M_{K^0}M_{\overline{K^0}}`$). We fit simultaneously to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$, $`\tau _S`$, and $`\varphi _+`$ with no assumption of CPT symmetry, and compare it to $`\varphi _{SW}`$ which was extracted under the assumption of CPT symmetry (see section 3.1). We find a value consistent with CPT symmetry:

$`\varphi _+`$ $`=`$ $`44.11^{}\pm 0.72_{stat}^{}\pm 1.1_{sys}^{}`$ (10)
$`\varphi _+\varphi _{SW}`$ $`=`$ $`0.61^{}\pm 0.62_{stat}^{}\pm 1.1_{sys}^{}`$ (11)
The systematic uncertainties include most notibly the understanding of the regeneration phase. It should be noted that the extracted $`\varphi _+`$ has significant correllations with $`\tau _S`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$. To illustrate the correlation, we show the variation of the central value of $`\varphi _+`$ in a data subsample:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _+`$ $`=`$ $`229.3[(\mathrm{\Delta }m10^{10}\mathrm{}^1s)0.52796]`$
$`891.2[(\tau _S10^{10}s^1)0.89669]`$
We can now examine the sidereal time dependence of $`\varphi _+`$. We perform a fit for only $`\varphi _+`$, while fixing $`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$ and $`\tau _S`$ to values extracted ealier (see Eq. 3.1). This would be logically inconsistent in the context of the traditional framework. However, our goal is to test the standard-model-extension, which predicts no dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$ and $`\tau _S`$ on sidereal time. By similar reasoning, we incur no uncertainty from $`\varphi _\rho `$. Thus, the extraction of the sidereal time-dependent amplitudes $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_2`$ has nearly only statistical errors. Figure 4 shows our result.

We find a 90% C.L. limit of 0.37 degrees. Using $`cos\chi =0.6`$ and $`\gamma =100`$, we limit $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_2`$ to less than $`9.210^{22}`$ GeV at the 90% C.L.

## 4 Charge Asymmetries

In this section, we present two preliminary results involving the Ke3 charge asymmetry. In the beam that does not strike the regenerator, we would measure $`\delta _L`$. In the other beam, we use the charge asymmetry to extract valuable information about regeneration. The results are based on approximately 300M and 150M Ke3 events in the vacuum and regenerator beams respectively.

Since the asymmetries are very small, vary from a few $`\%`$ to $`0.3\%`$, we combine data from opposite magnet polarity running, which was reversed approximately once per day. This ensures that the oppositely signed charges have identical acceptance in our detector.

One also has to account for the interaction differences between particle and antiparticle in matter (our detector). The most significant of these include an asymmetry in the pion energy deposition in the CsI calorimeter. There is also a potential asymmetry in the pion punchthrough rate to our muon counters, which would veto the event and introduce biases.

### 4.1 Regeneration Phase

We can measure the regeneration phase directly using the charge asymmetry in the events behind the regenerator. Instead of Eq. 6, the propertime dependence of the charge asymmetry for the regenerated beam is:

$`\delta (\tau )`$ $``$ $`(1+2Rex)\left[2|\rho |e^{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_S\mathrm{\Gamma }_L}{2}\tau }cos(\mathrm{\Delta }m\tau +\varphi _\rho )+\delta _L\right]`$ (13)
The largest uncertainty in the analysis involves the understanding of incoherent scatters, which would have a different time dependence and phase. Unlike the 2$`\pi `$ final state, the missing neutrino makes it harder to removed scattered background. Likewise, $`p_K`$, which is needed to reconstruct $`\tau `$, is known only up to a two-fold ambiguity. To deal with the momentum reconstruction uncertainty, we rely on our understanding of the detector acceptance. For the scattered background, we rely on a model of their time evolution and phase, and float their normalization in our fit.

Figure 5 shows our result for the regeneration phase, as well as the theoretical prediction. The agreement of the two is:

$`\varphi _\rho \varphi _{th}=0.70^{}\pm 0.88_{stat}^{}\pm 0.91_{sys}^{}`$ (14)
We also extract $`Rex`$, the real part of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=\mathrm{\Delta }Q`$ amplitude. We find a value of:

$`Rex=(12\pm 33\pm 39)10^4`$ (15)
### 4.2 $`\delta _L`$

For $`\delta _L`$, we find a value of:

$`\delta _L`$ $`=`$ $`3322\pm 58(stat)\pm 47(syst)\mathrm{ppm}`$ (16)
This is in excellent agreement with previous measurements and 2.4x more precise than the current best result. A combination of all results including ours yields:

$`\delta _L=3307\pm 63\mathrm{ppm}\chi ^2`$ $`=`$ $`4.2/6\mathrm{d}.\mathrm{o}.\mathrm{f}.`$ (17)
The K$`\pi `$2 amplitude ratios ($`\eta _+,\eta _{00}`$) and $`\delta _L`$ can be used to place limits on CPT violation. Using $`\eta _+`$ and $`\eta _{00}`$ values from  and the combined $`\delta _L`$:

$`Re(Y+{\displaystyle \frac{x\overline{x}}{2}}+a)`$ $`=`$ $`Re({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\eta _++{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\eta _{00}){\displaystyle \frac{\delta _L}{2}}`$
$`=`$ $`(1650\pm 16)(1653\pm 32)`$
$`=`$ $`3\pm 35\mathrm{ppm}`$
where $`Rea`$ parameterizes CPT violation in K$`\pi `$2 decays. The result is consistent with no CPT violation and is limited by the charge asymmetry uncertainty. It limits $`|Re(Y+(x\overline{x})/2+a)|<61\mathrm{ppm}`$ at the 90% C.L.. Barring fortuitous cancellations, this is thus far the most stringent limit on $`Y,x,\mathrm{and}a`$.

## 5 Conclusion

We have presented several new preliminary results on the fundamental kaon parameters. It is based on the entire 1996-97 dataset, which represents 1/2 of all data collected by KTeV. We presented CPT results in the context of the traditional frame work as well as the one advocated by Kostelecky and collaborators. The results are consistent with CPT symmetry.

## References


text:
# Faint Cataclysmic Variables in Quiescence: Globular Cluster and Field Surveys

## 1. Introduction

Dwarf Novae (DN) systems contain a white dwarf (WD) accreting matter at time-averaged rates $`\dot{M}<10^9M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ from a low-mass ($`<0.5M_{}`$ typically) stellar companion (see Osaki 1996 for an overview). At these $`\dot{M}`$’s, the accretion disk is subject to a thermal instability which causes it to rapidly transfer matter onto the WD (at $`\dot{M}\dot{M}`$) for a few days to a week once every month to year. The orbital periods of these binaries are usually less than 2 hours (below the period gap), but there are also DN above the period gap, $`>`$ 3 hours (see Shafter 1992). The $`\dot{M}`$ onto the WD is often low enough between outbursts that the UV emission is dominated by the internal luminosity of the WD. Indeed recent spectroscopy has resolved the WD’s contribution to the quiescent light and found effective temperatures $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}10,00040,000\mathrm{K}`$ (see Sion 1999).

The measured internal WD luminosity is larger than expected from an isolated WD of similar age ($``$ Gyr), indicating that it has been heated by accretion (Sion 1985). Compressional heating (i.e. internal gravitational energy release) appears to be the main driver for this re-heating (Sion 1995). Sion’s (1995) estimate for internal gravitational energy release within the WD (of mass $`M`$ and radius $`R`$) was $`L0.15GM\dot{M}/R`$. However, we show in §2 that the energy release actually depends on the thermal state of the WD interior and that the dominant energy release is in the accreted outer envelope, giving $`L3kT_c\dot{M}/\mu m_p`$, where $`\mu 0.6`$ is the mean molecular weight of the accreted material, $`T_c`$ is the WD core temperature, $`m_p`$ is the baryon mass, and $`k`$ is Boltzmann’s constant.

The theoretical challenge that we address in §3 is how to calculate $`T_c`$ as a function of $`\dot{M}`$, and thus find $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. Because of unstable nuclear burning and the resulting classical novae cycle, the H/He envelope mass changes with time, allowing the core to cool at low accumulated masses and be heated prior to unstable ignition. We use nova ignition to determine the maximum mass of the overlying freshly accreted shell, and find the steady-state (i.e. cooling equals heating throughout the classical novae cycle) core temperature, $`T_c`$, as a function of $`\dot{M}`$ and $`M`$.

We compare our calculations to HST/STIS observations and infer $`\dot{M}`$ on the timescale of $`10^6`$ years. We find that DN above the period gap have $`\dot{M}10^9M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$, while those below have $`\dot{M}10^{10}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$, consistent with that expected from traditional CV evolution (e.g. Howell, Nelson, & Rappaport 2001), even those that involve some “hibernation” (Shara et al. 1986; Kolb et al. 2001). The result is more surprising if the much weaker magnetic braking laws of Andronov, Pinsonneault, & Sills (2001) are correct. We also predict the minimum light ($`M_V`$) of CVs in quiescence for a range of $`\dot{M}`$, WD mass, and companion mass. This assists the search for the predicted large population of CVs with very low mass companions ($`<0.1M_{}`$) that are near, or past, the period minimum (Howell, Rappaport, & Politano 1997). Observations already show that the WD fixes the quiescent colors of these CVs and our calculations are useful for CV surveys in the field (e.g. 2DF, SDSS, see Marsh et al. 2001 and Szkody et al. 2002) and globular clusters.

## 2. Compressional Heating: Core–Envelope Contrast

Compressional heating is the energy released by fluid elements as they are compressed by further accretion. The important feature of this heating mechanism is that the heat is released in the WD interior, and thus is radiated on a timescale which is longer than the time between DN outbursts. Contrast this to the gravitational potential energy released by the infalling matter, ($`GMm_p/R`$ per baryon) which is deposited at, or near, the photosphere and is rapidly radiated away. Such infall energy does not get taken into the star because in the upper atmosphere (where $`TT_c`$) the time it takes the fluid to move inward is much longer (by at least $`T_c/T`$) than the time it takes for heat to escape. This means infall energy is not important for setting the internal thermal state of the WD; it simply has no influence there. Also, once accretion has diminished for longer than the time to radiate the infall energy away (such as in DN quiescence), it is no longer relevant to the observed luminosity.

An additional energy source in the WD interior is slow nuclear burning near the base of the accreted H/He layer. This is significant when the accreted layer becomes thick, eventually becoming thermally unstable and leading to a Classical Nova. The nova energy is assumed to be radiated away in the explosion, but we have found that slow burning before that point contributes an amount of energy to the WD interior comparable to the energy released by compression. Our calculations take account of both compressional heating and slow nuclear burning to determine the WD’s thermal state.

We now sketch how compressional heating is included in our stellar model, demonstrate that heating in the envelope dominates that in the core and estimate its magnitude. This is a discussion specific to DN with low $`\dot{M}`$, and the reader should consult Nomoto (1982) for a complete account. The simplest estimate of the compressional energy release is the gravitational energy liberated as a fluid element moves down in the WD gravitational field, $`g=GM/R^2`$. In the non-degenerate outer atmosphere, a fluid element moves a distance of order the scale height, $`h=kT/\mu m_pg`$, in the time it takes to replace it by accretion, giving $`L\dot{M}gh\dot{M}kT/\mu m_p`$. This exhibits the correct scaling, notably the dependence on $`\mu `$ which is a contrasting parameter between the accreted H/He envelope and the C/O core.

To calculate the actual heat release we consider the local heat equation

$$T\frac{ds}{dt}=T\frac{s}{t}+T\stackrel{}{v}s=\frac{L}{M_r}+ϵ_N,$$
(1)
where $`ϵ_N`$ is the nuclear burning rate, $`s`$ is the entropy, and $`\stackrel{}{v}=\dot{M}\widehat{r}/4\pi r^2\rho `$ is the slow downward advection speed from accretion. The entropy profile is fixed by the temperature gradient needed to carry the luminosity outward and thus we simultaneously solve equation (1) with the heat transport equation, using opacities and conductivities from Iglesias & Rogers (1996) and Itoh et al. (1983) to find the thermal structure of the accreted envelope and the outer edge of the C/O core. For an analytic understanding, we neglect nuclear burning and $`/t`$ and use hydrostatic balance to recast equation (1) into

$$L=\dot{M}_0^PT\frac{s}{P}𝑑P.$$
(2)
Entropy decreases inward (i.e. the envelope and core are not convective), so this is an outward $`L`$. In the non-degenerate envelope, where $`s=k\mathrm{ln}(T^{3/2}/\rho )/\mu m_p`$, one more approximation is necessary to obtain an analytic form. For an atmosphere in which $`L`$ is constant with depth, the envelope satisfies $`T^{8.5}P^2`$. Though $`L`$ is not constant here, we use this to get an estimate, integrating down to the isothermal core and finding $`L3kT_c\dot{M}/\mu m_p`$.

Now consider the degenerate C/O core. For the $`\dot{M}`$’s and typical $`M=0.6M_{}`$ WD of interest here, the entropy is in the liquid ions at $`T_c10^7\mathrm{K}`$. The time it takes to transport heat through the interior is $`10^7\mathrm{yr}M/\dot{M}`$, so the core is isothermal and any compression is far from adiabatic.111This is in contrast to the rapid accretion rates $`\dot{M}10^8M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ considered for more massive Type Ia progenitors, where the interior undergoes nearly adiabatic compression (see Bravo et al. 1996). Due to uncertainty from the classical novae cycle, we don’t know whether the C/O core is secularly increasing in mass, but if it were, almost all of the work of compression goes into increasing the electron Fermi energy. The integrated heat release in the core would then be $`L15kT_c\dot{M}/\mu _im_p`$ (Nomoto 1982) for a $`0.6M_{}`$ C/O WD, where $`\mu _i14`$ is the ion mean molecular weight.

Due to the mean molecular weight contrast between the accreted envelope and the core, the energy release in the core is about a factor of five smaller than that in the envelope. Thus, for a given amount of compression of the star, the entropy drop for material in the accreted layer is much larger than for material in the core. Despite its comparatively small mass, the accreted layer is the main source of compressional heating.

## 3.  Finding the Equilibrium Core Temperature

For this initial study, we dropped the time-dependent term in equation (1), and presumed that the C/O core mass was constant throughout the classical nova cycle, thus only accounting for the compressional heating and $`ϵ_N`$ in the accreted layer. This method improves on that of Iben et al. (1992) by allowing the accreted envelope mass to change through the $`10^5`$ year classical nova cycle. Early in the cycle, the mass of the accreted layer is small, compressional heating is small, and the WD cools. Later in the cycle, the accreted layer becomes thick enough that compressional heating along with slow hydrogen burning releases a sufficient amount of energy to heat the core. As the WD has a large heat capacity, reaching the equilibrium $`T_c`$ where the heat exchanged between the envelope and core averages to zero over a single classical nova cycle takes $`10^8`$ years. Since this time is shorter than the time over which $`\dot{M}`$ changes due to changing orbital period, we construct such equilibrium accretors for a given $`M`$ and $`\dot{M}`$.

To do this construction, we first fix $`T_c`$ at the outer edge of the C/O core at a pressure high enough so that the changing accumulated mass has little direct effect. With a radiative-zero outer boundary condition, we integrate our structure equations with equation (1) to find the thermal state for an $`\dot{M}`$ and accreted layer mass. See Figure 1 for examples of the resulting $`T`$-$`P`$ relations. We then evaluate the luminosity across the chosen location (the right edge of the plot in Figure 1) for different accreted layer masses, up to the unstable ignition which is found by comparing the $`T`$ and $`\rho `$ at the base of the accreted layer with analytic ignition curves (Fujimoto 1982).

We vary $`T_c`$ to find an equilibrium model, where the “core luminosity” ($`L_{\mathrm{core}}`$) averages to zero over the classical nova cycle as shown in Figure 2. The quiescent $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ for the same cycle is also shown in Figure 2. At the nova outburst we assume that the accreted shell is expelled, and that, due to the rapidity of this event, it does not appreciably heat the WD. The resulting equilibrium core temperatures for $`\dot{M}=10^{10}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ are $`T_c/10^6\mathrm{K}=9,7.5`$ and $`8.5`$ for $`M=0.4,0.6`$ and $`1.0M_{}`$. The $`0.4M_{}`$ star is hotter than the $`0.6M_{}`$ star because it has a larger maximum accumulated mass that leads to a longer period of core heating. For a $`0.6M_{}`$ WD, the core temperatures are $`T_c/10^6\mathrm{K}=4,5.3,12.2`$ and 18.0 for $`\dot{M}/M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1=10^{11},3.2\times 10^{11},4.2\times 10^{10}`$ and $`10^9`$.

The $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ during the classical nova cycle varies over a relatively narrow range that allows us to compare to observations. For field CVs, the large set of STIS observations by Szkody et al. (2001) and previous observations (Urban et al. 2000) provide spectra of quiescent WDs in DN. These measurements are made during deep quiescence when the accretion luminosity is negligible and are long enough after the outbursts that other emission mechanisms (e.g. Pringle’s (1988) suggestion of radiative illumination of the WD) have faded. The observed $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$’s thus measure the heat directly from the WD interior. This comparison to observations indicates that below the period gap, $`\dot{M}10^{10}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ and the WD masses are in the range $`0.6`$-$`1.0M_{}`$. This agrees with the expectation from Kolb & Baraffe (1999), who find $`\dot{M}5\times 10^{11}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ at an orbital period of 2 hours presuming angular momentum losses from gravitational waves alone. Above the period gap, the $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is higher, and we estimate $`\dot{M}10^9M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$. For a graphical comparison, see Townsley & Bildsten (2001). This general agreement with data from field WDs in which the internal luminosity is directly visible gives us confidence that our calculations can be applied to other quiescent DN systems.

We predict that a $`0.6M_{}`$ WD above the gap has $`T_c=1.8\times 10^7`$ K and, if in equilibrium below the gap, $`T_c=7.5\times 10^6`$ K. However, if the WD does not have time to cool as it traverses the gap, it will be hotter than our calculation implies. We estimate this cooling time from the current WD cooling law (e.g. Chabrier et al. 2000), $`L_{\mathrm{cool}}10^2L_{}(T_c/1.8\times 10^7\mathrm{K})^{2.5}`$, along with the heat capacity of the core, $`M\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}k_B/\mu _im_p`$, giving $`\mathrm{\Delta }t0.5`$ Gyr. Since this is comparable to the estimated time spent in the gap (Howell et al. 2001), our equilibrium assumption below the gap is likely safe. However, note that about 0.2 Gyrs after accretion halts, the WD will enter the ZZ Ceti instability strip!

## 4. Application to Globular Cluster Populations

Due to the high frequency of stellar interactions in Globular Clusters (GCs), an abundant population of CVs is expected to be found there, especially at low $`\dot{M}`$. CVs in GCs are commonly searched for via the presence of hydrogen emission lines or X-ray emission (as recent Chandra observations have found; Grindlay et al. 2001a, Grindlay et al. 2001b), and this method is fruitful. We show that these systems (as well as CVs crossing the period gap or those “hibernating” post-novae, Shara et al. 1986) can also be identified by their position in a color-magnitude diagram (CMD). By using our theory of the thermal state of the WD, it is possible to predict the broadband colors of quiescent CVs.

An excellent example is NGC 6397 (King et al. 1998; Taylor et al. 2001). Figure 3 shows a CMD of NGC 6397 with our initial results. The data points are objects which meet the proper-motion criteria for cluster membership and which are below the MS. The lines were produced by superposing a WD with the maximum $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ for the indicated $`\dot{M}`$ with a MS star. Due to uncertainty in the theory of quiescent disks (Menou 2000), no disk contribution has been added. Note, however, that a constant $`T5000`$ K disk like those indicated in eclipse maps (Wood & Crawford 1986) would have a $`VI`$ color of 1.24 including the cluster reddening. Except for near the WD cooling line (dashed curve), where the WD dominates, the $`I`$ magnitude is set by the MS companion. The large dots along the $`10^9M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ and $`10^{10}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ lines indicate where the MS companion is 0.3, 0.2, 0.15 and 0.1 $`M_{}`$, and two additional points at 0.09 and 0.085 $`M_{}`$ are indicated on the $`10^{11}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ line. This immediately provides a number of candidate systems (namely, data in this part of the CMD).

The circled points are the “non-flickerers” (Cool et al. 1998) recently reported by Taylor et al. (2001). The three at $`I22.25`$ are very strong H$`\alpha `$ absorbers (consistent with a DA WD) and were not detected by Chandra (Grindlay et al. 2001b). These authors had discussed these systems as possible helium WDs with millisecond pulsar companions, though, given our work, we would claim that these are hot WDs with $`0.15M_{}`$ MS companions. In addition, the population of data points in this diagram with respect to our theoretical curves will eventually constrain CV evolutionary scenarios. If we assume many of the data points are CVs, we already see that most systems with high $`\dot{M}`$ have $`0.150.3M_{}`$ companions. If confirmed as members of the cluster, the stars below the $`\dot{M}=10^{11}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ line could well be the long-sought post-turnaround systems with $`\dot{M}=10^{12}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ and companion masses $`<0.09M_{}`$ (Howell et al. 1997).

## 5. Conclusions and Discussion

We have evaluated the action of compressional heating on accreting WD interiors and shown that most of the compressional energy release takes place in the accreted envelope, and is thermally communicated to the core. The maximum envelope mass is set by the unstable nuclear burning that causes a classical nova runaway and most likely expels the accreted mass. We have constructed equilibrium accretors which have constant core temperatures such that the heat lost from the core when the envelope is thin (i.e. right after the classical nova) is balanced by that regained when the envelope is thick. This equilibrium determines the $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ of the WD throughout the classical nova cycle. Our models agree with the observations of dwarf novae in deep quiescence and imply $`\dot{M}10^{10}M_{}`$ yr-1 just below the period gap and $`\dot{M}10^9M_{}`$ yr-1 just above the period gap for WD masses in the range $`0.6`$$`1.0M_{}`$.

Our $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ calculations provide a prediction of the colors of quiescent DN. Using MS stellar models, we have predicted where a DN should appear in a color-magnitude diagram as a function of $`\dot{M}`$ and the mass of its companion. Many unidentified objects appear in the relevant regions of the detailed CMDs which have been obtained for globular clusters by HST. The number of such systems in the field will increase due to upcoming surveys (such as SDSS and 2DF, see Marsh et al. 2001), and will push to lower $`\dot{M}`$ systems.

Though our initial efforts have met with apparent success, there is still much to be done. We need to vary the metallicity of the accreted material, lowering to values appropriate for globular cluster science. This could change our results at large $`\dot{M}`$, but at low $`\dot{M}`$’s, the ignition mass is set by $`pp`$ burning and will likely not change too much. We also need to relax our initial assumptions, e.g. by including WD excavation or accretion and accounting for thermal evolution of the WD.

The internal thermal state of the WD has been a longstanding uncertainty in classical nova work, as has the question of how much mass is ejected in the explosion (Gehrz et al. 1998). Our work provides the first calculation of the internal thermal state of a WD undergoing classical novae, and will eventually lead to self consistent calculations for ignition masses, including variations of the metallicity. This will be an improvement on previous work (e.g. Prialnik & Kovetz 1995) which treated $`T_c`$ and $`\dot{M}`$ as two independent parameters.

We thank Paula Szkody for helpful comments as referee and for sharing the most recent HST observations, and Ivan King and Jeno Sokoloski for comments. This research was supported by NASA via grant NAG 5-8658 and by the NSF under Grants PHY99-07949 and AST01-96422. L. B. is a Cottrell Scholar of the Research Corporation and D. T. is an NSF Graduate Fellow.