text:
# THE TURN-OVER SCENARIO FOR WHITE DWARFS AND NEUTRON STARS

## 1 Introduction

“Turn-over” or “turn-over phase” or “turn-over process” is called the gradual increase of the angle between the magnetic symmetry axis and the rotation axis of a star from $`0\mathrm{°}`$ (axisymmetric or aligned rotator) to $`90\mathrm{°}`$ (orthogonal or perpendicular rotator). Any intermediate configuration is called “oblique rotator”. The angle $`\chi `$ between the magnetic and the rotation axis is called “turn-over angle” or “obliquity angle”. We say that we study a “turn-over scenario” if we take into account the turn-over phase in this scenario.

Actually, during the turn-over phase, it is the angular momentum that remains invariant (its axis is taken to be the $`z`$ axis); while the angular velocity is inclined at a small angle $`\gamma `$ (less than $`2\mathrm{°}`$, say) with respect to the angular momentum axis. At a first approximation and without loss of generality, we can assume that these two axes coincide.

Turn-over seems to be a rather underestimated phenomenon. Indeed, searching the NASA Astrophysics Data System (http://adswww.harvard.edu), we find that, during the last 30 years, $`12000`$ papers have been published with the keywords (white AND dwarf) OR (neutron AND star) OR (pulsar) in their title; while, at the same time, roughly 100 papers have in their title the keywords (oblique AND rotator) OR (perpendicular AND rotator). This is strange enough, since turn-over is closely related to the well-known lighthouse model: as the pulsar spins on its axis, the emission beam (with symmetry axis coinciding with the magnetic symmetry axis of the star) sweeps the space, crossing periodically our line of sight. This happens only if $`\chi >0`$, since, otherwise (that is, for an aligned rotator), we can observe just a radiation source coinciding with one of the magnetic poles of the emitting star. So, an aligned rotator lacks the most significant characteristic of a typical pulsar.

In the turn-over scenario, the casting of the roles has mainly to do with rotation, toroidal field, poloidal field, and turbulent viscosity. In particular, rotation (1) builds up the most efficient energy reservoir, i.e., the rotational kinetic energy, which then powers on a variety of interesting phenomena; and (2) induces oblate configurations due to centrifugal forces.

The poloidal magnetic field (1) turns on the magnetic dipole mechanism, which then converts rotational kinetic energy into radiated energy; and (2) cooperates with rotation in inducing oblate configurations, i.e., both these partners tend to derive oblate configurations.

The toroidal magnetic field (1) stabilizes the poloidal magnetic field structure; and (2) tends to derive prolate configurations, that is, it has opposite action to both rotation & poloidal field.

Finally, the turbulent viscosity causes drastic energy dissipation and, thus, brings the configuration from an unstable high energy level (aligned rotator) to a stable low energy level (perpendicular rotator).

## 2 The turn-over scenario

A full discussion on this subject can be found in Geroyannis (2001, hereafter Paper I; symbols and definitions used here are identical to those in Paper I) and also in Geroyannis (2002, hereafter Paper II), Geroyannis & Papasotiriou (2002, hereafter Paper III), and Geroyannis, Papasotiriou, & Valiaka (2002, hereafter Paper IV). A brief description of the turn-over scenario has as follows.

Early evolutionary phase (EEP)
(1) We assume an axisymmetric differentially rotating magnetic model, undergoing an axisymmetric early evolutionary phase of secular timescale, $`t_{SEC}`$, during which rotation & poloidal field dominate over the toroidal field and derive oblate configurations with moment of inertia $`I_{33}`$ (where the principal axis $`I_3`$ coincides with the spin axis) greater than $`I_{11}(=I_{22})`$; the other two principal axes $`I_1`$ and $`I_2`$ lie on the equatorial plane.
(2) During the EEP, the model suffers from secular angular momentum loss and spin-down due to the magnetic dipole mechanism, activated by the poloidal field; this leads to secular decrease of both ellipticity and $`I_{33}`$.

Late evolutionary phase (LEP)
(1) At some particular time signaling the beginning of a late evolutionary phase, the toroidal field starts prevailing over rotation & poloidal field, first succeeding in equating the moments of inertia, $`I_{11}=I_{33}`$, and then in establishing “dynamical asymmetry”, $`I_{11}>I_{33}`$.
(2) “Dynamically asymmetric configurations” (DAC) tend to turn over spontaneously, so that to rotate about axis with moment of inertia greater than $`I_{33}`$, with the angular momentum remaining invariant; thus, the fate of a DAC is to become oblique rotator and, eventually, perpendicular rotator.

Turn-over phase (TOP)
(1) During the turn-over phase, the turn-over angle, $`\chi `$, increases spontaneously up to $`90\mathrm{°}`$ on a turn-over timescale, $`t_{TOV}`$. The terminal model rotates about its $`I_1`$ axis, coinciding with the invariant angular momentum axis, and occupies the state of least energy consistent with its angular momentum and magnetic field.
(2) The excess energy due to differential rotation, defined by the angular velocity component $`\mathrm{\Omega }_3`$ along the spontaneously turning over $`I_3`$ axis, coinciding in turn with the magnetic symmetry axis, is dissipated down to zero due to the very efficient action of turbulent viscosity in the convective zone of the model. So, the terminal model does not rotate about its magnetic symmetry axis.
(3) It seems very difficult for the terminal model to sustain differential rotation along its $`I_1`$ axis, mainly due to the destructive action of the poloidal field. There is a competition between the efforts of the magnetic stresses to remove rotational nonuniformities, and those of the rotational velocities to bury and destroy the magnetic flux. If the magnetic field and the electrical conductivity have appropriate values, then the magnetic field prevails and removes all the nonuniformities of rotation. So, the terminal model rotates rigidly about its $`I_1`$ principal axis with angular velocity $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$.

A critical question is if the magnetic field is strong enough to remove differential rotation. This interesting problem is discussed in full detail in Paper I (§ 7); the discussion reveals a critical issue concerning the starting model. In particular, it seems that the toroidal magnetic field must be strong enough so as to induce an adequate dynamical asymmetry for the turn-over to take place; while, at the same time, it must be weak enough so as to permit interchanging of angular momentum via hydromagnetic Alfvén waves propagating across its field lines. The difficulty is that, on the one hand, dynamical asymmetry increases with the toroidal magnetic field and, on the other hand, efficiency in interchanging angular momentum decreases as the toroidal field increases. In view of this remark and to the extent that our problem concerns mainly the behavior of the starting model, the right question seems to be: is the toroidal magnetic magnetic field strong enough to induce dynamical asymmetry and weak enough to permit angular momentum mixing?.

An approximative estimate for the turn-over timescale, $`t_{TOV}`$, is given by Mestel & Takhar (1972, hereafter MT72, eq. (54); see also some interesting remarks regarding differential rotation at the last two paragraphs of § 3)

$$t_{TOV}\frac{DE_{DRD}}{V}\mathrm{\Omega }_3^2\frac{H^2}{8\pi \varrho a^2}^2\frac{1}{3}\frac{\varrho V_t}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_t}_{sz}^1\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_3^2r^2}{a^2}_{sz}^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_t_{sz}^2,$$
(1)
where the subscript $`sz`$ denotes that the corresponding average is calculated over the surface zone with base at the transition layer, $`\xi _s`$, and top at the boundary, $`\xi _1`$, of the star; averages without subscripts are calculated over the whole star, i.e., they are global averages. This estimate results as the mean energy per unit volume available for dissipation, $`DE_{DRD}/V`$ ($`DE_{DRD}`$ is the excess rotational kinetic energy due to differential rotation and $`V`$ is the volume of the configuration), divided by the mean energy dissipation during the turn-over due to turbulent viscosity in the convective surface zone per unit volume and per unit time (i.e., the product of the last 5 terms in the right-hand side of eq. ; details on the derivation of such a relation are given in MT72, eqs. , –).

## 3 Some results

Table 1 gives some significant quantities involved in the turn-over scenario. Our computations concern two models of compact stars.

The first model simulates the AE Aqr white dwarf (for white dwarf models of several masses, angular momenta, and magnetic fields, see Paper II \[especially § 7, Table 1\], Paper III \[especially § 3, Figs. 1–4, Tables 5, 10, 15\], and Paper IV \[§ 3, Table 1\]); the corresponding computations have been performed by the so-called “complex plane iterative technique” (CIT) (Geroyannis & Papasotiriou, 2000, and references therein).

The second model simulates the 1987A neutron star (for another neutron star model, see Paper IV \[§ 3, Table 1\]); the corresponding computations should be considered as rough computations. An accurate numerical treatment of neutron stars is now in preparation.

The results for the AE Aqr white dwarf can simplify the study of the well-known spin-down problem in this white dwarf. In particular, during the turn-over phase, the observed spin-down time rate (interpreted as spin-down time rate due to turn-over) is large, $`\dot{P}5\times 10^{14}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{s}^1`$; while the estimated spin-down power, $`\dot{T}5\times 10^{32}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$, is almost two orders of magnitude less than the classically estimated spin-down power (for details, see Paper I, §§ 1–2). So, an interesting conclusion is that: an observed large spin-down time rate does not always imply a large spin-down power.

Our results for the 1987A neutron star show that it needs $`t_{SEC}8.5\text{yr}`$ to complete its early enolutionary phase, and $`t_{now}8.5\text{yr}`$ to obtain an observationally favourable turn-over angle (in accordance with the lighthouse model), $`\chi 60\mathrm{°}`$; the full turn-over timescale for this star is $`t_{TOV}16\text{yr}`$. In conclusion, we expect that we will be able to observe the 1987A neutron star as typical pulsar within the period 2004 (i.e., $`1987+8.5+8.5\text{yr}`$) – 2012 (i.e., $`1987+8.5+16\text{yr}`$).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported here was supported by the Research Committee of the University of Patras (C. Carathéodory’s Research Project 1998/1932). This research has made use of NASA’s Astrophysics Data System.


format: text

text:
# Lowering of the Kinetic Energy in Interacting Quantum Systems

## I Introduction

It is a common assumption that the addition of interactions to a noninteracting quantum system will broaden the momentum distribution and increase the kinetic energy (proportional to the second moment of the momentum distribution). An intuitive understanding of this follows from perhaps the first example encountered in studying quantum mechanics, the particle in a box, where the kinetic energy scales as the box size $`L^2`$. More generally the kinetic energy, given by the average curvature of the wavefunction, is expected to scale as the “localization length”-2. Since interactions lead to a nonuniform density, i.e. increased “localization”, the kinetic energy is expected to increase.

For condensed matter scientists, two well ingrained many body examples of this, illustrated in Fig. 1, are the broadening of the free Fermi ground state momentum distribution due to electron repulsion and the depletion of the zero momentum condensate in a strongly interacting Bose system such as 4He penrose . For the homogeneous electron gas, Fig. 1a shows the promotion of low momentum states to higher momentum and the reduction in the step discontinuity at the Fermi surface ortiz . Similarly Fig. 1b shows that the 100% condensation into the zero momentum ground state of a noninteracting Bose system is reduced to roughly 8% in 4He with the rest going into an almost Gaussian distribution pollock .

The proof of this assumption for systems at zero temperature is an immediate consequence of the ground state variational principle applied to the free particle Hamiltonian, $`H_0`$, which states that $`K_0=\mathrm{\Psi }_0|H_0|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ is minimized by $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$, the true ground state wavefunction of $`H_0`$. Using any other wavefunction, such as the ground state, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_G`$, for an interacting system, $`H=H_0+U`$, leads to

$$K=\mathrm{\Psi }_G|H_0|\mathrm{\Psi }_GK_0,$$
(1)
demonstrating that the kinetic energy, $`K`$, of the interacting system is never lower than the free particle kinetic energy, $`K_0`$.

This argument fails however, when generalized to nonzero temperature, $`T`$, where the system occupies a thermal distribution of energy eigenstates. From the Gibbs variational principle, the free energy functional,

$$F[\rho ]=\text{Tr}[H_0\rho ]+k_BT\text{Tr}[\rho \mathrm{ln}\rho ],$$
(2)
takes its minimum value $`F[\rho _0]=K_0TS_0`$ for the equilibrium density operator $`\rho _0=e^{\beta H_0}/\text{Tr}[e^{\beta H_0}]`$ where $`\beta =1/k_BT`$ and $`k_B`$ is Boltzmann’s constant. Any other normalized density operator, such as that for the interacting system,  $`\rho =e^{\beta H}/\text{Tr}[e^{\beta H}]`$, gives a higher value,

$$F[\rho ]=KTSF[\rho _0]=K_0TS_0.$$
(3)
The ground state inequality, Eq. 1, now generalizes to,

$$KK_0+T(SS_0).$$
(4)
Since interactions often increase order, the entropy $`S`$ of the interacting system can be less than that of the noninteracting, $`S_0`$, and $`SS_0`$ may be negative. This allows Eq. 4 to be satisfied while the ground state inequality, $`KK_0`$, is not. In general, at nonzero temperature nothing forbids interactions from lowering the kinetic energy.

This kinetic energy lowering would only be observed in an intermediate range of temperatures since in the high temperature, classical limit, interactions only effect equilibration rates, not the final Maxwellian momentum distribution.

## II Weak Coupling Limit

Not only is this lowering theoretically possible, it can be shown to occur for a variety of weakly interacting physical systems using lowest order thermodynamic perturbation theory. The change in the Helmholtz free energy, $`F`$, to first order in the interaction potential is

$$F=F_0+U_0,$$
(5)
where $`U_0`$ is the potential averaged over the free particle configurations. Since the total energy is given by, $`E=(\beta F)/\beta `$, the first order change in the kinetic energy from Eq. 5 is

$$K_1=\beta \frac{U_0}{\beta }.$$
(6)
For a single component system of $`N`$ particles with pair interaction, $`V(r)`$, the first order energy change reads,

$$U_0=N\frac{n}{2}g_0(r)V(r)𝑑r^3$$
(7)
where $`n`$ is number density. The first order kinetic energy change

$$K_1=TN\frac{n}{2}\frac{g_0(r)}{T}V(r)𝑑r^3$$
(8)
depends on the temperature dependence of the free particle radial distribution function, $`g_0(r)`$.

As shown in Fig. 2, for both fermions and bosons $`g_0(r)/T`$ can be positive at all $`r`$ leading to a kinetic energy decrease for repulsive interactions although for quite different reasons in the two cases. For fermions the increase of $`g_0(r)`$ with temperature is due to the filling in of the “Fermi hole”, the region near the origin where due to the Pauli principle like spin particles are excluded. The size of this region is roughly the de Broglie thermal wavelength which is proportional to $`1/\sqrt{T}`$.

For noninteracting bosons at $`T=0`$, all particles are in the zero momentum condensate and $`g_0(r)=1`$. As the temperature increases particles are promoted from the condensate and $`g_0(r)`$ increases at all $`r`$ for $`T/T_c(2/5)^{2/3}`$, where $`T_c`$ is the Bose condensation temperature, and thereafter at small $`r`$, reaching $`g_0(0)=2`$ at $`T=T_c`$ landau ; baym . Since $`Tg_0(r)/T`$ vanishes at $`T=0`$, the ground state inequality, Eq. 1, is not violated.

The mechanism for the narrowing of the electron gas momentum distribution can be seen from the first order shift in the free electron energy levels ashcroft ,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ(𝐤)=\frac{4\pi e^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\underset{𝐤^{}𝐤}{}\frac{n_0(𝐤)}{|𝐤𝐤^{}|^2}.$$
(9)
The decrease of $`n_0(𝐤)`$ with k leads to a larger lowering of the energy levels at smaller k and thus to a population redistribution and momentum distribution narrowing as demonstrated in Fig. 3.

## III Simulation results

For the electron gas, this weak coupling expansion applies only at very high densities, $`r_s\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.5}`$, and is of little use for realistic condensed matter densities. It is necessary to use more powerful quantum many body simulation methods. Two such methods, path integral Monte Carlo (PIMC) ceperley ; ceperley2  and a variational trial density matrix method (VDM) pollock2 , have been used here to search for narrowing of the momentum distribution in a variety of fermion systems.

Liquid 3He is a strongly coupled system. Due to its steeply repulsive short ranged interactions the weak coupling arguments of the preceding paragraphs do not apply. Restricted PIMC calculations using free particle nodes for 3He at number density $`n=0.01636\mathrm{\AA }^3`$ and temperatures from $`1`$ to $`40`$ K show the kinetic energy to be more than $`5`$ K above the noninteracting value. Narrowing of the momentum distribution is not found for this system.

For the electron gas model both restricted PIMC and VDM calculations find momentum distribution narrowing. The effect is small, with the relative decrease of the kinetic energy from its ideal value less than a few percent pokrant ; kraeft , but well within the accuracy of the two methods. The computation of momentum distribution for fermions with PIMC (see Fig. 3) required extending the restricted path integral technique to simulations with open paths openpaths ; openpaths2 .

Fig. 4 shows the difference in kinetic energy of the homogeneous electron gas for different densities and temperatures indicated by the degeneracy parameter $`T/T_{\mathrm{Fermi}}`$. For densities corresponding to $`r_s\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}4}`$, a lowering of the kinetic energy with respect to the noninteracting value is found. The magnitude of the lowering increases with density (smaller $`r_s`$). The statistical uncertainty of these results was estimated at $`r_s=1`$ and $`T=T_{\mathrm{Fermi}}`$ by a study of finite size effects (using 14, 38, 66, and 114 particles in the periodic simulation cell) and path discretization errors (using 16, 32, and 64 time steps) which gave $`(KK_0)/K_0=0.023\pm 0.002`$. The region of the effect, as predicted by PIMC simulations, is shown in the high temperature and density phase diagram in Fig. 5.

Simulations of dense hydrogen plasma pierleoni  have also indicated kinetic energy lowering, which we confirmed and extended. We found a maximal lowering of $`(KK_0)/K_0=0.007\pm 0.001`$ for $`r_s=0.5`$ and $`T=T_{\mathrm{Fermi}}`$. The magnitude is reduced compared to the electron gas because Coulomb interactions of electrons and protons counteract the entropic lowering. This also results in a reduction of the parameter region in the temperature and density plane for which the effect can be observed. However, in the limit of high density, the boundaries for the electron gas model and for hydrogen converge because interactions become weaker in the high density limit. Fig. 5 shows that the lowering region of hydrogen includes conditions near the core of the sun or other low mass stars Saumon  as well as on the compression path of inertial confinement fusion lindl , indicating that hydrogen is a potential candidate for experimental verification of this effect.

## IV Conclusions

Analytical and numerical arguments show that interactions can reduce the kinetic energy of a quantum system below the corresponding noninteracting value. The associated narrowing in the momentum distribution can potentially be verified experimentally. Prime examples are the Bose condensates in magnetic traps, in which the momentum distribution can be inferred by measuring the expansion rates after the magnetic field has been switched off. Sufficiently accurate measurements of the momentum distribution could be used to provide information about the nature of the interactions of the trapped atoms.

Lowering of the kinetic energy was demonstrated in the homogeneous electron gas model, one of the fundamental models in condensed matter physics and a well studied example of a one-component plasma. Corrections to the noninteracting kinetic energy are always positive at zero temperature and vanish in the high temperature limit, which makes it counterintuitive to expect lowering at intermediate temperature. Research on the one-component plasma has focused more on the internal energy, pressure and correlation energy. However, the kinetic energy is relevant of our understanding of quantum systems and can be determined experimentally by measuring the momentum distribution.

The effect, previously indicated but left uninterpreted in dense hydrogen pierleoni , is reconfirmed here. The arguments presented above suggest that the kinetic energy reduction should be present in weakly coupled systems with repulsive pair interactions. Simulation evidence for this effect was presented here only for Coulombic systems. More work is necessary to understand how these arguments apply to other systems and where the entropic reordering in the thermal population of states leading to a lower kinetic energy can best be observed experimentally.

## V Acknowledgements

We thank Bernie Alder, Erich Mueller, and Forrest Rogers for their comments on this work and Hugh DeWitt for triggering interest in it. B.M. thanks David Ceperley for advice on the PIMC computation of the momentum distribution. This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by University of California Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract No. W-7405-Eng-48.


text:
# The 𝜆 Bootis phenomenon: interaction between a star and a diffuse interstellar cloud

## 1 Introduction

The $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars are late B to early F-type population I stars, which show a peculiar surface abundance pattern: while the light elements (C, N, O and S) are roughly solar, the Fe-peak elements show underabundances of up to a factor of 100. Venn & Lambert (1990) are the first who noticed the similarity between this abundance pattern and the depletion pattern of the interstellar medium (ISM) and suggested the accretion of interstellar or circumstellar gas to explain the $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars. In this respect they differ from the rest of the peculiar A-type stars where the abundance pattern is caused by separation processes in the stellar atmosphere itself. The abundances are ascribed to diffusion in the presence of slow rotation (Am stars) or strong magnetic fields (Ap stars).

Paunzen et al. (2002) scrutinized the available observational data to put constraints on any model trying to explain the $`\lambda `$ Bootis phenomenon. A comparsion between the $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars and a reference sample of normal stars showed that both groups share the same fundamental parameters, like effective temperature, gravity, mass, rotational velocity and age. But most surprisingly, the Na abundance of the $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars revealed a correlation with nearby local interstellar column densities of Na i.

This discovery, although so far tentative, because of the inhomogeneity of the stellar Na abundances, motivated a detailed analysis of the interaction between a star and a diffuse ISM cloud as an explanation for the $`\lambda `$ Bootis phenomenon.

## 2 Interaction between ISM and star

Vergely et al. (2001) reconstructed the density distribution of the ISM in the solar neighbourhood from Na i and H i observations. They found density fluctuations of a factor of 1000 for Na i and about 250 for H i. Typical number densities for diffuse clouds in the ISM range from 0.1 to 100 cm-3.

Fig. 1 shows what is supposed to happen, if a $`\lambda `$ Bootis star travels through a diffuse ISM cloud: the star creates a cavity in the ISM cloud. There are two questions arising: What happens to the ISM dust? What are the typical gas accretion rates? We assume in the following a moderate density of $`n=10`$ cm-3; using a mean molecular weight $`\mu =1.4`$, appropriate for atomic gas, this leads to a lower limit of the ISM mass density, $`\rho =2.34\times 10^{23}`$ g cm-3.

The dust grains of the diffuse ISM cloud will be charged in the vicinity of the star. Hydrogen will be mostly neutral and the dominant charged gas species is C+. Assuming 50 Å dust particles and a density of $`n(\mathrm{C}^+)=10^3`$ cm-3, we derive the distance at which coulomb forces and radiation pressure are equal

$$d=9.47\times 10^3\left(\frac{L_{}}{L_{}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{U}{\mathrm{V}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{AU}.$$
(1)
The grain potential $`U`$ is related to strength of the stellar and interstellar ultraviolet radiation field, the potential for dust grains at 500 AU around an A0 V star being $`U48`$ V and $`U24`$ V for a F5 V star (Weingartner & Draine, 2001) depending on the grain material. From this comparison we conclude that radiation pressure clearly dominates at distances out to about 10 000 AU from the star. At these low densities dust and gas are also not effectively coupled via collisions. Hence, we deal with dust and gas separately in the two following sections.

### 2.1 Interstellar dust

The ISM consists mainly of particles much smaller than 1 $`\mu `$m. The following calculations are performed for 0.01 $`\mu `$m grains. Artymowicz & Clampin (1997) showed that the ISM dust particles undergo Rutherford scattering off the star and hence never approach the star closer than its avoidance radius

$$r_{\mathrm{av}}=\frac{2(\beta 1)GM_{}}{v_{\mathrm{}}^2}\mathrm{cm},$$
(2)
where $`\beta `$ is the ratio of radiation pressure to gravity. For a spectral type of A5 V (2 R, 2 M) which resembles $`\beta `$ Pictoris and 0.01 $`\mu `$m grains, their fig. 4 gives an avoidance radius of approximately 500 AU. Therefore, the dust grains will not be accreted by the star.

Following their approach, we derived $`r_{\mathrm{av}}`$ for other stars using the radiation pressure efficiencies (mixture of 50 per cent astronomical silicates and 50 per cent graphite) tabulated for various black body radiation fields by Draine & Lee (1984). Our result for $`\beta `$ Pictoris, $`r_{\mathrm{av}}=340`$ AU, using an 8000 K black body radiation field, and that of Artymowicz & Clampin (1997), who used a Kurucz (1992) model atmosphere, agree within a factor of 2, which is more than satisfactory.

Figure 2 shows the ratio of radiation pressure to gravity for 4 stars: an A2 V star, $`\beta `$ Pictoris, an F2 V and an F5 V star. The assumed stellar parameters are taken from Cox (2000) and are shown together with the derived quantities in Table 1. The results clearly show that the avoidance radius for 0.01 $`\mu `$m grains around a main sequence F2 star is still about 130 AU, while it is only 30 AU for a F5 star. Stars much cooler than that may not be able to prevent accretion of ISM dust grains onto their surface.

### 2.2 Interstellar gas

Interstellar gas around O and B-type stars is known to be ionized (H ii regions). In a first approximation, the Strömgren radius around the star can be calculated from the number of Lyman $`\alpha `$ continuum photons, $`N_\mathrm{u}`$ and the density of the ISM, $`n_\mathrm{H}`$,

$$r_\mathrm{s}=8.66\times 10^{13}\left(\frac{R_{}}{R_{}}\right)^{2/3}N_\mathrm{u}^{1/3}n_\mathrm{H}^{2/3}\mathrm{AU}.$$
(3)
While the radiation field of an O star can be reasonably approximated by a black body, A-type stars have strong line blanketing in the UV. Hence, to calculate the number of Lyman $`\alpha `$ continuum photons for A and F-type stars, we used Kurucz (1992) model atmospheres and the appropriate stellar radii taken from Cox (2000)

$$N_\mathrm{u}=_0^{912\mathrm{\AA }}F_\nu 𝑑\nu \mathrm{photons}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(4)
The resulting Strömgren radii are summarized in Table 2 for various A and F-type stars. Assuming a density of 10 cm-3 for the ISM cloud, the Strömgren radii lie between 3.1 and 0.8 AU. Assuming a relative velocity of 17 km s-1, a gas particle takes about 1 yr to reach the stellar surface from this radius. The time which a neutral hydrogen atom spends before it is ionized can be calculated from the photoionization rate of H i

$$t=R^1=\left(_{912\mathrm{\AA }}^{\mathrm{}}a_\mathrm{E}F_\nu \left(\frac{r}{R_{}}\right)^2𝑑\nu \right)^1\mathrm{s},$$
(5)
using the parameterized photoionisation rate $`a_\mathrm{E}`$ from Cox (2000). The timescales at the Strömgren radius are then between $`3.2\times 10^8`$ and $`10^9`$ yr depending on the spectral type of the star. A comparison with the dynamical timescale shows that the accreted interstellar gas will be mostly neutral.

Bondi & Hoyle (1944) have calculated the mass accretion rate of material onto a star as it moves through an ISM cloud. The basic assumptions are that (1) the gas is mainly molecular and hence the temperature remains small via effective cooling and (2) effects of gas pressure are small compared to the gravitational forces. The first assumption may pose a problem for an A-type star which efficiently dissociates the molecular ISM gas in its vicinity, but C, C+ and O are efficient alternative coolants of the gas (Black, 1987). The second point can be checked by calculating the critical radius up to where gas pressure effects can be neglected (Bondi & Hoyle, 1944)

$$r_{\mathrm{crit}}=\frac{GM}{u^2}\mathrm{cm}.$$
(6)
Here $`u`$ is the thermal velocity of the interstellar material. Assuming $`u=0.1`$ km s-1 leads to a critical radius of $`8.9\times 10^4`$ AU for a solar-mass star. This is well outside the regime we consider in this study.

Bondi & Hoyle (1944) derive the radius for which ISM particles are accreted onto the star

$$r_{\mathrm{acc}}=\frac{\sqrt{2.5}GM}{v_{\mathrm{rel}}^2}\mathrm{cm}.$$
(7)
Different prefactors can be found in the literature, but Bondi & Hoyle (1944) showed that $`\sqrt{2.5}`$ holds for steady state. This radius leads to an accretion rate of

$$\dot{M}=\pi r_{\mathrm{acc}}^2\rho v_{\mathrm{rel}}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(8)
An A-type star of 2 M passing the diffuse ISM cloud at a relative velocity of 17 km s-1 has an accretion radius of 9.7 AU and an accretion rate of $`4.2\times 10^{14}`$ M yr-1. Since no evidence is found for emission lines in the ultraviolet spectral range and accretion must overcome diffusion, the accretion rate must lie between $`10^9`$ (Bertout, 1989) and $`10^{14}`$ M yr-1 (Turcotte & Charbonneau, 1993). Hence the range of relative velocities between star and diffuse ISM cloud is 1 to 20 km s-1 (Fig. 3).

This estimate assumes that collisions occur frequently enough to reduce the angular momentum of the particles streaming around the star. In order to verify this, one can calculate the number of collisions of a particle on a circular orbit with a radius $`r_{\mathrm{acc}}`$ around the star. We assume that collisions are effective in removing angular momentum over a path length of $`\pi r_{\mathrm{acc}}`$ and that the cross section of the gas particle is $`6.3\times 10^{16}`$ cm2 (corresponding to a radius of $`10^8`$ cm)

$$N_{\mathrm{coll}}=6.3\times 10^{16}n\frac{\sqrt{2.5}\pi GM}{v_{\mathrm{rel}}^2},$$
(9)
where $`n`$ denotes the density of the ISM cloud. Inserting a 2 M star and assuming a relative velocity of 17 km s-1, we obtain 3 collisions for the orbiting particle. The accretion scenario will certainly work for ISM clouds with densities $`10`$ cm-3.

Typical sizes $`d`$ for ISM clouds are of the order of 0.1 to 10 pc (Dring et al., 1996). The duration of accretion is determined by the relative velocity between cloud and star and the dimension of the cloud

$$t_{\mathrm{acc}}=9.8\times 10^5\left(\frac{d}{\mathrm{pc}}\right)\left(\frac{v_{\mathrm{rel}}}{\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}}\right)^1\mathrm{yr}.$$
(10)
In the above scenario with a relative velocity of 17 km s-1, the star passing a diffuse ISM cloud of 1 pc accretes for $`5.8\times 10^4`$ yr.

In the light of the above described scenario, the $`\lambda `$ Bootis phenomenon is a transient phenomenon. The abundance pattern imprinted by the diffuse ISM cloud will disappear very rapidly, within $`10^6`$ yr, after the star has passed the cloud (Turcotte & Charbonneau, 1993). This is due to diffusion taking over again and to effective mixing by convection and meridional circulation. Since the time, which a star actually spends crossing a diffuse ISM cloud, is very short, we do not expect circumstellar/interstellar lines towards every $`\lambda `$ Bootis star. In fact Holweger & Rentzsch-Holm (1995) and Holweger et al. (1999) have shown that about 30 per cent of the $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars reveal narrow absorption features in Ca ii K. On the other hand Bohlender et al. (1999) have found narrow Na i D absorption features in 3 out of 8 $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars.

## 3 The borders of the $`\lambda `$ Bootis phenomenon

The spectral range of $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars extends from B9.5 V to F3 V with a peak around F1 V. 60 per cent of the $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars are cooler than 8000 K and the stellar masses range between $`1.56(8)`$ and $`2.50(12)`$ M (Paunzen et al., 2002). The distribution of rotational velocities of $`\lambda `$ Bootis A-type stars is indistinguishable from normal A-type stars (Paunzen, 2001), the maximum so far being 250 km s-1. We first consider the hot end of the phenomenon, where stellar winds stop the accretion of interstellar matter and then the cool end, where convection zones become too massive to be contaminated by the above derived accretion rates.

### 3.1 The hot and cool end

B-type stars possess radiatively driven winds and typical values derived for the mass loss rates from radiative acceleration calculations by Abbott (1982) can be found in Cohen et al. (1997). They range from $`3\times 10^8`$ M yr-1 for a B0 V star to $`3\times 10^{12}`$ M yr-1 for a B7 VIe star. Babel (1996) has shown that these calculations tend to overestimate the mass loss rate by typically a factor of 4, because they do not take into account the dependence of the radiative acceleration on the outwards velocity in the wind and the detailed shadowing by photospheric lines. So the range of mass loss rates for B-type stars will then become roughly $`8\times 10^9\mathrm{}8\times 10^{13}`$ M yr-1.

For the A-type stars Babel (1995) has found mass loss rates below $`10^{16}`$ M yr-1. This mass loss is due to selective winds that act only on the metals and the terminal velocity of this wind is rather high, about 6000 km s-1. Comparing the momenta of the wind and the accretion flow, we find that a typical accretion rate of $`10^{13}`$ M yr-1 at velocities of 10 km s-1 wins over the selective wind. Such selective mass loss will therefore not affect the formation of a $`\lambda `$ Bootis abundance pattern. Since we do not know exact mass loss rates for late B-type stars, we can only conclude that the hot end of the $`\lambda `$ Bootis phenomenon lies at the transition between A and B-type stars.

Stellar evolutionary models show that the mass of the convection zone at $`10^8`$ yr (that is on the main-sequence) is $`10^8`$, $`10^{10}`$, and $`10^{11}`$ M for a 1.5, 1.7, and 2.5 M star respectively (Richard et al., 2001). Overshoot is supposed to enlarge this mass by less than a factor of 10 (Freytag et al., 1996 and Freytag private communication). Given the accretion timescales and rates derived in Sect. 2, the photospheres of stars more massive than 1.5 M can be contaminated by the diffuse ISM cloud.

### 3.2 The rotational velocity

Charbonneau & Michaud (1991) have shown that meridional circulation does not completely wipe out the chemical abundance pattern established under the influence of diffusion in fast rotating stars. The timescale for mixing by meridional circulation is a fraction of the Eddington-Sweet time (Turcotte & Charbonneau, 1993)

$$t_\mathrm{m}=\frac{G^2M_{}^3}{L_{}R_{}^2v_\mathrm{e}^2}\mathrm{s},$$
(11)
where $`v_\mathrm{e}`$ denotes the equatorial rotational velocity. For the A5 and F5 star we obtain a mixing time of $`8.4\times 10^6`$ and $`2.1\times 10^7`$ yr for an equatorial velocity of 200 km s-1. This is much longer than we expect the accretion signature to last after the accretion process has ceased.

## 4 Statistics

In order to test our proposed scenario with the observed number of $`\lambda `$ Bootis type objects within a given space volume, we have made the following analysis. Paunzen (2001) has estimated that the current spectral classification resolution surveys in the relevant spectral domain are complete up to 60 pc. Within this space volume we know of 8 well established $`\lambda `$ Bootis type stars: HD 30422, HD 31295, HD 74873, HD 110411, HD 125162, HD 142703, HD 183324 and HD 192640.

Within a space volume of 60 pc, there are about 1100 “normal” type stars in the relevant spectral domain. Since most of the spectral classification surveys are mainly devoted to single objects, we discard all apparent spectroscopic binary systems. Taking an average binary frequency of 30 per cent, we are left with 330 apparent single objects.

As next step, we derive a rough estimate of the space volume for which the densities of the ISM are high enough so that accretion of interstellar matter on to the stellar surface occurs. For the space volume considered here, we are confronted with the “Local Bubble” which surrounds the Sun. It stretches out with a radius between 30 and 300 pc. Its characteristics, distribution and kinematic are still not well understood (Génova et al., 1997; Snowden et al., 1998). From the maps of the Local Bubble from Welsh et al. (1998) and Sfeir et al. (1999), we determine an average value of 3 per cent for which the densities of the ISM are high enough. Notice that the published maps reflect the characteristics on rather large scales only (about 10 to 20 pc). The kinematically and chemically structure varies on scales which are 10 times smaller than that (Génova et al., 1997).

So we are left with 10 stars within a space volume of 60 pc which can be accounted as $`\lambda `$ Bootis type objects. This is very well in the range of the actual observed number (8). However, this does, by no means, prove our scenario, but naturally explains the low number of detected members.

Let us also make a remark about the (non-) detection of $`\lambda `$ Bootis type objects in open clusters (Gray & Corbally, 1999, 2002). Up to now only few members in the Orion OB1 association and NGC 2264 (ages about 107 yr) are known although an extensive survey by the group of R.O. Gray in about two dozen open clusters has been performed. We believe that the lack of members in open clusters is due to a lack of gas to accrete. Palla & Stahler (2000) have shown that the remnant gas from the stellar formation dissipates in less than 107 yr. This even holds for aggregates containing no massive stars.

## 5 Observational tests

Some $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars are members of binary systems. In all cases, where a detailed abundance analysis has been done so far, both stars turned in fact out to be $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars (Stürenburg, 1993; Iliev et al., 2002; Heiter, 2002): HD 84948 A+B, HD 171948 A+B, HD 193281/HD 193256, HD 198160/HD 198161. This is naturally explained by the above described scenario, because both stars pass through the same diffuse cloud and accrete interstellar gas. If both stars have a spectral type between late B and early F, they both appear afterwards as $`\lambda `$ Bootis stars. But, if one component has an earlier or later spectral type, it will not show the typical $`\lambda `$ Bootis abundance pattern.

To test the above described scenario, it is crucial to analyze more $`\lambda `$ Bootis binary systems and to find systems consisting of an A-type star and a companion which is beyond the hot or cool end as described in Sect. 3.1.

## Acknowledgements

We have greatly benefited from many helpful discussions with Harm Habing, Garrelt Mellema, Hartmut Holweger and Werner Weiss. EP acknowledges partly support by the Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung, project P14984.


text:
# Preliminary Results on |𝑉_{𝑢𝑏}| from Inclusive Semileptonic 𝐵 Decays with Neutrino Reconstruction

## I Introduction

The CKM matrix element $`|V_{ub}|`$ is the coupling between the bottom and up quarks, and is therefore a fundamental parameter in the Standard Model. Its value is relevant to studies of flavor-changing currents, including the rates of $`B`$ and $`B_s`$ mixing and CP violation in the mixing and decays of $`B`$ hadrons.

Recent theoretical progress in charmless semileptonic $`B`$ decays using Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQET) and the Operator Product Expansion (OPE) ref:general\_HQET\_OPE ; ref:falkqsqr ; ref:neubertqsqr ; ref:bauercuts  has made possible new levels of precision in the measurement of $`|V_{ub}|`$ref:Bslendpoint . The calculations relate $`|V_{ub}|`$ to the partial branching fraction of $`BX_ul\nu `$ in a restricted region of phase space in which $`BX_cl\nu `$ does not contribute. The region of phase space most accessible to experiment is the lepton energy endpoint, $`E_{\mathrm{}}>(m_B^2m_D^2)/2m_B`$. This region was used in the first measurement of $`BX_ul\nu `$ establishing a non-zero value of $`|V_{ub}|`$ref:firstbtou . Unfortunately the OPE calculation is not valid in the very restricted region of phase space delineated by this lepton energy cut. A recent CLEO measurement has used a spectral function measured in $`BX_s\gamma `$ to obtain the normalization factor which relates the measured partial branching fraction in the lepton endpoint region to $`|V_{ub}|`$ref:Bslendpoint . Another method is to replace the lepton energy cut with a cut on the invariant mass of the lepton pairref:falkqsqr ; ref:neubertqsqr , $`q^2`$, or on the mass of the recoiling hadronic system, $`M_X`$, to exclude $`BX_cl\nu `$ events. Recent theoretical work suggests that a combination of cuts on both $`q^2`$ and $`M_X`$ yields the smallest uncertaintyref:bauercuts .

In this paper we report an analysis of $`BXl\nu `$ decays in which both the charged lepton and the neutrino are reconstructed. The neutrino is reconstructed using the approximate hermeticity of the CLEO II and CLEO II.V detectors and the well known initial state of the $`e^+e^{}`$ system produced by the Cornell Electron Storage Ring (CESR). The $`q^2`$ kinematic variable is then calculated directly, and the $`M_X`$ kinematic variable can be calculated if the $`B`$ momentum, $`\stackrel{}{p}_B`$, is known,

$`M_X^2`$ $`=`$ $`M_B^2+q^22E_{beam}(E_{\mathrm{}}+E_\nu )+2|\stackrel{}{p}_B||\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{}\nu |\mathrm{cos}\theta _{B\mathrm{}\nu },`$
where $`\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{}\nu `$ is the sum of the charged lepton and neutrino momenta and $`\theta _{B\mathrm{}\nu }`$ is the angle between $`\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{}\nu `$ and the $`B`$ momentum direction. Since the $`B`$ mesons are the daughters of an $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ produced at rest, the magnitude of the $`B`$ momentum is known and small, however its direction is unmeasured. The last term in the $`M_X^2`$ equation depends on the $`B`$ momentum direction, and is small, unmeasured, and neglected in this analysis. From the lepton pair sample, the differential decay rate is measured as a function of the reconstructed quantities $`q^2`$, $`M_X`$, and $`E_{\mathrm{}}`$. The experimental resolution on the neutrino four-momentum is poor, with a narrow core of approximately 120 MeV and broad tail of over-estimation of the neutrino energy which extends up to 1.5 GeV. The resulting resolution on $`q^2`$ and $`M_X`$ is also poor, so it is not possible to cleanly isolate $`BX_ul\nu `$ events with cuts on these variables. Instead, we fit this observed distribution to a sum of models for the different hadronic final states: $`D`$, $`D^{}`$, $`D^{}`$, $`X_c`$ non-resonant, and $`X_u`$. From the fit results we infer the partial branching fraction over a region of phase space with high $`q^2`$ and low $`M_X`$. These partial branching fractions are related to $`|V_{ub}|`$ by theoretical calculations whose uncertainty has been estimated ref:bauercuts .

The data were accumulated with two configurations of the CLEO detector ref:NIM , CLEO II and CLEO II.V, with an integrated luminosity of $`9.4\mathrm{fb}^1`$ taken on the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance and an additional $`4.5\mathrm{fb}^1`$ taken off resonance, just below the $`B\overline{B}`$ production threshold. Both configurations cover 95% of the 4$`\pi `$ solid angle with drift chambers and a cesium iodide calorimeter. In addition there are muon chambers with measurements made at 3, 5, and 7 hadronic interaction lengths of iron and a time of flight system which augments the particle ID information from specific ionization ($`dE/dx`$). In the the CLEO II configuration, there were three concentric drift chambers filled with a mixture of argon and ethane. In the CLEO II.V detector, the innermost tracking chamber was replaced with a three layer silicon detector and the drift chamber gas was changed to a mixture of helium and propane.

## II Neutrino Reconstruction and Event Selection

Events are selected to have an electron or muon with momentum greater than 1 GeV/$`c`$ and a well reconstructed neutrino. Additional cuts are used to suppress background events from the $`e^+e^{}q\overline{q}`$ continuum.

The leptons are selected to fall within the barrel region of the detector ($`|\mathrm{cos}\theta |<.71`$, where $`\theta `$ is the angle between the lepton momentum and the beam axis). Electrons are selected based on $`E/p`$, $`dE/dx`$, and time of flight information combined using a likelihood technique. Muons are identified by requiring a penetration of 3 interaction lengths of iron for muons less than 1.5 GeV/$`c`$ and 5 interaction lengths for muons greater than 1.5 GeV/$`c`$. The absolute lepton identification efficiencies are calculated by embedding leptons from radiative QED events into hadronic events. The rate at which pions and kaons fake leptons is measured by reconstructing $`K_S^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, $`D^0K^{}\pi ^+`$, and $`\overline{D^0}K^+\pi ^{}`$ without using particle identification and then checking daughter particle lepton identification signatures.

Neutrinos are reconstructed by subtracting all observed track and neutral shower four-momenta from the four-momentum of the $`e^+e^{}`$ initial state which is at rest in the laboratory,

$`p_\nu ^\mu =p_{e^+e^{}}^\mu p_{visible}^\mu .`$
The errors made in this assumption are due to particles lost through inefficiency or acceptance, fake tracks and showers, and other undetected particles such as second neutrinos, $`K_L^0`$’s, or neutrons. Several cuts are made to select events in which these effects are reduced and the neutrino four-momentum resolution is correspondingly enhanced. Since extra neutrinos are correlated with extra leptons, events with a lepton beyond the signal lepton in the event are rejected.

The primary source of fake tracks is from charged particles which do not have sufficient transverse momentum, $`p_t`$, to reach the calorimeter and therefore curl multiple times in the tracking chambers. The portions of the track after the initial outbound section may accidentally be called a second track. Criteria have been developed to identify such errors and make a best estimate of the actual charged particles in the event. Events for which the total charge of the tracks is not zero are removed, reducing the effect of lost or fake tracks. Showers in the calorimeter associated with tracks in the drift chamber are removed, so as not to double count their energy. The association between tracks and showers has been refined to take into account secondary hadronic showers which can appear to be showers isolated from tracks. Finally a requirement is made that the ratio of the reconstructed neutrino four-momentum divided by twice the reconstructed neutrino energy be less than 0.35 GeV, $`\frac{M_{missing}^2}{2E_\nu }<.35`$ GeV. This quantity is constructed to be proportional to the energy of a lost or fake particle. The reconstructed neutrino’s energy is assigned to be the magnitude of the momentum, because the momentum is not dependent on the particle identification of the tracks and so has a better resolution than the direct energy measurement.

Continuum events are suppressed by a combination of event shape and orientation variables which exploit the fact that continuum events tend to be jet-like and aligned with the beam axis, whereas $`B\overline{B}`$ events are more spherical and their orientation is uniformly distributed in the detector. The second Fox-Wolfram moment ref:foxwolfram , R2, of the energy flow in the event is required to be less than 0.4. In addition a neural network is used to combine R2, the angle between the lepton and the thrust axis, the angle between the lepton and the beam axis, and the fraction of the energy lying in 9 separate cones around the lepton direction, which cover the full the $`4\pi `$ solid angle. The R2 cut is more than 99% and 95% efficient for $`BX_cl\nu `$ and $`BX_ul\nu `$ respectively, while removing 60% of the continuum events. The neural net cut removes an additional 73% of the continuum background while keeping 92% and 94% of the $`BX_cl\nu `$ and $`BX_ul\nu `$ respectively.

After all cuts we observe 42333 events from CLEO II and 81368 events from CLEO II.V. The overall efficiency varies from 1.5% for $`BX_cl\nu `$ non-resonant to 4.2% for $`BX_ul\nu `$.

## III Fitting for Composition

The full three dimensional differential decay rate distribution as a function of the reconstructed quantities $`q^2`$, $`M_X`$, and $`E_{\mathrm{}}`$ is fit for the contributions of the signals and backgrounds. The signals are $`BDl\nu `$, $`BD^{}l\nu `$, $`BD^{}l\nu `$, $`BX_cl\nu `$ non-resonant, and $`BX_ul\nu `$. The backgrounds are events where the $`B`$ decay candidate is faked by a lepton from the process $`bcX\mathrm{}\nu `$, a lepton from the $`e^+e^{}q\overline{q}`$ continuum, or a fake lepton. We have the freedom to choose the kinematic variables used in the fit. We use $`q^2/(E_{\mathrm{}}+E_\nu )^2`$, $`M_X`$, and $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _W\mathrm{}`$. The helicity angle of the virtual $`W`$, $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _W\mathrm{}`$, is defined to be the angle between the lepton momentum in the $`W`$ frame and the $`W`$ in the lab frame. The fit variables have been chosen to minimize complexity of the phase space boundaries and cover the same kinematic space as $`q^2`$, $`E_{\mathrm{}}`$, and $`E_\nu `$.

We perform a binned maximum-likelihood fit where the probability distribution functions (PDFs) are constructed from weighted Monte Carlo or data events. The fit uses electrons and muons simultaneously, with a separate set of PDFs for the electrons and muons. The likelihood is implemented to take into account the PDF statistics using the method described in reference ref:BarlowBeeston . The projections of the reconstructed quantities $`q^2`$, $`M_X`$, and $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _W\mathrm{}`$ of the various $`BXl\nu `$ modes are shown in Figure 1. Projections of the fit result are shown in Figure 2. Projections restricted to the region of enhanced $`BX_ul\nu `$ sensitivity are shown in Figure 3. It should be noted that the correlations between the the three variables shown in the projections are fully included in the fit, and provide considerable power in distinguishing the contributions of the various components.

The $`BXl\nu `$ modes, secondary leptons and real leptons from continuum are simulated with CLEO’s GEANT based Monte Carlo. The $`BDl\nu `$ and $`BD^{}l\nu `$ modes are modeled with ISGW2 ref:isgw2 . The $`BD^{}l\nu `$ mode is modeled with HQET using CLEO’s previous measurement of the form factors ref:DSlnuFFs . The $`X_c`$ non-resonant modes are modeled with a combination of the Goity and Roberts modelref:GoityRoberts  and a crude model of $`B\mathrm{\Lambda }_cXl\nu `$. For an assessment of the $`BX_cl\nu `$ model dependence, the $`BDl\nu `$ and $`BD^{}l\nu `$ form factors are varied within their experimentally allowed ranges, and the $`BD^{}l\nu `$ masses are varied in an ad-hoc manner. Because very little is known about the $`X_c`$ non-resonant mass spectrum, it is reweighted drastically in the study of the $`BX_cl\nu `$ model dependence. In a further study, each $`X_c`$ final state is constrained to a value away from the nominal fit result. The results of the variations are summed in quadrature. The modeling of the $`BX_ul\nu `$ mode and the resulting model dependence is discussed in a later section.

The fake leptons are modeled by taking a sample of tracks from data that are classified as $`\pi `$, $`K`$, or $`\mu `$ (electrons and protons are not a significant source of fake leptons) and unfolding their spectra to get the true spectra of $`\pi `$, $`K`$ and $`\mu `$, which are then multiplied by the measured fake rates. This models fake leptons from both $`B\overline{B}`$ and $`e^+e^{}q\overline{q}`$ continuum. The real leptons from continuum are modeled with continuum Monte Carlo which has been tuned to replicate the appropriate charm spectra. Charm is the source of most leptons from continuum. The models of both continuum and fakes have been validated and constrained by a comparison with the $`4.5\mathrm{fb}^1`$ of off-resonance data. The secondary leptons are modeled with a convolution of CLEO’s measured charm spectra from $`B\overline{B}`$ events and DELCO results on the inclusive semileptonic decays of charmref:delco .

The method of neutrino reconstruction adds a large amount of kinematic information to each event, however it also adds significant potential for systematic errors. The resolution on the neutrino kinematics is affected by the models of both the signal, the other $`B`$ in the event, and the detector response. The GEANT Monte Carlo does not perfectly simulate the track and shower efficiencies and fake rates, nor are $`B`$ decays well enough understood that the inclusive particle distributions are well known. For this analysis we employ a method of reweighting in order to quantify the effects of these uncertainties on our results. For example to study effect of the tracking efficiency uncertainty on result, the Monte Carlo events in which tracks are lost are given a higher or lower weight in constructing the PDFs and the fit is repeated. The scale of the variation made can in general be constrained by direct measurements of the quantity being varied. One important example is that having a $`K_L^0`$ in the event adds a tail to the neutrino resolution. The inclusive $`K_S^0`$ spectrum in $`B\overline{B}`$ events has been measured and can be used to constrain the $`K_L^0`$ spectrum.

## IV $`BX_ul\nu `$ Model Dependence

We use calculations based on HQET and the OPE to extract $`|V_{ub}|`$ from the $`BX_ul\nu `$ rate in restricted regions of phase space. This is a well controlled expansion and the theoretical uncertainties have been assessed by several authors ref:falkqsqr ; ref:neubertqsqr ; ref:bauercuts . However, the fit’s region of sensitivity does not coincide with these regions, and, as previously mentioned, it is not possible to make cuts to isolate these regions, because of the poor resolution on the neutrino four-vector and hence $`q^2`$ and $`M_X^2`$. In order to calculate $`|V_{ub}|`$, we first make a model dependent inference of the partial branching fraction in a region, and then apply the HQET and OPE calculations. This prescription is designed to minimize the reliance on models and instead rely on the controlled expansion in HQET and OPE calculations.

$`BX_ul\nu `$ models are used for two purposes in this analysis. The first is in the simulation of the efficiency and resolution of the detector. This cannot be done with the HQET and OPE calculations, because they do not predict specific hadronic final states. The second use of models is to extrapolate and interpolate between the regions of high sensitivity to $`BX_ul\nu `$ and regions of interest for extracting $`|V_{ub}|`$. The fit is primarily sensitive to low $`M_X^2`$ and high $`q^2`$, but within this region the sensitivity is strongly biased toward the lepton energy end-point, hence the models are relied on to extrapolate to the full range of lepton energies.

The result of the fit is the fraction of $`BX_ul\nu `$ events in the sample. This is converted into a branching fraction using the efficiency determined by Monte Carlo simulation and number of $`B\overline{B}`$s in the sample. The $`BX_ul\nu `$ portion of the fit is driven by the region of phase space where the $`BX_cl\nu `$ contribution is not overwhelming, however the fit extrapolates from this region to the full space using the models. This results in a very large model dependence for the total rate. The effect can be reduced by calculating for each model a fraction, $`f_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{model}}`$, of events in a region of enhanced $`BX_ul\nu `$ sensitivity. The fractions, $`f_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{model}}`$, are calculated from the model using the true $`q^2`$ and $`M_X^2`$, not the reconstructed $`q^2`$ and $`M_X^2`$. The product of the branching fraction from the fit result for a model and $`f_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{model}}`$ is the inferred partial branching fraction of $`BX_ul\nu `$ for the model in region selected,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{model}}`$ $`=`$ $`(BX_ul\nu )^{\mathrm{model}}\times f_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{model}}.`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{model}}`$ has significantly less dependence on the model than the inferred full branching fraction, $`(BX_ul\nu )^{\mathrm{model}}`$, however it still involves a model dependent combination of interpolation and extrapolation from the actual region of measurement.

The models used range across extremes from the ISGW2 model to a model with only non-resonant modes. The ISGW2 model contains only low mass hadronic resonances and no non-resonant or high mass hadronic systems. The purely non-resonant model implements the HQET and OPE prediction for the hadronic mass spectrum based on the $`BX_s\gamma `$spectral function, where the hadronic system is decayed via JETSET. The true spectrum is likely somewhere between the extremes of all high mass non-resonant and all low mass resonances. Two permutations of the all non-resonant model correspond to changing the spectral function parameters, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and $`\lambda _1`$ within the bounds of the CLEO measurement ref:Bslendpoint . Another model combines ISGW2 and some non-resonant events. In addition, the ISGW2 model is reweighted to have a higher or lower $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _W\mathrm{}`$, corresponding to more or less rate in the lepton end-point, or reweighted to have a harder or softer $`q^2`$ spectrum. Table 1 shows the results for the total rate and the inferred partial branching fractions for five different regions. The central value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{region}}`$, reported in the first column of Table 2, is the center of the range of models, and the model dependence uncertainty is assigned to cover the full range. The fit results for the branching fractions of the final states containing charm agree with previous CLEO measurements and will be reported in a subsequent paper.

In the context of HQET and the OPE another fraction, $`f_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{HQET}}`$, relates the partial branching fraction to $`|V_{ub}|`$ref:VubtoTotalRate ,

$`|V_{ub}|`$ $`=`$ $`\left[3.07\pm 0.12\times 10^3\right]\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{region}}}{.001\times f_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{HQET}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1.6\mathrm{ps}}{\tau _B}}\right]^{1/2}.`$
The fractions, $`f_{\mathrm{region}}^{\mathrm{HQET}}`$, for the five regions used have been calculated with an evaluation of the theoretical uncertainty by Bauer et al. in reference ref:bauercuts . Some of the regions have also been evaluated in referenceref:neubertqsqr . The $`|V_{ub}|`$ results that correspond to the five inferred partial branching fractions with their respective model dependences are shown in Table 2. We choose the $`q^2>11\mathrm{GeV}^2/c^4,M_X<1.5\mathrm{GeV}/c^2`$ results as a central value because it has the least model dependence.

## V Conclusion

We have made a preliminary measurement the CKM parameter $`|V_{ub}|`$ with high precision, but some model dependence, and obtain

$`V_{ub}`$ $`=`$ $`(4.05\pm 0.18\pm 0.58\pm 0.25\pm 0.21\pm 0.56)\times 10^3`$
where the errors are statistical, detector systematics, $`BX_cl\nu `$ model dependence, $`BX_ul\nu `$ model dependence, and theoretical uncertainty respectively. The result is consistent with the CLEO result using the lepton end-point measurement ref:Bslendpoint . There is some statistical correlation with the lepton end-point measurement and the model dependence may be correlated as well. These correlations will be investigated. This analysis is the first to use neutrino reconstruction and the full three-dimensional kinematic information to extract the $`BX_ul\nu `$ branching fraction. This also pioneers the application of the multidimensional cuts laid out by Bauer et al.ref:bauercuts . A more detailed study of the region of sensitivity is in progress, and may result in a less model dependent extraction of $`|V_{ub}|`$.

The composition of the $`BX_cl\nu `$ is also currently being analyzed and will provide new information on the branching fractions, the HQET parameters $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and $`\lambda _1`$, and the Standard Model parameter $`|V_{cb}|`$.

We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the CESR staff for providing the luminosity and the National Science Foundation and U.S. Department of Energy for supporting this research.


text:
# Asymptotic Freedom for Non-Relativistic Confinement

## I Introduction

Asymptotic freedom was discovered to be a property of non-Abelian gauge theories nearly 30 years ago Gross and Wilczek (1973) Politzer (1973), and has been used to explain scaling in electroproduction Bjorken (1969). A version of asymptotic freedom also holds trivially in non-relativistic quantum mechanics since the Born series converges more and more rapidly with increasing energy. In particular, final state interactions can be ignored in the response functions for inclusive scattering from condensed matter systems at large momentum transfer Sears (1984). This result follows easily from simple quantum mechanical arguments, although the calculation of corrections can be quite complicated Gurvits and Rinat (1993). The case of confined systems is a bit more subtle, however, since the particles in the final state are always in discrete excited states of finite (possibly large) size and thus never really free. The case of non-relativistic confinement has been discussed extensively, however, as a toy model for asymptotic freedom and quark-hadron duality Bloom and Gilman (1970) in the structure function for electroproduction, where the production of resonances at low energies and momentum transfers averages to the smooth scaling curve observed at large momentum transfers. This is now known to occur quite locally, essentially for each resonance. An explanation in terms of a relativistic quark model has been given recently Isgur et al. (2001), while Close and Isgur Close and Isgur (2001) have used a simple non-relativistic model to explain one aspect of duality: how the square of a sum in the amplitude for production of resonances becomes approximately the sum of squares required for duality. A similar non-relativistic model had been used earlier by Greenberg Greenberg (1993) to investigate the scaling limit in terms of the Bjorken scaling variable.

In this paper we also use a two-body model to discuss non-relativistic asymptotic freedom. Such a model provides at best an approximate description of mesons containing heavy quarks Lucha et al. (1991); Bigi et al. (1997), but it is simple enough that some features of the large momentum transfer limit of the response function can be illustrated very concretely. In the context of the model, asymptotic freedom follows because of a simple relation between the radial wave functions describing bound states in the confining potential and the spherical Bessel functions which describe free particles of the same energy and angular momentum. Not only do these wave functions have the same shape for high enough energy and small enough separation: their relative normalizations are such that a form of duality follows once one properly allows for the comparison of a discrete sum with an integral.

The paper begins with the definition of the response functions of the model, showing how they are related to integrals over the final state radial wave functions. Both the exact case, where the final state wave functions are just the bound state wave functions for the discrete final states, and the approximate case using free-particle (plane-wave) wave functions are considered. The close relation between the two sets of wave functions for the same angular momentum, similar large energies, and small radii are then described in Sect. 3 for fairly general confining potentials, and the implications of these results for local duality are discussed. A method for calculating corrections to this simple relation is also given, leading to a discussion of the conditions under which asymptotic freedom is a good approximation. The results are applied in Sect. 4 to the case of the harmonic oscillator, where many of the expressions become simple analytic functions. The results are summarized in Sect. 5, which also contains suggestions for further work in this area .

## II Structure Functions

We use the model of Close and Isgur (2001), consisting of two particles of equal mass $`m`$ and reduced mass $`\mu =m/2`$ carrying charges $`e_1`$ and $`e_2`$. This system is initially in its ground state in the spherically symmetric confining potential $`V(r)`$ and, after being hit by a ”scalar photon”, transferring momentum $`𝐪`$ to one of the particles, it makes the transition to an excited state $`|n_r,l,m>`$ with energy $`E_{n_r,l}`$ . The probability for this transition is proportional to the response or structure function

$$F_{n_r,l,m}(𝐪)=|<n_r,l,m|[e_1e^{i𝐫𝐪/\mathrm{𝟐}}+e_2e^{i𝐫𝐪/\mathrm{𝟐}}]|0,0,0>|^2.$$
(1)
If the polarizations $`m`$ of the degenerate final states of a given $`n_r`$ and $`l`$ are not measured one needs only the sum

$$F_{n_r,l}(q)=\underset{m=l}{\overset{l}{}}F_{n_r,l,m}(𝐪)$$
(2)
Using completeness it is easy to see that

$$\underset{n_r,l}{}F_{n_r,l}(q)=e_1^2+e_2^2+2e_1e_2S(q),$$
(3)
where

$$S(q)=<0,0,0|e^{i𝐫𝐪}|0,0,0>$$
(4)
is the ground state form factor. Using standard manipulations one can write $`F_{n_r,l}(q)`$ in terms of the square of a radial integral involving the bound state radial wave functions $`u_{n_r,l}(r)`$:

$$F_{n_r,l}(q)=[e_1^2+e_2^2+2e_1e_2(1)^l](2l+1)r_{n_r,l}(q)^2,$$
(5)
where

$$r_{n_r,l}(q)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ru_{n_r,l}(r)j_l(qr/2)u_{0,0}(r),$$
(6)
with $`j_l(x)`$ a spherical Bessel function. The $`(1)^l`$ in 5 shows that the interference terms will tend to cancel when states of adjacent values of $`l`$ are included in a sum Close and Isgur (2001).

If the interaction of the two particles in the final state is completely ignored, as would follow from the assumption of asymptotic freedom, the final states can be labelled by either the relative momentum $`𝐤`$ of the two particles or its magnitude $`k`$ and the angular momentum $`l,m`$. Both will be useful below, so we define

$$F(𝐤,𝐪)=|<𝐤|[e_1e^{i𝐫𝐪/2}+e_2e^{i𝐫𝐪/2}]|0,0,0>|^2$$
(7)
and

$$F_{l,m}(k,𝐪)=|<k,l,m|[e_1e^{i𝐫𝐪/2}+e_2e^{i𝐫𝐪/2}]|0,0,0>|^2.$$
(8)
With these definitions

$$F(𝐤,𝐪)=e_1^2\varphi ^2(|𝐤𝐪/2|)+e_2^2\varphi ^2(|𝐤+𝐪/2|)+2e_1e_2\varphi (|𝐤𝐪/2|)\varphi (|𝐤+𝐪/2|),$$
(9)
where $`\varphi (p)`$ is the ground state momentum space wave function which is large only when $`p`$ is less than $`1/r_0`$, where $`r_0`$ indicates the size of the ground state wave function, and

$$F_l(k,q)=\underset{m=l}{\overset{l}{}}F_{l,m}(k,𝐪)=[e_1^2+e_2^2+2e_1e_2(1)^l](2l+1)r_l(k,q)^2,$$
(10)
with

$$r_l(k,q)=2_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑r\widehat{j}_l(kr)j_l(qr/2)u_{0,0}(r).$$
(11)
Here, to emphasize the similarity to the bound state case, we have introduced the Ricatti-Bessel functions $`\widehat{j}(x)=xj(x)`$. Summing $`F_l(k,q)`$ over $`l`$ produces the same structure function obtained by integrating $`F(𝐤,𝐪)`$ over all directions of $`𝐤`$ :

$$F(k,q)=\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}F_l(k,q)=(k/2\pi )^2𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐤F(𝐤,𝐪).$$
(12)
The completeness relation now take the form

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}(dk/2\pi )F(k,q)=e_1^2+e_2^2+2e_1e_2S(q).$$
(13)
Several properties of the structure functions can be read off from the expressions above. In the free case the structure function is large when $`𝐤\pm 𝐪/2`$ , and, for large $`q`$, the interference term cannot be large. The corresponding result for $`F_l(k,q)`$ can be seen in Eqn. 11, since here the two spherical Bessel functions are exactly in phase only if $`kq/2`$, so that $`r_l(k,q)`$ will be maximum here and begin to decrease significantly when $`|kq/2|r_01`$, where $`r_0`$ indicates the size of the ground state wave function. Using Eqn. 9, a simple change of variable in the integral over the direction of $`𝐤`$ shows that, in the large $`q`$ limit, $`F(k,q)`$ is simply the ground state probability distribution for the component of $`𝐤`$ in the $`𝐪`$ direction West (1975) . This means that, in this limit, $`F(k,q)`$ depends only on the scaling variable $`kq/2(k^2q^2/4)/q`$, which is the non-relativistic version of Bjorken scaling Bjorken (1969) .

In the confinement case the structure function $`F_{n_r,l}`$ can be large for large $`q`$ only if the oscillations of the radial wave function $`u_{n_r,l}(r)`$ are in phase with those of the spherical Bessel function $`j_l(qr/2)`$, so that asymptotic freedom will hold only if these radial wave functions have a form similar to that of $`\widehat{j}(kr)`$. In the next section this requirement will be studied in more detail and it will be shown that the two radial wave functions have almost the same shapes for the same energy and angular momentum.

## III Radial Wave Functions

Assuming $`V(r)0`$ smoothly as $`r0`$, the bound state radial wave function must have the same shape as the free particle radial wave functions for the same $`l`$ and for high enough energy and small enough $`r`$ since they satisfy approximately the same wave equation and both vanish at $`r=0`$. In this section we use the WKB approximation to discuss the normalization of the bound state radial wave function and show that the result obtained guarantees asymptotic freedom.

In the WKB approximation the radial wave function in the classically allowed region is simply

$$u_{n_r,l}(r)𝒩_{n_r,l}\mathrm{cos}[_r_{}^r𝑑r^{}k_{n_r,l}(r^{})\pi /4]/\sqrt{k_{n_r,l}(r)},$$
(14)
where

$$k_{n_r,l}(r)=\sqrt{k_{n_r,l}^22\mu V(r)(l+1/2)^2/r^2}$$
(15)
is the classical radial wave number at $`r`$ for a system with energy

$$E_{n_r,l}=k_{n_r,l}^2/2\mu ,$$
(16)
with the usual replacement $`l(l+1)(l+1/2)^2`$ Kemble (1958), and the classical turning points $`r_{}`$ and $`r_+`$ are determined by the condition $`k_{n_r,l}(r)=0`$. The normalization constant $`𝒩_{n_r,l}`$ can be estimated by assuming that, for high energy bound states, the average of the square of the cosine is close to $`1/2`$ and that the contributions to the normalization integral from the classically forbidden regions is negligible. Normalization then requires

$$1𝒩_{n_r,l}^2_r_{}^{r_+}𝑑r/(2k_{n_r,l}(r)).$$
(17)
The integral is clearly proportional to the period of the classical motion, and it is easy to show from the Bohr-Sommerfeld condition that it is inversely proportional to the level splitting. The final result can be written

$$𝒩_{n_r,l}^22\mu (E_{n_r+1,l}E_{n_r,l})/\pi .$$
(18)
(Similar arguments can be used to derive the expression for the the local electron density used in Thomas-Fermi theory Harrington (1973).)

From the discussion above, the shape of $`u_{n_r,l}(r)`$ must match that of the Ricatti- Bessel function $`\widehat{j}_l(k_{n_r,l}r)`$ at small $`r`$ . If we assume this match extends into the classically allowed region and to $`krl`$, so that the Ricatti-Bessel function takes on its sinusoidal asymptotic form, it must be approximately true that

$$u_{n_r,l}(r)𝒩_{n_r,l}\widehat{j}_l(k_{n_r,l}r)/\sqrt{k_{n_r,l}}.$$
(19)
This relation holds only for small enough radius since the local wave number $`k_{n_r,l}(r)`$ appearing in the WKB approximation will eventually begin to differ significantly from from $`k_{n_r,l}`$. The radial integrals Eq. (6,11) required for calculating the structure functions, however, involve only values of $`r`$ such that the ground state radial wave function $`u_{0,0}(r)`$ is large. As shown in Fig. 1, this can be much smaller than the size of higher energy excited states and so it might well be possible that the radial integrals in the bound and free cases are essentially identical except for the normalization constant $`𝒩_{n_r,l}`$.

Using the relation 16 between $`E_{n_r,l}`$ and $`k_{n_r,l}`$ it is easy to show that

$$\underset{n_r}{}k𝑑k/(\mu \mathrm{\Delta }E),$$
(20)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ is the energy difference appearing in Eq. 18 for energies related to $`k`$ by Eq. 16. Then, using (6) and (11),

$$\underset{n_r}{}F_{n_r,l}(q)𝑑kF_l(k,q)/(2\pi ).$$
(21)
These approximate relations hold for any set of $`n_r^{}s`$ provided the integral on the right is over the corresponding range of $`k^{}s`$, in the sense that the range of energies covered on the two sides is the same. This of course is just a statement of asymptotic freedom. Note that it holds for groups of states with a single definite angular momentum $`l`$, so that the correspondence is local in angular momentum as well as energy.

It has been stated somewhat vaguely above that the above results hold for small enough $`r`$ and high enough energy. It would be useful to have a more quantitative estimate of the errors and a scheme for correcting them. One method of calculating corrections has been discussed by Rinat et al Gurvits and Rinat (1993). Another, of more direct application to the approach here, using radial wave functions, can be obtained from the integral equation for the radial wave function Calogero (1967)

$`\widehat{u}_{n_r,l}(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{j}_l(k_{n_r,l}r)(1/k_{n_r,l}){\displaystyle _0^r}𝑑r^{}[\widehat{j}_l(k_{n_r,l}r)\widehat{n}_l(k_{n_r,l}r^{})\widehat{j}_l(k_{n_r,l}r^{})\widehat{n}_l(k_{n_r,l}r)]`$ (22)
$`2\mu V(r^{})\widehat{u}_{n_r,l}(r^{}),`$
where $`\widehat{n}_l(x)`$ is the Ricatti-Bessel function of the 2nd kind and $`\widehat{u}_{n_r,l}(r)`$ is an un-normalized version of $`u`$ which equals $`\widehat{j}_l(k_{n_r,l}r)`$ for very small $`r`$. (In this equation $`\widehat{u}`$ is normalizable only if $`k_{n_r,l}`$ corresponds to an energy eigenvalue.) This integral equation shows clearly that the error in the proportionality between $`u`$ and $`\widehat{j}_l`$ generally increases with $`r`$ and the strength of $`V`$ , but decreases as $`k_{n_r,l}`$ increases. It can be used to develop a perturbation expansion for the correction, the leading correction being simply the integral term in (22) with $`\widehat{u}_{n_r,l}(r^{})`$ replaced by $`\widehat{j}_l(k_{n_r,l}r^{})`$. This expansion must, of course, diverge at large $`r`$, but it can be used to estimate the accuracy of the proportionality (19) and thus of local duality itself. A simple change of variables, for example, shows that for an $`r^n`$ potential the leading correction decreases as $`1/k_{n_r,l}^{n+2}`$ .

## IV Harmonic Oscillator Examples

In the case of the harmonic oscillator potential $`V(r)=\frac{1}{2}Kr^2`$ there are analytic expressions for most of the quantities discussed above. It will be useful to define the usual parameters $`\omega =\sqrt{K/\mu }`$ and $`\alpha =\mu \omega `$, in terms of which $`E_{n_r,l}=\omega (2n_r+l+3/2)`$. The radial wave functions are then given by

$$u_{n_r,l}(r)=N_{n_r,l}\alpha ^{1/4}x^{l+1}L_{n_r}^{l+1/2}(x^2)e^{x^2/2},$$
(23)
where $`L_{n_r}^{l+1/2}`$ is an associated Laguerre polynomial, the dimensionless variable $`x=\sqrt{\alpha }r`$ and the normalization constant is

$$N_{n_r,l}=[2n_r!/\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_r+l+3/2)]^{1/2}.$$
(24)
Since in this case $`k_{n_r,l}=\sqrt{2\alpha (2n_r+l+3/2)}`$ , the relation between the bound and free radial wave functions in terms of dimensionless quantities is

$$u_{n_r,l}(r)/\alpha ^{1/4}2\widehat{j}_l(\sqrt{4n_r+2l+3}x)/[\sqrt{\pi }(4n_r+2l+3)^{1/4}].$$
(25)
An example of this relation is shown in Fig. 1, which shows that the normalized bound state and free particle radial wave functions for the same $`l`$ and energy are indeed almost identical near the the origin, in the region where the ground state radial wave function appearing in the radial integrals is large.

For the oscillator the radial integrals have simple analytic expression:

$$r_{n_r,l}(q)=\sqrt{2^{n_r+l}/[n_r!(2n_r+2l+1)!!]}(p/2)^{2n_r+l}e^{p^2/4},$$
(26)
and

$$r_l(k,q)=2\sqrt{2}\kappa (\pi /\alpha )^{1/4}e^{(\kappa ^2+p^2)/2}i_l(\kappa p),$$
(27)
where $`p=q/(2\sqrt{\alpha })`$ and $`\kappa =k/\sqrt{\alpha }`$ are dimensionless momenta and $`i_l`$ is a modified spherical Bessel function of the first kind. These two functions are plotted in Fig. 2 for the particular case of $`n_r=5`$ and $`l=2`$.

With these expressions for $`r_{n_r,l}(q)`$ and $`r_l(k,q)`$ we can use (5) and (10) to obtain expressions for $`F_{n_r,l}(q)`$ and $`F_l(k,q)`$. These can be summed over $`l`$ to obtain the structure functions for transitions to all states at a definite energy:

$`F_n(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n_r,l}{}}\delta _{n,2n_r+l}F_{n_r,l}`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`[e_1^2+e_2^2+2e_1e_2(1)^n](1/n!)(p^2/2)^ne^{p^2/2}`$
and

$`F(k,q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}F_l(k,q)`$ (29)
$`=`$ $`[e_1^2+e_2^2]\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\sqrt{\pi /\alpha }(\kappa /p)[e^{(\kappa p)^2}e^{(\kappa +p)^2}]`$
$`+2e_1e_2\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}\sqrt{\pi /\alpha }\kappa ^2e^{p^2\kappa ^2}.`$
It should be noted that for large momentum transfers the $`l`$-dependence of the terms in the sums above becomes Gaussian: $`(2l+1)exp(l^2/2n)`$ in (28) and $`(2l+1)exp(l^2/\kappa p)`$ in (29 ). This means that the number of terms which contribute significantly to the sums is only a few times $`\sqrt{2n}`$ or, equivalently, $`\sqrt{\kappa p}`$, respectively, so that the difference between the finite sum in (28) and the infinite sum in (29) is not significant. This limit on the angular momenta of the internal states produced can be easily understood by noting that the impact parameters involved cannot be greater than the size of the initial bound state. The expression for $`F_n(q)`$ shows how the contributions from alternate energy levels tend to cancel for the $`e_1e_2`$ interference term. For $`F(k,q)`$, on the other hand, the interference term is always small for large values of momentum transfer. Furthermore, for large $`p`$ only the $`exp[(\kappa p)^2]`$ term can be large which, as will become clearer below, gives scaling of the structure function. These structure functions, of course, satisfy the sum rules

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}F_n(q)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑k/(2\pi )F(k,q)=e_1^2+e_2^2+2e_1e_2S(q),$$
(30)
where here the form factor $`S(q)=e^{p^2}`$ , showing exactly how the interference term vanishes as $`q`$ increases Close and Isgur (2001).

In comparing the two structure functions $`F_n(q)`$ and $`F(k,q)`$ the fact that in the former the energy levels are discrete, while in the latter they form a continuum, must be addressed. Here the $`nth`$ excited discrete level is given a half-width $`a_n`$ in $`ϵ`$, the energy in units of $`\omega `$. This is done by defining

$$F(a,ϵ,q)=F_0(q)\delta (ϵϵ_0)+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}F_n(q)\delta _{a_n}(ϵϵ_n),$$
(31)
where $`ϵ_n=n+3/2`$, and $`\delta _a`$ is a finite-width version of the Dirac delta function $`\delta `$ :

$$\delta _a(ϵϵ_n)=(a/\pi )/[(ϵϵ_n)^2+a^2].$$
(32)
In general we expect the widths $`a_n`$ of the individual resonance peaks to increases with $`n`$ . Furthermore, if

$$F(ϵ,q)=(\alpha /(2\pi k))F(k,q),$$
(33)
where $`ϵ`$ and $`k`$ are related by $`ϵ=k^2/(2\alpha )`$, then the integral over $`ϵ`$ from zero to infinity for both $`F(a,ϵ,q)`$ and $`F(ϵ,q)`$ equals the right-hand expression in (30). (This equality is approximate for $`F(a,ϵ,q)`$ because the tails of the $`F(a,ϵ,q)`$ extend into the negative $`ϵ`$ region.) The two $`F`$-functions are plotted in Fig. 3 for the case where $`e_1=e_2=e`$, for which the square bracket in (28) is alternately $`4e^2`$ and $`0`$ : the contributions from the two particles cancel or add coherently for odd and even parity states respectively Close and Isgur (2001).

Note that the peaks of the smooth(ed) curves appear approximately at $`ϵ=p^2/2`$ and that the widths in $`ϵ`$ increases nearly linearly with $`p`$. (The heights of the curves therefore decrease inversely with $`p`$.) Thus plotting $`pF`$ versus a scaling variable $`y=(ϵp^2/2)/p`$ /, gives curves of a nearly Gaussian shape almost independent of $`p`$ as $`p\mathrm{}`$, as shown in Figure 4. This scaling variable is, aside from a trivial factor, just the $`y`$ variable of West West (1975), and corresponds to the component of a parton’s momentum in the $`𝐪`$ direction before the collision.

We can also calculate the first order correction to the approximations in which the bound state wave functions for the oscillator are proportional to spherical Bessel functions. The first two terms in the expansion can be written as

$$v_{n_r,l}(x)=v_{n_r,l}^{(0)}(x)+v_{n_r,l}^{(1)}(x),$$
(34)
where

$$v_{n_r,l}^{(0)}(x)=\widehat{j}_l(x)$$
(35)
and

$$v_{n_r,l}^{(1)}(x)=[1/(4n_r+2l+3)^2]_0^x𝑑x^{}[\widehat{j}_l(x)\widehat{n}_l(x^{})\widehat{j}_l(x^{})\widehat{n}_l(x)]x^2\widehat{j}_l(x^{}),$$
(36)
with $`x=k_{n_r,l}r`$. An indication of the size of the errors and the accuracy of the leading correction above for the case $`n_r=5`$ and $`l=2`$ are shown in Fig. 5. It is clear that the corrections are small in the region where the ground state wave function is large, but including them does improve the accuracy of the expression (19), especially at larger values of $`r`$. Note, however, that the corrections diverge rapidly at very large $`r`$.

## V Conclusion

In the non-relativistic case asymptotic freedom and scaling are automatic for high energy transfers provided the confining potential approaches zero smoothly as $`r0`$. This result is almost trivial since the system is effectively free at small separations. Only the relative normalizations of the terms in the sums for the bound states and the integrals in the free case require additional argument from the WKB approximation or, equivalently, the correspondence principle.

As is well known, the resulting structure functions are essentially the same for the confined and free cases, except for the resonance-like bumps in the former, and for large momentum transfers depends only on the scaling variable $`y=(ϵp^2/2)/p\kappa p`$, as shown in Fig. 3.

It would be of interest to extend these results to more general potentials and to semi-relativistic calculations Lucha et al. (1991). For example, how would the results be modified for the frequently-used Coulomb-plus-linear confining potential Eichten et al. (1978), or for various relativistic extensions Isgur et al. (2001); Godfrey and Isgur (1983); Jeschonnek and Orden (2002)? Another possible extension would be to many-body systems, including the nucleon and nuclei West (1975).

## VI Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank Professor Dieter Drechsel and his colleagues in the Theory Group at the Institut für Kernphysik at the Univerität Mainz, where this work was done, for stimulating his interest in this topic and for their hospitality.