text:
# On the existence of global solutions for 𝑇³-Gowdy spacetimes with stringy matter

## 1 Introduction

The singularity theorem states that generic spacetimes have a singularity (spacetimes with incomplete geodesics). If the singularity can be seen, i.e. there exists a naked singularity, the predictability is violated. Thus, the strong cosmic censorship conjecture proposed by Penrose is the most important (and an unsolved) problem in classical general relativity. Roughly speaking, the conjecture states that naked singularities should not evolve from regular initial data. However, this statement remains elusive. Then, a sharp formulation that seems provable is given as follows:

###### Conjecture 1

\[AL99, CD, KN, ME\] Let $`M`$ be a partial Cauchy surface and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$ are matter fields on $`M`$. Then for generic data sets $`(M,h,k,\mathrm{\Phi }_i)`$, where $`h`$ and $`k`$ are the first and second fundamental forms of $`M`$, the maximal Cauchy development of $`(M,h,k,\mathrm{\Phi }_i)`$ is equal to the maximal extension of $`(M,h,k,\mathrm{\Phi }_i)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

To answer this problem we must prove (1) a global existence theorem for the Einstein-matter equations with a suitable time coordinate and (2) inextendibility of the maximal Cauchy development of initial data. This paper is mainly related to the above problem (1). It is very difficult to answer the conjecture in general by using present mathematical techniques. Then, it is necessary to make some simplifications, which are symmetry assumptions or restriction on initial data.

For the case of small initial data without symmetry assumptions, partial results for this problem are provided by Christodoulou-Klainerman theorem which states that any asymptotically flat initial data set which is sufficiently close to the trivial one has a complete maximal future development \[CK, KN\]. Recently, Andersson and Moncrief have shown that for a vacuum data set which is sufficiently close to the data in a spatially compact (local) open Friedmann-Robertson-Walker spacetime, the maximal Cauchy development is causally geodesically complete in the expanding direction \[AL99\] (see also Ref. \[R02\]).

For the case of large initial data with symmetry assumptions, some results have been obtained. (Hereafter, models we consider are restricted to spatially compact spacetimes.) The first result for inhomogeneous cosmological spacetimes was proved by Moncrief \[M81\]. He proved a global existence theorem for $`T^3`$-Gowdy spacetimes (which are vacuum spacetimes with $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ symmetry and whose spatial topology is $`T^3`$) in the areal coordinate (defined in section 2). This result has been generalized to the case with non-vanishing twist \[BCIM\] or with Vlasov matter \[AH\]. A result on global existence in the areal time has also been obtained for hyperbolic symmetric spacetimes with Vlasov matter \[ARR\].

Although the areal time coordinate is well-chosen one in the sense that it is geometrically defined, this coordinate choice strongly depends on spacetime symmetry. The most attractive (and independent on spacetime symmetry) time coordinate is the constant mean curvature (CMC) one. CMC foliations can avoid a crushing singularity which is one where there is a foliation on a neighborhood of the singularity whose mean curvature tends uniformly to infinity as the singularity is approaches \[ES\]. It was shown from Hawking’s singularity theorem that the crushing singularity is either a true singularity or a boundary of maximal Cauchy development, i.e., a Cauchy horizon. Thus, the existence of CMC foliations is closely related to conjecture 1. Indeed, it has been conjectured as follows:

###### Conjecture 2

\[ME\] Every maximally extended, globally hyperbolic spacetime can be foliated by CMC hypersurfaces. $`\mathrm{}`$

A global existence theorem in the CMC time coordinate for $`T^3`$-Gowdy spacetimes was proved in Ref. \[IM\]. Recently, this result has been generalized to the case of local $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ symmetric spacetimes with Vlasov or wave-map matter \[R97, H02b\]. Results on global existence in the CMC time have been shown for hyperbolic symmetric spacetimes with Maxwell field or Vlasov matter \[H02a, ARR\].

Note that the choice of matter models is serious. For some matter models (Vlasov matter, Maxwell field and wave map), there are global existence theorems as above. Contrary, a global non-existence result have been obtained for the Einstein-dust system \[IR\]. Therefore, it would be worth to investigate global existence problems for several matter models, in particular, systems of nonlinear and fundamental fields equations.

The purpose of the present paper is generalization of the above results, that is, to show global existence theorems for the $`T^3`$-Gowdy symmetric spacetimes with stringy matter fields. From the unified theoretical point of view, there are many reasons to believe that the distinction between fundamental fields (i. e. gravitational and matter fields) interactions is impossible in asymptotic regions (e. g. near singularities) of spacetimes and the most consistent theory along these line is superstring/M-theory. Therefore, the matter fields we will consider are Maxwell-dilaton-axion fields which arise naturally from low-energy effective superstring theory \[ON\]. This system is nonlinear even if the background spacetime is flat since there is a dilaton coupling. One of the main results of this paper is a global existence theorem for such system in the areal time coordinate (Theorem 1) and another of them is one in the CMC time coordinate (Theorem 2).

In section 2, we will review $`T^3`$-Gowdy symmetric spacetimes in the Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton-axion (EMDA) system and derive the Einstein-matter equations. In section 3, we shall show a global existence theorem for the system in the areal time coordinate. In section 4, it is shown that a global existence theorem for the system in the CMC time coordinate. In section 5, we discuss on inextendibility of the spacetime.

## 2 $`T^3`$-Gowdy symmetric spacetimes in the Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton-axion system

The action of the EMDA theory \[STW\] is

$`S=S_G+S_M,`$ (1)
$`S_G={\displaystyle d^4x\sqrt{g}\left[^{(4)}R\right]},`$ (2)
$`S_M:={\displaystyle d^4x\sqrt{g}\left[e^{2a_M\varphi }F^2+2\left(\varphi \right)^2+\frac{1}{3}e^{4a_A\varphi }H^2\right]}={\displaystyle d^4x_M},`$ (3)
where $`g`$ is the determinant of a 4-dimensional spacetime metric $`g_{ab}`$, $`{}_{}{}^{(4)}R`$ is the Ricci scalar for $`g_{ab}`$, $`F`$ is the Maxwell field, $`\varphi `$ is the dilaton field, $`H=dB\frac{1}{2}e^{4a\varphi }d\kappa `$ is the three-index antisymmetric tensor field dual to the axion field $`\kappa `$, and $`a_M`$ and $`a_A`$ are coupling constants. For simplicity, the Chern-Simon term is neglected. Varying the action (1) with respect to the functions, we get the Einstein-matter equations.

The metric of Gowdy symmetric spacetimes \[GR\] is given by

$$ds^2=e^{\lambda (t,\theta )/2}t^{1/2}(dt^2+d\theta ^2)+R(t,\theta )\left[e^{Z(t,\theta )}\left(dy+X(t,\theta )dz\right)^2+e^{Z(t,\theta )}dz^2\right].$$
(4)
Gowdy symmetric spacetimes have two twist free spacelike Killing vectors $`/y`$ and $`/z`$. Properties of the metric (4) depend on whether $`R`$ is timelike, spacelike or null. When the metric (4) describes a cosmological model, i.e. $`R`$ is globally timelike and the spatial topology is $`T^3`$ (periodic in $`\theta `$), one can take the function $`R(t,\theta )=t`$ without loss of generality by Gowdy’s corner theorem if the spacetime is vacuum \[GR, M81\]. This fact be seen from Einstein’s equations,

$$G_{tt}G_{\theta \theta }=\ddot{R}R^{\prime \prime }=0,$$
(5)
where dot and prime denote $`t`$ and $`\theta `$ derivatives, respectively. In the EMDA system, equation (5) is not satisfied generically. However, in the case that the Maxwell field strength $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu `$ has only the following components \[MP\],

$$F_{ty}=\dot{\omega }(t,\theta ),F_{\theta y}=\omega ^{}(t,\theta ),F_{tz}=\dot{\chi }(t,\theta ),F_{\theta z}=\chi ^{}(t,\theta ),$$

and $`\varphi =\varphi (t,\theta )`$ and $`\kappa =\kappa (t,\theta )`$, equation (5) is satisfied. As similar as the $`T^3`$-vacuum case, one can take the function $`R(t,\theta )=t`$ without loss of generality. In this gauge choice, the spacetimes have spacelike singularities at $`t=0`$. We call this gauge the areal time coordinate since $`R`$ is proportional to the geometric area function of the orbit of the isometry group.

We should mention on another important choice for the Maxwell field. In \[WIB\], it was taken that $`\omega `$ and $`\chi `$ are zero but one of the other components of the Maxwell field is non-zero. This spacetime is called “magnetic Gowdy spacetime” and concerns the complementary case with ours.

In this coordinate we obtain the Einstein-matter equations as follows:

$`\dot{\lambda }t[\dot{Z}^2+Z^2+e^{2Z}(\dot{X}^2+X^2)]=4tT_{tt},`$ (6)
where

$`T_{tt}`$ $`=`$ $`(\dot{\varphi }^2+\varphi ^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}e^{4a_A\varphi }(\dot{\kappa }^2+\kappa ^2)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}e^{2a_M\varphi }[e^Z\{(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })^2+(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})^2\}+e^Z(\dot{\omega }^2+\omega ^2)]`$
$`=`$ $`T_{\theta \theta },`$
$`\lambda ^{}2t[\dot{Z}Z^{}+e^{2Z}\dot{X}X^{}]=8tT_{t\theta },`$ (8)
where

$`T_{t\theta }=\dot{\varphi }\varphi ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}e^{4a_A\varphi }\dot{\kappa }\kappa ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}e^{2a_M\varphi }\{e^Z(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})+e^Z\dot{\omega }\omega ^{}\},`$ (9)
$`t^2\ddot{Z}+t\dot{Z}t^2Z^{\prime \prime }`$ $`+`$ $`t^2e^{2Z}(\dot{X}^2X^2)`$ (10)
$``$ $`2te^{2a_M\varphi }[e^Z\{(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })^2(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})^2\}+e^Z(\dot{\omega }^2\omega ^2)]=0,`$
$`t^2\ddot{X}+t\dot{X}t^2X^{\prime \prime }2t^2(\dot{X}\dot{Z}X^{}Z^{})4te^{2a_M\varphi }e^Z[(\dot{\omega }^2\omega ^2)X(\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi }\omega ^{}\chi ^{})]=0,`$ (11)
$`t^2\ddot{\varphi }+t\dot{\varphi }t^2\varphi ^{\prime \prime }`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{a_A}{2}}t^2e^{4a_A\varphi }(\dot{\kappa }^2\kappa ^2)`$ (12)
$`+`$ $`a_Mte^{2a_M\varphi }[e^Z\{(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })^2(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})^2\}+e^Z(\dot{\omega }^2\omega ^2)]=0,`$
$`t^2\ddot{\kappa }+t\dot{\kappa }t^2\kappa ^{\prime \prime }+4a_At^2(\dot{\varphi }\dot{\kappa }\varphi ^{}\kappa ^{})=0,`$ (13)
$`\ddot{\chi }\chi ^{\prime \prime }(\dot{Z}+2a_M\dot{\varphi })\dot{\chi }+(Z^{}+2a_M\varphi ^{})\chi ^{}`$ $`+`$ $`(2X\dot{Z}\dot{X})\dot{\omega }(2XZ^{}X^{})\omega ^{}`$ (14)
$`+`$ $`e^{2Z}X\{\dot{X}(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })+X^{}(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})\}=0,`$
$`\ddot{\omega }\omega ^{\prime \prime }+(\dot{Z}2a_M\dot{\varphi })\dot{\omega }(Z^{}2a_M\varphi ^{})\omega ^{}+e^{2Z}\{\dot{X}(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })+X^{}(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})\}=0,`$ (15)
where $`T^{ab}:=\frac{2}{\sqrt{g}}\frac{\delta _M}{\delta g_{ab}}`$ is the energy-momentum tensor. Hereafter, we call the above system the $`T^3`$-Gowdy symmetric EMDA system.

Note that the metric function $`\lambda `$ is decoupled with other functions. The function appears only in the Hamiltonian and momentum constraints (6) and (8). Then, we can calculate the metric function $`\lambda `$ by evaluating the integral of $`\lambda ^{}`$ from $`\pi `$ to $`\pi `$ after obtaining other functions from the evolution equations (10)-(15).

## 3 Global existence theorem in the areal coordinate

For simplicity, we will assume that the initial data are $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ on $`T^3`$. In this circumstance we can show the following global existence theorem.

###### Theorem 1

Let $`(,g,\varphi ,\kappa ,A)`$ be the maximal globally hyperbolic development of the initial data for the Gowdy symmetric EMDA system. Then, $``$ can be foliated by areal coordinate with $`t(0,\mathrm{})`$.

Proof of Theorem 1: The local existence and uniqueness of smooth solutions of the partial differential equation system (10)-(15) follows from standard results for hyperbolic system \[AS, CBG, FR, HL\]. Then, it is sufficient to verify that for any globally hyperbolic subset of the $`(t,\theta )`$ cylinder on which they exist as a solution to (10)-(15), the functions $`(Z,X,\varphi ,\kappa ,\chi ,\omega )`$ and their first and second derivatives are uniformly bounded \[MA\]. To do this, we will use light cone estimate \[AH, BCIM, M81, M97\].

Let us now define the quadratic forms $`𝒢`$ and $``$ by

$`𝒢`$ $`:=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t\left[\dot{Z}^2+Z^2+e^{2Z}\left(\dot{X}^2+X^2\right)\right]`$ (16)
$`+2e^{2a_M\varphi }\left[e^Z\{(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })^2+(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})^2\}+e^Z(\dot{\omega }^2+\omega ^2)\right]`$
$`+2t\left(\dot{\varphi }^2+\varphi ^2\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}e^{4a_A\varphi }t\left(\dot{\kappa }^2+\kappa ^2\right),`$
and

$`:=t\left[\dot{Z}Z^{}+e^{2Z}\dot{X}X^{}\right]+4e^{2a_M\varphi }\{e^Z(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})+e^Z\dot{\omega }\omega ^{}\}+4t\dot{\varphi }\varphi ^{}+te^{4a_A\varphi }\dot{\kappa }\kappa ^{}.`$ (17)
Deriving $`𝒢`$ and $``$ with respect to $`t`$ and $`\theta `$ and using the evolution equations (10)-(15), after long calculation, we have the following inequalities.

$`\sqrt{2}_\eta (𝒢+)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\dot{Z}^2+Z^2+e^{2Z}(\dot{X}^2+X^2)\right]+2\left[\dot{\varphi }^2+\varphi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}e^{4a_A\varphi }(\dot{\kappa }^2+\kappa ^2)\right]`$ (18)
$`:=`$ $`J{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}𝒢,`$
and

$`\sqrt{2}_\xi (𝒢)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\dot{Z}^2+Z^2+e^{2Z}(\dot{X}^2+X^2)\right]+2\left[\dot{\varphi }^2+\varphi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}e^{4a_A\varphi }(\dot{\kappa }^2+\kappa ^2)\right]`$ (19)
$`:=`$ $`L{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}𝒢,`$
where $`_\xi :=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(_t+_\theta )`$ and $`_\eta :=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(_t_\theta )`$.

At first, let us consider the future (expanding) direction. Integrating these equations (18) and (19) along null paths starting at $`(\widehat{\theta },\widehat{t})`$ and ending at the initial $`t_0`$-surface (i.e. from the future into the past) and adding them we have

$`𝒢(\widehat{\theta },\widehat{t})`$ $`=`$ $`𝒢(\widehat{\theta }+t_0\widehat{t},t_0)+𝒢(\widehat{\theta }t_0+\widehat{t},t_0)`$ (20)
$`+`$ $`(\widehat{\theta }+t_0\widehat{t},t_0)(\widehat{\theta }t_0+\widehat{t},t_0)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _{t_0}^{\widehat{t}}}[J(\widehat{\theta }+s\widehat{t},s)+L(\widehat{\theta }s+\widehat{t},s)]𝑑s.`$
Next, we take supremums over all values of $`\theta `$ on the both sides of the equation (20). Then, we have

$`\underset{\theta }{sup}𝒢(\theta ,\widehat{t})`$ $``$ $`2\underset{\theta }{sup}𝒢(\theta ,t_0)+2\underset{\theta }{sup}(\theta ,t_0)`$ (21)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _{t_0}^{\widehat{t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{s}}\underset{\theta }{sup}𝒢(\theta ,s)ds,`$
where we used the estimates (18) and (19). We can apply the following lemma to (21).

###### Lemma 1 (Gronwall’s lemma \[HL\])

Suppose that $`\varphi (t)`$, $`a(t)`$, $`b(t)0`$. If

$$\varphi (t)a(t)+_{t_0}^tb(s)\varphi (s)𝑑s,$$

then,

$$\varphi (t)a(t)+_{t_0}^ta(r)b(r)\mathrm{exp}_r^tb(s)𝑑s𝑑r.$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

By Lemma 1, we get the following inequality

$`\underset{\theta }{sup}𝒢(\theta ,\widehat{t})2[\underset{\theta }{sup}𝒢(\theta ,t_0)+\underset{\theta }{sup}(\theta ,t_0)]\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _{t_0}^{\widehat{t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{s}}𝑑s).`$ (22)
From equation (22), since $`\mathrm{exp}(_{t_0}^{\widehat{t}}\frac{1}{s}𝑑s)`$ is bounded, we get the desired bound on $`\dot{Z}`$, $`Z^{}`$, $`e^Z\dot{X}`$, $`e^ZX^{}`$, $`e^{a_M\varphi \frac{1}{2}Z}(X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi })`$, $`e^{a_M\varphi \frac{1}{2}Z}(X\omega ^{}\chi ^{})`$, $`e^{a_M\varphi +\frac{1}{2}Z}\dot{\omega }`$, $`e^{a_M\varphi +\frac{1}{2}Z}\omega ^{}`$, $`\dot{\varphi }`$, $`\varphi ^{}`$, $`e^{2a_A\varphi }\dot{\kappa }`$ and $`e^{2a_A\varphi }\kappa ^{}`$ for all $`t(t_0,\mathrm{})`$.

Once we have bounds on the first derivatives of $`Z`$ and $`\varphi `$, it follows that $`Z`$ and $`\varphi `$ are bounded for all $`t(t_0,\mathrm{})`$ as well since

$$u(t,x)=u(t_0,x)+_{t_0}^t_su(s,x)ds,$$

where $`u(t,x)`$ is a function. Then, we have bounds on $`\dot{X}`$, $`X^{}`$, $`X\dot{\omega }\dot{\chi }`$, $`X\omega ^{}\chi ^{}`$, $`\dot{\omega }`$, $`\omega ^{}`$, $`\dot{\kappa }`$ and $`\kappa ^{}`$. Consequently, we obtain bounds on $`X`$, $`\omega `$ and $`\kappa `$ and furthermore, we have bounds on $`\dot{\chi }`$ and $`\chi ^{}`$. Finally, we have bounds on $`\chi `$. Thus, it has shown the boundedness of the zeroth and first derivatives of all the function except for $`\lambda `$.

Next, we must show bounds on the second derivatives of the functions. There is a well-known general fact that in order to ensure the continued existence of a solution of a system of semilinear wave equations it is enough to bound the first derivative pointwise (see Theorem 1.1 of Chapter III and page 42 of Ref. \[AS\]). Our system is a special case of that. Then, we have boundedness of the higher derivatives.

The same argument can be applied into the past (contracting) direction. By the constraint equations (6) and (8), boundedness for the function $`\lambda `$ is also shown. Indeed, we have the following equations:

$`\dot{\lambda }=P\mathrm{and}\lambda ^{}=Q.`$ (23)
Since $`P`$ and $`Q`$ are bounded as we have already seen, $`\dot{\lambda }`$ and $`\lambda ^{}`$ are bounded. Then, we have shown that the first derivatives of $`\lambda `$ must be bounded uniformly for all $`0<t<\mathrm{}`$. Consequently, $`\lambda `$ itself also is bounded. Concerning the second derivative of $`\lambda `$, we can apply the argument of Alinhac \[AS\] again. Then, we have uniform $`C^2`$ bounds on all of the functions for all $`t(0,\mathrm{})`$.

Finally, we must demand that the function $`\lambda `$ is compatible with the periodicity in $`\theta `$. The following argument is similar with Moncrief’s one \[M81\]. This is true if $`\lambda (t,\pi )=\lambda (t,\pi )`$ over the interval of existence. Integrating equation (8) for the interval $`\theta [\pi ,\pi ]`$, we have a constraint

$`{\displaystyle _\pi ^\pi }𝑑\theta \{t[\dot{Z}Z^{}+e^{2Z}\dot{X}X^{}]4tT_{t\theta }\}=0.`$ (24)
This constraint condition need only be imposed on the initial Cauchy surface since this integral is conservation on any time interval if all other functions satisfy the periodicity condition. This fact follows from the constraint equations (6) and (8):

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\{t[\dot{Z}Z^{}+e^{2Z}\dot{X}X^{}]4tT_{t\theta }\}={\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta }}\{{\displaystyle \frac{t}{2}}[\dot{Z}^2+Z^2+e^{2Z}(\dot{X}^2+X^2)]2tT_{tt}\}.`$ (25)
Thus, we have completed the proof of Theorem 1. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Existence of constant mean curvature foliations

For vacuum $`T^3`$-Gowdy spacetimes it has been proved that conjecture 2 is valid \[IM\]. In that paper, the important idea is that one can apply the estimates for the functions in the areal time coordinate to show the existence of CMC foliations. Using the same argument with Ref. \[IM\], we can show a global existence theorem in the CMC time coordinate for the $`T^3`$-Gowdy symmetric EMDA system.

For the Gowdy symmetric spacetime the Einstein-matter equations imply that

$`trK(t)=e^{\frac{\lambda }{4}}t^{\frac{1}{4}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\dot{\lambda }+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4t}}\right]=e^{\frac{\lambda }{4}}t^{\frac{1}{4}}_t,`$ (26)
where $`trK(t)`$ is mean curvature of a compact Cauchy surface $`S_t`$ and

$`_t:={\displaystyle \frac{3}{4t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{t}{4}}\left[\dot{Z}^2+Z^2+e^{2Z}(\dot{X}^2+X^2)\right]+tT_{tt}.`$ (27)
From the positivity (see equation (2)) and bounds on the functions of right-hand-side of equation (27), we have the following estimate.

$`\underset{S_t}{inf}(trK(t))Ct^{\frac{3}{4}},`$ (28)
for some constant $`C`$ and for all $`0<t<t_0`$. This means that the spacetime has a crushing singularity as $`t0`$ since the mean curvature goes to infinity uniformly \[ME, M81\].

Cosmological spacetimes imply that spatially compact, globally hyperbolic spacetimes satisfying the strong energy condition \[BR\]. Gerhardt has shown that in cosmological spacetimes if there exists a foliation whose mean curvature tends uniformly to infinity, there is a CMC foliation with same property \[GC\]. Then, the past region of the initial hypersurface $`S_{t_0}`$, $`D^{}(S_{t_0})`$, is covered by CMC hypersurfaces.

Next, we must show that $`D^+(S_{t_0})`$ also can be covered by CMC hypersurfaces. To do this the following lemma is useful. Note that, from the previous argument, we have one initial CMC hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\tau _0}`$ in $`D^{}(S_{t_0})`$.

###### Lemma 2

Suppose that $`(D^+(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\tau _0}),g,\varphi ,\kappa ,\chi )`$ be a maximally extended, globally hyperbolic development of the initial data $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\tau _0}`$ of $`T^3`$-Gowdy symmetric spacetime in the EMDA system. Then, $`(D^+(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\tau _0}),g,\varphi ,\kappa ,\chi )`$ admit a unique, monotonic CMC foliation $`i_\tau `$ which covers $`(D^+(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\tau _0}),g,\varphi ,\kappa ,\chi )`$.

Proof of Lemma 2: The argument is very similar with one of the proof of Lemma 1 of Ref. \[IM\]. It is well known that there is a unique, monotonic, local CMC foliation of $`(D^+(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\tau _0}),g,\varphi ,\kappa ,\chi )`$ defined near the initial hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\tau _0}`$ \[MT\] and that the spacelike Killing fields must be tangent to CMC hypersurfaces \[AL99\].

First, we shall show that this foliation is uniformly spacelike. If $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau =i_\tau (T^3)`$ is a CMC hypersurface in the local foliation, there is a smooth function $`h_\tau :S^1R^+`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ is defined in the coordinates $`(t,\theta ,y,z)`$ by $`t=h_\tau (\theta )[t_0,t_1]`$ and $`h_\tau `$ satisfies the following equation:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\theta }}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\frac{\lambda }{4}}t^{\frac{1}{4}}h_\tau h_\tau ^{}}{(1(h_\tau ^2))^{1/2}}}\right]=e^{\frac{\lambda }{4}}t^{\frac{1}{4}}h_\tau \left[(1(h_\tau ^2))^{1/2}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\dot{\lambda }+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4t}})+trKe^{\frac{\lambda }{4}}t^{\frac{1}{4}}\right]|_{t=h_\tau (\theta )},`$ (29)
where $`h_\tau ^{}:=\frac{dh_\tau }{d\theta }`$, $`\lambda =\lambda (h_\tau (\theta ),\theta )`$ and $`trK`$ is the (constant) mean curvature of the embedded hypersurface. If $`h_\tau ^{}<1`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ is spacelike since the induce metric $`\gamma _\tau `$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ is

$`\gamma _\tau =e^{\frac{\lambda }{2}}t^{\frac{1}{2}}(1(h_\tau ^2))d\theta ^2+t\left[e^{Z(t,\theta )}\left(dy+X(t,\theta )dz\right)^2+e^{Z(t,\theta )}dz^2\right].`$ (30)
Integrating equation (29) from $`\theta _0`$ to $`\theta _1`$, we get

$`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\frac{\lambda }{4}}t^{\frac{1}{4}}h_\tau h_\tau ^{}}{(1(h_\tau ^2))^{1/2}}}\right||_{\theta =\theta _1}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\theta \left[e^{\frac{\lambda }{4}}t^{\frac{1}{4}}h_\tau \left[(1(h_\tau ^2))^{1/2}_t+trKe^{\frac{\lambda }{4}}t^{\frac{1}{4}}\right]\right]|_{t=h_\tau (\theta )},`$ (31)
where $`\theta _1`$ is arbitrary and we can choose that $`h_\tau ^{}(\theta _0)=0`$. From the boundedness of the right-hand-side of equation (31) and the fact that $`h_\tau (\theta )[t_0,t_1](0,\mathrm{})`$, we have that $`\frac{h_\tau ^{}}{(1(h_\tau ^2))^{1/2}}`$ is bounded by a constant and then, the estimate $`h_\tau ^{}<1`$ is obtained. Thus, the CMC hypersurfaces are uniformly spacelike.

The above argument holds for any $`[t_0,t_1](0,\mathrm{})`$. Then, the local foliation $`i_\tau `$ can be extended to $`t\mathrm{}`$. Next, we shall show that the leaves $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\tau `$ cannot approach the boundary at $`t\mathrm{}`$ without foliating a full neighborhood of the boundary. Since $`\theta [0,2\pi )`$ and $`h_\tau ^{}<1`$, we have

$$0\underset{i_\tau (T^3)}{sup}(t)\underset{i_\tau (T^3)}{inf}(t)2\pi .$$

Then, the hypersurface $`i_\tau (T^3)`$ cannot approach the boundary at $`t\mathrm{}`$ without foliating a full neighborhood of the boundary. (See also the proof of theorem 6.2 of \[ARR\].) $`\mathrm{}`$

Lemma 2 states that future Cauchy development of the initial Cauchy surface is cover by CMC foliations. Combining the result from Gerhardt’s theorem, which states that past Cauchy development of the initial Cauchy surface is cover by CMC foliations, we have the following theorem which supports the validity of conjecture 2.

###### Theorem 2

The spacetime can be covered by hypersurfaces of CMC, $`trK(t)(0,\mathrm{})`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 Discussion

The remaining open question to prove the conjecture 1 is to prove the inextendibility of the spacetime. This can be divided two questions which are: (1) Does the Kretschmann scalar of the spacetime blow up tend to singularities? (2) Is the spacetime geodesic complete into the future?

For question (1), we have a very useful tool to analyze the nature of singularities, that is, the Fuchsian algorithm developed by Kichenassamy and Rendall \[KR\]. It has been shown that $`T^3`$-Gowdy spacetimes have an asymptotically velocity-terms dominated (AVTD) singularity in general in the sense that a family of solutions depends on the maximal number of arbitrary functions. Recently this result has been generalized to the case of the Einstein-scalar system without symmetry assumptions \[AR\], of the EMDA system with Gowdy symmetry \[NTM\] and of the $`D`$-dimensional Einstein-dilaton-p-form system without symmetry assumptions \[DHRW\]. These spacetimes are inextendible beyond the singularity since the Kretschmann scalar blows up there. We can conclude the inextendibility in general if we can answer the following question: Is there an open set of initial data on a regular Cauchy surface whose singularity is AVTD? For the last question, we have only result for vacuum Gowdy spacetimes \[CIM, RH\]. We may extend the technique in their paper to our case.

Concerning question (2), Rein has obtained a related result for the Einstein-Vlasov system with hyperbolic symmetry \[RG\]. The spacetimes are shown to be causally geodesically complete in the future (expanding) direction if the data satisfy a certain size restriction.

If all of the above were proved, we would complete a proof of the strong cosmic censorship conjecture in the $`T^3`$-Gowdy symmetric EMDA system.

## Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Lars Andersson, Häkan Andreasson, James Isenberg, Alan Rendall for useful discussion and Yoshio Tsutsumi for reading the manuscript and suggesting several improvement. I also want to thank anonymous referees for helpful comments.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The first discoveries of extrasolar planets have triggered a renewal of the permanent question on the possible presence of life outside the Solar System. This question can now be addressed in scientific terms. Before detecting life on exoplanets, it is necessary to detect and characterize these planets. I do here focus on the reflected light and thermal emission approaches of the direct imaging of planets.

## 2 Detection of exoplanets by imaging

Although the most difficult, it is the most promising method for the characterization of planets. I will therefore remind its essential aspects. There are two kinds of emissions by a planet:

1. Reflected light:
The planet reflects the stellar light with a flux ratio given by

$$\frac{F_{refl}(t)}{F_{}}=\frac{A_{pl}}{4}\times \left(\frac{R_{pl}}{a}\right)^2\times \varphi (t)(1)$$

where $`\varphi (P,i,e,\omega ,t)`$ is an orbital phase factor (sinusoïdal in case of a circular orbit) and $`A_{pl}`$ the planet albedo. This ratio peaks at the same visible spectral range than the star itself and is typically $`10^910^{10}`$.
2. Thermal emission:
The planet, heated by the star at a temperature $`T_{pl}=T_{}\times (R_{}/2a)^{1/2}(1A_{pl})^{1/4}`$, emits a thermal flux given by

$$\frac{F_{th}}{F_{}}=\left(\frac{R_{pl}}{2a}\right)^2(2)$$

This ratio peaks at the mid-infrared and is typically $`10^710^7`$, i. e. about $`10^3`$ larger than in the visible range. There is no orbital phase factor here.
Note that the above formulae do not hold for non spherical objects, i.e. planets with large Moons and planets with rings.

## 3 Application of imaging to the characterization of exoplanets

Let us look with more details into the planet characteristics accessible by imaging.

1. Orbit:
If an object is detected close to the star, one wants to determine its orbit. Two orbital positions, together with the observation epochs, i.e. 6 observables $`t_1`$, $`t_2`$, $`x(t_1)`$, $`x(t_2)`$, $`y(t_1)`$, $`x(t_2)`$, are in principle sufficient to determine the 6 orbital parameters $`a`$, $`i`$, $`\omega `$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`T_o`$ and $`e`$. But one has to verify that the object is not a close background star. This requires a third position measurement ($`x(t_3)`$, $`y(t_3)`$) at a third epoch $`t_3`$.

This minimum number at least holds for the thermal emission which is independent from the orbital phase. For the reflected flux, one can take advantage of the phase dependance given by (1) to reduce this number to 2 orbital positions to deduce the orbit parameters. In that case it would indeed by unlikely that a background star had, by coïncidence, a flux variation precisely given by (1). This reduction from 3 to 2 of the number of observations of a star required to assess the existence of a planet is important for missions scenarii and represents a significant advantage of observations in the visible.

2. Mass:
In principle it can be determined only from the dynamical perturbation of the star’s motion by the planet. Nevertheless, from a low spectral resolution spectrum (R=5) in the visible, one can infer whether there is a high, medium or low density atmosphere. From the latter, one can deduce, up to a factor 2-5 (Brown et al 2002), the mass of the planet (low mass planets do not retain their atmosphere, while high mass planets retain thick atmospheres). The thermal infrared is not suited for this type of studies.

3. Radius:
From formula (1) and from the fact that the albedo has an upper limit of 1, the visible flux gives an lower limit for the planet radius; unless a giant planet would have an albedo of 1%, it cannot be confused with an Earth-sized planet. The thermal emission gives, thanks to the formula (2) a safer value for the radius (unless the planet is surrounded by Moons (DesMarais et al 2001) or by rings (Schneider 1999).

4. Temperature:
For reflected light, it can be infered from the star-planet distance and from the albedo through the relation $`T_{pl}=T_{}\times (R_{}/2a)^{1/2}(1A_{pl})^{1/4}`$. But then one has in principle to know the planet albedo. Nevertheless, the latter formula shows that the temperature is not very sensitive to the albedo: a variation of $`A_{pl}`$ from 0.3 to 0.7 gives an decrease of 20% for $`T_{pl}`$. Here again, the thermal infrared gives a direct (and independent) measurement of $`T_{pl}`$, safer than from the reflected flux.

5. Albedo colour $`A(\lambda )`$:
The albedo can only be given by the reflected flux. But, as seen on formula (1), only the product $`A_{pl}\times R_{pl}^2`$ can be directly measured. Nevertheless, the measurement at different wavelengths gives the albedo colour, regardless of its absolute value. By itself this already constitutes a precious indication on the nature of the planet surface, as shown by Brown et al. (2002).

7. Environment:

* Atmosphere:
As already mentionned, the albedo colour gives the amount of Rayleigh scattering, and thus the density of the atmosphere (Brown et al. 2002).
* Clouds:
The most natural explanation of chaotic variations of the albedo would be a variable cloud coverage. Let us note that a similar chaotic variation can also be due to dust storms, like on Mars. In this case, the confusion with clouds can be removed by the colour characteristics of the albedo fluctuations: clouds have a white albedo, while dust is red.
* Rings:
Their existence would be inferred from a non Keplerian variation of the phase factor $`\varphi (t)`$. Indeed, its standard mathematical expression ($`\varphi (t)=(1\mathrm{sin}i\mathrm{sin}(2\pi t/P))/2`$ in case of circular orbits) holds only for spherical bodies. In presence of rings, for half of the orbit, the observer sees only their backside, which is black, giving to $`\varphi (t)`$ a more complicated expression depending on the detailed configuration of the rings (Schneider 1999). This case is not an exception, as shown by the Solar System planets; it is quantitatively not negligeable since for instance the reflected solar flux from Saturn rings is as large as the planet reflected flux itself.
* Moons :
They will most likely be first detected by the transit method (Sartoretti and Schneider 1999). For the coming generation of imaging space missions (e.g. Darwin/TPF), the angular resolution will not be sufficient to separate them angularly from their parent planet. It will nevertheless be possible to detect them by a photometric monitoring of the planet:
a) Planet-satellite mutual transits (Schneider 2003). A planet brightness drop with an amplitude $`(R_{sat}/R_{pl})^2`$ should appear with a period half the satellite revolution period. The geometric probability of this event nevertheless does not exceed $`10\%`$. The event is detectable in both reflected and thermal emission regimes.
b) Planet-satellite mutual shadows (Schneider 2003). It is most likely that the satellite orbits lies close the planet orbital plane. In that case, the satellite throws, once per orbit, a shadow on the illuminated part of the planet and, once per orbit, disappears in the planet shadow. An interesting feature of this event is that the satellite+planet flux drop has a very characteristic shape. In case of a satellite orbit lying exactly in the planet orbital plane, this shape is, for $`\varphi =\pi /2`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }F_{pl}/F_{pl}(\varphi _{sat})=\mathrm{tan}\varphi _{sat}`$, varying from 0 (when the satellite orbital phase $`\varphi _{sat}=0`$) up to a maximum $`(R_{sat}/R_{pl})^{3/2}/\sqrt{2}`$ which is larger by a factor $`\sqrt{R_{pl}/(2R_{sat})}`$ than the drop due to mutual transits. For satellite orbits not lying exactly in the planet orbital plane, the evolution of the function $`\mathrm{\Delta }F_{pl}(\varphi _{sat})/F_{pl}`$ along the planet orbital revolution gives the two angular parameters characterizing the relative inclination of the planet and satellite orbital planes. In addition to being larger than mutual transits, mutual shadows have a geometric probability close to 1. This event can be seen only for reflected light, i.e. in the visible.

8. Surface properties:

* Structures:
The formula (1) only gives the product $`A_{pl}\times R_{pl}^2`$. It thus does not enable to give the absolute value of the planet albedo. But from the time variation of $`F_{refl}(t)`$ one can, after correction of orbital effects, deduce the time variation $`A_{pl}(t)`$ of the albedo (since the planet radius is constant). A short term (hours to days) periodic variation would reveal the presence of surface inhomogeneities of the albedo by the modulation of $`F_{refl}(t)`$ due to the planet rotation. The period of the modulation gives the duration of the planet day, its amplitude gives the albedo contrast between different parts of the planet surface (“continents”) and the shape of the modulation gives the spatial extension of “continents” (Schneider 1999, Ford, Seager and Turner 2001). In principle the modulation of the thermal emission by oceans and continents could also be detected during the diurnal planet rotation. But, while the continent/ocean contrast is about a factor 5 in reflected light, it is only $`4|T_{ocean}T_{cont.}|/T_{mean}10\%`$ for thermal emission.
* Internal heat vs/ stellar heating:
Depending on the orbital phase, the observer sees the illuminated side or dark side of the planet. There may exist a temperature contrast $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{pl}=T_{pl,day}T_{pl,night}`$ between these two sides. Along the orbital revolution it will provide an annual modulation of the effective planet temperature $`T_{pl,eff}(t)(T_{pl,day}^4(1\mathrm{sin}i\mathrm{cos}(2\pi t/P))/2+T_{pl,night}^4(1\mathrm{sin}i\mathrm{sin}(2\pi t/P))/2)^{1/4}`$ (for $`e=0`$). A low $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{pl}`$ would mean a high atmospheric or oceanic circulation, while a high $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{pl}`$ would mean a low lithsopheric heat conductivity. For instance, for the Earth the day/night temperature difference is about 10 K leading to a relative thermal flux variation $`4(T_{pl,day}T_{pl,night})/T_{mean}10\%`$. For the Moon and Mars the temperature difference is $``$ 100 K, giving a relative flux variation of a factor 2. The contrast $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{pl}`$ can be due to several factors: surface (lithosperic and oceanic) thermal conductivity, oceanic and atmospheric circulation, and depends on the planet rotation rate. An additional source of thermal emission can be purely internal, due to tectonic activity and to rocks radioactivity. It could in principle produce a temperature in excess of the equilibrium temperature $`T_{pl}=T_{}\times (R_{}/2a)^{1/2}(1A_{pl})^{1/4}`$. But the example of the Earth, for which the the tectonic and the radiogenic heat flow is only 100 mW/m2, compared to the $``$ 1 kW/m2 heat flow produced by stellar heating, shows that this effect can be appreciable only for planets far away from their star, where the stellar heating is small. That is e.g. the case of Io where the thermal heating causes about 12 one day volcanic outbursts per year doubling the total 5 micron flux (Spencer and Schneider 1996). Together with the planet radius, mass (and thus the density), age, albedo, the measurement of the effective temperature and its modulation will provide precious constraints on the planet atmospheric, surfacic and internal structure. Of course, this measurement is possible only in the infrared regime.

9. Life?
A traditional prerequisit is the presence of liquid water, imposing a planet temperature of about 300 K. The planet must therefore lie in the “habitable zone”, i.e. at a distance of $`(T_{}/T_{})^2(R_{}/R_{})`$ AU from the star ($``$ from 0.1 to 1.5 AU, for M to F stars).
The detection of signatures of Life (“biosignatures”) makes use of two approaches:

* “Dejecta”:
These are by-products of biological activity on the planet. The latter are mainly atmospheric gases such as O2 (and its by-product O3), CH4. The key argument here is that on Earth all the molecular oxygen content of the atmosphere (20 %) comes from the photosynthetic activity of vegetation and bacteria. This argument is enforced by the fact that on Mars and Venus there is no oxygen or ozone. Since the main source of carbon for organics is the atmospheric CO2, the latter must also be present in the planet atmosphere. The detection of O2 is a priority in the sense that it gives an access to the degree of biological evolution on the planet (DesMarais et al. 2001, 2002). O2 is detectable only in the visible, all the other gases are detectable in both visible and infrared regimes (DesMarais et al. 2002).
* “Vegetation”:
Whatever the detailed photosynthetic mechanisms are, they must substract energy from some part of the stellar spectrum reflected by the planet, leading to absorption features in this spectrum. This mechanism is responsible for the “red edge” at 750 nm in the terrestrial vegetation spectrum. The latter has been observed globally, for the first time, for the whole Earth seen as an unresolved source in the Earthsine spectrum (Arnold et al. 2002). The shape of this spectral feature gives some indication on the energy conversion mechanism, but the possible confusion with mineral absorption features has to be investigated further. It cannot be a safe biosignature by itself, it is useful only in association with other ones.

The Table 1 summarizes the best wavelength regime for different planet characteristics.

Table 1

| Parameter | Visible | Infrared |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Radius |  | yes |
| Mass | yes |  |
| Temperature | yes | yes |
| Albedo | yes |  |
| Day | yes |  |
| Seasons | yes | yes |
| Clouds | yes |  |
| Rings | yes |  |
| Moons |  | yes |
| O2 | yes |  |
| O3, CH4, CO2, H2O | yes | yes |
| Vegetation | yes |  |
| Intern. heat |  | yes |

It seems that more science can be done with reflected light observations, but it cannot do all of it and thermal infrared regime will provide important complements.


text:
# An Optical Bow Shock Around the Nearby Millisecond Pulsar J2124–3358

## 1. Introduction

Many pulsars experience significant ram pressure as they move through the interstellar medium (ISM). This pressure can confine the pulsar’s relativistic wind and generate a bow-shock pulsar wind nebula (PWN). The H$`\alpha `$ emission generated by such sources provides an important probe of the pulsar’s interaction with its environment (see Chatterjee & Cordes (2002) for a recent review). However, until recently only three H$`\alpha `$ PWNe were known, and we consequently have lacked a detailed understanding of this phenomenon.

We are carrying out a survey for new pulsar bow shocks in the southern sky. We have previously reported the discovery of a faint H$`\alpha `$ PWN surrounding PSR B0740–28 (Jones, Stappers, & Gaensler (2002)). We here present another new H$`\alpha `$ pulsar bow shock, associated with the nearby millisecond pulsar J2124–3358 (Bailes et al. (1997)). A recent timing ephemeris (M. Bailes, private communication) yields a spin period of 4.93 ms and a position (at MJD 50288.0) of RA (J2000) $`21^\mathrm{h}24^\mathrm{m}43\stackrel{\mathrm{s}}{\mathrm{.}}86196(6)`$, Dec. (J2000) $`33^{}58^{}44\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}257(1)`$, where the numbers in parentheses indicate the uncertainty in the last digit. The pulsar’s intrinsic spin-down luminosity is $`\dot{E}=4.3\times 10^{33}`$ erg s-1 (Toscano et al. (1999)), while its dispersion measure of 4.61 pc cm-3 implies a distance of $`270\pm 20`$ pc (Cordes & Lazio (2002)). In future discussion, we adopt a distance $`D=270d_0`$ pc to the source.

The pulsar timing ephemeris yields a proper motion relative to the solar system barycenter of $`52.6(3)`$ milliarcsec yr-1 at position angle $`195\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}6(3)`$ (North through East). Because of the pulsar’s proximity and low space velocity, the peculiar motion of the sun with respect to the Local Standard of Rest needs to be accounted for. In the case of PSR J2124–3358, the sun’s motion is directed almost perpendicular to the line-of-sight, and so contributes a significant component of the observed proper motion. After correction for the solar peculiar velocity (and for the small effects of differential Galactic rotation), we find that the motion of the pulsar relative to its local standard of rest is 47(3) milliarcsec yr-1 at position angle $`209(3)^{}`$, corresponding to a projected space velocity of $`(61\pm 4)d_0`$ km s-1. The uncertainties in the direction and magnitude of the solar motion dominate those in the pulsar’s distance and measured proper motion.

## 2. Observations and Results

The field around PSR J2124–3358 was observed for 4800 sec on 2001 July 25 (MJD 52115) with a narrowband H$`\alpha `$ filter on the 3.5-m New Technology Telescope (NTT) at the European Southern Observatory, La Silla, Chile. The mean seeing was $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}2`$; all other observational parameters were as described by Jones et al. (2002). Standard techniques for bias and flat-field correction were used to remove instrumental signatures from the data. Individual frames were dithered to permit removal of CCD defects and cosmic rays using median filtering on the frames when combined. An astrometric solution was determined using 10 field stars with positions in the USNO Catalog. The iraf task ccmap was used to fit the positions with a third order polynomial with cross terms. The RMS scatter was $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha ,\mathrm{\Delta }\delta )`$ = ($`\pm 0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}15`$,$`\pm 0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}07`$) and the residuals uniformly scattered. A transformation of the derived USNO star coordinates back onto the image did not reveal any systematic offsets between the observed and derived positions.

Figure 1 shows a smoothed H$`\alpha `$ image of the field surrounding PSR J2124–3358. The position of the pulsar at epoch MJD 52115 is marked, as is the pulsar’s direction of motion with respect to its local standard of rest. The pulsar is located just inside the apex of an optical nebula with a clear bow-shock morphology, while the pulsar’s projected velocity points within $`30^{}`$ of the apparent nebular symmetry axis. This confirms that the nebula is a bow-shock PWN powered by the pulsar.

The morphology of this PWN deviates in several ways from the classic bow-shock shape predicted by theory. The eastern half of the nebula is dominated by a marked kink (indicated with a “K” in Figure 1), located about $`25^{\prime \prime }`$ north-east of the pulsar. North of this kink the opening angle of the bow shock becomes significantly broader; this eastern limb of the nebula fades into the background $`1.^{}5`$ from the pulsar. The western half of the nebula is generally more uniform in its shape and brightness than the eastern half. On the western side, the opening angle of the bow shock reaches a maximum $`1^{}`$ from the pulsar, before starting to closing back in on itself. This half of the nebula extends $`2^{}`$ from the pulsar.

H$`\alpha `$ emission from the head of the nebula is clearly resolved, with a thickness adjacent to the pulsar of $`3^{\prime \prime }`$, decreasing to $`2^{\prime \prime }`$ in parts of the nebula to the pulsar’s north-east and north-west. The head of the PWN is highly asymmetric around the pulsar’s velocity vector, being considerably broader to the west of this axis than to the east.

The H$`\alpha `$ flux density was calculated from an unsmoothed frame in the manner described by Jones et al. (2002), using the planetary nebula G321.3–16.7 as a flux standard. Considering an $`8^{\prime \prime }`$-wide curved strip enclosing the entire visible nebula, we find that the H$`\alpha `$ flux for the PWN powered by PSR J2124–3358 is $`2.5\times 10^4`$ photons s-1 cm-2. The mean surface brightness is $`7.4\times 10^{19}`$ erg s-1 cm-2 arcsec-2, three times that measured for PSR B0740–28 (Jones et al. 2002) or one-tenth of that for PSR J0437–4715 (Bell et al. (1995)). Both in the immediate vicinity of the pulsar and at the kink, the nebula’s surface brightness is $`1.5\times 10^{18}`$ erg s-1 cm-2 arcsec-2, a factor of $`2`$ brighter than the nebular average.

## 3. Discussion

The position, speed and direction of motion of PSR J2124–3358 have all been determined to reasonably high precision (see §1). This system thus presents an excellent opportunity to model a bow-shock PWN and to constrain its parameters.

To quantify the properties of this nebula, we consider a pulsar of space velocity $`V`$ moving through an ambient medium of mass density $`\rho _0`$ and number density $`n_0`$. We define the “stand-off distance”, $`R_0`$, to be the characteristic scale size of the nebula. For an idealized bow shock, $`R_0`$ is the distance from the pulsar to the apex of the bow shock along the direction of motion. The corresponding “stand-off angle” is $`\theta _0=R_0\mathrm{sin}i/D`$, where $`i`$ is the inclination of the pulsar’s motion to the line-of-sight (see Equation  of Chatterjee & Cordes (2002)). We further define the “bow-shock angle”, $`\psi _0`$, to be the angular separation between the pulsar and the outermost edge of the projected H$`\alpha `$ emission along the projected direction of the pulsar’s motion. In general, $`\psi _0`$ is the only parameter which can be directly measured from an image; in this case $`\psi _02\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}6`$.

We crudely estimate the parameters of the system by assuming that $`i=90^{}`$, and that the outer edge of the observed H$`\alpha `$ emission demarcates the bow shock structure. In this case $`\theta _0\psi _0`$ and so $`R_00.003d_0`$ pc. At the stand-off distance, pressure from the pulsar wind, $`P_{\mathrm{PSR}}=\dot{E}/4\pi R_0^2c`$, balances the ram pressure of the ambient medium, $`P_{\mathrm{ISM}}=\rho _0V^2`$, so that $`n_0=1.6d_0^4`$ cm-3. This confirms that the pulsar is embedded in the warm, neutral component of the ISM (e.g. Kulkarni & Heiles (1988)), as expected for observable H$`\alpha `$ bow shocks. The corresponding ISM sound speed is $`c_s5`$ km s-1, and the Mach number for the pulsar is $`M=V/c_s12`$.

We now consider the detailed morphology of the head of the nebula. We first rotate the image counterclockwise by $`61^{}`$, so that the pulsar’s motion is strictly from left to right, and adopt an $`(x,y)`$ coordinate system with the pulsar at the origin. We then by hand identify a series of points which demarcate the outermost boundary of the head of the optical nebula, over an azimuthal range of $`120^{}`$ on either side of the pulsar’s direction of motion. The resulting data-points can then be fit with a variety of functional forms. We note that variations in thickness and brightness seen in the nebula potentially provide additional information on the pulsar’s interaction with its environment. However, to use these data, one must take into account the width and surface density of the emitting regions as a function of position, and also must consider the effects of charge-exchange and collisional excitation (Bucciantini & Bandiera (2001); Bucciantini 2002b ). Given these considerable complications, here we consider only the overall shape of the emitting regions, as delineated by the outermost edge of the H$`\alpha `$ nebula.

We first consider the idealized case of an isotropic wind propagating through a homogeneous ambient medium. In this case, the shape of the bow-shock surface is given by (Wilkin (1996)):

$$R(\varphi )=\kappa R_0/\mathrm{sin}\varphi \sqrt{3(1\varphi /\mathrm{tan}\varphi )},$$
(1)
where $`R(\varphi )`$ is the distance from the pulsar to a given point on the bow-shock surface, $`\varphi `$ is the angle between the velocity vector and the vector joining the pulsar to this point, and $`\kappa `$ is a constant, with value $`\kappa =1`$ in this case.

In panels A and B of Figure 2, we show solutions to Equation (1) for $`i=90^{}`$ and $`i=30^{}`$ respectively, scaled to match the data so that for $`\varphi =0^{}`$, the angular separation between the pulsar and the outermost edge of the bow-shock surface is $`\psi _02\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}6`$. Best-fit parameters for each solution are listed in Table 1. (As an aside, we note that unless $`i=90^{}`$, the usual assumption that $`\theta _0\psi _0`$ is incorrect. For example, for the inclined case $`i=30^{}`$ we find that $`\theta _0=\kappa R_0\mathrm{sin}i/D=0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}8\psi _0`$. This indicates that in cases where the inclination angle is not known, the first-order assumption that $`\theta _0=\psi _0=\kappa R_0/D`$ results in an upper limit on $`\kappa R_0`$ and a lower limit on $`n_0`$, in contrast to previous calculations \[see e.g. §5.1 of Chatterjee & Cordes (2002)\].)

These plots make clear that for any inclination, the observed nebula is too broad and too asymmetric to be described by Equation (1). However, in comparing a pulsar bow shock to the shape described by Equation (1), a number of caveats must be made. First, Equation (1) describes a system in which radiative cooling is efficient, and in which there is significant mixing between the stellar wind and ambient material (Wilkin (1996)), neither of which is likely to be the case for pulsar bow shocks (Bucciantini & Bandiera (2001)). However, these effects do not change the shape of the bow shock, but simply require $`\kappa 1.72.4`$ in Equation (1) (Bucciantini 2002a ; van der Swaluw et al. (2002)). van der Swaluw et al. (2002) also demonstrate that for low Mach numbers $`M5`$, the tail of the resulting bow shock is slightly broader than that described by Equation (1). However, in this case we have demonstrated above that $`M>12`$, sufficiently high that a morphology close to the analytic shape should result.

We are thus forced to conclude that the idealized bow-shock morphology is unable to describe this nebula. To account for the observed appearance, we must relax some of the assumptions from which Equation (1) was derived. Specifically, we need to consider the possibilities of a density gradient in the ISM, a significant flow velocity for the ambient medium, or of anisotropies in the pulsar wind. We briefly summarize how each of these effects manifest themselves in the observed nebular morphology:

1. A local density gradient perpendicular to the pulsar’s direction of motion will distort the bow-shock shape of Equation (1) so that the head of the nebula is narrower on the side where the density is higher, and broader on the side where the density is lower. We here consider a nebula in an exponential density gradient of e-folding scale $`\kappa lR_0`$, using the analytic solution provided by Wilkin (2000).
2. A density gradient parallel to the pulsar velocity vector results in a time-variable ambient gas pressure. The stand-off distance will thus continually change to adjust for this pressure imbalance, decoupling the position of the pulsar from that of its bow-shock. A detailed treatment of this process is beyond the scope of this paper; here we approximate the effects of such a gradient by using Equation (1), but with the nebula shifted along the $`x`$-axis by an amount $`R_1`$. This crudely corresponds to an increase in ambient density by a factor $`(\kappa R_0)^2/(\kappa R_0R_1)^2`$ over a length scale $`\kappa R_0`$. If we assume an exponential density gradient with e-folding scale $`\kappa mR_0`$, we then find that $`m1/[2\mathrm{ln}(1R_1/\kappa R_0)]`$. Note that this approximate treatment only describes the behavior in the narrow region between the pulsar and the apex of the bow shock; we assume here that the pulsar has only recently encountered the density gradient, so that the overall nebular morphology has the form of Equation (1) with constant $`R_0`$.
3. Bulk motion of the ambient gas (in the reference frame of Galactic rotation at that position) will result in a nebula as described by Equation (1), but with the nebula rotated by some angle $`\omega `$ about the pulsar position. The angle $`\omega `$ is determined by subtraction of the ISM flow velocity vector from the pulsar velocity vector.
4. An anisotropic wind can generate a wide variety of complicated bow-shock morphologies, depending on the geometry and orientation of the outflow (Bandiera (1993); Wilkin (2000)). Wilkin (2000) derives analytic solutions for the bow shocks generated by axisymmetric winds, parameterizing the resulting morphologies via the variable $`c_2`$ and $`\lambda `$. The parameter $`c_2`$ indicates the nature of the wind (see Equation  of Wilkin (2000)): $`c_2=3`$ corresponds to a completely polar wind, $`c_2=0`$ to an isotropic wind, and $`c_2=1.5`$ to a completely equatorial wind. The parameter $`\lambda `$ is the angle between the pulsar spin axis and the pulsar velocity vector.

We have generated an exhaustive set of bow-shock morphologies corresponding to each of the above four models, for all reasonable free parameters and for all inclination angles. For each of these models alone, we are unable to find a set of parameters which can match the observed bow-shock morphology: a perpendicular density gradient or ISM bulk flow can generate a nebula which is asymmetric about the $`x`$-axis (as seen in panels C and D of Figure 2) but which is too narrow to match the data, while a a parallel gradient or anisotropic wind can generate a broader bow shock (as seen in panels E and F of Figure 2) but cannot account for the high level of asymmetry between the top and bottom halves of the nebula.

However, when we combine two or more of these effects, we find that we can match the morphology of the head of the nebula with a wide variety of parameters. A representative selection of such fits are listed in the lower half of Table 1; in all cases, the predicted bow-shock morphology corresponds well to that of the H$`\alpha `$-emitting nebula. We plot three of these models in Figure 2: in model H, there is a density gradient at an angle to the pulsar’s motion (in this case at an approximate PA of $`225^{}`$ in Figure 2) and a bulk flow in the ISM; in model I, a pulsar with an equatorial wind (with $`\lambda =0^{}`$) moves through a perpendicular density gradient and a bulk flow; in model J, there is both a parallel density gradient and a bulk flow. This latter case is particularly noteworthy, as the resultant model is completely equivalent to that described by Equation (1), but with an apparent pulsar position and direction of motion which differ from their true values. This makes clear that fitting to the morphology of the bow shock without knowing these parameters can give misleading results.

The models which we have invoked to describe the nebular morphology all correspond to physically reasonable scenarios. Most notably, each of the successful fits to the data requires both a peculiar flow velocity for the ambient ISM of magnitude $`1525`$ km s-1, and an increase in ambient density of magnitude $`\mathrm{\Delta }n_0110`$ cm-3 over a scale of $`0.02`$ pc. The implied flow velocities are all within the range of random motions seen in H i clouds (Anantharamaiah, Radhakrishnan, & Shaver (1984); Kulkarni & Fich (1985)), while the required density variations are common in the warm ISM, being comparable to the typical level of turbulent fluctuations at these scales inferred from H i absorption experiments (Deshpande (2000)). Such density gradients have also been proposed to account for the morphologies of the bow-shock PWNe powered by PSRs B0740–28 and B2224+65 (Jones et al. 2002; Chatterjee & Cordes (2002)), and may also account for the “kink” seen in Figure 1. Models I, K and L require a pulsar wind which is dominated either by an equatorial flow or by polar jets, properties which have both been seen in many recent PWN observations (e.g. Hester et al. (1995); Gaensler et al. (2002)). Finally, the mean density implied by all these models is $`n_0=0.81.3`$ cm-3 (assuming $`\kappa =2`$ and $`d_0=1`$), quite typical of the warm, neutral component of the ISM in which observable H$`\alpha `$ pulsar bow-shocks will be generated.

Given the density gradients inferred for the ambient medium, it is perhaps surprising that large variations in the H$`\alpha `$ surface brightness are not seen as a function of position around the PWN. A considerably more detailed investigation, incorporating the effects discussed by Bucciantini & Bandiera (2001), is needed to establish whether the ambient density can be quantitatively probed using the variations in nebular brightness.

## 4. Conclusions

We have identified a striking H$`\alpha `$ bow shock powered by the millisecond pulsar PSR J2124–3358. The morphology of the nebula does not match the standard bow shock shape, but can be described by models which include a significant density gradient in the ISM and a bulk flow of ambient gas; an anisotropy in the pulsar wind may also contribute to the nebular morphology. We conclude that in general, it is not possible to uniquely extract the physical conditions of the system by fitting to the morphology of the nebula with respect to the central source, nor can the position and direction of motion of the pulsar be determined from the shape of the bow shock alone. Rather, we find that additional information is needed to break the degeneracy between different possibilities. In the case of PSR J2124–3358, a significant flow velocity for ambient gas can be identified through a non-zero systemic velocity in optical spectroscopy, a density gradient along the pulsar’s direction of motion can be demonstrated through relative motion of the pulsar and its bow shock in multi-epoch imaging, and anisotropies in the pulsar’s relativistic wind may be revealed through high-resolution imaging of the X-ray emission from J2124–3358 (e.g. Sakurai et al. (2001)) using the Chandra X-ray Observatory. When combined with detailed modeling of the brightness and width of the nebula as a function of position, these data can be used to fully characterize the interaction of this pulsar with its environment.

We thank Matthew Bailes for providing updated timing parameters for PSR J2124–3358 and Shami Chatterjee for helpful discussions. We are particularly grateful to the referee, Rino Bandiera, for pointing out a crucial error in our original calculations. We acknowledge the NTT team for their assistance. These results are based on observations made with ESO Telescopes at the La Silla Observatory (program 67.D–0064).


text:
# Discovery of a Near-Infrared Jet-Like Feature in the Z Canis Majoris System

## 1 Introduction

Z Canis Majoris (Z CMa) is a luminous and irregularly variable young stellar object (YSO) originally classified as a Herbig Ae/Be star (HAeBe, intermediate to high mass pre-main sequence stars) on the basis of its emission line spectrum and association with reflection nebulosity (Herbig, 1960). It underwent an outburst lasting a few months in 1987, during which its spectral characteristics drastically changed and its visual brightness increased by a modest $`0.7`$ magnitudes (Hessman et al., 1991). High resolution optical and near-infrared (IR) spectra in the post-outburst state showed features typical of the FU Orionis (FUOri) class, believed to be disk objects undergoing a period of very active accretion (Hartmann et al., 1989). Under this interpretation, Z CMa is unique in that it is the YSO with the highest known accretion rate ($`10^3M_{\mathrm{}}yr^1`$). The ranges of visual and near-IR magnitudes of the unresolved system found in the literature are: V=$`11.208.80`$, J=$`6.165.87`$, H=$`5.094.70`$ and K=$`3.44.2`$.

A companion was discovered in IR speckle observations by Koresko et al. (1991). The binary system had an angular separation of $`0.1\mathrm{}`$ and position angle PA=$`120\mathrm{°}`$ (measured East from North), where the primary is defined to be the North-West (NW) component, which dominates the flux beyond $`2.2\mu m`$. Individual spectral energy distributions reconstructed from the spatially resolved photometry, combined with unresolved photometry at optical and far-IR wavelengths, revealed that the emission in both components is dominated by circumstellar material, i.e. there are no signs of stellar photospheres. The South-East (SE) component has been identified as the FU Ori object inferred by Hartmann et al. (1989), while the NW component is most-likely a HAeBe star surrounded by an asymmetric dust envelope (e.g., Garcia, Thiébaut, & Bacon, 1999).

In the last few years, HAeBe and FU Ori objects have also been resolved using the techniques of long baseline interferometry and aperture masking at near-IR wavelengths (Malbet et al., 1998; Akeson et al., 2000; Millan-Gabet, Schloerb, & Traub, 2001; Tuthill, Monnier, & Danchi, 2001; Danchi, Tuthill, & Monnier, 2001). However, the interpretation of the interferometer data depends on important model assumptions, namely the extent to which the measured visibilities are systematically reduced (which results in an overestimate of the size measured) by flux arising in a widely-separated companion or scattered by distant dust.

The discovery reported here took place in the larger context of a program of adaptive optics (AO) observations of HAeBe systems, aimed at providing these constraints by exploring the level of extended emission present at spatial scales intermediate between the very narrow interferometric beams and the large scale nebulosity known to surround these systems.

## 2 Observations

We observed Z CMa on 2001 January 11, using the AO system at the Keck-II telescope (Wizinowich et al., 2000). These observations were carried out using the slit viewing camera (SCAM) of the NIRSPEC instrument (McLean et al., 2000) as the imaging science detector. In these observations, Z CMa itself – unresolved by the Shack-Hartmann sensor sub-apertures – was used as the source of visible photons for the AO wavefront sensor. In order to achieve highest sensitivity to scattered emission from circumstellar material, we limited our observations to the shorter wavelength near-IR bands: J (N3 filter, $`\lambda =1.1431.375\mu m`$) and H (N5 filter, $`\lambda =1.4131.808\mu m`$).

Our observing procedure consisted of establishing the maximum integration time per frame which did not saturate the bright stellar core, and co-adding 30 such frames. For all frames the correlated double sampling (CDS) readout mode was used. In order to search for circumstellar emission beyond the normal field of view of the SCAM array in AO mode ($`4.3\times 4.3\mathrm{}`$) and to improve the image quality – by removing the effect of the NIRSPEC slit – we recorded 4 such frames nodding the telescope around a square by offsets of $`4.3\mathrm{}/2`$, which resulted in a total field of view in the combined image of $`6.45\times 6.45\mathrm{}`$. We also recorded J–band frames in which the central core was allowed to saturate the detector, in order to further augment our sensitivity to faint extended emission.

The results presented here have been obtained from the AO-corrected images, after straightforward processing (i.e. no deconvolution has been applied) consisting of: bad pixel removal, flat field correction (using images of near-sunrise sky) and sky background subtraction (using images obtained with a telescope offset of $`60\mathrm{}`$ from the target source).

As an indication of the seeing quality and performance of the AO system at the time of our Z CMa observations, the images of an unresolved calibrator star – HD 54335, chosen to also have similar visual and near-IR magnitude as Z CMa – were fitted with the sum of two Gaussians of different widths, representing the narrow core and wide halo into which partially corrected point spread functions (PSF) can be approximately decomposed. Using the full-width at half-maximum of the core component as a measure of effective seeing, we find on average 45 mas and 46 mas at J and H bands respectively, both close to the diffration limit of the 10 m telescope (31 and 42 mas respectively). For this analysis, as well as in the rest of the paper, stellar images are fitted with sub-pixel resolution using 2-dimensional pixelized Gaussians.

## 3 The Z CMa Binary

We first derive the basic parameters of the Z CMa binary from our images. A model consisting of two scaled and displaced Gaussians gives us the binary separation, PA, and flux ratio. These parameters are derived for each of the N frames in our dithering procedure, and the final value adopted is the mean of these independent measurements, with a statistical error given by their standard deviation.

The plate scale and orientation of the AO images were calibrated using observations of the quadruple system $`\xi `$ Ursae Majoris (HD 98230) and its published orbital elements (Mason, McAlister, Hartkopf, & Shara, 1995). Given that the published orbit applies to the “Aa” center of mass and “B” component (the “a” component was unresolved until recent, unpublished, Keck Aperture Masking observations in June 2000 by one of the authors – J. D. Monnier), we estimated the location of the former in our images using the published masses (Heintz, 1967). Assigning 10% and 30% mass uncertainties to the “A” and “a” components respectively, we obtain a plate scale of $`17.32\pm 0.06`$ mas/pixel (1.9% different than nominal value of 17 mas/pixel) and a PA offset (calculated $``$ nominal) of $`1.18\pm 0.18\mathrm{°}`$.

These results are summarized in Table 1. In addition, our 1.25 $`\mu `$m and 1.65 $`\mu `$m measurements are consistent with both binary components being unresolved; that is, we find no evidence for the extended component reported by Malbet et al. (1993) at somewhat longer wavelengths ($`\lambda >3.87\mu `$m).

Figure Discovery of a Near-Infrared Jet-Like Feature in the Z Canis Majoris System shows the history of measurements of the Z CMa orbital elements up to this work (Koresko et al., 1991; Haas et al., 1993; Barth, Weigelt, & Zinnecker, 1994; Thiebaut et al., 1995) spanning a total of 11.2 years, and linear fits to the data. While only a marginal change in the angular separation is detected ($`\chi _{reduced}^2=0.3`$ for the linear fit, compared to 0.8 for the weighted mean), the PA has clearly increased over this period of time ($`\chi _{reduced}^2=0.6`$ for the linear fit, compared to 5.8 for the weighted mean), making this the first detection of orbital motion in this system.

The linear fit to the PA data gives a total change of $`8.8\pm 1.5\mathrm{°}`$. For a distance to Z CMa of about 1150 pc (Herbst, Racine, & Warner, 1978), the $`0.1\mathrm{}`$ angular separation corresponds to a projected linear separation of 115 AU. Assuming masses for the components of $`1M_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`5M_{\mathrm{}}`$, typical of T Tauri and HAeBe stars respectively, the period of a face-on circular orbit would be $`500`$ years, and the expected rate of position angle change $`0.7`$ degrees/year. Therefore, our detection of a $`8.8\mathrm{°}`$ change in about a decade is indeed plausible.

Previous workers have found the near-IR flux ratios to be highly variable: $`[NW/SE]_J=0.090.3`$, $`[NW/SE]_H=0.250.5`$ and $`[NW/SE]_K=1.63.3`$ (Koresko et al., 1991; Haas et al., 1993). As can be seen in Table 1, we find the unexpected result that the NW (HAeBE) component becomes brighter than the SE (FU Ori) component at H-band, in contrast to previous reports that the NW component became the brightest in the system at K-band and longer wavelengths. This flux reversal could be naturally explained if the FU Ori object has been continuously fading following its recent outburst. Approximate absolute photometry may be derived from our observations as follows.

The total flux of the Z CMa system at our epoch is estimated using the calibrator (HD 54335) as a flux standard. Its 2MASS fluxes are: $`F_J(\text{HD 54335})=19\pm 4`$ Jy and $`F_H(\text{HD 54335})=31\pm 6`$ Jy. From our images we derive a ratio of fluxes between Z CMa and HD 54335 of $`1.39\pm 0.08`$ and $`2.68\pm 0.25`$ at J and H bands respectively. The resulting combined fluxes of Z CMa as well as those of its components, derived using our estimates of the sum and ratio of fluxes, are also given in Table 1. Indeed, these estimates clearly show that the FU Ori object has been dimming between 1986 and 2001. In particular, comparing with the epoch of the Koresko et al. (1991) observations, the SE fluxes have decreased by $`1.1\pm 0.4`$ mag and $`0.7\pm 0.3`$ mag at J and H bands respectively. In contrast, the HAeBe photometry is consistent with no flux change at J band ($`\mathrm{\Delta }m_J0.1\pm 0.5`$) and a marginally significant increase at H band ($`\mathrm{\Delta }m_H0.5\pm 0.4`$).

## 4 High Dynamic Range Imaging: Discovery of a New Jet-Like Feature

### 4.1 Image Processing

We have detected a new jet-like feature in deep images at J–band in which the stellar cores were saturated. Unfortunately, there are many imaging artifacts in such high-dynamic range images, and we will briefly mention the dominant ones before discussing the “jet-like” feature discovered around Z CMa. In Figure Discovery of a Near-Infrared Jet-Like Feature in the Z Canis Majoris System we show the mosaiced images of Z CMa and the unresolved reference star (HD 54335), in which an azimuthally-averaged PSF core has been subtracted to artifically enhance the dynamic range in the image. We have marked the dominant artifacts common to the both Z CMa and the reference star, but note the interesting new feature not associated with the PSF. Prior to this detection, no extended structure was known for Z CMa at these wavelengths and scales ($`<1`$ arcsec) beyond that of a pure binary (nebulosity on larger scales has been reported by Nakajima & Golimowski, 1995).

Figure Discovery of a Near-Infrared Jet-Like Feature in the Z Canis Majoris System shows a close-up of the region near the new narrow feature, rotated so that North is up and East is left. In order to remove the wings of the PSF, we have subtracted a two-component model of the binary star using the PSF measured with the reference star. Clearly this subtraction is imperfect, as evidenced by the speckled residuals within 0.5$`\mathrm{}`$ of the binary. Despite these obvious flaws, the dynamic range (DR) in the image (unsaturated peak to noise ratio) is $``$ 200000 beyond $`0.5\mathrm{}`$ from the central binary, and the signal-to-noise in the jet-like feature is greater than 10. The jet-like feature extends to $`0.9\mathrm{}`$ (1135 AU) from the central binary in the S-SW direction, and has a width of $`0.1\mathrm{}`$ (115 AU).

### 4.2 Discussion

It is likely that the extended emission we have detected is stellar light or disk emission scattered off of dust grains, since at the observed distance from the central stars this dust would be too cold to emit thermally in the near-IR. Alternatively, the emission could arise from a faint emission line within J–band bandpass, a possibility which needs to be eliminated in follow-up observations. We note that the jet-like feature is not detected in our H–Band images, likely a consequence of the lower DR in those images (with non-saturated peaks) and/or the lower efficiency of scattering by dust at longer wavelengths.

Assuming scattering by dust, an intriguing interpretation is that this scattering takes place off the inner walls of an evacuated cavity carved by the well-known large-scale outflow. A bipolar outflow was discovered by Poetzel, Mundt, & Ray (1989), traced by several Herbig-Haro objects (blue and red-shifted sides) and a jet (blueshifted side, also SW direction). The total extent of the outflow was 3.6 pc, oriented at PA=$`60\mathrm{°}`$. Garcia, Thiébaut, & Bacon (1999) reported an optical jet in \[OI\] extending approximately 1$`\mathrm{}`$ from Z CMa at PA $`240\mathrm{°}`$. The radio counterpart of the outflow was also detected in CO lines (Evans et al., 1994) and in the thermal jet (Velázquez & Rodríguez, 2001), both oriented coincident with the optical jet. In the latter case, the high angular resolution of the VLA observations allowed for the first time to clearly identify the origin of the outflow with the SE (FU Ori) binary component. Understanding the shape of the jet-blown cavity and the amount of swept-up dust could constrain the momentum profile of the bipolar winds, testing current theories for such winds and the generation of jets (e.g., Shang, Shu, & Glassgold, 1998; Matzner & McKee, 1999).

Figure Discovery of a Near-Infrared Jet-Like Feature in the Z Canis Majoris System also indicates the direction of the previously known optical jet and bipolar outflow at PA=$`240\mathrm{°}`$. If the near-infrared feature arises from light scattering off dust swept-up into a thin shell surrounding a jet-blown cavity, we would expect features on either side of the jet direction (as is also indicated in Figure Discovery of a Near-Infrared Jet-Like Feature in the Z Canis Majoris System) and both should be (more-or-less) static. However, we do not see any evidence for symmetrical emission on the other side of the optical jet, casting doubt on this hypothesis. On the other hand, the high level of spurious emission may be masking this feature, and even higher dynamic-range observations are needed before this interpretation can be ruled out.

Alternatively, the emission may be directly associated with a different or new jet, given its morphology and association with known accretion objects. If the feature is moving with typical jet velocities (e.g., 500 km/s, Poetzel et al. 1989), then proper motions of the jet feature of up to 100 AU per year ($`90`$ mas per year) are expected and should be readily detectable within a short time-span, in contrast to the previous hypothesis.

Unfortunately, due to the PSF artifacts in these first images, the new feature cannot be followed close enough to the central binary to establish whether or not it is associated with one of the components, and higher signal-to-noise at close separations plus optimum placement of the feature with respect to the PSF artifacts may be able resolve this issue.

## 5 Conclusions

We have detected a new jet-like feature in the close environment of the young stellar binary Z CMa. The feature extends about 1035 AU from the central binary, in the S-SW direction, and has a width of about 115 AU. A symmetric feature to the other side of the known optical jet and bipolar outflow is expected but not detected, and therefore further targeted observations are required to establish whether this new feature is indeed associated with the bipolar outflow (e.g. scattering off dust in its inner walls) or constitutes an independent jet. Our high resolution observations have also revealed for the first time orbital motion in the ZCMa system, as well as further established the high degree of flux variability of its individual components.

R.M.G acknowledges that this work was performed while he was a Michelson Postdoctoral Fellow, funded by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which is managed for NASA by the California Institute of Technology. J.D.M. acknowledges support from a Center for Astrophysics Fellowship at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. The data presented here were obtained at the W. M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute of Technology, the University of California, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The observatory was made possible by the generous financial support of the W. M. Keck Foundation. This publication makes use of data products from the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation.