text:
# WHY THE LAWS OF PHYSICS ARE JUST SO

## 1 INTRODUCTION

If at all a fundamental physical theory be derived, it is by teleological arguments—from what it is good for. It has been suggested, for instance, that the laws of physics are preconditions (conditions of possibility) of empirical science . They might, instead, be preconditions of observers, of life, or of chemistry. This article presents arguments in support of the view that both the standard model of elementary particle physics (SM)  and general relativity (GR) are preconditions of an “interesting” world, defined by Squires  as one that contains chemistry. It further suggests that the very existence of stable, spatially extended material objects, if not the very existence of a physical world, may require the validity of the SM and GR, at least as effective theories.

It is well known, but rarely sufficiently appreciated, that matter owes its stability at least in part to the indefiniteness of the relative positions between its constituents. Section 2 shows that the proper way of dealing with indefinite properties or values leads straight to the existence of a unique density operator and the familiar trace rule of quantum mechanics (QM). Section 3 explains why the vector space of QM must be complex. Section 4 derives the local metric structure of the world, which is described by special relativity. Section 5 demonstrates that the only possible effects on the motion of a scalar particle are those represented by the vector potential $`A`$ and the metric tensor $`g`$. Section 6 traces the steps leading to quantum field theory in general and to quantum electrodynamics (QED) in particular, argues that QED and GR are necessary but not sufficient for chemistry, and presents arguments in support of the following: The electroweak and strong forces—U(1)$``$SU(2)$``$SU(3)—together with GR constitute the simplest theoretical structure consistent with chemistry. Sections 7 and 8 put forward arguments suggesting that the very stability of matter, if not the very existence of the physical world, implies both the SM and GR.

The final sections address a couple of related issues. Section 8 suggests that the final theory envisaged by Weinberg  and others may be nothing more than the best effective theory, and Sec. 9 argues that perhaps we don’t need a quantum theory of gravity, inasmuch as all that such a theory would allow us to do is investigate the world on scales that do not exist.

## 2 THE ORIGIN OF THE TRACE RULE

An obvious feature of our world is the stability of matter. By this I mean the existence of spatially extended material objects that neither explode nor implode the moment they are formed. It is well known that matter owes this feature in part to the indefiniteness of the relative positions between its constituents; together with the exclusion principle it “fluffs out” matter .

The importance of indefiniteness for the obvious stability of matter can hardly be overstated. This makes it an excellent starting point for a derivation of the laws of QM. As is explained elsewhere , the proper way of dealing with variables with indefinite values is to make counterfactual probability assignments. If an observable is said to have an “indefinite value,” what is meant is that it does not have a value (inasmuch as no value is indicated) but that it would have a value if one were indicated, and that positive probabilities are associated with at least two possible values.

The most important feature of observables with indefinite values is that their values are extrinsic. Since the indefiniteness of an observable implies that it sometimes does and sometimes does not have a value, a criterion is called for, and this is the existence of a value-indicating fact—an actual event or state of affairs from which the value can in principle be inferred. An observable with extrinsic values possesses a value only if, and only to the extent that, a value is indicated by a fact . (Since only a fact can indicate something, the words “by a fact” are of course redundant.) Specifically, no position is a possessed position unless it is an indicated position.

What else can we deduce from the existence of observables with indefinite values? Let me begin by denouncing a didactically disastrous approach to QM. This starts with the observation that in classical physics the state of a system is represented by a point $`𝒫`$ in some phase space, and that the system’s possessed properties are represented by the subsets containing $`𝒫`$. Next comes the question, what are the quantum-mechanical counterparts to $`𝒫`$ and the subsets containing $`𝒫`$ qua representations of an actual state of affairs and possessed properties, respectively? Once we accept this as a valid question, we are on a wild-goose chase.

If at all we need to proceed from classical physics, the proper way to do so is to point out that every classical system is associated with a probability measure, that this is represented by a point $`𝒫`$ in some phase space, that observable properties are represented by subsets, and that the probability of observing a property is 1 if the corresponding subset contains $`𝒫`$; otherwise it is 0. Next comes the question, what are the quantum-mechanical counterparts to $`𝒫`$ and the subsets containing $`𝒫`$ qua representations of a probability measure and observable properties, respectively? Once we have the answer to this we are ready for the next question: Is it possible to reinterpret the quantum-mechanical counterpart to $`𝒫`$ as representing an actual state of affairs connoting a set of possessed properties? Because the classical probability measure assigns trivial probabilities (either 0 or 1), it is possible to think of it as an actual state of affairs. Because quantal probability measures generally assign nontrivial probabilities (neither 0 nor 1), it is not possible to similarly reinterpret the quantum counterpart to $`𝒫`$.

To find the quantum counterpart to $`𝒫`$, all we have to do is make room for nontrivial probabilities, and the obvious way to do this is to replace the subsets of a phase space by the subspaces of a vector space, or by the corresponding projectors. An atomic probability measure will then be a 1-dimensional subspace $`U`$, probability 1 will be assigned to properties that contain $`U`$, probability 0 to properties that are orthogonal to $`U`$, and the remaining properties will be associated with nontrivial probabilities. The possible values of an observable will evidently correspond to an orthogonal resolution of the identity, and compatible attributions of properties will be represented by projectors that are sums of projectors from an orthogonal resolution of the identity—that is, by commuting projectors. Finally, the probability assigned to the sum of two orthogonal projectors will be the sum of the probabilities assigned to the individual projectors. This is nothing but the classical sum rule for the probability of “either $`A`$ or $`B`$,” which holds if $`A`$ and $`B`$ are members of a set of mutually exclusive events, provided that one of them happens. Since probabilities are assigned on the proviso that a value be indicated, this condition is always satisfied.

All of the above follows directly from the obvious way to make room for nontrivial probabilities—namely, the substitution of subspaces for subsets and 1-dimensional subspaces for points. It is sufficient to prove Gleason’s theorem  for real and complex vector spaces with more than two dimensions , according to which probability assignments based on earlier value-indicating facts are governed by the familiar trace rule and a unique density operator. The theorem has recently been proved for two dimensions as well . The question as to why QM needs a complex vector space will be answered in the following section.

## 3 WHY COMPLEX NUMBERS?

Consider a series of measurements. (A measurement is anything that results in an actual event or state of affairs from which the possession of a property by a physical system or a value by a physical variable can in principle be inferred.) If we assign probabilities to the possible results of the final measurement, we have to do so in conformity with the probability algorithm derived in the previous section. If the intermediate measurements are not performed but the histories that lead to a possible result of the final measurement are defined in terms of the possible results of the intermediate measurements, the probability of any possible final result will, according to that algorithm, be given by the (absolute) square of a sum over all the histories that lead to this result. Each history contributes an amplitude, which may be real or complex.

Next consider the limit of a series of unperformed position measurements on a scalar particle, in which the histories become continuous trajectories. Suppose $`s`$ parametrizes such a trajectory, and $`ds_1`$ and $`ds_2`$ label adjoining infinitesimal segments. Our probability algorithm requires us to multiply the amplitudes associated with successive segments of a history, so that

$$A(ds_1+ds_2)=A(ds_1)A(ds_2).$$
(1)
Hence the amplitude for propagation along an infinitesimal path segment can be written as $`A(ds)=\mathrm{exp}(zds)`$, and the amplitude for propagation along a path $`𝒞`$ can be written as $`A(s[𝒞])=\mathrm{exp}(zs[𝒞])`$. If $`z`$ had a real part, the probability of finding the particle anywhere would not be conserved; it would either increase or decrease exponentially with time. It follows that $`A(s[𝒞])`$ must be a phase factor $`\mathrm{exp}(ibs[𝒞])`$.

## 4 THE ROAD TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY

Consider a scalar particle and a particular continuous path. As the particle travels along this path (in our imagination if nowhere else), $`s`$ increases, and $`\mathrm{exp}(ibs)`$ rotates in the complex plane. Let us say that every time it completes a cycle, the particle “ticks.” If the particle is free, it singles out a class of uniform time parameters—those for which the number of ticks per second is constant. Different particles may tick at different rates, which are related to the standard rate of one tick per second by the species-specific constant factor $`b`$.

So much for the origin and meaning of mass and proper time. Our next task is to determine the physical roots of the spatial part of the metric. An analysis of two-slit interference experiments (in the framework of standard QM)  has shown that physical space cannot be a self-existent and intrinsically differentiated expanse. Space is the totality of positions that are possessed by material objects, and since these are relatively defined, there are no absolute positions. By the same token, there is no absolute rest. As a consequence, the proper-time interval $`ds`$ and inertial coordinates are related via

$$ds^2=dt^2+K(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2),$$
(2)
where $`K`$ is a universal constant, which may be positive, zero, or negative .

Here are some of the reasons why $`K>0`$ can be excluded. (i) Ubiquitous causal loops: Reversing an object’s motion in time is as easy as changing its direction of motion in space. (ii) The nonexistence of an invariant speed—a speed that is independent of the inertial frame in which it is measured—rules out massless particles, long-range forces, and the possibility of resting the spatial part of the metric on the cyclic behavior of particles (the rates at which they tick). The last point is decisive, in as much as all there is to fix the spatial part of the metric is the rates at which free or freely falling particles tick. Since space is not a self-existent and intrinsically differentiated expanse, the metric has to be defined—as well as brought into existence—by the behavior of the world’s material constituents. And the only thing that a scalar particle does is tick as time passes. This cyclic behavior realizes (makes real) the temporal part of the metric. Hence if there is to be a spacetime metric, its spatial part must be determined by its temporal part.

If $`K`$ is not positive, causal loops are ruled out by the existence of an invariant speed. For $`K=0`$ this is infinite, and for negative $`K`$ it is $`c=\sqrt{1/|K|}`$. The problem with the nonrelativistic case $`K=0`$ is that the rates at which free particles tick still cannot fix the spatial part of the metric. They just define a universal inertial time scale via $`ds=dt`$. Nor are light signals available for converting time units into space units. Nor do we get interference from free particles since $`\mathrm{exp}(ibs[𝒞])`$ is the same for all paths with identical endpoints—and without interference QM is inconsistent (with the existence of a macroworld, which it presupposes ). It is possible to obtain interference via an action that depends on the frame, but if all there is to fix the spatial part of the metric—for every inertial frame—is the cyclic behavior of free or freely falling particles, this ought to be invariant. And for this we need a finite invariant speed (negative $`K`$).

## 5 THE CLASSICAL FORCES

The rates at which particles “tick” not only found the metric properties of the world but also make it possible to influence the behavior of matter by influencing particle propagators. The only way of influencing the probability of finding at one spacetime location a scalar particle last “seen” at another location, is to modify the rate at which it ticks as it travels along each path connecting the two locations. The number of ticks associated with an infinitesimal path segment defines a species-specific Finsler geometry $`dS(dt,d𝐫,t,𝐫)`$ . As the following will show, there are just two ways of influencing the Finsler geometry that goes with a scalar particle.

As mentioned, the stability of matter rests on both the indefiniteness of relative positions and the exclusion principle . For the exclusion principle to hold, the ultimate constituents of matter must be indistinguishable members of one or several species of fermions. The necessary indistinguishability entails that all free particles belonging to the same species of fermions tick at the same rate. This guarantees the possibility of a global system of spacetime units : While there may be no global inertial frame, there will be local ones, and they will mesh with each other as described by a Riemannian spacetime geometry. Accordingly there is a species-specific way of influencing the Finsler geometry associated with a scalar particle, which bends geodesics relative to local inertial frames, and there is a species-independent way, which bends the geodesics of the Riemannian spacetime geometry. In natural units:

$$dS=m\sqrt{g_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu }+qA_\nu dx^\nu ,$$
(3)
where $`A`$ and $`g`$ represent the two possible kinds of effects on the motion of scalar particles.

If the sources of these two fields have no definite positions, the fields themselves cannot have definite values. We take this into account by summing over histories of $`A`$ and $`g`$, and for consistency with the existence of a macroworld (presupposed by QM ) we make sure that a unique history is obtained in the classical limit. Obvious and well-known constraints then uniquely determine the terms that need to be added to $`dS`$ (except for a possible cosmological term) .

We have reached an inconsistency, which no physical theory proposed so far has been able to eliminate. Since we sum over histories of $`g`$, none of the continuous paths contributing to a particle propagator has a definite spacetime length. And since the spacetime lengths of these paths constitute the physical basis of the metric properties of the world, definite distances or durations do not exist. But the spacetime points on which $`g`$ as a field depends can only be defined by the spacetime distances that exist between them. If definite spacetime distances do not exist, the manifold over which field theories are constructed does not exist either. (Renormalization is a way of glossing over this inconsistency.)

## 6 THE STANDARD MODEL

Huygens’ principle tells us that a sum over spacetime trajectories can be replaced by a wave equation. A relativistic wave equation has “negative energy” solutions corresponding to particles for which proper time decreases as inertial time increases , and it conserves charge rather than probability. Particle numbers are therefore variables, and since the quantities that dynamically influence their values are fuzzy, so are they.

To accommodate fuzzy particle numbers we sum over the histories of a field the Lagrangian of which yields the wave equation in the classical limit. This turns the field modes into harmonic oscillators whose quanta represent individual particles with definite energies and momenta. Expanding the interaction part of $`\mathrm{exp}(iS)`$ yields a sum over histories in which free particles are created and/or annihilated, and by using the appropriate wave equation for spin-$`1/2`$ particles we arrive at the Feynman rules for QED. (The wave equation for a free particle is obtained by imposing on the wave function a specific relation between the energy $`E`$ and the absolute value $`p`$ of the momentum. This too is a consequence of the fact that the spatial part of the metric is determined by its temporal part—the rates at which free particles tick. For spin-$`1/2`$ particles the relativistic relation between $`E`$ and $`p`$ leads to the Dirac equation. A half-integral spin is required by the stability of matter since the exclusion principle only holds for fermions.)

Gravity and electromagnetism are clearly necessary for a world that contains something as interesting as chemistry. Without the electromagnetic force there would be no Periodic Table, and without gravity there would be no stars to synthesize the Table’s ingredients beyond helium. But the two classical forces are not sufficient. Nucleosynthesis calls for another force. The requirement of renormalizability pretty much narrows this down to a non-Abelian gauge field. A posteriori we know that three colors suffice. Why not less? One reason is that two would not lead to confinement. There would be no nucleons for making a variety of nuclei and no residual force that is both attractive and short-range—capable of binding nucleons into nuclei and incapable of spoiling the delicate electromagnetic equilibria on which the Periodic Table depends. Thus three colors are needed as well as sufficient, which fixes the Lagrangian for quantum chromodynamics , give or take a few adjustable parameters.

Yet another force is needed, for several reasons. If stars did not explode, the elements beyond helium would remain confined to the interiors of stars, where they are created. The force responsible for stellar explosions—the weak force—has the simplest non-Abelian gauge group. It also plays an important role in nucleosynthesis and critically controls the primordial fusion of hydrogen into helium. Since SU(2) does not lead to confinement, and since the stability of matter forbids the weak force to cause the decay of atomic electrons through interactions with nuclear quarks, a different mechanism for reducing its range is needed—the Higgs mechanism . Moreover, the electron’s flavor-doublet partner must be neutral if the weak force is to trigger stellar explosions .

Thus once again one is left with little choice. The non-conservation of parity remains something of a mystery, as does the triplication of flavor pairs, but there are indications that both are needed to create the required excess of matter over antimatter . (The total annihilation of both matter and antimatter would spell the total annihilation of all spatiotemporal relations and thus the total annihilation of space and time.)

While these arguments are certainly not rigorous, they nevertheless make it plausible that the SM and GR together constitute the simplest theoretical structure consistent with a world that contains chemistry. It seems that we do live in the simplest possible interesting world . In the following two sections I shall submit stronger claims, namely that the stability of matter may call for a world in which the SM is at least an effective theory (Sec. 7), and that such a world may be the only possible physical world (Sec. 8).

## 7 THE STABILITY OF MATTER AND THE STANDARD MODEL

The “anthropic” principle  is usually invoked to account for (i) the approximate values of some of the SM’s 19$`+`$ adjustable parameters and (ii) certain rather special cosmological initial conditions. What the previous sections have shown, or strongly suggest, is that the entire SM (including GR and the general theoretical framework of quantum field theory) has teleological underpinnings. It not only describes almost all known physical phenomena (exceptions are the recently observed neutrino masses, if confirmed, and the as yet unknown nature of dark matter ) but it also appears to contain nothing but the simplest set of physical laws permitting the existence of something as interesting as chemistry.

Laws that are at least effectively identical with the SM may follow from a weaker requirement. The stability of matter (as defined at the beginning of Sec. 2) rests on the indefiniteness of relative positions. The search for the right formalism for dealing with indefinite variables takes us straight to QM. But QM would be inconsistent without macroscopic objects, inasmuch as no position is a possessed position unless it is an indicated position (Sec. 2), and only a macroscopic object can indicate something. (The reason why only macroscopic objects can be indicators is that only the positions of macroscopic objects can be consistently thought of as forming a self-existent system of causally connected properties that are effectively detached from the facts by which they are indicated .) The stability of matter thus entails the existence of macroscopic objects in general and of macroscopic detectors in particular. But it may well be that macroscopic detectors can exist only in worlds that contain a sufficient variety of chemical elements. If this turned out to be the case, the stability of matter would require chemistry. Hence it would entail physical laws that are (at least effectively) identical with the SM (including GR). In short:

$$\text{Stable Matter}\text{QM}\text{Detectors}\stackrel{\mathrm{?}}{}\text{Chemistry}\text{SM+GR}$$

## 8 THOUGHTS ON A FINAL THEORY

In the context of the SM only certain quite unlikely values of the adjustable parameters and the cosmological initial conditions are consistent with the phenomenology encapsulated in the Periodic Table. To some this suggest design, to others it suggests the existence of an ensemble of universes across which parameters and initial conditions take random values, while to the majority of theoretical physicists it suggests the need for a final theory which allows most of the actual parameter values to be derived from first principles, and which either stipulates the initial conditions  or makes the universe largely insensitive to them .

I can see another possibility. Supposing that chemistry is indeed required for the existence of detectors (and thus for the stability of matter), a world governed by laws that are not (effectively) identical with the SM will be void of detectors, as will be a world with the “wrong” parameter values and/or cosmological initial conditions. But a world without detectors is a world without positions, and a world without positions is a spaceless world. And since a spaceless physical world is a contradiction in terms, we can conclude that any physical world will (at least effectively) be governed by the SM and GR. For the same reason we cannot conceive of universes with the “right” parameters and initial conditions as members of an ensemble across which parameters and/or initial conditions vary. Universes with the wrong parameters or initial conditions are logically inconsistent and therefore nonexistent. Nor can we infer design if only worlds with the right parameters and initial conditions are logically consistent.

What about the possibility of a final physical theory that leaves no room for “anthropic” adjustments? If the cognitive apparatus of the human mind is up to the task of discovering the true structure of the world, we can expect that this will eventually be discovered. And if this structure—or a part of it—admits of a precise mathematical description, it may well turn out to be faithfully represented by such a theory. But the human mind may not be up to that task, and the true structure of the world may not be mathematical. In either case all physical theories would be effective approximations to the true structure of the world, which would remain forever beyond our ken. There could still be a final theory, but it would simply be the best effective theory, and it could contain as reminders of its effective nature such inconsistencies as the one pointed out at the end of Sec. 5.

Elsewhere  I argued that the world is constructed from the top down, by a finite spatial differentiation that stops short of realizing the multiplicity of a manifold, rather than built from the bottom up, on an intrinsically and maximally differentiated manifold, out of locally instantiated properties. There are psychological as well as neurobiological reasons  to believe that the physically inadequate bottom-up approach is intrinsic to the human mind. If so then it appears that we cannot hope for more than an optimal effective theory.

## 9 A QUANTUM THEORY OF GRAVITY?

The search for a final theory is in large measure a search for a quantum theory of gravity. Yet there are reasons to believe that the idea of such a theory is self-contradictory, as the following will show.

As a rule, the indefiniteness of a variable cannot evince itself without something less indefinite. The indefiniteness of the position of a material object can evince itself (through statistical fluctuations) only to the extent that detectors with sharper positions exist. The residual fuzziness of the positions of macroscopic objects cannot evince itself, which is why these positions are effectively intrinsic .

Again, the indefiniteness of the electromagnetic field can evince itself to the extent that distances are well-defined. The fuzziness of $`A`$ induces an indefiniteness in the species-specific lengths (Sec. 5) of the histories (paths) associated with electrically charged particles, and so does the fuzziness of $`g`$. On observationally accessible scales the indefiniteness induced by $`A`$ far exceeds that induced by $`g`$. Down to scales on which $`g`$ becomes as fuzzy as $`A`$, distances are well-defined. This is why the fuzziness of $`A`$ has observables consequences such as the Lamb shift. (This effect exists not only because a 2S electron is closer to the proton on average than is a 2P electron but also because on atomic scales “closer” is still extremely well defined.)

On the other hand, there is nothing less fuzzy than the metric. This suggests to me that there are no physical effects that are due to the indefiniteness of the metric, just as there are no physical effects that are due to the indefiniteness of the positions of macroscopic objects. If so, a quantum theory of gravity would allow us to study the physical consequences of a fuzziness that lacks physical consequences. Such a theory would make it possible to investigate the physics on scales that do not exist, for on scales on which the fuzziness of $`g`$ becomes significant, the concept of “scale” loses its meaning.


format: text

text:
# A Comparison of gas dynamics in SPH and semi-analytic models of galaxy formation

## 1 Introduction

A range of physical processes are responsible for the formation and evolution of the galaxies we see in the universe today. The starting point for current hierarchical cold dark matter models of galaxy formation is the gravitational amplification and eventual collapse of primordial density fluctuations to form the dark matter halos in which stars and galaxies may form. This process is now quite well understood, and predictions of halo mass functions from analytic techniques such as Press-Schechter theory (Press & Schechter ) and its extensions () are in good agreement with numerical simulations (e.g. ).

Unfortunately, the behaviour of the baryonic component of the universe is more complex and less well understood. While the dynamics of the dark matter are determined by gravitational forces alone, gas is subject to hydrodynamical forces and radiative effects. The situation is further complicated by the absence of a complete theory of star formation and the fact that star formation involves length and mass scales many orders of magnitude smaller than the galaxies themselves forces those modelling galaxy formation to resort to recipes and prescriptions to obtain star formation rates. Nevertheless, semi-analytic models have met with considerable success, for example in reproducing the local field galaxy luminosity function and distributions of colour and morphology (e.g. ; , ; ) and galaxy clustering properties (e.g. ). In this work, we compare two possible ways of modelling the process which provides the raw material for star formation – the cooling of gas within dark matter halos. Such a model is a necessary part of almost any treatment of the hierarchical formation of galaxies, yet there is still some uncertainty as to which of the approaches currently in use are reliable and whether they are in good agreement.

While Eulerian numerical techniques may be employed in the modelling of galaxy formation in cosmological volumes (e.g. ), here we concentrate on the Lagrangian method known as smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH), first described by Lucy () and Gingold & Monaghan (). SPH simulations have been able to predict the formation of objects of approximately galactic mass with appropriate abundances in a cosmological context (e.g. ; Pearce et al. , ) and allow the investigation of the dynamics of galaxies within clusters and the spatial distribution of galaxies.

Semi-analytic and SPH galaxy formation models rely on very different sets of assumptions and approximations. For example, semi-analytic models assume that dark matter halos are spherically symmetric and that infalling gas is shock-heated to the virial temperature of the halo, whereas SPH simulations impose no restrictions on halo geometry but assume that continuous distributions of gas and dark matter may be well represented by a limited number of discrete particles. Consequently, SPH and semi-analytic models have complementary strengths and weaknesses. Semi-analytic models are computationally much cheaper than simulations, which allows extremely high mass resolution in halo merger trees and more thorough investigation of the effects of varying parameters or the treatment of particular processes. SPH simulations contain fewer simplifying assumptions but have limited dynamic range and without sufficiently large numbers of particles may suffer from numerical effects.

The aim of this paper is to compare SPH and semi-analytic treatments of the gas dynamics involved in galaxy formation in order to gauge the effects of the uncertainties present in the two techniques. A previous comparison carried out by Benson et al. (\[2001a\]) found that SPH and semi-analytic models give similar results for the thermodynamic evolution of cooling gas in cosmological volumes. In particular, the global fractions of hot gas, cold dense gas and uncollapsed gas agreed to within 25% and the mass of gas in galaxies in the most massive halos differed by no more than 50%. However, their analysis was restricted to a statistical comparison because their semi-analytic model employed merger histories created using a Monte-Carlo algorithm, that of Cole et al. (). We improve on the work of Benson et al. by calculating the merger trees directly from the simulations so that the merger histories of the halos in the semi-analytic and SPH treatments are the same. This removes a source of uncertainty from the comparison, since any differences between the models must be due entirely to differences in the treatment of the *baryonic* component. Our method also allows a comparison between halos on an individual basis and lets us investigate whether the dependence of the cold gas mass on the halo’s merger history is the same in the SPH and semi-analytic cases.

Our approach is that of “modelling a model”, using a semi-analytic model to reproduce the behaviour of the simulation including the effects of limited mass resolution. Since we are interested primarily in the rate at which cooling occurs in the two models, we use a simulation which allows radiative cooling but which does not include any prescription for star formation or feedback. We attempt to model this simulation using a “stripped down” semi-analytic model which also neglects these phenomena. Hierarchical models of galaxy formation without feedback predict that most of the gas in the universe cools in low mass objects at high redshift (e.g. ). Consequently, we cannot expect either our SPH simulation or our stripped down semi-analytic model to cool realistic quantities of gas, and where differences between the two approaches are found it may not be possible to conclude that one is more “correct” than the other. However, the changes which must be made to the semi-analytic model to match the SPH simulation may provide insight into the level of agreement between the two techniques and the reasons for any discrepancies.

The layout of this paper is as follows. In Section 2 we describe our semi-analytic model and give details of the SPH simulation we use. In Section 3 we compare properties of the two models, including galaxy masses, cold gas mass in halos as a function of redshift and the spatial distribution of the galaxies. In Section 4 we present our conclusions.

## 2 The Models

### 2.1 The SPH Simulation

SPH is a Lagrangian numerical method which follows the motion of a set of gas elements represented by discrete particles. The thermal energy and velocity of each particle are known at any given time and each particle has a fixed mass. Properties of the gas at the position of a particle can be estimated by smoothing these quantities over the $`N_{\mathrm{SPH}}`$ nearest neighbouring particles. The gas properties are then used to calculate the forces acting on each particle in order to update the positions and velocities. In cosmological simulations both dark matter and gas particles are included and the particles are initially distributed in a manner consistent with a cosmological power spectrum. If the process of galaxy formation is to be simulated then radiative cooling of the gas must also be included.

The SPH simulation used here was performed using the Hydra code. This particular implementation includes a modification, described by Pearce et al. (), to prevent the rate of cooling of hot gas being artificially increased by nearby clumps of cold, dense gas, or “galaxies”. Any gas hotter than $`10^5`$K is assumed not to interact with gas at temperatures below $`\mathrm{12\hspace{0.17em}000}`$K. Thus, for cooling purposes the density estimate for a hot particle near a galaxy is based only on the neighbouring hot particles and the cooling rate is unaffected by the presence of the galaxy.

The simulation has $`80^3`$ gas and $`80^3`$ dark matter particles with individual masses of $`2.57\times 10^9h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`2.37\times 10^{10}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ respectively, contained in a cube of side $`50h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$. The power spectrum is that appropriate to a cold dark matter universe with the following parameter values: mean mass density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.35`$, cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0=0.65`$, baryon density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b=0.0377`$, Hubble constant $`h=0.71`$, power spectrum shape parameter $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.21`$ and rms linear fluctuation amplitude $`\sigma _8=0.90`$. The gravitational softening length is $`25h^1\mathrm{kpc}`$, fixed in physical coordinates.

The metallicity of the gas in the simulation, measured in terms of the mass fraction of metals, $`Z`$, is uniform and varies linearly with time according to:

$$Z=0.3Z_{}t(z)/t_0,$$
(1)
where $`Z_{}`$ denotes the solar metallicity, $`t(z)`$ is the age of the universe at redshift $`z`$ and $`t_0`$ is the age of the universe at $`z=0`$.

This simulation makes no attempt to treat star formation and does not include any heating or feedback processes.

### 2.2 The N-body GALFORM Model

The semi-analytic model used here, which we will refer to as N-body galform, is a galaxy formation model which uses the output from an N-body simulation to calculate halo merger histories and semi-analytic techniques to model baryonic processes. Briefly, halo merger trees are constructed by identifying halos at each simulation output time using the friends-of-friends (FOF) algorithm of Davis et al. (). Each halo at each output time is identified as a progenitor of whichever halo contains the largest fraction of its mass at the next output time. The merger history of each halo at the final time can then be traced back. Semi-analytic techniques are used to treat the shock heating of gas during the formation of a halo, the cooling of gas within halos and, in the general case, the formation of stars and the merging of galaxies within halos. The full model predicts a wide range of galaxy properties including luminosity, stellar masses of the bulge and disk components and cold gas mass. Galaxy positions can be obtained since each galaxy is associated with a particle in the N-body simulation. Initially, this will be taken to be the most bound particle of the halo in which the galaxy formed, but if the galaxy subsequently merges with the central galaxy of another halo it will be associated with the most bound particle of that halo.

The semi-analytic methods employed in this work are taken from the galform model of Cole et al. (), who use a Monte-Carlo algorithm to generate realisations of halo merger histories. Helly et al. () describe the N-body galform model and the technique used to obtain merger trees in detail, and investigate the effects of using simulation derived merger trees on the predicted galaxy populations.

In order to allow a direct comparison between the predictions of this model and those of the SPH simulation, the merger trees must be calculated from the dark matter component of the SPH simulation. Consequently, the time and mass resolution in the halo merger trees are determined by the properties of the SPH simulation and differ from the time and mass resolution of the simulation employed by Helly et al. We have a total of 61 outputs from the SPH simulation, the first 26 of which are logarithmically spaced in expansion factor between redshifts $`z10`$ and $`z1.5`$. The remaining outputs are equally spaced in time between $`z1.5`$ and $`z=0`$. This is something of an improvement in time resolution over the simulation used by Helly et al. (). However, the predictions of the galform model were not significantly affected when the number of timesteps was increased, so we do not expect this difference to be important.

There are two parameters which we vary in order to model the SPH simulation. The N-body galform model assumes that the distribution of mass in dark matter halos is described by the radial density profile found by Navarro, Frenk & White (, ). This profile contains a single free parameter, which can be expressed as the concentration parameter, $`c`$, defined by Navarro, Frenk & White or a halo scale radius, $`r_{\mathrm{NFW}}=r_{\mathrm{virial}}/c`$, where $`r_{\mathrm{virial}}`$ is the virial radius of the halo. Like Cole et al. (), we set $`r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ using the method described in the appendix of Navarro, Frenk & White (). No scatter is included in the scale radius as a function of halo mass. The radial density profile we assume for the hot gas within halos is described by Helly et al. This profile also contains one parameter, the core radius $`r_{\mathrm{core}}`$, which we specify as a fraction of $`r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ and may be held at a fixed value or allowed to increase with time from an initial value $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0`$. See Helly et al. () for details.

We also allow ourselves the freedom to vary the rate at which mergers occur between galaxies in the same dark matter halo. This is specified in terms of a merger timescale parameter, $`f_{\mathrm{df}}`$, which is a prefactor in the standard dynamical friction timescale. Reducing $`f_{\mathrm{df}}`$ increases the rate at which mergers occur. See Cole et al. () for details of the merger scheme we use.

## 3 Comparison between SPH and N-body GALFORM

In this section we compare the results of the SPH simulation with the N-body galform model, which uses merger trees derived from the dark matter component of the SPH simulation. Fig. 1 shows the positions and masses of the galaxies which form in a $`5h{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{Mpc}`$ thick region in both the SPH simulation and N-body galform . The SPH “galaxies” (i.e. clumps of cold gas) shown here were identified using a FOF group finder on gas particles with temperatures between $`\mathrm{8\hspace{0.17em}000}`$ and $`\mathrm{12\hspace{0.17em}000}`$K (see Section 3.1.1).

### 3.1 Modelling SPH with N-body GALFORM

In order to produce a semi-analytic model of the SPH gas simulation using N-body galform we must first remove the treatment of star formation, feedback and chemical enrichment from galform. We set the metallicity of the gas to be the same as that in the simulation, using eqn. (1).

The cooling rate of the gas in our simulation depends on its density, which is estimated by searching for the $`N_{\mathrm{SPH}}`$ nearest neighbours. The density of gas in halos with less than $`N_{\mathrm{SPH}}=32`$ gas particles, or a total gas mass less than $`8.2\times 10^{10}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$, will in general be severely underestimated with an associated suppression of the cooling rate. Consequently, the mass of gas which cools is dependent on the particle mass.

In order to model this effect in the semi-analytic treatment, we first investigate the variation of the mean estimated density of gas in halos in the SPH simulation with halo mass. A characteristic volume for each gas particle can be obtained by dividing its mass by its SPH density estimate. The total volume of the gas in a halo is calculated by summing the volumes of its constituent gas particles. The total volume is then divided by the mass of gas in the halo to obtain an estimate of the mean gas density. Fig. 2 shows this density estimate plotted against halo mass, at redshift $`z=0`$. In halos identified using the FOF group finder with $`b=0.2`$ we expect the mean gas density to be several hundred times the universal mean gas density. The dotted line shows the median of the mean densities of halos of a given mass. Halos with more than 32 particles have approximately constant mean density, although the density does increase somewhat with halo mass.

The estimated density rapidly drops once the halo mass falls below 32 dark matter particle masses. Since the cooling time of the gas is inversely proportional to its density this could significantly affect the amount of gas which cools in the smaller halos in the simulation. We incorporate this effect into the semi-analytic model by increasing the cooling time for gas in halos of fewer than 32 particles. A least squares fit to Fig. 2 gives:

$$\mathrm{log}_{10}\frac{\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{SPH}}}{\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}\mathrm{\Omega }_b}=1.23\mathrm{log}_{10}\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{halo}}11.79,$$
(2)
where $`\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{SPH}}`$ is the mean gas density estimated from the SPH simulation and $`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{halo}}`$ is the mass of the halo. The cooling time in our model is inversely proportional to the mean density of the gas in the halo. In halos of fewer than 32 particles we replace the cooling time, $`\tau _{\mathrm{cool}}`$, with a longer cooling time, $`\tau _{\mathrm{cool}}^{\mathrm{SPH}}`$, given by

$$\tau _{\mathrm{cool}}^{\mathrm{SPH}}=k\tau _{\mathrm{cool}}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_b\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}}{\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{SPH}}},$$
(3)
where $`\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}`$ is the critical density. We set the constant of proportionality, $`k`$, in this relation by requiring that the cooling time for halos of 32 particles be unchanged.

#### 3.1.1 Halo by halo comparison

The masses of individual galaxies in the N-body galform model depend on the rate at which galaxy mergers occur within dark matter halos. Since the merger rate in the SPH simulation may not be the same as that in the semi-analytic model, we first compare the total amount of gas which cools in halos of a given mass. This quantity should be independent of the merger rate, at least in the semi-analytic case, and can be used to compare the treatment of cooling in the two models. In the SPH simulation a large galaxy forming at the centre of a halo through mergers may gravitationally affect the density, and hence the cooling rate, of nearby gas, but we do not expect this to be a large effect and the mass of gas which cools should be only weakly dependent on the merger rate.

We adopt two different models for the evolution of the gas density profile in the semi-analytic treatment. The first is that used by Cole et al. () in which the core radius in the gas profile increases with time in order to maintain the gas density at the virial radius. We may vary the initial core radius, $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0`$, in order to adjust the amount of gas which cools (the standard choice adopted by Cole et al. was $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=0.33r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$. The second is a simpler model in which the core radius remains a constant fraction of the halo scale radius, $`r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$. Again, the size of this fixed core may be varied in order to adjust the rate at which cooling occurs.

In order to quantify the mass of cold gas present in halos in the SPH simulation, we first associate gas particles with dark matter halos. A gas particle is considered to belong to a halo if it lies within a linking length $`b=0.2`$ of a dark matter particle which belongs to that halo. In the unlikely event that dark matter particles from more than one halo are found within the linking length, the gas particle is assigned to the halo containing the nearest dark matter particle. The linking length used in this procedure is the same as that used to identify dark matter halos with the FOF group finder. This ensures that the condition for a gas particle to be associated with a halo is consistent with the definition of halo membership used for the dark matter particles.

The cooling function in our simulation permits gas to cool only to a temperature of $`10^4`$K. This allows us to distinguish between gas which has been heated and has subsequently cooled to $`10^4`$K and the diffuse cold gas in voids which has never been heated and is at much lower temperatures. The mass of gas which has cooled in each halo is obtained by summing the masses of all gas particles associated with the halo and having temperatures between $`\mathrm{8\hspace{0.17em}000}`$K and $`\mathrm{12\hspace{0.17em}000}`$K. In the N-body galform model, the amount of cold gas in each halo is simply the mass of gas which has cooled from the hot phase, since the model includes no star formation.

Fig. 3 shows the mean fraction of gas which has cooled as a function of halo mass, in both N-body galform and the SPH simulation. Here we consider four different N-body galform models. We vary the initial core radius in the gas profile between $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=1.0r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ and $`0.15r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ and either fix the core radius as a fraction of the NFW scale radius or allow it to increase with time as described earlier. In the case of a fixed core, $`r_{\mathrm{core}}=r_{\mathrm{core}}^0`$ at all times.

The dotted lines in Fig. 3 show N-body galform models which include the modification to the cooling time in low mass halos described by eqn. (3). All four models reproduce the quantities of cold gas observed at redshift $`z=0`$ in the SPH simulation remarkably well, for halos of mass greater than about $`10^{12}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ or around 40 dark matter particles — in all but the worst case the difference is less than 50%. We find that if the core radius in the gas density profile is allowed to increase as gas cools, the fraction of cold gas is not particularly sensitive to the choice of intitial core radius, although a small initial value, $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=0.15r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$, gives a slightly better match than if the core is initially larger. If the core radius is fixed as a fraction of the NFW scale radius a much larger value, $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=1.0r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$, is necessary.

The dashed lines in the figure show the fraction of gas which cools if cooling is allowed to occur at the normal rate in halos of all masses down to the mass of the smallest halo we can resolve in the simulation. Surprisingly, this appears to have little effect on halos with fewer than 32 dark matter particles for which the cooling rate has been altered. The fraction of gas which has cooled in larger halos also increases by a similar amount. The extra cold gas in these halos must have cooled in progenitors of fewer than 32 particles before being incorporated into larger halos. Overall, the change is not large, with some halos having around 10-20% more cold gas on average. This suggests that our results are not particularly sensitive to the way in which we model the loss of cooling efficiency in low mass halos, although in both cases the agreement between the SPH simulation and the semi-analytic model is poor in such halos.

Fig. 4 shows a direct comparison between the masses of cold gas in individual halos in the SPH simulation and the four N-body galform models of Fig. 3, again using the modified cooling time for low mass halos. The mass of cold gas predicted by N-body galform is plotted against the mass of cold gas in the simulation for each halo, with the initial core radius set to $`r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ in the upper panels and $`0.15r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ in the lower panels. In the models shown on the left-hand side the core radius remains fixed at its initial value at all times. The long-dashed lines show where the points would lie if the simulation and the semi-analytic models were in perfect agreement.

Again, in all four cases the mass of cold gas in the SPH simulation is well correlated with the mass of cold gas in the N-body galform model. The small scatter, at least at high masses, shows that the dependence of cold gas mass on merger history must be similar in the SPH simulation and the semi-analytic model. N-body galform with a gas density profile with a fixed core radius appears to cool on average more gas in halos of all masses than the SPH simulation. This can be alleviated to some extent by increasing the size of the core in the gas profile but it appears that a rather large core in the gas distribution would be required to obtain good agreement. Allowing the core radius to increase as gas cools reduces the rate of cooling and results in closer agreement with the simulation; the best agreement is obtained for a small initial core radius of around $`0.15r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$, although the mass of cold gas in each halo is clearly not particularly sensitive to the initial core radius in this galform model.

Fig. 5 shows the mass of cold gas in progenitors of four of the larger halos in the simulation as a function of redshift. The mass of cold gas in the simulation (solid lines) at a given redshift is obtained by summing the masses of all cold gas particles associated with the progenitors of the final halo at that redshift. Particles are associated with halos using the method described earlier in this section and, as before, “cold” particles are those with temperatures in the range $`\mathrm{8\hspace{0.17em}000}`$$`\mathrm{12\hspace{0.17em}000}`$K. Similarly, the mass of cold gas in the N-body galform model is obtained by summing the masses of the galaxies in the progenitor halos. Here we show results for two models, one with $`r_{\mathrm{core}}`$ fixed at $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=1.0r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ (dotted lines) and the other with a growing core which has an initial core radius $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=0.15r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ (dashed lines). The model of Cole et al. used a gas profile with a larger initial core radius, $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=0.33r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$.

The long dashed lines show the mass of cold gas in progenitors in the simulation if instead of associating gas particles with halos directly, we use the FOF group finder to first identify clumps of cold gas and then associate clumps with dark matter halos. A clump is assigned to a halo if a dark matter particle from that halo is found within a dark matter linking length of the clump’s centre of mass. If particles belonging to several halos are found in this region, the nearest to the centre of mass is used. A linking length $`b=0.02`$ is used to identify the clumps and a minimum group size of 10 particles is imposed on the clumps. These lines are shown in Fig. 5 only to illustrate that there is some dependence on the way in which we define “cold halo gas” in the simulation. This second method will certainly underestimate the mass of cold gas because the group finder imposes a minimum mass on the clumps, missing smaller groups of cold particles. Also, at high redshift the gravitational softening length exceeds the linking length used to identify the clumps, so particles which ought to be considered part of a clump may not have collapsed to sufficiently high densities to be picked up by the group finder. We find that most of the discrepancy between these two SPH results is due to cold particles in small groups of fewer than five particles, at least with $`b=0.02`$.

It is also possible that the first method of counting individual gas particles associated with halos overestimates the mass of cold gas in smaller halos, where the linking length becomes a significant fraction of the radius of the halo. Any particle within a linking length of the outer dark matter particles of the halo may be associated with that halo. Despite this uncertainty, it appears that more of the cold gas found in the simulation cooled at high redshift than in either of the N-body galform cases considered. At redshift 2 the discrepancy is approximately a factor of 2. Allowing the core radius to increase from a small initial value helps somewhat by encouraging more cooling initially and slightly suppressing it later, but the improvement is small compared to the size of the discrepancy with the SPH simulation for redshifts greater than around 2. Reducing the initial core radius in this model further has little effect on these results.

We have tried to model the effect of limited resolution on cooling in SPH blobs of fewer than 32 dark matter particles, but in the N-body galform model no cooling is possible in halos of fewer than 10 dark matter particles. It appears that in our SPH simulation some cooling *does* occur in these halos. However, it may not be useful to model the rate of cooling in this regime, since it is entirely artificial and likely to be dependent on the details of the particular SPH implementation. In any case, when halos in the SPH simulation first grow to 10 dark matter particles they may have already cooled some gas. These halos will eventually be incorporated into larger halos, where the cold gas mass becomes dominated by material which cooled in well resolved halos so that at late times the SPH and galform calculations converge.

#### 3.1.2 Galaxy by galaxy comparison

Fig. 6 shows the number density of galaxies as a function of mass in the SPH simulation and in the N-body galform model at redshift $`z=0`$. Here, SPH “galaxies” are groups of particles identified by the FOF group finder applied to all particles with temperatures in the range $`\mathrm{8\hspace{0.17em}000}`$$`\mathrm{12\hspace{0.17em}000}`$K. We use a linking length $`b=0.02`$ and impose a minimum group size of 10 particles. The results are insensitive to the specific choice of $`b`$ within reasonable bounds. Two N-body galform cases are shown, one with a core of fixed size $`r_{\mathrm{core}}=r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$ in the gas density profile, the other with a growing core of initial size $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=0.15r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$. In both cases N-body galform predicts about 50% more galaxies with masses around $`3\times 10^{11}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ or less and fewer galaxies with masses greater than this for the latter choice of $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0`$. The deficit in the number of massive galaxies is more apparent in the model with a large, fixed gas core radius. Since we know that the total amount of gas cooled in the semi-analytic models in each halo is similar to the amount that cooled in the simulation (see Fig. 4), this suggests that there is more merging occurring in the simulation. This does not necessarily indicate a failure of the semi-analytic model, however, since it is possible that numerical effects in the simulation contribute significantly to the merger rate.

To test this hypothesis, we varied the merger timescale parameter, $`f_{\mathrm{df}}`$ in the semi-analytic models. Fig. 7 shows galaxy number density as a function of mass for three N-body galform models with $`f_{\mathrm{df}}`$ = 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0. All three have gas profiles with growing cores of initial radius $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=0.15r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$. Doubling the merger timescale ($`f_{\mathrm{df}}=2.0`$) drastically reduces the number of more massive galaxies and prevents the formation of any galaxies more massive than $`10^{12}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$. Halving the merger timescale ($`f_{\mathrm{df}}=0.5`$) improves agreement with the simulation by increasing the masses of the largest galaxies and reducing the number of small galaxies. However, the improvement is relatively small and, in any case, the treatment of mergers in the N-body galform model reproduces the distribution of masses observed in the simulation reasonably well with our default $`f_{\mathrm{df}}=1.0`$.

The N-body galform model described in Section 3 does not allow semi-analytic galaxies to be compared with their SPH counterparts on a one to one basis because mergers between galaxies in N-body galform are treated in a statistical manner. While the agreement between the galaxy mass distributions suggests that the overall merger rate in the N-body galform model is similar to that seen in the simulation, we cannot expect mergers to occur between the same galaxies in the two cases, and hence it is not possible to identify clumps of cold gas particles with individual semi-analytic galaxies.

This problem could be avoided by following the substructure within dark matter halos to determine when mergers between galaxies occur, using a method similar to that of Springel, White, Tormen & Kauffmann (). Unfortunately the halos in our simulation typically contain too few particles for this to be practical. Any dark matter substructure is rapidly destroyed by numerical effects.

In order to compare the masses of individual galaxies directly, we need an alternative way to ensure that the same galaxies merge in each model. We do this by using information from the baryonic component of the SPH simulation to merge N-body galform galaxies. We first populate the simulation volume with galaxies calculated using the N-body galform model, with merging of galaxies completely suppressed. We find the halo in which each semi-analytic galaxy first formed, and identify the gas particles associated with that halo as those with indices corresponding to the indices of the dark matter particles in the halo — this is possible because in our SPH simulation gas and dark matter particles with the same indicies are initially at the same locations and tend to remain in the same halos at later times. By redshift $`z=0`$ some of these particles will be contained within SPH galaxies. Each semi-analytic galaxy is assigned to the SPH galaxy which contains the largest number of gas particles from the halo in which it formed. This procedure often results in several semi-analytic galaxies being assigned to the same blob of cold gas at redshift $`z=0`$. These galaxies are assumed to have merged and their masses are added together. It is possible to think of rare situations where our method might incorrectly merge galaxies, but this is the best that can be done within the limitations of the SPH simulation.

We are only able to detect SPH galaxies with 10 particles or more, so it is inevitable that sometimes a semi-analytic galaxy will not be assigned to any SPH galaxy. This would occur if the semi-analytic galaxy formed in a halo which, in the simulation, failed to cool enough particles to constitute a group by redshift $`z=0`$. Such galaxies are generally found in small, recently formed halos and typically have masses of around 10 gas particle masses or less. These galaxies account for about 20% of the total semi-analytic galactic mass in the simulation volume. We also find that a small number (about 2%) of the SPH galaxies have no corresponding semi-analytic galaxy. Almost all of these are poorly resolved objects close to the 10 particle threshold.

Since the unmatched semi-analytic galaxies largely correspond to SPH galaxies which have yet to gain enough cold particles to be identified by the group finder, we simply omit them from the comparison shown in Fig. 8. Here, we compare the masses of the merged semi-analytic galaxies with the corresponding galaxies in the SPH simulation. Each point on the plot represents a single SPH galaxy which has been associated with one or more semi-analytic galaxies. We have split the galaxies into two categories – central galaxies (left panel) and satellite galaxies (right panel). This allows us to test the assumption made in the galform model that no gas cools onto satellite galaxies. If this is not true, galaxies which are considered to be satellites in the N-body galform model will have systematically lower masses than their SPH counterparts. It therefore makes sense, for this purpose, to use information from the semi-analytic model (and not the SPH simulation) to determine whether each galaxy is a satellite. The semi-analytic mass of each galaxy shown in Fig. 8 is the sum of the masses of the galform galaxy fragments which have been associated with the corresponding SPH galaxy. We identify the galaxy as a central galaxy if any one of those fragements was a central galaxy before we applied our SPH merging scheme. If all of the fragments were satellites, the galaxy is considered to be a satellite.

There is clearly a very strong correlation between the mass of each simulated galaxy and its semi-analytic counterpart, although the N-body galform galaxies appear to be systematically more massive by up to 25% at low masses. The scatter in this plot is comparable to that in Fig. 4. There appears to be little or no systematic difference between satellite and central galaxies, which suggests that no significant amount of cooling of gas onto satellite galaxies is occurring in the simulation. There are a few outlying points where the galform and SPH masses are drastically different – these are mainly satellites, but there are as many with much *higher* galform masses than SPH masses as there are with lower masses. These are most likely a result of the SPH merging algorithm assigning galform galaxy fragments to the wrong SPH galaxy.

Finally, we compare the clustering of galaxies in the two models. While the spatial distribution of dark matter halos in the N-body galform model is identical to that in the simulation, the number of galaxies in each halo and their distribution within the halo may differ. Fig. 9 shows two point galaxy correlation functions for galaxies in the SPH simulation and two different N-body galform models, both of which have gas profiles with growing core radii which are initially set to $`r_{\mathrm{core}}^0=0.15r_{\mathrm{NFW}}`$. In the first galform model, merging between galaxies is treated using the dynamical friction approach of Cole et al. with $`f_{\mathrm{df}}=0.5`$, which gives a closer match to the distribution of galaxy masses in the simulation than our default value of 1.0 (see Fig. 7.) In the second galform model, we use the SPH based merging scheme described earlier in this section and put each merged galform galaxy at the position of its associated SPH galaxy. In each case, we include only the 700 (left panel of Fig. 9) or 300 (right panel) most massive galaxies in our calculation. This ensures that the overall density of galaxies in the volume is the same in each sample. Picking the 700 largest galaxies excludes all galaxies less massive than about $`8\times 10^{10}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ or 30 gas particles. Picking the 300 largest galaxies corresponds to a minimum mass of approximately $`1.5\times 10^{11}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ or around 60 gas particles.

The correlation function has been calculated on scales of up to 25$`h^1`$Mpc. This is half of the size of the simulation box, so the results presented here should not be treated as predictions of the true galaxy correlation function. Instead, the plots in Fig. 9 are intended to compare the relative clustering of galform and SPH galaxies in our *small* simulation volume. All three models show qualitatively similar behaviour. When we consider the larger sample of galaxies (left panel in Fig. 9), we see an anti-bias relative to the dark matter on scales of less than a few $`h^1`$Mpc, with galaxies tracing the dark matter on larger scales. This behaviour agrees with previous semi-analytic (e.g. ) and SPH simulation (e.g. ) results. If we include only the 300 most massive galaxies in the simulation volume (right panel in Fig. 9), we see that on large scales these more massive galaxies are more strongly clustered than the dark matter in all three cases.

The N-body galform model with $`f_{\mathrm{df}}=0.5`$ is in close agreement with the SPH simulation on scales larger than a few $`h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ when we use the 700 most massive galaxies. This is to be expected since we have the same distribution of dark matter halos in each case and the merger rate in the semi-analytic model has been adjusted to reproduce roughly the distribution of galaxy masses in the simulation. On length scales smaller than this, where the correlation function is sensitive to the details of our treatment of galaxy mergers within halos, there is a difference of almost a factor of 2 between the SPH simulation and the galform model with $`f_{\mathrm{df}}=0.5`$. The treatment of mergers in this model reproduces the overall distribution of galaxy masses but the merger rates and galaxy distributions in halos of a given mass may not be in close agreement. When we merge galform galaxies by associating them with groups of cold gas in the SPH simulation (short dashed lines in Fig. 9), the correlation functions agree to within about 25% on these small scales. If we consider only the 300 most massive galaxies in each case, the correlation function for the model with $`f_{\mathrm{df}}=0.5`$ drops to almost an order of magnitude below that of the SPH simulation on scales of about $`0.3h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$. Again, this is due to differences in the merger rates in halos of a given mass since the discrepancy disappears if we use our SPH-based merging algorithm.

Once we ensure that the same galaxies merge in each model, any remaining differences between the correlation functions shown must be due to differences in the galaxy masses. The most massive 700 objects in the SPH model must be a somewhat different population to the 700 most massive objects in the semi-analytic model. In fact, we find that the two samples possess only 590 objects (about 85%) in common. This is an inevitable consequence of the scatter in the relation between SPH and semi-analytic galaxy masses shown in Fig. 8. Unless there is zero scatter, there will always be galaxies just massive enough to be included in the correlation function for one model which will not be included in the sample for the other. This explains why the level of agreement is reduced when we consider only the most massive galaxies, where we might have expected to obtain improved agreement. By increasing the minimum mass required for a galaxy to be included in each sample we increase the proportion of galaxies which have masses close to the threshold and the fraction of galaxies common to both samples falls slightly to 237 out of 300, or about 80%.

## 4 Discussion and Conclusions

In this paper we have used the N-body galform model of Helly et al. () to compare the results of a semi-analytic calculation of the radiative cooling of gas in halos with results from a cosmological SPH simulation. We have tried to reproduce the results of the simulation by adjusting the semi-analytic cooling prescription and modelling the effects of limited mass resolution on the SPH cooling rate.

We compared properties of halos in the simulation with the properties of the same halos in the N-body galform model. First, we looked at a global property of the halo population, the average fraction of cooled gas at redshift $`z=0`$ as a function of halo mass. We found that a model in which the gas density profile with an initially small core radius which is able to increase with time provided the best match to the mean cold gas fractions seen in the SPH simulation among those considered. The level of agreement was excellent for halos with masses above the resolution limit of the SPH simulation.

Our method also enabled us to compare the cool gas content of individual halos. For the gas density profile described above, and also for a profile with a fixed core radius, the total mass of cold gas in each halo was found to be in remarkably good agreement at cold gas masses greater than about $`10^{12}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$. In poorly resolved halos with lower cold gas masses the scatter in this comparison increased substantially, to a factor of about 3. We found that much of the cold gas found in the more massive halos in the N-body galform model generally cooled at later times than the gas in the same halos in the SPH simulation. By a redshift of 2 in the N-body galform case, the progenitors of the halos contained only half as much cold gas as was present in the simulation. As the redshift increases, the mass of cold gas in the SPH simulation becomes dominated by material which cooled in very small halos, where the cooling rate may be strongly affected by resolution effects and depends sensitively on the SPH implementation (). These effects are difficult to model reliably and so the discrepancy between the galform and SPH cold gas masses increases at higher redshifts.

We then turned our attention to the properties of individual “galaxies” (i.e. cold gas clumps) at redshift $`z=0`$. Our best fit model gave a distribution of galaxy masses in good agreement with those in the SPH simulation for galaxies of more than 32 particles when we used the merger timescale of Cole et al. (), although the N-body galform model contained a somewhat greater number of low mass galaxies and fewer very massive galaxies than the simulation. Doubling the merger rate in the galform model improved the agreement at all masses, but note that the merger rates in the SPH simulation may not be reliable due to the effects of artificial viscosity ().

In our semi-analytic approach, galaxy mergers are treated in a probabilistic fashion based on the dynamical friction timescale. Thus, a direct identification of semi-analytic and SPH galaxies is not possible. In order to circumvent this problem, we suppressed all merging in the N-body galform model and then used information from the SPH simulation to merge the semi-analytic galaxies and to associate the merged galaxies with groups of cold gas particles in the simulation. This gave us a semi-analytic mass for each galaxy in the SPH simulation. We found that these masses were generally similar (within about 50% for larger galaxies) with a scatter close to that seen in the comparison of halo cold gas masses.

Finally, we examined the clustering properties of the more massive galaxies in the SPH simulation and two N-body galform models. The first used the dynamical friction treatment of galaxy mergers, the second used our SPH merging scheme. We found that the correlation functions of galaxies in both galform models agreed well with the SPH simulation on scales larger than typical group and cluster sizes, but that on scales of a few $`h^1`$Mpc or less the correlation function of galaxies in the galform model with merging based on the dynamical friction timescale was higher by almost a factor of 2. Using the SPH merging scheme reduced this discrepancy to about 25%.

Our comparison shows that it is possible to reproduce accurately gas cooling, and to a lesser extent galaxy merger rates, in an SPH simulation using semi-analytic methods. Benson et al. (\[2001a\]) demonstrated that the overall rate of cooling, globally and in halos of a given mass, predicted by SPH and semi-analytic models show remarkable consistency. They found that the overall fractions of hot gas, cold, dense gas and uncollapsed gas agreed to within 25% at $`z=0`$. The cold gas fractions in halos of a given mass were found to agree to within 50%, with the SPH simulation cooling more gas than the semi-analytic model. This is consistent with the results presented here, since our best semi-analytic model assumes a gas density profile with a smaller core radius than that of Benson et al. , resulting in a higher central gas density in each halo and more rapid cooling.

Here we have shown that, with only minor changes to the semi-analytic model, very close agreement can be obtained on a halo by halo basis when merger trees are taken from the SPH simulation. The agreement between SPH and semi-analytic masses for individual halos indicates that the dependence of the cooling rate on merger history is very similar in the two cases. Given the quite different limitations and assumptions inherent in the two techniques, this is a remarkable result. While we have allowed ourselves some freedom to adjust the semi-analytic model in order to maximise the level of agreement with the simulation, it should be noted that in our best fit model, the only changes we have made to the cooling model of Cole et al. () are a slightly smaller core in the gas density profile and an increased cooling time in small halos. Neither of these changes have a large effect on the mean cold gas fraction at $`z=0`$.

Springel & Hernquist () show that when SPH is formulated in terms of the thermal energy equation, substantial overcooling may occur in halos of fewer than several thousand particles – for example, gas may cool as it passes through shocks which have been artificially smoothed out by the SPH algorithm. They demonstrate that a new formulation (‘entropy SPH’) using entropy rather than thermal energy as an independent variable, which conserves both energy and entropy, can significantly reduce this problem. This conclusion would seem to suggest that the quantities of gas cooling in the majority of halos in our SPH simulation may be overestimated. This could explain why a gas profile with a smaller core radius than that used by Cole et al. is required in our semi-analytic model to reproduce the quantities of cold gas in the simulation. However, the Hydra SPH code which we use in this work is significantly different from the GADGET code () employed by Springel & Hernquist and it is not clear to what extent our simulation suffers from the overcooling effect.

In an independent investigation carried out concurrently with this one, Yoshida et al. () compared gas cooling in SPH simulations carried out using GADGET with a semi-analytic model based on that of Kauffmann et al. (). This model contains a simpler cooling prescription than used in this work – the gas within each halo is assumed to trace the dark matter exactly at all times so there is no core radius. Yoshida et al. adopt a similar approach to our own, taking halo merger histories from the dark matter in their SPH simulations and neglecting star formation and feedback in both models. They show results for two of the SPH implementations investigated by Springel & Hernquist – one is the entropy SPH implementation discussed above, the other is a ‘conventional’ implementation based on taking the geometric means of the pairwise hydrodynamic forces between neighbouring particles. Yoshida et al. find good agreement between the masses of individual galaxies in their semi-analytic model and the entropy SPH implementation. SPH galaxy masses, however, can differ by a factor of 2 between the two SPH implementations considered, but Yoshida et al. believe the entropy SPH to be the more reliable technique and note that their ‘conventional’ SPH implementation actually suffers the overcooling problem more severely than other conventional implementations, including the Hydra code which we have used here.

Overall, it appears that the differences between cooling rates predicted by SPH and semi-analytic techniques are small, and quite possibly comparable to the uncertainty in the SPH results. As well as providing evidence to support the treatment of cooling in current semi-analytic galaxy formation models, these results show that semi-analytic modelling provides a convenient, alternative way to add a baryonic component to an N-body simulation, which is at least as reliable as an SPH simulation. When used to investigate star formation and feedback prescriptions this approach allows the investigation of large regions of parameter space at little computational cost and so can provide an indication of how these phenomena may be included in full hydrodynamic simulations.

## Acknowledgements

We acknowledge support from PPARC and the Royal Society.


text:
# Chandra High-Resolution Spectrum of the Anomalous X-ray Pulsar 4U 0142+61

## 1 Introduction

The anomalous X-ray pulsars (AXPs) have a number of properties that distinguish them as a class from other pulsars (Mereghetti & Stella 1995; van Paradijs, Taam, & van den Heuvel 1995). They have spin periods falling in a narrow range (6–12 s), luminosities of order 1034–1035 erg s-1, and a soft X-ray spectrum well described by a blackbody plus a power-law (see Gavriil & Kaspi 2002 and references therein). They also undergo relatively steady spin-down, have faint or unidentified optical counterparts, and show no evidence of binary motion. Several of the AXPs are associated with supernova remnants, indicating that they are relatively young neutron stars. Models to explain these properties fall into two general categories: accretion models and magnetar models.

In the accretion models, the accreting matter does not necessarily originate from a binary companion. X-ray timing and optical counterpart limits allow for only very low-mass companions, although it is difficult to reconcile such binaries with the supernova remnant associations because a supernova explosion would likely have unbound the binary. Another accretion model suggests that AXPs are isolated neutron stars accreting from a fallback disk of material from the supernova explosion or from the remains of a Thorne-Zytkow object (e.g., van Paradijs et al. 1995; Ghosh, Angelini, & White 1997). For all accretion models, there is an equilibrium pulsar spin period set by the mass accretion rate and the pulsar magnetic field strength. For the observed pulse periods and luminosities, the derived surface magnetic fields are of order $`10^{11}`$ G.

On the other hand, magnetar models have also been proposed, in which the AXPs are ultramagnetized (B$``$1014–1015 G) neutron stars whose spin down is due to magnetic dipole radiation. In these models, the X-ray luminosity (which far exceeds the spin-down energy) arises from magnetic field interactions in the neutron star crust (see, e.g., Thompson & Duncan 1996). The spectral and timing properties of AXPs have been used to constrain models for the atmospheres of ultramagnetized neutron stars (Özel, Psaltis, & Kaspi 2001). Other recent work on magnetar atmospheres has shown that proton cyclotron absorption features should be apparent in the soft X-ray spectrum of magnetars (Ho & Lai 2001; Zane et al. 2001). These lines are predicted to be broad ($`\mathrm{\Delta }E/E1`$; Ho & Lai 2001). High-resolution soft X-ray spectroscopy should be able to test the magnetar model for AXPs.

The brightest known AXP is 4U 0142$`+`$61 ($`l=129\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}4`$, $`b=0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}4`$), with a spin period of 8.7 s (see, Gavriil & Kaspi 2002, and references therein). Although long ago identified as an unusually soft X-ray source (Markert 1976; White & Marshall 1984; White et al. 1987), confusion with the nearby accretion-powered binary pulsar RX J0146.9$`+`$6121 contaminated the spectrum measured by early X-ray missions. More recent ASCA and BeppoSAX spectral studies measured a two component spectrum consisting of a 0.4 keV blackbody and a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$=3.7 photon power-law (White et al. 1996; Israel et al. 1999; Paul et al. 2000). Hulleman, van Kerkwijk, & Kulkarni (2000) identified an optical counterpart based on the Einstein X-ray position, and 8.7 s optical pulsations have recently been reported (Kern & Martin 2001).

In this Letter, we discuss our Chandra X-ray Observatory High Energy Transmission Grating Spectrometer observation of 4U 0142$`+`$61. This is the first grating observation of an AXP obtained with Chandra. We show that the X-ray spectrum is consistent with previous lower resolution results and report on a search for line features in the spectrum. We place stringent limits on the strength of absorption lines and consequently the allowed magnetic field strengths assuming a magnetar model.

## 2 Observation and Data Reduction

We observed 4U 0142$`+`$61 with Chandra on 2001 May 23 for 25 ks using the High Energy Transmission Grating Spectrometer (HETGS) and the spectroscopy array of the Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer (ACIS-S). For a more detailed description of the instruments, we defer to available Chandra X-ray Center (CXC) documents111http://asc.harvard.edu/udocs/docs/docs.html. The HETGS employs two sets of transmission gratings: the Medium Energy Gratings (MEGs) with a range of 2.5–31 Å (0.4–5.0 keV) and the High Energy Gratings (HEGs) with a range of 1.2–15 Å (0.8–10.0 keV). The HETGS spectra were imaged by ACIS-S, an array of 6 CCD detectors. The HETGS/ACIS-S combination provides an undispersed (zeroth order) image and dispersed spectra from the gratings. The various orders overlap and are sorted using the intrinsic energy resolution of the ACIS CCDs. The first-order HEG (MEG) spectrum has a resolution of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda =`$ 0.012 Å (0.023 Å). The ACIS CCDs are normally read out every 3.2 s. In order to sample the 8.7-s pulse period of 4U 0142$`+`$61 more effectively, we designed the observation to read out only a 512-row subarray on the ACIS-S detectors, resulting in a frame time of only 1.8 s.

The “level 1” event file was processed using the CIAO v2.1 data analysis package222http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/. During our analysis, it was found that the pipeline tool acis\_detect\_afterglow rejects 3–5% of source photons in grating spectra333http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/threads/acisdetectafterglow/. Afterglow is the residual charge left from a cosmic-ray event which is released over several frames and can cause a line-like feature in a grating spectrum; the tool attempts to identify afterglow by flagging events that occur at the same chip coordinates in consecutive frames. However, for bright sources like 4U 0142$`+`$61, the tool also rejects a small fraction of the valid source events. Although only a small fraction of the total, the rejection of source photons by this tool is systematic and non-uniform. Since order-sorting of grating spectra provides efficient rejection of background events, the afterglow detection tool is not necessary. Therefore, we reextracted the event file, retaining those events previously tagged by the acis\_detect\_afterglow tool in order to improve statistics. No spectral features were found that might be attributable to afterglow events.

The zeroth-order image of 4U 0142$`+`$61 was affected by photon pileup (see, e.g., Davis 2001b) and was not used in our spectral analysis. However, we used the zeroth-order image to measure the source position, with the CIAO tool celldetect. Our best-fit position was R.A.=$`01^\mathrm{h}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}46}^\mathrm{m}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}22}\stackrel{\mathrm{s}}{\mathrm{.}}44`$ and Dec.=$`61^{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}45}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}03}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}3`$ (equinox J2000.0), with an approximate error radius of 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5. The optical counterpart of Hulleman et al. (2000) lies 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$46 from our X-ray position.

The combined MEG and HEG first order count rate was only 4.2 cts s-1. We therefore did not expect the dispersed spectrum to be affected by pileup, although we made several checks nevertheless. First, the dispersion distance, $`d`$, of each event was compared to the energy determined by the intrinsic CCD resolution, $`E_{\mathrm{ACIS}}`$. The grating equation predicts $`E_{\mathrm{ACIS}}=hc/\lambda =hcmR/(Pd)`$, where $`R`$ is the Rowland distance, $`m`$ is the grating order, and $`P`$ is the grating period. Sources with pileup show a deviation from this relationship in lower orders, as low order photons combine to produce higher energy events which are then attributed to higher orders. There were no signs of pileup from the observed dispersion-energy relationship. Also, separate model fits of the first and second order spectra were found to be consistent both with past (low-resolution) observations and with each other, with no signatures of pileup in the residuals. We conclude that pileup is negligible in our dispersed spectra.

We used the standard CIAO tools to create detector response files (ARFs; see Davis 2001a) for the MEG and HEG $`+1`$ and $`1`$ order spectra. These were combined when the $`+`$/$``$ order spectra were added for the HEG and MEG separately. The spectra were binned in two different ways. For continuum analysis, we binned the data at 0.08 Å with a minimum of 50 counts per bin. To look for high-resolution spectral features, the data were binned at 0.015 Å for the HEG and 0.03 Å for the MEG. We also created background files for the HEG and MEG spectra using the standard CIAO tools. Finally, we used the XSPEC v11 data analysis package (Arnaud 1996) to fit continuum models to the background-subtracted spectra.

## 3 Search for Absorption Features

We fit a variety of one and two component models to the coarsely binned HEG and MEG spectra: power-law, cutoff power-law, thermal bremsstrahlung, power-law $`+`$ blackbody, power-law $`+`$ disk blackbody, power-law $`+`$ bremsstrahlung, bremsstrahlung $`+`$ blackbody, and cutoff power-law $`+`$ blackbody. All models included absorption by neutral interstellar gas with cosmic abundances. The Chandra best fit parameters of the most acceptable models are given in Table 1.

The cutoff power-law $`+`$ blackbody best fit parameters were inconsistent and gave a cutoff energy far above the instrument bandpass, suggesting that a standard power-law model was sufficient. The one component models had larger reduced $`\chi ^2`$ values than the two component models and showed residuals that suggested the need for a second component. Using an F-test (see, e.g., Bevington & Robinson 1992), we determined that the addition of a blackbody to the power-law and bremsstrahlung models is highly significant. Therefore, we rule out the single component models: power-law, cutoff power-law, and thermal bremsstrahlung. The two component bremsstrahlung models all gave large emission measures $`10^{58}`$ $`d_{\mathrm{kpc}}^2`$ cm-3 which would require an emission radius orders of magnitude larger than a neutron star for an optically thin plasma (White et al. 1996), and were rejected on this basis. Traditionally, the source has been fit with an absorbed power-law $`+`$ blackbody model and our analysis favors this model as well. The results of the Chandra fit, summarized in Table 1 and shown in Figure 1, are consistent with previous observations of 4U 0142$`+`$61. When the same model is applied to the high-resolution binned data set, the same parameter values are found to within the uncertainties.

With this continuum model, we then looked for absorption and emission features in the high-resolution spectrum. We searched for both narrow and broad line-like features. An initial inspection of the residuals of the power-law $`+`$ blackbody model fit seemed to show a feature at $``$6 Å (2 keV; see Figure 1). This feature is however highly suspect, since it is located between two known instrumental edges (Si-K at 6.75 Å and Ir-M at 5.98 Å). It does not appear in the MEG $`+`$1 spectrum (which is on a back-illuminated chip) but only in the MEG $``$1 and HEG $`+`$1/$``$1 spectra (on front-illuminated chips). Furthermore, the dip occurs at a slightly different energy and with a different depth in the MEG and HEG spectra (see Figure 2). For these reasons, we conclude that the feature is instrumental.

To search for broad features, we used the high-resolution HETGS spectra and fit Gaussian line models to the fractional residuals (\[data-model\]/model) of the continuum fit. The central energies and widths of the Gaussian components were fixed, while the normalizations were fitted. To look for features that had been predicted in the magnetar models (Ho & Lai 2001; Zane et al. 2001), the sigma of the Gaussian was chosen to vary with energy ($`\sigma =0.1\times E`$). The Gaussian model was fit to the data centering at every wavelength point. We were able to determine the best fit amplitude and standard deviation of this result as well as the significance of each feature. The 4$`\sigma `$ upper limits on the equivalent widths (EWs) of any features are shown in Figure 3. There were no features with a significance greater than 4$`\sigma `$, which we believe is a reasonable lower limit. In Figure 3, we have also included lines which mark the equivalent width limits for EW=$`0.1E`$ and EW=$`0.5E`$ for comparison.

Similarly, no narrow line features were found in the high-resolution spectra. We can place a 3$`\sigma `$ upper limit of 10 eV on any emission line between 4.1–17.7 Å (0.7–3.0 keV) whose width (FWHM) is comparable to the instrument resolution (see Figure 4). The computation uses the model fit to the time-averaged HEG and MEG data. We assume that candidate features are only 2 bins wide. One may derive limits on broader features until the scale of the feature becomes comparable to that of the instrument calibration uncertainties. Limits on absorption lines are identical when there are $``$25 counts per bin but are systematically larger for $``$25 counts per bin.

## 4 Discussion

The Chandra spectrum of 4U 0142$`+`$61 is well fit by an absorbed power-law $`+`$ blackbody, which is consistent with previous observations of the source (White et al. 1996; Israel et al. 1999; Paul et al. 2000). The small radius of the blackbody model might be explained by atmospheric effects which give an overestimation of the temperature and thus an underestimation of the radius when fit by a standard blackbody (see, e.g., Perna et al. 2001, and references therein). The best fit hydrogen column density of (0.88$`\pm `$0.13)$`\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 is consistent with estimates derived from radio and optical studies (Dickey & Lockman 1990; Hulleman et al. 2000). Distance estimates from extinction measurements for 4U 0142$`+`$61 range from 1–5 kpc due to the line of sight passing through the edge of a local ($`<1`$ kpc) molecular cloud. When including effects of the molecular cloud, a lower limit of 1 kpc is determined, whereas when neglecting the molecular cloud a lower limit of 2.7 kpc is obtained (Özel et al. 2001). Normalizing the distance to 1 kpc, we find a luminosity (0.5–10 keV) of 5.3$`\times 10^{34}`$ $`d_{\mathrm{kpc}}^2`$ ergs s-1 which is consistent with past measurements from ASCA and BeppoSAX.

No significant discrete features were found in the high-resolution spectrum. We can place a limit on the equivalent width of any narrow feature of $``$10 eV in the range 4.1–17.7 Å (0.7–3.0 keV) and $``$50 eV for broad features in the range 2.5–13 Å (0.95–5.0 keV). The limits on the equivalent width of any absorption features place strong constraints on the neutron star atmosphere models. Atmosphere models of ultramagnetized neutron stars predict a broad proton cyclotron absorption feature at an energy $`E_B=0.63y_g(B/10^{14}\mathrm{G})`$ keV, where $`y_g=(12GM/c^2R)^{1/2}`$ is the gravitational redshift factor and $`B`$ is the surface magnetic field strength (Ho & Lai 2001; Zane et al. 2001). If we assume that magnetic dipole radiation drives the spindown, the magnetic field strength found using P and  ($`B^2P\dot{P}`$) is 1.3$`\times 10^{14}`$ G (Gavriil & Kaspi 2002). A dipole field produces a cyclotron absorption feature consistent with a surface magnetic field strength 20–30% lower (Zane et al. 2001). For 4U 0142$`+`$61, the dipole field of 1.3$`\times 10^{14}`$ G would give a cyclotron absorption feature at $``$0.5 keV, which is well outside of the range accessible to our observation.

Initial theoretical work predicted a proton cyclotron absorption feature of equivalent width 0.70–0.75$`E_B`$ (Ho & Lai 2001; Zane et al. 2001), which is much greater than the equivalent width limits in the 0.95–5.0 keV range. If we take $`y_g0.8`$, the above energy range corresponds to magnetic field strengths of (1.9–9.8)$`\times 10^{14}`$ G. More recent work has shown that vacuum polarization effects strongly suppress the cyclotron absorption feature, giving equivalent widths an order of magnitude lower (Ho & Lai 2002). It should also be noted that the theoretical calculations of the equivalent width of the cyclotron feature were done for a local patch of the neutron star surface. A phase averaged spectrum, like the one we are using, would include contributions from various magnetic field strengths, directions and effective temperatures, which would further suppress the cyclotron feature. The combination of these effects may reduce the predicted equivalent widths to below our measured values for much of the spectral range we studied.

We thank Claude R. Canizares, the HETGS principal investigator, for allocating part of his Chandra guaranteed time program to this observation. We also thank Wynn C. G. Ho, Dong Lai, Feryal Özel, Dimitrios Psaltis, and Peter Woods for useful discussions. This research was supported in part by contracts SAO SV1-61010 and NAS8-38249 as well as NASA grant NAG5-9184.