text:
# 1 The Puzzle of Infinite Size

## 1  The Puzzle of Infinite Size

The historical origins of string theory were an attempt to understand the structure of hadrons  . However the theory encountered a number of obstacles. Some obvious difficulties involved the spectrum which invariably included massless vectors, scalars and tensor particles. There were also more subtle problems that seemed insurmountable and which involved the existence of form factors. In other words there was no possibility of constructing matrix elements of local currents needed to describe the interaction of hadrons with electromagnetism and gravitation . The natural candidates, vertex operators like $`\mathrm{exp}ikX`$, can not be sensibly continued away from specific discrete “on shell” values of $`k^2`$. Closely connected with this was the divergence encountered in attempting to compute the hadronic electromagnetic or gravitational radius  . Thus string theory was abandoned as a theory of hadrons and replaced by QCD. The success of string theory in understanding Regge trajectories and quark confinement was understood in terms of an approximate string-like behavior of chromo-electric flux tubes. According to this view, hadronic strings are not the infinitely thin idealized objects of mathematical string theory but are thick tubes similar to the quantized flux lines in superconductors. The ideal string theory was relegated to the world of quantum gravity.

However more recent developments  have strongly suggested that an idealized form of string theory may exactly describe certain gauge theories which are quite similar to QCD . We have returned full circle to the suspicion that hadrons may be precisely described by an idealized string theory, especially in the ’t Hooft limit . The new string theories are certainly more complicated than the original versions and it seems very plausible that the problems with the massless spectrum of particles will be overcome. Less, however, has been studied about the problems connected with local currents. In this paper we will show that the new insights from the AdS/CFT correspondence suggest a solution to the form factor problem.

We begin by reviewing the problem. For definiteness we work in the light cone frame in which string theory has the form of a conventional Galilean-invariant Hamiltonian quantum mechanics. The degrees of freedom of the first-quantized string include $`D2`$ transverse coordinates $`X^m(\sigma )`$. The Lagrangian for these variables is

$$L=\frac{1}{4\pi }_0^{2\pi P_{}}𝑑\sigma \left(\dot{X}\dot{X}\alpha ^2X^{}X^{}\right),$$
(1.1)
where $`\dot{X}`$ and $`X^{}`$ denote derivatives with respect to light-cone time $`\tau `$ and string parameter $`\sigma `$. The light-cone momentum $`P_{}`$ is conjugate to the light-like coordinate $`x^{}`$. All irrelevant constants have been set to unity.

An important feature of the light-cone theory involves the local distribution of $`P_{}`$ on the string. The rule is that the distribution of $`P_{}`$ is uniform with respect to $`\sigma `$. In other words the longitudinal momentum $`dP_{}`$ carried on a segment of string $`d\sigma `$ is exactly $`d\sigma /2\pi `$. Let us now consider the transverse density of $`P_{}`$. In a space-time field theory this would be given by

$$\rho (X)=𝑑x^{}T_{}(X,x^{}),$$
(1.2)
where $`T`$ is the energy momentum tensor of the field theory, and $`X`$ without a superscript denotes the two noncompact transverse coordinates. Matrix elements of $`\rho `$ between states of equal $`P_{}`$ define form factors for gravitational interactions of the state and are entirely analogous to electromagnetic form factors.

The natural object in string theory to identify with $`\rho (X)`$ is

$$\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi P_{}}𝑑\sigma \delta ^2(XX(\sigma )).$$
(1.3)
(To be precise, we subtract the center-of-mass mode from $`X(\sigma )`$.) In other words $`\rho (X)`$ receives contributions from every element of string localized at $`X`$. The Fourier transform of $`\rho (X)`$

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi P_{}}𝑑\sigma \mathrm{exp}ikX(\sigma )$$
(1.4)
defines a system of form factors by its matrix elements between string states.

The mean square radius of the distribution function is given by

$$\overline{r^2}=d^2XX^2\rho (X)$$
(1.5)
and can be rewritten in terms of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$,

$$\overline{r^2}=_k_k\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)|_{k=0}.$$
(1.6)
Eq. (1.6) is the standard definition of the mean-square radius in terms of the momentum space form factor. The squared radius is also given by

$$X(\sigma )^2.$$
(1.7)
where the value of $`\sigma `$ is arbitrary.

For a field theory with a mass gap, such as pure QCD, it is possible to prove that $`\overline{r^2}`$ is finite. This follows from the standard analytic properties of form factors. The problem arises when we attempt to apply the world sheet field theory to compute $`X(\sigma )^2`$. An elementary calculation based on the oscillator representation of $`X`$ gives a sum over modes

$$X^2\alpha ^{}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n}=\alpha ^{}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{}.$$
(1.8)
A related disaster occurs when we compute the form factor which is easily seen to have to form

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)=\mathrm{exp}(k^2X^2/2).$$
(1.9)
Evidently it is only non-zero at $`k^2=0`$.

In a covariant description of string theory the problem has its roots in the fact that the graviton vertex operator is only well defined on the mass shell of the graviton, $`k^2=0`$. Vertex operators to be well defined must correspond to perturbations with vanishing world sheet $`\beta `$-function. This implies that they should correspond to on shell solutions of the appropriate space-time gravitational theory. For the kinematical situation in which the graviton carries vanishing $`k_\pm `$ the transverse momentum must vanish. Thus, no well defined off shell continuation of the form factor exists.

One might wonder if the divergence of $`X^2`$ is special to the case of a free world sheet field theory. The answer is that the divergence can only be made worse by interactions. The 2-point function of a unitary quantum field theory is at least as divergent as the corresponding free field theory. This follows from the spectral representation for the two point function and the positivity of the spectral function. Thus it is hard to see how an ideal string theory can ever describe hadrons.

## 2  Light Cone Strings in AdS

There are good reasons to believe that certain confining deformations of maximally supersymmetric Yang Mills theory are string theories albeit in higher dimensions. The strings move in a five-dimensional space that is asymptotically AdS.111 Strictly speaking the target space is ten-dimensional with the form $`AdS_5`$ times a compact space such as $`S_5`$. In this paper the compact factor plays no role. In the ’t Hooft limit these theories are believed to be free string theories. Evidently if this is so there must exist a well defined string prescription for form factors in the 4-D theory.

What we will see is that although the theory in bulk of AdS is an ideal thin-string theory, the 4-D boundary field theory is not described by thin strings. That may seem surprising. Suppose that in the light-cone frame the thin 5-D string has the form

$$(X(\sigma ),Y(\sigma ))$$
(2.1)
where $`X`$ are the transverse coordinates of 4-D Minkowski space and $`Y`$ is the additional coordinate perpendicular to the boundary of AdS. Then it would seem natural to consider the projection of the string onto the $`X`$ plane to define a thin string. According to this view the mean-squared radius would again be $`X^2`$ and we would be no better off than before. Before discussing the resolution of this problem let us work out the bosonic part of the light-cone string Lagrangian in AdS. We will make no attempt to derive the full supersymmetric form of the theory  in this paper. We believe the resolution of the form factor problem does not require this. On the geometric side we will also ignore the 5-sphere component of the geometry implied by the usual R-symmetry of the $`N=4`$ supersymmetry.

The metric of AdS is given by

$$ds^2=R^2\frac{2dx^+dx^{}+dX^2+dY^2}{Y^2}.$$
(2.2)
We have defined the overall scale of the AdS (radius of curvature) to be $`R`$.

In order to pass to the light cone frame we must also introduce the world sheet metric $`h_{ij}`$. In the usual flat space theory it is possible to fix the world sheet metric to be in both the light cone gauge $`\sigma _0=\tau =x^+`$ and also the conformal gauge $`h_{00}=h_{11},h_{01}=0`$. However this is not generally possible since it entails three gauge conditions which is one too many (we do not count the local Weyl symmetry, because none of these conditions fix it; this would require a fourth condition, $`deth=1`$). The special feature of flat space which permit the over-fixing of the gauge is not shared by AdS. Thus we must give up the conformal gauge if we wish to work in light-cone gauge.

Let us fix the gauge by choosing two conditions

$`\sigma _0`$ $`=`$ $`x^+,`$ (2.3)
$`h_{01}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (2.4)
The Lagrangian becomes

$$L=\frac{1}{4\pi }𝑑\sigma \left\{\frac{R^2E}{Y^2}(2\dot{X}^{}+\dot{X}\dot{X}+\dot{Y}\dot{Y})\frac{1}{\alpha ^2R^2EY^2}(X^{}X^{}+Y^{}Y^{})\right\},$$
(2.5)
where we have defined

$$\sqrt{\frac{h_{11}}{h_{00}}}=E.$$
(2.6)
The equation of motion from $`X^{}`$ states that the density $`p_{}(\sigma )=R^2E(\sigma )/2\pi Y^2(\sigma )`$ is time-independent. We can then use the $`\tau `$-independent $`\sigma `$ reparameterization not fixed by eq. (2.4) to set $`p^{}=1/2\pi `$. The Hamiltonian becomes

$$H=\frac{1}{2}_0^{2\pi P_{}}𝑑\sigma \left\{P_XP_X+P_YP_Y+\frac{R^4}{\alpha ^2Y^4}(X^{}X^{}+Y^{}Y^{})\right\}.$$
(2.7)
This is a more or less conventional string action with the unusual feature that the effective string tension scales like $`1/Y^2`$. Thus the tension blows up at the AdS boundary $`Y=0`$ and tends to zero at the horizon $`Y=\mathrm{}`$. This of course is a manifestation of the usual UV/IR connection.

The Hamiltonian could be obtained from an action

$$S=\frac{1}{2}_0^{2\pi P_{}}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau \left\{\dot{X}\dot{X}+\dot{Y}\dot{Y}\frac{R^4}{\alpha ^2Y^4}(X^{}X^{}+Y^{}Y^{})\right\}.$$
(2.8)
This action thought of as a $`1+1`$ dimensional field theory is not Lorentz invariant in the world-sheet sense. However it is classically scale invariant if we assume $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are dimension zero. The Hamiltonian has dimension $`1`$ and therefore scales as the inverse length of the $`\sigma `$ circle which is $`P_{}`$. We recognize this scale symmetry as spacetime longitudinal boost invariance under which $`H`$ and $`P_{}`$ scale oppositely and $`X,Y`$ are invariant. No doubt the actual Lagrangian, properly supersymmetrized, retains this symmetry when quantized.

Let us consider the equal time correlation function $`X(0)X(\sigma )`$ in the field theory defined by eq. (2.8), or more precisely in its supersymmetrized version. By inserting a complete set of eigenstates of the energy and (world sheet) momentum we obtain

$`X(0)X(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dEdp}{p^2}e^{ip\sigma }|X(0)|E,p|^2}`$ (2.9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dEdp}{p^2}e^{ip\sigma }F(E,p)}`$ (2.10)
with $`F0`$. The measure of integration $`dEdp/p^2`$ follows from the fact that $`X`$ has “engineering” dimension zero under the longitudinal boost rescaling. Furthermore the assumption that the scale invariance is preserved in the quantum theory requires $`F(E,p)=F(E/p)`$ for large $`p,E`$. It follows that as long as $`F`$ does not go to zero in this limit that the correlation function diverges as $`\sigma 0`$. This would imply $`X^2=\mathrm{}`$.

## 3 Dressing the Vertex with $`Y`$ Dependence

Let us consider the problem from the point of view of the vertex operator $`\mathrm{exp}ikX`$. One problem that we have emphasized is that it is not a solution of the on-shell condition. We can try to fix this by replacing it with a solution of the wave equation for a graviton in AdS space . The relevant equation is

$$\left(_\mu ^\mu +Y^3_YY^3_Y\right)\mathrm{\Phi }=0,$$
(3.1)
where $`\mu `$ runs over the four dimensions of flat Minkowski space. To be precise, this is the first point at which we have assumed large ’t Hooft parameter, so that we can use the low energy field equations.

The particular solutions we are looking for are independent of the $`x^\pm `$ and have the form

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{exp}(ikX)f(k,Y),$$
(3.2)
where $`F`$ satisfies

$$Y^3_YY^3_Yf(k,Y)=k^2f(k,Y).$$
(3.3)
Thus the on shell vertex operator has the form

$$𝑑\sigma \mathrm{exp}(ikX(\sigma ))f(k,Y(\sigma )).$$
(3.4)
The factor $`f`$ is a dressing of the vertex, necessary to make its matrix elements well defined for $`k0`$.

Let us consider the mean square radius of the hadron defined by eq. (1.6),

$`\overline{r^2}`$ $`=`$ $`_k_kf(k,Y)\mathrm{exp}(ikX)|_{k=0}`$ (3.5)
$`=`$ $`X^2f(0,Y)2iXf^{}(0,Y)f^{\prime \prime }(0,Y)`$
where $`f^{\prime \prime }_k_kf`$.

For a state of zero angular momentum in the $`X`$ plane the term linear in $`X`$ vanishes and we have

$$\overline{r^2}=X^2f(0,Y)f^{\prime \prime }(0,Y).$$
(3.6)
To compute $`f`$ and $`f^{\prime \prime }`$ we Taylor expand $`f(k,Y)`$ in powers of $`k`$. There are two linearly independent solutions,

$$f(k,Y)=Y^4+\frac{1}{12}k^2Y^6+\mathrm{}$$
(3.7)
and

$$f(k,Y)=1\frac{1}{4}k^2Y^2+\mathrm{}.$$
(3.8)
Only the second of these is relevant to the problem of form factors. To see this we need only note that the vertex at $`k=0`$ is just the operator that measures $`P_{}`$. For states with $`P_{}=1`$ this operator in just the identity. This implies that $`F(0,Y)=1`$. Thus we find

$$\overline{r^2}=(X^2+Y^2).$$
(3.9)
This dressed result should be finite, because the on-shell condition in five (actually ten) dimensions arises from the requirement of world-sheet conformal invariance. One might have expected that this would happen as a simple cancellation between a divergence in $`X^2`$ and a divergence in the dressing. However, this is not the case: $`\overline{r^2}`$ as given in eq. (3.9) is the sum of $`X^2`$ and a positive term. Evidently cancellation is not the answer, and it must be that, in contrast to all experience in field theory, the operator $`X^2`$ is finite!

The dressing of the vertex by the factor $`f(k,Y)`$ obviously modifies the expression (1.3) for the transverse density $`\rho `$. If we define the Fourier transform of $`f`$ with respect to $`k`$ to be $`\stackrel{~}{f}(X,Y)`$, eq. (1.3) is replaced by

$$\rho (X)_0^{2\pi P_{}}𝑑\sigma \stackrel{~}{f}(XX(\sigma ),Y).$$
(3.10)
This means that an ideal thin string in the AdS bulk space is smeared out by the holographic projection onto the boundary. This is of course the familiar UV/IR correspondence at work. Bulk strings near the boundary are projected as very thin strings in the 4-D theory but those far from the boundary are fat. The extra term $`Y^2`$ in eq. (3.9) represents this fattening. Evidently we have only made things worse by including the dressing.

Before discussing the solution to the problem let us make some remarks about confining deformations in the context of AdS/CFT. Bulk descriptions of confining deformations of super Yang Mills theory have an effective infrared “wall” at a value of $`Y`$ which represents the confinement scale. In these cases the metric (2.2) is modified in the infrared region. A simple model for this is

$$ds^2=h(Y)\left(2dx^+dx^{}+dX^2+dY^2\right)$$
(3.11)
where, as in the conformal case, $`h1/Y^2`$ for $`Y0`$. Assume that $`h`$ has a minimum at the confinement scale, $`Y=Y^{}`$.

The light-cone hamiltonian is easily worked out,

$$H=\frac{1}{2}_0^{2\pi P_{}}𝑑\sigma \left\{P_XP_X+P_YP_Y+h(Y)^2\alpha ^2(X^{}X^{}+Y^{}Y^{})\right\}$$
(3.12)
Consider a string stretched along the $`X`$ direction and choose $`\sigma `$ so that $`_\sigma X=1`$. The potential energy of the string is then given by

$$V(Y)=h(Y)^2\alpha ^2$$
(3.13)
which has a minimum at $`Y=Y^{}`$. Thus a classical long straight string will be in equilibrium at this value of $`Y`$. This classical bulk string corresponds to a field theory configuration which, according to the UV/IR connection, is thickened to a size $`Y^{}`$, that is, the QCD scale.

Quantum fluctuations will cause the wave function of the string to fluctuate away from $`Y^{}`$. The implication is that the QCD string is a superposition of different thickness values extending from infinitely thin to QCD scale. Indeed different parts of the string can fluctuate in thickness over this range. The portions of the string near $`Y=0`$ will be very thin and will determine the large momentum behavior of the form factor.

## 4 Finiteness of $`X^2`$

We believe that despite the argument given at the end of Section 2 the value of $`X^2`$ is finite. This can only be if the function $`F=|X(0)|E,p|^2`$ vanishes in the scaling limit of large $`E,p`$. We will first give an intuitive argument and follow it with a more technical renormalization group analysis.

First suppose the string is “stuck” at some value of $`Y`$. In that case the action for $`X`$ in eq. (2.8) is a conventional string action except that the sting tension is replaced by $`1/Y^4`$. The divergence in $`X^2`$ would then be given by

$$X^2=Y^2|\mathrm{log}ϵ|.$$
(4.1)
If we ignore quantum fluctuations of $`Y`$ we could replace $`Y`$ by $`Y^{}`$. But $`Y`$ fluctuates as well as $`X`$ and can be expected to fluctuate toward the boundary as $`ϵ`$ tends to zero. This is just the usual UV/IR connection in AdS. Therefore as we remove the cutoff the fluctuations of $`X`$ are diminished because the string moves into a region of increasing effective stiffness. If for example the average value of $`Y^2`$ tends to zero as $`|1/\mathrm{log}ϵ|`$ or faster then the fluctuations of $`X`$ would remain bounded.

To see that this happens we consider the renormalization running of the operator $`X^2`$. We begin with the bare theory defined with a cutoff length $`ϵ`$ on the world sheet. We can then ask how a given operator in this bare theory is described in a renormalized version of the theory with a cutoff at some longer distance $`l`$. A general operator $`\varphi (X,Y)`$ runs to lower momentum scales according to the renormalization group equation

$$(l/l)\varphi (X,Y,l)=(\alpha ^{}/2)^2\varphi (X,Y,l).$$
(4.2)
For example, consider flat space and the operator $`X^2`$. We look for a solution of (4.2) with

$$\varphi (X,ϵ)=X^2.$$
(4.3)
The solution is

$$\varphi (X,l)=X^2+\alpha ^{}\mathrm{log}l/ϵ.$$
(4.4)
Thus if we regulate the theory at some fixed scale, for example $`l1`$, the matrix elements of $`X^2`$ blow up as we send $`ϵ0`$.

By contrast, consider the the case of AdS space where

$$^2=R^2(Y^2_X^2+Y^5_YY^3_Y).$$
(4.5)
For a solution of the form $`X^2+f(l)Y^2`$ this becomes

$$(l/l)f=(2\alpha ^{}/R^2)(1f).$$
(4.6)
With $`f(ϵ)=0`$ the solution is

$$f(l)=1(ϵ/l)^{2\alpha ^{}/R^2}.$$
(4.7)
So if we fix the scale $`l`$ and take the cutoff length $`ϵ`$ to zero the matrix elements tend to finite limits and the problem of infinite radii is resolved. If, however, we expand in powers of $`\alpha ^{}`$ there are logarithmic divergences. Note that the operator $`X^2`$ runs to a fixed point $`X^2+Y^2`$ which is just the operator in eq(3.10) which represents the mean squared radius $`\overline{r^2}`$.222Juan Maldacena raised the issue as to whether the undressed operator $`X^2`$ is physically observable. Once light-cone gauge is fixed, every operator should be observable. A world-sheet scale transformation corresponds to a spacetime boost, so a scale-dependent operator has a nontrivial transformation under this boost.

Let us make a similar renormalization group calculation of the two-point function. For simplicity we consider the equal-time case; the method extends to unequal times, but the expressions are not as simple. When the renormalization scale is the same as the separation there are no large logarithms and so we obtain the semiclassical result

$$X_{\sigma }^{i}{}_{}{}^{}(\sigma ,0)X_\sigma ^j(0,0)\delta ^{ij}\frac{\alpha ^{}Y_\sigma ^2}{\sigma R^2}.$$
(4.8)
Subscripts on operators signify the renormalization scale. The $`\sigma `$-derivative (prime) is taken in order to make this insensitive to IR physics. Now let us write this in terms of operators renormalized at a lower scale $`l`$ as in eq. (4.2). The operator $`X`$ renormalizes trivially, and so we can drop the subscript. The renormalization of $`Y^2`$ gives

$$X_{}^{i}{}_{}{}^{}(\sigma ,0)X^j(0,0)\delta ^{ij}(\sigma /l)^{2\alpha ^{}/R^2}\frac{\alpha ^{}Y_l^2}{\sigma R^2}.$$
(4.9)
We can now integrate with respect to $`\sigma `$,

$$X^i(\sigma ,0)X^j(0,0)\mathrm{constant}\frac{\delta ^{ij}}{2}(\sigma /l)^{2\alpha ^{}/R^2}Y_l^2.$$
(4.10)
To complete the evaluation of the two-point function we must run the operators down to the length scale of the string, and then evaluate the expectation value of $`Y^2`$ in the given string state, which we might take to be a wavepacket centered on some value of $`Y`$,

$$X^i(\sigma ,0)X^j(0,0)\mathrm{constant}\frac{\delta ^{ij}}{2}\sigma ^{2\alpha ^{}/R^2}Y^2.$$
(4.11)
The result has the advertised property: a finite limit as $`\sigma 0`$.

Precisely where does the spectral argument (2.10) go wrong? It is in the assumption of scale invariance. Scale invariance is of course broken by the finite coordinate length of the string, but this is an IR effect that should not change the short-distance behavior of correlators. In the present case there is a second source of scale breaking. The operators $`Y^q`$ have anomalous dimension $`(2\alpha ^{}/R^2)q(4q)`$. Since $`Y`$ is positive, these operators must have expectation values in any state, and this breaks the scale invariance spontaneously. We see this in eq. (4.10): this equation is covariant under scale transformations, but when the operators on the right are replaced with their expectation values the two-point function scales nontrivially. (One might try to interpret the result (4.11) in terms of an anomalous dimension for $`X`$, but this does not seem sensible). Note the close analogy between $`Y`$ and a Liouville field, as emphasized in ref. .

The reader may wonder how the finiteness of $`X^2`$ can be explained in covariant gauges such as the conformal gauge in which the world sheet theory has the form of a relativistic field theory. A standard argument insures that the singularity in a two point function can not be less singular than a free field; in this case logarithmic. The argument is based on the positivity of spectral functions which in turn assumes the metric in the space of states is positive. In general this is not the case in covariant gauges.

## 5 Calculation of the Form Factor

At large ’t Hooft parameter, we can use the dual supergravity description to calculate the form factor. To calculate a matrix element

$$A|T_{}(q)|B$$
(5.1)
we use the prescription of ref. . That is, the hadronic states $`A`$ and $`B`$ correspond to normalizable string states in the bulk, while the local operator insertion corresponds to a modification of the boundary conditions such that the nonnormalizable modes are excited. In particular, a perturbation of the bulk metric to

$$ds^2=R^2\frac{2dx^+dx^{}+2f(X,Y)dx^+dx^++dX^2+dY^2}{Y^2}$$
(5.2)
corresponds to a perturbation of the boundary metric,

$$ds_{\mathrm{boundary}}^2=2dx^+dx^{}+2f(X,Y)dx^+dx^+dX^2.$$
(5.3)
This in turn corresponds to an insertion of the operator

$$i𝑑x^+𝑑x^{}d^2Xf(X,0)T_{}(x^+,x^{},X).$$
(5.4)
The metric perturbation satisfies the same minimal scalar equation (3.3), as a consequence of the field equation $`_{++}=0`$. In $`AdS_5`$ the nonnormalizable solution would be

$$f(X,Y)=e^{iqX}q^2Y^2K_2(qY).$$
(5.5)
In nonconformal theories this is modified at $`Y\stackrel{}{>}Y^{}`$. Let us first consider hard scattering, where $`qY^{}1`$. The metric perturbation is exponentially suppressed in $`qY^{}`$ when $`Y\stackrel{}{>}Y^{}`$, and so we can calculate as though in $`AdS_5`$ (there is an admixture of the normalizable mode, but again this is exponentially suppressed).

A canonically normalized bulk scalar field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ couples to the metric perturbation as

$$i𝑑x^+𝑑x^{}d^2X𝑑Y\frac{R^3}{Y^3}f(X,Y)_{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}\mathrm{\Phi }.$$
(5.6)
A gauge theory hadron corresponds to a superposition of such states, with the mixing being due to the conformal symmetry breaking. For hard scattering, $`f(X,Y)`$ cuts off the integrand at $`Y>q^1`$ and so we are interested in the contribution that is least suppressed at small $`Y`$. As in ref. , if we restrict to scalar fields then the dominant component is that of smallest conformal dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. At small $`Y`$ the scalar wavefunction is

$$\mathrm{\Phi }R^{3/2}Y^{}(Y/Y^{})^\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{exp}(ip_\mu x^\mu ).$$
(5.7)
The normalization is determined as in ref. , though it is written differently here because we have reduced to five dimensions from the start.

The overlap integral (5.6) is peaked at $`Yq^1`$, giving

$$A|T_{}(q)|Bp_{}^2(q^2Y^2)^{1\mathrm{\Delta }}.$$
(5.8)
The numerical normalization depends on the coefficient of the leading piece (5.7) of the wavefunction, which is determined by the details of the geometry at $`Y\stackrel{}{>}Y^{}`$. As with exclusive scattering , the behavior agrees with QCD, with the dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ interpreted as the number of partons. Thus, for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1`$, which cannot actually be attained in AdS/CFT, the hadron has a pointlike form factor. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }>1`$ there is a suppression from the need to transfer momentum to all partons . For bulk fields with spin, the matrix element contains an additional factor of $`q^{s_A+s_B}`$ and the effective number of partons is given by the twist $`\tau =\mathrm{\Delta }s`$ .

The crossover from the hard behavior occurs when $`qY^{}1`$, so the effective size of hadrons is

$$X^2Y^2.$$
(5.9)
This corresponds to the confinement scale as measured by the masses of the lightest hadrons, coming from supergravity modes. As usual in AdS/CFT duality, the length scale set by the flux tube tension is smaller by a factor of $`(gN)^{1/4}`$, being given by the redshift of the fundamental string scale,

$$\alpha _{\mathrm{gauge}\mathrm{theory}}^{1/2}\frac{Y^{}}{R}\alpha ^{1/2}(gN)^{1/4}Y^{}.$$
(5.10)
Thus the size is determined by the holographic spreading and not by the internal wavefunction of the string, except for very highly excited string states. The detailed form of the form factor at small $`q`$ can be obtained from the supergravity dual, but it depends on the details of the conformal symmetry breaking.

These same methods can be applied to obtain other amplitudes such as that for deep inelastic scattering, which is expressed in terms of two-current matrix elements .

## 6 Discussion

The original attempt to describe hadrons as idealized strings was frustrated by the infinite zero point oscillations in the size of strings. Early ideas for modifying string theory such as replacing the idealized strings by fat flux tubes or as collections of partons which approximate strings fit well with QCD but seemed to preclude an idealized mathematical string description.

More recent evidence from AdS/CFT type dualities suggests that idealized string theory in higher dimensions may provide an exact description of the ’t Hooft limit of QCD-like theories. In this paper we have argued that an ideal bulk string theory in five dimensions is fully compatible with a fat non-ideal string in four dimensions.

The fifth dimension can be divided into two regions. The “wall” region near $`Y=Y^{}`$ corresponds to the confinement scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. If we ignore high frequency fluctuations, the string spends most of its time in this region. The usual UV/IR spreading gives the string a thickness of order $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. High frequency fluctuations of small sections of string can occur which cause it to fluctuate toward $`Y=0`$, the region corresponding to short distance behavior in space-time. These fluctuations will control the large momentum behavior of form factors as well as deep inelastic matrix elements. Such fluctuations should give the string a parton-like makeup. We have also seen that these fluctuations stiffen the effective string tension so much that the infinite zero point size is eliminated.

Vertex operators of the form (3.2) define matrix elements of local currents such as the energy momentum tensor. Similar vertices can be constructed for vector currents of $`R`$-charge. Products of such vertices can be studied to uncover the behavior of deep inelastic structure functions in the confining deformations of conformal theories.

Our work and ref.  show that even at large ’t Hooft parameter the short-distance behavior of gauge theories has much in common with QCD. However, to make contact with real QCD we need a better understanding of the strongly coupled world-sheet theory at small $`R`$. Even if we truncate to the single field $`Y`$ the theory (2.8) is nontrivial, and it would be interesting to understand its behavior at small $`R`$.

## 7 Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Juan Maldacena, Mimi Schwarz, and Matt Strassler for helpful discussions. This work was supported by NSF grants PHY98-70115, PHY99-07949 and PHY00-98395.


format: text

text:
# MODELS OF METAL POOR STARS WITH GRAVITATIONAL SETTLING AND RADIATIVE ACCELERATIONS: I. EVOLUTION AND ABUNDANCE ANOMALIES

## 1 Astrophysical context

Helioseismology has confirmed the importance of gravitational settling in the Sun’s external regions (Guzik & Cox 1992; Guzik & Cox 1993; Christensen-Dalsgaard et al. 1993; Proffitt 1994; Bahcall et al. 1995; Guenther et al. 1996; Richard et al. 1996; Brun et al. 1999). Turnoff stars in globular clusters are only slightly less massive than the Sun and have convection zones that tend to be somewhat shallower. In solar type stars, radiative accelerations have been shown to become equal to gravity for some metals around the end of the main sequence lives (Turcotte et al., 1998b). The question of the atomic diffusion of metals in Pop II stars then naturally arises. It is currently of special interest because large telescopes are now making possible the determination of the abundance of metals in the turnoff stars of globular clusters. In this paper evolutionary models that take into account the diffusion of He, LiBeB and metals in Pop II stars are presented for the first time. Surface abundances may then be used as additional constraints in the determination of the age of globular clusters and of the Universe (VandenBerg et al. 2001, hereafter Paper II). Given their old age, Pop II stars are those where the slow effect of atomic diffusion has the largest chance to play a role on the evolutionary properties. Previously published evolutionary models of Pop II stars have included some of the effects of diffusion (Deliyannis et al. 1990; Proffitt & Michaud 1991a; Proffitt & VandenBerg 1991; Salaris et al. 2000; Stringfellow et al. 1983) but never included the effects of the diffusion of metals with their radiative accelerations self consistently.

Determining constraints on stellar hydrodynamics from abundance observations requires knowing the original chemical composition of the star. In Pop II stars there are larger variations in original abundances than in Pop I. For that reason it is essential to use globular clusters for abundance determinations of metals since only then does one have a handle on the original abundances from observations of cluster giants. However LiBeB have an origin partly different from that of most metals. Coupled with their sensitivity to low temperature nuclear burning, their abundance determination in halo stars provides useful constraints on hydrodynamics even if determinations in cluster stars would be preferable. 111Only in the case of NGC 6397 (Molaro & Pasquini, 1994) and M92 (Boesgaard et al., 1999) have Li abundances been determined for turnoff stars, and these data are much less precise than those obtained for halo field stars. The M92 data are discussed later in the paper.

The observation by Spite & Spite (1982) of a plateau in the Li concentration over a relatively large $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ interval of Pop II stars has now been confirmed by many observations. Furthermore, the Li concentration is constant while that of Fe varies by more than a factor of 100 (Cayrel, 1998) from $`[\text{Fe}/\text{H}]=3.7`$ to $`1.5`$. This shows the primordial origin of Li. Its preservation for such a time interval over such a wide $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ interval seriously challenges our understanding of convection and other potential mixing processes in those stars (Michaud et al., 1984). If there were no mixing process outside of convection zones, the surface Li abundance would vary with $`T_{\text{eff}}`$: at small $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ because of nuclear reactions ($`{}_{}{}^{7}\text{Li}(p,\alpha )^4\text{He}`$) and at large $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ because of gravitational settling. Extending convection zones by a simple turbulence model does not solve the problem since, if the extension is sufficient to reduce Li settling enough in the hotter stars, it causes excessive Li destruction in the cooler stars of the plateau (Proffitt & Michaud, 1991a). Efforts were also made to link such an extension to differential rotation (Vauclair 1988 or, as parametrized in the Yale models, Pinsonneault et al. 1999) but the small apparent dispersion in the plateau makes this model unlikely. Ryan et al. (1999) even claim that the destruction may not be by more than 0.1 dex.

Several groups (Cayrel et al. 1999, Hobbs & Thorburn 1994, 1997, Smith et al. 1993) have also observed $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$ in halo stars. Since $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$ is destroyed at a smaller $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ than $`{}_{}{}^{7}\text{Li}`$, its survival in old stars implies a strict and small upper limit on the amount of mixing in those stars. The stars where a detection has been made are all concentrated close to the turnoff (Cayrel et al., 1999). While a mechanism has been suggested to produce $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$ in the Sun (Ramaty et al., 2000), it is not expected to significantly affect atmospheric values so that a star in which $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$ is seen in the atmosphere may not have destroyed a significant fraction of its original $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$.

Boesgaard et al. (1999) determined Be abundances in halo stars as well as a linear correlation with the Fe abundance suggesting that Be has not been destroyed in those stars.

The chemical composition of globular clusters is attracting more attention as large telescopes make the determination of the surface chemical composition of turnoff stars possible. The determination of the abundance of metals makes it possible to put additional constraints on the hydrodynamics of Pop II stars. Some observers have reported factors of 2 differences between Fe abundances in red giants and subgiants (King et al., 1998). However Ramirez et al. (2001) and Gratton et al. (2001) find no difference between the Fe abundances in red giants and turnoff stars. Thévenin et al. (2001) find the same relative abundances as in the Sun in the turnoff stars of NGC 6397. Unexplained anticorrelations between the abundances of O and Na have been observed by Gratton et al. (2001).

In this paper, the surface abundances to be expected in Pop II stars are calculated under different assumptions for the internal stellar hydrodynamics. The first and simplest assumption is that there is no macroscopic motion outside of convection zones. There remains only atomic diffusion, including the effects of gravitational settling, thermal diffusion and radiative accelerations, as a transport process outside of convection zones. On the main sequence, such models have been shown to lead to larger abundance anomalies than are observed (Turcotte et al., 1998a) but also to the appearance of an additional convection zone caused by the accumulation of iron peak elements (Richard et al., 2001). A relatively simple parametrization of turbulence, corresponding to an extension of those Fe convection zones by a factor of about 5 in mass, was shown to lead to a simple explanation of the AmFm phenomenon (Richer et al., 2000). A similar parametrization is used here in Pop II stars and leads to our second series of models. Finally, we use an additional parametrization that is chosen in order to minimize the reduction of the surface Li concentration, so as to provide the best representation of the Spite plateau. Proffitt & Michaud (1991a) introduced a similar parametrization of turbulence to compete with He and Li settling (other parametrizations of turbulence were introduced for the Sun by Richard et al. 1996 and Brun et al. 1999). Basu (1997) has shown that weak turbulence below the solar convection zone also improves agreement with the solar pulsation spectrum. For comparison purposes, series of models are also calculated without diffusion and one model is calculated with gravitational settling but without $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ (see subsubsection 3.2.2).

## 2 CALCULATIONS

### 2.1 Models

The models were calculated as described in Turcotte et al. (1998b). The radiative accelerations are from Richer et al. (1998) with the correction for redistribution from Gonzalez et al. (1995) and LeBlanc et al. (2000). The atomic diffusion coefficients were taken from Paquette et al. (1986). The uncertainties in the atomic and thermal diffusion coefficients have been discussed by Michaud & Proffitt (1993), and by Michaud (1991) in particular for the temperature–density domain of the interior of Pop II stars and the Sun.

Turbulent transport is included as in Richer et al. (2000) and Richard et al. (2001) where the parameters specifying turbulent transport coefficients are indicated in the name assigned to the model. For instance, in the T5.5D400-3 model, the turbulent diffusion coefficient, $`D_\mathrm{T}`$, is 400 times larger than the He atomic diffusion coefficient at $`\mathrm{log}T=5.5`$ and varying as $`\rho ^3`$. To simplify writing, T5.5 will also be used instead of T5.5D400-3 since all models discussed in this paper have the D400-3 parametrization. The $`\rho ^3`$ dependence is suggested (see Proffitt & Michaud 1991b) by observations that the Be solar abundance today is hardly smaller than the original Be abundance (see for instance Bell et al. 2001)

All models considered here were assumed to be chemically homogeneous on the pre-main sequence with the abundance mix appropriate for Pop II stars. The relative concentrations used are defined in Table 1. The relative concentrations of the *alpha* elements are increased compared to the solar mix as is believed to be appropriate in Pop II stars (VandenBerg et al., 2000).

### 2.2 Mixing length

In Turcotte et al. (1998b), the solar luminosity and radius at the solar age were used to determine the value of $`\alpha `$, the ratio of the mixing length to pressure scale height, and of the He concentration in the zero age Sun. They calibrated $`\alpha `$ both in models using Krishna-Swamy’s $`T(\tau )`$ relation (Krishna Swamy, 1966) (both with and without atomic diffusion) and in models using Eddington’s $`T(\tau )`$ relation (only with diffusion). The He concentration mainly affects the luminosity while $`\alpha `$ mainly determines the radius, through the depth of the surface convection zone. The required value of $`\alpha `$ was found to be slightly larger in the diffusive than in the non diffusive models because an increased value of $`\alpha `$ is needed to compensate for He and metals settling from the surface convection zone. The increased $`\alpha `$ in the diffusion models of the Sun is then determined by the settling occurring immediately below the solar surface convection zone. See Freytag & Salaris (1999) for a discussion of uncertainties related with the use of the mixing length in Pop II stars.

Some of the models presented in this paper were calculated with turbulence below the convection zone. The appropriate value of $`\alpha `$ to use then depends on the depth of turbulence. If turbulence is large enough to eliminate settling at the depth of solar models, the most appropriate $`\alpha `$ to use is that determined for non diffusing solar models. If the adopted turbulence is more superficial than the solar convection zone, the appropriate $`\alpha `$ to use is that for the solar models with diffusion. Given the uncertainty, it was chosen to use the same value of $`\alpha `$ for all models, both with and without diffusion, calculated with Eddington’s $`T(\tau )`$ relation. In order to give an estimate of the uncertainty related to $`\alpha `$, two values of $`\alpha `$ (one determined by the solar model without diffusion and one by the solar model with diffusion) will be used for one series of models with diffusion (see subsection 3.3).

The calculated series of models are identified in Table 2. The series labeled KS$`\alpha `$ used a value of $`\alpha `$ determined from a solar model with diffusion while the series labeled KS used a value of $`\alpha `$ determined from a solar model without diffusion.

## 3 EVOLUTIONARY MODELS

Four series of evolutionary models were calculated. In the first subsection, the models with atomic diffusion are presented. In the second one, the models with turbulence and those without diffusion are introduced and compared to the models with atomic diffusion. Two series of models with turbulence are discussed in some detail: a series that minimizes Li underabundance and one that contains a level of turbulence similar to that needed to reproduce the observations of AmFm stars. In the last subsection, the effect of changing boundary conditions is analyzed.

### 3.1 Evolution with atomic diffusion

The $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ and $`\mathrm{log}g`$ as a function of age as well as the luminosity as a function of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ are shown in Figure 1 for evolutionary models calculated including atomic diffusion and only those physical processes that can currently be evaluated properly from first principles. That figure also contains the time variation of the depth of the surface convection zone, of the temperature at its bottom and of central H concentration. Models were calculated for 0.5 to 1.0 $`\text{M}_{}`$ stars from the pre-main–sequence to the bottom of the giant branch except for the 0.85, 0.9 and 1.0 $`\text{M}_{}`$ stars which were stopped earlier because of numerical instabilities. All models shown have $`Z=0.00017`$. The mass interval was chosen to minimize the possibility of interpolation errors in the construction of isochrones (see Paper II).

The variation of the mass in the surface convection zone is large enough to play a major role on surface abundance evolution. In the next two subsections, the effect of radiative accelerations on surface abundances are related to the regression of the surface convection zone during evolution.

#### 3.1.1 Radiative accelerations

The radiative accelerations below the surface convection zone play the most important role in determining the surface abundance variations (see Fig. 2). As the evolution of a 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star proceeds during the main sequence phase, the surface convection zone becomes progressively thinner: between 6 and 11 Gyr, the mass in the convection zone is reduced by a factor of about 20, from $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}=3.0`$ to $`4.3`$ (see Fig. 1). The effect of this regression of the surface convection zone may be seen in the surface abundances through the dependence of $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ on nuclear charge. The $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ on Li has a maximum at $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}5`$ where it is in the hydrogenic configuration. It is completely ionized deeper in the star so that $`g_{\text{rad}}`$(Li) is progressively reduced deeper in. The chemical species with a larger nuclear charge become ionized deeper in so that they are in an hydrogenic configuration deeper in and have the related maximum of their $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ at greater depths. For B, it is at $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}4`$, for O at $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}2`$ and for Si at $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}1`$. Another maximum in the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ appears when a species is in between the atomic configurations of Li and F. This maximum occurs at $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}4`$ for P, and $`2`$ for Cr. These maxima may be followed on the figure for other species. As may be seen from Figure 2, when the atomic species is in the hydrogenic configuration, the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ is rarely larger than gravity. It is larger only for Be, B and C. At the maximum of $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ between the Li-like and F-like configurations, however, $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ is usually larger than gravity. Contrary to what happens in Pop I stars (Richer et al., 1998), the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ do not depend on the abundance of the species since it is too small to cause flux saturation.

#### 3.1.2 Abundances

The time variation of surface abundances in Pop II stars with atomic diffusion is shown in Figure 3. The surface abundances reflect the variation of the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ below the surface convection zone as it moves toward the surface. From Figure 1, one sees that the depth of the surface convection zone gets progressively smaller during evolution until hydrogen is exhausted from the center. In the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model, it starts at a depth of $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}2`$ and is at $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}4.5`$ after 11 Gyr. One sees in Figure 2 that $`g_{\text{rad}}`$(Fe) is smaller than gravity when the convection zone is deep but larger than gravity when it is more superficial. In the early evolution, Fe settles gravitationally though *less rapidly* than He or C, largely because $`g_{\text{rad}}`$(Fe) is not much smaller than gravity. Around 9 Gyr, $`g_{\text{rad}}`$(Fe) becomes larger than gravity below the surface convection zone. One sees the effect in the surface abundances (Figure 3) where the surface Fe concentration starts increasing around 9 Gyr, becoming larger than the original concentration around 10 Gyr and reaching an overabundance by a factor of about 5 just before the star becomes a subgiant, at which point the Fe abundance goes back to very nearly its original value as the convection zone becomes more massive. Similar remarks apply to other chemical species.

The depth dependence of the abundance variations is shown for a 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model in Figure 4. One first notices that the abundance of $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$ is modified by nuclear reactions over the inner 98 % of the mass. Atomic diffusion modifies the abundances over the outer 1 % of the mass. This leaves hardly any intermediate zone. At 6.1 Gyr, the surface convection zone extends down to $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}3.0`$, where the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ are smaller than gravity for most species. Only K, Ca and Ti start to be supported: their abundances in the surface convection zone are larger than immediately below. As evolution proceeds, the convection zone recedes. After 9.1 Gyr, atomic species between Na and Ni are supported as the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ is larger than gravity below the bottom of the convection zone. This continues as the evolution proceeds. After 11.4 Gyr, the Fe abundance, for instance, is 3 times larger than the original abundance in the surface convection zone. That increased concentration of Fe is caused by the migration of Fe above $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}3.5`$ where its $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ becomes larger than gravity. Between $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}4.5`$ and $`2`$, the concentration of Fe decreases since it is either pushed into the surface convection zone by radiative accelerations (for $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}3.5`$) or settles gravitationally below. On the scale of that figure, the concentration variations of Fe are not seen for $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}2`$. It sinks toward the center of the star where a small Fe overabundance appears. The diffusion time scales are long enough that the effects amount to nearly a 10 % increase at the center after 11.4 Gyr (see Fig. 5). This figure may be compared to Figures 15 and 16 of Turcotte et al. (1998b) where the increase in Fe concentration at the center is by about 3 % at the age of the Sun. Transformation of C and O into N also modifies the value of $`Z`$ so that it increases by only 4 % at the center and has a maximum outside of the region where O is transformed into N.

In stars of other masses, surface abundances are also mainly determined by the depth reached by the surface convection zone. In the 0.7 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model, the surface convection zone never gets thinner than $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}3`$ so that no overabundances appear during evolution and underabundances are limited to a factor of about 2. In the 0.9$`\text{M}_{}`$ model on the other hand, the surface Fe abundance starts increasing around 2 Gyr, when the surface convection zone becomes thinner than $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}4`$, where, as seen above, $`g_{\text{rad}}`$(Fe) becomes larger than gravity. In this star, Fe becomes overabundant around 3 Gyr. In Pop II stars of larger mass, the overabundances are larger because the surface convection zones are thinner.

### 3.2 Evolution with turbulent diffusion

#### 3.2.1 Turbulent diffusion coefficient and Li abundance

From Figure 1, one sees that even in one single model, say the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ one, the mass in the convection zone varies from about $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}2.1`$ to $`4.2`$ during the main–sequence evolution. Linking turbulence to the position of the convection zone could never produce a small variation of Li: if one increased the depth of the convection zone by a fixed factor, large enough to eliminate settling around 11 Gyr for instance (a factor of 100 or so is needed), this would lead to complete destruction of Li in the early evolution. To minimize Li abundance reduction, it is essential, if one uses time independent parametrization, to link turbulence to a fixed $`T`$ and not to the bottom of convection zones.

The turbulent transport coefficients used in these calculations are shown in Figure 6. We chose to introduce the turbulence that minimizes the reduction of the surface Li abundance. We consequently defined the turbulent diffusion coefficient as a function of $`T`$ in order to adjust it most closely to the profile that limits gravitational settling of Li while not burning Li. The nuclear reaction $`{}_{}{}^{7}\text{Li}(p,\alpha )^4\text{He}`$ is highly $`T`$ sensitive and the Li burning occurs at $`\mathrm{log}T6.4`$ (see Lumer et al. 1990 for a detailed discussion). Turbulent diffusion was adjusted to be smaller than atomic diffusion slightly below that $`T`$ so that turbulence would reduce settling as much as is possible in surface layers without forcing Li to diffuse by turbulence to $`\mathrm{log}T6.4`$.

A few series of evolutionary models were run in order to optimize turbulence parameters. Examples of the resultant interior Li profiles are shown in Figure 6. The Li concentration always goes down rapidly as a function of increasing $`T`$ for $`\mathrm{log}T6.4`$. In the absence of turbulence, there is a peak in the Li concentration at $`\mathrm{log}T6.3`$. This peak disappears as the strength of turbulence is increased. Turbulence in the T5.5D400-3 model is too weak to influence Li concentration in the $`T`$ interval shown. Turbulence in the T6.0D400-3 model eliminates the Li abundance gradient caused by gravitational settling down to $`\mathrm{log}T6.1`$ while causing little reduction on the largest Li abundance at $`\mathrm{log}T6.3`$. Increasing turbulence further reduces the Li peak, and in the T6.2 model the surface Li abundance is smaller than in the T6.13 model, showing that one has passed the optimal value of turbulence.

It is interesting to note that the turbulent diffusion coefficient of the T6.09D400-3 model of 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ is a factor of about 10 smaller than the turbulent diffusion coefficient found necessary to reproduce the solar Li surface abundance by Proffitt & Michaud (1991b). The latter corresponds approximately to the T6.2D400-3 turbulent diffusion coefficient profile. On the other hand the T5.5D400-3 turbulent diffusion parametrization corresponds approximately, as a function of $`T`$, to that found by Richer et al. (2000) to lead to the abundance anomalies observed in AmFm stars.

#### 3.2.2 Diffusion and stellar structure

A comparison of the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ models with and without diffusion is shown in Figure 7. First compare the Hertzsprung-Russell diagrams. All models with diffusion (both with and without turbulence) nearly have the same evolutionary tracks (those with turbulence are somewhat hotter). However the one without atomic diffusion goes to significantly higher $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ than all models with diffusion. We have also verified that the turnoff temperature is reached 6 to 7 % earlier in the models with diffusion (with or without turbulence) than in the model without diffusion. These differences are reflected in the isochrones based on these tracks and therefore on globular cluster age determinations (see Paper II). They partially come from the structural effects of the global redistribution of He but also from the 4 to 5 % difference in the age at which the central H abundance is exhausted. This in turn is reflected in the shorter age (also 4 to 5 %) at which all diffusion models become subgiants, as seen in the rapid decrease of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ but the rapid increases of the mass and $`T`$ at the bottom of the surface convection zone.

While there are significant differences between the model without diffusion and all those with diffusion, the effect of the different turbulent transport models on the depth and mass at the bottom of the surface convection zone, and the time variation of the central H concentration are seen from Figure 7 to be practically negligible on the scale of that figure. Of the macroscopic properties defining the evolution of a 0.8$`\text{M}_{}`$ star, only the $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ and $`\mathrm{log}g`$ appear to be modified by the turbulence models that were introduced. While it is not shown for other masses, it is also true for them. However it is shown in Paper II that the differences in $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ that seem small on the scale of Figure 7 are important in the comparison of calculated and observed isochrones.

Given that there are, in the literature, calculations of Pop II evolutionary tracks with gravitational settling but no $`g_{\text{rad}}`$, it is worth noting that the track ($`LT_{\text{eff}}`$ relation; upper left hand part of Fig. 7) of such a model is, around turnoff, slightly cooler than the track of the model with diffusion and $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ but no turbulence. Furthermore the Fe abundance is very different, by a factor of about 1000, at 12 Gyr. The $`T_{\text{bcz}}`$ is smaller by 0.1 dex mainly because of the reduction of opacity caused by the reduction of the Fe abundance. *It is a better approximation not to let Fe diffuse at all in a 0.8$`\text{M}_{}`$ star than to calculate its gravitational settling without including the effects of $`g_{\text{rad}}`$(Fe)*. The Li abundance is smaller by a factor of 2 in this case both because of the reduction of the $`T_{\text{bcz}}`$ and because $`g_{\text{rad}}`$(Li) has some effect in the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model.

#### 3.2.3 Stellar structure and abundances

The surface abundance anomalies caused by atomic diffusion are much more affected by turbulence than the macroscopic properties. In the T5.5 model, turbulence reduces surface abundance anomalies but only in the time interval from 9 to 12 Gyr. Before 9 Gyr, the surface convection zone is deeper than $`\mathrm{log}T5.7`$ while in the T5.5D400-3 model, the turbulent diffusion coefficient is larger than atomic diffusion only for temperatures up to $`\mathrm{log}T5.8`$. Only when the surface convection zone has retracted sufficiently for turbulent diffusion to be larger than atomic diffusion below the convection zone, does turbulence have any effect. In this model, the turbulent diffusion coefficient does not suppress completely the effects of atomic diffusion (see Fig. 7). It reduces them by an amount dependent on the chemical species. An Fe overabundance appears in the absence of turbulence but it is eliminated in the T5.5 model while the He underabundance is much less affected. The T6.0 model has the same turbulence profile as the T5.5D400-3 model except that the profile is shifted towards higher temperatures by a factor of 3 in $`T`$ (see Fig. 6); this leads to a much larger effect on abundance anomalies. It limits the effect of atomic diffusion on the surface abundances of He and Li to a factor of $`1.6`$.

The effect of turbulent transport on the interior concentrations in a 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star is shown, for two values of turbulence, in Figure 8. The no turbulence case is also shown for comparative purposes. The internal concentration profiles are shown at nearly the same age in the three models. Such a star today would be close to the turnoff. It is also the evolutionary epoch when the effect of radiative accelerations and diffusion are largest and when the effect of adding a turbulent diffusion coefficient is greatest. In the T6.09D400-3 case, the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ never play a large role since turbulence mixes down to $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}=2.3`$ and the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ are not much greater than gravity at that depth. In fact they are greater than gravity only for Ti, Cr, Mn and Fe and only around the end of evolution when $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ causes settling to slow down in the exterior region. A minimum in abundances appears at $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}=1.8`$ because of that slow down in the settling from above while settling continues unabated below. In the star with the T5.5D400-3 parametrization, there is mixing from the surface down to $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}4`$. Deeper in the star, radiative accelerations (see Fig. 2) are greater than gravity over a sufficient mass interval to cause overabundances in the surface regions for chemical species between Al and Ca and for Ni. The $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ for Mg, Ti, Cr, Mn and Fe are just sufficient to bring them back to their original abundance while most of the chemical species between He and Na are less supported and remain underabundant in the atmosphere. The exceptions are B and C which are very nearly normal. This behavior is to be contrasted to that in the star with no turbulence, where mixing by the surface convection zone extends from the surface down to $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Delta }M/M_{}4.4`$; the concentration gradients below the convection zone are very steep because of the absence of turbulence; this leads to larger overabundances, in particular a factor of 10 for Si and S but of 3 for most Fe peak elements; while C becomes underabundant, B becomes overabundant. Turbulence changes the position in the star where atomic diffusion dominates and so where the sign of $`(g_{\text{rad}}g)`$ matters. However, turbulent transport also modifies the steepness of concentration gradients. Together with evolutionary time scales, these determine over– vs under–abundances. This shows the need for complete evolutionary models in order to determine surface abundances.

### 3.3 Surface boundary conditions

Changing the surface boundary conditions has a significant effect on the depth of the surface convection zone (see Section 2.2 and Fig. 9). Two boundary conditions were used. Both are often used for Pop II models. In their solar models, Turcotte et al. (1998b) used mainly Krishna Swamy’s $`T(\tau )`$ relation. It is used here for some series of models. Eddington’s $`T(\tau )`$ relation is also used: it was used for A and F Pop I stars by Turcotte et al. (1998a) and Richer et al. (2000). In Turcotte et al. (1998b), the Sun is used to determine the appropriate value of $`\alpha `$ to use with each of these boundary conditions. One may view the difference in convection zone mass between the models (Fig. 9) as a reasonable estimate of the uncertainty. During evolution, the uncertainty varies from a factor of 1.3 to 1.6 in mass. This is sufficient to modify the fits to globular cluster isochrones (see Paper II). It has however a less pronounced effect on surface abundances than the uncertainty on turbulence. It modifies significantly surface abundances only when no turbulence is included in the models.

## 4 Surface abundances and observations

The surface concentrations of the 28 species impose constraints on stellar models. They will be shown for three series of models, the atomic diffusion models with no turbulence, those that mimic the turbulence of AmFm stars and those that minimize the effects of transport on surface Li concentration. Surface abundance variations as a function of time have been discussed above (see subsections 3.1 and 3.2). They are discussed below as a function of atomic number and of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ in order to facilitate comparison to observations. In the first subsection, we present the results for all calculated species for individual stars. In the second subsection, we present results at a given age for stars of various masses as a function of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$. They are then compared to observations in the last subsection.

### 4.1 As a function of atomic number

The surface concentrations at 10 and 12 Gyr are shown as a function atomic number in Figure 10 for the evolutionary models with atomic diffusion and no turbulence (see also subsection 3.1). The 0.7 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model is the one with the smallest mass shown. In it, gravitational settling causes a general reduction of surface abundances by close to 0.2 dex. As may be seen from Figure 1, the convection zone is always at least 1% of the mass in a 0.7 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star so that radiative accelerations play a modest role (see Fig. 2). In the 0.6 and 0.5 $`\text{M}_{}`$ models (not shown), the mass in the surface convection zone is always larger than about 20 % of the stellar mass so that gravitational settling is negligible even after 10 or 12 Gyr.

In stars of 0.75 $`\text{M}_{}`$ or more, the surface convection zone occupies less than 0.1 % of the stellar mass for part of the evolution. The $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ then play the major role for that part of the evolution. At 10 Gyr, the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model is significantly affected by $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ (see Fig. 10). The atomic species most affected are those between Al and Ca. They have overabundances by factors of up to 5. The Fe peak elements are hardly affected. In the 0.84 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model, Ni is overabundant by a factor of 70, while Fe is overabundant by a factor of 30. Large underabundances are expected for CNO and Li while Be and B are supported at least partly by their $`g_{\text{rad}}`$. Since the original metallic abundances are small, the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ are little affected by line saturation and the abundance anomalies reflect essentially the atomic configuration of the dominant ionization state of each chemical species. For instance, Li is completely stripped of its electrons while C, N and O are mainly in He-like configurations (see also Richer et al. 1998).

At 12 Gyr, the 0.84 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model has already evolved to the giant phase. The most massive star around the turnoff has 0.81 $`\text{M}_{}`$. It is already 300 K cooler than the turnoff so that its surface convection zone has already started to expand and its abundance anomalies to decrease. While its Fe peak shows approximately the original abundances, the species between Al and Ca have overabundances by up to a factor of 5. Note again that Be and B are supported by their $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ while Li has sunk. At that age, the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star is the star with the largest anomalies. Ni and species between Na and Cl are about a factor of 15 overabundant. He, Li and CNO are underabundant by a factor of about 10. At 12 Gyr, the 0.80 $`\text{M}_{}`$ is at the peak of its abundance anomalies: its surface convection zone is just about to start getting deeper (see Fig. 1). The 0.7 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star also has larger anomalies than at 10 Gyr. Its surface convection zone is still getting smaller (see Fig. 1) while the 20 % longer life means more time for gravitational settling.

At 13.5 Gyr (the age of the oldest clusters as determined in Paper II) the surface abundances are shown in Figure 11 for stars with no turbulence. The lower mass star, 0.7 $`\text{M}_{}`$, is at $`T_{\text{eff}}=6000`$ K and has seen its original abundances reduced by approximately 0.3 dex. This applies, in particular, to Li. The slightly warmer (6300 K) 0.75 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star has a larger Li underabundance ($``$0.5 dex), marginally larger Fe peak underabundances ($``$0.39 dex) but the Ca abundance goes back to its original value because it is supported by its $`g_{\text{rad}}`$. Chemical species between Al and Ti are at least partially supported by their $`g_{\text{rad}}`$. The slightly more evolved 0.77 and 0.78 $`\text{M}_{}`$ stars have nearly the same $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ but slightly lower gravities, less massive surface convection zones (see Fig. 1) and larger abundance anomalies than the 0.75 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star. The two have very similar abundance anomalies. Fe has about its original abundance while species between Al and Ca have larger surface abundances than their original ones. Li is underabundant by a factor of 7.3. A comparison to Figure 10 shows that, for instance, Ni and Al abundance anomalies are reduced by a factor of 10 as one goes from clusters of 10 Gyr to clusters of 12 Gyr and then by a factor of 5 as one goes from clusters of 12 Gyr to clusters of 13.5 Gyr. As clusters age, the abundance anomalies caused by atomic diffusion in turnoff stars get progressively smaller.

The effect of turbulence strength on surface composition is shown for the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model in Figure 12 at 10 and 12 Gyr. As a general rule, turbulence reduces abundance anomalies. However, in a 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star, the effect of the T5.5D400-3 turbulence is more complex. Mg is mildly overabundant in the absence of turbulence but normal for the turbulence used, while Na goes from slightly over to slightly underabundant and the overabundance of Ca is increased by the increased turbulence. The anomalies between Al and Cl are more robust. These differences in behavior may be related to the differences in the internal distribution of the abundance variations caused by diffusion for various species (see Fig. 8). At 11.7 Gyr, species from Na to Cl have their maximum concentrations in the surface convection zone in the absence of turbulence. They are reduced by the extra mixing brought about by turbulence. However, Ar, K, Ca and Ti have their maximum concentrations below the convection zone so that some extra mixing increases their surface abundances. As a comparison with Figure 10 shows, the effect of adding turbulence is similar to that of considering a slightly more evolved, slightly more massive model (compare the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star with T5.5 of Fig. 12 with the 0.81 $`\text{M}_{}`$ of Fig. 10), in that Fe peak anomalies are nearly eliminated in both while those between C and Ca are mildly reduced in both. The 0.78 $`\text{M}_{}`$ no-turbulence model (not shown) has very similar surface concentrations as both the 0.81 $`\text{M}_{}`$ model without turbulence and the 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$ star with T5.5 turbulence. It differentiates itself by slightly larger N, O and F underabundances.

However, the mixing that is strong enough to minimize Li abundance variations (the T6.09 model) goes deeper than the region where $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ play a substantial role. Turbulence then reduces the abundance anomalies of all metals to 0.1$``$0.2 dex. All metals are underabundant if mixing is that strong.

### 4.2 As a function of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$.

The 12 Gyr surface abundance isochrones are shown as a function of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ for a number of species (6Li, 7Li, Be, B, C, O, Na, Mg, Al, Si, S, Cl, Ca, Cr, Fe and Ni) in Figure 13 for the cases of atomic diffusion with no turbulence as well as with two turbulence strengths (T5.5 and T6.09). One first notes that, at the cool end, below 5000 K, there are only very small underabundances ($`0.1`$ dex) for all species and all turbulence strengths, except for Li which is destroyed by nuclear reactions and, to a lesser extent, Be. As one considers hotter stars, all underabundance factors increase until one reaches 6000 K. There the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ start to play a role for some species. Furthermore, in the vicinity of the turnoff, stars of similar $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ have very different evolution states. In the absence of turbulence, some turnoff stars can have overabundances of Fe by up to 0.7 dex. Around the turnoff the Fe abundance can vary between $``$0.3 dex underabundance and 0.7 dex overabundance. The presence of even a very small amount of turbulence reduces this range by more than 0.7 dex (compare the continuous and dotted lines). The maximum abundance is reduced to the original Fe abundance while the underabundance factor is only slightly reduced to 0.25 dex. B, Mg, Cr, Mn and Ni are similarly affected by the same turbulence model though by slightly smaller factors. However the overabundances between P (not shown) and Ca are more robust. The range of Cl anomalies is merely reduced from a factor of 20 to a factor of about 7. Similarly, the large underabundances (He, Li, N and O; He and N are not shown) are not much reduced by the introduction of a small amount of turbulence. In a given cluster, the range of chemical species calculated then offers the possibility of testing turbulence models.

The surface abundance isochrones at the age determined for M92 in Paper II are shown in Figure 14. One first notes, by comparing to Figure 13, the strong reduction in all abundance variations around the turnoff but the general slight increase in all underabundances in stars with $`T_{\text{eff}}6000`$ K. The increased underabundances reflect the increased time available for gravitational settling and the slight reduction in the depth of the surface convection zone between 12 and 13.5 Gyr (see Fig. 1).

At 13.5 Gyr, one then expects, in the absence of turbulence, underabundances of 0.05 dex at $`T_{\text{eff}}=5000`$ K increasing to 0.1 dex around 5500 K. Above that $`T_{\text{eff}}`$, underabundances remain approximately constant for stars with the T6.09 turbulence model. If there is no turbulence, underabundances increase to 0.3 dex at 6000 K and above that $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ both over and underabundances are present as $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ play a significant role. For the Fe peak elements, abundances are between the original and 0.3 dex underabundance. Only Ni could have an overabundance. Between C and Na all species are underabundant by a factor of order 2 while species between Al and Ca are generally overabundant. The presence of the T5.5 turbulence model mainly affects Al, Si, Fe and Ni overabundances which it reduces to or below the original abundance. Its presence is sufficient to reduce the expected range of underabundances of Fe to $`0.3\mathrm{}0.1`$ dex.

## 5 Comparison to observations

Since in this paper results are presented only for stars with $`Z=0.00017`$, we will compare with the abundance determinations in M92 (see Boesgaard et al. 1998 and King et al. 1998). In so far as one may assume all cluster stars to share the same original composition, giant stars give a handle on the original turnoff star composition. The observations of clusters with larger $`Z`$ values will be discussed in a forthcoming paper where the evolutionary calculations for various values of $`Z`$ will be presented. We will use Li abundance in field halo stars with $`Z0.001`$ to complement the M92 observations. Since Li is believed to be of cosmological origin in these stars, one expects that the original abundance is the same for all.

The $`{}_{}{}^{7}\text{Li}`$ observations of Spite & Spite (1982) and Spite et al. (1984), who have established the presence of a Li abundance plateau, are compared in Figure 15 to $`{}_{}{}^{7}\text{Li}`$ abundance isochrones at the age of M92 (13.5 Gyr) and at 12 Gyr. The observations of Ryan et al. (1999), are also included since they further constrain the high $`T`$ part of the plateau. Given these results, it appears difficult to question the constraints imposed by the Li plateau, as done by Salaris & Weiss (2001). Results for 3 series of models are shown: those with atomic diffusion without turbulence and those with the T5.5 and T6.09 turbulent transport models. The stars calculated with the T6.09 model clearly fit the $`{}_{}{}^{7}\text{Li}`$ observations much better. Both at 12 and 13.5 Gyr, there is a uniform $`{}_{}{}^{7}\text{Li}`$ abundance extending from $`T_{\text{eff}}=5500`$ to 6000 K, in agreement with observations. It corresponds to an underabundance by 0.17 dex from the original Li abundance. Note also that $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$ is reduced by less than a factor of 2 in turnoff stars (see Fig. 13 and Fig. 14), which is compatible with the observations of the presence of $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$ in those Pop II objects (see Cayrel et al. 1999).

The series of models calculated without turbulence and that calculated with the T5.5 model do not reproduce the observations for $`T_{\text{eff}}6100`$ K. Given the observational error bars, the T6.09 model leads to a $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ dependence of $`X`$(Li) which is perhaps more constant than required. However, at 12 Gyr, calculations with the T6.0 model (not shown) give a Li abundance 0.15 dex smaller at 6500 K than at 5600 K. While perhaps compatible with the error bars, this would lead to a significantly poorer fit and may be considered the lower limit to the turbulent transport required by observations.

The lithium abundances observed in the M92 turnoff stars by Boesgaard et al. (1998) are also shown in the 13.5 Gyr part of the figure. The error bars are much larger than for field stars mainly because of the much smaller signal to noise ratio. The determined Li abundances suggest a slightly larger original value for the Li abundance in M92 than in halo stars but, given the size of the error bars, this could be considered uncertain. One star has a Li abundance higher than the others by a factor larger than the error bars. Other stars at the same $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ have a clearly smaller equivalent width of the Li doublet. The authors used this to argue for Li destruction by a large factor in Pop II stars. This appears premature to us.

King et al. (1998) have observed 7 metals mainly in three subgiant stars of M92 with $`T_{\text{eff}}6020`$ K (see their discussion of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ in their section 4.3), which is slightly cooler than our 6300 K turnoff $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ at 13.5 Gyr. Their determination of the Fe abundance is based on more lines and appears more reliable than that of other metals. It is the only metal we discuss. Their main conclusion is that the subgiants of M92 have a 0.26 dex lower Fe abundance than the giants of M92 as determined by Sneden et al. (1991). They carefully discuss all sources of error and cannot completely exclude that this 0.26 dex difference be reduced even possibly to zero. If the T6.09 turbulent transport model applies, all 3 stars should have the same Fe abundance and it should be approximately 0.1 dex smaller than the original Fe abundance according to our Figure 14. The giants should have the original Fe abundance because of their large surface convection zones. This seems quite compatible with the observations of Fe given the uncertainties.

King et al. (1998) also find (their section 4.2) that star 21 has a 0.15 dex larger Fe abundance than the other two (stars 18 and 46). Furthermore Boesgaard et al. (1998) observed that the 7Li abundance is a factor of 3 smaller in star 21 than in star 18. This is to be compared to our results in Figure 14. At the turnoff, the Li and Fe abundances are sensitive functions of both the exact evolutionary state and turbulence. At 13.5 Gyr, in 0.78 $`\text{M}_{}`$ models without turbulence, the Fe abundance is $``$0.05 dex from normal. Introducing the T5.5 turbulence model reduces it by 0.25 dex while the T6.09 model brings it back to $``$0.1 dex from normal. As may be seen in Figure 16, the Fe abundance as a function of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ has a complex loop structure around the turnoff in both 0.8 and 0.78 $`\text{M}_{}`$ stars. Small changes in evolutionary state and/or turbulence can change the Fe abundance by 0.2$``$0.3 dex and the 7Li abundance by 0.5$``$0.6 dex. At the turnoff, the different Li and Fe abundances would then be explained by a different turbulence between the stars, resolving the difficulty described in Section 4.2 of King et al. (1998). They would become the Pop II analogue of AmFm stars. However all three of those stars appear to be past the turnoff. As Figure 16 shows, the $`g_{\text{rad}}`$ have significant effects on surface abundances in stars of mass 0.77 $`\text{M}_{}`$ and more but, for Fe, these effects are limited to $`T_{\text{eff}}6100`$ K. As seen in Figure 17, the abundance variations at the turnoff are not expected in subgiants when they reach 6020 K. At this temperature, reducing turbulence leads to more gravitational settling for both Li and Fe which cannot explain the differences between stars 18 and 21. While turnoff stars of a cluster could have abundance variations as observed for stars 18, 21 and 46, these are not expected in stars with exactly the parameters determined for them—and this is a difficulty even if there appears to be considerable uncertainty in the $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ of stars in this cluster (compare the $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ of Carney 1983 to those of King 1993 and the discussion in Section 4.3 of King et al. 1998). Note that in the comparison to our evolutionary models, it is the absolute $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ scale that matters and not just the $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ with respect to the turnoff $`T_{\text{eff}}`$. If anomalies are confirmed, agreement with our model would require the higher $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ scale for M92.

## 6 Conclusion

It has been clearly shown that, contrary to the belief expressed in many papers and recently by Chaboyer et al. (2001), atomic diffusion does not necessarily lead to underabundances of metals in Pop II stars. Differential radiative accelerations lead to overabundances of Fe and some other chemical elements in some turnoff stars.

Consider the evolution of Pop II stars with no tubulence. As one may see by considering the solid curves in Figures 13 and 14, generalized underabundances by 0.1 dex are expected in the $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ interval from 4600 to 5500 K. Between 5500 and 6000 K, the underabundances are still generalized and increase to 0.3 dex for some species such as O. In 12 Gyr turnoff stars however ($`T_{\text{eff}}6000`$K), overabundances by a factor of up to 10 are possible (e.g. Al and Ni). All calculated species heavier than Na may have overabundances. At a given $`T_{\text{eff}}`$, variations are expected from star to star. At 13.5 Gyr, similar but smaller anomalies are expected. The overabundances are sensitive to any left over turbulence below the convection zone.

In this paper, the evolution of stars with $`Z=0.00017`$ has been described both with and without turbulence. A 0.1 dex underabundance of metals in turnoff stars as compared to giants has been shown to be the smallest anomaly to be expected (section 4.2). Star– to– star variations were seen to be possible around the turnoff, if turbulence is small enough. Observations (see section 5) suggest the presence of abundance variations similar to those expected. The comparison to observations is, however, sensitive to the $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ scale. As King et al. (1998) concluded at the end of their section 4.2, higher quality data is probably required to establish the reality of Fe abundance variations within M92. The accurate determination of the abundance of more species is also needed. This may well have implications not only for intrinsic abundance variations in clusters but for internal stellar structure.

The effect of varying $`Z`$ on the evolution of Pop II stars will be investigated in a forthcoming paper, (Paper III), where comparisons to higher $`Z`$ clusters will be undertaken. Increasing $`Z`$ in Pop II stars will be shown to reduce considerably the expected abundance anomalies. Note also that Paper II shows that the present models for $`[\text{Fe}/\text{H}]_0=1.31`$ accurately reproduce the CMD locations of local Population II subdwarfs having Hipparcos parallaxes and metallicities within +/$``$ 0.2 dex of $`[\text{Fe}/\text{H}]=1.3`$.

In a number of clusters with higher $`Z`$ than M92, observations suggest that only small variations, if any, are present in turnoff stars (see for instance Ramirez et al. 2001; Gratton et al. 2001 and Thévenin et al. 2001). Furthermore in field halo stars, the Li abundance puts strict constraints on any chemical separation. In the companion paper (Paper II) we therefore took the cautious approach to use mainly evolutionary models that minimize the effect of atomic diffusion.

It has been shown that the use, in complete stellar evolution models, of a relatively simple parametrization of turbulent transport leads to Li surface abundances compatible with the Li plateau observed in field halo stars (with a 0.17 dex reduction from the original Li abundance) and small variations in the surface abundances of metals (a 0.1 dex reduction of the metal abundance in turnoff stars as compared to that in giants in clusters with $`Z=0.00017`$). At the same time, the gravitational settling of He leads to a reduction in the age of globular clusters by some 10 % (see Paper II). However simple the parametrization of turbulent transport, it is not understood from first principles. The high level of constancy of Li abundance as a function of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ requires that turbulence mixes to very nearly the same $`T`$ throughout the star evolution and in stars covering a mass interval of approximately 0.6 to 0.8 $`\text{M}_{}`$. As already noted by Michaud et al. (1984), this is not expected in standard stellar models. No convincing hydrodynamic model has been proposed that explains this property. Pop II stars appear to tell us that this is the case, however.

Mass loss is another physical process that could compete with atomic diffusion and maintain a constant value of Li as a function of $`T_{\text{eff}}`$ (Vauclair & Charbonnel, 1995). Whether, in the absence of turbulent transport, it could be made consistent with the observations of metals in globular cluster turnoff stars is a question that requires further calculations. These may lead to observational tests of the relative importance of mass loss and turbulence in these objects. The number of chemical species that are now included in these calculations and that can be observed makes such tests possible.

We thank an anonymous referee for constructive comments that led to significant improvements of this paper. This research was partially supported at the University of Victoria and the Université de Montréal by NSERC. We thank the Réseau Québécois de Calcul de Haute Performance (RQCHP) for providing us with the computational resources required for this work. S.T. extends his warm thanks to the Service d’Astrophysique at CEA-Saclay for an enjoyable and productive stay during which part of this research was performed. This work was performed in part under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, by the University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract No.W-7405-Eng-48.