text:
# Electroproduction of Charmonia off Protons and Nuclei

## 1 Introduction

In contrast to hadro-production of charmonia, where the mechanism is still debated, electro(photo)production of charmonia seems better understood: the $`c\overline{c}`$ fluctuation of the incoming real or virtual photon interacts with the target (proton or nucleus) via the dipole cross section $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}`$ and the result is projected on the wave function of the observed hadron KZ . The aim of this paper is not to propose a conceptually new scheme, but to calculate within this approach as accurately as possible and without any free parameters. Wherever there is room for arbitrariness, like form for the color dipole cross section and for for charmonium wave function, we use and compare other author’s proposals, which have been tested on different data.

In the light-cone (LC) dipole approach the virtual photoproduction of charmonia (here $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ stands for $`J/\psi `$ or $`\psi ^{}`$) looks as shown in Fig. 1 KZ .

The corresponding expression for the forward amplitude reads

$$_{\gamma p}(s,Q^2)=\underset{\mu ,\overline{\mu }}{}\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑\alpha d^2\stackrel{}{r}_T\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{\Psi }^{(\mu ,\overline{\mu })}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{r}_T)\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,s)\mathrm{\Phi }_\gamma ^{(\mu ,\overline{\mu })}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{r}_T,Q^2).$$
(1)
Here the summation runs over spin indexes $`\mu `$, $`\overline{\mu }`$ of the $`c`$ and $`\overline{c}`$ quarks, $`Q^2`$ is the photon virtuality, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\gamma (\alpha ,r_T,Q^2)`$ is the LC distribution function of the photon for a $`c\overline{c}`$ fluctuation of separation $`r_T`$ and relative fraction $`\alpha `$ of the photon LC momentum carried by $`c`$ or $`\overline{c}`$. Correspondingly, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{\Psi }(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{r}_T)`$ is the LC wave function of $`J/\psi `$ or $`\psi ^{}`$. The dipole cross section $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,s)`$ mediates the transition.

This paper is organized as follows. First we review the expressions of the factorized LC approach to electroproduction of heavy quarkonia (more details one can find in HIKT ) and then compare with available experimental data for $`J/\psi `$ production. The calculations which are parameter free demonstrate good agreement with data.

After it we analyse exclusive electroproduction of charmonia off nuclei $`\gamma A\mathrm{\Psi }X`$, where $`X=A`$ (coherent) or $`X=A^{}`$ (incoherent, where $`A^{}`$ is an exited state of the $`A`$-nucleon system). In these processes new phenomena are to be expected. (i) Color filtering, i.e. inelastic interactions of the $`c\overline{c}`$ pair on its way through the nucleus is expected to lead to a suppression of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ production relative to $`A\sigma _{\gamma p\mathrm{\Psi }p}`$. (ii) Production of a $`c\overline{c}`$ pair in a nucleus and its absorption are also determined by the values of the coherence length (lifetime of the $`c\overline{c}`$ fluctuation),

$$l_c=\frac{2\nu }{Q^2+M_{c\overline{c}}^2}\frac{2\nu }{Q^2+M_{J/\psi }^2},$$
(2)
where $`\nu `$ is the energy of the virtual photon in the rest frame of the nucleus. (iii) Since the dipole cross section $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}`$ also depends on the gluon distribution in the target ($`p`$ of $`A`$), nuclear shadowing of the gluon distribution is expected to reduce $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}`$ in a nuclear reaction relative to the one on the proton.

The predictions in this paper may be used for planning of future experiments for electron-nucleus collisions at high energies like in the eRHIC project. Another possibility to observe photoproduction off nuclei is heavy ion relativistic collisions (see, for example, review BHT ). In the last section we present our results for $`J/\psi `$ production in such processes.

## 2 Light-cone dipole approach

The LC variable describing longitudinal motion of the quarks is the fraction $`\alpha =p_c^+/p_\gamma ^+`$ of the photon LC momentum $`p_\gamma ^+=E_\gamma +p_\gamma `$ carried by the quark or antiquark. $`\alpha `$ is Lorentz-boost invariant. In the nonrelativistic approximation (assuming no relative motion of $`c`$ and $`\overline{c}`$) $`\alpha =1/2`$ (e.g. KZ ), otherwise one should integrate over $`\alpha `$ (see Eq. (1)).

### 2.1 Photon wave function

For transversely ($`T`$) and longitudinally ($`L`$) polarized photons the perturbative photon-quark distribution function in Eq. (1) reads KS ; BKS ,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{T,L}^{(\mu ,\overline{\mu })}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{r}_T,Q^2)=\frac{\sqrt{N_c\alpha _{em}}}{2\pi }Z_c\chi _c^\mu \widehat{O}_{T,L}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{\overline{c}}^{\overline{\mu }}K_0(ϵr_T),$$
(3)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{\overline{c}}=i\sigma _y\chi _{\overline{c}}^{}`$, $`\chi `$ and $`\overline{\chi }`$ are the spinors of the $`c`$-quark and antiquark respectively; $`Z_c=2/3`$. $`K_0(ϵr_T)`$ is the modified Bessel function with $`ϵ^2=\alpha (1\alpha )Q^2+m_c^2`$. The operators $`\widehat{O}_{T,L}`$ have the form:

$`\widehat{O}_T`$ $`=`$ $`m_c\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{e}_\gamma +i(12\alpha )(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{n})(\stackrel{}{e}_\gamma \stackrel{}{}_{r_T})+(\stackrel{}{n}\times \stackrel{}{e}_\gamma )\stackrel{}{}_{r_T},`$ (4)
$`\widehat{O}_L`$ $`=`$ $`2Q\alpha (1\alpha )\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{n},`$ (5)
where $`\stackrel{}{n}=\stackrel{}{p}/p`$ is a unit vector parallel to the photon momentum and $`\stackrel{}{e}`$ is the polarization vector of the photon. Effects of the non-perturbative interaction within the $`q\overline{q}`$ fluctuation are negligible for the heavy charmed quarks.

### 2.2 Charmonium wave function

The charmonium wave function is well defined in its rest frame where one can rely on the Schrödinger equation. As soon as the rest frame wave function is known, one may be tempted to apply the Lorentz transformation to the $`c\overline{c}`$ pair as it would be a classical system and boost it to the infinite momentum frame. However, quantum effects are important and in the infinite momentum frame a series of different Fock states emerges from the Lorentz boost. Therefore the lowest $`|c\overline{c}`$ component in the infinite momentum frame does not represent the $`|c\overline{c}`$ in the rest frame. We rely on the widely used procedure Terent'ev  for the generation of the LC wave functions of charmonia.

In the rest frame the spatial part of the $`c\overline{c}`$ pair wave function satisfying the Schrödinger equation

$$\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{m_c}+V(r)\right)\mathrm{\Psi }_{nlm}(\stackrel{}{r})=E_{nl}\mathrm{\Psi }_{nlm}(\stackrel{}{r})$$
(6)
is represented in the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{r})=\mathrm{\Psi }_{nl}(r)Y_{lm}(\theta ,\phi ),$$
(7)
where $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ is 3-dimensional $`c\overline{c}`$ separation, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{nl}(r)`$ and $`Y_{lm}(\theta ,\phi )`$ are the radial and orbital parts of the wave function. The following four potentials $`V(r)`$ have been used

* “COR”: Cornell potential COR ,

$$V(r)=\frac{k}{r}+\frac{r}{a^2}$$
(8)
with $`k=0.52`$, $`a=2.34\text{GeV}^1`$ and $`m_c=1.84\text{GeV}`$.
* “BT”: Potential suggested by Buchmüller and Tye BT  with $`m_c=1.48\text{GeV}`$. It has a similar structure as the Cornell potential: linear string potential at large separations and Coulomb shape at short distances with some refinements, however.
* “LOG”: Logarithmic potential LOG

$$V(r)=0.6635\text{GeV}+(0.733\text{GeV})\mathrm{log}(r1\text{GeV})$$
(9)
with $`m_c=1.5\text{GeV}`$.
* “POW”: Power-law potential POW

$$V(r)=8.064\text{GeV}+(6.898\text{GeV})(r1\text{GeV})^{0.1}$$
(10)
with $`m_c=1.8\text{GeV}`$.

The shapes of the four potentials differ from each other only at large $`r`$ ($`1\text{fm}`$) and very small $`r`$ ($`0.05\text{fm}`$) separations. Note, however, that COR and POW use $`m_c1.8\text{GeV}`$, while BT and LOG use $`m_c1.5\text{GeV}`$ for the mass of the charmed quark. This difference will have significant consequences.

For the ground state $`1S`$ all the potentials provide a very similar behavior for the radial part $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{nl}(r)`$ at $`r>0.3\text{fm}`$, while for small $`r`$ the predictions differ by up to $`30\%`$. The peculiar property of the $`2S`$ state wave function is the node at $`r0.4\text{fm}`$ which causes strong cancellations in the matrix elements Eq. (1) and as a result, a suppression of photoproduction of $`\psi ^{}`$ relative to $`J/\psi `$ KZ ; Benhar .

The lowest Fock component $`|c\overline{c}`$ in the infinite momentum frame is not related by simple Lorentz boost to the wave function of charmonium in the rest frame. This makes the problem of building the LC wave function for the lowest $`|c\overline{c}`$ component difficult, no unambiguous solution is yet known. There are only recipes in the literature, a simple one widely used Terent'ev , is the following. One applies a Fourier transformation from coordinate to momentum space to the known spatial part of the non-relativistic wave function (7), $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{r})\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{p})`$, which can be written as a function of the effective mass of the $`c\overline{c}`$, $`M^2=4(p^2+m_c^2)`$, expressed in terms of LC variables

$$M^2(\alpha ,p_T)=\frac{p_T^2+m_c^2}{\alpha (1\alpha )}.$$
(11)
In order to change integration variable $`p_L`$ to the LC variable $`\alpha `$ one relates them via $`M`$, namely $`p_L=(\alpha 1/2)M(p_T,\alpha )`$. In this way the $`c\overline{c}`$ wave function acquires a kinematical factor

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{p})\sqrt{2}\frac{(p^2+m_c^2)^{3/4}}{(p_T^2+m_c^2)^{1/2}}\mathrm{\Psi }(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T)\mathrm{\Phi }_\psi (\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T).$$
(12)
This procedure was used in Hoyer  and the result is applied to calculation of the amplitudes (1). The result was discouraging, since the $`\psi ^{}`$ to $`J/\psi `$ ratio of the electroproduction cross sections are far too low in comparison with data. However, the oversimplified dipole cross section $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T)r_T^2`$ was used, and what is even more essential, the important ingredient of Lorentz transformations, the Melosh spin rotation, was left out.

The 2-dimensional spinors $`\chi _c`$ and $`\chi _{\overline{c}}`$ describing $`c`$ and $`\overline{c}`$ respectively in the infinite momentum frame are known to be related via the Melosh rotation Terent'ev ; Melosh  to the spinors $`\overline{\chi }_c`$ and $`\overline{\chi }_{\overline{c}}`$ in the rest frame: $`\overline{\chi }_𝐜=\widehat{𝐑}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{𝐩}_𝐓)\chi _𝐜`$ and $`\overline{\chi }_{\overline{𝐜}}=\widehat{𝐑}(\mathrm{𝟏}\alpha ,\stackrel{}{𝐩}_𝐓)\chi _{\overline{𝐜}}`$, where the matrix $`R(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T)`$ has the form:

$$\widehat{R}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T)=\frac{m_c+\alpha Mi[\stackrel{}{\sigma }\times \stackrel{}{n}]\stackrel{}{p}_T}{\sqrt{(m_c+\alpha M)^2+p_T^2}}.$$
(13)
Since the potentials we use contain no spin-orbit term, the $`c\overline{c}`$ pair is in $`S`$-wave. In this case spatial and spin dependences in the wave function factorize and we arrive at the following LC wave function of the $`c\overline{c}`$ in the infinite momentum frame

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\psi ^{(\mu ,\overline{\mu })}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T)=U^{(\mu ,\overline{\mu })}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T)\mathrm{\Phi }_\psi (\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T),$$
(14)
where

$$U^{(\mu ,\overline{\mu })}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T)=\chi _c^\mu \widehat{R}^{}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T)\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{e}_\psi \sigma _y\widehat{R}^{}(1\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T)\sigma _y^1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{\overline{c}}^{\overline{\mu }}.$$
(15)
Now we can determine the LC wave function in the mixed longitudinal momentum - transverse coordinate representation:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\psi ^{(\mu ,\overline{\mu })}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{r}_T)=\frac{1}{2\pi }d^2\stackrel{}{p}_Te^{i\stackrel{}{p}_T\stackrel{}{r}_T}\mathrm{\Phi }_\psi ^{(\mu ,\overline{\mu })}(\alpha ,\stackrel{}{p}_T).$$
(16)
### 2.3 Phenomenological dipole cross section

The color dipole cross section $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,s)`$ is poorly known from first principles. It is expected to vanish $`r_T^2\mathrm{ln}r_T`$ at small $`r_T0`$ due to color screening ZKL  and to level off at large separations. We use a phenomenological form which interpolates between the two limiting cases of small and large separations. Few parameterizations are available in the literature, we choose two of them which are simple, but quite successful in describing data and denote them by the initials of the authors as “GBW” GBW  and “KST” KST .

$`\text{“GBW”:}\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,x)`$ $`=`$ $`23.03\left[1e^{r_T^2/r_0^2(x)}\right]\text{mb},`$ (17)
$`r_0(x)`$ $`=`$ $`0.4\left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{x_0}}\right)^{0.144}\text{fm},`$
where $`x_0=3.0410^4`$. The proton structure function calculated with this parameterization fits well all available data at small $`x`$ and in wide range of $`Q^2`$ GBW . However, it obviously fails describing the hadronic total cross sections, since it never exceeds the value $`23.03\text{mb}`$. The $`x`$-dependence guarantees Bjorken scaling for DIS at high $`Q^2`$, however, Bjorken $`x`$ is not a well defined quantity in the soft limit. Instead we use the prescription of Ryskin , $`x=(M_\psi ^2+Q^2)/s`$, where $`M_\psi `$ is the charmonium mass.

This problem with limited dipole cross section as well as the difficulty with the definition of $`x`$ have been fixed in KST . The dipole cross section is treated as a function of the c.m. energy $`\sqrt{s}`$, rather than $`x`$, since $`\sqrt{s}`$ is more appropriate for hadronic processes. A similarly simple form for the dipole cross section is used

$`\text{“KST”:}\sigma _{\overline{q}q}(r_T,s)`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _0(s)\left[1e^{r_T^2/r_0^2(s)}\right].`$ (18)
The values and energy dependence of hadronic cross sections are reproduced with the following expressions

$`\sigma _0(s)`$ $`=`$ $`23.6\left({\displaystyle \frac{s}{s_0}}\right)^{0.08}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_0^2(s)}{r_{ch}^2}}\right)\text{mb},`$ (19)
$`r_0(s)`$ $`=`$ $`0.88\left({\displaystyle \frac{s}{s_0}}\right)^{0.14}\text{fm}.`$ (20)
The energy dependent radius $`r_0(s)`$ is fitted to data for the proton structure function $`F_2^p(x,Q^2)`$, $`s_0=1000\text{GeV}^2`$ and the mean square of the pion charge radius $`r_{ch}^2=0.44\text{fm}^2`$. The improvement at large separations leads to a somewhat worse description of the proton structure function at large $`Q^2`$. Apparently, the cross section dependent on energy, rather than $`x`$, cannot provide Bjorken scaling. Indeed, parameterization (18) is successful only up to $`Q^210\text{GeV}^2`$.

In fact, the cases we are interested in, charmonium production and interaction, are just in between the regions where either of these parameterization is successful. Therefore, we suppose that the difference between predictions using Eq. (17) and (18) is a measure of the theoretical uncertainty which fortunately turns out to be rather small.

## 3 Electroproduction off protons

Having Eq. (1) and the expressions from the previous section (LC wave functions and dipole cross section), we can calculate cross sections for the virtual photoproduction $`\gamma p\mathrm{\Psi }p`$

$$\sigma _{\gamma p\mathrm{\Psi }p}(s,Q^2)=\frac{|\stackrel{~}{}_T(s,Q^2)|^2+\epsilon |\stackrel{~}{}_L(s,Q^2)|^2}{16\pi B},$$
(21)
where $`\epsilon `$ is the photon polarization (for H1 data $`\epsilon =0.99`$); $`B`$ is the slope parameter in reaction $`\gamma ^{}p\psi p`$. We use the experimental value H1-s  $`B=4.73GeV^2`$. $`\stackrel{~}{}_{T,L}`$ includes also the correction for the real part of the amplitude:

$$\stackrel{~}{}_{T,L}(s,Q^2)=_{T,L}(s,Q^2)\left(1i\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{\mathrm{ln}_{T,L}(s,Q^2)}{\mathrm{ln}s}\right),$$
(22)
where we apply the well known derivative analyticity relation between the real and imaginary parts of the forward elastic amplitude Bronzan . The correction from the real part is not small since the cross section of charmonium electroproduction is a rather steep function of energy.

We present here only results for energy dependence of the $`J/\psi `$ integrated cross section (Fig. 2) and for $`Q^2`$ dependence of the ratio $`\psi ^{}`$ to $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction (Fig. 3). More results are presented in HIKT . All calculations are performed with GBW and KST parameterizations for the dipole cross section and for wave functions of the $`J/\psi `$ calculated from BT, LOG, COR and POW potentials. One can see that there are no major differences for the results using the GBW and KST parameterizations. The BT and LOG potentials describe the data very well, while the potentials COR and POW underestimate them by a factor of two. The different behavior has been traced to the following origin: BT and LOG use $`m_c1.5\text{GeV}`$, but COR and POW $`m_c1.8\text{GeV}`$. While the bound state wave functions of $`J/\psi `$ are little affected by this difference, the photon wave function Eq. (3) depends sensitively on $`m_c`$.

It turns out that the effects of spin rotation have a gross impact on the ratio $`R=\sigma (\psi ^{})/\sigma (J/\psi )`$. This effects add 30-40% to the $`J/\psi `$ electroproduction cross section. But they have a much more dramatic impact on $`\psi ^{}`$ increasing the electroproduction cross section by a factor 2-3. This spin effects explain the large values of the ratio $`R`$ observed experimentally. Our results for $`R`$ are about twice as large as evaluated in Suzuki  and even more than in Hoyer .

## 4 Electroproduction off nuclei

Exclusive charmonium production off nuclei, $`\gamma A\mathrm{\Psi }X`$ is called coherent, when the nucleus remains intact, i.e. $`X=A`$, or incoherent, when $`X`$ is an excited nuclear state which contains nucleons and nuclear fragments but no other hadrons. The cross sections depend on the polarization $`\epsilon `$ of the virtual photon (in all figures below we will imply $`\epsilon =1`$),

$$\sigma _{\gamma A}(s,Q^2)=\sigma _T(s,Q^2)+\epsilon \sigma _L(s,Q^2),$$
(23)
where the indexes $`T,L`$ correspond to transversely or longitudinally polarized photons, respectively. At high energies the coherence length Eq. (2) may substantially exceed the nuclear radius ($`l_cR_A`$). In this case the transverse size of the $`c\overline{c}`$ wave packet is “frozen” by Lorentz time dilation, i.e. it does not fluctuate during propagation through the nucleus, and the expressions for the incoherent ($`inc`$) and coherent ($`coh`$) cross sections are simple KZ :

$`\sigma _{T,L}^{coh}(s,Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^2b\left|\stackrel{~}{}_{T,L}^{coh}(s,Q^2,b)\right|^2},`$ (24)
$`\sigma _{T,L}^{inc}(s,Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^2b\left|\stackrel{~}{}_{T,L}^{inc}(s,Q^2,b)\right|^2\frac{T_A(b)}{16\pi B(s)}},`$ (25)
where $`T_A(b)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z\rho _A(b,z)`$ is the nuclear thickness function given by the integral of the nuclear density along the trajectory at a given impact parameter $`b`$ and expressions for $`\stackrel{~}{}(s,Q^2,b)`$ are given by Eqs. (22) and (1) with replacement

$$\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,s)\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1\mathrm{exp}\left[\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,s)T_A(b)/2\right],& coh.\hfill \\ \hfill \sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,s)\mathrm{exp}\left[\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,s)T_A(b)/2\right],& inc.\hfill \end{array}$$
(26)
But for charmonium production off nuclei the “frozen” approximation is not enough and additional phenomena should be taken into account: effects of finite coherence length and gluon shadowing.

### 4.1 Finite coherence length

The “frozen” approximation (26) is valid only for $`l_cR_A`$ and can be used only at $`\sqrt{s}>20÷30\text{GeV}`$. The low-energy part should be corrected for the effects related to the finiteness of $`l_c`$. A strictly quantum-mechanical treatment of a fluctuating $`q\overline{q}`$ pair propagating through an absorptive medium based on the LC Green function approach has been suggested recently in KNST . However, an analytical solution for the LC Green function is known only for the simplest form of the dipole cross section $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T)r_T^2`$. With a realistic form of $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T)`$ it is possible only to solve this problem numerically, what is still a challenge. Here we use the approximation suggested in HKZ  to evaluate the corrections arising from the finiteness of $`l_c`$ by multiplying the cross sections for coherent and incoherent production evaluated for $`l_c\mathrm{}`$ by a kind of formfactor $`F^{coh}`$ and $`F^{inc}`$ respectively:

$$\sigma _{\gamma A}(s,Q^2)\sigma _{\gamma A}(s,Q^2)F(s,l_c(s,Q^2)),$$
(27)
where

$`F^{coh}(s,l_c)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^2b\left|\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑z\rho _A(b,z)F_1(s,b,z)e^{iz/l_c}\right|^2/(\mathrm{})}|_{l_c=\mathrm{}},`$ (28)
$`F^{inc}(s,l_c)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^2b\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑z\rho _A(b,z)\left|F_1(s,b,z)F_2(s,b,z,l_c)\right|^2/(\mathrm{})}|_{l_c=\mathrm{}},`$ (29)
$`F_1(s,b,z)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sigma _{\mathrm{\Psi }N}(s){\displaystyle \underset{z}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑z^{}\rho _A(b,z^{})\right),`$ (30)
$`F_2(s,b,z,l_c)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sigma _{\mathrm{\Psi }N}(s){\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{z}{}}}𝑑z^{}\rho _A(b,z^{})F_1(b,z^{})e^{i(zz^{})/l_c}.`$ (31)
For the charmonium nucleon total cross section $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Psi }N}(s)`$ we use our previous results HIKT .

### 4.2 Gluon shadowing

The gluon density in nuclei at small Bjorken $`x`$ is expected to be suppressed compared to a free nucleon due to interferences. This phenomenon, called gluon shadowing, renormalizes the dipole cross section,

$$\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,x)\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,x)R_G(x,Q^2,b).$$
(32)
where the factor $`R_G(x,Q^2,b)`$ is the ratio of the gluon density at $`x`$ and $`Q^2`$ in a nucleon of a nucleus to the gluon density in a free nucleon. No data are available so far which could provide information about gluon shadowing. Currently it can be evaluated only theoretically. To calculate function $`R_G`$ we use the approach developed in KST  and applied for charmonia production in HIKT-A .

### 4.3 Numerical results

Combining the results above (i.e. including finite coherence length and gluon shadowing) we obtain the results for charmonia ($`J/\psi `$ and $`\psi ^{}`$) electroproduction off nuclei. As it is common practice we express nuclear cross sections in the form of the ratio

$$R_\mathrm{\Psi }(s,Q^2)=\frac{\sigma _{\gamma A}(s,Q^2)}{A\sigma _{\gamma p}(s,Q^2)},$$
(33)
where the numerator stands for the expression Eq. (23) (with Eq. (24) for coherent and Eq. (25) for incoherent scattering) and the denominator is given by Eq. (21). We present here only $`s`$ dependences (plots for $`Q^2`$ dependences and momentum transfer $`\stackrel{}{k}_T`$ distributions are given in HIKT-A ) for coherent (Fig. 4) and incoherent (Fig. 5) production of charmonia with the GBW GBW  parameterization for the dipole cross section. KST KST  parameterization gives quite close results (they differ at most 10% at high energies). It is not a surprise that the ratios for coherent production exceed one: in the absence of $`c\overline{c}`$ attenuation the forward coherent production would be proportional to $`A^2`$, while integrated over momentum transfer it behaves as $`A^{4/3}`$. It is a result of our definition Eq. (33) that $`R_\mathrm{\Psi }^{coh}`$ exceeds one.

We see that in comparison with the “frozen” approximation, $`l_c`$ corrections noticeable change ratios at low energies (especially for $`\psi ^{}`$). For coherent production in the limit of low energies $`l_c0`$ the strongly oscillating exponential phase factor in (28) makes the integral very small and thus $`F^{coh}0`$. Then the cross section rises with $`l_c`$ unless it saturates at $`l_cR_A`$ when the phase factor becomes constant. Apparently, this transition region is shifted to higher energies for larger nuclear radius. For incoherent production the observed nontrivial energy dependence is easy to interpret. At low energies $`l_cR_A`$ and the photon propagates without any attenuation inside the nucleus where it develops for a short time $`t_c`$ a $`c\overline{c}`$ fluctuation which momentarily interacts to get on mass shell. The produced $`c\overline{c}`$ pair attenuates along the path whose length is a half of the nuclear thickness on the average. On the other hand, at high energies when $`l_cR_A`$ the $`c\overline{c}`$ fluctuation develops long before its interaction with the nucleus. As a result, it propagates through the whole nucleus and the mean path is twice as long as at low energies. This is why the nuclear transparency drops when going from the regimes of short to long $`l_c`$.

At high energies gluon shadowing becomes important. We see that the onset of gluon shadowing happens at a c.m. energy of few tens of GeV. Remarkably, the onset of shadowing is delayed with rising nuclear radius. Nuclear suppression of $`J/\psi `$ production becomes stronger with energy. This is an obvious consequence of the energy dependence of $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T,s)`$, which rises with energy. For $`\psi ^{}`$ the suppression is rather similar as for $`J/\psi `$. In particular we do not see any considerable nuclear enhancement of $`\psi ^{}`$ which has been found earlier KZ ; KNNZ , where the oversimplified form of the dipole cross section, $`\sigma _{q\overline{q}}(r_T)r_T^2`$ and the oscillator form of the wave function had been used.

## 5 Heavy ion peripheral collisions

The large charge $`Z`$ of heavy nuclei gives rise to strong electromagnetic fields: the photon field of one nucleus can produce a photo-nuclear interaction in the other. The cross section of the charmonia photoproduction by the induced photons reads

$$k\frac{d\sigma }{dk}=d^2bd^2b^{}n(k,\stackrel{}{b}^{}\stackrel{}{b})\sigma _A(b,s),$$
(34)
where $`k`$ is the photon momentum. Photon flux induced by projectile nucleus with Lorenz factor $`\gamma `$ is

$$n(k,\stackrel{}{b})=\frac{\alpha _{\text{em}}Z^2k^2}{\pi ^2\gamma ^2}K_1^2\left(\frac{bk}{\gamma }\right).$$
(35)
Cross sections $`\sigma _A(b,s)`$ for coherent and incoherent production are

$`\sigma _A^{coh}(s,b)`$ $`=`$ $`\left|\stackrel{~}{}_A^{coh}(s,b)\right|^2,`$ (36)
$`\sigma _A^{inc}(s,b)`$ $`=`$ $`\left|\stackrel{~}{}_A^{inc}(s,b)\right|^2{\displaystyle \frac{T(b)}{16\pi B(s)}},`$ (37)
where expressions $`\stackrel{~}{}(s,b)`$ correspond to $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ in Eqs. (24, 25) at $`Q^2=0`$. Our predictions for coherent $`J/\psi `$ production at RHIC and LHC energies are presented on Fig. 6.

We see that $`l_c`$ corrections modify the distribution at the edges (positive and negative $`y`$) while suppression around $`y=0`$ is provided mostly by gluon shadowing (especially for LHC, where energies should be much higher).

## 6 Conclusion

In this paper we use the LC dipole approach for description of charmonium electroproduction off protons and nuclei. We have no free parameters and our calculations are in good agreement with existing experimental data. Our predictions can be tested in future experiments at high energies with electron-nuclear colliders (eRHIC) and in peripheral heavy ion collisions (RHIC and LHC).

Acknowledgment: The authors gratefully acknowledge the partial support by a grant from the Gesellschaft für Schwerionenforschung Darmstadt (grant no. GSI-OR-SCH) and by the Federal Ministry BMBF (grant no. 06 HD 954).


format: text

text:
# References

STRING REPRESENTATION OF THE DUAL GINZBURG-LANDAU THEORY BEYOND THE LONDON LIMIT111Presented by M. Koma at “Confinement V”, Gargnano, Italy, 10-14 Sep. 2002

M. KOMAA,B, Y. KOMAA, D. EBERTC AND H. TOKIB

AMax-Planck-Institut für Physik, München
BResearch Center for Nuclear Physics(RCNP), Osaka University,
CInstitut für Physik, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin
E-mail: mkoma@mppmu.mpg.de

## Abstract

The effective string action of the color-electric flux tube in the dual Ginzburg-Landau (DGL) theory is studied by performing a path-integral analysis by taking into account the finite thickness of the flux tube. A modified Yukawa interaction appears as a boundary contribution and is reduced into the ordinary Yukawa interaction in the London Limit.

The dual Ginzburg-Landau (DGL) theory can sketch the dual superconductor scenario of quark confinement mechanism intuitively by the formation of a flux tube due to the dual Meissner effect. Since the flux tube corresponds to the hadronic object, the construction of the effective string action of the flux tube is one of the interesting applications of the DGL theory to the hadron physics. In this brief report, we discuss the structure of the effective string action of the $`U(1)`$ version of the DGL theory by using path-integral analysis. In particular, we pay attention to the effect of the finite thickness of the flux tube to the form of the string action.

The $`U(1)`$ DGL action in the differential form has the following form:

$`S_{\mathrm{DGL}}={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _g}{2}}(F)^2+((diB)\chi ^{},(d+iB)\chi )+\lambda (|\chi |^2v^2)^2,`$ (1)
where $`B`$ is the dual gauge field (1-form) and $`\chi =\varphi \mathrm{exp}(i\eta )`$ ($`\varphi `$, $`\eta `$ $`\mathrm{}`$) the complex-scalar monopole field (0-form). The dual gauge coupling, the strength of the self-coupling and the monopole condensate are denoted by $`\beta _g=1/g^2`$, $`\lambda `$ and $`v`$, respectively. They are related to the two mass scales of the theory: the mass of the dual gauge field $`m_B=\sqrt{2}gv`$ and that of the monopole field $`m_\chi =2\sqrt{\lambda }v`$. The inverses of these masses correspond to the penetration depth and coherence length, respectively.

In the presence of external quark sources, the dual field strength $`F`$ (2-from) is expressed as $`F=dB2\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }.`$ In a dual model, an external $`q`$-$`\overline{q}`$ source is described as an open color-electric Dirac string $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (2-form), whose boundary gives a quark current $`j`$ (1-form). By the Hodge decomposition, the dual gauge field is decomposed into two parts as $`B=B^{\mathrm{reg}}+B^{\mathrm{sing}},`$ where $`B^{\mathrm{sing}}=2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }^1\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Here, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^1`$ denotes a Coulomb propagator, which satisfies $`\mathrm{\Delta }^1\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^1=1`$. Then, the dual field strength can be rewritten as $`F=dB^{\mathrm{reg}}+2\pi d\mathrm{\Delta }^1\delta j`$. From the square of the second term of the dual field strength, one gets the Coulombic interaction between electric currents, which remains even if there is no monopole field. The rest of the effective action comes through the interaction between the monopole field and the dual gauge field.

After the functional path-integration over $`B^{\mathrm{reg}}`$ and $`\eta `$, introducing 2-form Kalb-Ramond (KR) field $`h`$, we obtain the action in terms of $`h`$ and $`\varphi `$. We divide it into three parts as

$`S^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi ^2\beta _g(j,\mathrm{\Delta }^1j),`$ (2)
$`S^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`(d\varphi )^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(dh,\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\varphi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v^2}}\right\}dh)+\lambda (\varphi ^2v^2)^2,`$ (3)
$`S^{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4v^2}}(dh)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\beta _g}}\{(h)^2(\delta h,\mathrm{\Delta }^1\delta h)\}2\pi i\{(h,\mathrm{\Sigma })(\delta h,\mathrm{\Delta }^1j)\}.`$ (4)
Here $`S^{(1)}`$ is the pure Coulombic interaction from the dual field strength as discussed above, $`S^{(2)}`$ contains monopole modulus $`\varphi `$, which plays a role only in the core region of the flux tube, where $`\varphi v`$ or $`d\varphi 0`$, and $`S^{(3)}`$ is the rest, which remains even where $`\varphi =v`$. From the structure of a classical flux-tube solution, we know that $`\varphi `$ varies from $`0`$ to $`v`$ at the region $`0\rho m_\chi ^1`$, where $`\rho `$ denotes transverse distance from the position of the Dirac string $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. This region, characterized by $`m_\chi ^1`$, is nothing but the core region. Therefore, we consider $`m_\chi `$ as an effective cutoff and evaluate the action $`S^{(2)}`$ and $`S^{(3)}`$ above and below this cutoff. The $`S^{(1)}`$ does not depend on $`m_\chi `$.

To treat the ultraviolet scale with respect to the cutoff $`m_\chi `$ (higher resolution than $`m_\chi ^1`$), one must evaluate the action $`S^{(2)}+S_{<m_\chi ^1}^{(3)}`$, since the detailed structure of the flux tube, variation of $`\varphi `$, is visible. From the knowledge of the classical solution, we speculate that this part gives a Nambu-Goto action with a certain string tension $`\sigma _{\mathrm{core}}`$ and non-confining potential $`S_{\mathrm{core}}(j)`$.

On the other hand, for the infrared scale (lower resolution than $`m_\chi ^1`$), one can only see the surface of the flux tube and cannot recognize inside of it. Thus $`S^{(2)}`$ gives no contribution and $`S_{>m_\chi ^1}^{(3)}`$ are essential to describe the system. In this case, further path-integration over the KR field $`h`$ is possible, which yields

$`S_{>m_\chi ^1}^{(3)}(\mathrm{\Sigma },j)`$ $`=`$ $`\left[2\pi ^2\beta _g(j,[D\mathrm{\Delta }^1]j)+4\pi ^2v^2(\mathrm{\Sigma },D\mathrm{\Sigma })\right]_{>m_\chi ^1},`$ (5)
where $`D(\mathrm{\Delta }+m_B^2)^1`$ is the propagator of the massive KR field. The last term gives another Nambu-Goto action with a string tension $`\sigma _{\mathrm{surf}}=\pi v^2\mathrm{ln}((m_B^2+m_\chi ^2)/m_B^2)`$ as a leading contribution of derivative expansion, together with corrections, for instance, a rigidity term with the negative coefficient. By adding all contributions, we arrive at the effective string action of the DGL theory as

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathrm{\Sigma },j)=S(j)+(\sigma _{\mathrm{core}}+\sigma _{\mathrm{surf}}){\displaystyle d^2\xi \sqrt{g(\xi )}}+(\text{corrections}),`$ (6)
where $`\xi ^a(a=1,2)`$ parametrize the string world sheet described by the coordinate $`\stackrel{~}{x}_\mu (\xi )`$ and $`g(\xi )`$ the determinant of the induced metric $`g_{ab}\frac{\stackrel{~}{x}_\mu (\xi )}{\xi ^a}\frac{\stackrel{~}{x}_\mu (\xi )}{\xi ^b}`$. The non-confining part of the effective action is given by

$`S(j)=2\pi ^2\beta _g(j,\mathrm{\Delta }^1j)+S_{\mathrm{core}}(j)+\left[2\pi ^2\beta _g(j,[D\mathrm{\Delta }^1]j)\right]_{>m_\chi ^1}.`$ (7)
We find that the Coulombic interaction from $`S^{(1)}`$ is partially cancelled by that from $`S_{>m_\chi ^1}^{(3)}`$. In the London limit, $`m_\chi \mathrm{}`$, the complete cancellation of the Coulombic term takes place and $`S_{\mathrm{core}}(j)`$ varnishes. Thus only the Yukawa term from $`S^{(3)}`$ remains.

To summarize, we have studied the effective string action of the $`U(1)`$ DGL theory. The effect of the finite thickness appears not only in the string tension but also in the shape of the non-confining potential, which becomes not pure Yukawa nor pure Coulomb potential, but something in between for a finite monopole mass $`m_\chi `$. This feature is the same even in the the $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ DGL theory, which corresponds to an infrared effective theory of $`SU(3)`$ Yang-Mills theory. In fact, an extension of these path-integral analyses is straightforward by using the Weyl symmetric representation of the $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ DGL action.


text:
# The Ly𝛼 Forest Around High Redshift Galaxies

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Galaxies form from the intergalactic medium (IGM), process such gas into stars, and possibly re-eject a fraction of it, enriched by nucleosynthetic products, back into the intergalactic space via powerful supernova-driven outflows (Mac Low & Ferrara 1999; Ferrara, Pettini & Shchekinov 2000; Madau, Ferrara & Rees 2001; Scannapieco, Ferrara & Madau 2002; Theuns et al. 2002). The energy deposition connected to these processes is expected to leave at least some detectable imprints on the physical state of the IGM. Thus, it is conceivable that such signatures can be studied through QSO absorption line experiments. Naively, the presence of hot outflowing gas should result primarily in two effects: \[i\] a decrease of the gas density and \[ii\] an increase of the temperature caused by shock-heating (acting in conjunction with photo-heating by the UV background) in a large (several hundreds kpc) region around the perturbing galaxy. Both these occurrences would imply an increasingly more transparent Ly$`\alpha `$ forest when approaching the galaxy, i.e. a galactic proximity effect. Quantitative confirmation of this scenario has faced tremendous difficulties, standing the complications of the physics of star formation, explosions and metal mixing in multiphase media. Hence, most simulations to date had to rely on ad hoc recipes for such processes.
Nevertheless, these ideas have stimulated the first challenging observations aimed at detecting the imprints of galaxy-IGM interplay. Adelberger et al. (2002, A02) obtained high resolution spectra of 8 bright QSOs at $`3.1<z<4.1`$ and spectroscopic redshifts for 431 Lyman-break galaxies (LBGs) at lower redshifts. By comparing the positions of the LBGs with the Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption lines in QSO spectra, indeed they conclude that within $`0.5h^1`$ (comoving) Mpc of the galaxies little $`\mathrm{I}`$is present; on the contrary, between 1 and 5$`h^1`$ Mpc an $`\mathrm{I}`$excess with respect to the IGM mean is detected. This simple interpretation might be at odd with the results of a VLT/UVES study of the Ly$`\alpha `$ forest in the vicinity of the LBG MS1512-cB58 showing the opposite trend (Savaglio et al. 2002), i.e. an absorption excess close to the galaxy.
Numerical simulations have also noticeable difficulties reproducing A02 results as discussed by Croft et al. (2002) and Kollmeier et al. (2002); however, these studies lack a self-consistent treatment of multiphase gas structure and/or outflow dynamics. Here we revisit A02 results through SPH simulations (Marri et al. 2003) that implement a new scheme for multiphase hydrodynamics and, more importantly, a physically meaningful outflow treatment; the full description of the code and of the tests made are given in Marri & White (2002). We then derive synthetic absorption line spectra along lines of sight randomly traced through the simulation box at $`z3`$ and compare them directly with A02 data to investigate galactic feedback effects on the IGM.

## 2 Simulations and data analysis

We have performed hydrodynamic simulations for a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM cosmological model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b=0.04`$ and $`h=0.7`$ km s-1 Mpc-1. The initial power spectrum is cluster-normalized ($`\sigma _8=0.9`$); periodic boundary conditions are adopted. We first obtained a set of low-resolution runs ($`64^3`$ particles for both gas and dark matter) in a $`7h^1`$ comoving Mpc cube; these runs serve as a guide for more computationally expensive runs and for testing purposes. We consider a first model where the IGM multiphase structure and galaxy outflows are deliberately ignored and a second one which includes a description of both these physical effects. We will refer to these runs as sph and mfb , respectively, with the same meaning (and parameters) adopted in the description of the low-resolution $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM test problem described in Marri & White (2002). The high-resolution run, on which the main results of the present analysis are based, is a $`128^3`$ particles simulation in a $`10.5h^1`$ comoving Mpc box. For this run we only studied the full mfb model.
Softening lenghts are fixed both in physical and comoving coordinates as required in GADGET (Springel, Yoshida & White 2001). Gas (dark matter) gravitational softening is approximately $`6h^1`$ kpc ($`8h^1`$ kpc) comoving and $`3h^1`$ kpc ($`4h^1`$ kpc) physical in the high-res case and scales according to particle number and box size in the low-res run. In all runs we include the effects of a UV background produced by QSOs and filtered through the IGM, whose shape and amplitude are taken from Haardt & Madau (1996).

### 2.1 Synthetic Ly$`\alpha `$ forest spectra

To allow a direct comparison of simulation results with observational data we construct synthetic Ly$`\alpha `$ spectra from simulation outputs at redshift $`z=3.17`$ ($`z=3.27`$) for the low-res (high-res) runs. In the simulation box we randomly trace 60 lines-of-sight (LOS) parallel to the $`x`$-axis, each of which is discretized into $`N_{pix}=1024`$ pixels. In order to assign to each pixel a value for the hydrogen density, temperature and peculiar velocity we perform a standard SPH smoothing using the 32 closest neighbour SPH particles to the LOS pixel position. The neutral hydrogen density is derived using the code CLOUDY94111http://nimbus.pa.uky.edu/cloudy/ on each pixel, adopting the same UVB as in the simulation. The transmitted flux due to Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption in the IGM is $`e^\tau `$, where $`\tau `$ is the optical depth along the considered LOS. The Hubble velocity $`v_H`$ varies in the range (0,$`v_H^{max}`$), where the maximum value is set by the box size. The contribution to $`\tau `$ at the observed frequency corresponding to $`v_H(k)`$, where $`1k1024`$ is the pixel index, is given by

$$\tau [v_H(k)]=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }x\sigma _0f\lambda _0}{\pi ^{1/2}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_{pix}}{}}\frac{n_{\mathrm{HI}}(i)}{b(i)}\mathrm{\Phi }_g[v_H(k)v(i)],$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ is the pixel size, $`\sigma _0`$ is the Ly$`\alpha `$ cross section, $`f`$ is the Ly$`\alpha `$ oscillator strength, $`\lambda _0`$ is the Ly$`\alpha `$ wavelength, $`n_\text{}\mathrm{I}(i),b(i)`$ and $`v(i)=v_H(i)+v_{pec}(i)`$ are the $`\mathrm{I}`$number density, the Doppler parameter, and the total velocity in the pixel $`i`$, respectively; $`\mathrm{\Phi }_g`$ is a gaussian line profile and $`v_{pec}`$ is the peculiar velocity. For additional discussion on this formula, see e.g. Rauch, Haehnelt & Steinmetz (1997a).
To compare observations and simulations at best it is necessary to degrade the synthetic spectra to account for the uncertainties affecting the observed spectra. We perform such procedure through the following steps: i) continuum normalization at the highest flux value in each spectrum; ii) convolution with the instrumental profile; iii) sampling due to spectrograph spatial resolution; iv) addition of instrumental noise (see Rauch et al. 1997b; Theuns et al. 1998; McDonald et al. 2000; Petry et al. 2002). As most of the data we compare with are taken with the Keck/HIRES spectrograph we adopt the following instrumental characteristics: FWHM $`=8.0`$ km s-1, pixel spectral resolution $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda =0.05`$Å and signal-to-noise ratio S/N=50. The low (high) resolution box has a wavelength extent of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _{box}=13.46`$Å ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _{box}=20.83`$Å); hence, degraded spectra in the two cases are made of 269 and 417 pixels, respectively.

## 3 Results

As a general sanity check of the simulations we have first confronted the simulated statistical properties of the Ly$`\alpha `$ forest with the observed ones. The most obvious comparison involves the probability distribution function (PDF) of the transmitted flux. In Fig.1 we plot the PDF as a function of the flux $`F=e^\tau `$ for the low-res (both mfb and sph runs) and high-res simulations (mfb case only) and compare them with the observational data of McDonald et al. (2000). The general agreement is quite good through all the flux range and for all three cases. The discrepancy between simulations and data at high fluxes is probably due to the uncertainties in the data continuum fitting (McDonald et al. 2000; Croft et al. 2002). Surprisingly, it appears that the inclusion of multiphase and outflow physics, not considered in the pure sph run, does not affect the distribution in a sensible manner. In other words, galactic outflows leave the Ly$`\alpha `$ forest unperturbed. This result is in agreement with that recently found by Theuns et al. (2002), who interpreted it as an indication that galactic outflows tend to propagate preferentially in the voids leaving the Ly$`\alpha `$ absorbing filaments virtually unaffected. As an additional check we have calculated the Doppler parameter, $`b`$, and the $`\mathrm{I}`$column density distribution, and compared them with two QSOs observations at $`z_{em}=3.38`$ and $`z_{em}=3.17`$ by Hu et al. (1995). The values of $`b`$ and $`N_{\mathrm{HI}}`$ for each absorber in the synthetic spectra have been derived using the fitting programm AUTOVP. The experimental $`b`$ distribution is well reproduced both by the sph and mfb (low-res + high-res) runs at similar quality level (simulated and observed distributions peak both around $`b20`$ km s-1). However, simulated spectra tend to slightly overproduce lines with $`10<b<22`$ km s-1 and under-predict lines with $`25<b<50`$ km s-1. A similar effect has already been noted by Theuns et al. (1998). These authors propose a number of possible explanations for this behavior: physical (HeII reionization, radiative transfer effects), numerical (resolution) and related to data analysis (fitting procedure). Our results seem to indicate that numerical artifacts should not be the dominant factor. As for the $`\mathrm{I}`$column density distribution, the mfb case seems to reproduce the observational data for $`\mathrm{log}N_{\mathrm{HI}}>15.5`$ somewhat better; for smaller values of $`N_{\mathrm{HI}}`$ the differences between the two runs are negligible.

In Fig.2 we show a temperature map from a slice through the high-res box at $`z=3.27`$. Hot bubbles ($`T10^6`$ K) of shocked gas produced by outflows around the parent galaxies are clearly apparent. Their sizes range from $`0.5`$ Mpc $`h^1`$ to $`2`$ Mpc $`h^1`$, and their shape appears in some case rather jagged as a result of the interaction with the inhomogeneous ambient medium. The volume filling factor of gas with temperature above $`10^5`$ K is 14%. The internal structure of the bubbles can be inspected more quantitatively in Fig.3, where the comparison between sph and mfb is shown (low-res case) for various physical quantities (hydrogen density, $`n_\mathrm{H}`$, ionization fraction, $`x_{\mathrm{HI}}`$, gas temperature, T, and peculiar velocity, $`v_{pec}`$) along the LOS through the center of the most massive galaxy $`M=1.5\times 10^{11}M_{}\mathrm{h}^1`$ in these simulations; the galaxy position corresponds to the density peak at $`x6.8`$ Mpc $`h^1`$. In both simulations the star formation rate in this galaxy is 5.6 $`M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ (18 $`M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$) for the mfb (sph ) models. A striking result of the comparison between the two models shows that, although outflows are able to heat the halo/IGM gas up to high temperatures out to more than 1 Mpc $`h^1`$ from the galaxy, they do not seem able to modify its density structure in a sensible way. Hence the density in the surroundings remains high and close to that set up by the process of galaxy formation. Close to the galactic center the outflow peak speed is about $`130`$ km s-1, but this value rapidly decreases as kinetic energy is used to counteract the pressure of intergalactic accreting gas, raining onto the galaxy at essentially the escape speed of the system, roughly $`150`$ km s-1. The stalling radius is seen at the zero-crossing of $`v_{pec}`$, approximately 0.3 Mpc $`h^1`$ away from the outflow source. The relative insensitivity of the density to the SN energy injection can be interpreted as the fact that the outflow velocities are lower than the escape speeds and hence the flow is confined by inflow.

Also, we note that the outflow velocities we find are lower than those inferred by A02, $`600`$ km s-1 from LBGs.
Fig.4 shows the mean Ly$`\alpha `$ forest flux averaged on pixels on different LOS at different distances, $`\mathrm{\Delta }r`$, from the galaxy centers in the simulation box, following the same experimental procedure as in A02:

$$<F(\mathrm{\Delta }r)>=\frac{1}{N(\mathrm{\Delta }r)}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N(\mathrm{\Delta }r)}{}}F_i,$$
(2)
where $`N(\mathrm{\Delta }r)`$ is the number of pixels that fall in the bin $`\mathrm{\Delta }r`$, and $`F_i`$ is the transmitted flux in the pixel $`i`$. The synthetic data, normalized to the observational ones, are plotted only out to a distance $`\mathrm{\Delta }r3.81`$ Mpc $`h^1`$ for the low-res simulations ($`\mathrm{\Delta }r5.32`$ Mpc $`h^1`$ for high-res one) due to the periodic boundary conditions of the simulation. We first compare the two low-res sph and mfb cases. The difference between these curves is negligible and on average the Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption is similar: this is expected after the results analyzed in Fig. 1. In addition both simulations are in agreement with the high-res one, thus ensuring that numerical convergence has been reached and results are not affected by spurious effects. However, these models fail in reproducing the observed trend inside 1 Mpc $`h^1`$. The simulated Ly$`\alpha `$ forest seems to be much more opaque than the observed one, with a maximum $`\tau `$ discrepancy of about a factor 2.2. In order to assess if the disagreement could be reduced by a more efficient outflow clearing of the halos of smaller systems, we excluded the contribution of most massive galaxies ($`M>1.5\times 10^{10}h^1M_{}`$) to the flux. However, as it is seen from the Figure, this does not solve the problem. As a final resort, we have randomized the position of galaxy centers in the box to account for the reported experimental error determination. To this aim we have added a gaussian random displacement to the redshift of each galaxy with r.m.s. $`\sigma _z=0.002`$, which represents the 1-$`\sigma `$ error of the measure. This procedure improves the result, as now galaxy centers do not perfectly coincide with density peaks, but to an extent insufficient to explain the data.

## 4 Conclusions

Motivated by the recent observational results of A02, we have studied, with the help of a set of cosmological simulations including star formation in multiphase gas and outflows from galaxies, the effects of galaxy formation/activity on the properties of the surrounding Ly$`\alpha `$ forest. Although on large scales our simulations can reproduce remarkably well a number of statistical properties of the IGM, they fail to predict the observed Ly$`\alpha `$ flux increase in regions close to the galaxies themselves. The success can be ascertain to two concomitant effects: (i) outflows preferentially expand in regions of low-density (voids) thus preserving the filaments responsible for the Ly$`\alpha `$ absorbing network; (ii) the hot bubbles fill a relatively small fraction of the cosmic volume ($`14`$% in our simulations). Support to the first hypothesis emerges also from an inspection of the velocity field in the surrounding of the most massive galaxy in the simulation: the inflow of gas from low density regions is blocked by the bubble expansion, but it proceeds basically unimpeded along the filaments (see Marri et al. 2003).
Much more puzzling is instead the reason for the opacity excess (with respect to real data) we see in the simulation in the inner Mpc $`h^1`$. Apparently, simulated outflows do not carry sufficient momentum to disperse the density peak created in the vicinity of the galaxy as a leftover of its formation. Also, a large fraction of the outflow energy is used to counteract the infalling gas ram pressure which tends to pile up the gas into the galaxy. The temperature increase close to galaxies amplifies the magnitude of the collisional ionization rate, which becomes larger than the equivalent photoionization rate for $`T\stackrel{>}{}10^5`$ K. In this case the $`\mathrm{I}`$neutral fraction $`x_{\mathrm{HI}}`$ is independent of gas density and remains at roughly the same level as in the general IGM. Therefore, collisional ionization is not sufficient to balance the opacity increase induced by the density raise and the transmitted flux drops accordingly to the latter. What are the possible alternative explanations for the observed flux trend? The presence of a bias in the data produced by a preferential selection effect of low Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption LBGs has already been suggested by Croft et al. (2002). Another possibility is provided by photoionization, particularly if one recalls the recent results by Steidel, Pettini & Adelberger (2001), who detected flux beyond the Lyman limit (with significant residual flux at $`\lambda <912`$ Å) in a composite spectrum of 29 LBGs at $`z=3.4`$, a clue of a conspicuous escape probability of ionizing radiation from these objects. As mentioned above, the A02 data would require an optical depth (or equivalently a $`x_{\mathrm{HI}}`$, assuming a prescribed density profile) a factor $`23`$ smaller. If this can be achieved with the ionizing flux coming from galaxies must be proved with detailed radiative transfer calculations which are currently ongoing (Maselli et al. 2003) The first attempt using simplified analytical and/or post-processing techniques to account for this effect (Croft et al. 2002, Kollmeier et al. 2002) have yielded so far negative answers, but a fully self-consistent, physically accurate description of the problem is awaited in order to draw a final conclusion.

This work was partially supported by the Research and Training Network ‘The Physics of the Intergalactic Medium’ set up by the European Community under the contract HPRN-CT2000-00126 RG29185. MB thanks P.Petitjean for discussions and hospitality at IAP. We are grateful to S. Bianchi for help with AUTOVP and discussions.


text:
# CNO in Low- and Zero-Metallicity AGB Stars

## 1. Introduction

The first nuclear processing of pristine Big Bang matter has left a signature in today’s most metal poor low mass stars. There is some debate whether both low mass and massive stars contributed to this processing (Nakamura & Umemura, 2002) or whether the first stars were exclusively very massive (e.g. Abel et al., 2002). The recently discovered low mass star HE0107-5240 has \[Fe/H\]=-5.3 (Christlieb et al., 2002). This may indicate that the Pop. III IMF has a low mass component. The large nitrogen overabundance in this object could mean that intermediate mass stars are involved in the contamination of this star.

This is much more obvious for stars like HE0024-2523 (Lucatello et al., 2003), a very metal poor main sequence star with \[Fe/H\]=-2.7, an $`s`$-process abundance signature, large C and N overabundances as well as radial velocity variations. It has been suggested that this star and related objects have been polluted by an intermediate mass binary companion. The carbon and $`s`$-process abundance could – in principle – be understood with the dredge-up and $`s`$-process mechanisms known from AGB stars of solar-like metallicity (e.g. Gallino et al., 1998). The nitrogen overabundance could result from partial envelope CNO cycling (hot bottom burning, HBB). Siess et al. (2002) predict that both carbon as well as nitrogen may be significantly enhanced due to dredge-up and HBB in Z=0 AGB stars. Their $`3(2)\mathrm{M}_{}`$ model predicts at the last thermal pulse (TP) \[C/H\]$`0.9(0.0)`$, \[N/H\]$`+0.4(2.2)`$ and C/O$`=5(53)`$. HE0024-2523 has \[C/H\]$`=0.1`$, \[N/H\]$`=0.6`$ and C/O$`=100`$. A \[C/N\] ratio of a few tenth of a dex is also found in other similar stars (e.g. CS 22948, Aoki et al., 2002). It is even more extreme in HE0107-5240. This puts some limit on the role HBB can play because efficient HBB may too quickly decrease the C/N ratio below unity.

The role of intermediate mass stars as a source of primary nitrogen in the early chemical evolution has recently been revisited on the basis of the N abundances in Damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ Absorbers (Pettini et al., 2002, and Henry & Proschaska, this volume). Meynet & Maeder (2002) have shown that in intermediate mass stars of very low metallicity rotationally induced mixing can lead to significant $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ enrichment of the outer layers even before the first TP occurs. In these models the C/N ratio is much smaller than unity and would not reproduce the abundance patterns of stars like HE0024-2523. Clearly, the the envelope abundances are modified in the subsequent TP AGB phase.

In very low and zero metallicity stars the convection zone driven by the He-flash may reach into the proton rich unprocessed outer layers . As protons enter the He-shell environment they initiate a vigorous non-equilibrium nuclear burning, mainly of proton captures on $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$. This may happen in the case of the He-core flash as well as the AGB He-shell flash for low enough metallicity and core mass (Fujimoto et al., 2000). The studies by Siess et al. (2002) and Chieffi et al. (2001) found that the TP AGB evolution of Z=0 objects eventually resembles that of only mildly metal poor AGB stars. Either the second dredge-up or a convective instability of the H-shell at reignition after a TP sufficiently increases the catalyst material for the CNO cycle.

In this paper I present first results on stellar evolution calculations that consider convective nucleosynthesis in a numerically consistent way and also allow for soft convective boundaries with respect to mixing. Models of the proton ingestion induced H-flash during TPs of Z=0 AGB stars of $`2\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`5\mathrm{M}_{}`$ are described. In addition I report on a new process of carbon and nitrogen enrichment uniquely present in very low metallicity stars which is a combination of HBB and third dredge-up.

## 2. Stellar evolution code and physical model

The 1D hydrostatic stellar evolution code EVOL has been previously used for extensive calculations of the TP AGB phase (Herwig, 2000). The models contain a parametric hydrodynamic overshooting at all convective boundaries. The efficiency $`f`$ is expressed as the e-folding distance of the decay of the turbulent velocity field in the stable layer. This scheme has been adopted from 2D RHD simulations. In AGB models the efficiency can be constrained by carefull analysis of the $`s`$-process nucleosynthesis, and comparison with both stellar observations and measurements of pre-solar meteoritic grains. In particular certain temperature dependent branchings provide valuable constraints on mixing processes in low mass TP AGB stars (Lugaro et al., 2002; Herwig et al., 2002).

EVOL has also been used to construct model sequences of pre-white dwarf He-shell flash stars which evolve into born-again AGB stars (Herwig et al., 1999). In these stars the convection zone of the He-shell flash can reach into the thin H-rich envelope, very similar to the events reported by Fujimoto et al. (2000) in very low or zero metallicity stars. We follow the convective nucleosynthesis with a solution scheme in which nuclear rate equations and time dependent mixing equations are fully coupled. In that way the abundance profiles, in particular of hydrogen, reflect at each grid point and time step the simultaneous action of fast convective mixing and fast p-captures by $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$. Although the numerical scheme is treating the abundance evolution in this convective nucleosynthesis event correctly there is evidence that the physical model to describe convection (here the mixing length theory) may need to be adjusted (Herwig, 2001), which is done here in an approximated way.

## 3. Proton capture burning in the He-shell flash layer

I have computed Z=0 tracks for initial stellar mass of $`2\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`5\mathrm{M}_{}`$ from the pre-main sequence up to the TP AGB. In both cases protons are eventually entering the He-flash convection zone. The $`5\mathrm{M}_{}`$ sequence starts on the AGB with eight weak TPs with $`L_{\mathrm{He}}<10^5\mathrm{L}_{}`$ and a TP period of $`3500\mathrm{y}\mathrm{r}`$ . The H-shell becomes convectively unstable at the time it reignites after the $`9^{\mathrm{th}}`$ TP. This occurence has been previously reported by Chieffi et al. (2001) and Siess et al. (2002) as a *hydrogen convective episode* (HCE). The trace of any small C and N envelope abundance increase resulting from this event is lost in the following TP. As the He-flash convection zone develops it eventually reaches out into the proton rich envelope and the well know sequence of events, including the H-flash and the splitting of the convection zone take place. A snapshot of the developing H-flash convection zone on top of the He-flash convection zone is shown in Fig. 1. In comparison to the very late TP in some pre-white dwarf models (Herwig et al., 1999) much more hydrogen is available and a large amount of $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ is produced. The processed material is dredged-up to the surface in two subsequent phases associated with the H-flash and the He-flash respectively. The envelope $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ mass fraction after the event is $`2.510^5`$. In the $`2\mathrm{M}_{}`$ case the proton ingestion into the He-shell flash layer happens after 7 weak initial pulses without a previous HCE event. A peak H-luminosity of almost $`10^{10}\mathrm{L}_{}`$ is obtained and after the event both the $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$ and the $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ abundance in the envelope amounts to about $`10^4`$ in mass fraction with C/N$`<1`$. For both masses the further evolution is equivalent to models at higher Z with the same supply of CNO catalytic material.

If the models by Meynet & Maeder apply to Z=0 intermediate mass stars, and if these are rapid rotators, then the proton ingestion into the He-flash convection layer will not occur in TP AGB models. It is also unlikely that the HCE will occur in this case.

## 4. Hot dredge-up

In addition to the Z=0.0 sequences I calculated tracks for $`\mathrm{log}Z=5`$, $`4`$, and $`3`$ for $`2\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`5\mathrm{M}_{}`$. In all sequences efficient dredge-up is present leading to gradual CNO enrichment at each TP. A new phenomenon was encountered in all $`5\mathrm{M}_{}`$ cases (Fig. 2). During the dredge-up phase protons are partially mixed with the underlying $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$ in the core. In this tiny layer the H/$`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$ ratio drops by orders of magnitude. At the given temperature this leads to fast proton captures and a very large H-burning luminosity. The partial mixing layer in these calculations is the immediate consequence of the hydrodynamic overshooting model. This effect is only observed in very low Z models where the dredge-up layer is hotter compared to higher metallicity models. As shown in Fig. 3 a substantial $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ pocket forms in this partial mixing layer. A $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}`$ pocket of the same size (not shown) is also present. The $`s`$-process can not take place in this partial mixing layer because the time scale is too short and the $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ abundance is too high. In these models carbon is CN processed *on the fly* as it is dredged-up to the envelope. This process can be thought of as a combination of HBB and third dredge-up, and I call it *hot dredge-up*. The dredge-up with simultaneous hydrogen burning may be much deeper than usually found. This can boost the envelope enrichment with processed matter, in particular C and N. We summarize the C and N abundance features before and after the first thermal pulse with hot dredge-up in Table 1. It is tempting to compare these results with observed C and N abundances and isotopic ratios, for example Tab. 6 in Aoki et al. (2002). The isotopic ratios agree within a factor of two. However, the combined effect of hot dredge-up, HBB, and mass loss over many thermal pulses should be taken into account before detailed comparisons are useful.

## 5. Conclusions

All recent calculations of the AGB phase at Z=0 agree that thermal pulses and dredge-up occur. Various processes, in particular rotationally induced mixing during the He-core burning phase, can lift the envelope abundance of catalytic material for the CNO cycle so that eventually the evolution in these objects resemble those of only mild metal deficiency. It is therefore not clear if the proton ingestion into the He-shell flash convection zone or the HCE take place in real Z=0 AGB stars should they have existed. Here a hot variant of the third dredge-up was described which may be an important ingredient in understanding both the primary production of nitrogen as well as the peculiar carbon and nitrogen overabundances observed in very metal poor stars.

### Acknowledgments:

I would like to thank D.A. VandenBerg for support through his Operating Grant from the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

## References

Abel, T., Bryan, G. L., & Norman, M. L. 2002, Science, 295, 93

Aoki, W., Norris, J. E., Ryan, S. G., Beers, T. C., & Ando, H. 2002, ApJ, 567, 1166

Chieffi, A., Dominguez, I., Limongi, M., & Straniero, O. 2001, ApJ, 554, 1159

Christlieb, N., Bessel, M. S., Beers, T. C., Gustafsson, B., Korn, A., Barklem, P. S., Karlsson, T., Mizuno-Wiedner, M., & Rossi, S. 2002, Nature, 419

Fujimoto, M. Y., Ikeda, Y., & Iben, I., J. 2000, ApJ Lett., 529, L25

Gallino, R., Arlandini, C., Busso, M., Lugaro, M., Travaglio, C., Straniero, O., Chieffi, A., & Limongi, M. 1998, ApJ, 497, 388

Herwig, F. 2000, A&A, 360, 952

—. 2001, ApJ Lett., 554, L71

Herwig, F., Blöcker, T., Langer, N., & Driebe, T. 1999, A&A, 349, L5

Herwig, F., Langer, N., & Lugaro, M. 2002, ApJ, submitted

Lucatello, S., Gratton, R., Cohen, J. G., Beers, T. C., Christlieb, N., Carretta, E., & Ramirez, S. 2003, AJ, accepted

Lugaro, M., Herwig, F., Lattanzio, J. C., Gallino, R., & Straniero, O. 2002, ApJ, accepted

Meynet, G. & Maeder, A. 2002, A&A, 390, 561

Nakamura, F. & Umemura, M. 2002, ApJ, 569, 549

Pettini, M., Ellison, S. L., Bergeron, J., & Petitjean, P. 2002, A&A, 391, 21

Siess, L., Livio, M., & Lattanzio, J. 2002, ApJ, 570, 329


text:
# References

## Abstract

The relations between masses and decay constants of variety of meson resonances in the energy range 0–3 GeV are verified from the string-like, linear mass spectrum for vector, axial-vector, scalar and pseudoscalar mesons with a universal slope. The way to match the universality with the Operator Product Expansion (OPE) is proposed. The necessity of small deviations from linearity in parameterization of the meson mass spectrum and their decay constants is proven from matching to OPE.

Meson mass spectrum and OPE: matching to the large-$`N_c`$ QCD***Talk at V-th International Conference “Quark Confinement and the Hadron Spectrum”, Gargnano, Garda Lake, Italy, 10-14 September 2002.This work is supported by Grant RFBR 01-02-17152, INTAS Call 2000 grant (Project 587), Russian Ministry of Education grant E00-33-208, the Program ”Universities of Russia: Fundamental Investigations” (grant UR.02.01.001). S.A. is also supported by Grant INTAS-YS 4384 and Grant for young scientists of St.Petersburg M02-2.4K-15.

A. A. Andrianov
St.Petersburg State University and INFN, Sezione di Bologna

V. A. Andrianov and S. S. Afonin
St.Petersburg State University

As it follows from phenomenology  the masses squared of mesons of a given spin increase linearly with the number of (radial) excitation $`n`$ which can be thought of as a hint on the string structure of QCD. The string picture gives an equal slope of these trajectories for different quarkonium mesons since this quantity is proportional to the string tension depending on gluodynamics only. In our talk we examine possible corrections to the linear trajectories for vector (V), axial-vector (A), scalar (S), and pseudoscalar (P) case. Our method is based on the consideration of two-point correlators of quark currents in the large-$`N_c`$ limit of QCD . On one hand, by virtue of confinement they are saturated by an infinite set of narrow meson resonances, on the other hand their high-energy asymptotics are provided by the perturbation theory and the OPE  with condensates.

We adopt the following ansatz for the meson mass spectrum (compare to ):

$$m_R^2(n)=m_{0,R}^2+an+\frac{d_R}{n+1},$$
(1)
where $`RV,A,S,P`$ and the corrections to linear trajectory fit a possible deviation from the string picture in QCD. It turns out that for the consistency with the OPE one needs the following conditions on the residues:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill Z_{VA}(n)& =& t\left(m_{VA}^2(n)\right)\frac{dm_{VA}^2(n)}{dn},\hfill \\ \hfill Z_{SP}(n)& =& t\left(m_{SP}^2(n)\right)\left(m_{SP}^2(n)\frac{3\alpha _s}{4\pi ^3C}\lambda ^2\right)\frac{dm_{SP}^2(n)}{dn};\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
$$t\left(m_R^2(n)\right)=C+\underset{i>0}{}A_i\mathrm{exp}\left(B_im_R^2(n)\right),B_i>0,$$
(3)
where $`\lambda `$ represents the possible dimension two condensate. The wave function corrections in Eq. (3) are taken in the exponential form in order to avoid positive powers of logarithms of momentum in the high-energy asymptotics in accordance with OPE.

Our numerical calculations (see the tables at the end) have shown that:
1. The linear ansatz ($`d_R=0`$) for the meson mass spectrum with a universal slope fits rather well the meson phenomenology  but for the corresponding residues (wave function moments) a related constant or linear ansatz ($`A_i=0`$) in Eq. (2) leads to a striking disagreement with the OPE and, in particular, does not provide Chiral Symmetry Restoration (CSR)  , i.e. fast decreasing of differences between correlators of parity doublers ($`SP,VA`$) (compare to ).
2. Nonlinear corrections ($`d_R0`$) to the meson trajectories with universal slope may bring CSR but they do not improve drastically the matching to the OPE in each channel.
3. The OPE matching may be fulfilled with the help of exponentially decreasing corrections ($`A_i0`$) to the meson residues (wave function momenta), Eq. (3) (in our calculations we introduced two of such terms in each channel). They control substantially the values of condensates in high-energy asymptotics though being numerically negligible at low and intermediate energies.

We express our gratitude to the organizers of the ”5-th International Conference Quark Confinement and the Hadron Spectrum” for hospitality.


text:
# COMPLEX-VALUED SECOND DIFFERENCE AS A MEASURE OF STABILIZATION OF COMPLEX DISSIPATIVE STATISTICAL SYSTEMS: GIRKO ENSEMBLE ”Space-time chaos: Characterization, control and synchronization”; Proceedings of the International Interdisciplinary School, Pamplona, Spain, June 19-23, 2000; S. Boccaletti, J. Burguete, W. Gonzalez-Vinas, D. L. Valladares, Eds.; World Scientific Publishers, Singapore, 45-52 (2001).

## 1 Summary

A complex quantum system with energy dissipation is considered. The quantum Hamiltonians $`H`$ belong the complex Ginibre ensemble. The complex-valued eigenenergies $`Z_i`$ are random variables. The second differences $`\mathrm{\Delta }^1Z_i`$ are also complex-valued random variables. The second differences have their real and imaginary parts and also radii (moduli) and main arguments (angles). For $`N`$=3 dimensional Ginibre ensemble the distributions of above random variables are provided whereas for generic $`N`$\- dimensional Ginibre ensemble second difference’s, radius’s and angle’s distributions are analytically calculated. The law of homogenization of eigenergies is formulated. The analogy of Wigner and Dyson of Coulomb gas of electric charges is studied. The stabilisation of system of electric charges is dealt with.

## 2 Introduction

We study generic quantum statistical systems with energy dissipation. The quantum Hamiltonian operator $`H`$ is in given basis of Hilbert’s space a matrix with random elements $`H_{ij}`$ . The Hamiltonian $`H`$ is not Hermitean operator, thus its eigenenergies $`Z_i`$ are complex-valued random variables. We assume that distribution of $`H_{ij}`$ is governed by Ginibre ensemble . $`H`$ belongs to general linear Lie group GL($`N`$, C), where $`N`$ is dimension and C is complex numbers field. Since $`H`$ is not Hermitean, therefore quantum system is dissipative system. Ginibre ensemble of random matrices is one of many Gaussian Random Matrix ensembles GRME. The above approach is an example of Random Matrix theory RMT . The other RMT ensembles are for example Gaussian orthogonal ensemble GOE, unitary GUE, symplectic GSE, as well as circular ensembles: orthogonal COE, unitary CUE, and symplectic CSE. The distributions of the eigenenergies $`Z_1,\mathrm{},Z_N`$ for $`N\times N`$ Hamiltonian matrices is given by Jean Ginibre’s formula :

$`P(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)=`$ (1)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi j!}}{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{\overset{N}{}}}|z_iz_j|^2\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|z_j|^2),`$
where $`z_i`$ are complex-valued sample points ($`z_i𝐂`$). For Ginibre ensemble we define complex-valued spacings $`\mathrm{\Delta }^1Z_i`$ and second differences $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i`$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^1Z_i=Z_{i+1}Z_i,i=1,\mathrm{},(N1),$$
(2)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i=Z_{i+2}2Z_{i+1}+Z_i,i=1,\mathrm{},(N2).$$
(3)
The $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i`$ are extensions of real-valued second differences

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^2E_i=E_{i+2}2E_{i+1}+E_i,i=1,\mathrm{},(N2),$$
(4)
of adjacent ordered increasingly real-valued energies $`E_i`$ defined for GOE, GUE, GSE, and Poisson ensemble PE (where Poisson ensemble is composed of uncorrelated randomly distributed eigenenergies) .

There is an analogy of Coulomb gas of unit electric charges pointed out by Eugene Wigner and Freeman Dyson. A Coulomb gas of $`N`$ unit charges moving on complex plane (Gauss’s plane) C is considered. The vectors of positions of charges are $`z_i`$ and potential energy of the system is:

$$U(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)=\underset{i<j}{}\mathrm{ln}|z_iz_j|+\frac{1}{2}\underset{i}{}|z_i^2|.$$
(5)
If gas is in thermodynamical equilibrium at temperature $`T=\frac{1}{2k_B}`$ ($`\beta =\frac{1}{k_BT}=2`$, $`k_B`$ is Boltzmann’s constant), then probability density function of vectors of positions is $`P(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)`$ Eq. (1). Complex eigenenergies $`Z_i`$ of quantum system are analogous to vectors of positions of charges of Coulomb gas. Moreover, complex-valued spacings $`\mathrm{\Delta }^1Z_i`$ are analogous to vectors of relative positions of electric charges. Finally, complex-valued second differences $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i`$ are analogous to vectors of relative positions of vectors of relative positions of electric charges.

The $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i`$ have their real parts $`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i`$, and imaginary parts $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i`$, as well as radii (moduli) $`|\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i|`$, and main arguments (angles) $`\mathrm{Arg}\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_i`$.

## 3 Second Difference Distributions

We define following random variables for $`N`$=3 dimensional Ginibre ensemble:

$$Y_1=\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_1,A_1=\mathrm{Re}Y_1,B_1=\mathrm{Im}Y_1,$$
(6)
$$R_1=|Y_1|,\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\mathrm{Arg}Y_1,$$
(7)
and for the generic $`N`$-dimensional Ginibre ensemble :

$$W_1=\mathrm{\Delta }^2Z_1,P_1=|W_1|,\mathrm{\Psi }_1=\mathrm{Arg}W_1.$$
(8)
Their distributions for are given by following formulae, respectively :

$`f_{Y_1}(y_1)=f_{(A_1,B_1)}(a_1,b_1)=`$ (9)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{576\pi }}[(a_1^2+b_1^2)^2+24]\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}(a_1^2+b_1^2)),`$
is second difference distribution for 3-dimensional Ginibre ensemble.

$$f_{A_1}(a_1)=\frac{\sqrt{6}}{576\sqrt{\pi }}(a_1^4+6a_1^2+51)\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{6}a_1^2),$$
(10)
$$f_{B_1}(b_1)=\frac{\sqrt{6}}{576\sqrt{\pi }}(b_1^4+6b_1^2+51)\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{6}b_1^2),$$
(11)
$`f_{R_1}(r_1)=`$ (12)
$`\mathrm{\Theta }(r_1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{288}}r_1(r_1^4+24)\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}r_1^2),`$
$`f_{\mathrm{\Phi }_1}(\varphi _1)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }},\varphi _1[0,2\pi ],`$
are real part’s, imaginary part’s, modulus’s and angle’s probability distributions for 3-dimensional Ginibre ensemble, where $`\mathrm{\Theta }(r_1)`$ is Heaviside (step) function. Notice, that the angle $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ has uniform distribution. Next, second difference’s distribution for $`N`$-dimensional Ginibre ensemble reads $`P_3(w_1)`$ :

$`P_3(w_1)=`$ (13)
$`=\pi ^3{\displaystyle \underset{j_1=0}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j_2=0}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j_3=0}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{j_1!j_2!j_3!}}I_{j_1j_2j_3}(w_1),`$
$`I_{j_1j_2j_3}(w_1)=`$ (14)
$`=2^{2j_2}{\displaystyle \frac{^{j_1+j_2+j_3}}{^{j_1}\lambda _1^{j_2}\lambda _2^{j_3}\lambda _3}}F(w_1,\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3)|_{\lambda _i=0},`$
$`F(w_1,\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3)=`$ (15)
$`=A(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3)\mathrm{exp}[B(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3)|w_1|^2],`$
$`A(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3)=`$ (16)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^2}{(\lambda _1+\lambda _2\frac{5}{4})(\lambda _1+\lambda _3\frac{5}{4})(\lambda _11)^2}},`$
$`B(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3)=`$ (17)
$`=(\lambda _11){\displaystyle \frac{2\lambda _1\lambda _2\lambda _3+\frac{1}{2}}{2\lambda _1+\lambda _2+\lambda _3\frac{9}{2}}}.`$
Finally,

$`f_{P_1}(\varrho _1)=2\pi P_3(\varrho _1)=`$ (18)
$`=2\pi ^2{\displaystyle \underset{j_1=0}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j_2=0}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j_3=0}{\overset{N1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{j_1!j_2!j_3!}}I_{j_1j_2j_3}(\varrho _1),`$
$`f_{\mathrm{\Psi }_1}(\psi _1)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }},\psi _1[0,2\pi ],`$
are modulus’s and angle’s probability distributions for $`N`$-dimensional Ginibre ensemble. Notice, that again the angle $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ has uniform distribution.

## 4 Conclusions

We compare second difference distributions for different ensembles by defining following dimensionless second differences:

$$C_\beta =\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^2E_1}{<S_\beta >},$$
(19)
$$X_1=\frac{A_1}{<R_1>},$$
(20)
where $`<S_\beta >`$ are the mean values of spacings for GOE(3) ($`\beta =1`$), for GUE(3) ($`\beta =2`$), for GSE(3) ($`\beta =4`$), for PE ($`\beta =0`$) , and $`<R_1>`$ is mean value of radius $`R_1`$ for $`N`$=3 dimensional Ginibre ensemble .

On the basis of comparison of results for Gaussian ensembles, Poisson ensemble, and Ginibre ensemble we formulate :

> Homogenization Law: Random eigenenergies of statistical systems governed by Hamiltonians belonging to Gaussian orthogonal ensemble, to Gaussian unitary ensemble, to Gaussian symplectic ensemble, to Poisson ensemble, and finally to Ginibre ensemble tend to be homogeneously distributed.

It can be restated mathematically as follows:

> If $`H`$ GOE, GUE, GSE, PE, Ginibre ensemble, then Prob($`D`$)=max, where D is random event corresponding to vanishing of second difference’s probability distributions at the origin.

Both of above formulation follow from the fact that the second differences’ distributions assume global maxima at origin for above ensembles . For Coulomb gas’s analogy the vectors of relative positions of vectors of relative positions of charges statistically most probably vanish. It means that the vectors of relative positions tend to be equal to each other. Thus, the relative distances of electric charges are most probably equal. We call such situation stabilisation of structure of system of electric charges on complex plane.

## Acknowledgements

It is my pleasure to most deeply thank Professor Jakub Zakrzewski for formulating the problem. I also thank Professor Antoni Ostoja-Gajewski for creating optimal environment for scientific work and Professor Włodzimierz Wójcik for his giving me access to computer facilities.

## References


text:
# References

Among other effects originated by medium-induced parton energy loss one may expect a observable modification in the rapidity distributions of the transverse energy flow and charged multiplicity, $`dE_T/d\eta `$, $`dE_T^\gamma /d\eta `$, and $`dn_{ch}/d\eta `$ .

Indeed, an indication is found for ultrarelativistic energy domain concerning the appearance of a wide bump in the interval $`2\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}\eta \begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}2`$ over a pseudo-rapidity plateau of such distributions due to jet quenching. Figure 1 demonstrates the evolution of the effect with Pb$``$Pb collision impact parameter variation (HIJING  prediction for the LHC energy, $`\sqrt{s}=5.5A`$ TeV). One can see that even peripheral Pb$``$Pb collisions show the effects of energy loss with the central enhancement still evident at impact parameters up to $`12`$ fm. Since jet quenching due to final state re-interactions is effective only for the mid-rapidity region (where the initial energy density of minijet plasma is high enough), very forward rapidity region, $`|\eta |\begin{array}{c}>\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}3`$, remains practically unchanged. A scan of collisions of different nuclear systems provides an additional test of jet quenching. Because smaller nuclei require a shorter transverse distance for the partons to traverse before escaping the system, the central enhancement due to energy loss decreases with system size as obvious from the comparison with and without energy loss. Note that although the effect has only been shown here for the global $`E_T`$ distributions $`dE_T/d\eta `$, qualitatively the same picture is seen when neutral or charged particle production is studied instead of $`E_T`$.

The greater the medium-induced energy loss, the more transverse energy is piled up at central $`\eta `$ values, leading to an increase in energy density or ”stopping” in the mid-rapidity region, in contradiction to the assumption of nuclear transparency. It is interesting to note that the qualitatively same results shown in figure 1 can be obtained using VENUS generator  and Parton Cascade Model VNI , in spite of the physics of the VENUS nucleon rescattering or VNI parton rescattering modes is very different than that of the radiative energy loss mechanism in HIJING. This may be due to the fact that the many kinds of nuclear collective effects like final state re-interactions are effective forms of ”nuclear stopping”.

One can consider rapidity spectrum of jets or high-pT products of jet fragmentation (the latter case has been discussed for RHIC energy in a paper ). The pattern of rapidity distribution of only hard jets (say, at $`E_T^{jet}>100`$ GeV) is expected to be rather opposite to that for global $`dE_T/d\eta `$ spectrum. Since jet quenching due to in-medium parton energy loss (more exactly, the part of energy loss which is outside the definite jet cone size, see for discussion ) is strongest in mid-rapidity, the maximal suppression of jet rates as compared to what is expected from independent nucleon-nucleon interactions extrapolation can be observed at central rapidity, while the very forward rapidity domain remains again almost unchanged. Thus analyzing the correlation between rapidity distributions of global energy (particle) flow and hard jets, by scanning the wide rapidity region (up to $`|\eta |5`$ under acceptance of CMS experiment ), might provide the important information about the pseudo-rapidity size of dense QCD-matter area.

It is pleasure to thank M. Bedjidian, D. Denegri, L.I. Sarycheva and U. Wiedemann for encouraging and interest to the work. Discussions with J. Damgov, V. Genchev, S. Kunori, M.V. Savina, N.V. Slavin and A.M. Snigirev are gratefully acknowledged.