text:
# Star formation histories of late-type dwarfs outside the Local Group

## 1. Introduction

The application of the synthetic colour-magnitude diagram (CMD) method to dwarf galaxies in the Local Group has allowed several people to infer the star formation histories (SFHs) of these galaxies with unprecedented accuracy (e.g. Tosi et al. 1991, Aparicio et al. 1996, Tolstoy & Saha 1996, Grebel 1998). It has thus been possible to understand that late-type dwarfs evolve following a gasping (Tosi et al 1991) regime of star formation (SF) rather than a bursting one. In other words, their SF occurs in long episodes of moderate activity, separated by short quiescent phases, and not in short episodes of strong activity, separated by long quiescent periods.

The natural question is what do late-type galaxies outside the Local Group do, and what is the SF regime in Blue Compact Dwarfs (BCDs), which are not present locally. BCDs have been suggested to undergo a few strong and short bursts of SF, to be so poorly evolved to represent the closest analogues to primeval galaxies and to be possible contributors to the excess of faint blue objects found in deep galaxy counts at redshifts between 0.7 and 1. Hence, understanding whether or not their SF activity can be strong enough to allow for sufficient brightness at intermediate redshift and whether or not any of them are currently forming their first stars can have interesting cosmological implications.

In order to answer these questions, we are studying the SFHs of a number of late-type dwarfs (both BCDs and dwarf irregulars) outside the Local Group. Their individual stars have been resolved by deep Hubble Space Telescope (HST) photometry and their stellar populations can be interpreted in terms of SFH with the synthetic CMD method. So far, we have examined three prototype systems: IZw18, NGC1569 and NGC1705. IZw18 (at a distance between 10 and 14 Mpc) is the most metal poor galaxy ever observed and has often been suggested to be experiencing now its first burst of SF. NGC1569 (at 2.2 Mpc) is one of the most active starburst dwarfs, exhibiting three super star clusters, a large concentration of giant HII regions, and shells and filaments presumably related to young SN ejecta. NGC1705 (at 5.1 Mpc) is a post-starburst BCD, containing a super star cluster and showing the best observational evidence of gas outflows (galactic winds) triggered by SN explosions.

## 2. Application of the synthetic CMD method to IZw18, NGC1569 and NGC1705

For these three galaxies we have reduced with the highest accuracy the HST photometric data, to resolve individual stars down to the faintest possible level and derive their CMDs. Since the fainter stars, in general, are also the older ones, the deeper we succeed in measuring the stars, the longer we cover in lookback time. We have estimated the incompleteness and blending factors and the photometric errors of the data by performing artificial star tests on the actual images. Then we have applied the synthetic CMD method as described by Tosi et al. (1991) and Greggio et al. (1998).

The synthetic CMDs are constructed via MonteCarlo extractions of (mass, age) pairs, according to the assumed IMF, SF law, and time interval of the SF activity. Each extracted synthetic star is placed in the CMD by suitable interpolations on the adopted stellar evolution tracks and adopting appropriate tables for photometric conversion in the desired photometric system (the HST-Vegamag system for all our HST data). The absolute magnitude is converted to a provisional apparent mag by applying the (either known or arbitrary) reddening and distance modulus. The results of the artificial star tests are crucial to create reliable synthetic CMDs. First, of the synthetic stars extracted for any mag and photometric band, we retain only the fraction given by the corresponding recovered/input artificial stars. Then, the retained synthetic stars are assigned a photometric error derived from the cumulative distribution of the (output-input) mags of the artificial stars with input mag equal to the provisional apparent mag.

Once the number of objects populating the whole synthetic CMD (or portions of it) equals that of the observed one, the procedure is stopped, yielding the quantitative level of the SF rate consistent with the observational data, for the prescribed IMF and shape of the SF law. To evaluate the goodness of the model predictions, we compare them with: the observational luminosity functions (LFs), the overall morphology of the CMD, its mag and colour distributions, the number of objects in particular phases (e.g. on the red giant branch, RGB, on the clump, on the blue loops, etc.). A model can be considered satisfactory only if it reproduces all the features of the empirical CMDs and LFs. Given the uncertainties affecting both the photometry and the theoretical parameters (stellar evolution tracks included), the method cannot provide strictly unique results; however, it allows us to significantly reduce the range of possible interpretations of the evolutionary status of the examined region.

The application of the method to IZw18 (Aloisi, Tosi & Greggio 1999) has shown that, despite its very low metallicity, this system is not experiencing now its first SF activity. The optical CMD plotted in the left-hand panel of Fig.1 shows the clear presence of red faint objects which can be interpreted only as relatively old stars (age larger than several hundreds Myrs) on the asymptotic giant branch or RGB phases. These same stars have been measured also in the infrared by Östlin (2000) who locates them exactly in the same CMD evolutionary phase. The lookback time reached with this photometry is around 0.5 Gyr (depending on the galaxy distance which is still relatively uncertain). A model assuming a single recent burst of SF (second panel from left in Fig.1) started 10 Myr ago and still active is definitely inconsistent with the data, since it predicts no red stars, either faint or bright, and too many bright blue stars, even adopting a steep IMF (in the shown case: $`\alpha =`$3.0, with the normalization where Salpeter’s slope is 2.35). Models assuming two episodes of SF (second panel from right) reproduce instead fairly well the observed stellar distribution. The best agreement is obtained with the Fagotto et al. (1994) stellar tracks with metallicity Z=0.0004, a flat IMF ($`\alpha `$=1.5), a first SF episode from 500 to 30 Myr ago, and a second one from 20 Myr to 5 Myr ago. The same scenario is obtained with the Geneva stellar models with Z=0.0001 (Schaller et al. 1992).

For NGC1569, the lookback time provided by the optical CMD (Greggio et al 1998) is about 0.15 Gyr, while it can reach about 1 Gyr with the infrared NICMOS data which we have only recently analyzed (Aloisi et al. 2001). Greggio et al. have thus derived the SFH of NGC1569 in recent epochs from the optical CMDs and we are planning to derive the less recent one from the infrared CMDs. The most probable scenario suggested by Greggio et al. for the recent SFH assumes an IMF slope $`\alpha `$=2.6 and two episodes of SF: one from the reached lookback time up to 35 Myr ago, and a more intense one from 30 to 10 Myr ago. The quiescent phase lasts 5 Myr; had it been only 5 Myr longer it would have led to a gap in the star distribution in the blue plume, which is instead definitely absent in the observational CMD. This places a strong upper limit to the length of the quiescent phases.

We have recently reduced V, I, J, H HST images of NGC1705 (Tosi et al. 2001) and found from the resulting CMDs that there is an age radial gradient, with the younger stars strongly concentrated in the central regions and the older stars dominating the outer regions; a result common to Local Group dwarfs. Thanks to the quality of these data, the lookback time is 10-15 Gyr, despite the high distance of this galaxy. We have already simulated (Annibali et al. 2001) the CMD of the inner field, observed in all the four bands. To reproduce all the observed features of the CMDs and LFs of this region (see Fig.2), we need to assume several episodes of SF: a roughly constant activity from the reached lookback time to 1 Gyr ago, another one from 1000 to 50 Myr ago, a more intense episode started 50 Myr ago and still active, and a short burst active only between 15 and 10 Myr ago. The SF rates of these episodes are still very preliminary, since an appropriate analysis of the individual galactic regions is still in progress.

## 3. The SFH of galaxies outside the Local Group

Fig.3 shows the SF rate per unit area as a function of time derived in our three galaxies from the best synthetic CMDs. Only NGC1569 shows what can be defined as a real intense burst. In fact, even if we do not have yet quantitative results on its SF at ages older than 0.15 Gyr, we do know that its mass (3.3$`\times 10^8`$M) does not allow for such gas consumption rates to last longer than 1 Gyr, at most. The other two galaxies have SFHs quite similar to those inferred by various groups for Local Group Irregulars (see Grebel 1998 and references therein): long episodes of moderate activity with only a few, short interruptions, back to the reached lookback time. We must emphasize that exactly the same scenario has been obtained for the other BCDs which have been examined with the synthetic CMD method by others. The left-hand and central panels at the bottom of Fig.3 show for instance the SFH inferred by Schulte-Ladbeck et al. (2001) and Schulte-Ladbeck et al. (2000) for the BCDs IZw36 and Mrk178, respectively.

The results presented here can be generalized if we take into account all the CMD analyses of late-type dwarfs available in the literature:

* No evidence has been found so far of long interruptions in the SF activity, neither in irregulars nor in BCDs;
* Only very few dwarfs show strong SF bursts, like NGC1569;
* No galaxy forming now its first stars has been found yet: all the examined systems were already active at the reached lookback time.

This implies that:

a) the late-type dwarfs outside the Local Group have a gasping SF regime like those inside it;

b) there is no obvious difference in the SFH of BCDs and irregulars;

c) only a few dwarfs may have had bursts of SF as strong as required to contribute to the excess of faint blue galaxies at intermediat redshifts.

### Acknowledgments.

We warmly thank Regina Schulte-Ladbeck for interesting conversations and for having provided her results in suitable format. This work has been supported by the Italian ASI (grant ARS-99-44) and MURST (Cofin2000).

## References

Aloisi, A., Clampin, M., Diolaiti, E., Greggio, L., Leitherer, C., Nota, A., Origlia, L., Parmeggiani, G., Tosi, M. 2001, AJ, 121, 1425

Aloisi, A., Tosi, M., Greggio, L. 1999, AJ, 118, 302

Annibali, F., Aloisi, A., Greggio, L., Leitherer, C., Tosi, M. 2001, in Dwarf Galaxies and their Environment, ed. K.S. de Boer, R.J. Dettmar, U. Klein (Aacher: Shaker), in press

Aparicio, A., Gallart, C., Chiosi, C., Bertelli, G. 1996, ApJ, 469, L97

Fagotto, F., Bressan, A., Bertelli, G., Chiosi, C. 1994, A&AS, 105, 29

Grebel, E.K. 1998, IAU Symp.192, p.1

Greggio, L., Tosi, M., Clampin, M., De Marchi, G., Leitherer, C., Nota, A., Sirianni, M. 1998, ApJ, 504, 725

Östlin, G. 2000, ApJ, 535, L99

Pagel, B.E.J. & Tautvaisiene, G. 1998, MNRAS, 299, 535

Schaller, G., Schaerer, D., Meynet, G., Maeder, A. 1992, A&AS, 96, 269

Schulte-Ladbeck, R.E., Hopp, U., Greggio, L., Crone, M.M. 2000, AJ, 120, 1713

Schulte-Ladbeck, R.E., Hopp, U., Greggio, L., Crone, M.M., Drozdovsky, I.O., 2001, AJ, 120, 1713

Tolstoy, E. & Saha, A. 1996, ApJ, 462, 672

Tosi, M., Greggio, L., Marconi, G., Focardi, P. 1991, AJ, 102, 951

Tosi, M., Sabbi, E., Bellazzini, M., Aloisi, A., Greggio, L., Leitherer, C., Montegriffo, P. 2001, AJ 122, 1271


format: text

text:
# Instanton-induced Semi-hard Parton Interactions and Phenomenology of High Energy Hadron Collisions

## I Introduction

The theoretical description of high energy hadronic processes began in the 1960’s, when Regge-based phenomenology was developed to describe energy dependence of interaction amplitudes. A special role has been played by the so-called Pomeron, the leading Regge pole with vacuum quantum numbers. It was first believed that its intercept, $`\alpha (t=0)`$, was unity, corresponding to asymptotically constant cross sections and satisfying the Pomeranchuck theorem, $`\sigma _{pp}\sigma _{\overline{p}p}0`$. However, it was discovered in the late 1970’s that the cross sections grow slowly with $`s`$, rendering the supercritical Pomeron with the intercept above 1, with the precise value DL

$$\alpha (t=0)1=\mathrm{\Delta }0.08.$$
(1)
The discovery at HERA of much stronger growth with energy in hard processes, with an effective power of about $`0.5`$, has led to a proposed separation of the former “soft” and new “hard” Pomerons, each with different parameters and different physics two\_pomerons , the latter presumably described by BFKL resummation of perturbative QCD which indeed leads to a power of such magnitude BFKL .

In this paper we will not discuss the issue of energy dependence of hard processes, focusing rather on the original “soft” Pomeron. We put “soft” in quotation marks here because we do not entirely agree with this terminology. It is now clear that the Pomeron itself is a small object, with its size represented by the slope of its trajectory, $`\alpha ^{}(t=0)1/(4\mathrm{GeV}^2)`$. The scale involved, $`0.1`$ fm, is much smaller than hadronic radii, and so the Pomeron exchanges should in fact be treated on the level of individual partons, appropriately defined at the intermediate momentum scale of 1-2 GeV. For lack of a better standard term, we will refer to it as the semi-hard scale.

More precisely, we will not consider the nature of the soft Pomeron in full either. The leading Regge pole, if it exists, is the analog of a single bound state appearing in the $`t`$-channel as a result of rather different interactions111Similar to the $`J/\psi `$, a definite charmonium state which appears as a result of interplay between both perturbative and confining potentials.. Although the existence of such a pole is an appealing possibility, no general principles demand that it occur in QCD.

We will follow the recent tendency of splitting the amplitude into two parts, the constant and growing contributions to the cross section. While the former part is believed to be related to color exchanges between partons, which lead to multiple hadron production via string breaking LN , the latter is related to rarer processes resulting in “prompt” production of additional gluons, quarks, or hadrons. Below we will also try to disentangle these two components using the available data, and focus on the nature of the $`growing`$ part of hadronic cross sections.

The theoretical explanation of any process which takes place at the semi-hard scale is notoriously difficult – which is not surprising, since both the pQCD and low energy hadronic descriptions fail at this scale. There are basically three distinct approaches:

(i) Minijet-based models use familiar formulae from pQCD minijets . They are well-tested in the domain of hard jets, but their application at the semi-hard scale is a drastic extrapolation. All of these models assume the existence of a non-perturbative momentum cutoff, $`p_{cutoff}`$, in order to render pQCD results finite. This cutoff is left unexplained, treated as a purely phenomenological parameter, and all results depend greatly on its value.

(ii) Instanton-based dynamics, to be discussed below, have only recently been applied to high-energy scattering SZ ; KKL ; NSZ  and use insights obtained a decade ago in electroweak theory weakinst . Particularly relevant for this work are the first two references, in which the growing part of the hadron-hadron cross sections is ascribed to multi-gluon production via instantons.

(iii) The Color Glass Condensate, a classical Weitzecker-Williams field of gluons carried by interacting hadrons, can be excited to produce prompt gluons KV . This is another example of a weakly-coupled system involving non-perturbative gauge field configurations.

The instanton approach, (ii), qualitatively relates the properties of the Pomeron to other non-perturbative phenomena at low energies NSZ  and to the static properties of the QCD vacuum (for a review and original references see SS\_98 ), providing useful constraints on parameters. First, the “soft” Pomeron’s compactness follows from the small average instanton size, $`\rho 1/3`$ fm. Second, a natural explanation of the smallness of the intercept $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (alternatively, the effective quark-quark cross section, as explained below) arises in that it is proportional to the “instanton diluteness parameter” of the QCD vacuum, $`\kappa =n\rho ^40.01`$. Furthermore, unlike in pQCD, at the classical level the “odderon” does not appear, since each instanton field belongs to an SU(2) subgroup of the SU(3) color group and therefore cannot discern between quarks and antiquarks.

The smallness of the instanton-induced amplitudes does not imply an extra penalty for the production of multiple prompt gluons and quarks. On the contrary, such processes dominate quasielastic (and other few-body) parton scattering. Instanton-induced processes furthermore lead to the creation of sphaleron-like gluomagnetic clusters which decay into many partons. Thus instanton effects can be expected to overshadow perturbative amplitudes of sufficiently high order and contribute substantially to the prompt entropy in heavy ion collisions.

The aim of this work is not to debate the theoretical issues, but to try to devise a phenomenological model capable of connecting many pieces of information about high energy collisions. Therefore, in judging the approaches to semi-hard dynamics mentioned above, we are most interested in their ability to explain the observed phenomena. To date, there is no direct evidence which empirically supports one over the other. While it is not possible to observe mini-jets, the CGC, or sphalerons directly, one might discern between these two mechanisms by comparing their predictions for particle production with data. This would require correlation analysis, which goes far beyond the current paper.

The goal of this paper is rather more modest. We analyze available hadron-hadron data and find a description of semi-hard interactions which involves prompt production via instantons. We phenomenologically fix the parameter left uncertain in Ref. NSZ , an instanton tail cutoff, and find the effective quark-quark cross section. With this in hand, we compute cross sections for various hadron-hadron scattering processes and then consider heavy ion collisions, making rough predictions but using no additional parameters.

## II Shadowing in hadron-hadron collisions

If all hadronic processes are dominated by a common Pomeron pole applied at the hadronic level, multiple factorization relations such as

$$\sigma _{NN}\sigma _{\gamma \gamma }=\sigma _{\gamma N}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}$$

are expected to hold. This implies identical energy dependence for all reactions, $`\sigma s^{\mathrm{\Delta }(0)}`$, with a universal Pomeron intercept and independent Pomeron coupling constants for photons and nucleons. However, this relation is not confirmed by the data. In particular, recent HERA measurements of the $`\gamma \gamma `$ cross section have shown a more rapid growth with energy than that seen in $`pp`$ collisions. In this section show that this feature follows naturally from different parton composition, by applying the idea of universal cross sections at the partonic level.

At moderate energies, $`\sqrt{s}100`$ GeV, the growing part of the cross section is small enough so that the simple logarithmic expression

$$\sigma _{hh^{}}(s)=\sigma _{hh^{}}+X_{hh^{}}\mathrm{ln}(s)$$
(2)
fits the data quite well. (For definiteness we will use values recently fitted by the Particle Data Group 2000 pdg .)

Although the second term is small compared to the first,

$$X_{hh^{}}<<\sigma _{hh^{}},$$

one should not assume that the measured $`X_{hh^{}}`$ is merely the sum of all cross sections involving prompt production. Even small partonic cross sections are affected by the screening induced by the much larger quasi-elastic processes comprising $`\sigma _{hh^{}}`$. This is especially clear in the impact parameter plane, discussed by Kopeliovich et al. KPPP . Since the nucleon center is nearly black, additional processes cannot change the total cross section. Therefore, the naive sum of all inelastic processes is always larger than the values present in empirical fits.

In the impact parameter space representation the total cross section is the integral over the “blackness” factor:

$$\sigma _{tot}(s)=2d^2b\mathrm{\Gamma }(b,s).$$
(3)
In the eikonal approximation, blackness is usually represented in the form

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(b,s)=1e^{\chi (b,s)},$$
(4)
where the quantity in the exponent is related to the absorption, $`\mathrm{}A_p(q,s)`$, at the “parton Born level” (where the subscript $`p`$ refers to a parton, quark, or gluon). Specifically, the phase shift function is written

$$\chi (b,s)=\frac{1}{s}\frac{d^2q}{(2\pi )}\mathrm{e}^{iqb}\mathrm{}A_p(q,s).$$
(5)
Unitarity is enforced with such a form, in the sense that an increasing cross section leads to complete blackness, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(b,s)1`$.

The next general step is to separate the relatively large and $`s`$-independent quasi-elastic contribution to $`\chi (b,s)`$ from the relatively small prompt production part, as

$$\chi (b,s)=\chi _0(b)+\chi _1(b,s).$$
(6)
After this is done, one expands to first order in $`\chi _1(b,s)`$ and again separates the growing and constant parts of the cross section,

$$\sigma _{tot}(s)=2d^2b\left[\left(1e^{\chi _0(b)}\right)+\chi _1(b,s)e^{\chi _0(b)}\right].$$
(7)
A naive additive formula is recovered for small $`\chi _0(b)`$, but this is in fact not appropriate. As we will see, corrections to the second term due to the $`\mathrm{exp}[\chi _0(b)]`$ factor are typically at the 50% level. This correction is larger in $`pp`$ than in $`\gamma \gamma `$ or $`\pi \pi `$ collisions, explaining the apparent differences between the cross sections.

## III Determining Partonic Content at the Semi-Hard Scale

Before going into model-dependent studies of shadowing, let us first address the partonic composition of different hadrons.

Comparing global fits to hard processes from the literature, one finds that despite the impressive (and ever-increasing) accuracy of DIS and Drell-Yan data, there is not yet truly quantitative data on gluons at the semi-hard scale we need. The reason for this is generic, in that gluonic densities are derived from perturbative DGLAP evolution, which naturally becomes less accurate as we approach its limits. It is even difficult to determine if the density of semi-hard gluons increases or decreases at small $`x`$. Fortunately, for our present purposes we can avoid discussing asymptotically large energies, restricting ourselves to sub-TeV domain and including only partons with Feynman $`x>x_{min}=0.01`$. The corresponding number of “relevant partons” for the nucleon, pion, and photon are summarized below in Table 1. The references given in the table are revised GRV parton distributions evaluated at next-to-leading order (NLO), taken at the scale of $`Q^2=1`$ GeV, which are then integrated over interval $`x=[0.01,1.0]`$.

In principle, with more accurate parametrizations, we might try to test parton additivity by separately extracting, from the data of the growing part of hadronic cross section, the contributions of $`qq`$, $`qg`$, and $`gg`$ to semi-hard processes. This was attempted, but with the accuracy at hand the differences between taking quarks and gluons is negligible. We are therefore forced to make a model-dependent assumption about their relative magnitude.

Perturbatively, prompt production processes occur during the collision of two “wee” (or Weitzecker-Williams) gluons which accompany the large-$`x`$ partons. In the instanton approach this should not necessarily be the case, since the amplitudes for absorption of various numbers of wee gluons are comparable and thus there is no suppression by the coupling constant. One might try completely resumming the Euclidean Wilson loops, as in Refs. SZ ; NSZ . We will simply take the lowest order scaling relation as derived in the next section and take the effective number of partons to be $`N_q+2N_g`$, where $`N_q`$ and $`N_g`$ are the numbers of quarks and gluons, respectively, taken from Table 1. This leaves us with only one unknown: the growing part of the $`qq`$ cross section.

Combining the parton content with this simple recipe, one obtains the ratios of cross sections which may be compared to the coefficients of $`\mathrm{ln}(s)`$ extracted from experiment. The results, summarized in Table 2, are reasonable, but cannot be taken as precise since shadowing corrections have not been considered here.

## IV Parton scattering in the Instanton Field

Multiple parton scattering through an instanton field can be computed either by evaluating Wilson lines in Euclidean space NSZ  or using perturbative rules in Minkowski space. Relating these two approaches to all orders is non-trivial. In this paper we use the former method, analytically continuing Wilson lines from Minkowski to Euclidean space as detailed in Ref. Meg  This method maintains diagram-by-diagram correspondence and allows one to calculate scattering amplitudes involving both quarks and gluons.

The Wilson line in an instanton field $`A_\mu ^a`$ is given by

$$W=P\mathrm{exp}\left(ig_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑\tau A_\mu ^a(E\tau +r)p^\mu T^a\right),$$
(8)
where $`r`$ is distance of Wilson path from the center of instanton and $`T^a`$ lies in fundamental representation for quarks and adjoint representation for gluons. Before analytically continuing to Euclidean space let us introduce small regulatory mass $`m`$ such that $`p^2=m^2`$. Analytic continuation is then performed respecting this condition. After an obvious change of variables one finds

$$W=P\mathrm{exp}\left(ig_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑xA_\mu ^a(x+r)\frac{p^\mu }{E}T^a\right).$$
(9)
Integrating, for the quark line we have

$$W_{AB}=\mathrm{cos}\left(\alpha \frac{m}{E}\right)\delta _{AB}+i\frac{E}{m}\mathrm{sin}\left(\alpha \frac{m}{E}\right)n^a\tau _{AB}^a,$$
(10)
where $`n^a=\eta ^{a\mu \nu }(p_\mu /E)(r_\nu /|r|)`$ and $`\alpha =\pi (1r/\sqrt{r^2+\rho ^2})`$. In the high energy limit, $`m/E0`$ leads to

$$W_{AB}=\delta _{AB}+i\alpha n^a\tau _{AB}^a.$$
(11)
For gluons we similarly have

$`W_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\left(2\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{m}{E}}\right)\delta _{ab}+{\displaystyle \frac{E}{m}}\mathrm{sin}\left(2\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{m}{E}}\right)n^c\epsilon _{abc}`$ (12)
$`+\left({\displaystyle \frac{E}{m}}\right)^2\left(\mathrm{cos}\left(2\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{m}{E}}\right)1\right)n_an_b,`$
and in the high energy limit,

$$W_{ab}=\delta _{ab}+2n^c\epsilon _{cab}\alpha 2n_an_b\alpha ^2.$$
(13)
Diagrammatical interpretation of these results is straightforward. In high energy (eikonal) limit only single gluon exchange contributes to the quark-instanton interaction, whereas single and double exchanges survive in gluon-instanton interaction.

Comparing results of Eq. (12) to Ref. NSZ , one notices that the only difference is the change $`\mathrm{sin}(\alpha )\alpha `$. The calculational techniques of Ref. NSZ  can therefore be used, except for a modification of the instanton-induced form factor as explained below.

As for gluon scattering, it is a general property of high energy cross sections in the instanton field that the number of normal vectors (the $`n_a`$) in the cross section corresponds to the moment of relative instanton-antiinstanton rotation and is in turn proportional to $`\sqrt{\alpha _s}`$ NSZ . Thus, the third term in the r.h.s. of Eq. (13) is subleading to the order $`\alpha _s^2`$ (there is no interference between the symmetric and antisymmetric terms). Such corrections are beyond the present accuracy and will be ignored. Consequently, after performing some straightforward algebra, we find that gluon scattering is governed by a form factor simply twice that for quarks, meaning that for the purpose of phenomenology we can consider hadrons as consisting of $`N_q+2N_g`$ “effective quarks”.

## V Fixing Partonic Cross Sections

We now proceed with a model-dependent analysis of the problem. As explained in Section II, we assume that $`\chi _1(b,s)1`$ (to be justified with numerics a posteriori) and write the blackness factor of Eq. (3) as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Gamma }_0+\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,$$
(14)
in which

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_0=1e^{\chi _0(b)},\mathrm{\Gamma }_1=\chi _1(b,s)e^{\chi _0(b)}.$$
(15)
Fourier transforming to a momentum representation, the rising contribution to the cross section can be written as

$$\chi _1(q,s)_{ij}=\frac{\rho ^2}{4}F_{ij}(q)\mathrm{\Delta }(q)\mathrm{ln}(s),$$
(16)
for two hadrons of types $`i`$ and $`j`$ explicitly. where $`F_{ij}(q)`$ is the hadronic form factor of Hüfner and Povh HP , and is factorizable as

$$F_{ij}(q)=F_i(q)F_j(q),$$
(17)
where the single-hadron form factors are of geometric monopole or dipole form for mesons or baryons, respectively. Explicitly, it is the parametrization

$$F_i(q)=\left(1+\frac{q^2R_i^2}{6n_i}\right)^{n_i},$$
(18)
with $`n=2`$ for protons and $`n=1`$ for mesons. The radii, phenomenologically fit to CERN and Fermilab data, are $`R_p=0.77`$ fm and $`R_\pi =0.64`$ fm.

The function $`\mathrm{\Delta }(q)`$ in Eq. (16) characterizes the processes responsible for prompt production and the growing cross section. The overall normalization is chosen so that taking $`F(q)=1`$ results in a growing component of $`\pi \rho ^2\mathrm{\Delta }(0)\mathrm{ln}(s)`$, as in Ref. NSZ .

We now consider the instanton model, in the context of which $`\mathrm{\Delta }(q)`$ was calculated in Ref. NSZ , and found to be

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(q)=\kappa \frac{16}{15}\frac{1}{(2\pi )^8}d^2q_1d^2q_2H(q_1,q_2;q).$$
(19)
The instanton diluteness parameter, $`\kappa `$, appears linearly and $`H(q_1,q_2;q)`$ is the instanton-induced interaction kernel. The double integral over the kernel may be written as

$$\frac{d^2q_1}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{d^2q_2}{(2\pi )^2}H(q_1,q_2;q)=\left(d^2be^{iqb}J(b)^2\right)^2,$$
(20)
where $`J(b)`$, the Fourier transform of the instanton-induced form factor, is

$`J(b)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi b}{\rho ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2+b^2}}}\left(1\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{x^2+b^2}{x^2+b^2+\rho ^2}}}\right)`$ (21)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi b}{\rho ^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2}{b^2}}\right),`$
in which $`\rho `$ is the average instanton size.

For large $`b`$, $`J(b)1/b`$, and thus the form factor is logarithmically divergent. A finite result can be obtained through phenomenological deformation of the instanton profile. We thus replace Eq. (21) with the deformed instanton form factor,

$$J(b)=\frac{\pi b}{\rho ^2}\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\frac{\rho ^2}{b^2}\right)e^{cb/\rho }.$$
(22)
The constant $`c`$ is a free parameter, to be fitted to the total proton-proton cross section. Combining Eqs. (19), (20), and (22), we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(q)=\frac{\kappa }{15\rho ^4}\left(d^2bb^2\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\frac{\rho ^2}{b^2}\right)\right]^2e^{2cb/\rho iqb}\right)^2$$
(23)
Combining all factors into Eq. (16), we have the final phase shift function

$`\chi _1(q,s)_{ij}=`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2}{4}}(N_q+2N_g)_i(N_q+2N_g)_jF_i(q)F_j(q)\mathrm{\Delta }(q)\mathrm{ln}(s).`$ (24)
with constituent numbers $`N_\alpha `$ taken from Table 1.

We must next consider shadowing corrections to $`\chi _1(q,s)`$. Again, following Ref. HP , we use

$$\chi _0(q)=\frac{\lambda _0}{4\pi }R_1^2R_2^2F_{12}(q),$$
(25)
where $`\lambda _0=0.52`$ GeV2 is a universal inverse area for hadronic collisions. Finally, we use the standard instanton parameters of $`\kappa =0.01`$ and $`\rho =0.3`$ fm Shu\_82 .

We fix the deformation parameter $`c`$ by fitting our model’s prediction for the rising part of the $`pp`$ cross section to the experimentally observed one, $`X_{pp}=0.174\mathrm{fm}^2`$ pdg . This requires $`c=0.327`$. We are now able to calculate the rising parts of total cross sections for other hadrons, and our precitions for $`p\pi `$, $`p\gamma `$, and $`\gamma \gamma `$ are given in Table 3. We find reasonable agreement between these numbers and the data, having fixed only one free parameter, $`c`$.

The $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(b,s)`$ dependence on $`b`$, which determines the differential cross section, is shown in Fig. 1. Following Ref. KPPP , we have plotted222 In Ref. KPPP  this was defined as $`\mathrm{\Delta }(b)`$; here we use alternative notation to avoid confusion with our quantity $`\mathrm{\Delta }(q)`$ as defined in Ref. NSZ .

$$\delta (b)=\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{d\mathrm{ln}s}.$$
(26)
The experimental points are a parametrization fit done by Kopeliovich et al. with ISR isr  and CERN UA4 sps  data. While our model captures the overall systematics of the curve extracted from experiment, it is clearly lacking at large $`b`$, suggesting that we have overestimated the instanton tail contribution.

## VI Heavy Ion Collisions

We may now extend our analysis to estimate the number of sphaleron-type clusters produced from excited instantons in heavy ion collisions. This issue has already been discussed by one of us Shu\_AA , and we now return to it with more definite knowledge of the parameters involved.

For symmetric, central $`AA`$ collisions of two nuclei we use the simplest model, one of two spheres with homogeneously distributed partons. The total parton number is $`AN_q`$, with $`N_q12`$ being the number of “effective quarks” (quarks number plus twice gluons number) per nucleon333Of course, the clustering of partons into “constituent quarks” and nucleons increases the number of collisions, but we will ignore such correlations for now..

The total number of $`qq`$ collisions in this case is easily obtained from the following geometric integral:

$`N_{coll}`$ $`=`$ $`8\pi \sigma _{qq}n_q^2{\displaystyle _0^R}𝑑r_tr_t\left(R^2rt^2\right)`$ (27)
$`=`$ $`3^{4/3}2^{5/3}\pi \sigma _{qq}n_q^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{AN_q}{\pi n_q}}\right)^{4/3},`$
where the quark density is determined by the nuclear density to be $`n_q=N_q\times 0.16`$ fm-3.

With $`A=197`$ (gold) and the value for the quark-quark cross section extracted above, $`\sigma _{qq}=1.69\times 10^3`$ fm2, we have the following production rate per unit rapidity of sphaleron-like clusters:

$$\frac{dN_{coll}}{dy}76.5,$$
(28)
a number somewhat smaller than estimated in Ref. Shu\_AA .

Each cluster will in turn decay into a number of quarks and gluons. Simply scaling of the couplings from the studies of sphaleron decay in electroweak theory leads to about 3.5 gluons per cluster, with 0-6 quarks (up to a complete set of light quark-antiquark pairs, $`\overline{u}u\overline{d}d\overline{s}s`$). As an average we tentatively take 3.5 gluons and 2.5 quarks, the latter obtained by applying a factor of one half for the suppression of strange quarks and another one half to account for the possibly change in Chern-Simons number. This yields an average of six partons per cluster, or in central $`AuAu`$ collisions at RHIC about $`76.5\times 6=460`$ partons per rapidity from sphaleron production. This is roughly one half the maximal possible value, $`dN_{partons}/dydN_{hadrons}/dy1000`$, inferred experimentally from the final entropy limitations.

This result is in good agreement with phenomenological studies of the energy and impact-parameter dependence of multiplicity KN , which have deduced that the contribution to multiplicity which scales as the number of parton collisions generates about half of the total, when calculated from the standard Glauber model and using the experimental nuclear density distribution for a gold nucleus. In this picture, the $`500`$ hadrons per unit rapidity are then a result of prompt production from QCD sphalerons.

The competing mini-jet picture, in which the products come from hadronization of two mini-jets, can also explain this number. However, in the minijet scenario this hadronization occurs later and one must confront problems such as the origin of strong collective effects, jet quenching, and the pronounced ellipticity at large $`p_t`$ observed at RHIC.

## VII Summary and Discussion

The objective of this paper was to evaluate the magnitude of the parton-parton cross sections which lead to prompt production and contribute to the growth of hadronic cross sections involving protons, pions, and photons. We have demonstrated that, at the semi-hard scale of $`Q^21`$ GeV, it is vital to accurately estimate the partonic content of each scattered particle. Furthermore, it was shown that a significant part of these effects are hidden by screening or quasi-elastic color exchange processes, i.e. the constant part of the cross sections.

The main assumption was that partons act additively (or, more precisely, multiplicatively), thereby ignoring transverse correlations which might reduce the cross sections. The nonperturbative dynamics were computed in the instanton model, taking formulae derived in Ref. NSZ .

Our main result is a surprisingly small prompt production component in parton-parton cross sections, reported in the Table 3, on the order of

$$\sigma _{qq}10^3\mathrm{fm}^2.$$
(29)
Naive geometric cross sections are 300 times larger, and thus an explanation of this much smaller number is necessary.

In terms of the instanton picture, the diluteness of the instanton ensemble, $`n\rho ^410^2`$, is in fact insufficiently small. An additional suppression thus seems to be needed. Following Ref. NSZ , rather than changing the phenomenologically sound parameters of the instanton ensemble, we instead turned to instanton tail suppression through an ad hoc exponential factor of $`exp\left(M|x|\right)`$. The results imply a rather large $`M`$ of about 500 MeV444 Incidentally, this is close to the mass suggested on the basis of the mutual instanton repulsion DP ..

We have shown that with this small cross section one can reasonably describe hadronic data – the energy dependence as a function of impact parameter and the growing parts of $`NN`$, $`\pi N`$, $`\gamma N`$, and $`\gamma \gamma `$ cross sections – and roughly estimate the amount of entropy produced in high energy $`AuAu`$ collisions at RHIC. In the future we plan to make this scenario much more quantitative by not only calculating the average parton numbers from sphaleron decay, but also their momentum spectra, quark/gluon ratios, and more.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank I. Zahed for useful discussions. This work was partially supported by US-DOE grants DE-FG02-88ER40388 and DE-FG03-97ER4014.


text:
# Discovery of 16.6 and 25.5 s Pulsations from the Small Magellanic Cloud

## 1 INTRODUCTION AND RXTE RESULTS

In the course of a survey of archival data from the Proportional Counter Array (PCA) of the Rossi X-Ray Timing Explorer(RXTE: Bradt, Rothschild, & Swank 1993), we have found evidence for two previously unreported pulsars with periods of 16.6 and 25.5 seconds.. The evidence is based on observations taken 2000 September 13-15, with the PCA field of view, $``$1.0 FWHM, (Jahoda et al. 1996) viewing an area near the southwestern edge of the Small Magellanic Cloud, centered on 00h 50m 44.64s, -73 16$`^{^{}}`$ 04.8\`\`.

The observation in question extended for 2.1 days, with minimal interruptions, leading to 68% of the time devoted to source region coverage. Such extended “dense” observations are well-suited for sensitive searches for periodic phenomena from relatively faint sources.

The PCA observations used the so-called Good Xenon data mode, in which the arrival of each photon at the detector is time tagged to an accuracy of better than 1$`\mu `$s. For the timing analysis the electrical pulses were required to originate in either one of the top two layers (of three) of the PCA, with pulse heights in the X-ray energy range 2 to 15 keV. Such an energy and layer selection is effective in improving signal-to-noise for pulsar detection.

The times of arrival were corrected to the barycenter of the solar system and a discrete Fourier transform (fft) of these times was performed. The portion of this transform from 0.02 to 0.2 Hz is shown in Figure 1.

There are four distinct frequencies and one second harmonic which are evident in the spectrum of Figure 1. The frequencies, corresponding periods, and Fourier power (normalized to 1) are listed in Table 1. Two of the periods are consistent with those that have been previously reported from this region of the SMC. The 8.9 s period is identified with the same period pulsation from the Be transient RX J0051.8-7231 (Israel et al. 1997). The 15.7 period may be identified with the reported 15.3 s period from the SMC transient RX J0052.1-7319 (Finger et al. 2001). The observations reported by Finger et al. for this object occurred 3.8 years earlier than the RXTE observation of Figure 1. The difference in period, 2.5%, can be accounted for by a spin-down episode(s) consistent with spin histories of other Be transients (Bildsten et al. 1997), therefore we regard this identification as reasonable. For the remaining periods, 16.6 and 25.5 s, we have found no previous reports covering this portion of the sky.

In what follows we present the lightcurves for both the 16.6 and the 25.5 s pulsars and discuss evidence for a possible identification of the 16.6 s pulsar with a ROSAT source, RX J0051.8-7310. In the concluding section we discuss the luminosities of sources. If these pulsars are associated with the SMC, as is likely, their discovery further accentuates the remarkable overdensity of binary pulsars in the SMC relative to our own galaxy.

## 2 LIGHTCURVES

There is evidence for a significant spin-down of the frequency of the 16.6 s pulsar during the course of the RXTE observation. We find that the time derivative of the frequency which maximizes the sum of the power at the fundamental and second harmonic ($``$0.12 Hz) is -4.6$`\pm `$1.0$`\times `$10-11 Hz/s, at a frequency of 0.0603435 Hz. With these values the sum of the power at the fundamental and second harmonic is 265; with no frequency derivative the power sum was 218. The lightcurve resulting from these values of frequency and its time derivative is shown in Figure 2 a). Using the lowest bin of the lightcurve to establish an unpulsed level we find a pulsed counting rate of 0.60$`\pm `$0.08 photons/s.

The upper limit for a non-zero frequency derivative for the 25.5 s pulsar is 3$`\times `$10-11 Hz/s. Its lightcurve is shown in Figure 2 b). Its pulsed counting rate is 0.49$`\pm `$0.08 photons/s.

## 3 POSSIBLE IDENTIFICATION OF THE 16.6 S PULSAR

We have examined the public archive of the ROSAT satellite for data relevant for the possible identification of either of these newly discovered pulsars. There are 4 PSPC observations which are within 30$`^{^{}}`$ of the center of the RXTE PCA’s field-of-view. Two of the four observations have insufficient exposure ($`<`$2 ks) for a sensitive search for pulsations from any of the relatively faint sources in the field. Both of the remaining observations have similar deep exposures, $``$ 20ks. However one of these (rp500249n00) is significantly more useful than the other (rp600149n01) since the latter observation has a duration more than 3 times as long. For a fixed number of pulsed photons, the detection sensitivity for a pulsar will decline as the length of the observation is increased. This is because the number of independent frequencies required to cover a given frequency range increases as T where T is the total observation duration. Also the frequency variations which are to be expected (on the basis of the RXTE observations for the 16.6 s pulsar) will further vitiate the sensitivity of long observations. Therefore, we have examined only rp500249n00 for possible counterparts to the RXTE sources.

In the field of rp500249n00 there are 5 sources with a counting rate greater than 0.01 cts/s. None of these 5 are identified with previously reported pulsars.

We have Fourier transformed the arrival times of the photons from each of the 5 sources with the view of establishing the identity and precise location of either of the 16.6 or the 25.5 s pulsars. The ROSAT observation occurred 6.8 years earlier than the RXTE observation. In order to account for possible episodes of spin-up and spin-down over that interval we have searched a range of $`\pm 5`$% around the signal frequencies of 0.06034 and 0.03923 Hz.

In order to assess the significance of any possible detection the number of trials must be included in the calculation of probability that a given outcome could be due to chance. The number of trials is given by the number of independent frequencies which span a given search range times a possible oversampling factor if the frequency digitization is finer than 1/T. We have oversampled the time series and use an oversampling factor of 3.

For the 0.039 Hz search region, there are 1060 independent frequencies. None of the 5 sources showed any power $`>8`$ over that region. The probability of a power 8 or more occurring by chance is therefore (1060 ind. trials)(3 oversampling factor)(5 sources)(exp(-8)) $`>`$ 1. Thus there is no evidence for the 25.5 s pulsar in this dataset.

For the 16.6 s search range, it is a somewhat different story. The largest power occurring in the search range for any of the 5 sources was 14.0. The probability that any one of the sources would give a power $`>`$14 is (1630)(3)(5)(exp(-14)) = 2.0%. Therefore this source, RX J0051.8-7310, is a candidate for identification with the 16.6 s pulsar. The portion of the fft from 0.02 to 0.2 Hz for this source is shown in Figures 3 a) and b).

The 4 peaks evident in the figure near 0.0615 Hz are due to the sparse sampling of the ROSAT data, which extended for 270 ks, with only 19 ks of exposure. The spacing of the 4 peaks (0.174 mHz between peaks) is due to the orbital period of the ROSAT spacecraft ($``$95 minutes). We have verified this behavior, using a simulation of the observation with an artifical 0.06 Hz signal arranged to mimic the exposure time of the ROSAT observation. In the simulation, a “picket fence” of power peaks around 0.06 Hz similar to that of Figure 3 b) was seen, with the separation between adjacent power peaks given by 0.174 mHz.

We have searched for evidence for a possible frequency derivative of the putative signal and find none.

Further support for the identification comes from an analysis of an ASCA observation (48003010). In this observaion RX J0051.8-7310 was in ASCA’s Gas Imagining Spectrometer’s field of view. This observation extended for 2.8 days beginning 2000 April 11. Again we use a search range of $`\pm `$5% around the RXTE frequency of 0.06034 Hz. Although the ASCA observation occurred less than six months prior to the RXTE observations, episodes of appreciable spin-up or spin-down may occur on rather short time scales (Bildsten et al. 1997). We selected photons from the region of RX J0051.8-7310 and performed an fft. In the search range, the highest power was 10.1. There were 145 independent frequencies in the search range and again, we use an oversampling factor of 3. The probability of a power exceeding this value in the search range is therefore: (1450)(3)exp(-10.1) = 18%.

We then added a search on a possible frequency derivative, varying it from -1.0$`\times 10^9`$ to +1.0$`\times `$10-9 Hz/s. The spacing between independent values of the frequency derivative is given by $`1/2T^2`$. Thus to cover this search range 230 trials with an additional factor of 3 for oversampling are required. From this search, a power 19.5 occurred at a frequency of 0.06028 Hz and a frequency derivative of 9.0$`\pm `$0.5$`\times `$10-11 Hz/s. The probability of this occurring by chance is given by: (230)(3)(1450)(3)exp(-19.5) = 1.0$`\times 10^2`$. Figures 3 c) and d) show a portion of the fft from the ASCA observation.

We may combine the probabilities of the ROSAT and ASCA observations to arrive at an overall probability that these two observations are due to chance. That probability is 2$`\times `$10-4. This number is sufficiently small to suggest that the identification is correct. However we propose that the identification remain tentative until it is supported by further imaging X-ray satellite observations.

If the identification is correct, then we may use ROSAT HRI data to establish an accurate position. Using an 27ks exposure from 1996 November (rh600811n00) which produced $``$ 80 signal photons on a background of 10, we find a position of RA = 00h 51m 51.2s, Dec. = 73 10$`^{^{}}`$ 32$`^{^{\prime \prime }}`$, with an error of 7$`^{^{\prime \prime }}`$. We note that this position agrees, within errors, with its position derived from PSPC data alone by Kahabka et al. (1999).

## 4 DISCUSSION

For the 25.5s pulsar we derive a pulsed flux value of 6.9$`\pm `$0.8$`\times `$10-12 (2-15 keV) under model assumptions of a power-law spectrum with an energy index of -2.0 and a hydrogen column density of 1.0$`\times `$1021atoms/cm2. Under the same assumptions the 16.6 pulsar flux is 8.5$`\pm `$1.1$`\times `$10-12 (2-15 keV). At the distance of the SMC (nominally 60 kpc) these pulsed fluxes correspond to isotropic luminosities of 3.0 and 3.7$`\times `$1036 ergs/s. These fluxes are a few percent of the Eddington luminosity, 2$`\times `$1038 ergs,s, for a 1.4 solar mass object.

Two arguments can be made to support the idea that at least one if not both of these pulsars are binary. Isolated pulsars with periods greater than 10s have yet to be seen. Also there is a significant non-zero period derivative for the 16.6 s pulsar with a time-scale of $``$ 50 years. Further analysis of existing and future RXTE observations may be able to constrain possible orbital parameters for this object.

If these pulsars are binaries in the SMC, their discovery further accentuates the dramatic difference between the SMC and our Galaxy with regard to the population of such systems. This fact has been noted by several authors (Schmidtke et al. 1999, Yokogawa et al. 2000).

In a recent compilation of known X-ray pulsars 4 there are 18 X-ray pulsar binaries listed for the SMC all of which are either high-mass or transient and therefore likely to be high mass systems. We cannot say if these newly discovered pulsars are high or low-mass. However, if they are high mass, then this increases the number of such systems in the SMC to 20. For the Galaxy the corresponding number is 40. Therefore, using a mass ratio of the SMC to the Galaxy of 1/100, this suggests that such systems are over-abundant by a factor of $``$50 relative to the Galaxy. This simple analysis ignores important issues regarding the uncertain coverage of the Galaxy for transient X-ray binaries versus the rerlatively complete coverage of the SMC. It also ignores differences in X-ray absorption effects. Nevertheless, pending careful analysis of such issues, there appears to be a significant overabundance of high mass binaries in the SMC relative to the Galaxy. Since high mass X-ray binaries have lifetimes which are $`10^3`$ the age of the Galaxy and possibly the SMC, this difference between the SMC and the Galaxy may point to a rather recent outburst of star-formation in the SMC within the past $`10^7`$ years. Yokogawa et al. (2000) reach a similar conclusion.

4 http://gammaray.msfc.nasa.gov/batse/pulsar/asm.pulsars.html


text:
# Gauge/Anomaly Syzygy and Generalized Brane World Models of Supersymmetry Breaking

## I Introduction

The standard model has been an exceptionally successful theory, explaining all observed phenomena except gravity, dark matter, and neutrino masses. Nonetheless, it is improbable that this is a complete effective theory of weak scale physics. It seems contrary to all reasonable expectations that the Higgs boson, whose renormalized mass squared receives contributions proportional to the cutoff squared, should be so light compared to the the Planck scale, the likely cutoff of field theory.

One candidate to upgrade the standard model to a more natural theory is weak-scale supersymmetry, in which every particle has a partner with opposite statistics. Because of this bose-fermi pairing, the quadratically divergent loops of the standard model are cancelled, making the light Higgs boson at least technically natural.

Because supersymmetry has not been observed, if it exists, it must be a broken symmetry of nature. Supersymmetry breaking can be parameterized by a spurion field $`X`$, with non-vanishing F-component. We generically expect the operators

$$d^4\theta \frac{X^{}XF_i^{}F_j}{M_{Pl}^2}$$
(1)
where $`F_i`$ is a Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) matter field, and $`i,j`$ index flavor. In supergravity mediated theories, the contribution of these local operators to squark and slepton masses dominates over the contribution of long range gravitational interactions. Since there is no reason to expect that these operators will be flavor diagonal (or CP conserving), they generate potentially excessive additional contributions to FCNC and CP violating processes, such as the $`K_L`$$`K_S`$ mass difference, $`\mu e\gamma `$ and the electron and neutron EDMs. However, precision tests have shown no deviation from the standard model. Thus, supersymmetry breaking and mediation must be largely CP conserving and flavor blind.

### I.1 Brane World Supersymmetry Breaking

Beginning with Randall and Sundrum (1999) and more recently with Kaplan et al. (2000); Chacko et al. (2000a), models have been constructed in which the dangerous supergravity operators are absent at tree level due to locality in a fifth dimension. In these models, the MSSM matter fields are confined to a three-brane in a fifth dimension. Supersymmetry breaking occurs on a different three brane, and, consequently, no higher dimension operators can exist at tree-level. Absence of contact terms in the low energy theory (“sequestering”) requires there be no fields in the bulk lighter than the compactification scale, which is not a generic feature of string theory Anisimov et al. (2001). However, as we live in a vacuum with broken supersymmetry and (possibly) non-zero cosmological constant, it seems that we already live in a non-generic vacuum, at least in the currently accepted conventional sense, so these issues may not be significant. Moreover, motivated by the AdS/CFT correspondence, Luty and Sundrum have recently demonstrated sequestering in certain four dimensional theoriesLuty and Sundrum (2001a, b). Brane world and other scenarios of sequestered supersymmetry breaking have so many desirable features that we feel they should be taken seriously even without an explicit string realization.

The mediation of supersymmetry breaking occurs by fields which exist in the bulk. Gravity alone will mediate supersymmetry breaking via the conformal anomaly (anomaly mediated supersymmetry breaking or AMSB)Randall and Sundrum (1999); Giudice et al. (1998). If gauge fields propagate in the fifth dimension, and if supersymmetry breaking gives a large F-term to a gauge singlet chiral superfield, then gaugino masses can arise at tree level which are larger than the AMSB contribution. Then gaugino mediation (g̃MSB) can generate the soft masses of the scalar matter fields through renormalization group effects.

Each of these models has problematic issues of varying severity. Anomaly mediation generically predicts negative slepton masses squared, although there are solutions to this problem Pomarol and Rattazzi (1999); Chacko et al. (2000b); Katz et al. (1999); Kaplan and Kribs (2000); Arkani-Hamed et al. (2001); Weiner and Nelson . Gaugino mediation has the stau as the lightest superpartner (LSP) over much of its parameter space Ellis et al. (2001). In all of these models, however, the setup is minimal, in particular, there are no new fields which are charged under the MSSM gauge group.

In Nomura and Suzuki (2001), it was noted that the brane world scenario can also serve as a setting for gauge mediation in which the gravitino is not the LSP. Here, the point is evident that it is natural to have messenger fields living on the brane with contact interactions with the supersymmetry breaking sector. However, phenomenologically, this model required a very small coupling between messenger fields and the SUSY breaking spurion.

In what follows we will adopt the brane world setup, and we will assume the following features of the theory:

* As in most brane world SUSY breaking scenarios, we will assume that MSSM matter fields live at one orbifold fixed point in a compact space with volume $`O(10100)`$,
* We will assume that gauge fields propagate in the extra dimension(s), although the gauginos need not necessarily get masses by coupling to a singlet as in gaugino mediation,
* As gauge fields propagate in the bulk, it is natural to expect additional fields, charged under the SM, to exist either localized on the brane where SUSY is broken, or in the bulk.

## II Gauge/Anomaly Mediated Syzygy

We will begin by studying the simplest case, in which there are no singlets with F terms. The anomaly mediated contribution to the slepton mass squared is negative. However, we now have messenger fields which can alter the slepton mass prediction.

Let us consider matter fields $`M`$ and $`\overline{M}`$, transforming nontrivially under the MSSM gauge group, localized on the supersymmetry beaking brane. Below the compactification scale, we have the ordinary supergravity operators

$$d^4\theta \frac{\lambda X^{}XM^{}M}{M_{}^2}+\frac{\overline{\lambda }X^{}X\overline{M}^{}\overline{M}}{M_{}^2},$$
(2)
which generate soft masses for the messenger fields $`\delta m^2=\lambda M_{}^nV_nm_{3/2}^2`$. These terms do not violate the R-symmetry of the theory and will not contribute to the gaugino masses. However, they will contribute to the soft masses of the MSSM matter fields by an amount Poppitz and Trivedi (1997); Arkani-Hamed et al. (1998)

$$m_i^2=\underset{a}{}\frac{g_a^4}{128\pi ^4}S_QC_{ai}\mathrm{Str}M_{mess}^2\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{UV}^2}{m_{IR}^2}\right),$$
(3)
where $`m_{IR}^2`$ is the mass of the messenger fields, $`S_Q`$ is the Dynkin index of the messenger representation, and $`C_{ai}`$ is the quadratic Casimir for the representation of the MSSM matter field in question. When the log terms are large, these terms should be resummed to yield

$$\underset{a}{}\frac{S_QC_{ai}\mathrm{Str}M_{mess}^2\left(g_a^2(m_{IR}^2)g_a^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{UV}^2)\right)}{8\pi ^2b_a},$$
(4)
where $`b_a`$ is the coefficient of the one-loop $`\beta `$ function for $`g_a`$ above the messenger scale.

When the messengers are localized on the SUSY breaking brane the contribution to the supertrace is naturally $`\lambda F^2/M_{}^2=\lambda F^2M_{}^nV_n/M_{Pl}^2=\lambda m_{3/2}^2M_{}^nV_n`$. Since the anomaly mediated contribution also occurs at two loops, it will be smaller by the volume factor, which can be $`O(10100)`$. Moreover, the messenger contribution can receive a logarithmic enhancement relative to the anomaly mediated contributions. The sign of the messenger contribution depends on the sign of the nonrenormalizable operator, but can be positive.

To address the negative slepton mass squared problem, while retaining the phenomenologically desirable feature that gaugino and scalar masses are about the same size, these effects should be comparable. One can simply assume that the coefficients of the messenger/SUSY breaking contact operators are small to compensate for the volume factor, but a more natural solution would be to assume that the messenger fields themselves propagate in the extra dimension, in which case the coefficients $`\lambda ,\overline{\lambda }`$ are suppressed by precisely this same volume factor. The alignment or “syzygy” of these contributions appears fortuitous, because they have distinct origins. Yet within this model, it occurs completely naturally. However, as pointed out in ref. Chacko and Luty (2001), in this case contact terms between messengers and MSSM fields could lead to flavor violation and FCNC at one loop, unless suppressed by a mechanism for repelling the messengers from our brane. Several such mechanisms were suggested in ref. Chacko and Luty (2001).

## III Messengers in Gaugino Mediation

If singlets with F terms exist on the SUSY breaking brane, then gauge particles naturally have contact terms with the singlet which give rise to supersymmetry breaking gaugino masses which dominate the anomaly mediated contributions Kaplan et al. (2000); Chacko et al. (2000a). We are now also allowing messenger fields. What effects can we expect?

The first important point is that the gaugino mass, being localized on a brane, is volume suppressed foo . If the messengers are localized on the brane (as opposed to propagating in the bulk, as discussed in the previous section), then their contributions to scalar masses are naturally larger than the gaugino mediated terms.

Let us assume that the messenger fields have masses at some lower scale, $`m`$. Then the nonrenormalizable operators already described give rise to contributions modifying the sfermion masses. In terms of the gravitino mass and the size of the extra dimensional volume

$$m_i^2\underset{a}{}\frac{g_a^4}{128\pi ^4}S_QC_{ai}m_{3/2}^2V_nM_{}^n\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{UV}^2}{m_{IR}^2}\right).$$
(5)
In contrast, the gaugino mass is given by

$$m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}\frac{m_{3/2}}{\sqrt{V_nM_{}^n}}$$
(6)
The usual one-loop RG contribution to soft masses is

$$\delta m^2\frac{g^2}{16\pi ^2}\frac{m_{3/2}^2}{V_nM_{}^n}\mathrm{log}(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{m_{IR}^2})$$
(7)
The relative strength of these effects is then (taking the logarithms to be of comparable size)

$$\frac{messengercontributions}{\stackrel{~}{g}MSB}\frac{g^2}{16\pi ^2}S_Q(V_nM_{}^n)^2.$$
(8)
For $`V_nM_{}^n10`$, these can be of comparable size, dramatically changing the spectrum of gaugino mediation. In particular, if these effects are positive, the scalar masses can be naturally heavier than the gaugino masses, leading to, e.g., a bino LSP over broader ranges of parameter space. The bino is preferable to the stau as LSP since stable charged relics are extremely constrained Kudo and Yamaguchi (2001), while a stable bino is an acceptable dark matter candidate.

Up to this point, we have only considered the effects of non-holomorphic masses for the messengers. With messengers coupled to a singlet, we have the expectation of additional holomorphic masses as well.

In particular, we must assume that the messengers are sufficiently light compared with the fundamental scale of the theory so that we can treat them within effective field theory. We will not explain the origin of their mass here, but simply introduce a superpotential operator,

$$WmM\overline{M}$$
(9)
Given the presence of the singlet field $`X`$, we expect the presence of the additional operator

$$W\frac{X}{M_{}}mM\overline{M}$$
(10)
If the gaugino mass arose from an order one coupling to $`X`$, this would lead to insignificant contributions to soft masses. However the gaugino mass is volume suppressed, and $`F/Mm_{3/2}\sqrt{V_nM_{}^n}`$. These terms will generate contributions to the scalar and gaugino masses which are of the conventional gauge mediated sort Dine and Nelson (1993); Dine et al. (1995, 1996).

The additional gaugino masses scale as

$$\delta m_{\stackrel{~}{g}_i}=\frac{\alpha _iS_Q}{4\pi }\frac{F}{M}\frac{\alpha _i}{4\pi }S_Qm_{3/2}\sqrt{V_nM_{}^n}$$
(11)
which compares with the tree level piece

$$\frac{messengercontribution}{treelevel}\frac{\alpha _i}{4\pi }S_QV_nM_{}^n,$$
(12)
so that these effects can be competitive. Of course, if all the new pieces are simply proportional to gauge couplings, these effects are consistent with a unified tree level piece at some higher scale. The distinctions between this case and traditional gaugino mediation come from the additional contributions to the scalar masses from the holomorphic terms and from eq. (7), both of which are volume enhanced.

### III.1 $`\mu `$ and $`B\mu `$

Brane world models such as gaugino mediation in which the gravitino mass is comparable to the weak scale have a natural solution to the $`\mu `$ problem. If Higgs fields propagate in the bulk, one can simply employ the Giudice-Masiero mechanism Giudice and Masiero (1988) by coupling the Higgs fields directly to the supersymmetry breaking fields Chacko et al. (2000b). However, even when the Higgs field is localized to a brane isolated from the supersymmetry breaking, it is trivial Nomura and Suzuki (2001). One simply includes a term in the Kähler potential

$$d^4\theta \varphi ^{}\varphi H_uH_d,$$
(13)
where $`\varphi `$ is the conformal compensator. Because $`\varphi =1+\theta ^2m_{3/2}`$ this generates both a $`\mu `$ and $`B\mu `$ term. However, in the limit of gauge-anomaly syzygy, in which case the soft masses are down by a loop factor from the gravitino mass, this is unworkable Randall and Sundrum (1999).

## IV Parameter space and phenomenology

A complete treatment of the phenomenology of these models will be left for future work, but we will briefly comment on the most significant qualititative effects. There are two main limiting cases. In the first case, which we refer to as “gaugino-like”, the anomaly mediated contributions are relatively small when compared with contributions arising from singlets. In the second, “anomaly-like” case, the gravitino is heavier than the weak scale by a loop factor, and holomorphic mass terms are small.

A great advantage of the anomaly-like case over minimal anomaly mediation is that sleptons are not tachyonic. Still, the model is highly predictive for the soft masses of the sfermions and gauginos, and retains a solution to the SUSY flavor problem. However, as we have not yet included a solution to the $`\mu `$ problem, we cannot speak reliably of the soft mass of the Higgs fields.

The gaugino-like case offers simple solutions to the $`\mu `$ problem. Unlike traditional gaugino mediation, the gauge mediated (both holomorphic and non-holomorphic) contributions can compete with the gaugino mediated contributions, changing the size of the sfermion masses relative to the gaugino masses, while maintaining flavor blindness. As in the original gaugino mediated framework, the Higgses can either be on our brane or in the bulk. In the latter case the operators

$$d^4\theta \frac{X}{M_{Pl}}(\xi _uH_u^{}H_u+\xi _dH_d^{}H_d)$$
(14)
give A-terms proportional to the Yukawas and a $`B\mu `$ parameter. Furthermore, contact terms with the SUSY breaking brane can contribute to the soft Higgs masses.

We can include all cases as limits of the following parameter space, although in most scenarios only a few parameters will be relevant: We have $`\mu `$, $`B\mu `$, $`m_{3/2}`$, $`m_{1/2}`$, $`\lambda `$ (the strength of non-holomorphic operators), $`S_Q`$, $`F/M`$ $`M`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, soft Higgs mass squared parameters $`m_{H_d}^2`$, $`m_{H_u}^2`$, $`\xi _u`$, $`\xi _d`$. After fixing $`m_Z`$, we have twelve continuous parameters and one discrete parameter (the sign of $`\mu `$).

The most predictive scenario is the gaugino-like case with Higgs confined to our brane. All soft SUSY breaking parameters can then be computed from $`\mu `$, $`m_{3/2}`$ (or equivalently $`B`$), $`m_{1/2}`$, $`\lambda `$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`S_Q`$, $`F/M`$ and $`M`$. One combination can be fixed by $`m_Z`$, leaving seven continuous and one discrete parameter.

Another predictive case is when there are no holomorphic mass terms (anomaly-like). In this case, however we do not have a preferred solution to the $`\mu `$ problem, so we leave $`m_{H_d}^2`$, $`m_{H_u}^2`$, and $`B\mu `$ free. The other parameters are $`\mu `$, $`m_{3/2}`$, $`\lambda `$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and $`M`$. After fixing $`m_Z`$ we are left with seven continuous and one discrete parameter.

One advantage of including messengers is that there are now significant contibutions to slepton masses arising at short distance where their gauge couplings are as large as those of the squarks. Thus, unlike traditional anomaly or gaugino mediation, which both predict relatively light sleptons, slepton and squark masses may now be comparable. Indeed, if these contributions arise above the GUT scale, they might be universal. Such a scenario would require less fine-tuning than either AMSB or g̃MSB.

While the number of parameters is slightly larger than in mSUGRA, generalized brane world models have a much richer phenomenology, a basis in a well defined framework, and no supersymmetric flavor problem. In addition, if CP is only broken on our brane, there are no phases in the soft parameters and the SUSY CP problem is solved.

The inclusion of AMSB and g̃MSB in the same framework — both as realistic models — with a limit that looks like a version of gauge mediation, is a step towards the “generalized model space” previously proposed Kaplan (2001).

## V Conclusions

In brane world models of supersymmetry breaking where gauge fields propagate in the bulk, it is natural to consider the presence of additional messenger fields transforming under the MSSM gauge group. The effects of these fields can drastically change the features of well known brane world models. In particular, it can solve the negative slepton mass squared problem within anomaly mediated supersymmetry breaking, and change the mass relationships of gaugino mediation.

The phenomenology of these models depends strongly on the inputs: the size of the extra dimensions and the mass scale of the messengers in particular. A study of the phenomenology of these models would be useful.

Acknowledgements

While this manuscript was being prepared ref. Chacko and Luty (2001) appeared, with overlapping results. This work was partially supported by the DOE under contract DE-FGO3-96-ER40956. We thank Y. Nomura, Z. Chacko and P. Fox for useful conversations.


text:
# Chiral meson masses at the critical point from QCD in the improved ladder approximation

## Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to M. Maruyama and F. Takagi for valuable discussions.


text:
# 1

## 1

There were several proposals of experiments on the coherent Coulomb excitation of relativistic nuclei in crystal target

$$A\gamma A^{}.$$
(1)
The central idea of  is that in a nucleus (the ground state $`|0`$ and the excited state $`|1`$) under periodical perturbation $`V\mathrm{sin}\nu t`$ with the frequency $`\nu `$ equal to the level splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=E_1E_0`$ there develop quantum beats with the oscillation frequency $`\omega =1|V|0`$. If the perturbation $`V`$ is weak, then for $`\omega t1`$ the $`|0|1`$ transition probability $`P(t)`$ increases rapidly with the time $`P(t)\omega ^2t^2.`$ If one could subject nuclei to a high frequency field, $`\nu \mathrm{\Delta }E`$, the rates of transition can be enhanced substantially. The high monochromaticity is an evident condition to sustain the fast growth of $`P(t)`$ over large time scale. It has been suggested in  that all of the above requirements are met best in Coulomb interaction of a high-energy nucleus propagating in a crystal along the crystallographic axis. Here the rôle of ”time” is played by the crystal thickness $`L`$. For ultrarelativistic particles $`\nu `$ is enhanced due to the Doppler shift, $`\nu ^{}=\gamma \nu `$, where $`\gamma `$ is the Lorentz factor. It is the Lorentz factor which can boost $`\nu `$ to the hundreds KeV’s range.

In  the Coulomb field of a crystal was evaluated in the Weizsäker-Williams approximation, and then applied to the calculation of the transition amplitude in the plane wave Born approximation. It was claimed  that the law $`P(N)N^2,`$ holds up to the crystal thicknesses $`N=L/a10^410^5`$ (hereafter $`a`$ stands for the lattice spacing). However, in a consistent treatment of coherent $`AA^{}`$ transitions one needs to include distortions due to the initial state Coulomb interactions (ISI) of the nucleus $`A`$ and final state Coulomb interactions (FSI) of the excited nucleus $`A^{}`$.

In this paper we show that at small transverse momenta the effect of these interactions (multiple diffractive scattering off atomic row) is reminiscent the well known Glauber-Gribov shadowing effect  and entails an attenuation of the coherent excitation amplitudes with growing crystal thickness. The early discussion of shadowing in the total cross section of elastic high-energy particle-crystal scattering is found in .

Here we emphasise that it is the diffraction phenomenon which makes the physics of ultrarelativistic nuclear excitations with $`\gamma 10`$ entirely different from the physics of coherent excitation of atoms , where typically $`\gamma 1`$.

It should be noticed, however, that in contrast to the high-energy hadronic scattering which is described by predominantly imaginary amplitudes, the shadowing in Coulomb scattering does not imply a simple ”absorption”, but a redistribution of scattered nuclear waves in the phase space. Therefore the depletion of the domain of small-$`q_{}`$ means the enhancement of the large-$`q_{}`$ region. At relatively large transverse momenta no shadowing is found but the nuclear waves scattered by different atoms get out of tune easily. Here the structure factor of crystal puts stringent constrain on the coherent excitation rate which at the projectile energies available would not exhibit any sizable enhancement effect.

## 2

Consider the small-angle Coulomb scattering of ultrarelativistic nucleus (the mass number $`A`$, the charge $`Z_1`$ and the four-momentum $`p`$) moving along a crystal axis. The projectile-nucleus undergoes a correlated series of soft collisions which give rise to diagonal ($`AA`$, $`A^{}A^{}`$) and off-diagonal ($`AA^{}`$, $`A^{}A`$) transitions. The interatomic distances, $`a35\AA `$, are large, compared to the Thomas-Fermi screening radius $`r0.468Z_2^{1/3}\AA `$, where $`Z_2`$ is the atomic number of the target atom and $`\alpha =1/137`$. The amplitude of thermal vibrations of the lattice $`u^2^{1/2}`$ estimated from the Debye approximation equals to $`u^2^{1/2}(0.050.1)\AA `$ for most commonly studied crystals at room temperature . The relevant impact parameters, $`b`$, satisfy as we shall see $`ba`$. This implies that the amplitudes of scattering by different atomic strings parallel to a given crystallographic axis are incoherent.

In  it has been proposed to study the electric dipole transition in $`{}_{}{}^{19}F`$, the excitation of the state $`|J^\pi =1/2^{}`$ from the ground state $`|1/2^+`$. Let us accept this proposal and consider the phenomenological matrix element of the transition $`1/2^+1/2^{}`$

$$=d\overline{u}(p^{})\gamma _5\sigma _{\mu \nu }u(p)q^\nu \epsilon ^\mu ,$$
(2)
where both $`u(p^{})`$ and $`u(p)`$ are bispinors of initial and final states of the projectile-nucleus. By definition, $`\sigma _{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}[\gamma _\mu ,\gamma _\nu ]`$, $`d`$ is the transition dipole moment, $`p^{}=p+q`$, $`𝐪=(𝐪_{},\kappa )`$, $`𝐪_{}=(q_{}\mathrm{cos}\varphi ,q_{}\mathrm{sin}\varphi )`$ and $`\epsilon `$ is the photon polarisation vector. Then after a series of quite standard high-energy approximations one readily finds the helicity-flip Born amplitude $`t_B(𝐪_{})`$ of the transition $`1/2^+1/2^{}`$ in the nucleus-atom collision

$$t_B(𝐪_{})=\sqrt{\alpha }dZ_2\frac{q_{}e^{i\varphi }}{q_{}^2+\lambda ^2},$$
(3)
where $`\lambda ^2=\mu ^2+\kappa ^2`$ and $`\mu =r^1`$. Denoted by $`\kappa `$ is the longitudinal momentum transfer

$$\kappa =\frac{2M\mathrm{\Delta }E+q_{}^2}{2p},$$
(4)
which determines the coherency length $`l_c\kappa ^1`$. In eq.(4) $`M`$ is the mass of projectile-nucleus. The excitation energy is $`\mathrm{\Delta }E110`$ KeV. Normalisation of amplitudes is such that

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dq_{}^2}=|t(𝐪_{})|^2.$$
(5)
The integral $`\sigma _B=𝑑q_{}^2|t_B(𝐪_{})|^2`$ diverges at large $`q_{}`$ and need be regularised. The natural regulator is the inverse amplitude of thermal vibrations of the lattice.

Making use of the impact parameter representation simplifies the summation of diagrams of multiple Coulomb scattering. Then, in the eikonal approximation the full nucleus-atom amplitude to all orders in $`\alpha Z_1Z_2`$ reads

$$t(𝐪_{})=\sqrt{\alpha }dZ_2\lambda e^{i\varphi }b𝑑bJ_1(q_{}b)K_1(\lambda b)\mathrm{exp}[i\chi (b)],$$
(6)
where $`J_1(x)`$ and $`K_{0,1}(x)`$ are the Bessel functions and the screened Coulomb phase shift function is

$$\chi (b)=\beta K_0(\mu b),$$
(7)
where $`\beta =2\alpha Z_1Z_2`$.

The only phenomenological parameter of eq.(2), dipole moment of the $`1/2^+1/2^{}`$ transition, denoted by $`d`$, can be determined from the width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of the $`110`$ KeV level $`{}_{}{}^{19}F(1/2^{})`$ which is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=d^2\mathrm{\Delta }E^3/\pi +𝒪\left(\mathrm{\Delta }E/M\right).`$ Then the measured life-time $`\tau =\mathrm{\Gamma }^1=(0.853\pm 0.010)\times 10^9`$ sec  yields $`d4.3\times 10^8`$ KeV<sup>-1</sup>. Two useful conclusions can be drawn immediately. First, because of large value of $`\tau `$ the decay of excited state inside the target can be safely neglected. Second, due to the smallness of $`d`$, the excitation amplitude is much smaller than the elastic Coulomb amplitude for all $`q_{}`$ up to $`q_{}\sqrt{\alpha }Z_1/d`$ and can be considered as a perturbation. Thus the multi-channel problem reduces to the one-channel one.

Then, in the static lattice approximation the evaluation of the full transition amplitude on a string of $`N`$ identical atoms reads

$$T(𝐪_{})=\sqrt{\alpha }dZ_2\lambda S(q_{})e^{i\varphi }I(q_{}),$$
(8)
where

$$I(q_{})=b𝑑bJ_1(q_{}b)K_1(\lambda b)\mathrm{exp}[i\beta NK_0(\mu b)]$$
(9)
In eq.(8) $`S(q_{})`$ is the structure factor of the lattice

$$S(q_{})=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(\kappa Na/2)}{\mathrm{sin}(\kappa a/2)},$$
(10)
and $`\kappa `$ is given by eq.(4).

Split integration over $`b`$ in eq.(9) into the two domains: $`\mu ^1\text{ }<b\text{ }<a`$ and $`0<b<\mu ^1`$. In the former domain it suffices to use the asymptotics $`K_{0,1}(x)\mathrm{exp}(x)`$ which upon the slight readjustment of screening parameters, $`\mu \mu ^{}=\mu (1+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(2\xi /\pi ))`$ and $`\lambda \lambda ^{}=\mu (1+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(2\xi /\pi ))`$ at the relevant $`b\mu ^1\xi `$ proves numerically very accurate. Hereafter, $`\xi =\mathrm{log}(\beta N/\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\lambda /\mu =\sqrt{1+\kappa ^2/\mu ^2}`$. Then, the steepest descent from the saddle-point at

$$b_0=\mu ^1(\xi +i\pi /2),$$

yields for $`\xi ^2\mu /\lambda `$ and $`q_{}\text{ }<\mu \xi ^1`$

$`I(q_{}){\displaystyle \frac{q_{}}{\mu ^3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{\Delta }}}}e^\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{log}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{i\beta N}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{i\beta N}}\right)^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (11)
$`\mathrm{log}^2N\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\right)^\mathrm{\Delta }.`$
Consequently, for small transverse momenta $`q_{}\text{ }<\mu \xi ^1`$ as soon as $`\xi 1`$ which holds for all practical purposes one has the attenuation of the coherent excitation amplitude.

For higher transverse momenta $`q_{}\mu \xi ^1`$ making use of the stationary phase approximation with the above reservation about the substitution $`\mu \mu ^{}`$ and $`\lambda \lambda ^{}`$ yields

$`I(q_{}){\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\eta }}{\mu q_{}}}\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Delta }\eta )\mathrm{exp}\left[i{\displaystyle \frac{q_{}}{\mu }}(\eta +1)\right]`$ (12)
$`\sqrt{\mathrm{log}N}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\right)^\mathrm{\Delta },`$
where $`\eta =\mathrm{log}(\mu \beta N/q_{})1`$. As before we find no enhancement but the attenuation of the coherent transition amplitude. Indeed, let the projectile momentum satisfies the resonance condition

$$\frac{M\mathrm{\Delta }E}{p}=\frac{2\pi n}{a},n=0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\mathrm{}.$$
(13)
In  it has been suggested to look for the coherent transitions in the $`W`$-crystal at $`n=3`$. This regime corresponds to $`\gamma 10`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\lambda /\mu \sqrt{1+4\pi ^2n^2/(a\mu )^2}1.2`$. Still higher $`n`$ discussed in  would correspond to higher momentum transfers and to much stronger suppression of the coherent excitation amplitude.

Now consider the contribution to $`I(q_{})`$ from the second domain, $`0<b<\mu ^1r`$. The region of small impact parameters is affected by the lattice thermal vibrations which are known to suppress the coherent amplitude. Let us make use of the fact that for some commonly used crystals at a room temperature the root-mean-square one-dimensional displacement $`u`$ is such that $`ur`$. For example, for the diamond lattice suggested as a target in  $`u/r0.16`$ . The integral in $`r.h.s.`$ of eq.(9) reads

$`I(q_{})={\displaystyle _0^r}b𝑑bJ_1(q_{}b)K_1(\lambda b)\mathrm{exp}[i\beta NK_0(\mu b)]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda q_{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{q_{}}}\right)^{i\beta N}{\displaystyle _0^{rq_{}}}𝑑zJ_1(z)z^{i\beta N}.`$ (14)
The contribution to $`I(q_{})`$ non-vanishing with growing $`N`$ comes from $`zz_0=\beta N`$, where $`z_0`$ is the point of stationary phase. Hence, the requirement $`q_{}\mu \beta N`$. The width, $`\delta z\sqrt{\beta N}`$, of the region, the major contribution to (14) comes from, is much smaller than the interval of integration in (14) which is $`\mathrm{\Delta }z\beta N`$. Then, for $`\beta N1`$ one has

$$I(q_{})\frac{1}{\lambda q_{}}\mathrm{exp}\left[i\beta N\mathrm{log}\frac{q_{}}{2\mu }+2i\phi \right],$$
(15)
where

$$\mathrm{exp}[2i\phi ]=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\beta N/2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1i\beta N/2)}.$$
(16)
Thus, for $`q_{}\mu \beta N`$ one finds no attenuation effect. However, at large $`q_{}`$ the structure factor of crystal (10) enters the game. The resonance condition (13) implies fine tuning of phases of scattered waves. If $`q_{}`$ becomes large the phases get out of tune easily. At large projectile momentum $`p`$ the structure factor (10) allows variation of $`q_{}^2`$ within a rather wide band which is however $`N^1`$. In the neighbourhood of the resonance

$$S(q_{})N[1B^2q_{}^4],$$
(17)
where $`B=aN/4\sqrt{6}p`$. Hence, the excitation cross section $`\sigma =𝑑q_{}^2|T(𝐪_{})|^2`$ which varies as

$$\sigma N^2\mathrm{log}(N_c/N),$$
(18)
where

$$N_cN_n=\left[\frac{4\sqrt{6}p_n}{a\mu ^2\beta ^2}\right]^{1/3}$$
(19)
and $`p_n=aM\mathrm{\Delta }E/2\pi n`$. For example, for the $`W`$ crystal $`N_330`$ and for the diamond target crystal one has $`N_3300`$. With certain reservations about the effect of lattice thermal vibrations, one can conclude that not only the $`q_{}`$-dependence of the coherent transition amplitude differs dramatically from the early predictions , but the effect of the coherent enhancement is much weaker than that predicted in .

Notice, that for $`NN_n`$ one has

$$\frac{p}{q_{}^2}L$$
(20)
and the straight paths approximation which we rely upon in our analysis holds true.

We conclude that in quantitative analysis of high-energy particle-crystal interactions due allowance must be made to the multiple scattering effects which dramatically change the pattern of the coherent Coulomb excitation compared to widely used approaches based on the Born approximation.

Acknowledgements: This paper has been inspired by discussions with L.B.Okun. Thanks are due to N.N. Nikolaev and B.G. Zakharov for useful comments. The author thanks J. Speth and FZ-Juelich for hospitality and DFG (grant 436 RUS 17/119/01) for support. Partial support from INTAS (grant 97-30494) is gratefully acknowledged.


text:
# MULTIPARTICLE PRODUCTION IN NUCLEUS-NUCLEUS INTERACTIONS AT HIGH ENERGH

## 1 Introduction

Studies on nucleus-nucleus interactions at high energies have been attracting more and more interest recently. It is believed \[1-3\] that these interactions may provide various information about the nuclear matter under extreme conditions of high temperature and densities. For this purpose, it is obviously necessary to obtain a considerable amount of experimental information on diverse characteristics of such interactions; this applies particularly to the multiple production of particles in the collisions of relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions with relatively larger mass numbers of the incident nuclei.

In the present work we present and discuss results on the characteristics and angular distributions of relativistic singly charged particles produced in silicon-nucleus collisions at 4.5 A GeV/c. These results are compared with those involving carbon-nucleus collisions  at the same incident beam momentum.

## 2 Experimental Detail

The experimental data has been obtained by investigating a NIKFI-BR2 nuclear photo-emulsion plates of dimension($`16.9\times 9.6\times 0.06`$) cm3 irradiated by 4.5 A GeV/c silicon beam at Dubna Synchrophasotron. 1524 interactions were collected by double, fast in the forward and slow in the backward direction, scanning of tracks under 15X eys-pieces and each interaction was looked at under 95X oil immersion objectives.

Secondary charged particles produced in each interaction are classified into shower, grey and black tracks; the division of tracks into three distint groups correspond to different physical processes through which they are envisaged to be produced. The shower tracks have very large range and ionization less than 1.4$`g_0`$, where $`g_0`$ represents the plateau density of a singly charged particles and equals 29.6 grains per 100 micron. The grey tracks have ranges greater than 3 mm and their ionizations lie in the range 1.4$`g_0`$-10$`g_0`$. The black tracks have ranges less than 3 mm and the ionization greater than 10$`g_0`$. The number of shower, grey and black tracks produced in an event are denoted by $`N_s`$, $`N_g`$ and $`N_b`$ respectively. Grey and black tracks together are referred to as the heavily ionizing particles or heavy tracks in an event and their number is represented by $`N_h(=N_g+N_b)`$.

Emission angles of all these tracks were measured by taking the space coordinates (x,y,z) at three consecutive points on the same track and at three other points on the incident beam track. Also, the space coordinates (x0,y0,z0) of the production point were noted.

## 3 Method of Target Identification

It is quite difficult to identify the exact nature of the target because emulsion consists of H, C, N, O, Ag and Br nuclei. However, various methods have been tried by several authors \[5-8\] to identify the targets on the basis of the distribution of heavily ionizing tracks, $`N_h`$. Usually, the events with $`N_h1`$ are taken to be due to H targets; interactions characterized by $`2N_h6`$ may be due to CNO and AgBr targets and the events with $`N_h7`$ are exclusively due to AgBr targets. This method of separation of targets in the experiment is more accurate in hardron-nucleus interactions because in that case the interactions are induced by very light nuclei. For the case of nucleus-nucleus interactions, this method is crude. The events having $`N_h>8`$ satify the condition fir AgBr, but for $`N_h8`$ events, there is an admixture of interactions due to CNO and peripheral collisions with AgBr targets. However, a method was suggested by Jakobsson and Kullberg for the separation of AgBr events from the interactions having $`N_h8`$ by the distribution of short-range tracks. This distribution reveals that there are practically no tracks for the interactions with AgBr targets in the emulsion having ranges between(10-50) $`\mu `$m in the interval of $`N_h=28`$. The events due to AgBr nuclei with $`N_h8`$ and having at least one short track of 10 $`\mu `$m are due to recoil nuclei.

In this paper, an attempt has been made to separate the targets using the following criteria for the case of nucleus-nucleus interactions.

| CNO events: | $`2N_h8`$ and no track with range $``$ 10 $`\mu `$m |
| --- | --- |
| AgBr events: | (i) $`N_h>8`$ , (ii) $`N_h8`$ and at least one track with range |
|  | $`10`$ $`\mu `$m and no track with $`10R50`$ $`\mu `$m |
| H events: | $`N_h1`$, but do not fall in the above categories. |

Table 1 gives the results using the above criteria along with the results of other similar efforts\[4,9-11\]. It may be seen from the table that the probability of events due to AgBr nuclei increases with increasing projectile mass.

Table 1. Percentage of occurrence of interactions in nuclear emulsion.

| Momentum per | Projectile | H | CNO | AgBr | Ref. |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Nucleon (GeV/c) |  |  |  |  |  |
| 3.0 | P | 18.00 | 49.50 | 32.50 | 9 |
| 4.5 | $`\alpha `$ | 21.03 | 40.42 | 38.55 | 10 |
| 4.5 | C | 21.29 | 30.87 | 47.84 | 4 |
| 4.5 | Si | 15.29 | 33.79 | 50.92 | Persent work |
| 1.8 | Fe | 23.13 | 22.64 | 54.23 | 11 |

Table 2. Mean multiplicity and dispersion of relativistic charged particles produced in carbon- (1st row) and silicon- (2nd row) nucleus collisions at 4.5 A GeV/c.

| H | | CNO | | AgBr | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`<N_s>`$ | $`D\left(N_s\right)`$ | $`<N_s>`$ | $`D\left(N_s\right)`$ | $`<N_s>`$ | $`D\left(N_s\right)`$ |
| 2.18 $`\pm `$ 0.18 | 1.74 $`\pm `$ 0.13 | 5.04 $`\pm `$ 0.21 | 3.66 $`\pm `$ 0.15 | 8.92 $`\pm `$ 0.25 | 5.17 $`\pm `$ 0.18 |
| 3.15 $`\pm `$ 0.19 | 2.98 $`\pm `$ 0.13 | 7.00 $`\pm `$ 0.26 | 5.93 $`\pm `$ 0.18 | 16.30 $`\pm `$ 0.27 | 10.95 $`\pm `$ 0.27 |

## 4 Experimental Results

The values of mean multiplicities and dispersion of the relativistic charged particles produced in the interactions of silicon nuclei with emulsion nuclei and the groups of events with $`N_h1`$, $`2N_h8`$ and $`N_h>8`$ are presented in Table 2. These results are compared with the values obtained for carbon-nucleus interactions. It is interesting to note that the mean multiplicity of the relativistic charged particles grows rapidly with the increase in the mass of the projectile and target nuclei.

Figure 1 shows the multiplicity distributions of shower particles obtained for the interactions of 28Si and 12C nuclei with emulsion for the three different targets. In Fig.2, we have plotted the multiplicity distributions of relativistic charged particles produced in 28Si-nucleus collisions for different targets and these distributions are compared with 12C-nucleus collisions. It may be seen that tht distribution changes most rapidly with increasing projectile and target mass; its broadening changes its shape.

In order to examine the dependence of mean shower particle multiplicity on target mass, the correlation between the mean multiplicity of shower and heavily ionzing particles has been investigated.

Figure 3 shows the correlation dependences $`<N_s(N_h)>`$ and $`<N_h(N_s)>`$ for 28Si-nucleus interactions. We note that these dependences can be represented nicely by the following Linear relation with positive slopes.

$$<N_s>=(0.81\pm 0.02)_{N_h}+(2.05\pm 0.52)(1)$$

$$<N_s>=(0.75\pm 0.02)_{N_s}+(1.88\pm 0.58)(2)$$

For each group of $`N_h`$, the $`N_h`$ were accumulated into a composite star and the forward F to backward B asymmetry of this star, $`A=(FB)/(F+B)`$ was determined. Results for different $`N_h`$ groups are shown in Fig. 4. From this figure, it is clear that the asymmetry A, which is a measure of the four-momenta transfer to the target, is greater for smaller $`N_h`$ values(peripheral collisions), whereas the results involving the whole data show relatively large momentums as well as ”bounce off, side-splash’ effects in the case of non-peripheral collisions that characterizes the collective flow observed in heavy ion experiment.

The angular distribution of shower particles have been analyzed in terms of the rapidity parameter, which at high energies reduces to $`\eta =`$ ln tan $`\theta /2`$, where $`\theta `$ is the emission angle of a shower particle with respect to the mean beam direction in the laboratory frame. Figure 5 shows pseudorapidity distribution of relativistic charged particles produced in 28Si- nucleus interactions for the three different $`N_h`$ groups. From this figure, it is observed that the centroid of the $`\eta `$-distribution shifts towards higher values of $`\eta `$ with increasing impact parameter. Furthermore, the excess of particles arising due to the decreasing value of the impact parameter tends to appear only in the central region of the rapidity space.

The variations of $`<\eta >`$ and rapidity dispersion D($`\eta `$) with $`N_h`$ are exhibited in Fig.6. It is interesting to note from the figure that $`<\eta >`$ decreases monotonically with increasing $`N_h`$ values. We notice that $`<\eta >`$ decreases slowly due to the loss of the projectile energy with increasing number of collisions. The energy is believed to be shared by more and more particles having relatively lower energies. This observation is incompatible with the predictions of tube type models . Furthermore, it may be noted from this figure that there is no systematic variation in the rapidity dispersion distribution D($`\eta `$) with increasing $`N_h`$, except in the region of very small values of $`N_h`$, where a large part of the cross-section is envisaged to be governed by the peripheral collision with probably one intranuclear nucleon.

The rapidity width (R) of an event is calculated using the following relation, $`R=\eta _H\eta _L`$, where $`\eta _H`$ and $`\eta _L`$ are respectively the maximum and minimum pseudorapidity values in an interaction. In order to investigate the dependence of the rapidity width distribution on target size, the data have been divided into different $`N_h`$\- intervals. The shower width distributions for various $`N_h`$\- intervals are displayed in Fig.7. It may be noticed in this figure that the peaks of the R-distribution shift towards the lower values of R with increasing impact parameter. This feature can be explained in terms of the fact that shower particles produced with relatively larger angles would tend to appear in the target fragmentation region.

## 5 Conclusion

The following conclusions may be drawn from the results of the present work:

1- Multiplicity distribution of relativistic charged particles depends on both projectile and target mass.

2- A linear dependence between the mean multiplicities of relativistic charged and heavy particles is observed.

3- Angular distribution of shower particles depends strongly on the impact parameter.

Figure Captions

Fig.1 Multiplicity distributions of shower particles for ($`a`$) silicon

and ($`b`$) carbon

Fig.2 Multiplicity distributions of relativistic particles for ($`a`$) H

($`b`$) CNO ($`c`$) AgBr

Fig.3 $`N_s`$ vs. $`N_h`$ and $`N_h`$ vs. $`N_s`$

Fig.4 Asymmetry parameter vs. $`N_h`$

Fig.5 Pseudorapidity distributions of relativistic particle produced

in 4.5 GeV/$`c`$ Si interactions

Fig.6 Dependence of $`\eta `$ and $`D(\eta )`$ on $`N_h`$

Fig.7 Shower width distributions in Si-nucleus interactions