text:
# On Principle of Universality of Gravitational Interactions

## I Introduction

The modern stage of development of gravity theory is characterized not only by the search for new effects and new experiments but also by a deeper analysis of fundamentals of the theory and conceptual problems including an important problem of the energy of gravitational field . Difficulties caused by the nontensor character of quantities describing the energy of gravitational field turn out to be so serious that they are considered as manifestation of specific properties of the gravitational field: universality, nonscreening nature, nonlocalizability. A detailed analysis shows that none of specific properties of gravitational field can explain the so-called nonlocalizability of that field. Not only the energy but also all the results of theory, except for the Lagrange function and gravitational field equations, appear to be noncovariant. So, in general relativity, a nonstandard situation occurred: in the theory whose principles are mathematically formulated rigorously, important physical consequences are in contradiction with the initial statements.

So, when general relativity is formulated, a general logical requirement admissibility of arbitrary systems of coordinates is postulated, however, it turns out that in the constructed theory, the dynamic characteristics of the gravitational field (except for the Einstein equations), the density of energy and momentum, are described by nontensor quantities. As a result, it is impossible to uniquely describe the distribution of energy-momentum of any physical system in the gravitational field. Therefore, there occurs the notion of nonlocalizability of the gravitational field. The energy of this field is not localizable, i.e. there is no uniquely defined energy density.

## II Nonlocalizability

The nature of this phenomenon is as follows. While the electromagnetic field is described both by a vector potential and a metric, the Einstein law of gravity  does not contain anything except gravitational potentials. For the electromagnetic field, the physical quantity is the class of equivalence of vector potentials determined by one arbitrary function. A representative of each class of equivalence is chosen by imposing the Lorentz condition that is generally covariant, i.e. independent of a particular system of coordinates, since the theory contains the so-called background object, the Minkowski metric. At the same time, the physical quantity for gravitational field is the class of equivalence of gravitational potentials defined by four arbitrary functions. Only one quantity, the Einstein-Hilbert action, is independent of the choice of these functions. Extending analogy, we note that different representatives of the class of equivalence in the Maxwell theory correspond not only to the same action but also to the so-called tensor of electromagnetic field. Therefore, the same Lorentz force and energy density correspond to different representatives of the equivalence class. In the Einstein theory, different representatives of the equivalence class correspond to the same gravitational field that is differently oriented in space-time with respect to the same observer. Different representatives correspond to different orientations. Ambiguity in the choice of orientation is determined by four arbitrary functions of coordinates. Since the theory does not contain any objects besides gravitational potentials, the representative from each equivalence class can be chosen in a general covariant manner only through introducing, into the theory, the nondynamic so-called background object, background metric .

The choice of a representative from each equivalence class is achieved by imposing four general covariant conditions on covariant derivatives of gravitational potentials with respect to the background connection. Nonlocalizability of the gravitational field is then defined by the freedom in choice of the background metric or background connection. Thus, the problem of energy of the gravitational field is reduced to the problem of physical meaning of the background connection that becomes of principal importance. If the gravitational field and background connection are given on the same manifold, gravitating particles are moving along geodesics defined by gravitational potentials. Then, a natural question arises concerning the nature of particles moving along geodesics given by the background connection. Existence of particles of that sort is an evident necessity without which it is a difficult problem to discuss the physical meaning of the background connection. The latter problem can be avoided by assuming that the particles are moving along geodesics of the background connection when there is no gravitational field. Then it follows that the background connection has the meaning only in the absence of gravitational field.

So, based on purely logical requirements following ¿from known facts, we conclude that there exists nongravitating form of the energy that is directly related to the physical meaning of gravitational potentials in the framework of general covariance principle. As it has already been underlined, the latter is a purely logical requirement inherent in any physical theory, including gravity theory. Hence it becomes necessary to experimental verify the universality principle of gravitational interactions. ”The validity of this principle in the microscopic domain is not as evident as the validity of the coincidence axiom. We know of many rules which apply with great rigor to electromagnetic and other types of interaction and it is conceivable that the special role of the gravitational interaction may dissolve in higher harmony. For this reason, I shall pay prime attention to Einstein‘s first observation, that only coincidences have a direct physical meaning, values of coordinates do not.” This citation is taken from paper by Wigner  in order to emphasize that it is important to test the universality principle of gravitational interactions not only for the problem of self-consistency of general relativity but also for explanation of the role of gravitational forces in the physics of microworld.

## III On gravity law

We will mathematically formulate main distinctive features of general relativity on the basis of the Einstein gravity law . This law, as viewed in the framework of mathematical analysis, is the following system of nonlinear second-order partial differential equations

$$R_{ij}=0$$
(1)
for ten functions $`g_{ij}(x)`$ of 4 independent variables $`x^0,x^1,x^2,x^3`$. This system of equations possesses the following remarkable property. Let the functions $`g_{ij}(x)`$ have a common domain of definition $`D`$ and are a solution to system (1). Now, consider functions $`\phi ^i(x),i=0,1,2,3,`$ such that their domain of definition and range of their values contain $`D`$, and the Jacobian $`J=|\phi ^i/x^j|`$ differs from zero in $`D`$. As it is known, in this case in the domain $`D`$ there exist functions $`f^i(x),`$ such that

$$\phi ^i(f(x))=x^i,f^i(\phi (x))=x^i.$$

Next, let us constitute the functions

$$\stackrel{~}{g}_{ij}(x)=g_{kl}(f(x))f_i^k(x)f_j^l(x),$$
(2)
where $`f_i^k(x)=_if^k(x).`$ Substitution of (2) into (1) shows that the functions $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{ij}(x)`$ are a new solution to equations (1) provided that the functions $`g_{ij}(x)`$ in (2) are a solution to those equations. This analytic aspect of the gravity law is a crucial point. We will now consider its manifestation in various problems.

First, we shall examine the very important Cauchy problem for eqs. (1). The metrics $`g_{ij}(x)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{ij}(x)`$ , as mentioned above, describe the same physical situation. It is associated with the whole class of equivalence of solutions to eqs. (1) determined by 4 functions. To choose a certain element from every class of equivalence, it is convenient to introduce a global ”background” metric and to impose 4 conditions on covariant derivatives of the physical metric with respect to the Levi-Civita background metric $`\widehat{g}_{ij}`$

$$\widehat{}_i(\sqrt{g}g^{ij})=0,$$

which remove arbitrariness defined by eqs.(2). The result is reduced equations of the hyperbolic type for the metric $`g_{ij}`$ with respect to the global background metric $`\widehat{g}_{ij}.`$ The background metric is quite necessary for writing ”gauge conditions” in a general-covariant form independent of the choice of a coordinate system. So, to derive a definite solution to the Einstein equations (1), one should eliminate arbitrariness given by analytic relations (2), which is achieved as indicated above. Consequently, to obtain physical solutions to equations of the gravitational field, they should be treated as a nonlinear system of second-order equations on the manifold $`M`$ with metric $`\widehat{g}_{ij}`$ given on the manifold globally . Note that the notion of a continuous 4-dimensional manifold provided an effective remedy used in considerations in modern physics. The very structure of manifold with its topology remains arbitrary and should be determined by considerations, generally speaking, outside of the scope of general relativity. Thus, the Cauchy problem in general relativity can be brought into the general-covariant form necessary for any physical theory only when the background connection is introduced.

For further clearer illustration, let us trace analogy with the theory of gauge fields. According to Einstein, the gravitational field is put into correspondence with a symmetric tensor field of the second rank $`g_{ij},`$ satisfying the nonlinear equations (1). The electrotonic state of electromagnetic field introduced by Faraday is described by the vector potential (1-form) $`A=A_idx^i.`$ The gauge transformations

$$A\overline{A}=A+d\phi $$

correspond to transformations (2). Principal difference of the gravitational field from the electromagnetic field is that one cannot construct quantities invariant under transformations (2) from the Einstein gravitational potentials, whereas from components of the vector potential, the gauge-invariant tensor of electromagnetic field (2-form) $`F=dA`$ can be constructed. In particular, with the help of (2) it is not difficult to verify that the tensor of Riemannian curvature that is in a sense analogous to the tensor of electromagnetic field is not invariant under the transformations of gravitational potentials (2). The case of non-Abelian gauge fields, in the sense of existence of gauge-invariant quantities, is closer to general relativity as compared to the Maxwell theory. The reason is that the strength tensor of a non-Abelian gauge field is not a gauge-invariant quantity ; only the energy-momentum tensor and Lagrange function remain gauge-invariant quantities. This can be observed as follows: with a non-Abelian gauge group, one cannot connect conserved gauge-invariant ”charges” analogous to the electron charge. This is a principal difference of the Yang-Mills field theory from electrodynamics, and just in this it is closer to general relativity, where also one cannot introduce an invariant gravitational ”charge”. It is well-known which difficulties are connected with the extension of gauge symmetry and how they were overcome. A rather long way was required to construct physically acceptable models with non-Abelian gauge fields. Spontaneous breaking of symmetry as the mechanism that allows one to provide quanta of those fields with mass and localization of interactions of the indicated class are merely the most typical manifestations caused by the change of the gauge group of electrodynamics to a wider gauge group of transformations. In gravity theory, only the Einstein-Hilbert action and equations of the gravitational field deduced from it are invariant under transformations (2). Related difficulties are not yet overcome. Like in the theory of non-Abelian gauge fields, in gravity theory, one cannot introduce a gravitational charge invariant under transformations (2). Which are consequences and how they show themselves physically, is still an open problem. The first important step along this way could be the problem of existence of a nongravitating form of energy, because having solved this problem, one could raise the problem of physical meaning of the background connection and analyze the corresponding consequences. In this connection, consider evidences for existence of a nongravitating form of energy beyond the scope of general relativity.

## IV Nongravitating form of energy

As it is shown in , the existence of nongravitating form of energy is closely related to gauge symmetry inherent in general relativity. The idea of symmetry like that is very simple and consists in that coordinates on the total linear group can be put in correspondence with tensor fields of type (1,1) on a manifold rather than a set of scalar fields , it is accepted in gauge abstract theory. Hence, it follows that coordinates of all subgroups of the total linear group can also be put in correspondence with tensor fields on a manifold.This actually covers all physically interesting groups of gauge symmetry. The gauge symmetry under consideration is a realization of the abstract theory of gauge fields in the framework of modern differential geometry. Its typical feature is that it does not supposes distinction between space-time and gauge, or so-called isotopic, space. At the same time contemporary gauge models presuppose an exact local distinction between space-time and gauge space. Just in this aspect, the gauge symmetry under consideration opens essentially new possibilities. So, the total linear group and its subgroups admit a simple realization in terms of geometrically well defined tensor fields.

The total linear group, like the group of gauge symmetry, is invariant under transformations (2). This signifies that transformations (2) do not break equivalence given by that gauge group. However, any reduction of the considered gauge group to its subgroups results in that all these subgroups are not invariant under transformations of the symmetry group of gravitational interactions defined locally and usually called the group of diffeomorphisms. Thus, if at least one subgroup of the gauge group is physically realized, the form of energy connected with this system will be nongravitating. In the papers mentioned above it has been shown that the Dirac theory cannot be deduced without reduction of the given gauge group. This result is itself rather easily apprehended within the Dirac theory on the basis of the well-known fact that spinors are not a basis of a representation of the total linear group considered here as a group of transformations of coordinates. For that reason, difficulties have arisen of fundamental character when introducing spinors into general relativity. Strange though it may seem, the way out of that situation was looked for not through analyzing and verification of the universality principle of gravitational interactions as applied to electrons but through introducing an orthogonal basis into gravity theory. The difficulties with geometrization of the Dirac theory were resolver in its favor.

Accurate formulation of the Dirac theory, even in the Minkowski space-time, requires introduction of the so-called tetrad. As a result, instead of the analysis of the Dirac theory, there appear various tetrad theories of gravity and, which is surprising, the introduction of basis was apprehended as a peculiar revelation not only in physics, but in geometry, as well. However, a pure logic and evident requirement applicable to any physical theory is the principle according to which physical laws should be formulated in the form independent of both the choice of a coordinate system and a basis in vector spaces associated with a given theory. The notion of basis should be absent in the formulation of physical laws. For the first time, this principle was formulated by Dirac who gave a consistent construction of quantum mechanics on its basis . However, it turns out that the Dirac electron theory does not the principle he formulated. It seems that existence of the Dirac theory very clearly points out that this theory is a reduction of a more general theory and the simplest way to perform that reduction is to employ an orthogonal basis. This program was realized in the papers mentioned above. The relevant conclusion consists in that electrons carry the nongravitating form of energy. So, the nature unambiguously points to self-consistency of general relativity and to particles that transfer the nongravitating form of energy, electrons.

## V On gravitational interactions of electrons

We will not present detailed computations, rather we dwell upon main results following from . It has been shown there that the theory of fermion fields cannot in principle be formulated without reduction of the total linear group as a group of gauge symmetry. As a result, it turned out to be impossible to construct the theory invariant under both gauge transformations and transformations of the group of diffeomorphisms. This result could be easily understood without formulae, as well. Reduction of the gauge group is accompanied by imposing constraints formulated in terms of the metric tensor. Consequently, the reduced gauge group will be invariant under transformations of the group of diffeomorphisms if the metric tensor does not change under those transformations. According to (2), the condition for the metric being conserved under diffeomorphisms is expressed by the system of partial differential equations for functions…

$$\stackrel{~}{g}_{ij}(x)=g_{kl}(f(x))f_i^k(x)f_j^l(x)=g_{ij}(x).$$
(3)
Equations (3) may not have solutions at all. If $`g_{ij}(x)`$ in (3) is the Minkowski metric, the group of space-time symmetry that keeps the reduced gauge group to be invariant will be the Poincare group which is in the given case a general solution to equations (3).

When the problem of gauge-invariant determination of the energy density was studied, it was proved that there exists canonical gauge-invariant tensor of the energy-momentum; the latter differs from the metric tensor of energy-momentum which is not gauge-invariant since reduction of the gauge group breaks gauge invariance of the procedure of deriving the metric tensor of energy momentum. As the right-hand side of the Einstein equations contains the metric tensor of energy-momentum, it follows that gravitational interactions cannot be introduced in a gauge-invariant way. As noted above, the Dirac theory is realized in the reduction of the total linear group as the group of gauge symmetry. However, the reduction of this gauge group automatically leads to the reduction of the group of diffeomorphisms which is a symmetry group of gravitational interactions.

Now, we will formulate conditions to hold for any gravitational-interacting field. Let a physical object be described by an appropriate field, and equations of the field be derived from the Lagrangian. Then the field is gravitational-interacting provided the following condition are fulfilled. The considered field, like the gravitational field, makes a basis of the faithful representation of the diffeomorphism group. Varying the action of the field with respect to the metric, we obtain the metric tensor of energy- momentum. This symmetric tensor will obey the well-known local conservation law on solutions to the field equations. If the theory has any gauge symmetry, the energy-momentum tensor should be gauge-invariant. A relevant necessary condition is invariance of the gauge group with respect to transformations of the group of diffeomorphisms, the symmetry group of gravitational interactions. If the latter condition is not satisfied, there are two possibilities. The first consists in that gauge symmetry is eliminated from consideration, and the theory is constructed which is invariant only with respect to transformations of the group of diffeomorphisms. The second possibility is to construct the gauge-invariant theory which cannot include gravitational interactions. This means that there exists the nongravitating form of energy. As it has turned out, the Dirac theory does not obey the formulated conditions.

The Dirac theory unambiguously points to the existence of nongravitating form of energy and to a concrete object , the carrier of that form, the electron. Reduction of the gauge group resulting in the Dirac wave function, (for details see papers cited above) reduces the group of space-time symmetry step by step, so that the latter is to be properly restored to ensure the Poincare invariance. This is achieved with the help of global gauge invariance, and therefore, the electron represents the nongravitating form of energy.

The simplest test for establishing whether the electron is that form is to measure its weight. Experiments of that kind were performed in 1967 at Stanford University by the Fairbank group . They demonstrated a zero result. Here we will cite the abstract of paper .

”A free-fall techniques has been used to measure the net vertical component of force on electrons in vacuum enclosed by a copper tube. This force was shown to be less than $`0.09mg`$, where $`m`$ is the inertial mass of the electron and $`g`$ is $`980cm/sec^2`$. This supports the contention that gravity induces an electric field outside a metal surface, of magnitude and direction such that the gravitational force on electrons is cancelled”.

Thus, the explanation of experimenters of that ”zero” is that gravity induces, in an experimental setup, an electric field which just compensates the force of gravitational attraction. It follows then that positrons under the same conditions should fall with acceleration $`2g`$. Fairbank planned to carry out experiments with positrons, however, this plan met with difficulties. Later, when up-to-data-technologies open new possibilities, preparation of this experiment was taken up again. Unfortunately, the experiment with positrons remained at the level of preparation since after 1989 it was closed because of decease of the project’s leader. Details of the Fairbank experiment and subsequent discussions can be found in review papers  and .

## VI Proposal of experiment

What is suggested on the basis of our consideration? To solve the problems of fundamental importance both for gravity theory and elementary particle physics, it is necessary to perform the Fairbank experiments both with electrons and positrons, i.e. to measure the acceleration of electrons and positrons in the gravitational field of the Earth. If the result is zero, in accordance with theoretical predictions, it will first of all follow that general relativity is , like the theory of electromagnetic fields, self-consistent. An urgent necessity will be the problem of physically substantiated choice of the background metric and proper violation of the symmetry of gravitational interactions, of the physical meaning of that manifold, with which the background metric is connected. Consideration of gravitational interactions on the background of the Minkowski metric is quite natural. However, other possibilities should not be neglected a priori, especially, in connection with the problem of compatibility of gravitational field equations and subsidiary (auxiliary?) conditions imposed on gravitational potentials . It may happen that gravitational interactions, like weak interactions, are localized, which means that gravitons transfer the mass. In the physics of elementary particles, it will be necessary to consider the problem of gravitational interactions of the emitting matter as a collective effect.

In conclusion, we note that expenditures on the experiment proposed could by no means be compared with its fundamental importance for physics, we tried here to demonstrate from various viewpoints.

References

1. Einstein A. Sitzungsber. Preuss. Acad. Wiss. 1917.
2. Hilbert D. Grundlagen der Physik, 2 Mitteilung, Gott. Nachr. 1917.
3. Landau L.D. and Lifshitz E.M. The Classical Theory of Fields, 3rd ed. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1971.
4. Dirac P.A.M. General Theory Relativity. A Wiley Interscience Publication, 1975.
5. Hawking S.W. and Ellis F.R. the Lardge Scale Structure of Space-Time. Cambridge University Press. 1973
6. Wigner E.P. Symmetries and Reflections. Indiana University Press. 1970.
7. Pestov I.B. Hadronic Journal Suppl. 1993. v. 8, n.2. p. 99- 135.
8. Dirac P.A.M. The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. Oxford, At the Clarendon Press.
9. Witteborn F.C. and Fairbank W.M. Experimental comparison of the gravitational force on freely falling electrons and metallic electrons. // Phys. Rev.Lett. 1967. vol. 19, p.1049-1052.
10. Nieto M.M. and Goldman T. The Arguments Against ”Antigravity” and the Gravitational Acceleration of Antimatter. //Physics Reports. 1991. v.205, n.5, p.222-281.
11. Darling T.W., Rossi F., Opat G.I.,and Moorhead. The fall of chardged particles under gravity: A study of experimental problems.// Rev. of Mod.Phys. 1992. v.64, n.1, p. 237-257.


format: text

text:
# FIRST-based survey of Compact Steep Spectrum sources

## 1 Introduction

Compact Steep Spectrum (CSS) sources (Kapahi, 1981; Peacock & Wall, 1982) form a well defined class of radio sources; they are powerful, compact (projected linear sizes $``$ 20 kpc and hence angular sizes of the order of a few arcseconds) and possess steep ($`\alpha 0.5`$, $`S\nu ^\alpha `$) spectra. CSSs are identified with quasars, radio galaxies and Seyferts. Wilkinson et al. (1984) found a morphological separation between CSS quasars and galaxies (see also Spencer et al., 1989; Fanti et al., 1990) which is similar to that observed for larger sources: radio galaxies generally have a simple double radio structure (sometimes with weak radio jets and weak radio cores) whilst quasars show either a triple structure (with a strong central component consisting of a bright jet) or complex structure.

An astrophysical interpretation of the CSS phenomenon has been given in Fanti et al. (1990). They show that in principle small apparent sizes of CSSs could result from the projection of “normal” Large Symmetric Objects (LSO), however only less than 25% of these objects are expected to be larger sources seen close to the line of sight. Most of them are supposed to be intrinsically small objects randomly oriented on the sky and their sub-galactic apparent linear dimensions can be explained by two main hypotheses. According to the first one CSS sources are confined by the interaction of the jet with an inhomogeneous, dense and possibly turbulent medium in the host galaxy which inhibits a normal development (van Breugel et al., 1984). In this scenario CSSs are so called frustrated objects. The second hypothesis (Phillips & Mutel, 1982; Carvalho, 1985; Mutel & Phillips, 1988) — and this one has gained more observational support recently (see e.g. Fanti et al., 2000) — suggests that CSS sources may be the young stages of future LSOs and so the compactness of these objects is just an evolutionary effect: they are small because they have not had enough time to expand to supergalactic scales. If that hypothesis is correct, CSSs can be regarded as an intermediate class between even smaller Compact Symmetric Objects (CSOs) (Readhead et al., 1996) and LSOs and, together, these three groups of radio sources make up an evolutionary sequence. One of the main argument in favour of the evolution is that CSOs and some CSS sources, namely Medium-sized Symmetric Objects (MSOs) (Augusto et al., 1998) which are unbeamed CSSs, have similar morphologies to LSOs. On the other hand, the lobe speeds in CSO sources are high: $`0.2c`$ (Owsianik & Conway, 1998; Owsianik et al., 1998), so CSOs quickly evolve into larger objects and MSOs seem to be perfect candidates to become post-CSOs. Most of the CSS sources known so far have sufficiently high radio luminosity that even assuming a strong decrease in luminosity as they evolve, they remain good candidates for future large scale Fanaroff–Riley class II (FRII) (Fanaroff & Riley, 1974) sources with high radio luminosity. An additional support of this view comes from the morphological similarity of many CSSs to FRIIs as expected if the evolution is self-similar.

All studies of CSS sources made by 1995 i.e. until publication of papers by Dallacasa et al. (1995) and Sanghera et al. (1995), were based on the so called 3CRPW sample consisting of 54 sources (Spencer et al., 1989). The next step in such investigations can be made through extension of the available sample of CSSs toward weaker sources. For example, Saikia et al. (2001) selected a sample of 42 candidates from the S4 survey (Pauliny-Toth et al., 1978) which is complete to 0.5 Jy at 5 GHz and Fanti et al. (2001) — hereafter F2001 — derived a new sample of 87 CSSs with flux densities $`0.8\mathrm{Jy}`$ at 408 MHz from B3-VLA survey (Vigotti et al., 1989). Here we present a genuine method of finding weak CSSs which makes use of Faint Images of Radio Sky at Twenty (FIRST) (White et al., 1997). Its fine resolution ($`5\stackrel{}{.}4`$) is the crucial feature for that purpose. A strong motivation to conduct the research in this direction came from the fact that a number of CSS sources weaker than those in the 3CRPW sample have already been mapped with the VLA at 8.4 GHz by Patnaik et al. (1992)111In principle Patnaik et al. (1992) sought candidates for pointlike phase calibrators among flat-spectrum objects in Green Bank surveys but the procedure they used was different from that used by e.g. White & Becker (1992). When we supplemented their list with flux densities from White & Becker it turned out that some of their candidates actually had steep-spectra. Consequently the VLA observations revealed resolved structure and so these objects could not be used as calibrators. In this way Patnaik et al. made a serendipitous discovery of several weak CSSs.. It appears that those sources have angular sizes of the same range as all the CSSs known so far, yet they are significantly weaker. There are two plausible explanations: a) these sources are those CSSs we see almost exactly face-on, so their Doppler boosting is minimal, or b) these sources form a new class of “weak” CSSs.

In 1996 we proposed observations based on newly released early results of FIRST aimed to discriminate between cases a) and b). If case a) is true then those ones with counter-jets should dominate among these new CSS sources; sources of this kind were rare in the 3CRPW sample. If case b) is true then there is a chance to find an elegant analogy: strong CSSs are “miniature FRIIs” whereas weak CSSs are “miniature FRIs”. Taking into account the evolutionary scenario and assuming that radio sources evolve in a self-similar manner we might also say that strong CSSs from the 3CRPW sample evolve towards FRIIs whereas weak CSSs evolve towards FRIs. Testing such a possibility is among the goals of a series of papers resulting from interferometric (MERLIN, EVN, VLBA) observations of our FIRST-based sample of CSS candidates.

## 2 Sample selection

To select weak CSS sources from the FIRST catalogue we made the following steps:

1. From the source list based on Green Bank (GB) surveys at 21 and 6 cm White & Becker (1992) we selected those sources lying within the then current limits of the FIRST survey when FIRST covered the area of declination $`28\mathrm{°}`$$`42\mathrm{°}`$, having steep spectra ($`\alpha >0.5`$) and being stronger than 150 mJy at 6 cm. (This flux density limit was chosen in order to produce a sample of manageable size.) The above declination limits indicate that the overlap between our sample and the B3-VLA survey based sample of F2001 (their limits are $`37\mathrm{°}15\mathrm{}`$$`47\mathrm{°}37\mathrm{}`$) is not large.
2. We identified FIRST sources with those GB survey sources. We found, quite expectedly, that thanks to a dramatic difference in the resolution, the majority of sources appearing as single in the GB survey turn out to be double (or multiple) on FIRST maps and so they are represented either as compact pairs or clusters of pointlike sources in the FIRST catalogue.
3. We rejected all such cases i.e. we selected only those sources that are single entities in the FIRST catalogue i.e. more compact than the FIRST beam (5$`\stackrel{}{.}`$4) and surrounded by an empty field. We adopted 1 arcmin as a radius of that field. Such a procedure allows us to make sure that we deal with isolated objects and not parts of larger objects.
4. We, again, checked whether our targets fulfill the spectrum steepness criterion: instead of GB-survey flux densities at 21 cm we used more accurate values from FIRST. We rejected candidates with flat spectra ($`\alpha 0.5`$).
5. We found that all already known CSS sources lying within our R.A. and declination limits have been correctly selected so far. Obviously we rejected them.
6. We rejected the Gigahertz Peaked Spectrum (GPS) sources because — in our opinion — they constitute a separate class. The main reason for this is that GPSs are an order of magnitude more compact than CSSs and their spectra have a different shape. Our research was focused on “true” CSSs and not GPSs222A review of both GPS and CSS classes has been given by O’Dea (1998). To this end we identified our preliminary candidates with objects listed in 365 MHz Texas catalogue (Douglas et al., 1996). We passed only those objects which have non-inverted spectra between 365 and 1400 MHz. In other words the turnover frequencies of our sources lie below 365 MHz.

Finally we selected 60 candidates for CSS sources. Radio selected samples normally suffer from redshift information scarcity and it was the case here. Therefore, for the majority of our candidates it was not possible to calculate their distances and to judge which of them fulfill the linear size criterion for CSSs which, obviously, is of primary importance for the physics and evolution issues. Instead we used the angular size criterion which is still helpful for making sure we reject objects with excessively large linear sizes. Since the resolution of FIRST is 5$`\stackrel{}{.}`$4, we realised from the beginning that a number of those candidates may *not* fulfill the angular size criterion and so a rejection of sources with angular sizes larger than certain limit yet pointlike according to FIRST was planned as the first step after completion of the initial survey of all those 60 targets. Assuming that the linear sizes of a CSS source should remain below 20 kpc for currently adopted cosmological parameters, in particular for $`H_0=72`$ km $`\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$ (Freedman et al., 2001), we adopted $`3\mathrm{}`$ for such a criterion.

## 3 Observations and data reduction

The initial survey was performed with MERLIN at 5 GHz. At that frequency MERLIN attains a resolution of $`0\stackrel{}{.}04`$ which is sufficient to make a final selection of actual CSSs from the list of our candidates. We made snapshot observations of the sample of CSS sources defined above in 1997. Our targets were observed 6 times in 10 min. scans spread evenly over a 12-hour track. Six MERLIN telescopes were used. A typical $`uv`$ coverage accomplished in those observations is shown on Fig. 1.

Phase calibrator sources chosen from the MERLIN Calibrator List (Patnaik et al., 1992) were observed twice per target scan for 1–2 min. Poor weather conditions allowed us to observe only a part of our sample in 1997, however we successfully observed and mapped about 3 dozen sources. At this point we rejected the sources which were too large to be regarded as CSS sources using a $`3\mathrm{}`$ limit for the angular size. The remaining 21 objects were indeed new CSS sources. We divided them into 3 groups:

* relatively large ones with sizes ranging from $`1\mathrm{}`$ to $`3\mathrm{}`$ (6 sources);
* relatively compact ones with typical sizes of $`0\stackrel{}{.}5`$ and double structure (9 sources);
* relatively compact ones with typical sizes of $`0\stackrel{}{.}5`$ and complex structure (6 sources).

Objects from groups 2 and 3 as well as the full list of objects in our sample will be described in subsequent papers. In this paper we focus on the first group i.e. on the objects possessing similar sizes to classical CSSs, yet less luminous333Three of them also belong to F2001 sample.. Further observations have been made using MERLIN at 1.6 GHz in ‘snapshot’ mode of six sources from the first group to make calculation of components’ spectral indices possible. Again six MERLIN telescopes were used. A typical $`uv`$ coverage accomplished in those observations is shown on Fig. 2. Here we present the observations of five sources (see Table 1) from the first group because the data for the sixth source (1236+327) were corrupt. Initial amplitude calibration was derived from daily observations of the unresolved source OQ208 giving a calibration error of $`<5\%`$ in flux density. The preliminary data reduction including phase-referencing was made using the AIPS-based PIPELINE procedure developed at JBO. The phase-calibrated images created with PIPELINE were refined in AIPS using several cycles of self-calibration and — in case of 1.6 MHz observations — amplitude self-calibration was applied at the end. The corrected data were mapped with IMAGR and the final maps are shown on Figs. 3 to 7. The lowest contour represents roughly a $`3\sigma `$ level.

We measured the flux densities of the components labelled on those maps and arrayed the results in Table 2. For the 3 targets also observed by F2001 (0805+406, 1201+394, 1233+418) we quoted their 4.86 GHz VLA measurements of respective components in the third column of that table. The differences in the 4.86 GHz flux densities measured with the VLA and MERLIN are attributed to the sparse $`uv`$ coverage attained by MERLIN during the observations in snapshot mode. As a result, some flux pertinent to extended structures is missing on our 5 GHz maps. For calculation of the spectral indices (see Table 2) we used therefore VLA (A-conf.) 4.86 GHz fluxes taken from F2001 (when available) instead of those derived from our MERLIN maps.

1201+394 has clearly unbeamed lobes and its redshift is known; therefore we estimated the angular sizes $`\theta _x`$, $`\theta _y`$ from the 1.6-GHz maps using the JMFIT program from the AIPS package and based on these values the physical parameters of the lobes were found using formulæ from Miley (1980). The results are shown in Table 3. The calculations of physical parameters were made for deceleration parameter $`q_0=0.5`$ which is used throughout this paper.

## 4 Notes on individual sources

0801+303. This radio source is identified with a QSO of redshift $`z=1.446`$ (Hewitt & Burbidge, 1989). The 1.6-GHz observation reveals a triple structure. The central, brightest component C is a core and the two structures B1 and B2 straddling it are lobes. The B1 lobe is much brighter than B2 (Fig. 3, left panel). The 5-GHz map shows a double structure of the source: the B1 lobe and more complex structure of the central component. The element C seen on the 1.6-GHz map is split here into two components: C1, which is probably the actual core, and C2, which is a part of the jet (Fig. 3, right panel). The spectrum of the component C is the flattest in the part identified with C1 and becoming steeper towards C2. The spectrum of component B1 is steep and the component B2 has presumably even steeper spectrum; it does not appear on the 5-GHz map at all.

0805+406. This source is an unconfirmed quasar (a “blue object”) of unmeasured redshift (Gregorini et al., 1998; Vigotti et al., 1999). The map resulting from the 1.6-GHz observation shows a triple structure of the source. The brightest component C is a core, the A component is a part of the jet structure directed towards us and the B component is a lobe (Fig. 4, left panel). A triple structure of the source appears also on the 5-GHz map. Components C and A are compact and have higher luminosity than more extended component B (Fig. 4, right panel). The spectrum of component C is flat and its spectral index amounts to $`\alpha =0.26`$. Also the component A has a rather flat spectrum ($`\alpha =0.46`$) and only the component B is featured by a truly steep spectrum ($`\alpha =0.71`$). That means the source is clearly a core-jet-lobe structure. Another confirmation of this comes from F2001; their maps additionally show a diffuse western component which may be related to the (hidden) counter-jet.

0850+331. There is no optical identification of this source (McMahon et al., 2001) so we do not know either its magnitude or redshift. The 1.6-GHz map shows the very complex structure of the source. The brightest component C is a core and structures A1 and A2 are fragments of a jet but the A1 component has lower radio emission than component A2. The brighter elements of A2 structure presumably represent the part of the jet seen at a smaller angle to the line of sight and so more Doppler-boosted (Fig. 5, left panel). The 5-GHz map also shows a complex structure of the source. The component C seen on the 1.6-GHz map, here falls apart into small elements which, again, seem to be fragments of the wiggling jet, except component C1 which is probably the actual core. We can hardly see the component A1 and the structure A2 also consists of a few small elements (Fig. 5, right panel).

1201+394. This source is identified with a radio galaxy of redshift $`z=0.445`$ (Wan & Daly, 1996). The 1.6-GHz map shows a symmetric, double structure of the source. The two extended components B1 and B2 are lobes but the lobe B1 has stronger radio emission (Fig. 6, left panel). The 5-GHz map shows the same symmetric, double structure with two lobes B1 (also brighter) and B2 (Fig. 6, right panel). The spectra of the lobes are steep and their spectral indices amount to $`\alpha =0.71`$ for B1 and $`\alpha =0.66`$ for B2. Physical parameters for both lobes are shown in Table 3. 1.6 GHz luminosities were calculated based on fluxes derived from our MERLIN maps; 5 GHz luminosities were calculated based on fluxes taken from F2001.

1233+418. This source is identified with a radio galaxy redshifted to $`z=0.25`$ (Murgia et al., 1999). The 1.6-GHz map shows a core-jet structure; the source consists of two components: the core (component C) and an elongated jet structure (component A). Emission from the jet fragment lying closer to the core is high and it fades along the jet structure (Fig. 7, left panel). The 5-GHz observation shows a triple structure of the source. The brightest component C is probably a core. The jet component A is split here into two elements A1 and A2 (Fig. 7, right panel). All the components have steep or very steep spectra: the spectral index of the component C is $`\alpha =0.64`$ and the spectral index of the component A amounts to $`\alpha =0.89`$.

## 5 Discussion

New MERLIN 1.6 and 5-GHz maps show many details of the structures of weak CSS sources. None of these have both jets visible — most of them consist of a core, one-sided jet and sometimes a lobe. Jets of 0850+331 and 1233+418 have quite complex structures. There are no hotspots in the lobes of these sources although the lobes in 1201+394 are edge-brightened as in FRIIs. For all principal components of the 3 sources belonging both to our and F2001 samples we calculated the spectral indices. Cores have been found for four sources: 0801+303, 0805+406, 0850+331 and 1233+418. Three objects — two quasars and one radio galaxy — follow a division in radio morphology similar to that for LSOs and CSSs from the 3CRPW sample: galaxies are simple doubles whilst quasars show triple or complex structures. The fourth object, a radio galaxy 1233+418, is an exception — it shows an asymmetric structure with a core and one-sided jet. (The remaining 5th object has no optical identification.) With an exception of 1201+394 all sources are moderately beamed.

The symmetric, double structure of 1201+394 and absence of a visible core indicate that this source lies almost in the sky plane so the calculated projected linear size — $`l=10.1h^1`$ kpc — is probably close to the physical size. 1201+394 is therefore MSO-type.

Because of the apparent lack of beaming in this source plus the fact we know its redshift and consequently the luminosity, we checked how this object would fit into the Fanaroff–Riley classification scheme (Fanaroff & Riley, 1974). To this end we calculated the spectral index between 365 and 1400 MHz using the 365-MHz flux density from the Texas catalogue (1343 mJy). We found that $`\alpha _{0.365\mathrm{GHz}}^{1.4\mathrm{GHz}}=0.78`$ is quite consistent with $`\alpha _{1.4\mathrm{GHz}}^{4.85\mathrm{GHz}}=0.85`$ so using both of them and assuming that the indices remain valid down to 178 MHz we estimated the 178-MHz flux to be 2359 mJy or 2723 mJy respectively. The mean value derived from the above figures yields $`L_{178\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}=6.45\times 10^{26}h^2\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1`$. According to Fanaroff & Riley, the boundary value of $`L_{178\mathrm{M}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}3\times 10^{25}h^2\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1`$ indicates the division of large-scale objects into two types: the FRII sources, which are beyond the luminosity boundary, and FRI sources which lie below. Our estimate is more than an order of magnitude higher than that dividing luminosity and indicates that indeed 1201+394 belongs to the FRII class.

Ledlow & Owen (1996) found that the radio luminosity of the FRI/FRII divide varied with optical luminosity. For a mixed sample of sources the dividing luminosity at 1.4 GHz is around $`1.4\times 10^{24}h^2\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1`$ for $`M_R=21.2`$ which is the case of the galaxy identified with 1201+394. The rest frame radio luminosity of 1201+394 at 1.4 GHz is $`1.2\times 10^{26}h^2\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1`$ and so the source is again expected to be an FRII.

Fanti et al. (1995) and Readhead et al. (1996) using self-similar models predict that the luminosity is expected to decrease rapidly with size as the source evolves. O’Dea & Baum (1997) also show that a strong decrease in luminosity with size is expected as CSS sources evolve into LSOs and so 1201+394 might become an FRI-type object in the future. On the other hand this conjecture seems to be unlikely taking into account the clear FRII-like morphology of 1201+394 (an edge brightened double lobed structure). Self-similar evolution would result in the source maintaining the same morphology as it evolved. It is only for a flat external density profile that a source might be expected to maintain or increase in luminosity as predicted for GPS sources (Snellen et al., 2000) and so rather special conditions are required for the source to stay as an FRII. To add to the confusion, Zirbel (1997) found that FRI sources tend to be in richer groups than FRIIs and so may be in a flatter external density profile. Clearly the evolution of these sources is uncertain and further work on the lower luminosity CSSs is required.

## 6 Conclusions

MERLIN has been used to survey a sample of 60 weak Compact Steep Spectrum sources. This paper deals with five relatively large (arcsecond scale) sources. According to the evolutionary scheme compact doubles or, broadly speaking, CSOs are the progenitors of the extended doubles (Phillips & Mutel, 1982; Carvalho, 1985) and the CSS sources form an evolutionary link between those most compact/youngest objects and the classical double FRIIs. All CSS sources known so far have high radio luminosities and the radio structures of those which are unbeamed have FRII structures. It seemed reasonable to suspect that the lower radio luminosity CSSs could be the progenitors of less luminous FRI objects. Our investigations of a new sample of weak CSS sources were motivated by the above-mentioned view. The triple or double structures of the five CSS sources and the presence of one-sided core–jet structures indicate they are more similar to FRII objects than FRIs. The radio structure of 1201+394 is also similar to the structure of FRII object because of edge-brightening of the lobes. The remaining four sources seem to be moderately beamed. Their structures consist of a core and one-sided jet. None of these sources have counter-jets. This means that the low luminosities of these sources are not a consequence of a lack of significant Doppler boosting. We claim, therefore, they constitute a new class of “weak” CSS sources.

###### Acknowledgements.

MERLIN is a UK National Facility operated by the University of Manchester on behalf of PPARC. This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Part of this research was made when MK stayed at JBO and received a scholarship provided by the EU under the Marie Curie Training Site scheme.


text:
# Microscopic Description of Band Structure at Very Extended Shapes in the 𝐴∼110 Mass Region

\[

## Abstract

Recent experiments have confirmed the existence of rotational bands in the $`A110`$ mass region with very extended shapes lying between super- and hyper-deformation. Using the projected shell model, we make a first attempt to describe quantitatively such a band structure in 108Cd. Excellent agreement is achieved in the dynamic moment of inertia $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ calculation. This allows us to suggest the spin values for the energy levels, which are experimentally unknown. It is found that, at this large deformation, the sharply down-sloping orbitals in the proton $`i_{13/2}`$ subshell are responsible for the irregularity in the experimental $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$, and the wave functions of the observed states have a dominant component of two-quasiparticles from these orbitals. Measurement of transition quadrupole moments and g-factors will test these findings, and thus can provide a deeper understanding of the band structure at very extended shapes.

\]

Low-energy nuclear physics is characterized by a rich shell structure. A nuclear system can be stabilized at large deformations by quantum shell effects, leading to many observable phenomena. Nuclear super- and hyper-deformations have long been predicted to exist in nuclei. The study of superdeformed nuclei has been an active focus of low-energy nuclear physics for the past two decades. Today, superdeformation (SD) at high spin is not an isolated phenomenon, but instead is observed across the nuclear periodic table . However, the field has remained active because of the continuing discovery of new, exotic bands with distinct characteristic structures that one has never encountered before.

The very recent experimental work of Clark et al.  in the $`A110`$ mass region provides an example. Early calculations  suggested the likely regions where super- and hyper-deformation might exist. In particular, calculations predicted a very extended shape minimum in 108Cd, lying intermediate between super- and hyper-deformation, and that the nuclei at this deformation are possibly stable against fission. In a recent letter , Clark et al. have found a rotational band in 108Cd with the data indicating that the nucleus has the most deformed structure identified to date.

An irregular pattern in dynamic moments of inertia ($`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$) was observed in this highly deformed band . The experimental $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ curve begins with a large value $`(80[\mathrm{}^2\text{MeV}^1])`$ at lower spins and quickly drops to 50. For the deduced transition quadrupole moment $`Q_t`$, the lower experimental limit was given as 9.5 $`e`$b . Besides these global features, no detailed structure information is currently known for this band. This Rapid Communication aims to analyze the microscopic structure of this band and to explain the cause of the rapid change in $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$. Our calculations suggest that the low-K $`i_{13/2}`$ proton orbitals are responsible for the $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ irregularity and that the two-quasiparticle configurations from these orbitals dominate the structure of the observed states. Based on the excellent reproduction of the experimental $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$, we further suggest the spin values for the observed energy levels.

Our analysis is performed using the projected shell model (PSM) . The PSM follows closely the shell model philosophy, and in fact, is a spherical shell model truncated in a deformed BCS single-particle basis. The truncation is first achieved within the quasi-particle basis with respect to the deformed BCS vacuum $`|0`$; then rotational symmetry that is violated in the deformed mean-field basis is restored by standard angular-momentum projection techniques  to form a spherical basis in the laboratory frame; finally the shell model Hamiltonian is diagonalized in the projected basis. The truncation obtained in this way is very efficient, making a shell model calculation for a heavy, very deformed nucleus possible. Moreover, spin is a strictly conserved quantity in a theory with angular momentum projection. This is the most desired feature when applying a model to study SD structure because, for the most observed SD bands, it is very difficult to determine spin values experimentally. In the past, the PSM was consistently applied for SD structure study to the mass regions $`A190`$ , $`A130`$ , $`A80`$ , $`A60`$ , and $`A30`$ . The predicted spin values for some SD bands were confirmed by later experiments.

In the PSM, the many-body wave function is a superposition of (angular momentum) projected multi-quasiparticle states,

$$|\psi _M^I=\underset{\kappa }{}f_\kappa \widehat{P}_{MK_\kappa }^I|\phi _\kappa ,$$
(1)
where $`\widehat{P}_{MK}^I`$ is the projection operator  and $`|\phi _\kappa `$ denotes basis states consisting of the quasiparticle (qp) vacuum, 2 quasi-neutron and -proton, and 4-qp states

$`|\phi _\kappa =\{|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},a_{\nu _1}^{}a_{\nu _2}^{}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},a_{\pi _1}^{}a_{\pi _2}^{}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},a_{\nu _1}^{}a_{\nu _2}^{}a_{\pi _1}^{}a_{\pi _2}^{}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}\}.`$ (2)
In Eq. (2), $`a^{}`$’s are the qp creation operators, $`\nu `$’s ($`\pi `$’s) denote the neutron (proton) Nilsson quantum numbers, which run over properly selected (low-lying) orbitals and $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ is the qp vacuum (0-qp state). The dimensionality of the qp basis (2) is about 80 and the deformation of the basis is fixed at $`ϵ_2=0.67`$ for calculations in this paper. The choice of this deformation is based on experimental information . We note that the choice of a basis deformation is not very sensitive for the PSM because the input deformation parameter serves to provide a good basis and the real deformation will be determined dynamically by later configuration mixing.

For this $`N=60`$ and $`Z=48`$ nucleus with a large deformation, single-particle orbitals from several major shells can be found near the Fermi levels. Among them, the high-$`j`$ orbitals $`i_{13/2}`$ and $`h_{11/2}`$ are expected to play an important role. However, some orbitals from the major shells $`N=4`$ and $`N=3`$ also surround the Fermi levels. For a proper treatment, we have therefore included four major shells ($`N=3,4,5`$ and 6) each for neutrons and protons. This configuration space will ensure a correct description not only for the moment of inertia, but also for the quadrupole moment, which receives contributions from many nucleons. The importance of the neutron $`i_{13/2}`$ and proton $`h_{11/2}`$ orbitals was mentioned in Ref. . However, we have found that the structure of the measured states is mainly determined by the $`i_{13/2}`$ protons, as one will see below.

The same Hamiltonian (including spherical single-particle, residual quadrupole–quadrupole, monopole pairing, and quadrupole pairing terms) as employed in all of the early PSM work is then diagonalized in the basis (1). The strength of the quadrupole-quadrupole force is determined such that it has a self-consistent relation with the quadrupole deformation $`ϵ_2`$ . The monopole-pairing force constants $`G_M`$ used in the present calculations are

$$\begin{array}{c}G_\text{M}=\left[17.1011.16\frac{NZ}{A}\right]A^1,\end{array}$$
(3)
with “$``$” for neutrons and “$`+`$” for protons. These are the same as those in the SD calculations for the $`A80`$ mass region , and have an 8$`\%`$ reduction from the values used for the $`A190`$ mass region . Finally, the strength parameter $`G_Q`$ for the quadrupole pairing is simply taken to be proportional to $`G_M`$. For the present calculation a standard proportionality constant of 0.16 is used.

We have applied this formalism to calculate energy levels of 108Cd for each spin and use the resulting wave functions to compute the matrix elements. In Fig. 1, the calculated energy levels are compared with data . As in most SD band experiments, the spin value of the measured energy levels was not determined experimentally because of lack of information of linking them to the known low-lying states. Assuming $`\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$, the authors in  estimated that the spin range for the 11 observed $`\gamma `$-rays is $`I=40(2)\mathrm{}60(2)\mathrm{}`$. The calculated transition energies E$`\gamma `$ are displayed in Fig. 1(a) together with data. The best fit between experiment and theory is achieved if we place the measured first E$`\gamma `$ at $`I=36\mathrm{}`$. We regard this as fairly good agreement in spin values between our calculation and the experimental estimation.

Static and dynamic moments of inertia, $`\mathrm{}^{(1)}`$ and $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$, are compared in Fig. 1(b). The most characteristic feature is that the theoretical $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ exhibits a peak, starting from $`I=10\mathrm{}`$ and ending at $`I=50\mathrm{}`$, with the centroid around $`I=36\mathrm{}`$. This corresponds to the clear slope change in the $`\mathrm{}^{(1)}`$ curve in the same spin range. As can be seen, the measured $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ falls nicely onto the right side of the peak in the theoretical curve if the spin values $`I=36\mathrm{}`$ for the measured first E$`\gamma `$ is assumed. With the same assumption, the experimental $`\mathrm{}^{(1)}`$ coincides with our calculated curve rather precisely.

The validity of the condition $`\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ can be further examined for the whole spin range. It is seen in Fig. 1(b) that the condition is nicely fulfilled at the beginning and at the end of the theoretical curves beyond the peak region. However, $`\mathrm{}^{(1)}`$ and $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ differ strongly for a wide range of spin values in between. The measured cascade of $`\gamma `$-rays stops at the top of the peak and the experiment did not identify any further states along the left side of the $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ peak.

The existence of such a peak in $`\mathrm{}^{(2)}`$ usually indicates a crossing of two (or more) bands with strong band interaction. The crossing can change the content of the wave functions for the spin states before and after the crossing. It is thus of interest to determine what the crossing bands are. To see this, a band diagram  is the most useful tool.

In the PSM, a band diagram is defined as the rotational energies of a set of bands calculated as the expectation values of the Hamiltonian with respect to projected quasiparticle states $`|\phi _\kappa `$ of Eq. (2). These are the PSM basis bands before configuration mixing. Fig. 2 shows the band diagram from the current calculation. We plot the ground (0-qp) band, three important 2-qp bands, and two representative 4-qp bands. In addition, the lowest (yrast) states for each spin obtained from band mixing are plotted as dots. In this diagram, we look for bands that are the lowest in energy (thus most influential on the yrast states) in the spin range of interest. It can be seen that the three 2-qp bands cross the ground band and become lower in energy at high spins. These bands are built on two 2-quasineutron states of the $`i_{13/2}`$ orbitals, coupled to ($`K=1/2K=3/2`$) and ($`K=3/2K=5/2`$) respectively, and one 2-quasiproton state of the $`i_{13/2}`$ orbitals, coupled to ($`K=1/2K=3/2`$). One sees that the proton 2-qp states (solid line in Fig. 2) define the lowest 2-qp band in the spin region where the first band crossing occurs. The inset to Fig. 2 shows clearly that the proton 2-qp band crosses the ground band at $`I=38\mathrm{}`$. The other two 2-qp bands associated with $`i_{13/2}`$ neutrons lie roughly 1 MeV higher than the proton 2-qp band and they cross the ground band at higher spin around $`I=46\mathrm{}`$. The 2-qp bands based on $`h_{11/2}`$ protons (not shown in Fig. 2) lie even higher, about 2 MeV above the lowest proton $`i_{13/2}`$ 2-qp band. Thus, the band diagram tells us that the proton $`i_{13/2}`$ 2-qp states may be the dominant component in the observed band structure.

As one has seen in Fig. 1, the measured $`\gamma `$-rays are suggested to be in the spin range $`I=36\mathrm{}56\mathrm{}`$. For this spin range, the proton 2-qp band is the lowest configuration, as shown in Fig. 2. We thus expect that the $`i_{13/2}`$ protons with $`K=1/2`$ and 3/2 should strongly influence the high spin properties of the observed states, leading to additional observable phenomena. Electromagnetic transitions are important in understanding the underlying physics and in testing theoretical models. Transition quadrupole moments measure the contribution of many orbits to the collective structure. A large polarization effect is normally expected if the wave functions contain significant components from particular orbitals. This should be seen in calculations of the total electrical quadrupole moment. On the other hand, the g-factor is more sensitive to the single-particle structure in wave functions because of the intrinsically opposite signs of the neutron and proton $`g_s`$. Therefore, we now discuss two additional physical quantities, the transitional quadrupole moment $`Q_t`$ and the g-factor.

The transition quadrupole moment $`Q_t`$ is related to the $`B(E2)`$ reduced transition probability through

$$Q_t(I)=\left(\frac{16\pi }{5}\frac{B(E2,II2)}{IK20|I2K}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(4)
The reduced transition probabilities $`B(E2)`$ from the initial state $`\psi ^{I_i}`$ to the final state $`\psi ^{I_f}`$ are given by

$$B(E2,I_iI_f)=\frac{e_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}{2I_i+1}|\psi ^{I_f}||\widehat{Q}||\psi ^{I_i}|^2.$$
(5)
In the calculations, we have used effective charges ($`e_{\mathrm{eff}}`$) of 1.5e for protons and 0.5e for neutrons, which are the same as in the previous PSM calculations .

The g-factor can be expressed as

$$g(I)=\frac{\psi _{M=I}^I|\widehat{\mu }_z|\psi _{M=I}^I}{\mu _NI}=\frac{\psi ^I\widehat{\mu }\psi ^I}{\mu _N\sqrt{I(I+1)}},$$
(6)
with $`\widehat{\mu }`$ the magnetic vector and $`\mu _N`$ the nuclear magneton. $`g(I)`$ can be written as a sum of proton and neutron contributions $`g_\pi (I)+g_\nu (I)`$, with

$`g_\tau (I)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mu _N\sqrt{I(I+1)}}}`$ (8)
$`\times \left(g_l^\tau \psi ^I\widehat{j}^\tau \psi ^I+(g_s^\tau g_l^\tau )\psi ^I\widehat{s}^\tau \psi ^I\right),`$
where $`\tau =\pi `$ or $`\nu `$, and $`g_l`$ and $`g_s`$ are the orbit and spin gyromagnetic ratios, respectively. We use the free values for $`g_l`$ and the free values damped by the usual 0.75 factor for $`g_s`$

$`g_l^\pi `$ $`=`$ $`1g_s^\pi =5.586\times 0.75`$ (9)
$`g_l^\nu `$ $`=`$ $`0g_s^\nu =3.826\times 0.75.`$ (10)
We emphasize  that the g-factor in the PSM is computed directly from the many-body wave function without a semiclassical separation of the collective and single-particle parts. In particular, because of the large configuration space employed, there is no need to introduce a core contribution, $`g_R`$, which is a model-dependent concept and not a measurable quantity.

The calculated $`Q_t(I)`$ values are plotted in Fig. 3(a) as squares. Our calculation gives a constant value of 9.9 $`e`$b up to spin $`I=20\mathrm{}`$. A smooth increase follows until $`Q_t`$ reaches the maximum value of 10.4 $`e`$b. These values are compared with the average value ($`>`$ 9.5 $`e`$b) from experiment . The increase in $`Q_t`$ (about 12$`\%`$ in the spin range roughly from $`I=20\mathrm{}`$ to $`I=50\mathrm{}`$) is associated with increased contribution of sharply down-sloping $`i_{13/2}`$ orbitals. We note that a larger basis deformation $`ϵ_2`$ used for construction of the shell model space will in general give rise to a larger quadrupole moment calculated from the obtained wave functions. Here, what we believe is more important is the clear increase in $`Q_t`$ near the band crossing region. Usually, a band crossing will cause a drop in $`Q_t`$ values.

To see that the major influence discussed above is mainly from the protons, not from the neutrons, we may study the rotational behavior of the g-factor. Due to the opposite sign of neutron and proton $`g_s`$ in (10), effects originating from neutrons and protons should be easily distinguished. As shown by squares in Fig. 3(b), our calculations indicate a significant increase of the g-factor around the band crossing region. The increase is rather pronounced ($`25\%`$). This indicates that starting from $`I=20\mathrm{}`$, components of the $`i_{13/2}`$ proton wave function become more and more dominant. In contrast, no increase can be seen if the proton 2-qp states are excluded from the calculation, as shown by the circles in Fig. 3(b). The slight decrease at higher spins is because the neutron 2-qp states will first cross the ground band (at $`I=46\mathrm{}`$) in the absence of the protons.

Thus, measurement of g-factors for several spin states and additional measurement of $`Q_t`$ should be able to test our predictions and provide a deeper understanding of the measured band. Excited bands with very extended shapes in 108Cd might also been observed; our calculations show that these are likely to be mainly of neutron $`i_{13/2}`$ 2-qp structure (see Fig. 2).

In summary, using the projected shell model, which has been successfully applied to a microscopic description of nuclear superdeformed structure in several mass regions, we have studied the recently measured highly deformed rotational band in 108Cd. Our suggested spin values for the experimental levels are within 2 spin units of the experimental estimation. The observed irregularity in the dynamic moment of inertia is attributed to the quasiparticle alignment of $`i_{13/2}`$ orbitals. Moreover, our calculations suggest that the important $`i_{13/2}`$ configurations are not built on neutrons but on protons, and that the measured states have a proton $`i_{13/2}`$ 2-qp structure. Rotational behavior of $`Q_t`$ and the g-factor has also been studied, with several predictions awaiting future experimental confirmation.

The present work provides a theoretical framework for a detailed structure study of nuclei with very extended shapes. One may expect that rotational bands in the neighboring nuclei could have similar properties and may be accessible in future experiment. Work on calculating neighboring nuclei is in progress. The present contribution has shown another example that the angular momentum projection is indeed a very efficient truncation scheme for a shell model calculation for medium or heavy nuclei with large quadrupole and pairing collectivities.

Research at the University of Tennessee is supported by the U. S. Department of Energy through Contract No. DE–FG05–96ER40983.


text:
# Chiral 𝑆𝑈(3) Symmetry and Strangeness

## 1 Introduction

A good understanding of the antikaon spectral function in nuclear matter is required for the description of $`K^{}`$-atoms  and the subthreshold production of kaons in heavy ion reactions . An exciting consequence of a significantly reduced effective $`K^{}`$ mass could be that kaons condense in the interior of neutron stars . The ultimate goal is to relate the in-medium spectral function of kaons with the anticipated chiral symmetry restoration at high baryon density. To unravel quantitative constraints on the kaon spectral functions from subthreshold kaon production data of heavy-ion reactions requires transport model calculations which are performed extensively by various groups . The next generation of transport codes which are able to incorporate more consistently particles with finite width are being developed . This is of considerable importance when dealing with antikaons which are poorly described by a quasi-particle ansatz .

There has been much theoretical effort to access the properties of kaons in nuclear matter . An antikaon spectral function with support at energies smaller than the free-space kaon mass was already anticipated in the 70’s by the many K-matrix analyses of the antikaon-nucleon scattering process (see e.g. ) which predicted considerable attraction in the subthreshold scattering amplitudes. This leads in conjunction with the low-density theorem  to an attractive antikaon spectral function in nuclear matter. Nevertheless, the quantitative evaluation of the antikaon spectral function is still an interesting problem. The challenge is first to establish a solid understanding of the vacuum antikaon-nucleon scattering process, in particular reliable subthreshold antikaon-nucleon scattering amplitudes are required, and secondly, to evaluate the antikaon spectral function in a systematic many-body approach.

The antikaon-nucleon scattering is complicated due to the open inelastic $`\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ channels and the presence of the s-wave $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and p-wave $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(1385)`$ resonances just below and the d-wave $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1520)`$ resonance not too far above the antikaon-nucleon threshold. In this talk we review recent progress obtained within the newly formulated $`\chi `$-BS(3) approach, for chiral Bethe-Salpeter approach to the SU(3) flavor group . It constitutes a systematic and non-perturbative application of the chiral SU(3) Lagrangian to the meson-baryon scattering problem consistent with covariance, crossing symmetry, large-$`N_c`$ sum rules of QCD and the chiral counting concept. The low-energy pion-, kaon- and antikaon-nucleon scattering data were reproduced successfully demonstrating that the chiral SU(3)flavor symmetry is a powerful tool to analyze and predict hadron interactions systematically. The amplitudes obtained in that scheme are particularly well suited for an application to the nuclear kaon dynamics, because it was demonstrated that they are approximately crossing symmetric in the sense that the $`KN`$ and $`\overline{K}N`$ amplitudes smoothly match at subthreshold energies. Therefore we believe that those amplitudes, which are of central importance for the nuclear kaon dynamics, lead to reliable results for the propagation properties of kaons in dense nuclear matter .

As was pointed out in  the realistic evaluation of the antikaon self energy in nuclear matter requires a self consistent scheme. In particular the feedback effect of an in-medium modified antikaon spectral function on the antikaon-nucleon scattering process was found to be important for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ resonance structure in nuclear matter. In this talk we present a selection of results obtained in a novel covariant many-body framework . Self consistency was implemented in terms of the free-space meson-nucleon scattering amplitudes, where the amplitudes of the $`\chi `$-BS(3) approach were used. Besides presenting realistic kaon and antikaon spectral functions we discuss the in-medium structure of the s-wave $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and p-wave $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(1385)`$ resonances.

## 2 Kaon- and antikaon-nucleon scattering

We briefly review the most striking phenomena arising when applying the chiral $`SU(3)`$ Lagrangian to the kaon- and antikaon-nucleon interaction processes. At leading chiral order these interactions are supposedly described by the Weinberg-Tomozawa term,

$`_{WT}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{8f^2}}(\overline{N}\gamma _\mu N)\left((^\mu K)^{}KK^{}(^\mu K)\right)`$ (1)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3i}{8f^2}}(\overline{N}\gamma _\mu \stackrel{}{\tau }N)\left((^\mu K)^{}\stackrel{}{\tau }KK^{}\stackrel{}{\tau }(^\mu K)\right),`$
where the parameter $`ff_\pi 92.4`$ MeV is known from the decay process of charged pions. In contrast to the successful application of the chiral Lagrangian in the flavor $`SU(2)`$ sector, its application to the strange sector of QCD is flawed by a number of subtleties if the rigorous machinery of chiral perturbation theory is applied. The leading interaction term (1) fails miserably in describing the s-wave scattering lengths of both kaons and antikaons off a nucleon. Most stunning is the failure of reproducing the repulsive $`K^{}p`$ scattering length . The chiral Lagrangian predicts an attractive scattering length at leading order instead. This is closely linked to the presence of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ resonance in the $`K^{}p`$ scattering amplitude just below the $`K^{}p`$ threshold. Considerable theoretical progress has been made over the last few years by incorporating the dynamics of that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ resonance into the chiral dynamics. The key point is to change approximation strategy and expand the interaction kernel rather than the scattering amplitude directly. That amounts to solving some type of coupled-channel scattering equation like the Lippmann-Schwinger or the Bethe-Salpeter equation. As a consequence the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ resonance is generated dynamically by coupled channel effects. A realistic description of the antikaon-nucleon scattering process requires the inclusion of all SU(3) channels $`\overline{K}N,\pi \mathrm{\Lambda },\pi \mathrm{\Sigma },\eta \mathrm{\Sigma },\eta \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`K\mathrm{\Xi }`$ together with correction terms predicted by the chiral $`SU(3)`$ Lagrangian. The number of free parameters controlling the chiral correction terms can be significantly reduced by insisting on sum rule relations as they arise from QCD in the large-$`N_c`$ limit. For a detailed description of an up-to-date scheme with a more complete list of references we refer to the recent work . In that work it is shown that the chiral $`SU(3)`$ Lagrangian does describe all low-energy pion-, kaon- and antikaon-nucleon scattering data fairly well, once chiral perturbation theory is applied to the covariant scattering kernel of the Bethe-Salpeter scattering equation.

In this talk we would like to discuss an aspect in more detail, which is particularly important when applying the chiral kaon- and antikaon-nucleon dynamics to kaon and antikaon propagation in dense nuclear matter. Crossing symmetry relates the $`\overline{K}N`$ and $`KN`$ scattering amplitudes at subthreshold energies. This manifests itself in the form of the dispersion-integral representation of the antikaon-nucleon scattering amplitude, $`\mathrm{T}_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\sqrt{s})`$, evaluated in forward direction,

$`\mathrm{T}_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\sqrt{s})\mathrm{T}_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\sqrt{s_0})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f_{KN\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2}{sm_\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_{KN\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2}{s_0m_\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}`$ (2)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{(m_Nm_K)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{ds^{}}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{ss_0}{s^{}s_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{T}_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\sqrt{s^{}})}{s^{}siϵ}}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _{(m_\mathrm{\Sigma }+m_\pi )^2}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{ds^{}}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{ss_0}{s^{}s_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{T}_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\sqrt{s^{}})}{s^{}siϵ}},`$
where we performed one subtraction at $`s=s_0`$ to help the convergence of the dispersion integral. For sake of clarity we consider here the isospin zero channel only. The scattering amplitude $`\mathrm{T}_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\sqrt{s})`$ shows unitarity cuts not only for $`\sqrt{s}>m_\mathrm{\Sigma }+m_\pi `$, representing for instance the inelastic process $`\overline{K}N\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$, but also for $`\sqrt{s}<m_Nm_K`$ reflecting the elastic $`KN`$ scattering process.

A problem arises because the kaon- and antikaon-nucleon scattering processes are described by two distinct Bethe-Salpeter equations. If the Bethe-Salpeter interaction kernel of the $`\overline{K}N`$ sector, that implies a particular scattering amplitude $`\mathrm{T}_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\sqrt{s})`$, is evaluated in perturbation theory, the amplitude $`\mathrm{T}_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\sqrt{s})`$ does not describe properly the unitarity cuts of the $`KN`$ channel, manifest at the subthreshold energy $`\sqrt{s}<m_Nm_K`$. Analogously, an evaluation of the kaon-nucleon scattering amplitudes in terms of a perturbative interaction kernel is not reliable far below threshold where the $`\overline{K}N`$ channel opens. Of course, crossing symmetry is reconciled once the interaction kernels of the $`KN`$ and $`\overline{K}N`$ sectors include the appropriate infinite class of Feynman diagrams. It is important to face this problem since the in-medium antikaon spectral function tests the subthreshold $`\overline{K}N`$ amplitudes,

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\overline{K}}(\omega ,\stackrel{}{q}=0)\left(\frac{1}{4}T_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(\omega +m_N)+\frac{3}{4}T_{\overline{K}N}^{(1)}(\omega +m_N)\right)\rho +\mathrm{}`$ (3)
where we recalled the low-density theorem written down for for the antikaon polarization function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\overline{K}}(\omega ,\stackrel{}{q})`$ . If an antikaon can propagate in dense nuclear matter with $`\omega <m_K`$ and say $`\stackrel{}{q}=0`$ for simplicity, the evaluation of the antikaon polarization function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\overline{K}}(\omega ,0)`$ at that energy requires the knowledge of the scattering amplitudes $`T_{\overline{K}N}^{(I)}(\sqrt{s})`$ at a subthreshold energy $`\sqrt{s}<m_N+m_K`$.

This problem is solved in the chiral coupled channel framework by supplementing the Bethe-Salpeter equation with an appropriate renormalization program that leads to the matching of the subthreshold $`KN`$ and $`\overline{K}N`$ amplitudes,

$`T_{\overline{K}N}^{(0)}(s){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{KN}^{(0)}(2s_0s)+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}T_{KN}^{(1)}(2s_0s),`$
$`T_{\overline{K}N}^{(1)}(s)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{KN}^{(0)}(2s_0s)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{KN}^{(1)}(2s_0s),`$ (4)
close to the optimal matching point $`s_0=m_N^2+m_K^2`$. This is a crucial input of the $`\chi `$-BS(3) approach developed in . Even though the renormalization of the chiral Lagrangian in perturbation theory is straightforward, this it not anymore the case once the infinite diagram summation implied by the Bethe-Salpeter equation is performed. An additional renormalization condition is needed. In  it was strongly argued that this condition is naturally provided by the crossing symmetry constraint. In Fig. 1 we demonstrate that the hyperon pole-subtracted scattering amplitudes, $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{KN}^{(I)}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\overline{K}N}^{(I)}`$, comply with the crossing identities (4) close to $`ss_0=m_N^2+m_K^2`$ approximatively. We are therefore convinced that our subthreshold antikaon-nucleon scattering amplitudes are determined reliably and well suited for an application to the nuclear kaon dynamics.

We close this section on the microscopic input by a presentation of total cross sections relevant for transport model calculation of heavy-ion reactions. We believe that the $`\chi `$-BS(3) approach is particularly well suited to determine some cross sections not directly accessible in scattering experiments. Typical examples would be the $`\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }\pi \mathrm{\Sigma },\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ reactions. Here the quantitative realization of the chiral SU(3) flavor symmetry including its important symmetry breaking effects are an extremely useful constraint when deriving cross sections not accessible in the laboratory directly. It is common to consider isospin averaged cross sections

$`\overline{\sigma }(\sqrt{s})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{I}{}}(2I+1)\sigma _I(\sqrt{s}).`$ (5)
The reaction dependent normalization factor is determined by $`N=(2I+1)`$ where the sum extends over isospin channels which contribute in a given reaction. In Fig. 2 we confront the cross sections of the channels $`\overline{K}N,\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ with typical parameterizations used in transport model calculations. The cross sections in the first column are determined by detailed balance from those of the first row. Uncertainties are present nevertheless, reflecting the large empirical uncertainties of the antikaon-nucleon cross sections close to threshold. The remaining four cross sections in Fig. 2 are true predictions of the $`\chi `$-BS(3) approach. We should emphasize that we trust our results quantitatively only for $`\sqrt{s}<1600`$ MeV. It is remarkable that nevertheless our cross sections agree with the parameterizations in  qualitatively up to much higher energies except in the $`\overline{K}N\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ reactions where we overshoot those parameterizations somewhat. Besides some significant deviations of our results from  at $`\sqrt{s}\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{th}}}<`$ 200 MeV, an energy range where we trust our results quantitatively, we find most interesting the sizeable cross section of about 30 mb for the $`\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ reaction. Note that here we include the isospin two contribution as part of the isospin averaging. As demonstrated by the dotted line in Fig. 2, which represent the $`\chi `$-BS(3) approach with s-wave contributions only, the p- and d-wave amplitudes are of considerable importance for the $`\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ reaction.

## 3 Kaon and antikaon propagation in nuclear matter

We begin with a discussion of kaon propagation in dense nuclear matter. The kaon self energy is evaluated in terms of the real parts of the s- and p-wave kaon-nucleon scattering amplitudes of . The resulting quasi-particle energy $`E_K(\stackrel{}{q})`$ is shown in Fig. 3 for nuclear saturation density, $`\rho _0`$, and 2 $`\rho _0`$. We neglect small rescattering effects proportional to $`(T_{KN})^n`$ with $`n2`$, which introduce a 15 $`\%`$ correction term at small kaon momenta only. A nuclear environment leads to an increase of the kaon energy where the effect is reduced as the kaon momentum $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ increases. Our result can be interpreted rather accurately in terms of scalar and vector potentials, parameterizing the kaon polarization function,

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_K(\omega ,\stackrel{}{q})\left(1.1m_K\omega +0.2{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{q}^2}{m_K}}\right)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}46.8}\mathrm{MeV}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\rho _0}},`$ (6)
for $`\omega =E_K(\stackrel{}{q})`$. We emphasize that the parameterization of the polarization function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_K(\omega ,\stackrel{}{q})`$ is reliable only at the quasi-particle energy of the kaon, $`E_K(\stackrel{}{q})`$, as is implied by (6). In particular, the parameterization (6) does not describe correctly any derivatives of the polarization function. The parameterization $`\mathrm{\Pi }_K(\omega ,\stackrel{}{q})`$ is in striking contradiction to the naive representation,

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_K(\omega ,0)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{3\omega }{4f^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{KN}}{f^2}}\right)\rho ,`$ (7)
in terms of the Weinberg-Tomozawa term and the so called kaon-nucleon sigma term, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{KN}>0`$, frequently seen in the literature. The scalar and vector terms in (6) and (7) have opposite signs. As we argued in the previous section, the chiral Lagrangian does not describe the kaon-nucleon scattering process correctly if evaluated in perturbation theory. The small attractive energy dependence of the self energy reflects important range terms required to describe the s-wave KN phase shifts. The rather small repulsive momentum dependence follows from the net-repulsion of the p-wave amplitudes. For non-zero momentum the small attractive vector potential in (6) leads to a reduction of the repulsion implied by the s-wave scattering lengths and p-wave scattering volumes. We checked that the parameterization (6) is valid to high accuracy for kaon momenta smaller than $`|\stackrel{}{q}|<600`$ MeV reproducing quantitatively the kaon quasi-particle energy $`E_K(\stackrel{}{q})`$. This is clearly demonstrated in Fig. 3 where we compare the spectrum following from the exact polarization operator with that one from the parameterization (6) at two different nuclear densities.

We turn to antikaon and hyperon resonance propagation in dense nuclear matter. In Fig. 4 we present the antikaon spectral function together with the antikaon-nucleon scattering amplitudes of selected channels at various nuclear matter densities, $`\rho `$, as evaluated in a self consistent manner in . The antikaon spectral function exhibits a rich structure with a pronounced dependence on the antikaon three-momentum. That reflects the coupling of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(1385)`$ hyperon states to the $`\overline{K}N`$ channel. Typically the peaks seen are quite broad and not always of quasi-particle type. As was emphasized in  the realistic evaluation of the antikaon propagation in nuclear matter requires the simultaneous consideration of the hyperon resonance propagation. The most important contributions, the s-wave $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and p-wave $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(1385)`$ resonances, experience important medium modifications as demonstrated in Fig. 4. The results at $`2\rho _0`$ should be considered cautiously because nuclear binding and correlation effects were not yet included in .

## 4 Summary

We reviewed the application of the microscopic $`\chi `$-BS(3) dynamics developed recently in  to kaon, antikaon and hyperon resonance propagation in nuclear matter. Of central importance for the microscopic evaluation of the kaon and antikaon spectral functions in cold nuclear matter are the kaon- and antikaon-nucleon scattering amplitudes, in particular at subthreshold energies. The required amplitudes are well established by the $`\chi `$-BS(3) approach and show sizeable contributions from p-waves not considered systematically so far . For the antikaon spectral function one finds a pronounced dependence on the three-momentum of the antikaon reflecting the presence of hyperon-nucleon-hole states. The quantitative evaluation of the antikaon self energy requires the self consistent consideration of the in-medium change of the hyperon resonance structures. At nuclear saturation density we reported attractive mass shifts for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(1385)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1520)`$ of about 60 MeV, 60 MeV and 100 MeV respectively. The resonance widths increase to about 120 MeV, 70 MeV and 90 MeV. Whereas the kaon spectral function is well approximated by a quasi-particle approach the antikaon spectral function shows typically a rather wide structure invalidating a simple quasi-particle description.

## References