text:
# Contribution of starburst mergers at 𝑧∼ 1 to the strong evolution of infrared and submillimeter deep surveys

## 1 Introduction

There has been much progress in the study of extragalactic evolution since far-infrared and submillimeter deep surveys detected a significant population of Ultraluminous Infrared Galaxies (ULIGs: $`L_{ir}>10^{12}L_{}`$) at high redshift ($`z14`$) (Hughes et al. 1998, 2000, Blain et al. 1999, Eales et al. 1999, Holland et al. 1999, Puget et al. 1999, Sanders 1999, Dole et al. 2000). The major interests of present research are the nature and evolution of these sources. Due to the lack of high resolution morphological studies, the origin of these faint SCUBA sources are still not clearly understood. Local ULIGs most likely arise from major galaxy mergers with high dust extinction for the central starburst or AGN activities (Sanders & Mirabel 1996, Murphy et al. 1996, Surace et al. 1998, 2000, Scoville et al. 2000). Nevertheless, more than 50$`\%`$ of the high redshift ultraluminous infrared objects and the optical counterparts of ISOCAM HDF-N galaxies are suggested to show indication of galactic interactions and merger signatures (Mann et al. 1997, Smail et al. 1999, Ivison et al. 1998, 2000, Sanders 1999). Meanwhile, estimation of their spectral energy distributions suggests that these galaxies are probably the high redshift counterpart of the local ULIGs discovered by the IRAS deep survey (Barger et al. 1998, 1999, Smail et al. 1998, Trentham et al. 1999, Frayer et al. 2000). Although the exact mechanism for formation of these interesting sources are not clear, there are certain reasons to say that majority of them may be major mergers of gas-rich disks accompanied by dust-shrouded nuclear starbursts or powerful Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN). SMM J14011+0252, and ERO J164502-4626.4 (HR10) are two such candidates with their central activities heavily hidden by dust extinction, and are suggested to be consistent with the evolutionary track of mergers–starbursts/AGN, probably elliptical galaxies in formation (Graham & Dey 1996, Cimatti et al. 1998, 1999, Frayer et al. 1998, 1999, Dey et al. 1999, Papadopoulous et al. 2001).

On the other hand, the source counts from present infrared and submilimetre surveys, such as IRAS, ISO and SCUBA all significantly exceed the non-evolving predictions. The extremely strong evolution is seen from the differential counts of the ISOCAM at $`15\mu m`$, with the remarkable upturn at $`S_{15}<3mJy`$ and a fast convergence when $`S_{15}0.3mJy`$. This striking feature is based on the data from several independent sky surveys (Elbaz et al. 1999, Chary & Elbaz 2001, Mazzei et al. 2001, Serjeant et al. 2001). Although there are many other possible evolutionary scenarios which could explain the present observations, the reason that we are encouraged to explore here a merger-driven galaxy evolution picture with binary aggregation dynamics is simply because the IRAS database and recent ISO and sub-mm deep surveys indicate that most of the luminous infrared sources are actually interacting/mergering systems. Also, the local IR luminosity function shows an excess over the Press-Schechter formula (Press & Schechter 1974, Lonsdale 1995, Pearson & Rowan-Robinson 1996, Guiderdoni et al. 1998, Roche et al. 1998, Rowan-Robinson et al. 1998, Dey et al. 1999, Sanders 1999, Dole et al. 2000, Efstathiou et al. 2000, Silk & Devriendt 2000, Serjeant et al. 2001, Takeuchi et al. 2001).

Considering mergers as a possible formation mechanism of Ultraluminous Infrared Galaxies both at high and low redshift, as well as their significant infrared emissions, Wang (1999) and Wang & Biermann (2000) discussed the effects of galaxy mergers on the strong evolution of the IRAS $`60\mu m`$ deep survey within a binary aggregation galactic evolutionary scheme. In this model, the bright tail of the infrared luminosity function is simulated in a consistent way for both the density and luminosity evolution due to the decrease of the merger fration with cosmic time and a merger-triggered infrared burst phase. They found that a luminosity-dependent infrared burst phase is crucial for the interpretation of the steep slope within a flux range of $`10mJy1Jy`$ by the IRAS $`60\mu m`$ deep survey. This means dusty starburst galaxies or AGNs from gas rich mergers at high redshift may experience an infrared burst phase around a transition redshift $`z1`$, and fade quickly within the merger time scale of that epoch. The more massive merger systems could have such infrared emission enhanced to a higher level and decrease even faster. This kind of speculation is based on the observation that ULIGs are usually more than a factor of 20 brighter than normal starburst galaxies. Although the detailed mechanism for such enormous infrared emission is still unclear, it is believed to be related to a special stage of the merger process when the dust mass and temperature are both dramatically increased (Kleinmann & Keel, 1987, Taniguchi & Ohyama 1998). Recent numerical simulation on the evolution of dusty starburst galaxies by Bekki & Shioya (2001) shows that there is a very strong photometric evolution during the merger process of two gas-rich disks, and a dramatic change of the spectral energy distribution (SED) around a cosmic time scale $`T1.3Gyr`$, when the two disks of the merger become very close and suffer from violent relaxation and the star formation becomes maximal ($`378M_{}yr^1`$). The infrared flux in this case could increase by one magnitude, especially for the far infrared wavelength range ($`60\mu m90\mu m`$) in the emitting frame.

The redshift distribution of the contributing sources for the steep slope at faint IRAS $`60\mu m`$ counts in the model of Wang & Biermann (2000) shows that the infrared burst phase around $`z1`$ could have comparable significance to the local IR sources. The question is then whether such an infrared burst phase, or such a population of ULIGs, could also sufficiently account for the strong evolution seen in other infrared wavelengths, especially at the ISOCAM $`15\mu m`$, ISOPHOT $`90\mu m`$, $`170\mu m`$ and SCUBA $`850\mu m`$. We thus try to make a reconciliatory evolution model which could fit at least the present statistics of the multi-wavelength deep surveys.

In this paper, we will first review the binary aggregation galaxy evolution model by Wang (1999) and by Wang & Biermann (2000) in section 2, where starburst/AGN activities may be triggered during the merger process, as well as an infrared burst phase from gas-rich mergers around a redshift of one. We will discuss the SED template we adopt in our calculation for the nearby starburst galaxies and a possible strong evolution of the spectral energy distribution of the dusty starburst merging systems at $`z1`$. We thus could further investigate whether the infrared burst phase from gas-rich mergers around redshift $`z1`$ is sufficient to account for the strong evolution also detected by ISO and submillimetre deep surveys. One set of cosmological parameters, namely $`H_0=50km/s/Mpc,\mathrm{\Omega }=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$ is adopted in the calculation.

## 2 Model

We adopt in this study the binary aggregation dynamics based on the Smoluchowski equation (1916) within a merger-driven galaxy evolutionary scheme, which simulates the evolution of a luminosity function due to galaxy mergers and predicts the redshift-dependent luminosity function of a population of galaxies evolving forwards in time from the formation epoch to match the observed local luminosity function, number counts and space distribution etc. Studies of Cavaliere & Menci (1993, 1997) show that this method could include more dynamics to describe a further step in galaxy-galaxy interactions within the scheme of direct hierarchical clustering (DHCs), and probably could help to alleviate some intrinsic problems in the DHC scenario, such as the overproduction of small objects as well as the difficulty of a reconciliation between the excess of faint blue counts and the flat local luminosity function. The numerical technique to solve the Smoluchowsky equation is a Monte-Carlo approach for the inverse-cascade merger tree. Readers are referred to Cavaliere & Menci (1993, 1997), Wang (1999) and Wang & Biermann (2000) for the details of the dynamics and the techniques.

Considering different evolutionary characteristics of different morphologies, we adopt in our study a multi-component model that contains starburst galaxies, dust shrouded AGNs and spiral galaxies as three major classes of infrared emitting sources. The local luminosity functions of the spiral and starburst galaxies at $`60\mu m`$ from Saunders (1990), and that of Seyferts from Ruch et al. (1993) are used to normalize the Monte-Carlo simulation. We adopt the mass-light relation of blue starburst galaxies, which is given by Cavaliere & Menci (1997) in a study of the excess of faint blue galaxies in optical surveys. The abundances of dust-shrouded AGNs are set to be $`50\%`$ and $`80\%`$ at local and high redshift based on the statistics from Hubble Space Telescope imaging survey of nearby AGNs and the cosmic X-ray background (Malkan et al. 1998, Gilli et al. 1999).

The modelling of a luminosity-dependent ultraluminous infrared burst phase from gas-rich mergers is described in detail by Wang & Biermann (2000). Here we give a brief review of the basic dynamics and the template SED we adopt in our model for the infrared luminous sources. We introduce also in this section the construction of a SED for the dusty starburst mergers at $`z1`$, normally with the luminosity $`L_{ir}>10^{12}L_{}`$, in order to further investigate such an evolutionary scenario at mid and far-infrared wavelengths from the ISO deep survey. Considering that star formation is triggered by mergers and proportional to $`M_{gas}/\tau `$ ($`\tau `$ is the dynamical interaction time scale), Cavaliere & Menci derived a mass-light ratio for dwarf galaxies, $`L/L_{}=(M/M_{})^\eta `$ (where $`\eta =4/3`$, if the cross section is purely geometrical). $`L_{}f(z,\lambda _0,\mathrm{\Omega }_0)`$ could be used to describe a redshift dimming, or a luminosity evolution. A power law prescription of $`f(z)(1+z)^\beta `$ is adopted in the model. Simplifying the color and K- corrections, they roughly get $`L_B\frac{L_{}}{M_{}^\eta }M^\eta =\frac{L_{}(0)}{M_{}^\eta f(z)M^\eta }`$. We assume in our model a luminosity ratio $`\frac{L_{60}}{L_B}M^{\stackrel{´}{\eta }}`$, which is consistent with current understanding of the nature of ULIGs, where people normally believe that the extremely infrared bright phase is due to the starburst merger events with the far-infrared luminosity $`L_{ir}`$ enhanced both by the accumulation of the dust mass and the increase of the dust temperature. This burst phase could enhance the infrared luminosity by a factor of about 20 over that of normal starburst galaxies (Kleinmann & Keel, 1987, Taniguchi & Ohyama 1998, Bekki & Shioya 2001). We give $`L_{60}\frac{L_{}(0)}{M_{}^\eta }f(z)M^{\eta +\stackrel{´}{\eta }}`$. $`\stackrel{´}{\eta }=1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.2}`$ is adopted in the calculation, which not only reasonably represents an infrared enhancement of about a factor of 20 for a typical ULIG with a mass of $`10^{12}M_{}`$ (the mass increases about one magnitude over that of normal starburst galaxies), but successfully interprets the steep slope of IRAS number counts. The scaling factor of the mass-light ratio here is normalized by the local luminosity function of the IRAS deep survey. We found from our best fit results that a population of infrared starburst sources, especially with spheroidal morphology, would have experienced very strong evolution in the past. A rate of $`\beta =3.7`$ in the luminosity evolution $`f(z)(1+z)^\beta `$ since a transition redshift $`z1`$ indicates a very strong evolution for such a population of starburst galaxies. This is at least comparable to, if not stronger than, QSOs (Roche et al. 1998, Lonsdale 1995, Pearson & Rowan-Robinson 1996, Rowan-Robinson et al. 1998, Sanders 1999, Dole et al. 2000, Franceschini et al. 1988, 2001). A differential dimming is simulated by $`L_{ir}(z\delta z)L_{ir}(z)^{1\zeta }`$ below a transition redshift $`z\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$, in order to match the observed local luminosity function by the IRAS deep survey. The simulation gives a best value $`\zeta \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.4}`$. This power law suppression also includes another physical reality, that the infrared luminous galaxies at the bright tail of the luminosity function become gas poor faster than the less luminous ones. Besides the merger rate decrease with cosmic time, this physical effect is very important for a good fit of the steep slope at IRAS $`60\mu m`$ number counts within a flux range of $`100mJy1Jy`$.

We reviewed above the dynamics and some important physical parameters in the current study, which are the same as those used in the previous paper of fitting IRAS $`60\mu m`$ number counts (Wang 1999, Wang & Biermann 2000). In the following, we will start to construct the spectral energy distribution for dusty starburst mergers around redshift $`z\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$, in order to extrapolate the calculation to mid- and far-infrared wavelengths. Because the unclear nature of the Ultraluminous Infrared Galaxies at high redshift, we do not have a good understanding of the dust environment and properties in these sources. An optically thin, single-temperature dust model is adopted as a first order approximation for a modified blackbody continuum of temperature $`T`$ at far-infrared wavelength in this calculation. The formula is simply given by $`S_\lambda =B_\lambda (T)\tau _\lambda B_\lambda K_\lambda `$. $`\tau _\lambda =K_\lambda \rho dl`$ is the dust opacity, and $`K_\lambda `$ the dust absorption coefficient ($`K_\lambda \lambda ^\beta `$ of $`\beta 12`$). In this case, the flux received at wavelength $`\lambda `$ is $`S_\lambda =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\lambda _e^\beta B(\lambda _e,T)}{4\pi dL^2(1+z)}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the scaling factor for a conservation of the dust absorbed energy and re-emitting energy, $`\lambda _e=\lambda /(1+z)`$ is the wavelength in the emitting frame. A flux ratio in the observer’s frame could be derived by $`\frac{S_{\lambda _1}}{S_{\lambda _2}}=\frac{\lambda _{1e}^\beta B(\lambda _{1e},T)}{\lambda _{2e}^\beta B(\lambda _{2e},T)}(\frac{\lambda _2}{\lambda _1})^{\beta +5}e^{\frac{hC}{k}(\frac{1}{\lambda _2}\frac{1}{\lambda _1})\frac{1+z}{T}}`$, where $`h`$ is Plank’s constant, $`k`$ is Boltzmann’s constant and $`C`$ is the speed of light. With a reasonable assumption for the dust emissivity power $`\beta `$ and the dust temperature $`T`$, we can easily extend our calculation to far-infrared wavelengths. The mid-infrared emission is more complicated than that of the far-infrared which could be well described by a single temperature blackbody spectrum by cold, large grain dust. The MIR emission properties are usually dominated by the radiation field of heated small grains and PAHs. These dust grains are normally heated stochastically, and are not in thermal equilibrium with the ambient radiation field. Thus the MIR continuum is most like a power law spectrum. In this calculation, we will not go to a detailed modelling of the MIR emission feature. Instead, we only modify the template SED of the starburst galaxy Arp220 by Silva et al. (1998), with the observational correlations of $`S_{15}/S_{60}`$ by IRAS and ISOCAM deep surveys for the ultraluminous case ($`L_{ir}>10^{11}L_{}`$) to represent the dusty starburst merging system around redshift one. The color ratio of $`S_{15}/S_{60}`$ for the ULIGs are a factor of about 5 lower than the mean value of the whole sample, which may imply a very complicated process to heat small grains during the merger process (Aussel et al. 2000, Dunne et al. 2000, Saunders et al. 2000, Chary & Elbaz 2001). Although there are many indications that the MIR continuum is correlated with the temperature of large grain dust (Dale et al. 2001), there is still no exact modelling for such a process. Our goal in this paper is to construct a simple SED for those luminous starburst mergers based on various obsevational correlations, which not only represents the observed trend for individual samples of a certain luminosity bin ($`L_{ir}>10^{12}L_{}`$), but matches the statistical results from the multiwavelength deep surveys. The number of sources $`dN`$ in a comoving volume $`dV`$ within the flux range $`S_\lambda `$ to $`S_\lambda +dS_\lambda `$, measured at wavelength $`\lambda `$, is defined by: $`dN=\rho (L_\lambda ,z)dV\frac{dL_\lambda }{dS_\lambda }dS_\lambda `$, $`\frac{dL_\lambda }{dS_\lambda }=\frac{4\pi d_L^2}{K(L_\lambda ,z)}`$, where $`K(L_\lambda ,z)=\frac{L_{\lambda _e}d\lambda _e}{L_\lambda d\lambda }`$ is the K-correction, and $`d_L`$ is the luminosity distance in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ dominated universe.

## 3 Results and discussions

The exact broad-band spectra of faint IR sources is still not well defined. Considering deep surveys at various IR/submm wavelengths would help to simultaneously constrain the evolution properties and the typical spectral energy distribution of such sources. We show in this section the comparison of our model prediction with the ISOCAM $`15\mu m`$ survey data, IRAS $`60\mu m`$, ISOPHOT $`90\mu m`$ and $`170\mu m`$ (FIRBACK Survey), as well as the SCUBA $`850\mu m`$ data. We also calculated the redshift distribution of these sources within a certain flux range and the cosmic infrared background level. Fig. 1 to Fig. 3 are the model predictions for the European Large Area ISO Survey (ELAIS). This survey covered 12 $`deg^2`$ of the sky in four main areas and was carried out with the ISOPHOT instrument onboard the Infrared Space Observatory ISO, which is at least an order of magnitude deeper than the IRAS $`100\mu m`$ survey. It therefore provides an important constraint for our model of galaxy evolution. The majority of the optical identification of the detected sources are for interacting pairs or small groups of galaxies, which may indicate that the ELAIS sample includes a significant fraction of luminous infrared galaxies from galaxy mergers. Although there is some discrepancy in the data reduction, previous estimations show that the source counts are mostly in agreement with strongly evolving starburst models, with a rapid increase in the fraction of ULIGs towards high redshift (Efstathiou et al. 2000, Matsuhara et al. 2000, Serjeant et al. 2001). From our calculations, we see in Fig. 1 to Fig. 3 that the differential number counts of $`90\mu m`$, $`15\mu m`$ and $`170\mu m`$ for a reliable subset of the detected sources could be sufficiently accounted for by the infrared burst phase when a population of ultraluminous infrared sources with $`L_{ir}>10^{12}L_{}`$ could be produced by the merger-triggered starburst/AGN activities at $`z1`$ (Kawara et al. 1998, Elbaz et al. 1999, Efstathiou et al. 2000, Dole et al. 2001). The enormous infrared emission, especially at far-infrared wavelengths is modelled by a modified black body spectrum which we discussed in the previous section. We assume that the starburst merging system has a similar MIR emission feature as Arp220, but modified by the observed flux correlation of $`S_{15}/S_{60}`$ from IRAS and ISOCAM deep surveys. We found from the calculation that the dust temperature of these starburst merging systems would be higher than that of the nearby starburst ULIGs Arp220, with dust temperature $`T=65K`$ and $`\beta =1.5`$ for a best fit result. Fig. 4 shows our model fitting for the differential counts of the IRAS $`60\mu m`$ deep survey, and Fig. 5 shows the integrated number counts of submillimeter SCUBA deep survey at $`850\mu m`$ (Hacking et al. 1987, Moshir et al. 1992, Barger et al. 1999, Blain et al. 1999). Almost all the number counts could be reproduced quite well by such an evolutionary scenario, except for the ISOCAM $`15\mu m`$ differential number counts, where our model prediction shows a slight excess at the bright part of $`S_{15}2mJy`$. The reason could be that we simply adopt the mid-infrared emission feature of Arp 220 for the case of the starburst merging system around $`z1`$. We hope to improve the current results by further theoretical modelling and additional observational constraints for the emission properties at mid infrared bands from future infrared missions.

The infrared background in this calculation gives 2.4$`nWm^2sr^1`$ at 15$`\mu m`$, 1.9$`nWm^2sr^1`$ at 60$`\mu m`$, 3.8$`nWm^2sr^1`$ at 90$`\mu m`$, 10.6$`nWm^2sr^1`$ at 170$`\mu m`$, which are all consistent with current upper limits from TeV detections, COBE results and the resolved fraction of the CIRB by the deep ISO surveys (Funk et al., 1998, Guy et al. 2000, Hauser & Dwek 2001).

The redshift distribution of the ISOCAM 15$`\mu m`$ contributing sources within the detected flux range ($`0.1mJy10mJy`$) from our model calculation is shown in Fig. 6. It gives a rough statistical finding that these luminous infrared sources cover a wide redshift range of $`0.52.5`$, peaking at $`z1`$. Comparing our model prediction and the redshift distribution of 15$`\mu m`$ sources with $`S_{15}>120\mu Jy`$ in the HDF North and the z-distribution of sources in the CFRS field (Flores et al. 1999, Cohen et al. 2000, Aussel et al. 2001), we found that the starburst mergers at $`z1`$ in our model are good candidates for a strongly evolving population that results in the strong evolution in mid- and far-infrared deep surveys. Recent redshift estimation from sub-mm follow up of 10 known FIRBACK 170$`\mu m`$ ISO sources by Scott et al. (2000) suggests that they are in a redshift range of $`01.5`$, still consistent with our current model predictions. However, these redshift determinations strongly depend on the assumption of the dust properties. We need further accurate measurements for the robust constraints of the models. We discussed in a previous paper that shifting the peak redshift of these ULIGs by a factor of 2 could affect the source count fitting of the IRAS 60$`\mu m`$ deep survey, especially for a low redshift peak ($`z<0.5`$). Strong evolution of the ULIGs to $`z1`$ may be the most reasonable case for the existing model constraints from both the infrared deep surveys and the cosmic infrared background upper limits from high energy TeV detections, as well as the indicated star formation history by UV/optical deep surveys (Lilly et al. 1996, Connolly et al. 1997, Madau et al. 1998).

We plot the redshift distribution of ULIGs ($`\nu L_\nu >10^{12}L_{}`$) to understand the evolutionary properties of the ULIGs from mergers in our model. A rapid increase in the number density of ULIGs up to $`z1`$ is seen in Fig. 7, which is actually consistent with a scenario where galaxy merger rates increase dramatically during that epoch as seen from various observations and theoretical considerations (Zepf & Koo 1989, Carlberg 1992, Burkey et al. 1994, Carlberg et al. 1994). However, the number density of ULIGs decreases beyond $`z23`$, which may reflect a stage when merger pairs are mostly dwarfs and the infrared emissions are less than $`10^{12}L_{}`$ even with intensive starburst activities triggered by mergers. In this scenario, an infrared luminous tail of the luminosity function may form at $`z1`$, with enormous infrared emission enhancement.

There is still no firm statistical basis for the classification of starbursts and AGNs from current spectroscopies. We thus adopt the observed AGN local luminosity function of Rush et al. (1993) as a model constraint, and assume in our calculations that the observed starburst galaxies and Seyferts follow the same evolutionary track, based on naive thinking that starburst/AGN may both be triggered by galaxy interactions. We know the subtle differences in the dust emission properties could result in a different fraction of their contribution. This is still far too early to discuss here. We thus adopt only the SED of the Cloverleaf quasar which represents a phase poor in cold gas, as well as the dust enshrouded phase of F10214+4724 as two typical AGN templates in our calculation. We know from the result that the AGN contribution is only a small fraction of the whole and our current model prediction is within the present understanding of this issue, i.e. the starburst powered ULIGs are dominating over the AGN powered ones (Fig. 7) and may take over at higher redshifts and in the higher luminosity case (Lutz et al. 1998, Tran et al. 2001).

## 4 Summary

We have described a galaxy evolutionary scenario with galaxy mergers in a CDM cosmology, where starburst and AGN activities may be triggered by the merger events. With a reasonable assumption of the ultraluminous infrared burst phase from gas rich mergers at high redshift, we sucessfully interpreted the strong evolution of IRAS 60$`\mu m`$ deep survey, leaving the infrared background still with a low limit of $`1.9nWm^2sr^1`$, consistent with the upper limits from recent TeV $`\gamma `$ ray detection of nearby Blazars.

Lacking a comprehensive understanding of the gas and dust environment of faint ISO sources, especially the starburst merging system at $`z1`$, we adopt the template spectral energy distribution such as that of Arp220 by Silva et al. (1998) as typical for nearby starburst galaxies. Meanwhile, we construct a simple SED for the starburst mergers at $`z1`$. The far-infrared emission in such a system is modelled by a single temperature, optically thin dust law with modified black body emission. The MIR emission feature is assumed to be similar to Arp 220, but modified by the flux correlation from IRAS and ISOCAM observations. In this case, we can further investigate such a merger-driven galaxy evolutionary scenario at other infrared and submillimeter wavelengths with ISO and SCUBA deep surveys. Our calculation shows that the current results of multi-wavelength deep surveys at ISOCAM 15$`\mu m`$, ELAIS 90$`\mu m`$, FIRBACK 170$`\mu m`$, IRAS 60$`\mu m`$ and SCUBA 850$`\mu m`$ number counts could be sufficiently accounted for by the merger-triggered infrared enhancement at $`z1`$ from our model with the dust temperature ($`T65K`$, and $`\beta 1.5`$), slightly higher than the local starburst galaxy Arp220. Future accurate redshift measurements and multiband photometries would provide a robust model check.

The background levels at these wavelengths are estimated from our model calculation, which gives 2.4$`nWm^2sr^1`$ at 15$`\mu m`$, 3.8$`nWm^2sr^1`$ at 90$`\mu m`$, 10.6$`nWm^2sr^1`$ at 170$`\mu m`$, still compatible with the cosmic infrared background level both from the upper limit of high energy TeV $`\gamma `$ ray detection of nearby Blazars and from COBE and ISO results.

The redshift distribution of the luminous infrared sources within the ISOCAM $`15\mu m`$ detection flux range ($`0.1mJy10mJy`$) from our calculation is plotted in Fig. 6. The redshift distribution of these sources cover a wide redshift range from $`0.5\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}2.5}`$ and peak around a mean redshift of $`z1`$.

We also plot the redshift distribution of ULIGs ($`\nu L_\nu >10^{12}L_{}`$) in Fig. 7. It shows a strong increase in the ultraluminous infrared population untill a mean redshift $`z1`$, and decreases by a factor of about 2 by $`z23`$. This is probably the major difference between our current calculation and other models, and indicates that the infrared luminous tail may be produced at the cosmic epoch of $`z1`$, when the merger rate and the size of parent galaxies are suitable for such an infrared emission enhancement.

A brief discussion about the fraction of contribution from AGNs and starbursts from our calculation is given in section 3. We assumed in the model a similar evolutionary track for the starburst galaxies and AGNs based on the idea that both AGNs and starbursts may be triggered by galaxy interactions, where the AGN population is constrained by the observed Local Luminosity Function of Seyferts from Rush et al. (1993). Given the uncertainty of the dust properties of ULIGs, especially for those harboring an AGN in the center, we adopt here only two typical SED templates of Cloverleaf QSO and F10214+4724. In this case, we give a rough estimation of the relative abundance of AGN and starburst-powered ULIGs ($`L_{ir}>10^{12}L_{}`$) of $`1/5`$, which seems to be close to the recent submillimeter observations of Chandra X-ray sources (Almaini et al. 1999, Barger et al. 2001, Gunn & Shanks 2001).

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowlege helpful discussions with Profs. P. L. Biermann, M. Harwit, N. Arimoto, and Drs. K. Kawara, Y. Taniguchi, T. Yamada. YPW would like to thank the anonymous referee for the kind suggestions and comments, which helped to improve the paper significantly. YPW is supported by NSFC 10173025 and Chinese post-doctor science foundation. YPW is also very grateful for the hospitality of NAOJ staff and COE fellowship of Japan, where the final stage of this work was finished.


format: text

text:
# Inequalities for generalized parton distributions 𝐻 and 𝐸

## Abstract

New positivity bounds are derived for quark and gluon generalized parton distributions $`H`$ and $`E`$ in spin 1/2 hadrons.

Institute for Theoretical Physics II, Ruhr University Bochum,

D-44780 Bochum, Germany

Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina, St. Petersburg, 188350, Russia

Generalized parton distributions (GPDs) appear in the QCD description of a number of hard exclusive processes . Since our current knowledge about GPDs is rather poor, any additional information deserves attention and from this point of view so called positivity bounds  for GPDs are of certain interest.

In this paper the following bound for quark generalized parton distributions $`H_q`$ and $`E_q`$ of spin 1/2 hadrons is derived

$$\left|H_q(x,\xi ,t)\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_q(x,\xi ,t)\right|^2+\left|\frac{\sqrt{t_0t}}{2M\sqrt{1\xi ^2}}E_q(x,\xi ,t)\right|^2\frac{q(x_1)q(x_2)}{1\xi ^2}.$$
(1)
Here the notation of X. Ji is used for quark GPDs $`H_q,E_q`$ and for their arguments $`x,\xi ,t`$ (see e.g. ), $`M`$ is the mass of the hadron. The usual (forward) unpolarized quark distributions $`q(x)`$ are taken at values of $`x`$

$$x_1=\frac{x+\xi }{1+\xi },x_2=\frac{x\xi }{1\xi }.$$
(2)
Inequality (1) is written for the region $`|\xi |<|x|`$. The parameter

$$t_0=\frac{4\xi ^2M^2}{1\xi ^2}$$
(3)
corresponds to the maximal value of the squared momentum transfer $`t`$ ($`tt_00`$).

Obviously the bound (1) is stronger than the following inequality derived in ref.

$$\left|H_q(x,\xi ,t)\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_q(x,\xi ,t)\right|\sqrt{\frac{q(x_1)q(x_2)}{1\xi ^2}},$$
(4)
We also see from inequality (1) that

$$\frac{\sqrt{t_0t}}{2M}\left|E_q(x,\xi ,t)\right|\sqrt{q(x_1)q(x_2)}.$$
(5)
This inequality agrees with the one derived in ref.  up to a typo there .

As noticed in ref.  the earlier bound suggested in refs.

$$\left|H_q(x,\xi ,t)\right|\sqrt{\frac{q(x_1)q(x_2)}{1\xi ^2}}$$
(6)
is not justified since in its derivation the $`E_q`$ contribution was overlooked.

The derivation of inequality (1) starts from the positivity condition

$$\underset{k=1}{\overset{2}{}}b_\lambda ^k\frac{d\tau }{2\pi }e^{i\tau x_k(P_kn)}\psi _\alpha \left(\tau n\right)|P_k,\lambda ^20.$$
(7)
The lhs contains a superposition of two states obtained by acting with quark fields $`\psi `$ on a nucleon state $`|P_k,\lambda `$ with momentum $`P_k`$ and polarization $`\lambda `$; $`n`$ is a light-cone vector and the coefficients $`b_\lambda ^k`$ are arbitrary. Expanding this squared sum and summing over the “good” spin components $`\alpha `$ of the quark fields we obtain

$$b_\lambda ^1b_\lambda ^1q(x_1)+b_\lambda ^2b_\lambda ^2q(x_2)$$

$$+\sqrt{1\xi ^2}\left[b_\lambda ^{}^1_{\lambda ^{}\lambda }^q(\mathrm{\Delta })b_\lambda ^2+b_\lambda ^{}^2_{\lambda ^{}\lambda }^q(\mathrm{\Delta })b_\lambda ^1\right]0.$$
(8)
The summation over repeated indices is implied, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=P_2P_1`$, and the matrix $`_{\lambda ^{}\lambda }^q`$ is taken from ref.

$$_{\lambda ^{}\lambda }^q(\mathrm{\Delta })=\left(\begin{array}{cc}H_q\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_q& \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^1+i\mathrm{\Delta }^2}{2M(1\xi ^2)}E_q\\ \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^1+i\mathrm{\Delta }^2}{2M(1\xi ^2)}E_q& H_q\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_q\end{array}\right)_{\lambda ^{}\lambda }.$$
(9)
The inequality (8) should hold for any $`b_\lambda ^k`$. Taking special cases $`b_{}^1=b_{}^2=0`$ or $`b_{}^1=b_+^2=0`$ one reproduces the bounds (4), (5).

Now let us consider the case of arbitrary $`b_\lambda ^k`$. One can rewrite inequality (8) in the following form

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{1\xi ^2}}\left[b_\lambda ^1b_\lambda ^1q(x_1)+b_\lambda ^2b_\lambda ^2q(x_2)\right]+\left(b_\lambda ^1b_\lambda ^2+b_\lambda ^2b_\lambda ^1\right)\left(H_q\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_q\right)$$

$$+i\left(b_{\lambda _2}^1b_{\lambda _1}^2b_{\lambda _2}^2b_{\lambda _1}^1\right)\left(\mathrm{\Delta }^1\sigma ^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2\sigma ^1\right)_{\lambda _2\lambda _1}\frac{E_q}{2M(1\xi ^2)}0$$
(10)
where $`\sigma ^k`$ are Pauli matrices. Rotating the spinor indices $`\lambda `$ of $`b_\lambda ^k`$ by an $`SU(2)`$ transformation one can diagonalize $`\mathrm{\Delta }^1\sigma ^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2\sigma ^1|\mathrm{\Delta }_{}|\sigma ^3`$ so that the inequality takes the form

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{1\xi ^2}}\left[b_\lambda ^1b_\lambda ^1q(x_1)+b_\lambda ^2b_\lambda ^2q(x_2)\right]$$

$$+\left(b_\lambda ^1b_\lambda ^2+b_\lambda ^2b_\lambda ^1\right)\left(H_q\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_q\right)$$

$$+i\left(b_{\lambda _2}^1b_{\lambda _1}^2b_{\lambda _2}^2b_{\lambda _1}^1\right)|\mathrm{\Delta }_{}|\sigma _{\lambda _2\lambda _1}^3\frac{E_q}{2M(1\xi ^2)}0.$$
(11)
We see that we have two independent inequalities for $`b_+^k`$ and $`b_{}^k`$

$$\underset{k,k^{}}{}b_\pm ^k^{}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{q(x_1)}{\sqrt{1\xi ^2}}& H_q\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_q\pm i\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_{}|E_q}{2M(1\xi ^2)}\\ H_q\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_qi\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_{}|E_q}{2M(1\xi ^2)}& \frac{q(x_2)}{\sqrt{1\xi ^2}}\end{array}\right)_{k^{}k}b_\pm ^k0.$$
(12)
The positivity of this quadratic form immediately leads us to the constraint

$$\left(H_q\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_q\right)^2+\left(|\mathrm{\Delta }_{}|\frac{E_q}{2M(1\xi ^2)}\right)^2\frac{q(x_1)q(x_2)}{1\xi ^2}.$$
(13)
Taking into account that

$$t=\frac{4\xi ^2M^2+|\mathrm{\Delta }_{}|^2}{1\xi ^2}$$
(14)
one arrives at the result (1).

Note that excluding $`E_q`$ from the bound (1) we obtain a constraint on $`H_q`$

$$|H_q(x,\xi ,t)|\sqrt{\left(1\frac{t_0}{t}\right)^1\frac{q(x_1)q(x_2)}{1\xi ^2}}.$$
(15)
Since $`tt_00`$ this bound is weaker than the obsolete bound (6).

In a similar way one can derive the following bound for the gluon GPDs $`H_g,`$ $`E_g`$ (normalized according to the convention of ref. )

$$\left|H_g(x,\xi ,t)\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_g(x,\xi ,t)\right|^2$$

$$+\left|\frac{\sqrt{t_0t}}{2M\sqrt{1\xi ^2}}E_g(x,\xi ,t)\right|^2\frac{x^2\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}g(x_1)g(x_2)$$
(16)
where $`g(x)`$ is the forward gluon distribution. In particular, this allows us to to reproduce the following result from ref.

$$\left|H_g(x,\xi ,t)\frac{\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}E_g(x,\xi ,t)\right|\sqrt{\frac{x^2\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}g(x_1)g(x_2)}.$$
(17)
By analogy with (15) we find from (16)

$$|H_g(x,\xi ,t)|\sqrt{\left(1\frac{t_0}{t}\right)^1\frac{x^2\xi ^2}{1\xi ^2}g(x_1)g(x_2)}.$$
(18)
Although the inequalities derived here are stronger than the bounds on GPDs found earlier, one should not consider the new results as the best final estimates. Indeed, the derivation included the summation over quark polarization indices in the lhs of (7) and some information could be lost at this step.

I appreciate discussions with A. Belitsky, J.C. Collins, M. Diehl, N. Kivel, D. Müller, V.Yu. Petrov, M.V. Polyakov, A.V. Radyushkin, M. Strikman and O. Teryaev.


text:
# Chandra Spectroscopy of Pulsars and their Wind Nebulae

## 1. Introduction

Recent observation of pulsars associated with supernova remnants obtained with the Chandra X-ray observatory (Weisskopf, O’Dell & van Speybroeck 1996) are providing an unprecedentedly detailed view of pulsar wind nebulae. For the first time, emission features involving wisps, co-aligned toroidal structures, and axial jets are fully resolved in X-rays on arcsecond scales. These features, similar to those seen from the optical Crab nebula, are now found to be common to young, energetic pulsar in supernova remnants (Gotthelf 2001). Herein we present preliminary spectral analysis of several PWNe observed with Chandra, which, collectively, suggest a fundamental observational relationship between the spectral characteristics of pulsars and their pulsar wind nebulae.

Table 1 presents spectral results from a sample of Chandra pulsars which have characteristic wind nebulae. A summary of these objects along with references and images can be found in Gotthelf (2001). All observations were obtained with the ACIS-CCD camera which is sensitive to X-rays in the 0.2–10 keV band with an energy resolution of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E/E0.1`$ at $`1`$ keV. The on-axis point spread function is slightly undersampled by the CCD pixels ($`0.5^{\prime \prime }`$) allowing us to isolate the pulsar emission from that of the nebula. Except for N157B, which serendipitously fell on ACIS-I0, all data were obtained with ACIS-S3. The data were collected in nominal spectral (“FAINT”) and timing (3.24 s) mode and reduced and analyzed using the latest version of CIAO (CIAO 2.2/CALDB v.2.9). Starting with the Level 1 processed event files we corrected the event data for CTI effects (Townsley et al. 2001) and applied the standard Level 2 filtering criteria, then further rejected time intervals of anomalous background rates.

aRanked by increasing averaged PWN photon index.
bValues for the following objects were taken from the literature: Crab: Willingale et al. (2001); N157B: Wang & Gotthelf 1998.
cThe value for the Crab pulsar has been obtained from the literature. The measured photon-indices have been corrected for pile-up as discussed in the text.
dPulsed PI value references: Vela: Strickman, Harding & Jager (1999);G11.2-0.3: Torii et al. (1997); Kes 75: Gotthelf et al. (2000); Crab: Pravdo, Angelini & Harding (1997); N157B: Marshall et al. (1998).

For each object listed in Table 1, we extracted spectra from the PWN, pulsar core, and background, when available, or obtained spectral parameters from the literature as indicated. For the core spectra, the brightest central pixels were extracted based upon data above 4.0 keV, where the core emission is substantially greater than that of the surrounding nebula. The nebula itself was then extracted from the region above which the background was constant, excluding the core. Large variations in background rates and size of both the nebula and the central source amongst observations precluded the use of a standard extraction aperture. Custom spectral response matrix functions (RMFs) were provided with the CTI correction software, and ancillary response functions (ARFs) were created according to standard CIAO 2.2 procedures, using the QEU calibration files similarly provided. All spectra were grouped to a minimum of 50 counts per spectral bin.

We fit the resultant background-subtracted pulsar and PWN spectra with a power-law model above $`2`$ keV using the latest version of XSPEC (v11.1). The spectral fits to the core included a convolution model to account for pileup effects on the spectra. Table 1 lists the spectral parameters obtained for each object; the values for the Crab and N157B have been obtained from the literature (Willingale et al. (2001), Wang & Gotthelf 1998, respectively). No measurement of the pulsed spectrum for 3C58 is currently available. Absorption values were obtained by fitting the nebula spectra with an absorbed power-law above 0.6 keV, and were subsequently frozen for all future fits.

The best-fit linear relationship between core and PWN photon indices is shown in Figure 1. We expect that the linear relationship seem in Fig. 1 may steepen slightly as we more fully account for pileup effects in the spectra. We note that the pileup corrected photon indices are likely subject to change due to the preliminary nature of the pileup model implementation, and suggest caution until these issues are resolved, but expect the basic result to remain unchanged.

We also note that due to extreme pileup effects and the brightness of its nebulae compared to the brightness of its core, SNR 0540-69 has not been included pending a more detailed analysis of the available data.

As a check to our final spectral results and to look for any systematic effect due to pile-up, we compare our measured power-law indices with those obtained from the literature for the pulsed emission for each source (Figure 2). Although they need not be the same, it is reassuring that they agree to within measurement errors.

## 2. Results

The photon indices obtained from this analysis show a trend that the average PWNe photon indices are consistently steeper than their core’s photon indices by a factor of one-half to one. We suggest that this relationship is linear, with the form $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{PWN}=0.8\times \mathrm{\Gamma }_{Core}+0.8`$. This trend may be due to a number of factors. It may imply that the synchrotron spectrum frequency break occurs close to the neutron star, that there is a fundamental difference in emission mechanisms between the two regions, or that the nebula is being powered by the core and that the steepening is due to synchrotron burnoff or a comparable aging mechanism.

Chandra is the first telescope able to spatially resolve the neutron star from the nebula. Previous spectral observation of pulsars are likely to be strongly contaminated by PWN emission. For example, we see no clear relationship between the power-law spectral index obtained for these pulsars by ASCA with any of those measured by Chandra. As more crab-like pulsars are observed and analyzed, a more complete picture of their morphological and spectral characteristics comes into view, paving the way for future models and simulations.

### Acknowledgments.

This work made possible by NASA LTSA grant NAG 5-7935. C.M.O. also acknowledges the support of the I.I. Rabi Scholars Program at Columbia University.

## References

Gotthelf, E. V., Vasisht, G., Boylan-Kolchin, M., et al. 2000, ApJ, 542, L37

Gotthelf, E. V. 2001, Proc. The 20th Texas Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics, AIP Press; astro-ph/0105128

Marshall, F. E., Gotthelf, E. V., Zhang, W., et al. 1998, ApJ, 499, L179

Pravdo, S. H., Angelini, L., & Harding, A. K. 1997, ApJ, 491, 808

Torii, K., Tsunemi, H., Dotani, T., & Mitsuda, K. 1997, ApJ, 489, L145

Townsley, L. K., Broos, P. S, Garmire, G. P., Nousek, J. A., ApJ, 534, L139

Strickman, M. S., Harding, A. K., & de Jager, O. C. 1999, ApJ, 524, 373

Wang, Q. D. & Gotthelf, E. V. 1998, ApJ, 509, L109

Weisskopf, M. C. O’Dell, S. L., van Speybroeck, L. P. 1996, Proc. SPIE 2805, Multilayer and Gazing Incidence X-ray/EUV Optics III, 2

Willingale, R., Aschenbach, B., Griffiths, R. G., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, L212


text:
# Untitled Document

A Note on Arithmetic Cohomologies for Number Fields

Lin WENG

Graduate School of Mathematics, Nagoya University, Japan

In this short article, we develop a new cohomology theory for number fields as a part of our Program for Geometric Arithmetic. 1. Arithmetic Cohomology Groups Let $`F`$ be a number field with discriminant $`\mathrm{\Delta }_F`$. Denote its (normalized) absolute values by $`S_F`$, and write $`S_F=S_{\mathrm{fin}}\stackrel{}{}S_{\mathrm{}}`$, where $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ denotes the collection of all archimedean valuations. For simplicity, we use $`v`$ (resp. $`\sigma `$) to denote elements in $`S_{\mathrm{fin}}`$ (resp. $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$).

Denote by $`𝐀=𝐀_F`$ the ring of adeles of $`F`$, and $`\mathrm{Gl}_r(𝐀)`$ the rank $`r`$ general linear group over A, and write $`𝐀:=𝐀_{\mathrm{fin}}𝐀_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\mathrm{Gl}_r(𝐀):=\mathrm{Gl}_r(𝐀)_{\mathrm{fin}}\times \mathrm{Gl}_r(𝐀)_{\mathrm{}}`$ according to their finite and infinite parts.

For any $`g=(g_{\mathrm{fin}};g_{\mathrm{}})=(g_v;g_\sigma )\mathrm{Gl}_r(𝐀)`$, define the injective morphism $`i(g):=i(g_{\mathrm{}}):F^r𝐀_{\mathrm{}}^r`$ by $`(f)(g_\sigma f)`$, $`F^r(g):=\mathrm{Im}\left(i(g)\right)`$ and

$$𝐀^r(g):=\{(a_v;a_\sigma )𝐀^r:fF^r\mathrm{s}.\mathrm{t}.g_v^1(a_v)𝒪_v^r,g_v^1(f)𝒪_v^r,v\mathrm{and}(a_\sigma )=i(g_{\mathrm{}})(f)\}.$$

Then we have the following 9-diagram with all columns and roots exact:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccc}& & 0& & 0& & 0& & \\ & & & & & & & & \\ 0& & 𝐀^r(g)F^r(g)& & 𝐀^r(g)& & 𝐀^r(g)/𝐀^r(g)F^r(g)& & 0\\ & & & & & & & & \\ 0& & F^r(g)& & 𝐀^r& & 𝐀^r/F^r(g)& & 0\\ & & & & & & & & \\ 0& & F^r(g)/𝐀^r(g)F^r(g)& & 𝐀^r/𝐀^r(g)& & 𝐀^r/𝐀^r(g)+F^r(g)& & 0\\ & & & & & & & & \\ & & 0& & 0& & 0.& & \end{array}$$

Motivated by this and Weil’s adelic cohomology theory for divisors over algebraic curves, (see e.g., \[Serre\] and \[Weil\]), we introduce the following Definition. For any $`g\mathrm{GL}_r(𝐀)`$, define its 0-th and 1-st arithmetic cohomology groups by

$$H^0(F,g):=𝐀^r(g)F^r(g),\mathrm{and}H^1(F,g):=𝐀^r/𝐀^r(g)+F^r(g).$$

Theorem. (Serre Duality=Pontrjagin Duality) As locally compact groups,

$$H^1(F,g)\widehat{H^0(F,k_Fg^1)}.$$

Here $`k_F`$ denotes an idelic canonical element of $`F`$. Remark. For many $`vS_{\mathrm{fin}}`$, denote $`_v`$ the local differential of $`f_v`$, the $`v`$-completion of $`F`$ at $`v`$. Denote by $`𝒪_v`$ the valuation ring and $`\pi _v`$ any local parameter. Then $`_v=\pi _v^{\mathrm{ord}_v(_v)}𝒪_v`$ and we call $`k_F:=(_v^{\mathrm{ord}_v(_v)};1)`$ an idelic canonical element of $`F`$. Proof. As usual, introduce a basic character $`\chi `$ on A by $`\chi =(\chi _v^{(r)};\chi _\sigma ^{(r)})`$ where $`\chi _v:=\lambda _v\mathrm{Tr}_{𝐐_v}^{F_v}`$ with $`\lambda _v:𝐐_v𝐐_v/𝐙_v𝐐/𝐙𝐑/𝐙`$, and $`\chi _\sigma :=\lambda _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{Tr}_𝐑^{F_\sigma }`$ with $`\lambda _{\mathrm{}}:𝐑𝐑/𝐙`$. Then the pairing $`(x,y)e^{2\pi i\chi (xy)}`$ induces a natural isomorphism $`\widehat{𝐀^r}𝐀^r`$. Moreover, with respect to this pairing, $`\left(𝒪_v^r\right)^{}=_v^r`$ and $`F^r(g)^{}F^r(g^1)=F^r(k_Fg^1)`$. Thus, we could complete the proof by the fact that

$$\left(𝐀^r(g)F^r(g)\right)^{}=\left(𝐀^r(g)\right)^{}+\left(F^r(g)\right)^{}.$$

2. Arithmetic Counts Motivated by the fact that the dimension of a vector space is equal to the dimension of its dual space, one of the basic principal we adopt in counting locally compact groups is the following: Counting Axiom. If $`\mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}`$ is a count for a certain class of locally compact groups $`G`$, then $`\mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}(G)=\mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}(\widehat{G})`$.

Clearly, this is compactible with the Pontrjagin duality. Thus, our counts of arithmetic cohhomology groups should be based on Fourier analysis over these groups, or better, the Fourier inverse formula for Fourier transforms. In this way, practically, it is natural to use the Plancherel formula to do counts.

While we may use any reasonable test functions on $`𝐀^r`$ to do the counts, for simplicity and also as a continuation of a more classical mathematics, we set $`f:=_vf_v_\sigma f_\sigma `$. Here $`f_v`$ is the characteristic function of $`𝒪_v^r`$; $`f_\sigma (x_\sigma ):=e^{\pi |x_\sigma |^2/2}`$ if $`\sigma `$ is real; and $`f_\sigma (x_\sigma ):=e^{\pi |x_\sigma |^2}`$ if $`\sigma `$ is complex. Definition. (1) The arithemtic counts of the 0-th and the 1-st arithmetic cohomology groups for $`g\mathrm{Gl}_r(𝐀)`$ are defined to be

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}\left(H^0(F,g)\right):=& \mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}(H^0(F,g);f,dx):=_{H^0(F,g)}|f(x)|^2𝑑x;\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}\left(H^1(F,g)\right):=& \mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}(H^1(F,g);\widehat{f},d\xi ):=_{H^1(F,g)}|\widehat{f}(\xi )|^2𝑑\xi .\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`dx`$ denotes (the restriction of) the standard Haar measure on A, $`d\xi `$ denotes (the induced quotient measure from) the dual measure, and $`\widehat{f}`$ denotes the Fourier transform of $`f`$; (2) The 0-th and the 1-st arithmetic cohomologies of $`g\mathrm{Gl}_r(𝐀)`$ is defined to be

$$h^0(F,g):=\mathrm{log}\left(\mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}\left(H^0(F,g)\right)\right)\mathrm{and}h^1(F,g):=\mathrm{log}\left(\mathrm{\#}_{\mathrm{ga}}\left(H^1(F,g)\right)\right).$$

3. Serre Duality and Riemann-Roch For the arithmetic cohomologies just introduced, we have the following Theorem. (1) (Serre Duality) $`h^1(F,g)=h^0(F,k_Fg)`$; (2) (Riemann-Roch Theorem)

$$h^0(F,g)h^1(F,g)=\mathrm{deg}(g)\frac{r}{2}\mathrm{log}|\mathrm{\Delta }_F|.$$

Proof. (1) is a direct consequence of the topological version of Serre duality and the Plancherel Formula. (2) is a direct consequence of the Serre duality just proved and the Poisson summation formula by noticing that $`\left(H^0(F,g)\right)^{}=H^0(F,k_Fg^1)`$. This then completes the proof.

4. Comments Our work here is motivated by the works of Weil, Tate, van der Geer and Schoof, and Li, as well as the works of Lang, Arakelov, Szpiro, Neukirch, Connes, Deninger, Borisov, and Moreno. For details, please see the references below, in particular \[Weng2\]. As an application, we could introduce new yet natural non-abelian zeta functions for number fields, based on a discussion about intersection stability (\[Weng1\]). As it stands, one may start from only $`𝐀_{\mathrm{}}`$ to introduce arithmetic cohomogy groups and do corresponding counts. This has the advantage of being more concrete, and applies well say in Arakelov theory. On the other hand, a more general theory indeed works well for a much wider class of characters and test functions. We leave this to the reader. (See e.g., \[Tate\] and \[Moreno\].) Finally, I would like to thank Deninger for his discussion and encouragement.

REFERENCES

\[Borisov\] A. Borisov, Convolution structures and arithmetic cohomology, preprint

\[Connes\] A. Connes, Trace formula in noncommutative geometry and the zeros of the Riemann zeta function. Sel. math. New ser 5 (1999), no. 1, 29–106.

\[Deninger\] Ch. Deninger, Motivic $`L`$-functions and regularized determinants, Motives (Seattle, WA, 1991), 707-743, Peoc. Sympos. Pure Math, 55 Part 1, AMS, Providence, RI, 1994

\[GS\] G. van der Geer & R. Schoof, Effectivity of Arakelov Divisors and the Theta Divisor of a Number Field, Sel. Math., New ser. 6 (2000), 377-398

\[Lang1\] S. Lang, Algebraic Number Theory, Springer-Verlag, 1986

\[Lang2\] S. Lang, Fundamentals on Diophantine Geometry, Springer-Verlag, 1983

\[Li\] X. Li, A note on the Riemann-Roch theorem for function fields. Analytic number theory, Vol. 2, 567–570, Progr. Math., 139, Birkhäuser, 1996

\[Moreno\] C. Moreno, Algebraic curves over finite fields. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, 97. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991

\[Neukirch\] J. Neukirch, Algebraic Number Theory, Grundlehren der Math. Wissenschaften, Vol. 322, Springer-Verlag, 1999

\[Serre\] J.-P. Serre, Algebraic Groups and Class Fields, GTM 117, Springer (1988)

\[Tate\] J. Tate, Fourier analysis in number fields and Hecke’s zeta functions, Thesis, Princeton University, 1950

\[Weil\] A. Weil, Basic Number Theory, Springer-Verlag, 1973

\[Weng1\] L. Weng, Riemann-Roch Theorem, Stability and New Zeta Functions for Number Fields, version $`1\frac{1}{2}`$, preprint

\[Weng2\] L. Weng, A Program for Geometric Arithmetic, preprint


text:
# The field of NGC 6397 as a test for Galactic models

## 1 Introduction

Since the very beginning of modern astronomy, the distribution of stars over the night sky has been understood as evidence for the spatial distribution we now know as “the Galaxy”. Therefore, the use of star counts to constrain the Galactic structure has been the goal of generations of astronomers. In the long run, relevant progresses on that matter has been allowed by the increased amount of observational data, by the availability of modern computers and, last but not least, by the original approach to the problem presented twenty years ago in a seminal paper by Bahcall & Soneira (1980, see also 1984). Since that time star counts began an effective way of investigating the broad properties of stellar populations in our Galaxy (see e.g. Gilmore 1981, 1984, Gilmore & Reid 1983 and for a review Bahcall 1986 and Gilmore, Wyse & Kuijken 1989).

Galactic models, which predicts star counts in selected areas of the sky and for selected intervals of magnitude, give, at the same time, constraints about such relevant issues as the amount of mass in the form of stars and, in particular, about the contribution of faint stars to the dark-matter problem. One naturally expects that the contribution of intrinsically faint stars increases as the limiting magnitude of star counts is increased. Thus the limiting magnitude of the observational samples is a critic factor governing the possibility of constraining the Galactic abundance of such kind of stars. However, the difficulty in distinguishing faint images of stars from galaxies has limited most of the ground based work to V $`\stackrel{<}{_{}}`$ 20, reaching as extreme limit V$``$ 22 (e.g. Bahcall 1986, Reid & Majewski 1993, Haywood et al. 1997 and references therein).

This situation has been recently improved by observational data from the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). HST observations reach very faint magnitudes (V$``$30, see e.g. Williams et al. 1996) and even though the number of stars in the field of view is generally quite small they can be used to test Galactic models at the best resolution available. However the tests of Galactic models at faint magnitudes available in the literature are still very few and mainly based on a restricted number of stars (see Mendez et al. 1996, Reid et al. 1996, Basilio et al. 1996, Mendez & Guzman 1998).

In this paper we will take advantage of recent HST observations of the Galactic globular cluster NGC 6397, to discuss a rich sample of about thousand bona fide Galactic field stars which should be fairly complete (more than 95% detection level) down to $`V`$ 25, with a reliable evaluation of the completeness reaching $`V`$ 27 (King et al. 1998, hereafter KACP). This sample obviously gives the exciting opportunity of testing Galactic models over an almost unexplored range of magnitudes, with possible relevant outcomes concerning the abundance of faint stars. For the analysis we will use observational data of field stars in the direction of NGC 6397 from the second epoch HST observations. Field stars have been obtained by an accurate separation from cluster stars based on proper motions analysis (KACP). The area covered by observations is of 6.6 arcmin2 centered at the Galactic coordinates $`l=337^{}.9`$, $`b=11^{}.7`$. Figure 1 shows the $`(VI,V)`$ color–magnitude diagram for the about 1000 stars whose proper motion is significantly different from that of the NGC 6397 stellar population (cf. Fig.1 in KACP).

In Section 2 we will use these data to discuss the predictions of the Bahcall-Soneira Galaxy model (Bahcall 1986) which has been widely used by observers to predict the number of stars of different types, colors and apparent magnitude ranges in different fields of interest (see e.g. Boeshaar & Tyson 1985, Flynn & Freeman 1993, Lasker et al. 1990, Stuwe 1990, Basilio et al. 1996). Bahcall and Soneira assumed that the Galaxy is simply composed by a disk, with a scale height of a few hundred parsecs, and a more or less spherical spheroid. The Bahcall-Soneira model, as further improved mainly to account for interstellar reddening and obscuration, was proved to be in good agreement with available observations (see e.g Bahcall 1986, Gould, Bahcall & Maoz 1993 and references therein) and the export code was made available on the Web to the scientific community in 1995. However at faint magnitudes such an agreement is strongly dependent on the assumption about the luminosity function (LF) of faint main sequence (MS) stars. As a result, in Sect.3, we will show that the above quoted agreement vanishes for several recent evaluations of the actual LF of either the disk or the halo components.

The need for more complex Galactic models has been advanced in 1983 by Gilmore & Reid, who firstly suggested the occurrence of an extended “thick disk” population consisting of stars with spatial and kinematic properties intermediate between disk and spheroid. Starcounts is not the best way to constrain this third component because similar results could be obtained either with a thick disk or without it in dependence of the adopted model parameters (disk/thick disk scale height, scale lenght and normalizations). However detailed analysis which, in addition to the star counts, take into account the velocity distribution of local stars, support the need for a thick disk component (Ojha et al. 1996, Wyse & Gilmore 1995, Norris & Ryan 1991, Casertano, Ratnatunga & Bahcall 1990.)

However up to now, sensitively different values for the thick disk structural parameters (density law, local density etc..) have been proposed (see e.g. Reid & Majewski 1993, Yamagata & Yoshii 1992, Ojha et al. 1996, Mendez & Guzman 1998). Thus the situation is not yet well defined and in Sect.4 we will use our data to test some three-component models currently available in the literature. In this context, one has to remind that with very faint observations it should be possible to resolve the Galaxy into its component populations. This because for V$`>`$19, at least for high Galactic latitudes, the various components are expected to contribute with different colors: the bluer colors are dominated by spheroid stars, the reddest objects do belong to the disk population, while the intermediate colors should be dominated by thick disk stars (see Basilio et al. 1996).

Unfortunately, our data refer to a sky region of somewhat low latitude, which gives a sensitive gain in the number of stars but which - as we will find - makes difficult a clear separation among the various populations. As a result we will find that either two-component or three component models give an equally satisfactory agreement with magnitude and color observational counts. No one of the current Galactic models appears in agreement with observations for some extreme assumptions on the faint LF, whereas the data do not allow to discriminate between different three-component models within the current uncertainties on the scale height and on the density of stars in the solar neighbourhood.

## 2 The B&S model

As first step we compared color and magnitude distributions from our observational sample to the predictions of the Bahcall-Soneira model in its original export version (see Bahcall, 1986, for a complete description of the model). For convenience in the following we will briefly summarize the main parameters (see also table 1:
i) Disk. The disk has a Wielen (1974) luminosity function and an exponential scale lenght of 3.5 kpc. The scale height for the later main sequence (MV$`>`$5) is 325 pc. For the early main sequence (MV$`<`$5) it is (82.5 MV $``$ 97.5) pc with a minimum of 90 pc. The scale height of the giant branch is 250 pc.
ii) Spheroid. The spheroid has the same LF as the disk implemented for MV$``$4.5 with the 47 Tuc luminosity function (Da Costa, 1982), shifted to fit the Wielen LF at MV$``$4.5. The Galactocentric distance is R=8 kpc and the axis ratio is 0.8. The density is normalized locally at 1/500 of the disk.

For each stellar population it is possible to associate intrinsic stellar magnitudes with colours, predicting in such a way the expected colour distribution of stars in each given interval of magnitudes. The original version of the B&S model adopts as relations between (B-V) colors and absolute visual magnitudes, a disk main sequence (MS) from observations by Johnson (1965,1966) and Keenan (1963) and the color-magnitude (CM) diagram of M67 by Morgan & Eggleton (1978) for disk giant stars. The program allows the choice of the spheroid giant branch from a number of different color-magnitude diagrams (e.g. 47 Tuc, M13, M15, M92) while the main sequence adopted for the disk is shifted to properly match the evolved stars of the selected diagram, reproducing in this way the different colors of the spheroid MS as a function of the assumed metallicity.

Figure 2 compares the distribution of apparent $`V`$-magnitudes of the sample stars with the corresponding predictions produced by a straightforward application of the B&S model. The observed magnitude distribution plotted in Fig.2 has been corrected for incompleteness as in KACP (cf. Tab. 1 in KACP), restricting the investigation to the range of magnitudes with completeness larger or of the order of 80%. i.e. to stars with $`V26.5`$ . As shown in Fig.2, one finds a good agreement over the whole accepted range of magnitudes, with theoretical predictions almost always within the expected statistical fluctuation of the counts. As expected, at these low latitudes, counts are dominated by disk stars. Thus, as we will discuss better later, the total distributions are barely sensitive to the presence of a possible third component.

The observational data can also be used to test predicted color distributions. We used the MV-(B-V) relations described above together with the relations from ($`BV`$) to ($`VI`$) colour bands for MS and giant stars obtained from Johnson (1965, 1966) observational data, as suggested in the original B&S code. Figure 3 shows that, in this case, the agreement is far from being satisfactory, the difference between predictions and observations becoming worse at fainter magnitude. Thus while V magnitudes are well reproduced, $`(VI)`$ colour distributions are not. The origin of such an occurrence is easily understood, since inspection of the B&S data discloses that the adopted ($`M_V`$, $`BV`$) diagram for the two stellar populations was still in excellent agreement with recent results from the Hipparcos satellite for nearby stars (Kovalevsky 1998), whereas this is not the case for the ($`M_V`$, $`VI`$) distributions. To be quantitative, the upper panel in Fig. 4 compares the adopted B&S ($`M_V`$,$`VI`$) distributions for disk and spheroid MS stars with recent data by Monet et al. (1992) and Dahn et al. (1995) for dwarf and subdwarf stars in the solar neighbourhood; the need to update the MV-($`VI`$) relations appears obvious. In passing we note that the B&S model was never compared by the authors with ($`VI`$) color distributions thus they had not the need to introduce in the code precise relations for this color band. We derived a new ($`M_V`$, $`VI`$) relation for the disk population by best fitting the above-cited observational data for dwarf stars.

In order to keep our computations as close as possible to the original B&S model, we choose for the spheroid a $`Z=0.0002`$ MS as defined by HST in the very metal-poor globular M30 (Piotto et al. 1997). The bottom panel of Fig.4 shows the new sequences as compared with the same observational data in the upper panel. Here we notice that the excellent agreement recently found between theoretical predictions and HST observations of faint MS in Galactic globulars (Cassisi et al. 2000) supports the use of theoretical data in varying the adopted spheroid metallicity. Thus in the lower panel of Fig.4 the low MS at Z=0.002 is from evolutionary calculations by Cassisi et al. (2000). Finally, ($`M_V`$,$`VI`$) relations for giants stars that have left the MS have been taken from the CM diagrams of M67 (Montgomery, Marshall & Janes 1993) and M92 (Johnson & Bolte 1998) for disk and spheroid stars, respectively.

However, even if relying on observational data, one can not ignore that all the available theories unanimously predict that the location of the lower mass limit for H burning is strongly dependent on the star’s metallicity and, in particular, that for $`Z=0.0002`$ this limiting magnitude is $`M_V=14.2`$ (see, e.g., again Cassisi et al. 2000). To be realistic, we thus used this magnitude as a cut-off of the luminosity function of the spheroid component. Numerical experiments, as reported in the previous Fig.2, shows that such a cut-off is predicted to affect the distribution of the observed luminosities only at magnitudes fainter than $`V=28`$, thus beyond the limit of the present investigation. However, it appears interesting to notice that, at least in principle, observational data below $`V`$28 should constrain the magnitude of the cut-off, and, therefore, the mean metallicity of the spheroid component.

Before comparing theory and observation with the new color-magnitude relations, it is useful to discuss the adopted reddening correction. The original version of the code incorporates for intermediate-to-high Galactic latitudes ($`b`$10) the “default” reddening/obscuration correction through “infinity” from Sandage (1972) based on Galaxy counts, which gives in the direction of NGC 6397 a reddening E(B-V)$``$0.26. However we prefer to adopt the more precise and extensively used reddening maps by Burnstein & Heiles (1982). For their reddening estimates the authors used together the results of surveys of neutral hydrogen column densities and of deep Galactic counts. The Burnstein & Heiles compilation gives E(B-V)$``$0.18 in the direction of NGC 6397, a value in good agreement with reddening estimates for the cluster from different methods: E(B-V)=0.18 $`\pm `$0.02 (see e.g. Harris 1996, Anthony-Twarog et al. 1992, Drukier et al. 1993). Thus, in the following, we will adopt E(B-V)=0.18 transformed in E(V-I) by using E(V-I)$``$1.25 E(B-V) by Bessel & Brett (1988). The reddening scale height adopted in the program is 100 pc (see e.g. Mendez & van Altena, 1998).

The difference between Sandage (1972) results and these estimates for the reddening/obscuration correction clearly affects both magnitude and colors distributions in a small but not negligible way; the magnitude distribution is shifted by about 0.2 mag. toward brighter magnitudes due to the reduced extinction, while the color distribution in the interval 23$`<`$V$`<`$25 is shifted toward bluer colors by about 0.2 mag. and the total counts in this interval are increased due to the change in the extinction. In passing we note that the NGC 6397 field is just above the lower limit ($`b=10^{}`$) of Galactic latitudes covered by the reddening treatment by Burnstein & Heiles (1982).

Figure 5 shows the effect of improving both the reddening and ($`M_V`$, $`VI`$) relations for the predicted colour distributions in the same magnitude interval as in Fig.3. The agreement now appears rather satisfactory, showing that with such a minor modifications the B&S model appears able to fit all the observational constraints reasonably well. Numerical simulations show that results do not change significantly if we assumed Z=0.002 as spheroid mean metallicity.

## 3 The faint star problem

The excellent agreement between theory and observation discussed in the previous section is not without problems. At present time one has much more information about the faint end of the disk luminosity function than at the time when the original B&S model was produced. As a matter of fact, below $`M_V`$=12.5 the original version of the B&S model assumes a flat luminosity function both for the disk and the spheroid component. However, several lines of evidence have been found indicating that in both populations the luminosity functions undergo a noticeable decrease at the faintest luminosities. Figure 6 (upper panel) shows recent observational data for the faint end of the disk luminosity function together with the distribution originally assumed in the B&S model.

A decrease of the luminosity function beyond $`M_V`$= 13 has been firstly suggested by Wielen, Jahreiss and Kruger (1983, WJK), on the basis of parallax-star studies. An even more drastic decrease, starting at $`M_V`$= 12, was more recently suggested by Gould, Bahcall and Flynn (1996, 1997) from an analysis of HST data. The results from a large-area multicolor survey by Martini and Osmer (1998) and those from photometric parallax surveys by Reid & Gizis (1997) appear intermediate between the Wielen et al. and the Gould et al. results. All these luminosity functions fit the Wielen et al. LF at a visual magnitude of about 9.

Figure 6, lower panel, shows the situation for the spheroid component. Again there is not agreement among the results of different authors. Dahn et al. (1995) from parallaxes studies of nearby subdwarf stars found a peak of the luminosity function at $`M_V`$ $``$ 11.5. However, Gould, Flynn and Bahcall (1998) investigated HST data and suggested a flat LF below $`M_V`$= 7, while very recently Gizis & Reid (1999), by using a sample of stars from the Palomar Sky Surveys, support the luminosity function results by Dahn et al. (1995). The original B&S choice for the spheroid LF is also shown.

An extensive investigation of the luminosity functions in Galactic globulars has recently shown the common occurrence of a maximum near $`M_V`$10 (Piotto, Cool & King 1997, Piotto & Zoccali 1999). In the same panel of Fig. 6 we show the luminosity function of the metal-poor Galactic globular M30, as obtained down to $`M_V`$$``$8 by Sandquist et al. (1999) and extended below $`M_V`$$``$8 with the LF of M30 provided by Piotto et al. (1997). M30 is a metal poor cluster that we will assume as possibly representative of the spheroid luminosity function. The rationale for this choice follows from the assumption of a substantial similarity between field and cluster spheroid populations. In this context, one may take note of the different LFs observed in Galactic globulars (see, e.g., Piotto & Zoccali 1999) as an evidence for a different efficiency of the evaporation of low-mass stars from the clusters, a mechanism which is obviously impoverishing the faint end of the original LFs. By adopting M30 we choose one of the globulars with the largest abundance of faint stars, thus with a LF which should be closer to the original one for spheroid stellar content.

Dahn et al.(1995) and Gould et al. (1998) LFs rejoin each other at MV$``$ 7.5 mag. to match the B&S LF. M30 LF has been normalized to fit at MV$``$7 the spheroid LFs (see Gould et al. 1998). In passing we note that the difference between the M30 luminosity function and the original choice of B&S for MV$`<`$6 is mainly due to the normalization chosen by the authors: the luminosity function of 47 Tuc (for MV$`<`$4.5) has been shifted to connect to the Wielen LF at MV=4.5. However numerical experiments show that, due to the poor population of the high luminosity LF regions, the quoted differences for MV$`<`$6 affects only slightly magnitude and color distributions, while difference in the LF for MV$`<`$4.5 does not influence at all the results. In the following we will choose to adopt the M30 LF at brigh magnitudes (MV$`<`$6).

We are now in the position to explore the role played on the predicted star counts by the faint portion of the luminosity function. Fig.7 shows the predicted magnitude distribution of disk and spheroid stars when different LFs have been adopted. For comparison the histogram of the observed counts in the field of NGC 6397 is also shown. These results are easily understood on the basis of the shape of the adopted LFs.

From the results of Fig.7 one also easily understand the magnitude distribution for the different combinations of disk and spheroid LFs shown in Fig.8. As a first result, one finds that different assumptions about the faint end of the luminosity function affect star counts only for V $`\stackrel{>}{_{}}`$ 23 (see Fig.7 and Fig.6). If one takes the already known capability of the B&S model to pass the observational tests down to $`V`$$``$ 21 as an evidence that the model gives a satisfactory description of the Galactic distribution of the most luminous components of the stellar populations, one would conclude that the abundance of fainter stars depends only on the overall behaviour of the LFs.

By assuming the Gould et al. (1996, 1997) disk LF together with the Gould et al. (1998) spheroid LF (thin solid line in Fig. 8) there is no way to reconcile the predicted and observed $`V`$-magnitude distributions. Since star counts are governed mainly by the disk component, by assuming the Gould et al. (1997) disk LF one predicts a number of faint stars smaller than observations in the last two magnitude bins, even assuming for the spheroid component the M30 LF, which gives the largest counts at faint magnitudes (long dashed line in Fig.8). Similarly by adopting the Gould et al. (1998) spheroid LF the model underestimates the observed counts in the last two bins of magnitude for any choice of the disk LF (dot-dashed line and thin solid line in Fig.8).

However the reliability of star counts in the last magnitude bin: 26$`<`$MV$`<`$26.5 is important to evaluate if the Gould et al. (1997) LF for the disk or the Gould et al. (1998) LF for the halo are separately acceptable for our field. We note that in the last bin (from MV=26 to MV=26.5) the completeness falls from about 90% to about 80%. If, very conservatively, we decide do not take into account the results in this bin of magnitude we cannot exclude the separate adoption either of the Gould et al. (1997) LF for the disk or of the Gould et al. (1998) LF for the halo, excluding however the contemporary adoption of both LFs.

Figure 8 shows that it is possible to find several combinations of LFs for disk/spheroid which fit the observational magnitude distribution in a better way. However, due to the large uncertainties still present in the determination of disk and spheroid LFs this seems to us a meaningless numerical exercise. Figure 9 shows the predicted color distribution in the region 23$`<`$V$`<`$25 (the only affected by the changes in the adopted LFs) for the combinations of LFs shown in Fig.8. All the results are in fair agreement with observational color distributions. Thus Fig.9 does not allows to discriminate among different LFs.

## 4 Models with thick disk

In the previous sections we have shown that the two-component (disk + spheroid) B&S model, appears able to reach a satisfactory agreement with the deep star counts provided by HST in the field of NGC 6397 only if LFs are larger than expected on the basis of Gould et al. (1997,1998) indications. In this section we will include a thick disk component to check if such a conclusion is affected by the addition of a third component to the Galactic structure.

In 1993 Gould et al. discussed photometric data from the Hubble Space Telescope Snapshot Survey up to an average apparent magnitude of V=21.4 to conclude that, mainly due to the lack of information about the colors of the observed stars, it was not possible to distinguish between the presence or the absence of the thick disk. In 1996 Basilio et al. used I magnitude and ($`VI`$) color star counts from 17 HST deep fields data to discriminate between the results of the standard models by Bahcall & Soneira (1980,1984) and by Gilmore & Reid (1983). They concluded that the two standard model predictions for the magnitude counts was similar and in good agreement with observations. However they obtained a reasonable agreement between model and data for colour distributions only with the introduction of a thick disk component. Mendez & Guzman (1998) by adopting a small data sample with V up to $``$25 found an equally good agreement between models with thick disk and observations for a thick disk with a local normalization of 2% and a scale height of 1300 pc (Reid & Majewski 1993) or a local normalization of 6% and a scale height of 750 pc (Ojha et al. 1996). More in general, one finds that a large variety of disk/thick disk parametrizations is available in literature (see e.g. Reid & Majewski 1993, Ojha et al. 1996).

For our first test we adopted a consistent set of disk/thick disk/spheroid parameters as given for the “Besancon model” by Haywood, Robin & Creze (HR&C, 1997, see also Haywood, Robin & Creze 1996, Ojha et al. 1996, Robin et al. 1996 for more details). The disk /thick disk luminosity function adopted by the authors is from Wielen et al. (1983) for MV$`>`$4, from McCuskey (1966) for MV $`<`$-1 and an average of both LFs in the interval -1$``$ MV $`<`$4. The chosen parameters are: a disk scale height of 240$`\pm `$50 pc, a thick disk scale height of 760$`\pm `$50 pc, a disk scale lenght of 2500$`\pm `$300 pc, a thick disk scale lenght of 2500$`\pm `$800 pc, a thick disk/disk local density ratio of 5.6$`\pm `$1%, a spheroid/disk local density ratio of 0.10%, R=8.5 Kpc (see HR&C). However the “Besancon” model explicity allows for time evolution of vertical scaleheight whereas the other models implicit take into account this variation by assigning lower scaleheights to early-type dwarfs. Thus here we will take a scale height of 90 pc for the youngest MS stars and 240 pc for the oldest ones.

To explore the range of possible results, we made tests by adopting either Wielen et al. (1983) or Gould et al. (1997) disk and thick disk LFs for selected assumptions about the spheroid LF and by adopting for the thick disk LF at bright magnitudes (MV$`<`$4.5) the LF of 47 Tuc (Hesser, Harris & Vandenberg, 1987), assumed more representative of high luminosity thick disk stars. However numerical results show that by replacing, for MV$`<`$4.5, the 47 Tuc LF with the Wielen et al. LF the differences in the resulting star counts, at least for our field, are small.

Figure 10 shows the theoretical magnitude distributions when different disk/thick disk and spheroid luminosity functions are used. The contribution of the thick disk component is also shown. The dashed line represents a model with Wielen et al. (1983) disk/thick disk luminosity function and Gould et al. (1998) spheroid LF at faint magnitudes (MV$`>`$ 8) implemented at brighter magnitudes by M30 LF (Sandquist 1999). The solid line represents a model with Gould et al. (1997) disk/thick disk LF and with Dahn et al. (1995) spheroid LF at low luminosities completed with M30 for (MV$`<`$ 8). As expected, one finds again that the distribution is affected by the change of the faint LF only for MV $`\stackrel{>}{_{}}`$ 24. However now one finds that the three-component model with the parameters described above slightly overestimates the counts up to (MV$``$24). Comparison with results in Fig.8 shows that predictions based on Gould et al. (1998) LF appear in better agreement with faint star counts (see e.g. the case of Wielen et al. disk LF and Gould et al., 1998, spheroid LF).

Before discussing such an evidence, as an alternative choice, let us now explore the model by Gilmore & Reid (1983) by adopting their most frequently used parameters (G&R, 1983, 1984, see also Colless et al. 1991, Basilio et al. 1996). The chosen parameters are: an disk scale height of 325 pc, a thick disk scale height of 1300 pc, a thick disk scale lenght of 3500 pc, a thick disk/disk local density ratio of 2%, a spheroid/disk local density ratio of 0.125% with, as in Reid & Majewski (1993), similar LFs for both disk and thick disk. Reid & Majewski (1993) adopted for disk/thick disk luminosity function the Wielen et al. (1983) LF for MV$`<`$ 11 implemented at fainter magnitudes with the photometric-parallax-based LF by Reid (1987) which is not too much different from the Reid & Gizis one, shown in Fig.6 and thus it is intermediate among the Wielen et al. (1983) and Gould et al. (1997) one. For reader’s convenience, table 1 summarizes the main disk/thick disk/spheroid parameters of the selected galactic models.

Fig.11 (upper panel) shows the comparison between the predicted magnitude distribution for a model with the parameters of the “Besancon model” and the one with the Gilmore & Reid model parameters. The adopted luminosity functions are Wielen et al. (1983) for disk and thick disk and Gould et al. (1998) + M30 for the spheroid. One sees that the predictions of the two models are coincident in the whole region of interest (MV $`\stackrel{<}{_{}}26.5`$). This result confirms that different combinations of disk/thick disk/spheroid parameters can give the same results for predicted star counts (see e.g. the discussion in Mendez & Guzman 1998) and thus there is no an unique solution when the results of different models are compared with observational magnitude and color counts. Mendez & Guzman (1998) concluded that to discriminate among different possible parameters one should need kinematical data in addition to star counts as done e.g. by Ojuka et al. (1996) who obtained the parameters adopted in the “Besancon” model. Fig.11 also shows the contribution of the thick disk components to the total counts. Note that while the total counts are very similar for the two sets of parameters (G&R and HR&C) the contribution of the thick disk is different, due to the different normalizations, scale heights and scale lenghts. For comparison the total star counts of the two components B&S model with the same disk/spheroid LFs is also shown. As expected, due to the lack of the thick disk component the total counts of the B&S model are lower. Fig.11 lower panel shows the contribution to the total counts of the upper panel of disk and spheroid components for the three selected models. The B&S disk overlaps the G&R one because the two models adopt the same disk parameters (see Table 1), while the HR&C model adopts a lower scale height for the disk and thus its thick disk contribution is larger (see upper panel). The spheroid contribution of the B&S model is larger with respect to the ones of the models with the thick disk (see Table 1).

From Figs. 10 and 11 one should conclude that, for the field of NGC 6397, both the adopted three-component models overestimate star counts at bright magnitudes. However, we remind that Robin et al. (1996) evaluate for the thick disk density and scale height an uncertainty of, respectively, $``$20% and $``$7%. Within this uncertainty the thick disk density and scale height for the “Besancon” model can thus be decreased down to 4.6% and 710 pc, respectively. The results of such a decrease are shown in Fig.12 for various combinations of disk/thick disk/spheroid LFs at faint magnitudes.

One finds that just by tuning the thick disk parameters within their uncertainties it is possible to obtain a good fit in the high luminosity region of the magnitude distribution, while the fit at faint magnitudes depends on the choice of the combination of disk/thick disk/spheroid faint LFs. If relying on such a model, one finds again that the combination of Gould et al. (1997) disk/thick disk LF and Gould et al. (1998) halo LF (completed with M30 LF) appears in disagreement with observations (Fig.13), whereas the separate adoption of Gould et al. (1997) LF for the disk/thick disk or the Gould et al. (1998) LF for the halo cannot be excluded.

Fig. 14 shows the predicted ($`VI`$) colour distribution in the labelled intervals of magnitude with the ‘Besancon” parameters tuned as in Fig. 12 with the Wielen et al. LF for the disk and Dahn et al. 1995 (+ M30) LF for the spheroid (heavy long dashed line in Fig.12). Following Gilmore (1984) (see also Reid & Majewski 1993) we used the CMD of the metal rich globular cluster 47 Tucanae to derive the color-magnitude relation for evolved thick disk stars. For MS thick disk stars we used theoretical predictions with Z=0.006 (Cassisi et al. 2000) which, as already discussed, have shown to be in very good agreement with observational data. In all cases E(B-V)=0.18. One sees that the agreement is reasonable in all the magnitude intervals. Figure 15 shows the contribution of disk, thick disk and spheroid to the colour-number plots of Fig.14. Due to the HR&C choice of normalizations, scale heights and scale lenghts, the thick disk contribution in the selected intervals of magnitude is slightly larger than the disk contribution (see Fig. 11). Moreover the thick disk colors are bluer than the disk ones due the lower metallicity (Z=0.006) of the thick disk.

Figure 16 compares observed and predicted colour counts for 23$`<`$V$`<`$25 for different assumptions about the faint LFs for disk/thick disk and spheroid (see Fig.12 for the corresponding magnitude distributions). As in the two-component model, all the LF combinations taken into account (even Gould et al. 1997 - Gould et al. 1998) show an acceptable fit to observational data; thus the color distributions does not allow to discriminate among different LFs at faint magnitudes.

For the Gilmore & Reid model too the thick disk parameters can be tuned to reconcile the model with observations. In this case one expects that due to the lower contribution of the thick disk to the counts (see Fig.11) the effect of varying the thick disk parameters will be lower. In fact, taking as representative the estimate of errors by Robin et al. (1996), to obtain a good agreement with observational data, one needs to reduce the thick disk scale height and normalization by 2$`\sigma `$ (scale height=1100 pc, normalization=1.25%). Figure 17 shows the magnitude distribution for the model with original Gilmore & Reid (1983) parameters, (with Wielen et al. disk/thick disk LF and Gould et al., 1998, +M30 spheroid LF) together with the corresponding results when the thick disk parameters are lowered by 2$`\sigma `$. For comparison the model with the HR&C parameters tuned as in Fig. 12 is also provided. With this modifications the results of the G&R model appear as good as the HR&C one. We do not show the color distributions for the “modified” G&R model because as disclosed by Fig.17, the results are practically coincident with those of Fig.14 and Fig.16.

## 5 Conclusion

In this paper we have discussed star counts in the field of the globular NGC 6397. As expected, we found that the predicted distribution of stars fainter than MV$``$24 is critically dependent on the assumptions about the LF of faint MS stars. According to the discussion given in the previous sections one finds that neither the two-component B&S model not the more sophisticated three-component models by HR&C and G&R can satisfactory fit star counts in the field of NGC 6397, when assuming for disk and spheroid the low LF suggested by Gould et al. (1997), Gould et al. (1998), respectively. A satisfactory fit of the data can be achieved, either for a two-component or for a three component model, with other suitable combinations of LFs suggested in the current literature, provided that density and scale height of the two discussed three-component models are decreased within the predicted existing uncertainties. Nor the color distributions appear able to discriminate among the various possible solutions. However, we regard the previous conclusions as suggestions to be further tested in deep surveys at different Galactic locations. In this context, and before closing the paper, one has to notice that from the comparison of Figs. 2 and 6 one derives the tantalizing evidence that going deeper than $`V`$=26.5 by a couple of magnitudes one would derive much more stringent and precise constraints on the LF of faint stars and, in turn, on the mean metallicity of the spheroid. Such an evidence should be taken into account in future researches on this matter.

## Acknowledgments

It’s a pleasure to thank I. King for useful comments and for a careful reading of an early version of the manuscript. We warmly thank J.N. Bahcall for his advice and for making available to the scientific community the Bahcall-Soneira Galactic model. GP acknowledges partial support by the Agenzia Spaziale Italiana (ASI) and by the Ministero della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (MURST) under the program “Stellar Dynamics and Stellar Evolution in Globular Clusters”. VC and SDI thank the partial support by MURST within the “Stellar Evolution” project.