text:
# Primordial black holes in braneworld cosmologies: Formation, cosmological evolution and evaporation

## I Introduction

The idea that our observable Universe may be a brane embedded in a higher-dimensional bulk is one which has deep ramifications for cosmology, and which in particular may rewrite many of our ideas as to how the Universe evolved during its earliest stages. One probe of these early stages is the possible formation of a population of primordial black holes PBH , and for the standard cosmology considerable attention has been directed at establishing constraints both from evaporation products and from a possible contribution to the present dark matter density PBHcons ; Carr75 ; Carr85 . The constraints on the formation rate are typically extremely strong, as after formation there is a long epoch during which the black hole energy density grows relative to radiation, so that even a modest initial fractional density can have a large impact at later stages.

Such constraints may be modified in many ways within the braneworld context. Thus far, the problem has only be studied in detail for the case of large compact extra dimensions ADM98 ; Kanti ; however in the first reference it was presumed that most of the radiation would be lost to the extra dimensions, whereas it is now believed that the emitted radiation is mostly confined to the brane EHM20 . In this paper we adopt a different scenario, namely the simplest of the Randall–Sundrum models RSII , known as Type II (henceforth RS-II), where a positive-tension brane is embedded in a bulk with a negative cosmological constant. We will not specifically address black hole formation mechanisms, but seek to determine the properties and population evolution of the black holes after formation, setting up a framework enabling formation mechanisms to be tested against observational data.

There are many modifications to the standard constraints that need to be taken into account. At high energies there is a modified form of the Friedmann equation, which alters the cosmological temperature–time relation in the early stages as well as modifying the horizon mass. The temperature of a black hole of a given mass may be modified by the presence of the extra dimension, so that the masses of black holes persevering to key epochs such as nucleosynthesis and the present change, and the character of their final emission products is altered. The purpose of this paper is to determine how the key primordial black hole properties are modified in the simplest braneworld scenario. In a forthcoming companion paper (Clancy et al.), we analyze the astrophysical constraints on the primordial black hole population taking into account these modifications.

## II Braneworld cosmology

In the cosmological model as outlined in Ref. branecos , our universe is a positive tension brane embedded in an (otherwise empty) AdS bulk, which is $`Z_2`$ symmetric about the brane. The energy–momentum tensor of fields confined to the brane will be taken to be of perfect fluid form. If the metric on the brane is of the Friedmann–Robertson–Walker form, the Einstein equations projected onto the brane reduce to the usual energy conservation equation

$$\dot{\rho }+3H(\rho +p)=0,$$
(1)
and a modified Friedmann equation

$$H^2=\frac{8\pi }{3M_4^2}\left(\rho +\frac{\rho ^2}{2\lambda }+\rho _{\mathrm{KK}}\right)+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_4}{3}\frac{k}{a^2}.$$
(2)
Here an overdot denotes derivative with respect to cosmic time $`t`$, $`\rho `$ and $`p`$ are the energy density and pressure of the fluid, $`a`$ is the scale factor on the Friedmann brane, with $`H`$ the Hubble constant, $`k=1,0,1`$ for open, flat or closed Friedmann branes respectively, $`M_4`$ is the effective 4D Planck mass and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$ is the 4D cosmological constant. Furthermore, $`\rho _{\mathrm{KK}}`$ is an effective energy density stemming from the bulk Weyl tensor; it behaves like (dark) radiation, $`\rho _{\mathrm{KK}}=\rho _{\mathrm{KK},0}\left(a_0/a\right)^4`$, although $`\rho _{\mathrm{KK},0}`$ needn’t be positive. Finally, the brane tension $`\lambda `$ is related to the fundamental 5D Planck mass $`M_5`$ by $`\lambda =3M_5^6/4\pi M_4^2`$.

Defining the AdS curvature radius $`l`$ in terms of the bulk cosmological constant

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_5=\frac{3}{4\pi }\frac{M_5^3}{l^2},$$
(3)
we have

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_4=3\left(\frac{M_5^6}{M_4^4}\frac{1}{l^2}\right).$$
(4)
In the following, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$ will be set to zero. The AdS radius provides an effective size of the extra dimension. As will become apparent, differences between RS-II and the standard scenario will be most pronounced for black holes whose radius is much smaller than the AdS radius. With $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_40`$, it follows that the brane-tension $`\lambda `$ and the AdS radius $`l`$ are related via

$$\lambda ^{1/4}=\left(\frac{4\pi }{3}\right)^{1/4}\left(\frac{l}{l_4}\right)^{1/2}l_4,$$
(5)
where $`l_4=M_4^1`$ is the 4D Planck length.

In Ref. RSII , corrections to the Newtonian potential of a point mass $`m`$ due to the 5th dimension were calculated for large distances as

$$V(r)=\frac{2m}{M_4^2r}\left(1+\frac{2}{3}\frac{l^2}{r^2}\right).$$
(6)
Current experiments using torsion pendulums have failed to observe such corrections on scales down to $`r0.2\mathrm{mm}`$ ref9 . This means the AdS radius must be smaller than $`l_{\mathrm{max}}10^{31}l_4`$. \[To our knowledge this is the strongest upper bound on the AdS radius to date. A much weaker constraint derives from the fact that the high-energy phase (defined below) should be over at the onset of nucleosynthesis, giving $`l<10^{43}l_4`$.\]

The case of interest for primordial black hole formation is the early universe, and we will focus on a flat radiation-dominated model. As for the dark radiation term, nucleosynthesis constrains $`(\rho _{\mathrm{KK}}/\rho )_{\mathrm{nuc}}`$ to be smaller than $`0.024`$ ref3 . Since both energy terms scale in the same way, the dark radiation will always have a small effect on the overall dynamics, and will be neglected in the remainder. With these assumptions, the solutions for the scale factor and energy density are

$$\rho =\frac{3M_4^2}{32\pi }\frac{1}{t(t+t_c)},$$
(7)
and

$$a=a_0\left[\frac{t\left(t+t_c\right)}{t_0\left(t_0+t_c\right)}\right]^{1/4},$$
(8)
where $`t_0`$ is any non-zero time, and $`t_c`$ is the ‘transition time’

$$t_c\frac{l}{2}.$$
(9)
At times much smaller than $`t_c`$ (equivalent to $`\rho \lambda `$), this gives rise to a non-conventional high-energy regime, in which

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`a_0\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{t_0}}\right)^{1/4},`$ (10)
$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3M_4^2}{32\pi t_ct}},`$ (11)
$`R_\mathrm{H}=4t,`$ $`M_\mathrm{H}=8M_4^2{\displaystyle \frac{t^2}{t_c}},`$ (12)
with $`R_\mathrm{H}`$ and $`M_\mathrm{H}`$ denoting the Hubble radius and mass inside the Hubble horizon respectively. For times much larger than $`t_c`$, we recover the regime of standard cosmology where

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`a_0\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{t_0^{1/2}t_c^{1/2}}}\right)^{1/2},`$ (13)
$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3M_4^2}{32\pi t^2}},`$ (14)
$`R_\mathrm{H}=2t,`$ $`M_\mathrm{H}=M_4^2t.`$ (15)
In the high-energy regime, as in standard cosmology, the radiation has a temperature given by

$$\rho =\frac{\pi ^2}{30}g_{\mathrm{cosm}}T^4,$$
(16)
where $`g_{\mathrm{cosm}}`$ indicates the number of relativistic particle species at a particular time. This gives rise to a modified temperature–time relation:

$$\frac{T}{T_4}=\left(\frac{45}{8\pi ^3}\right)^{1/4}g_{\mathrm{cosm}}^{1/4}\left(\frac{l}{l_4}\right)^{1/4}\left(\frac{t}{t_4}\right)^{1/4}.$$
(17)
An interesting background temperature to consider is at the transition time between the high-energy and standard regime. Taking $`g_{\mathrm{cosm}}=O(100)`$, it reads

$$T_c=3\times 10^{18}\left(\frac{l}{l_4}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{GeV}.$$
(18)
Its minimum value allowed by experiment is $`T_c(l_{\mathrm{max}})10^3`$ GeV.

Inflation is an important part of the standard cosmology and we will assume that black hole formation takes place after it, possibly though not necessarily induced by inflation-generated density perturbations. There is a firm upper limit on the inflationary energy scale from the requirement that the gravitational waves it produces don’t lead to excessive large-angle microwave anisotropies, and this leads to a lower limit on the horizon mass.111Inclusion of density perturbations strengthens this constraint somewhat, as does allowing for reduction in energy density during the late stages of inflation, so our limits are conservative. The amplitude of gravitational waves in the RS-II model was computed in Ref. LMW ; using their notation it is

$$A_\mathrm{T}^2=\frac{4}{25\pi }\frac{H^2}{M_4^2}F^2(Hl),$$
(19)
where

$$F(x)=\left[\sqrt{1+x^2}x^2\mathrm{sinh}^1\frac{1}{x}\right]^{1/2}.$$
(20)
In the high-energy regime $`x1`$, $`F^2(x)3x/2`$.

If we require that gravitational waves contribute no more than half the anisotropy signal seen by COBE (in order to leave room for density perturbations to induce structure formation), this gives the limit $`A_\mathrm{T}^2<3\times 10^{11}`$ LL . Combining this with the horizon mass formula Eq. (12) gives a lower limit on the horizon mass, and hence on the masses of PBHs that can form. In the high-energy regime it gives

$$M_\mathrm{H}>2\times 10^6\left(\frac{l}{l_4}\right)^{1/3}M_4=2\times 10^6M_5.$$
(21)
The general expression for the lower limit on $`M_\mathrm{H}`$ is shown in Figure 1. The limit is quite weak, with allowed initial masses even below $`M_4`$ in the high-energy limit (though not of course below $`M_5`$). This limit does not restrict any of the situations we will consider, as black holes surviving to nucleosynthesis always have masses higher than this limit. One could however in principle have inflation models where the energy scale after inflation was low enough to prevent the formation of early evaporating PBHs.

## III Black Hole Evaporation

### III.1 The Evaporation Rate and Lifetime

In this section, using standard black hole thermodynamical arguments, a mass–lifetime relation will be derived for black holes that formed by a small amount of matter collapsing on the brane.222The study of collapse in this context has been carried out by a number of authors DadhichGhosh2001 ; Brunietal2001 , although at the time of writing a full description is lacking. These studies have revealed that the nature of collapse is much richer and more complex in the braneworld context and in Refs. Brunietal2001 ; Dadhichetal2000  it was conjectured that primordial black holes could in principle have formed from the collapse of dark radiation alone. Here, however, we shall assume a minimal picture of collapsing matter on the brane. We will also determine the range of values of the AdS radius for which the derivation is valid. This will be used in the final section to estimate the time of formation of primordial black holes in the present cosmological scenario.

Consider a black hole formed from collapsing matter confined to the brane. It will have an event horizon that extends into the bulk. Moreover, if the size of the hole $`r_0`$ is much smaller than the AdS radius $`l`$ (and neglecting possible charges or rotation), it is natural to assume its geometry is given by a 5D Schwarzschild solution333This would certainly be the outcome according to a higher-dimensional generalization of the hoop conjecture ADM98 ; Thorne . Near the horizon, the black hole would have no way of distinguishing the AdS dimension from the others. See also Ref. hoop . EHM99

$$ds_5^2=f(r)dt^2+f^1(r)dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_3^2,$$
(22)
with $`f(r)=1r_0^2/r^2`$ and $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_3`$ the volume element of a 3-sphere. This form of the metric is a good approximation in the vicinity of the event horizon, which is the region needed to analyze the Hawking effect. The black hole is expected to emit Hawking radiation both into the brane and the bulk by exciting the brane or bulk degrees of freedom. In the present model, only gravitational radiation can propagate in the bulk. It is worth noting that near the horizon, the induced metric on the brane is given by

$$ds_4^2=f(r)dt^2+f^1(r)dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2,$$
(23)
which is not the usual $`4`$D Schwarzschild metric.444It is expected EHM99  that the metric will approach the standard $`4`$D form far away from the event horizon. An interesting class of exact solutions to the RS-II 4D brane equations which describe Reissner–Nordström type black holes, but possessing a so-called ‘tidal charge’ which arises due to the presence of a non-zero bulk Weyl tensor, have been given by Dadhich et al. Dadhichetal2000 . However, it is not yet clear whether these solutions are consistent with a full 5D solution. If so then we expect that these should represent a class of large black holes, i.e. black holes formed in the low-energy regime. Indeed, this metric has an effective negative energy–momentum tensor outside the horizon that will modify the gray-body factors of radiation by quantum fields confined to the brane EHM20 . However, the effective potentials in the field propagation equations bear similarity to those of the standard treatment. They also vanish when approaching the horizon, reducing the propagation equations to free wave equations. Since the brane is tuned to be flat, the derivation of the Hawking process on the brane will essentially be identical to the standard case. As for the bulk, Hawking radiation in AdS space has been discussed in Ref. Hemming , where it was shown to be similar to the asymptotically-flat case.

The expressions for radius, area and temperature of the black hole are given in terms of the AdS radius $`l`$ and the black hole mass $`M`$ as

$`r_0`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{M^{1/2}}{M_5^{3/2}}}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3\pi }}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{l}{l_4}}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{M_4}}\right)^{1/2}l_4,`$ (24)
$`A_5`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi ^2r_0^3,`$ (25)
$`T_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi r_0}},`$ (26)
and hold provided $`r_0l`$. This is to be contrasted with the usual $`4`$D result

$$T_{\mathrm{BH}}(4\mathrm{D})=\frac{M_4^2}{8\pi M}.$$
(27)
To estimate the lifetime, consider the number of particles of a certain species $`j`$, emitted in $`D`$-dimensional spacetime by a black hole of temperature $`T_{\mathrm{BH}}`$, in a time interval $`dt`$ and with momentum in the interval $`(𝐤,𝐤+d𝐤)`$:

$$dN_j=\sigma _j(k)\frac{dt}{\mathrm{exp}(\omega /T_{\mathrm{BH}})\pm 1}\frac{d^{D1}k}{(2\pi )^{D1}},$$
(28)
with $`\omega ^2=k^2+m^2`$ and $`m`$ the mass of the particle. The upper and lower sign apply to fermions and bosons respectively. As regards the absorption/emission cross-sections $`\sigma _j`$, summation over all angular modes is understood. In general, they depend on the species and frequency and must be determined numerically Page . Due to the different metrics Eq. (23) and Eq. (22), accurate determination of the cross-sections is beyond the scope of this paper. However, in the high-frequency limit all cross-sections reduce to the same expression (see below). In the low-frequency limit, the cross-sections decrease with frequency, approaching a finite value for spin-$`0`$ or spin-$`1/2`$ particles, whereas they vanish with increasing powers of frequency for higher-spin particles. This means the total energy emitted in higher-spin particles is suppressed relative to particles of lowest spin. These features are expected to carry over to the brane context, while the numerical factors may change somewhat.

The rate of energy loss by $`D`$-dimensional evaporation is obtained from Eq. (28) as

$$\frac{dM}{dt}=\underset{j}{}\sigma _j(k)\frac{\omega }{\mathrm{exp}(\omega /T_{\mathrm{BH}})\pm 1}\frac{d^{D1}k}{(2\pi )^{D1}}.$$
(29)
In the high-frequency limit ($`\omega T_{BH}`$) all cross-sections become identical, namely

$$\sigma \frac{A_{\mathrm{eff},D}}{4}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_{D2}r_{\mathrm{eff},D}^{D2}}{4},$$
(30)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{D2}`$ is the volume of a $`(D2)`$-sphere and $`r_{\mathrm{eff},D}`$ an effective radius for black-body emission, defined as EHM20 ; ref6

$$r_{\mathrm{eff},D}=\left(\frac{D1}{2}\right)^{1/(D3)}\left(\frac{D1}{D3}\right)^{1/2}r_0.$$
(31)
Adopting this approximation for all cross-sections reduces Eq. (29) to Stefan’s law:

$$\frac{dM}{dt}g_D\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_DA_{\mathrm{eff},D}T^D,$$
(32)
with $`g_D`$ composed of bosonic and fermionic degrees of freedom as

$$g_D=g_{D,\mathrm{bos}}+\frac{2^{D1}1}{2^{D1}}g_{D,\mathrm{ferm}}.$$
(33)
Further, $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_D`$ denotes the $`D`$-dimensional Stefan–Boltzmann constant, defined per degree of freedom:

$$\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_D=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_{D2}}{4(2\pi )^{D1}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(D)\zeta (D),$$
(34)
with $`\zeta (D)`$ the Riemann zeta function.555The $`D`$-dimensional Stefan–Boltzmann constant was misrepresented in Ref. EHM20 .

In the present set-up, we thus estimate the total emitted power as

$$\frac{dM}{dt}g_{\mathrm{brane}}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_4\stackrel{~}{A}_{\mathrm{eff},4}T^4g_{\mathrm{bulk}}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_5A_{\mathrm{eff},5}T^5,$$
(35)
where we must take $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{\mathrm{eff},4}=4\pi r_{\mathrm{eff},5}^2`$ because of the induced metric Eq. (23). Further, $`g_{\mathrm{brane}}`$ and $`g_{\mathrm{bulk}}`$ denote the brane and bulk degrees of freedom with rest masses lower than $`T_{\mathrm{BH}}`$. Since we have regarded $`g_{\mathrm{bulk}}`$ from the 5D point of view, it does not count the number of graviton Kaluza–Klein modes. Rather, it is the number of polarization states of the graviton, $`D(D3)/2`$, which gives $`g_{\mathrm{bulk}}=5`$. The number of quantum fields into which the hole evaporates is approximately constant until its lifetime is nearly over. Then substituting the relevant expressions into Eq. (35) and integrating gives the lifetime $`t_{\mathrm{evap}}`$ of a black hole of initial mass $`M`$:

$$\frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}(M)}{t_4}\stackrel{~}{g}^1\frac{l}{l_4}\left(\frac{M}{M_4}\right)^2,$$
(36)
with

$$\stackrel{~}{g}\frac{1}{160}g_{\mathrm{brane}}+\frac{9\zeta (5)}{32\pi ^4}g_{\mathrm{bulk}}.$$
(37)
In the standard BH thermodynamics, Stefan’s law was shown to overestimate the emitted power Eq. (29) by a factor $`2.6`$ Page , and we therefore divide the first term of $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ by the same factor, which should remain approximately true. The overestimate should be at least as severe for the bulk gravitational radiation, because of the higher spin suppression and the confining influence of the negative cosmological constant (although the latter supposedly would have little influence on small black holes); a more thorough analysis is required to be definite, but we divide by the same factor 2.6, resulting in a corrected form

$$\stackrel{~}{g}0.0024g_{\mathrm{brane}}+0.0012g_{\mathrm{bulk}}.$$
(38)
Since only gravity is allowed to propagate in the bulk, $`g_{\mathrm{bulk}}`$ simply counts the number of polarization states of the graviton, namely $`D(D3)/2=5`$. Combined with the fact that $`g_{\mathrm{brane}}>g_{\mathrm{bulk}}`$, it is now apparent that evaporation into the bulk is a subdominant effect, even for very small black holes. We mention two typical values for $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$: If the black hole emits only massless particles we have $`g_{\mathrm{brane}}=7.25`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}0.023`$. If the hole is just hot enough to emit electron–positron pairs, we have $`g_{\mathrm{brane}}=10.75`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}0.032`$. Given the fairly qualitative nature of current observational constraints, results will be rather insensitive to the precise value of $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$.

By comparing with the lifetime of a black hole of same mass in standard relativity

$$\frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}(M,4\mathrm{D})}{t_4}1.2\times 10^4g_{\mathrm{brane}}^1\left(\frac{M}{M_4}\right)^3,$$
(39)
we find

$$\frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}(M,5\mathrm{D})}{t_{\mathrm{evap}}(M,4\mathrm{D})}\left(\frac{l}{r_0(5\mathrm{D})}\right)^2.$$
(40)
For a fixed mass, small black holes can have much longer lifetimes in the higher-dimensional case.

Figure 2 shows the lifetimes of black holes for three choices of the AdS radius. As will become clear in the following sections, for $`l=10^{20}l_4`$, corresponding to a brane tension $`\lambda ^{1/4}=10^9\mathrm{GeV}`$, black holes initially of the AdS radius would be evaporating around the present epoch, and so this $`l`$ marks the transition between whether presently-evaporating black holes are effectively four or five dimensional. For values of $`l`$ higher than this, black holes evaporating today have lower initial masses than the usual $`10^{20}M_410^{15}\mathrm{g}`$.

Figure 3 shows the initial temperatures of black holes for the same choices of $`l`$. Most of the energy of a PBH is radiated at temperatures close to the initial temperature, with only a small fraction in a high-energy tail as the evaporation culminates. For $`l10^{20}l_4`$, the temperature of black holes evaporating at the present is reduced.

For future reference, we list the $`5\mathrm{D}`$ expressions for mass and temperature in terms of the lifetime

$`{\displaystyle \frac{M}{M_4}}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{g}^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{l}{l_4}}\right)^{1/2},`$ (41)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{T_{\mathrm{BH}}}{T_4}}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{32\pi }}}\stackrel{~}{g}^{1/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}}\right)^{1/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{l}{l_4}}\right)^{1/4},`$ (42)
where $`T_4=M_4`$ is the 4D Planck temperature.

### III.2 Ranges

The mass–lifetime relation Eq. (41) was derived under the assumption that the initially formed black hole is small, $`r_0l`$. Using the mass–radius relation Eq. (24), this implies the consistency condition

$$\frac{M}{M_4}\frac{l}{l_4}.$$
(43)
Thus, for a black hole of a given $`\mathrm{𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒}`$ there is an allowed range of values of $`l`$ for which it is small, obtained by substituting the mass–lifetime relation into condition Eq. (43):

$$l_{\mathrm{min}}ll_{\mathrm{max}},$$
(44)
with

$$l_{\mathrm{min}}(t_{\mathrm{evap}})=\stackrel{~}{g}^{1/3}\left(\frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}\right)^{1/3}ł_4,$$
(45)
and $`l_{\mathrm{max}}`$ the experimental upper limit on the AdS radius quoted earlier.

Using Eqs. (41) and (42), this corresponds to a range on the initial mass and temperature. The mass ranges from

$`M_{\mathrm{min}}`$ $``$ $`M(t_{\mathrm{evap}},l_{\mathrm{max}})`$ (46)
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{l_{\mathrm{max}}}{l_4}}\right)^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{g}^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}}\right)^{1/2}M_4`$
to

$$M_{\mathrm{max}}M(t_{\mathrm{evap}},l_{\mathrm{min}})=\stackrel{~}{g}^{1/3}\left(\frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}\right)^{1/3}M_4.$$
(47)
As for the black hole temperature, it ranges from

$`T_{\mathrm{BH},\mathrm{min}}`$ $``$ $`T_{\mathrm{BH}}(t_{\mathrm{evap}},l_{\mathrm{max}})`$
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{32\pi }}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{l_{\mathrm{max}}}{l_4}}\right)^{1/4}\stackrel{~}{g}^{1/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}}\right)^{1/4}T_4`$
to

$`T_{\mathrm{BH},\mathrm{max}}`$ $``$ $`T_{\mathrm{BH}}(t_{\mathrm{evap}},l_{\mathrm{min}})`$ (49)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{32\pi }}}\stackrel{~}{g}^{1/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}}\right)^{1/3}T_4.`$
We note that, although the braneworld scenario allows PBHs of a given lifetime to be lighter than in the standard case, their initial temperature will be lower as well.

The maximum values are essentially what is obtained in the standard 4D theory, where $`M0.04g_{\mathrm{brane}}^{1/3}(t_{\mathrm{evap}}/t_4)^{1/3}M_4`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{BH}}g_{\mathrm{brane}}^{1/3}(t_{\mathrm{evap}}/t_4)^{1/3}T_4`$. This should come as no surprise, since they correspond to the limit of what can be considered a small black hole. Well beyond that limit, i.e. for much smaller values of the AdS radius, the initial size (on the brane) of a black hole of the same lifetime would have been large, and it would have started out with properties indistinguishable from a $`4`$D black hole EHM99 . At a certain stage, the size of the hole will become comparable with the AdS radius, a transition stage that has so far eluded accurate description. But this happens near the end of its lifetime, when most of its mass has evaporated.666Although the lifetime in its 5D phase will be longer as compared to the standard estimates, for a given black hole it will still be a short time as compared to the 4D phase. For those black holes, we use the conventional estimates for the mass–lifetime relation etc.

Two examples are of particular interest in terms of observational consequences. The first concerns PBHs with lifetime equal to the present age of the universe. The currently-favoured low-density flat cosmology has an age of about 14 gigayears, i.e. $`t_08\times 10^{60}t_4`$. The AdS radius marking the transition between 4D and 5D behaviour is $`l_{\mathrm{min}}=7\times 10^{19}l_4`$. The mass then ranges from $`M_{\mathrm{max}}=4\times 10^{14}\mathrm{g}`$ in the standard scenario, to $`M_{\mathrm{min}}=3\times 10^9\mathrm{g}`$ for $`l=l_{\mathrm{max}}=10^{31}l_4`$. The allowed temperatures range from $`T_{\mathrm{BH},\mathrm{max}}=25\mathrm{MeV}`$ in the standard scenario to $`T_{\mathrm{BH},\mathrm{min}}=50\mathrm{keV}`$ for $`l=l_{\mathrm{max}}`$. Note that 4D PBHs are hot enough to copiously emit electrons, whereas only massless Standard Model particles can be emitted for large values of the AdS radius.

As a second example, consider the era of nucleosynthesis ($`t_{\mathrm{nuc}}100\mathrm{s}10^{44}t_4`$). Taking $`g_{\mathrm{brane}}=100`$, we find $`l_{\mathrm{min}}=10^{15}l_4`$. The mass ranges from $`M_{\mathrm{max}}=5\times 10^9\mathrm{g}`$ in the standard scenario to $`M_{\mathrm{min}}=2\times 10^2\mathrm{g}`$ for $`l=l_{\mathrm{max}}`$. The temperatures range from $`T_{\mathrm{BH},\mathrm{max}}=2\times 10^3\mathrm{GeV}`$ to $`T_{\mathrm{BH},\mathrm{min}}=0.2\mathrm{GeV}`$.

The initial temperatures of PBHs evaporating at these two epochs are shown as a function of $`l`$ in Figure 4.

## IV Formation and Evolution

We now return to the cosmology of Section II. There are several mechanisms by which black holes could have formed in the early universe (see Ref. Carr85  for a review.) We focus on collapse of primordial density fluctuations.

### IV.1 Formation mass

The end stage of the collapse process is highly nonlinear, and it is difficult to be very precise, as the formation masses remain poorly understood even in the standard cosmology. However it can be argued that the mass of the hole will be of order the Hubble horizon mass at the time of formation, $`t_i`$, by studying the Jeans mass. Consider a slightly overdense region of energy density $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$. Its density contrast is defined as $`\delta =(\stackrel{~}{\rho }\rho )/\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$. Expanding the density contrast in Fourier modes, perturbation theory provides evolution equations for these modes, as long as $`\delta 1`$. The Jeans length $`L_\mathrm{J}`$ is then defined such that modes with wavelength bigger than $`L_\mathrm{J}`$ are growing modes, while those with smaller wavelength oscillate. In Ref. ref10  the mode equations for the Friedmann model were given for a braneworld scenario. Applied to the present model, they read

$$\ddot{\delta }_k+H\dot{\delta }_k+\left[\frac{16\pi }{3M_4^2}\rho \frac{24\pi }{M_4^2}\frac{\rho ^2}{\lambda }+\frac{1}{3}\left(\frac{k}{a}\right)^2\right]\delta _k=0.$$
(50)
Here, $`k`$ denotes the comoving wavenumber of the mode. The Jeans length is obtained by setting the expression in the brackets to zero. In the high-energy regime we can neglect the first term, leading to

$$L_\mathrm{J}=\frac{\pi }{3}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}R_H0.85R_H.$$
(51)
Just as in standard cosmology, in the high-energy regime the Jeans length is of order the horizon size.

The scenario for forming PBHs is the standard one. One starts with a slightly overdense region in a flat FRW Universe, on a scale much larger than the horizon. Because of the superhorizon scale, the region can separately be described as a portion of a closed FRW model Harrison ; Carr75 . Therefore, it will expand less rapidly than the environment, and the density contrast will grow. At a certain time the region will cross the Jeans scale. If the density contrast is still very small at that time, its evolution will be accurately described by Eq. (50), and it will start to oscillate, preventing collapse from ever occurring. Thus, a necessary condition for black hole collapse is $`\delta 1`$ at ‘Jeans’ crossing, which as shown above is more or less at horizon crossing.

To keep account of the uncertainty in the precise formation mass, we introduce a factor $`f`$ as follows:

$$M_i=fM_H(t_i).$$
(52)
A certain amount of controversy exists over the possible range of $`f`$, although, recent numerical studies seem to favour $`f1`$ NJ . Moreover, we find in general that the constraints examined in the companion paper will turn out not to be too sensitive to its exact value.

### IV.2 Formation time

First consider PBHs forming in the high-energy regime. Then by assumption it holds that $`t_it_c`$. By substituting the expressions (12) and (9) for horizon radius and transition time, this translates into

$$R_H(t_i)2l.$$
(53)
Since the mass of the PBH is not expected to be larger than the horizon mass, its initial radius will not be larger than the horizon. It is clear from Eq. (53) that PBHs formed in the high-energy regime are $`\mathrm{𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑙}`$ and effectively 5-dimensional. The formation time can be expressed in terms of the initial mass or lifetime, by substituting Eqs. (12) and (9) into Eq. (52) and using the mass–lifetime relation Eq. (41):

$`{\displaystyle \frac{t_i}{t_4}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}f^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_i}{M_4}}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{l}{l_4}}\right)^{1/2}`$ (54)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}f^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{g}^{1/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}}\right)^{1/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{l}{l_4}}\right)^{1/4}.`$
In the standard regime, the formation time is given through Eq. (15) as

$$\frac{t_i}{t_4}=f^1\frac{M_i}{M_4}=0.04f^1g_{\mathrm{brane}}^{1/3}\left(\frac{t_{\mathrm{evap}}}{t_4}\right)^{1/3},$$
(55)
which now must satisfy $`t_it_c`$. Thus $`f^1M/M_40.5l/l_4`$, which violates condition Eq. (43). As could be expected, a black hole formed in the standard regime will be large, and behaves for the vast majority of its lifetime as a 4D object.

Using Eqs. (24) and (12) it is straightforward to show that

$$r_0=f^{1/2}\sqrt{\frac{8}{3\pi }}4t_if^{1/2}R_H,$$
(56)
i.e. that at the formation time, $`t_i`$, the Schwarzschild radius associated with the collapsing perturbation, of mass $`M_i`$, is of order the horizon size, $`R_H`$, so long as $`f`$ is not much smaller than 1. This is important since it implies that the collapsing perturbation will fall within its Schwarzschild radius and so form a black hole very soon after entering the horizon. Hence, as with the standard PBH scenario it is reasonable to assume that we need not concern ourselves too greatly with details such as the anisotropy and inhomegeneity of the collapse in the nonlinear subhorizon regime, since the black hole should form before any such effects have a chance to act.

Finally, we note that the minimum mass enforced by the condition that PBHs form after inflation guarantees that their mass will be much greater than the Planck mass relevant at that time (either $`M_5`$ in the high-energy regime or $`M_4`$ in the low-energy regime), which in turn means that their lifetime will be much greater than the formation time.

### IV.3 Evolution

Once the black holes have formed, their evolution must be followed forwards in time to the epoch where observational constraints might apply, either the present epoch or the time of evaporation. As the PBH comoving number density is constant up until evaporation, as usual the relative density of PBHs as compared to radiation will grow proportional to the scale factor while evaporation is negligible. A common approximation is to presume that evaporation is negligible right up until the lifetime of the PBH is reached, at which point its entire mass–energy is released with products characteristic of its initial temperature, and this approximation continues to be good in the braneworld case.

## V Conclusions

We have carried out a detailed investigation of how primordial black hole scenarios are modified in the RS-II braneworld. Whether these changes are significant depends on the AdS radius $`l`$ of the braneworld model; if this is sufficiently small then the standard scenario is recovered. However, current constraints on the AdS radius are very weak ($`l10^{31}l_4`$ where $`l_4`$ is the 4-dimensional Planck length), and substantial modifications to the usual case are possible for black holes evaporating at any epoch. If the AdS radius exceeds $`10^{15}l_4`$ then the properties of PBHs evaporating at nucleosynthesis (or earlier) are modified, and if it exceeds $`10^{20}l_4`$ PBHs evaporating up to the present epoch are affected. PBHs will have modified evolution if and only if they form during the high-energy phase of braneworld cosmological evolution.

If braneworld effects are important, they act to reduce the mass of a black hole surviving to a given epoch. More importantly, they give a reduced temperature, which will alter the evaporation products characteristic of such PBHs. An important application of these results is to investigate how constraints on PBH abundances are modified in the braneworld scenario. Because the black holes surviving to key epochs such as nucleosynthesis and the present can have modified temperatures, the standard astrophysical constraints cannot be applied and must be rederived from scratch. We carry out this analysis in a forthcoming companion paper (Clancy et al.).

Throughout we have ignored the possibility that PBHs might grow significantly through accretion of the background, known to be a valid approximation in the standard cosmology Carr75 . However in the high-energy regime this issue deserves re-investigation, which we will do in a forthcoming paper.

We have considered the simplest of braneworlds. It would be interesting to see how robust our conclusions are in more complicated cosmological models, for instance those including one or more bulk fields. Unless their number is very large, this will not drastically alter the energy fraction a black hole loses to the brane as compared to the bulk. On the other hand, the early phase of 4D cosmology can be significantly modified, in turn altering the relation between the black hole’s lifetime and time of formation. This is left for future investigation.

###### Acknowledgements.

D.C. was supported by PPARC and A.R.L. in part by the Leverhulme Trust. R.G. would like to thank John Barrow for inspiration, and we thank Carsten van de Bruck, Bernard Carr, Anne Green, and also Roy Maartens and the group at ICG Portsmouth for discussions.


format: text

text:
# Short-Spacings Correction from the Single-Dish Perspective

## 1. Introduction

All radio telescopes can be classified as either filled or unfilled-aperture antennas. The simplest filled-aperture antennas are single-dish telescopes. The desired astronomical object to be observed and the particular scientific goals determine which type of radio telescope to use. In general, single-dishes are considered as tools for low spatial resolution observations, while interferometers are used for high resolution observations. While compact objects are more suited for interferometric observations, extended objects are commonly observed with single-dishes as interferometers cannot faithfully recover information on the largest spatial scales.

However, in many scientific cases it is essential to obtain high spatial resolution observations of large objects, and to accurately represent emission present over a wide range of spatial scales. A simple recipe you may follow in such cases is:

* observe (mosaic) your object with an interferometer,
* observe your object with a single-dish,
* cross-calibrate the two data sets, and then
* combine the single-dish and interferometer data.

This combination of single-dish and interferometer data, when observing extended objects, is referred to as the short-spacings correction.

This ‘simple’ recipe may be considered as an artistic touch to the interferometric images as it makes them look much nicer but still preserves their high spatial resolution. This results from: (a) inclusion of more resolution elements, those seen by a single-dish; and (b) reconstruction of image artifacts. At the same time, these images contain information about the total power, and can be used to measure accurate flux densities, column densities, masses, etc. From a pure historical perspective, the short-spacings correction bridges the gap between the two classes of radio telescopes, essentially obtaining the best of ‘both worlds’, that is the high spatial resolution information provided by interferometers, and the low spatial resolution, including the total power, information provided by single-dishes.

This article will explain what the short-spacing problem is, how it is manifested, and how we can, both theoretically and practically, solve this problem. Section 2 depicts very briefly the fundamentals of interferometry, defines the spatial frequency domain, and draws an analogy between a single dish and an interferometer. The effects of missing short spacings are demonstrated in Section 3, as well as prospects for solving the problem. Section 4 considers the cross-calibration of interferometer and single dish data which is a precursor to any combination method. Methods for data combination are discussed in Section 5 and Section 6, and compared in Section 7.

## 2. A Very Brief Introduction to Interferometry

A very brief review of the basics of interferometry is necessary right at the beginning of this article, in order to define and explain some terms that will be used further on. However, we do not want to go deeply into interferometry, as there is a vast literature available on this topic, starting with “Interferometry and Synthesis in Radio Astronomy” (Thompson, Moran, & Swenson 1986) and “Synthesis Imaging in Radio Astronomy” (Taylor, Carilli, & Perley 1999).

The fundamental idea behind interferometry is that a Fourier transform relation exists between the sky radio brightness distribution $`I`$ and the response of a radio interferometer. If the distance between two antennas (the baseline) is $`𝐝`$, then the so-called visibility function, $`V(𝐝)`$, is given by:

$$V(𝐝)=_{\mathrm{source}}A(𝝈)I(𝝈)\mathrm{exp}\left[2\pi i𝐝𝝈/\lambda \right]𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }.$$
(1)
Here, $`A(𝝈)`$ is an antenna reception pattern, or primary beam, and $`𝝈`$ is the vector difference between a given celestial position and the central position of the field of view. The aperture synthesis technique is a method of solving Equation 1 for $`I(𝝈)`$ by measuring $`V`$ at suitable values of $`𝐝`$.

To simplify Equation 1, a more convenient, right-hand rectilinear, coordinate system is introduced in Fugure 1. Coordinates of vector $`𝐝`$ in this system are $`(u,v,w)`$, where the direction to the source center $`𝐬_0`$ defines the $`w`$ direction, and $`u`$ and $`v`$ are baseline projections onto the plane perpendicular to the $`𝐬_0`$ direction, towards the East and the North, respectively. A synthesized image in the $`lm`$ plane represents a projection of the celestial sphere onto a tangential plane at the source center. In certain conditions, that is in the case of an Earth tracking, East-West interferometer array, with the $`w`$-axis lying in the direction of the celestial pole, further simplifications of Equation 1 are possible:

$$V(u,v)=A(l,m)I(l,m)\mathrm{exp}[2\pi i(ul+vm)]\frac{dldm}{\sqrt{1l^2m^2}}.$$
(2)
Therefore, the visibility function $`V(u,v)`$ can be expressed as the Fourier transform of a modified brightness distribution $`A(l,m)I(l,m)`$. Coordinates $`u`$ and $`v`$ ($`w=0`$) are measured in units of wavelength and the $`uv`$ plane is called the spatial frequency domain. These are effectively projections of a terrestrial baseline onto a plane perpendicular to the source direction. The $`lm`$ plane is referred to as the image domain. To obtain $`I(l,m)`$, from Equation 2, an inverse Fourier transform of $`V(u,v)`$ is required, meaning that a complete sampling of the spatial frequency domain is essential. In practice however, a bit more than a simple inversion is needed as only limited sampling of the $`uv`$ plane is available.

### 2.1. How do we ‘fill in’ the $`uv`$ plane?

For a given configuration of antennas any interferometer array has a limited range of baselines, lying between a minimum, $`d_{\mathrm{min}}`$111The shortest baseline that can be achieved is constrained by the physical limitations in placing two dishes together and the shadowing effect of one dish by another one., and maximum, $`d_{\mathrm{max}}`$, baselines. As an example, 5 antennas of the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) form 10 baselines, with $`d_{\mathrm{min}}=31`$ m and $`d_{\mathrm{max}}=459`$ m for a particularly compact configuration. The final resolution ($`\theta _{\mathrm{int}}`$) is inversely related to the maximum baseline by $`\theta _{\mathrm{int}}\lambda /d_{\mathrm{max}}`$. In the case of an Earth tracking interferometer, as the Earth rotates the baseline projections on the $`uv`$ plane trace a series of ellipses. The parameters of each ellipse depend upon the declination of the source, the length and orientation of the baseline, and the latitude of the center of the baseline (Thompson et al. 1986). The ellipses are concentric for a linear array (e.g. ATCA). For a 2-dimensional array (e.g. the Very Large Array, VLA), the ellipses are not concentric and so can intersect.

As each baseline traces a different ellipse, the ensemble of ellipses indicates the spatial frequencies that can be measured by the array (see Thompson et al. 1986). At each sampling interval, the correlator measures the visibility function for each baseline, thus resulting in a number of samples being measured over elliptical tracks in the $`uv`$ plane. Hence, the resultant interferometer $`uv`$ coverage will always be, more or less, incomplete, having a hole in the center of the $`uv`$ plane whose diameter corresponds to the minimum baseline, gaps between measured elliptical tracks, and gaps between each adjacent samples on each elliptical track. The ensemble of ellipses (loci) is known as the transfer or sampling function, $`b_{\mathrm{int}}(u,v)`$. An example of the sampling function obtained with the VLA is shown in Fugure 2.

Hence, if $`V(u,v)`$ is a true (ideal) visibility function, the measured (observed) visibilities ($`V_{\mathrm{int}}^{}`$) can be expressed as:

$$V_{\mathrm{int}}^{}(u,v)=V(u,v)b_{\mathrm{int}}(u,v).$$
(3)
$`b_{\mathrm{int}}`$ is usually representable by a set of $`\delta `$-functions, between the lowest and the highest spatial frequency sampled by the interferometer (corresponding to the shortest and the longest baselines, respectively). The Fourier transform of Equation 3 gives the observed sky brightness distribution $`I_{\mathrm{int}}^\mathrm{D}`$ (so called ‘dirty’ image):

$$I_{\mathrm{int}}^\mathrm{D}(l,m)=I(l,m)B_{\mathrm{int}}(l^{},m^{}),$$
(4)
where $`B_{\mathrm{int}}`$ is the synthesized or ‘dirty’ beam, which is the point source response of the interferometer. As usually, asterisks ($``$) are used to denote convolution. When imaging, incomplete $`uv`$ coverage leads to severe artifacts, such as negative ‘bowls’ around emission regions and negative and positive sidelobes (Cornwell, Braun, & Briggs 1999). We return to this in Section 3. The determination of $`I`$ from $`I_{\mathrm{int}}^\mathrm{D}`$ in the deconvolution process, requires beforehand interpolation and extrapolation of $`V_{\mathrm{int}}^{}`$ for missing data due to the discontinuous nature of $`b_{\mathrm{int}}`$ (Cornwell & Braun 1989). This process works well when a compact configuration of antennas is used and when the source is small enough, with angular size $`\theta 2\lambda /d_{\mathrm{min}}`$ (Bajaja & van Albada 1979).

For imaging larger objects, with angular size $`\theta >\lambda /d_{\mathrm{min}}`$, a significant improvement in filling in the $`uv`$ coverage can be achieved by using the ‘mosaicing technique’, where observations of many pointing centers are obtained and ‘pasted’ together (see Holdaway 1999). Mosaicing effectively reduces the shortest projected baseline to $`d_{\mathrm{min}}D/2`$, where $`D`$ is the diameter of an individual antenna. Nevertheless, the center of the $`uv`$ plane still suffers if significant large scale structure is present. This lack of information for very low spatial frequencies (around the center of the $`uv`$ coverage) in an interferometric observation is usually referred to as the ‘short-spacings problem’.

### 2.2. A single-dish as an interferometer?

Extended objects with angular size $`\theta >\lambda /d_{\mathrm{min}}`$ can be observed with a single-dish. Let us now think of a single-dish in a slightly unusual way, imagining filled apertures consisting of a large number of small panels packed closely together. Then all these panels can act as interferometer elements with their signals being combined together at the focus, making a so called phased or adding array (see contribution by D. Emerson in this volume). The distance between each two panels corresponds to a baseline, as shown in Fugure 3. The baseline distribution then monotonically decrease from zero at the center up to the maximum baseline, determined by the single-dish diameter $`D_{\mathrm{sd}}`$. This is also shown in Fugure 3.

One observation with a single-dish provides a total flux density measurement, corresponding to the zero spacing, $`(u,v)=(0,0)`$. However, if a single-dish scans across an extended celestial object, it measures not only a single spatial frequency, but a whole range of continuous spatial frequencies all the way up to a maximum of $`D_{\mathrm{sd}}`$ (Ekers & Rots 1979). Hence, a single-dish behaves as an interferometer with an almost infinite number of antennas, and therefore has a continuous range of baselines, from zero up to $`D_{\mathrm{sd}}`$. The nice thing about this representation is that we can now use the same mathematical notation to describe both single-dishes and interferometers.

The observed sky brightness distribution $`I_{\mathrm{sd}}^\mathrm{D}`$ in the case of single-dish observations is then given by:

$$I_{\mathrm{sd}}^\mathrm{D}(l,m)=I(l,m)B_{\mathrm{sd}}(l^{},m^{}),$$
(5)
with $`B_{\mathrm{sd}}`$ being the single-dish beam pattern. The Fourier transform of Equation 5 gives the observed single-dish ‘visibilities’, $`V_{\mathrm{sd}}^{}`$:

$$V_{\mathrm{sd}}^{}(u,v)=V(u,v)\times b_{\mathrm{sd}}(u,v)$$
(6)
where $`b_{\mathrm{sd}}`$ is the Fourier transform of the single-dish beam pattern which, unlike $`b_{\mathrm{int}}`$, is a continuous function between zero and the highest spatial frequency sampled by the single-dish. Determination of $`I`$ from $`I_{\mathrm{sd}}^\mathrm{D}`$ requires deconvolution, but no interpolation of $`V_{\mathrm{sd}}^{}`$ is needed since this is a continuous function.

## 3. How is the Short-spacings Problem Manifested?

As shown in Equation 4, the sky brightness distribution can be reconstructed, in the case of interferometric observations, by deconvolving the ‘dirty’ image with the synthesized beam. As an example, Fugure 4 shows the result of the HI ‘mosaic’ observations of the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC) with the ATCA. More information about these observations and data reduction is available in Stanimirovic et al. (1999). The two adjacent panels on the right side show right ascension (RA) cuts through the image. Negative bowls (shown in white on the image) are seen around emission peaks (shown in black), as well as in RA cuts. These are typical interferometric artifacts resulting from an incomplete $`uv`$ coverage.

A simple graphical explanation of why this happens, borrowed from Braun & Walterbos (1985), is shown in Fugure 5 for the case of a point source. The solid vertical line in Fugure 5 distinguishes the spatial frequency (a) from the image domain (b). The distribution of measured spatial frequencies, or what we have already defined as a transfer (or sampling) function, $`b_{\mathrm{int}}`$, is given on the left side, while its Fourier transform, that is the synthesized beam, $`B_{\mathrm{int}}`$, is shown in the right. An exclusion of the central values from the spatial frequency domain, is equivalent to a subtraction of a broad pedestal in the image domain, resulting in the presence of a deep negative ‘bowl’ around the observed object, as seen in Fugure 4.

This demonstrates simply how severe the effects of missing short-spacings can be. The larger the object is relative to the reciprocal of the shortest measured baseline one tries to image, the more prominent the short-spacing problem becomes.

### 3.1. How can we solve the short-spacings problem?

There are two main questions concerning the short-spacings problem:

1. how to provide (observe) missing short spacings to interferometric data;
2. how to combine short-spacing data with those from an interferometer.

In answering the first question, all solutions can be grouped into two array schemes: homogeneous, having all antennas of the same size, and heterogeneous, based on observations obtained with different-sized antennas. There are many possibilities concerning the heterogeneous arrays, such as using smaller arrays and even a hierarchy of smaller arrays. The simplest option, though, is a single-dish telescope with a diameter ($`D_{\mathrm{sd}}`$) larger than the interferometer’s minimum baseline.

We briefly touch here on some pros and cons for both array schemes. One of the difficulties in providing short-spacings with a single-dish is that it is hard to provide a large single-dish which would have the sensitivity equivalent to that of an interferometer (Holdaway 1999). Also, single-dish observations are complex (they require a lot of separate pointing centers to cover a large object) and very sensitive to systematic errors. Using theoretical analysis, numerical simulations and observational tests, Cornwell, Holdaway, & Uson (1993) show that a homogeneous array in which the short-spacings are obtained from single antennas of the array, allows high quality imaging. They find that a key advantage over the large single-dish scheme is pure simplicity, which is an important factor for the complex interferometric systems. As both interferometric and total power data are obtained with the same array elements, no cross-calibration is required in this case. Note that in this case total-power and interferometric observations have to be synchronized which is not a simple task because of different observing techniques involved (e.g. the single-dish observations require frequency or position switching modes!). This turns out to be an especially difficult task for the continuum observations.

However, to fully fill in the central gap in an interferometer $`uv`$ coverage and preserve sensitivity at the same time, the heterogeneous array scheme appears more advantageous. This has been recently recognized in the planning of the future Atacama Large Millimeter/Submillimeter Array (ALMA). Imaging simulations have shown that antenna pointing errors of only a few percent of the primary beam width produce large errors in the visibilities in the central $`uv`$ plane, causing a large degradation of image quality (see Morita 2001). To compensate for this problem, an additional, smaller array of 6 – 8 m dishes, the so called ALMA Compact Array (ACA), has been proposed to provide short baselines.

In answering the second question, methods for the combination of interferometer and single-dish data can be grouped into two classes: data combination in the spatial frequency domain (Bajaja & van Albada 1979; Vogel et al. 1984; Roger et al. 1984; Wilner & Welch 1994; Zhou, Evans, & Wang 1996), and data combination in the image domain (Ye & Turtle 1991; Stewart et al. 1993; Schwarz & Wakker 1991; Holdaway 1999). Each approach can be realized through a number of different methods. Both approaches are very common and are becoming a standard data processing step.

As the most common scheme of a heterogeneous array involves use of a large single-dish telescope, we proceed to consider this particular case further.

## 4. Cross-calibration of Interferometer and Single-dish Data

Before adding short-spacing data, it is necessary to be sure that both the interferometer and single-dish data sets have identical flux density scales. As calibration is never perfect, the calibration differences between the two sets of observations can be significant in some cases (e.g. observations spread over a long period of time, different data quality, use of different flux density scales for calibration, quality of calibrators, etc.). This results in a small but appreciable difference in the measured flux densities.

We define the calibration scaling factor, $`f`$, as the ratio of the flux densities of an unresolved source in the single-dish and interferometer maps:

$$f=\frac{S_{\mathrm{int}}}{S_{\mathrm{sd}}}.$$
(7)
In the case of perfect calibration, $`f=1`$. However, $`f1`$ otherwise, and needs to be determined very accurately. Unfortunately, it is hard to find suitable compact sources to directly determine $`f`$. Hence, the best way to estimate $`f`$ is to compare the surface brightness of the observed object in the overlap region of the $`uv`$ plane, see Fugure 6. This region should correspond to angular sizes to which both telescopes are sensitive. For a source of brightness, $`I`$, both the interferometer and single dish should measure within this region the same, $`I_{\mathrm{sd}}=I_{\mathrm{int}}`$, and calibration errors will appear as:

$$f=\frac{I_{\mathrm{int}}}{I_{\mathrm{sd}}}.$$
(8)
For an extended source $`I_{\mathrm{int}}`$ and $`I_{\mathrm{sd}}`$ are often, for convenience, expressed in units of Jy beam-1 not Jy sr-1, and so will be different numbers because of the different beams considered (with beam areas $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{int}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{sd}}`$, respectively). For this purpose, an estimate of the resolution difference between the two data sets ($`\alpha =\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{int}}/\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{sd}}`$) is also needed.

To determine $`f`$ the following steps are required:

1. scale the single-dish data by $`\alpha `$ to account for the difference in brightness caused only by different resolutions,
2. Fourier transform the interferometer and scaled single-dish images,
3. deconvolve the single-dish data (by dividing them by the Fourier transform of the single-dish beam), and
4. compare ‘visibilities’ in the overlapping region of spatial frequencies.

Several important issues should be considered here:

* When Fourier transforming in Step 2 watch for edge-effects! To avoid nasty edge-effects in some cases apodizing of both interferometer and single-dish images may be required in order to make the image intensities smoothly decrease to zero near the edges.
* Step 3 requires a very good knowledge of the single-dish beam! To make things even harder, the FWHM of the single-dish beam and the calibration scaling factor are highly coupled (Sault & Killeen 1998). Therefore, an error in the single-dish beam model has the same effect in the overlapping region as an error in the flux density scale. If the single-dish beam is poorly known, $`f`$ will be a quadratic function of distance in the Fourier plane, in the first approximation (see Stanimirovic 1999).
* A sufficient overlap in spatial frequency is required for Step 4. Assuming a Gaussian-tapered illumination pattern for a single-dish, and considering a cut-off level of 0.2 for reliable data, we can estimate the minimum diameter, $`D`$, of a single-dish necessary to provide all spacings shorter than $`d_{\mathrm{min}}`$ for a given interferometer:

$$D>1.5\times d_{\mathrm{min}}.$$
(9)
In order to have a reasonable overlap of spatial frequencies so that $`f`$ can be derived, a slightly larger single-dish is required with $`D>2\times d_{\mathrm{min}}`$. For example, for the ATCA shortest baseline of 31 m, the single-dish providing short spacings should have diameter of $`D62`$ m. Therefore, the 64 m Parkes telescope can do a really great job. Also, while the 100-m Green Bank Telescope will be able to provide short-spacing data for the VLA C and D arrays (with $`d_{\mathrm{min}}=35`$ m), only Arecibo could do so for the VLA B array (with $`d_{\mathrm{min}}=210`$ m).

## 5. Data Combination in the Spatial Frequency Domain

### 5.1. Theoretically…

As shown by Bajaja & van Albada (1979), the true missing short-spacing visibilities can be provided from the function $`V(u,v)`$ in Equation 6, if the single-dish is large enough to cover the whole central gap in the interferometer $`uv`$ coverage. The deconvolution of the single-dish data gives the true single-dish visibilities, where $`b_{\mathrm{sd}}(u,v)0`$, by:

$$V(u,v)=\frac{V_{\mathrm{sd}}^{}(u,v)}{b_{\mathrm{sd}}(u,v)}.$$
(10)
Function $`V(u,v)`$ can be then substituted in Equation 3, after rescaling by $`f`$, everywhere in the $`uv`$ plane where Equation 10 holds. This would provide the resultant $`uv`$ coverage having the inner visibilities from the single-dish data only (rescaled to match the interferometer flux-density scale due to the calibration differences), and the outer visibilities from just the interferometer data. This is effectively feathering or padding the interferometer visibilities with the single-dish data.

Depending on the type of input images used, and/or the type of weighting applied within the region of overlapping spatial frequencies, there are several applications of this technique (Roger et al. 1984; Vogel et al. 1984; Wilner & Welch 1994; Zhou et al. 1996). However, in all cases, for a good data combination the single-dish data set should fulfill the following two conditions.

* A sufficiently fine sampling of the single-dish data at the Nyquist rate (2.4 pixels across the beamwidth) is required to avoid aliasing during deconvolution (Vogel et al. 1984). The single-dish data must also have the same coordinate system as the interferometer data. Therefore, it is sometimes necessary to re-grid single-dish images.
* Visibilities derived from the single-dish data should have a signal-to-noise ratio comparable to those of the interferometer in the overlapping region in order not to degrade the combined map (Vogel et al. 1984).

### 5.2. Practically…

This linear data combination in the spatial frequency domain is very widely used and is implemented in several packages for radio data reduction, e.g. task imerg in aips, image tool in aips++ and task immerge in miriad. As an example we will discuss immerge here.

immerge takes as input a clean (deconvolved) high-resolution image, and a non-deconvolved, low-resolution image. These images are Fourier transformed (labeled as $`V_{\mathrm{int}}(k)`$ and $`V_{\mathrm{sd}}^{}`$) and combined in the Fourier domain applying tapering functions, $`w^{}(k)`$ and $`w^{\prime \prime }(k)`$, such that their sum is equal to the Gaussian function having a FWHM of the interferometer, $`\theta _{\mathrm{int}}`$:

$`V_{\mathrm{comb}}(k)=w^{}(k)V_{\mathrm{int}}(k)+fw^{\prime \prime }(k)V_{\mathrm{sd}}^{}(k)`$ (11)
$`w^{}(k)+w^{\prime \prime }(k)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\theta _{\mathrm{int}}^2k^2}{4\mathrm{ln}2}}\right).`$ (12)
Function $`w^{\prime \prime }(k)`$ is a Gaussian with the FWHM of the single dish. The low-resolution visibilities are multiplied by $`f`$ to account for the calibration differences. The final resolution is that of the interferometer image. The tapering functions $`w^{}`$ and $`w^{\prime \prime }`$ are shown in Fugure 7, together with the tapering function of the merged data set, for the case of the ATCA interferometer and the Parkes single-dish telescope. immerge can also estimate the calibration scaling factor, $`f`$, by comparing single-dish and interferometer data in the region of overlapping spatial fequencies specified by the user.

As an example of how immerge works in practice, Fugure 8 shows a sequence of images at various stages of data processing: before merging, after Fourier transforming, and the final version.

## 6. Data Combination in the Image Domain

There are two distinct methods for data combination in the image domain. The first, the ‘linear combination’ method (Stanimirovic et al. 1999), merges data sets in a simple linear fashion before final deconvolution, while the second (Sault & Killeen 1998), the non-linear method, combines all data during the deconvolution process.

### 6.1. The ‘Linear combination’ approach

The theoretical basis for merging before deconvolution is the linear property of the Fourier transform: a Fourier transform of a sum of two functions is equal to the sum of the Fourier transforms of the individual functions. Therefore, instead of adding two maps in the Fourier domain and Fourier transforming the combined map to the image domain, one can produce the same effect (fill in missing short-spacings in an interferometer $`uv`$ coverage) by adding maps in the image domain. This method was first applied by Ye & Turtle (1991), and Stewart et al. (1993).

As we have seen from Equations 4 and 5, the interferometer and single-dish data obey the convolution relationship. The dirty images and beams can be combined to form a composite dirty image ($`I_{\mathrm{comb}}^D`$) and a composite beam ($`B_{\mathrm{comb}}`$) with the following weighting:

$`I_{\mathrm{comb}}^D=(I_{\mathrm{int}}^D+\alpha fI_{\mathrm{sd}}^\mathrm{D})/(1+\alpha )`$ (13)
$`B_{\mathrm{comb}}=(B_{\mathrm{int}}+\alpha B_{\mathrm{sd}})/(1+\alpha ),`$ (14)
where $`\alpha =\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{int}}/\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{sd}}`$ is an estimate of the resolution difference between the two data sets. The convolution relationship, $`I_{\mathrm{comb}}^D=B_{\mathrm{comb}}I`$, still exists between the composite dirty image, $`I_{\mathrm{comb}}^D`$, and the true sky brightness distribution, $`I`$. Deconvolving the composite dirty image with the composite beam hence solves for $`I`$.

There is no single existing program (task) that employs this method, but a linear combination of maps can be easily obtained in any package for radio data reduction, followed by a favorite choice of a deconvolution algorithm. As an example, Fugure 9 shows the ‘linear combination’ method applied on the ATCA mosaic and Parkes telescope HI observations of the SMC at several stages of data processing. Note that $`B_{\mathrm{int}}`$ in the case of mosaic observations represents a whole cube of beams, one for each pointing in the mosaic. The combined dirty image was deconvolved using miriad’s maximum entropy algorithm (Sault, Staveley-Smith, & Brouw 1996). The model was finally restored with a 98-arcsec Gaussian function.

### 6.2. Merging during deconvolution

Besides the missing information in the center of the $`uv`$ plane, an interferometer $`uv`$ coverage suffers from spatial-frequency gaps. Since the missing information can be introduced in an infinite number of ways, the convolution equation ($`I^D=IB`$) has a non-unique solution. Hence, the deconvolution has the task of selecting the ‘best’ image from all those possible (Cornwell 1988). Since deconvolution has to estimate missing information, a non-linear algorithm must be employed (Cornwell 1988; Sault et al. 1996). Cornwell (1988) and Sault et al. (1996) showed that the deconvolution algorithms implementing the so called ‘joint’ deconvolution scheme, whereby observations of many pointing centers are combined prior to deconvolution, produce superior results in the case of mosaicing, since more information is fed to the deconvolver. We expect that the same argument might apply for the addition of the single-dish data, resulting in the merging before and during deconvolution being more successful than the merging of clean images in the spatial frequency domain.

The maximum entropy method (MEM) is one of the non-linear deconvolution algorithms. It selects the deconvolution solution so it fits the data and, at the same time, has a maximum ‘entropy’. Cornwell (1988) explains this entropy as something which when maximised produces a positive image with a compressed range in pixel values. The compression criterion forces the final solution (image) to be smooth, while the positivity criterion forces interpolation of unmeasured Fourier components. One of the commonly used definitions of entropy is:

$$\mathrm{}=\underset{i}{}I_i\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{I_i}{M_ie}\right)$$
(15)
where $`I_i`$ is the brightness of $`i`$’th pixel of the MEM image and $`M_i`$ is the brightness of $`i`$’th pixel of a ‘default’ image incorporated to allow a priori knowledge to be used ($`e`$ is the base of the natural logarithms). The requirement that the final image fits the data is usually incorporated in a constraint such that the fit $`\chi _{\mathrm{int}}^2`$ of the predicted visibilities to those observed (Cornwell 1988) is close to the expected value:

$$\chi _{\mathrm{int}}^2N\sigma _{\mathrm{int}}^2,$$
(16)
with $`N`$ being the number of independent pixels in the map and $`\sigma _{\mathrm{int}}^2`$ being the noise variance of the interferometer data.

The single-dish data can be incorporated during the maximum-entropy deconvolution process in two ways.

1. The ‘default’ image
The easiest way is to use the single-dish data as a ‘default’ image in Equation 15 since, in the absence of any other information or constraints, this forces the deconvolved image to resemble the single-dish image in the spatial frequency domain where the interferometer data contribute no information. Since this method puts more weight on the interferometer data wherever it exists, the size of the overlapping region plays a very important role (Holdaway 1999). As large an overlap of spatial frequencies as possible is required to provide good quality interferometer and single-dish data within this region, in order to retain the same sensitivity over the image.
2. The ‘joint’ deconvolution
The second way maximizes the entropy while being subject to the constraints of fitting both data sets simultaneously:

$`\mathrm{}={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}I_i\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{I_i}{e}}\right)`$ (17)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\left\{I_{\mathrm{int}}^DB_{\mathrm{int}}I\right\}_i^2<N\sigma _{\mathrm{int}}^2`$ (18)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\left\{I_{\mathrm{sd}}^D{\displaystyle \frac{B_{\mathrm{sd}}I}{f}}\right\}_i^2<M\sigma _{\mathrm{sd}}^2.`$ (19)
The ‘joint’ deconvolution method provides also an alternative way, completely performed in the image domain, for determining the calibration scaling factor. Maximizing the entropy, while fitting both data sets, a ‘joint’ deconvolution algorithm can iteratively solve for $`I`$ and $`f`$ simultaneously.

As a schematic example, Fugure 10 shows the non-linear approach for data combination performed by miriad’s program mosmem.

## 7. Comparison of the Different Methods

The qualitative comparison of all four methods for the short-spacings correction addressed in Sections 5 and 6, is shown in Fugure 11 for the 169 km s-1 velocity channel of the SMC data. All four images have the same grey-scale range ($`11`$ to 107 K) and are remarkably similar. They all have the same resolution and show the same small and large scale features with only slightly different flux-density scales. No signs of interferometric artifacts are visible on any of the images. This demonstrates that all four methods for the short-spacings correction give satisfactory results in the first approximation, when an a priori determined calibration scaling factor is used. A similar conclusion was reached in Wong & Blitz (2000) where results of data combination using immerge and the ‘linear combination’ method (Section 6.1.) were compared for the case of BIMA and Kitt Peak 12-m telescope CO observations.

The quantification of the quality of an image depends on the scientific questions we want to address (Cornwell et al. 1993) and is therefore case specific. Something that any short-spacings correction must fulfill, though, is that the resolution of the final image should be the same as for the interferometer data alone, while the integrated flux density of the final image should be the same as measured from the single-dish data alone. Table 1 shows measurements of the total flux density, minimum/maximum values and noise level in the four resultant images. All four images have very comparable noise levels, minimum values and maximum values. The last two images also have very comparable (within 3%) total flux density, relative to the Parkes value alone, while the first two have lower (by 8%) and higher (by 7%) flux densities, respectively. The differences come, most likely, from the different weighting of the single-dish data employed by the different methods. While immerge slightly over-weights very short interferometric spatial frequencies, the ‘linear combination’ method slightly over-weights single-dish data in the region of overlap. This results in the total flux density being slightly lower in the first case, and slightly higher in the second case.

A few (general) remarks on all four methods:

* The ‘feathering’ or Fourier method (A) is the fastest and the least computer intensive way to add short-spacings. It is also the most robust way relative to the other three methods which all require a non-linear deconvolution at the end.
* The great advantage of the ‘linear combination’ method is that it does not require either Fourier transformation of the single-dish data, which can suffer severely from edge effects, nor deconvolution of the single-dish data which is especially uncertain and leads to amplification of errors.
* The ‘default’ image method shows surprisingly reliable results when a significantly large single-dish is used.
* Adding during deconvolution when fitting both data sets simultaneously provides, theoretically, the best way to do the short-spacing correction. However, this method depends heavily on a good estimate of the interferometer and single-dish noise variances.

## 8. Summary

In this article the need for, and methods of combining interferometer and single-dish data have been explained and demonstrated. This combination is an important step when mapping extended objects and it is becoming a standard observing and data processing technique.

After a brief introduction to interferometry in Section 2 the short-spacings problem and general approaches for its solution were discussed in Section 3. To fully and accurately fill in the missing short-spacings to interferometric data, a heterogeneous array scheme seems to be preferable. A sufficiently large single-dish, with diameter at least 1.5 greater larger than the shortest interferometer baseline, provides the simplest option. In order to cross-calibrate single-dish and interferometer data sets, a significant overlap of spatial frequencies is required. Four different combination methods, two linear and two non-linear, for the short-spacings correction have been discussed and the results of applying these methods to the case of HI observations of the SMC presented. Linear methods are data combination in the spatial frequency domain and the ‘linear combination’ method, while data combination during deconvolution provides two non-linear methods. All four techniques yield satisfactory and comparable results.

#### Acknowledgments.

Many thanks to Darrel Emerson, Chris Salter and John Dickey for reading the article and providing valuable suggestions for improvement. I am also grateful to Matthew Wyndham for his help with figures, as well as assisting with last minute crises in organizing the meeting.

## References

Bajaja, E., van Albada, G. D. 1979, A&A, 75, 251

Braun, R., Walterbos, R. A. M. 1985, A&A, 143, 307

Burke, B. F., Graham-Smith, F. 1997, Radio Astronomy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 76

Cornwell, T. J. 1988, A&A, 202, 316

Cornwell, T. J., Holdaway, M. A., Uson, J. M. 1993, A&A, 271, 697

Cornwell, T., & Braun, R. 1989, in ASP Conf. Ser. Vol. 6, Synthesis Imaging in Radio Astronomy, ed. R. Perley, F. Schwab, & A. Bridle (San Francisco: ASP), 167

Cornwell, T., Braun, R., Briggs, D. S. 1999, in ASP Conf. Ser. Vol. 180, Synthesis Imaging in Radio Astronomy II, ed. G. B. Taylor, C. L. Carilli & R. A. Perley (San Francisco: ASP), 151

Ekers, R. D., Rots, A. 1979, in IAU Colloq. 49, Image Formation from Coherence Functions in Astronomy, ed. C. van Schooneveld (Dordrecht: Reidel), 61

Holdaway, M. A. 1999, in ASP Conf. Ser. Vol. 180, Synthesis imaging in radio astronomy II, ed. Taylor G. B., Carilli C. L., Perley R. A., (San Francisco: ASP), 401

Morita, K-I. 2001, ALMA Memo 374

Roger, R. S., Milne, D. K., Wellinton, K. J., Haynes, R. F., Kesteven, M. J. 1984, Publ. Astr. Soc. Australia, 5(4), 560

Sault, R. J., Staveley-Smith, L., Brouw, W. N. 1996, A&AS, 120, 375

Sault R. J., Killeen N. 1998, Miriad Users Guide, Australia Telescope National Facility

Schwarz, U. J., Wakker, B. P. 1991, in IAU. Colloq. 131, Radio Interferometry: Theory, Techniques and Applications, ed. T. J. Cornwell & R. A. Perley (San Francisco: ASP), 188

Stanimirovic, S. 1999, PhD thesis, University of Western Sydney Nepean

Stanimirovic, S., Staveley-Smith, L., Dickey, J. M., Sault, R. J., Snowden, S. L. 1999, MNRAS, 302, 417

Stewart, R. T., Caswell, J. L., Haynes, R. F., Nelson, G. J. 1993, MNRAS, 261, 593

Thompson A. R., Moran J. M., Swenson G. W. J. 1986, Interferometry and Synthesis in Radio Astronomy (New York: John Wiley & Sons), 265

Thompson A. R. 1994, in ASP Conf. Ser. 6, Synthesis Imaging in Radio Astronomy, ed. R. Perley, F. Schwab & A. Bridle, (San Francisco: ASP), 11

Vogel, S. N., Wright, M. C. H., Plambeck, R. L., Welch, W. J. 1984, ApJ, 283, 655

Wilner, D. J., & Welch, W. J. 1994, ApJ, 427, 898

Wong, T., & Blitz, L. 2000, ApJ, 540, 771

Ye, T., Turtle, A. J. 1991, MNRAS, 249, 722

Zhou, S., Evans, N. J., Wang, Y. 1996, ApJ, 466, 296


text:
# The Peculiar Galaxy NGC 7332

## 1. Introduction

NGC 7332 is an ordinary-looking galaxy that is peculiar in many aspects. A detailed study of its kinematics of gas, stars and its surface photometry has shown that it is a Rosetta stone that can teach us what the components are that galaxies consist of, and how they form.

The galaxy is a highly inclinated S0 located close to the spiral galaxy NGC 7339 at 5.2 with a similar systemic velocity. Previous papers on this galaxy include those by Fisher, Illingworth, & Franx (1994) and Plana & Boulesteix 1996). While the main results of Fisher et al. include the B/D decomposition of the galaxy, as well as an analysis of its stellar and gaseous kinematics, Plana & Boulesteix focus exclusively on determining the gas morphology of the galaxy from H$`\alpha `$ emission maps. Fisher et al. show that the galaxy has kinematics fairly typical of a stellar disk, with a counter-rotating and a fainter co-rotating gas disk. An extension of this result was found by Plana & Boulesteix who not only mapped the distribution of the 2 gaseous components, but also modelled them, finding different inclination angles for each component. Broad band colours (Balcells & Peletier 1994) show that the colours of NGC 7332 ($`BR=1.4`$) are somewhat bluer than colours of elliptical galaxies of the same luminosity. This is confirmed by a spectral analysis showing that the galaxy has a luminosity weighted age of about 6 Gyr (Vazdekis & Arimoto 1999).

Here we present 2 studies aimed at understanding the difference between NGC 7332 and ordinary red S0 galaxies. First we present a new study of the position of this galaxy on the fundamental plane (FP) of early-type galaxies (for details see Falcón-Barroso et al. 2002). We show that NGC 7332 lies below the relation, and that the displacement can not explained by uncertainties in our measurements. Second, we show new 2D maps of the stellar and the gaseous kinematics in the \[OIII\] 5007 Å line obtained with SAURON.

## 2. NGC 7332 on the Fundamental Plane of Early-type galaxies

We have studied the position of 19 galactic bulges (the sample of Peletier et al. 1999) on the FP in both B and K, with the aim of finding out whether bulges are formed in the same way as ellipticals. We find that bulges are slightly shifted with respect to the FP defined by ellipticals. This is explained easily by the fact that the sample consists of galaxies with inclination $`>`$ 50o, together with the contribution of the rotating disk, which causes the velocity dispersion of a bulge to be slightly lower than an elliptical of the same mass. NGC 7332, however, lies significantly further below the FP. Not only is this the case in the B-band, where such a deviation can be explained if the galaxy is much younger than other bulges, but also in K, where young stellar populations cannot cause such a deviation. At this stage of our analysis we do not have a satisfactory reason why this galaxy is departing so strongly from the FP relation. NGC 7332 is the only S0 galaxy that we know which deviates so strongly, without being obviously interacting (see e.g. Schweizer & Seitzer 1992). Another peculiarity of this galaxy is that the stellar colours in this galaxy are so homogeneous, with only a very small blueing towards the outer parts (Balcells & Peletier 1994; Fisher et al. 1994).

In Fig. 1 we show the location of our sample of bulges on the FP of early-type galaxies as defined by Jørgensen, Franx & Kjærgaard 1996 (in the B-band, top panel) and Pahre et al 1998 (in K-band, bottom panel). We have marked NGC 7332 with an open circle.

## 3. Stellar Kinematics

NGC 7332’s kinematics reveals a smooth uniform stellar velocity field rotating along the minor axis of the galaxy (Fig. 2). The velocity field appears consistent with cylindrical rotation, although this result will have to be confirmed with some detailed modeling. The velocity dispersion map shows a dip along the major axis of the galaxy (Fig. 3). This is usually the case when a galaxy has an inner disk. Indeed, for NGC 7332 such an inner disk in the first $`\pm `$ 5 arcsec has been discovered by Seifert & Scorza (1996). The higher order moments Gauss-Hermite moments(h3, h4, van der Marel & Franx 1993) seem to be regular, which means that it is unlikely that the galaxy harbours multiple stellar disks, like e.g. in NGC 4550 (Rubin et al. 1992).

## 4. Measurement of the emission lines

In order to obtain the kinematics of the gas, we need to separate emission from absorption lines. To do this we used a small variation to a more sophisticated technique (see de Zeeuw et al. 2002) and subtracted the stellar spectrum by fitting the observed stellar energy distribution outside the region of the emission lines with synthetic templates from the models of Vazdekis (1999) for composite single age/metallicity models of various ages and metallicities.

This procedure can be summarize in a few steps:

* We first derive the stellar kinematics ($`\gamma ,V,\sigma `$) using the method of van der Marel & Franx (1993) with a single stellar population (SSP) model as template.
* Second, we build a library of models with different ages and metallicities (SSP models from Vazdekis 1999).
* We convolve the spectra of the library with the LOSVDs obtained in step 1.
* We then fit a linear combination of these SSP models to the galaxy spectrum.
* Finally we substract the fitted spectrum from the observed SED to obtain a pure emission-line spectrum.

Using this method it is possible to recover faint emission line profiles, as seen at the NI doublet at 5199 Å(log $`\lambda `$3.718) in Figures (8 & 9).

## 5. Counter-rotating gas in NGC 7332

This is without doubt the most unusual feature in NGC 7332. A close inspection of the \[OIII\] (5007 Å) gas emission lines shows a primary, counter-rotating gas disk (Figs. 4 & 5) and a much fainter secondary component (Figs. 6 & 7) corotating with respect to the stellar component. This double component has been detected also by Plana & Boulesteix (1996) from H$`\alpha `$ observations. In general, both Plana and we find the same spatial distribution of the second component. The spatial distribution of the emission in \[OIII\], however, is not the same as that of H$`\alpha `$. While we find very little OIII emission in the center of the galaxy, Plana & Boulesteix find a considerable amount of H$`\alpha `$. Trying to understand why this is the case, we have analysed long-slit data, in the H$`\alpha `$ region, from the ING (Isaac Newton Group) archive. These data, obtained in June 1994 by Merrifield & Kuijken, reveal that H$`\alpha `$ in the center is weak contrary to the results of Plana & Boulesteix. This is confirmed by the fact that H$`\beta `$ in our SAURON data is weak as well, casting doubt upon the results of Plana & Boulesteix. Further analysis about this subject is due to appear in a forthcoming paper.

## 6. Conclusions

* NGC 7332 is an unusual object.
* As yet it is a miracle why this galaxy lies so far away from the fundamental plane of early-type galaxies
* Its stellar kinematics is not peculiar at all.
* The existence of two gaseous components coexisting with opposite angular momentum leaves the hypothesis open of a recent merger scenario in NGC 7332.

## Acknowledgements

We thank the SAURON team for obtaining and reducing the data of NGC 7332. The William Herschel Telescope is operated on the island of La Palma by the Isaac Newton Group in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias.

## References

Balcells, M. & Peletier, R. 1994, AJ, 107, 135

Falcón-Barrosso, J., Peletier, R.F. & Balcells, M., 2002, submitted to MNRAS

Fisher, D., Illingworth, G. & Franx, M. 1994, AJ, 107, 160

Jørgensen, I., Franx, M., & Kjærgaard, P. 1996, MNRAS, 280, 167

Pahre, M.A., Djorgovski, S.G. & de Carvalho, R. 1998, AJ, 116, 1591

Peletier, R.F., Balcells, M., Davies, R.L., Andredakis, Y., Vazdekis, A., Burkert, A., Prada, F. 1999, MNRAS, 310, 703P

Plana, H. & Boulesteix, J. 1996, A&AS, 307, 391P

Rubin, V.C., Graham, J.A., Kenney, J.D.P. 1992 ApJ, 394L, 9R

Seifert, W. & Scorza, C. 1996, A&AS, v310, 75S

Schweizer, F., Seitzer, P. 1992,AJ, 104, 1039S

van der Marel, R.P. & Franx, M. 1993, ApJ, 407, 525

Vazdekis, A. 1999, ApJ, 513, 224

Vazdekis, A. & Arimoto, N. 1999, ApJ, 525, 144

de Zeeuw et al. 2002, MNRAS, 329, 513


text:
# Color confinement and dual superconductivity in full QCD

## I Introduction

In a series of papers , which we shall refer to as I,II,III respectively, we have demonstrated by numerical simulations that quenched QCD vacuum is a dual superconductor in the confining phase, and goes to normal state at the deconfinement transition (see also Ref. ). More precisely we have constructed an operator $`\mu `$ carrying magnetic charge and we have measured its vacuum expectation value $`\mu `$. For $`T<T_c`$ $`\mu 0`$, for $`T>T_c`$ $`\mu =0`$ and, approaching $`T_c`$, $`\mu (1T/T_c)^\delta `$ ($`\delta =0.50(3)`$). Magnetic charge is defined by a procedure called Abelian projection: it associates $`(N_c1)`$ $`U(1)`$ magnetic symmetries to any operator $`\varphi `$ in the adjoint representation . A priori magnetic symmetries corresponding to different Abelian projections (different choices of $`\varphi `$) are independent. In I, II, III we have shown that the behaviour of $`\mu `$, including the value of the index $`\delta `$, is independent of the Abelian projection.

There is general agreement on the order-disorder nature of the deconfining transition in the quenched case. The popular order parameter is the Polyakov line $`L`$; the symmetry involved is $`Z_N`$. Alternatively the dual (’t Hooft) line $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$  can be used as a disorder parameter (order parameter of the disordered phase) corresponding to the dual $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_N`$ symmetry. Our $`\mu `$ is also a good disorder parameter, and in fact it coincides numerically with $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ .

In full QCD, i.e. in the presence of dynamical quarks, the situation is less clear. $`Z_N`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_N`$ symmetries are explicitely broken by the very presence of the quarks. At zero quark mass there is a phase transition at some $`T_c`$ involving chiral symmetry: for $`T<T_c`$ chiral symmetry is spontaneously broken, the pseudoscalar octet being the Goldstone particles, and for $`T>T_c`$ it is restored. Quark masses do break chiral symmetry explicitely. It is not clear theoretically what the chiral transition has to do with the deconfinement transition. However, the susceptibilities of different quantities (the Polyakov line $`L`$, the chiral condensate) have been measured, and all of them have a maximum at the same value $`T_c(m_q)`$ for any value of $`m_q`$. Above a certain value of $`m_q`$ ($`m_q>3`$ GeV) the transition is first order, as in the quenched case, and $`L`$ still works as an order parameter. At $`m_q0`$ the transition is presumably second order. At intermediate values the susceptibilities which have been considered show a maximum at $`T_c`$, but it does not go large at increasing volume. The indication is then that there is no transition but only a crossover.

A natural question is then if dual superconductivity is a symmetry for the transition in full QCD as it is in the quenched case. In the spirit of the $`N_c\mathrm{}`$ limit, one would expect that the mechanism of confinement be the same as in quenched QCD, the idea being that the structure of the theory is the same as that in the limit $`N_c\mathrm{}`$ at $`g^2N_c=\lambda `$ fixed: at finite $`N_c`$ small differences are expected with respect to the limiting case. Quark loops are nonleading in the expansion. The mechanism of confinement should be approximately $`N_c`$ independent and the same with and without dynamical quarks.

The disorder parameter $`\mu `$ can be constructed in full QCD exactly in the same way as in the quenched case (see Section 2). At a given temperature $`T`$, $`\mu `$ has to be computed in the infinite volume limit. We have investigated the region $`T<T_c`$, where we find

$`\underset{V\mathrm{}}{lim}\mu 0`$ (1)
and $`T>T_c`$, where we find

$`\underset{V\mathrm{}}{lim}\mu =0`$ (2)
as will be shown in detail below. Notice that the limit Eq. (2) is not within errors but exact. Indeed we measure, instead of $`\mu `$, the quantity $`\rho =\frac{d}{d\beta }\mathrm{ln}\mu `$, and we find that it tends to $`\mathrm{}`$ as $`\rho =kN_s+k^{}`$ ($`k>0`$) as the spatial size of the sample $`N_s\mathrm{}`$.

The finite size scaling analysis in the critical region is under investigation, to study the nature and the order of the transition.

## II Disorder parameter

The operator $`\mu `$ is defined in full QCD exactly in the same way as in the quenched theory

$`\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{Z}}{Z}},`$ (3)
$`Z={\displaystyle \left(𝒟U\right)e^{\beta S}},`$ (4)
$`\stackrel{~}{Z}={\displaystyle \left(𝒟U\right)e^{\beta \stackrel{~}{S}}}.`$ (5)
$`\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ is obtained from $`Z`$ by changing the action in the time slice $`x_0`$, $`S\stackrel{~}{S}=S+\mathrm{\Delta }S`$. In the Abelian projected gauge the plaquettes

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_{i0}(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)=`$ (6)
$`=U_i(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)U_0(x+\widehat{ı},x_0)U_i^{}(\stackrel{}{x},x_0+\widehat{0})U_0^{}(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)`$ (7)
are changed by substituting

$`U_i(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)\stackrel{~}{U}_i(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)U_i(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)e^{iTb_i(\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y})}`$ (8)
where $`\stackrel{}{b}(\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y})`$ is the vector potential of a monopole configuration centered at $`\stackrel{}{y}`$ in the gauge $`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{b}=0`$, and $`T`$ is the diagonal gauge group generator corresponding to the monopole species chosen. In SU(2) $`T=\sigma _3/2`$, in SU(3) $`T=\lambda _3/2`$ or $`(\sqrt{3}\lambda _8\lambda _3)/2`$. In the generic SU($`N`$) case the procedure is explained in Ref. . Unlike the $`Z_N`$ centre symmetry, the $`U(1)`$ magnetic symmetry defined after Abelian projection is a good symmetry also in presence of dynamical fermions. It can be shown that, as in the quenched case, $`\mu `$ adds to any configuration the monopole configuration $`\stackrel{}{b}(\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y})`$. If the magnetic symmetry is realized à la Wigner, $`\mu =0`$ if $`\mu `$ carries non zero net magnetic charge. Then $`\mu 0`$ means Higgs breaking of the U(1) symmetry. Therefore $`\mu `$ can be a correct disorder parameter for the transition to dual superconductivity also in full QCD.

## III Numerical results

We have measured $`\mu `$ with two flavours of degenerate staggered fermions on $`N_s^3\times 4`$ lattices, with different values of $`N_s`$ ($`N_s=`$ 12,16,32) and of the bare quark mass $`m_q`$. In particular we have chosen, in the transition region, to vary the temperature, $`T=1/(N_ta(\beta ,m_q))`$, moving in the $`(\beta ,m_q)`$ plane while keeping a fixed value of $`m_\pi /m_\rho `$. To do this and to extract the physical scale we have used fits to the $`m_\rho `$ and $`m_\pi `$ masses published in . We present here results obtained at $`m_\pi /m_\rho 0.505`$: in this case, at $`N_t=4`$, the $`\beta `$ corresponding to the transition is approximately $`\beta _c5.35`$ . Preliminary results have been already presented in .

Instead of $`\mu `$ we measure the quantity

$`\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\beta }}\mathrm{ln}\mu .`$ (9)
It follows from Eq. (3) that

$`\rho =S_S\stackrel{~}{S}_{\stackrel{~}{S}},`$ (10)
the subscript meaning the action by which the average is performed. In terms of $`\rho `$

$`\mu =\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^\beta }\rho (\beta ^{})\text{d}\beta ^{}\right).`$ (11)
A drop of $`\mu `$ at the phase transition corresponds to a strong negative peak of $`\rho `$.

We have used the R version of the HMC algorithm for our simulations . Some technical complications arise in the computation of the second term on the right hand side of Eq. (10). In the evaluation of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{\stackrel{~}{S}}`$, $`C^{}`$-periodic boundary conditions in time direction have to be used for the gauge fields and this requires $`C^{}`$ boundary conditions in temporal direction also for fermionic variables (in addition to the usual antiperiodic ones), in order to ensure gauge invariance of the fermionic determinant. This implies relevant changes in the formulation and implementation of the HMC algorithm which are explained in detail in Ref. .

We have chosen the Polyakov line as the local adjoint operator which defines the Abelian projection. Actually, calling $`L(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)`$ the Polyakov line starting at point $`(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)`$, the Abelian projection is defined by the operator $`L(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)L^{}(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)`$, which transforms in the adjoint representation when using $`C^{}`$ boundary conditions.

The use of a modified gauge action also implies changes in the molecular dynamics equations. One has to maintain the modified hamiltonian containing $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ constant. A change in any temporal link indeed induces a change in $`L(\stackrel{}{x},x_0)`$ and hence in the Abelian projection defining the monopole field. Therefore the dependence of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ on temporal links is non trivial and the equations of motion for the temporal momenta become more complicated.

Fig. 1 shows $`\rho `$ for a $`32^3\times 4`$ lattice, and the chiral condensate as a function of $`\beta `$. The negative peak of $`\rho `$ is clearly at the same value of $`\beta `$ where $`\overline{\psi }\psi `$ drops to zero.

Fig. 2 shows the plot of $`\rho `$ for different spatial sizes $`N_s`$. For larger lattices the peak becomes deeper and the value of $`\rho `$ at high $`\beta `$ lower.

An analysis of $`\rho `$ at large $`\beta `$’s as a function of $`N_s`$ is shown in Fig. 3, for different masses of the staggered fermions used in the simulations. For net magnetic charge $`0`$

$`\rho kN_s+k^{}(k>0)`$ (12)
and is practically independent of the quark mass within errors. For net charge zero (e.g. monopole-antimonopole pair) $`\rho `$ stays constant at large $`N_s`$. Going back to Eq. (11) this means that $`\mu `$ is strictly zero in the infinite volume limit for non zero magnetic charge, and can be $`0`$ for excitations with zero net magnetic charge. This statement is based on the analysis of many different excitations with different magnetic charges, and Fig. 3 is only an example. The magnetic symmetry is therefore realized à la Wigner for $`T>T_c`$ and the Hilbert space is superselected. Notice that:

(1) $`\mu `$ can only be strictly zero in the infinite volume limit (Lee-Yang theorem ).

(2) If we were measuring $`\mu `$ directly we would find zero within large errors. Looking instead at $`\rho `$ we can unambigously check Eq. (12), which means that $`\mu `$ is strictly zero as $`N_s\mathrm{}`$.

For $`T<T_c`$ $`\mu 0`$ if $`\rho `$ stays constant and finite with increasing volume. This is what indeed happens as shown in Fig. 4. Nothing spectacular can happen at larger volumes, since no larger length scale exists in the system.

Around $`T_c`$ a finite size scaling analysis is required to get information on the order of the transition as well as to measure the critical indices. The problem is more complicated than in the quenched case, since an extra scale, the quark mass, is present. The program is on the way on a set of APEmille machines. Some qualitative features are shown in Fig. 2.

## IV Conclusions

The preliminary data reported in this paper contain enough information to state that dual superconductivity is at work as a confinement mechanism in QCD with dynamical quarks, in the same way as in the quenched theory \[I,II,III\]. For $`T>T_c`$ the Hilbert space is superselected with respect to magnetic charge, for $`T<T_c`$ the symmetry is Higgs broken.

Dependence of the disorder parameter on the choice of the Abelian projection and nature of the transition are under investigation.

## Acknowledgements

This work has been partially supported by MIUR and by EU contract No. FMRX-CT97-0122. BL is supported by the Marie Curie Fellowship No. HPMF-CT-2001-01131.