text:
# Stodolsky’s Theorem and Neutrino Oscillation Phases – for pedestrians

## Abstract

Neutrino oscillations are experimentally observable only as a result of interference between neutrino states with different masses and THE SAME ENERGY. All interference effects between neutrino states having different energies are destroyed by the intereaction between the incident neutrino and the neutrino detector. Erroneous results are frequently obtained by neglecting the neutrino-detector interactions.

Stodolsky has given a very simple answer to the confusion that still arises in discussions of the phase of neutrino oscillations. The relevant literature producing this confusion has recently been summarized and clarified. The purpose of this note is to support this excellent analysis without engaging in a direct debate against the confusing articles and also to present a “pedestrian” version of Stodolsky’s work which is hopefully understandable to students and experimentalists.

The detection of a neutrino always involves its interaction with a detector that is part of an environment described by a density matrix in which the energy is diagonal. Unless this interaction with the environment is turned off, and no experiment can do this, all relative phase information between neutrino states with different energies is destroyed.

The question is not whether states of the same momentum and different energies are coherent, states of the same energy and different momentum or states of the same velocity. There have been many irrelevant arguments about these issues. But states with different ENERGIES ARE NEVER COHERENT in any realistic experiment. States of the same energy and different momenta can be coherent, but may not be. This depends upon the way the measurement is made. But states with different energies can not be coherent.

This discussion refers only to neutrino detectors, The usual detector is a nucleon, which changes its state after absorbing a neutrino and emitting a charged lepton, and is initially either in an energy eigenstate or in a statistical mixture in thermal equilibriam with its surroundings. No neutrino detector has ever been prepared in a coherent mixture of energy eigenstates and no such detector has been proposed for future experiments .

All arguments about Lorentz invariance are irrelevant. The detector chooses a particular Lorentz frame where the detector is at rest and described by a density matrix in which the energy is diagonal and no interference between states of different energies can be observed.

Most treatments do not consider at all the quantum mechanics of the detector. Since the detector is a quantum system (e.g. a nucleon) which undergoes a transition together with the neutrino-to-charged-lepton transition, and the initial and final states of the detector are not measured, the transition probability is the square of the transition matrix element for the whole system, averaged over detector initial states and summed over detector final states. This immediately kills all interference between neutrino states with different energies as they are accompanied by different detector states which must have different energies because energy in conserved in the process. The detector states with different energies are orthogonal to one another and all interference terms between them vanish because of this detector orthogonality.

In this context the “factor-of-two” arguments are seen to be missing an essential point in the actual neutrino oscillation experiments; namely the role of the detector as a quantum-mechanical system entangled with the neutrino.

The standard textbook neutrino-oscillation wave function, a coherent linear combination of states with different energies, is not found in real experiments. Thus considerable confusion remains even though coherence, interference and dephasing have been extensively discussed and clarified . Elementary quantum mechanics and quantum statistical mechanics tell us that the components of the density matrix describing a neutrino detector and having different energies are never coherent, while neutrino components with different masses and different momenta must be coherent to cancel components with the wrong flavor just outside the neutrino source.. This coherence between source states having the same energy and different momenta can produce coherence between neutrino states with the same energy and different masses.

This physics is illustrated in detail in a toy model for the detection of a neutrino as a transition between an initial state of a neutrino and a detector and a final state of a muon and the same detector. The wave function for the initial state of neutrino and detector is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_i(\nu ,D)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{N_\nu }{}}|\nu (E_\nu ,m_k,\stackrel{}{P}_k),D_i(E_i)$$
(1)
where $`N_\nu `$ is the number of neutrino mass states, $`E_\nu `$, $`m_k`$ and $`\stackrel{}{P}_k`$ denote the neutrino energy, mass and momentum and $`D_i(E_i)`$ is the initial state of the detector with energy $`E_i`$. If the detector is a muon detector the final detector state after neutrino absorption is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_f(\mu ^\pm ,D)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{N_\nu }{}}|\mu ^\pm (E_\mu ,\stackrel{}{P}_\mu ),D_{kf}^{}(EE_\mu )$$
(2)
where $`E_\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{}{P}_\mu `$ denote the muon energy and momentum, $`D_{kf}^{}`$ is the final detector state produced in the “path $`k`$”; i.e. after the absorption of a neutrino with mass $`m_k`$ and emission of a $`\mu ^\pm `$, and $`E=E_\nu +E_i`$ is the total energy which is conserved in the transition.

The transition in the detector occurs on a nucleon, whose co-ordinate is denoted by by $`\stackrel{}{X}`$, and involves a charge exchange denoted by the isospin operator $`I_{}`$ and a momentum transfer $`\stackrel{}{P}_k\stackrel{}{P}_\mu `$. The detector transition matrix element is therefore given by

$$D_{kf}^{}\left|T^{}\right|D_i=D_{kf}^{}\left|I_{}e^{i(\stackrel{}{P}_k\stackrel{}{P}_\mu )\stackrel{}{X}}\right|D_i$$
(3)
The overlap between the final detector wave functions after the transitions absorbing neutrinos with masses $`m_k`$ and $`m_j`$ is then

$$D_{kf}^{}|D_{jf}^{}=D_i\left|e^{i(\stackrel{}{P}_j\stackrel{}{P}_k)\stackrel{}{X}}\right|D_i$$
(4)
If the quantum fluctuations in the position of the active nucleon in the initial state of the detector are small in comparison with the oscillation wave length, $`\mathrm{}/(\stackrel{}{P}_j\stackrel{}{P}_k)`$,

$$|\stackrel{}{P}_j\stackrel{}{P}_k|^2D_i\stackrel{}{X}^2D_i1$$
(5)
$$D_{kf}^{}|D_{jf}^{}1(1/2)|\stackrel{}{P}_j\stackrel{}{P}_k|^2D_i\stackrel{}{X}^2D_i1$$
(6)
There is thus effectively a full overlap between the final detector states after absorption of different mass neutrinos, and a full coherence between the neutrino states with the same energy and different momenta.

The total energies of the final muon and detector produced after absorption of neutrinos with different energies are different. These muon-detector states are thus orthogonal to one another and there is no coherence between detector states produced by the absorption of neutrinos with different energies.

There have been suggestions for bypassing Stodolsky’s theorem by exploiting some kind of energy-time uncertainty to detect interference between components having different energies in the neutrino wave function. The time of flight of the neutrino from source to detector might be measured by detecting the muon emitted together with the neutrino in a pion decay in the source and measuring precisely the times of emission in the source and of absorbtion in the detector.

However, if the quantum fluctuations in the position of the active nucleon in the initial state of the detector are small in comparison with the oscillation wave length, eqs. (5) and (6) apply and the coherence and relative phase of the components in the neutrino wave function having the same energy and different momenta are preserved . This relative phase completely determines the flavor output of the detector; i.e. the relative probabilities of producing a muon or an electron. These probabilities in all realistic cases are essentially independent of energy over the relevant energy range. Thus the relative phases and coherence between components in the neutrino wave function with different energies is irrelevant. All energies give the same muon/electron ratio whether they add coherently or incoherently and time measurements cannot change the muon/electron ratio observed at the detector.

It is a pleasure to thank Maury Goodman, Yuval Grossman, Boris Kayser, Lev Okun,and Leo Stodolsky for helpful discussions and comments.


format: text

text:
# PROSPECTS FOR HIGH ENERGY STUDIES OF PULSARS WITH THE AGILE GAMMA-RAY TELESCOPE

## THE AGILE MISSION

AGILE is a small scientific mission of the Italian Space Agency dedicated to high-energy astrophysics (Tavani et al. 2001). It will be the only mission entirely devoted to gamma-ray observations in the 30 MeV-50 GeV energy band, with simultaneous X-ray imaging also in the 10-40 keV band, during the period 2005-2007. Despite its small dimensions ($``$0.3 m3) and weight ($``$100 kg) compared to other future instruments such as GLAST, the AGILE performance will be as good as, or better than, that of bigger past instruments such as EGRET, thanks to the new silicon detector technology employed for the AGILE instruments.

High-energy photons are converted into e+/e- pairs in a tracker made of 12 Silicon-Tungsten planes, which allows us to efficiently collect photons with an effective area of $``$500 cm2 and to perform photon direction reconstruction with good angular resolution ($``$0.5, $`E`$$``$1 GeV) (Figure 1) on a very large field of view, covering about 1/5 of the sky in a single pointing (Figure 3). A mini-calorimeter made of Cesium-Iodide bars supports the tracker for photon energy reconstruction and particle background rejection, together with a set of anticoincidence scintillator panels surrounding 5 sides of the instrument. An additional silicon plane and a coded mask, positioned on top of the tracker, constitute SuperAGILE, an X-ray imager with angular resolution of $``$1-3 arcmin and sensitivity of $``$5 mCrab in the band 10-40 keV. AGILE is characterized by the smallest deadtime ever obtained for gamma-ray detection ($`<`$200 $`\mu `$s) and absolute time tagging with uncertainty near $``$1 $`\mu `$s.

## PULSAR STUDIES

Among the $``$1500 rotation-powered pulsars, observed mainly in the radio band, only 7 are seen as pulsed gamma-ray sources, and another $``$10 have been reported as possible detections (e.g. Kanbach, 2002). The availability of a wider and deeper sample of gamma-ray observations of pulsars could better constrain emission models that predict different beaming angles and directions for the radio and gamma-ray emission. AGILE will improve photon statistics for gamma-ray pulsation searches and will offer the first possibility, before the launch of GLAST (Michelson, 2001), of detecting several young and energetic radio pulsars that have been discovered since the end of the CGRO mission.

Except for the claimed detection of the millisecond pulsar J0218+4232 at high-energy gamma rays (Kuiper et al. 2000, 2002), all other known gamma-ray pulsars discovered by EGRET (including low significance pulsed detections) lie in the region of the $`P\dot{P}`$ diagram characterized by $`B`$$`>`$$`2\times 10^{11}`$ $`G`$ and $`\dot{E}_{rot}`$$`>`$$`1.3\times 10^{33}`$ $`erg`$ $`s^1`$ (Figure 2). Radio pulsars in this region are natural gamma-ray pulsar candidates to be detected by instruments like AGILE with sensitivity slighly better than EGRET. It is worth noting that tens of them are within the error boxes of selected EGRET unidentified sources that do not show significant flux variations (compared to blazars) and are therefore good gamma-ray pulsar candidates. Although many of these associations are expected to be chance coincidences, they represent top-ranked targets for pulsations searches with AGILE.

The large field of view of AGILE allows simultaneous monitoring of many of these sources, and could cover the whole sky with only 6 pointings (Figure 3). In particular, a single pointing at the Galactic Center region could include tens of nearby radio pulsars belonging to the “gamma-ray pulsar region” described in Figure 2, and $``$50 unidentified EGRET sources possibly associated with radio-quiet pulsars, including those within the Gould Belt region (Gehrels et al. 2000).

AGILE will continuously observe pulsars for long periods ($``$1-2 months) avoiding typical timing analysis problems arising from merging many short observations at different times. A typical exposure on the galactic plane after two years of observations is $``$2$`\times `$109 cm2 s for $`E`$$`>`$100 MeV and the expected pulsar counts at these energies (e.g. $``$7000 cts from Geminga and $``$17000 from the Vela pulsar) are comparable or slighly better than the corresponding values for EGRET. The expected typical sensitivity after folding data at known pulsar periods is $``$5$`\times `$10-8 ph/cm$`{}_{}{}^{2}s`$ for $`E`$$`>`$100 MeV. Furthermore, using accurate radio ephemerides, it is possible to extract pulsar photons also in confused regions and exploit low energy data (20-100 MeV) for which angular resolution is poor but the AGILE effective area is still useful and better than that of EGRET (Figure 1).

In contrast to the relation valid at soft X-ray energies ($`F_x\dot{E}d^2`$ ), the expected gamma-ray flux of radio pulsars is directly correlated to the Goldreich-Julian current and can be estimated according to the law $`F_\gamma \sqrt{\dot{E}}d^2`$ (Kanbach, 2002) fitting EGRET pulsars well. The dispersion of the fit provides the min/max normalization values allowing a worst/best case approach for the gamma-ray fluxes estimates ($`F_{min}`$ and $`F_{max}`$ in Table 1) in the assumption that the gamma-ray beams intersect the line of sight. In this way it is possible to extract a subsample of radio-loud pulsars expected to be above the AGILE sensitivity threshold. Up to $``$100 radio pulsars (Figure 3) could provide enough photons to be in principle observable by AGILE, the actual number of detections being dependent on the emission geometry. Assuming, for example, gamma-ray emission cones of $``$1 sr with random orientation respect to the radio beam, roughly $``$10 sources of our sample should be detectable with AGILE. Table 1 provides the first 35 top ranked radio-pulsars likely to have detectable fluxes ($`F_{min}`$$`>`$$`2\times 10^8`$ $`ph/cm^2s`$) even in the absence of coincidences with EGRET sources. It also includes (lower part) all the other weaker 11 radio-pulsars of the “gamma-ray pulsar region” coincident with EGRET unidentified sources and with expected fluxes near AGILE sensitivity.

Apart from the sources within the “gamma-ray pulsar region”, AGILE will have the first opportunity to explore the “millisecond region” of the $`P\dot{P}`$ diagram looking for peculiar gamma-ray emission from these objects and to confirm the claimed detection in high-energy gamma rays of PSR J0218+4232 (Kuiper et al. 2000, 2002).

More detailed simulations of the population of gamma-ray pulsars, including deep statistical analysis of the emission geometry and beaming, predict very different numbers of radio-loud and radio-quiet pulsars detectable in gamma rays, strongly depending on the assumed model (see e.g. Gonthier et al. 2001; Mac Laughlin and Cordes, 2001). Extrapolating these results to the AGILE wide-band sensitivity, we expect to discover at least a dozen new objects.

## DISCUSSION

AGILE will contribute to the study of known and newly discovered gamma-ray pulsars in several ways: 1) detecting possible secular variations of the gamma-ray emission; 2) studying unpulsed gamma-ray emission from plerions in supernova remnants and searching for time variability of pulsar/wind nebula interactions (e.g. in Crab); 3) looking for possible breaks in pulsar spectra; 4) obtaining high time resolution of known gamma-ray pulsars. In particular, AGILE will have the first opportunity to observe pulsars with better time resolution than EGRET, looking for possible microstructures in folded gamma-ray light curves such as those clearly seen in single radio pulses from Vela (Johnston et al. 2001). We simulated a $`5`$$`\times `$$`10^6`$ $`s`$ AGILE observation of the Vela pulsar including different microstructure templates in the light curve. A preliminary analysis shows that we can achieve an effective resolution better than $``$50 $`\mu `$s with a good signal-to-noise ratio allowing us to discover hypothetical microstructures not resolved with lower resolution (Figure 4). Compared to the pulsar population as a whole, young and energetic radio-loud pulsars, of which the gamma-ray pulsars are a subset, present a significant amount of timing noise and occasional glitches. Since these strongly affect the folding process for long exposures and smear gamma-ray light curves, simultaneous radio observations are essential for accurate gamma-ray timing analysis of these sources.

The analysis of a larger sample of pulsar spectral breaks could provide a powerful tool to constrain the production processes and sites in the magnetosphere (e.g. the height of the emission region from the neutron star surface). Pulsar spectra are generally curved in the gamma-ray band leading to a cut-off at a few GeV and therefore very difficult to investigate with reasonable energy resolution ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`E/E`$$`1`$) due to the poor photon statistics available at these energies. However, PSR B1509-58, a pulsar with a very strong magnetic field ($`>`$$`10^{13}`$ $`G`$), shows a spectral turnover in the 10 MeV range (Kuiper et al. 1999) which can be explained with photon absorption by photon splitting in the scenario of polar cap models (Harding et al. 1997). For the competing scenario with outer gaps, Zhang and Cheng (2000) offer an alternative explanation. There are now more than $``$30 pulsars known with $`B>10^{13}G`$. These highly-magnetized pulsars represent a good opportunity for AGILE to perform a set of gamma-ray observations providing spectral break measurements in a more accessible energy range, possibly providing conclusive evidence for the signature of this exotic photon splitting process in the strongest magnetic fields of pulsars.

E-mail address of A. Pellizzoni alberto@mi.iasf.cnr.it


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The response of nanotubes to external electric fields is of interest both for transport devices and for nano–electromechanical systems . When the transverse field strength is large enough to couple neighboring subbands, it is not appropriate to use the conventional 1D approximation, which assumes a uniform charge and potential distribution along the NT circumference. In this article, we address the issue of how the NT material properties are modified when the electronic potential along the circumference is no longer uniform. We use a single $`\pi `$ orbital tight-binding model in a self-consistent way to account for screening effect caused by the non-uniform charge distribution along the NT circumference.

To our knowledge, this is the first study that considers a wide range of applied transverse electric field conditions. Within the limit of relatively weak electric fields, we obtain different behaviors for semiconducting and metallic nanotubes, either intrinsic or doped. The weak field condition can be expressed as $`ta/(eR^2)`$($`0.1\text{V/Å}`$ for $`R=8\text{Å}`$), where $`t=2.5\text{eV}`$ and $`a=2.49\text{Å}`$ are the hopping integral and lattice constant of two-dimensional graphite respectively, as defined for example in the book . One may safely use a rigid bond approximation in this field limit, without severely perturbing the original bandstructure. We also investigate the regime of relatively strong fields, $`ta/(eR^2)<t/(ea)`$, where bandstructure modifications need to be considered and subband mixing cannot be neglected, while a TB approach can still be used. Also for this regime, qualitatively different behaviors of semiconducting and metallic NTs are found.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec.2 we calculate the transverse polarizability for nanotubes of various symmetry, considering a linear approximation and no phonon contributions. The dependence of the polarizability on tube radius, symmetry and Fermi level position are discussed. The role of the Fermi level is not related to intra-band free carrier transitions, but rather to inter-band transitions between neighboring conduction/valence bands. We then exam the effect of a uniform transverse transverse field on the bandstructure of nanotubes in Sec.3. Because of the symmetry of the nanotube, the subbands of the tube are mixed according to certain selection rules and the bandstructure and bandgap are correspondingly modified. Several interesting phenomena are predicted to happen in the transverse field: bandgap opening/closing, energy subband flattening and over-bending, lifting of subband degeneracy, and generation of multiple valleys. These effects can be used to modulate the bandgap, effective mass and carrier densities of NTs and to enhance the density of states(DOS) at the Fermi level. For example, it has been suggested that opening of energy gaps of metalic nanotubes under a local transverse electric field can be used for designing quantum switches. Our calculation shows that there exists a critical magnitude of the field strength beyond which the gap starts to decrease and oscillates further on.

For simplicity, only zigzag (both metallic and semiconducting) and armchair tubes are considered in the full-band TB calculations. The extension of the numerical results to chiral tubes is confirmed by the analytical results within the $`\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{p}`$ method.

## 2 Transverse polarizability of a NT in a weak electric field

An external electrical field creates an induced dipole moment p on the nanotube, which can be estimated through the calculation of the polarizability of $`\pi `$ electrons . The unscreened linear polarizability $`\alpha _0(\omega )`$ relates the dipole moment $`p`$ to the total electrical field $`_{tot}`$ with $`p=\alpha _0_{tot}`$, which accounts for the contribution from the single particle excitation. The dielectric function, defined as $`ϵ=_{tot}/_{ex}`$, and the actual (or screened) polarizability $`\alpha `$ can be easily retrieved from $`\alpha _0`$ as

$$ϵ(\omega )=1+2\frac{\alpha _0(\omega )}{R^2},\alpha (\omega )=\frac{\alpha _0(\omega )}{ϵ(\omega )}$$
(1)
As discussed above, when the field strength is less than $`ta/(eR^2)`$, one can use wavefunctions and energies of the electron states obtained without external perturbation. Results of the TB calculation in the static limit are shown in Figure 1, where metallic and semiconducting tubes are compared. The unscreened polarizability $`\alpha _0`$ is quadratically proportional to $`R^2`$ and is dependent on the conducting properties (symmetry of the tube). As the radius of NTs increases, $`\alpha _0`$ can be fitted by an universal expression:

$$\alpha _0=CR^2,C\{\begin{array}{cc}1.96,\hfill & \text{metallic}\hfill \\ 2.15,\hfill & \text{semiconducting}\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
The corresponding dielectric function $`ϵ`$ is

$$ϵ\{\begin{array}{cc}4.92,\hfill & \text{metallic}\hfill \\ 5.30,\hfill & \text{semiconducting}\hfill \end{array}$$
(3)
which agrees very well with previous results . For comparison, we have calculated the transverse polarizability using the $`\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{p}`$ scheme . This approximation is equivalent to the linerization of the electron energy dispersion in the vicinity of the Fermi points $`\pm k_F`$. The cutoff of $`k_{max}=1/R`$ is used for the calculation and only the lowest subbands are included.

With these approximations, the analytical expression for the polarizability is

$$\alpha _0=C^{}R^2,C^{}=\{\begin{array}{ccc}(\sqrt{2}1)\frac{4e^2}{v_F\pi }1.41,\hfill & \text{metallic}\hfill & \\ \beta \frac{4e^2}{v_F\pi }1.58,\hfill & \text{semiconducting}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(4)
Here, $`v_F=\sqrt{3}at/25.4\text{eVÅ}`$ is the Fermi velocity, with $`\mathrm{}`$ taken to be unity. We also have for the integration constant, $`\beta 0.463`$. The value of $`\alpha _0`$, calculated with the $`\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{p}`$ scheme in Eq. (4), is smaller than the numerical result obtained from by the full-band calculation, Eq. (2), but it provides a more intuitive understanding of the physical factors which affect the polarizability.

The independence of the dielectric function on the geometry (NT radius) holds only as long as one can verify the condition that the NT bands are half-filled. However, we notice that some nanotubes are naturally doped during the growth process, in which case the Fermi level $`E_F`$ would shift away from the charge neutrality level, and similarly under conditions of charge injection or application of an external bias to the nanotube. In these cases, the polarizability depends on the occupation or depletion of new states.

Let’s assume $`E_F>0`$ (note that the sign of $`E_F`$ does not affect the results) and define the unscreened polarizability for a metallic tube as:

$`\alpha _0^{met}(E_F,R)`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha _0^{met}(0,R)+\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _0^{met}(E_F,R)`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`\alpha _0^{met}(0,R)+\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _0^{met,1}(E_F,R)+\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _0^{met,2}(E_F,R)+\mathrm{}`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _0^{met,i}(E_F,R)`$ accounts for the contribution due to the occupation of $`i`$th conduction subband. At low Fermi energy, the $`\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{p}`$ approximation gives:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _0^{met,1}(E_F,R)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4e^2}{\pi v_F^3}}R^4E_F^2`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _0^{met,2}(E_F,R)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8e^2}{3\pi v_F^3}}R^4H[E_FE_{b2}]\left(E_F\sqrt{E_F^2E_{b2}^2}E_{b2}^2\mathrm{arcsinh}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{E_F^2E_{b2}^2}}{E_{b2}}}\right]\right)`$ (6)
Here, $`H`$ is the unit step function ($`H[x]=1`$ when $`x>0`$ and $`0`$ otherwise), and $`E_{b2}=v_F/R`$ is the energy of the bottom of the $`2^{nd}`$ subband.

If one considers the low energy properties of nanotubes, the $`\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{p}`$ method provides a reasonable approximation. When the Fermi level is within the first subband, the unscreened polarizability and the dielectric function for a metallic tube of radius R can be written as:

$$\alpha _0^{met}(E_F,R)\alpha _0^{met}(0,R)+\frac{4e^2}{\pi v_F}\left(\frac{E_FR}{v_F}\right)^2R^2$$
(7)
$$ϵ^{met}(E_F,R)ϵ^{met}(0)+2\frac{4e^2}{\pi v_F}\left(\frac{E_FR}{v_F}\right)^2$$
(8)
where the prefactor $`4e^2/\pi v_F`$ is the dimensionless density of states of the first subband.

As shown above, the shift of Fermi level away from the charge neutrality level changes considerably the polarizability and, consequently, the nanotube dielectric function. The dielectric screening increases with the radius of the tube, according to Eq. (8), in contrast to the screening of a neutral tube, which is independent of the radius. This is because of the strong dependence on $`R`$ found in the transition energy of the main terms in the expressions for $`ϵ`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Ev_F/R`$. One must conclude that the dielectric properties of a nanotube depend not only on radius and type of bandstructure (metal or semiconductor), but also on the charge carrier density in the tube . This charge density varies with applied field if the tube is connected to electron reservoirs and charge flow through the tube is allowed. Thus, the calculation of the polarizability of the nanotube in a device environment is a complicated problem which has to be solved self-consistently.

## 3 NT Bandstructure Modification in a strong field limit

When the applied field is strong enough to mix neighboring subbands, that is $`eRta/R`$, the bandstructure of a nanotube is considerably modified. We have calculated the energy bands of a  armchair tube in electrical fields of different strength. Since we are interested in the low energy region of nanotubes, only subbands in the energy range $`|E|t`$ are shown in Figure 2. We emphasize that the two lowest subbands always cross, even at a very large field, although the bandstructure has been noticeably modified . At $`=0.1\text{V/Å}`$ (see Figure 2(b)), the Fermi points shift toward the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ point ($`k=0`$) and the two lowest subbands are flattened near the Fermi points. At the same time, all states which were degenerate with respect to the magnetic number, $`\pm m`$, split. The splitting becomes more obvious closer to the lowest subbands. The large degeneracy at the first Brillouin zone (FBZ) boundary $`k=\pi /a`$ is also lifted and bending is observed for all subbands at this point.

As the field strength increases, the two lowest subbands show oscillatory bends with multiple nodes generated, while the first node moves even closer to $`k=0`$ (Figure 2(c)). For other subbands, the splitting of $`\pm m`$ subbands become more significant.

This bandstructure modification is clearly seen in the density of states of the nanotube, as shown in Figure 2(d–f). As the field is applied, the low energy plateau displays a bump which increases with field. The enhanced DOS near $`E=0`$ is due to the flattening and bending of the two lowest subbands. On the other hand, the lifting of $`\pm m`$ degeneracy of all doublets and the bending at the FBZ boundary split the single VHS peaks into multiple ones. Although the DOS structure (Figure 2) changes considerably as compared to the case $`=0`$, all DOS features may be attributed to specific symmetry of the states. We stress that many experimental techniques, ranging from Raman scattering to scanning tunneling spectroscopy use high electric fields to probe the electronic properties of a nanotube, which may perturb the underlying electronic structure. Our theoretical results may help to understand disagreements between experimental measurements and predictions for DOS, effective masses and the locations of VHS peaks. For example, we obtained different shifts of optical transition energy $`E_{11}`$ and $`E_{22}`$.

For quasi-metallic zigzag tubes, the physics is quite different. At weak fields, a bandgap opens at the Fermi point $`k=0`$. When the total field is smaller than a critical field $`_c`$, the gap is quadratically proportional to the product of the field strength $``$ and the radius $`R`$, as shown in Figure 3. The analytical expression for the gap can be obtained within a degenerate perturbation theory:

$$E_g\frac{(eR)^2}{6t},<_c$$
(9)
When the field increases beyond $`_c`$, the minimum gap shifts away from the original Fermi point $`k=0`$ and the gap starts to decrease. The value of the critical field depends on the nanotube radius (see Figure 3 inset) and is fitted to be:

$$e_cRv_F/R$$
(10)
Thus, the degenerate perturbation theory which is used in deriving Eq. (9) is no longer valid, when the external potential exceeds the energy distance between neighboring subbands, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Ev_F/R`$.

It may be interesting for electronics applications to be able to modulate locally the gap of the nanotube. Our study shows that for metallic zigzag NT one can, indeed, open the gap. However the gap cannot exceed some critical value beyond which a further increase of the field begins to close the gap. From Eqs. (9) and (10), the critical bandgap for a metallic zigzag tube $`[3n,0]`$ is approximately:

$$E_{gc}\frac{v_F^2}{6tR^2}=\frac{\pi ^2}{2n^2}t$$
(11)
which is almost negligible for nanotubes with large radius ($`n>20`$). Although larger radius NTs may seem more attractive due to the smaller critical field is smaller, in these structures the maximum gap will also be smaller. On the other hand, we notice that for very narrow NTs, the $`\sigma \pi `$ mixing may results in the opening of secondary gaps, which may prohibit using very narrow NTs for band modulations.

The transverse field effect discussed above, including gap opening or preserved subband crossing as well as degeneracy lifting, can be explained by using methods of group theory. For a detailed description of a group theory technique for nanotubes, we refer the reader to . For armchair and zigzag tubes, the full set of quantum numbers includes the longitudinal momentum $`k`$, the angular momentum $`m`$, and parities with respect to the vertical mirror reflection $`\sigma _v`$ and the horizontal mirror reflection $`\sigma _h`$ . Of the $`4n`$ bands (for a $`[n,n]`$ or $`[n,0]`$ tube), only those with $`m=0,n`$ have definite even or odd parity about $`\sigma _v`$ and they are non-degenerate (spin degeneracy is not relevant here and is not discussed). All the other bands are doubly degenerate at zero field with respect to $`+m`$ and $`m`$ indices.

We assume that the components of the electron state on different sub-lattices are not mixed when the magnitude of the field satisfies $`ea_{cc}t`$, where $`a_{cc}`$ is the nearest neighbor distance in the CNT. Thus, a uniform transverse electric field possesses an odd parity with respect to a vertical mirror plane of the nanotube. Due to the commutation of a perturbed Hamiltonian $`H=H_0+ex`$ and the vertical parity operator $`\sigma _v`$, parities with respect to $`\sigma _v`$ remain good quantum numbers. For an armchair tube, the two crossing subbands ($`m=n,s=\pm 1`$) have opposite $`\sigma _v`$ parities.

In the presence of a transverse field, the degeneracy of these two subband at $`k_F=2\pi /3a`$ is lifted in the second order of perturbation theory, but since they have different $`\sigma _v`$ parities, the crossing at the new Fermi points is not prohibited. In contrast, for metallic zigzag tubes, electron states in the four lowest subbands $`(m=\pm 2n/3,s=\pm 1)`$ do not have definite $`\sigma _v`$ parities and can be mixed by the external field in a high order perturbation theory by coupling to the states with $`m=2n/3\pm 1`$. Two pairs of new states with opposite parities with respect to $`\sigma _v`$ are the result. According to the anti–crossing rule for NTs subbands noticed in , the degeneracy at $`k_F=0`$ will be lifted. Similarly, the splitting of the degenerate subbands $`\pm m`$ is explained by their mixing to the other subbands by the transverse field. Because of the selection rule $`m^{}=m\pm 1`$, the two degenerate states $`|\psi _m^{(0)}`$ and $`|\psi _m^{(0)}`$ can only be mixed and split at a high order of perturbation theory. Thus, the coupling strength between $`|\pm m`$ states depends on min$`[m,nm]`$, which is a “distance” between these two states and the non-degenerate states $`|0`$ and $`|n`$. This explains why, at low energy, the splitting is more prominent for subbands in armchair tubes, i.e. near $`m=n`$ and almost indiscernible for subbands in zigzag tubes, i.e. away from $`m=0,n`$.

In summary, we studied for the first time the effect of doping and/or charge injection on the transverse polarizability of nanotubes. We found that for metallic tubes, the polarizability grows quadratically with $`E_F`$ and scales as $`R^4`$ at low Fermi levels, leading to an enhancement of the dielectric function for the doped nanotubes. With an increase of the the applied field, the bandstructure is considerably modified due to the lowering of symmetry. The zero-gap structure of armchair tubes is always preserved while gap opening and closing occur in metallic and semiconducting zigzag tubes respectively. Degeneracy lifting of $`\pm m`$ subbands and the flattening of lowest subbands are predicted, which changes the shape and magnitude of the peaks in the density of states.Thus we conclude that formation of multiple valleys in the bandstructure, enhancement of DOS at the Fermi level and engineering of subbands with required effective mass of charge carriers are possible with a transverse electric field. We also predict a maximum bandgap which opens in a metalic tube and give an optimal range of nanotube radius for bandgap engineering.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was partial supported by the National Science Foundation, grant ITR/SY 0121616. One of us (SVR) acknowledges support through a CRI grant of UIUC, DoE grant DE-FG02-01ER45932, NSF grant ECS-0210495 and Beckman Fellowship from the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation


text:
# Capacitively coupled hot-electron nanobolometer as far-infrared photon counter

## Abstract

We show theoretically that hot-electron nanobolometers consisting of a small piece of normal metal, capacitively coupled to a superconducting antenna through a pair of normal metal–insulator–superconductor (NIS) tunnel junctions may be used as far-infrared photon counters. To make the device most effective at high counting rates, we suggest the use of the bolometer in the simplest configuration, when the NIS tunnel junctions are used as both an electron cooler and thermometer. The absorption of the photon in the normal metal produces a pulse in the electron temperature, which is measured by the NIS junctions. The counter may resolve photons up to 0.3–0.4 mm wavelength and has a typical re-equilibration time constant of about 20 ns.

The far-infrared region is one of the richest areas of spectroscopic research, with applications ranging from molecular physics to astronomy. These applications, especially the astrophysical observations, require extremely sensitive detectors. Depending on the energy of the incident photons, the input power, and the response time of the detector, the device may resolve individual quanta (quantum detectors), or may measure the total input power (integrating detectors). In general, integrating detectors measure long-wavelength radiation fluxes (infrared and far infrared regions integrating ; NHEB-CC ), while high energy photons (for example, x ray) are observed by quantum detectors. The first x-ray detector using a normal metal film as an absorber and a normal metal–insulator–superconductor (NIS) tunnel junction as a thermometer, was built by Nahum et al. X-ray . The photon interacts with the detector by producing a hot spot in the normal metal. The energy dissipated into the hot spot diffuses then into the whole absorber and the increase of electron temperature is measured by the NIS thermometer. The re-equilibration time constant of the detector was of the order of 10 $`\mu \mathrm{s}`$ and determined mostly by the electron–phonon coupling. The same phenomenon of hot spot formation due to the photon absorption was suggested for the detection of longer wavelength photons hotspot . Recently, Semenov et al. semenov  constructed a near-infrared photon counter based on a current biased narrow superconducting strip. The hot spot formed in the strip leading to a break of the superconductivity across it, which further produced a signal in the voltage read out. At the experimental stage reported until now, the time constant of the detector is of the order of 100 ps and is limited by the amplifier bandwidth–the estimated thermalization time of the superconducting strip being of the order of tens of picoseconds.

To increase the limit wavelength of detectable individual IR photons, at a counting rate high enough for astronomical observations but still within the range of broad-bandwidth amplifiers, we suggest the use of the capacitively coupled hot-electron microbolometer NHEB-CC  as a photon counter. The detector (Fig. 1) is formed of a small normal metal island connected to the superconducting antenna by two symmetric NIS tunnel junctions. As in the case of x-ray detectors X-ray , the energy of the quanta, dissipated in the normal metal island \[which we call the thermal sensing element (TSE)\] leads to an increase of the electron temperature, which is measured by the NIS tunnel junctions. The time scale of the heat diffusion into the whole normal metal element is $`\tau _\mathrm{d}L^2/(\pi ^2D)`$, where $`L`$ is the linear dimension of the sample and $`D`$ is the electron diffusion constant. If we set $`L=1\mu \mathrm{m}`$, then, for a typical value of $`D=10^4\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ in Cu thin films, $`\tau _\mathrm{d}1`$ ns. To have an accurate reading of the temperature variation in the TSE, the detector re-equilibration time, $`\tau `$, should be larger than $`\tau _\mathrm{d}`$. Although not shown in Fig. 1, the detector (TSE plus antenna) is supported by an insulating substrate, which acts also as a heat bath of temperature $`T_\mathrm{b}`$. Here, we assume perfect thermal contact between the substrate and the detector lattice, and we set the lattice temperatures of both the TSE and the antenna equal to $`T_\mathrm{b}`$. On the other hand, in the operating temperature range of the detector (of the order of 100 mK) the electron–phonon coupling is weak and we assign to the electron gas in the TSE an effective temperature $`T_\mathrm{e}`$, which, in general, is different from $`T_\mathrm{b}`$. For the most effective operation of the nanobolometer, the NIS junctions are used both to cool the electron gas in the detector bellow the heat bath temperature $`T_\mathrm{b}`$ and to measure the temperature pulse (the principles of NIS cooling and temperature measurement are presented in Refs. NIScooler ; jukka\_c  and nahum\_bolo , respectively). In the normal metal, the power flow from the electron system to the lattice is $`\dot{Q}_{\mathrm{ep}}=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\mathrm{ep}}\mathrm{\Omega }(T_\mathrm{e}^5T_\mathrm{b}^5)`$ wellstood , where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the volume of the TSE. We approximate the electron specific heat with $`C_\mathrm{V}=\mathrm{\Omega }(k_\mathrm{B}^2T_\mathrm{e}/3\mathrm{}^3)\sqrt{2m_\mathrm{e}^3ϵ_\mathrm{F}}`$, where $`ϵ_\mathrm{F}`$ is the Fermi energy and $`m_\mathrm{e}`$ is the electron mass. In what follows, for the concrete calculations, we shall consider Cu as the normal metal and Al as the superconductor since these two metals are routinely used in the construction of microrefrigerators. The cooling power of one junction is denoted by $`\dot{Q}_\mathrm{J}`$ and, for a symmetric setup as the one shown in Fig. 1, the total power extracted through the junctions is $`2\dot{Q}_\mathrm{J}`$. $`\dot{Q}_\mathrm{J}`$ is a function of both the effective temperature of the quasiparticles in the superconductor, $`T_\mathrm{s}`$, and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$. We assume that the superconductor is thermalized by using efficient traps noitrap , so we use also $`T_\mathrm{s}=T_\mathrm{b}`$. At equilibrium (no incident radiation), the total power extracted from the normal metal is zero:

$$\dot{Q}_\mathrm{T}2\dot{Q}_\mathrm{J}+\dot{Q}_{\mathrm{ep}}=0.$$
(1)
Equation (1) sets the equilibrium electron temperature, $`T_{\mathrm{e0}}`$, as a function of $`T_\mathrm{b}`$. As a thermometer, the NIS junctions may work in either voltage biased (VB) or current biased (CB) regime. For a linear response of the detector, the temperature pulse due to the photon absorption, $`\delta T_\mathrm{e}T_\mathrm{e}T_{\mathrm{e0}}T_\mathrm{e}`$, has an exponential decay $`\delta T_\mathrm{e}(t)=\delta T_\mathrm{e}(0)\mathrm{exp}(t/\tau )`$, where $`\delta T_\mathrm{e}(0)=\mathrm{}\omega /C_\mathrm{V}`$ and we assume that $`\tau C_\mathrm{V}\left(\dot{Q}_\mathrm{T}/T_\mathrm{e}\right)_{T_\mathrm{e}=T_{\mathrm{e0}}}^1\tau _\mathrm{d}`$. Using Eq. (1) and the expression for $`\tau `$, we write $`\tau ^1=\tau _\mathrm{J}^1+\tau _{\mathrm{ep}}^1`$, in obvious notations. For Cu at $`T_\mathrm{e}=100`$ mK ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\mathrm{ep}}=4\mathrm{nWK}^5\mu \mathrm{m}^3`$ jukka\_c ), $`\tau _{\mathrm{ep}}3.5\times 10^5`$ s, which will turn out to be much larger than $`\tau _\mathrm{J}`$.

Besides $`\tau `$, the most important figure of merit of the detector is the energy resolution (ER). A photon can be detected if the signal produced by its absorption is larger than the square root of the mean square fluctuation of the measured quantity, $`\delta ^2M^{1/2}(MM)^2^{1/2}`$, where $`M`$ is current (VB) or voltage (CB), and by $``$ we denote the statistical average. The ER can then be defined as $`\delta ^2M^{1/2}/m_{\mathrm{max}}`$, where $`m_{\mathrm{max}}`$ is the amplitude of the measured pulse. Due to the finite bandwidth of the measuring device, $`\tau _\mathrm{c}^1`$, the measured and real values of $`M`$, say $`M_\mathrm{m}(t)`$ and $`M_\mathrm{r}(t)`$, respectively, may be related in a general formalism by the equation $`dM_\mathrm{m}(t)=\tau _\mathrm{c}^1[M_\mathrm{r}(t)M_\mathrm{m}(t)]dt`$. This leads to the usual frequency dependent amplification factor, proportional to $`[1+(\omega \tau _\mathrm{c})^2]^{1/2}`$. Therefore, the measured mean square fluctuation is $`\delta ^2M_\mathrm{m}=_0^{\mathrm{}}\delta ^2M_\mathrm{r}_\omega /[1+(\omega \tau _\mathrm{c})^2]𝑑\omega `$, where $`\delta ^2M_\mathrm{r}_\omega `$ is the spectral density of noise. In VB and CB regimes, $`M_\mathrm{r}I_\mathrm{J}`$ (current through the junctions) and $`M_\mathrm{r}2V`$ (voltage across both junctions), respectively. Following Ref. euj1  and disregarding the external circuit of the detector, we write the total fluctuation $`\delta I_\mathrm{J}`$ (VB) as the superposition of the fluctuation due to the discrete transport of charges through the junctions, and the current fluctuations induced by the temperature and particle fluctuations in the normal metal island. In the CB regime, the voltage fluctuation is induced only by the particle number fluctuation. Using this, we obtain the following spectral densities:

$`\delta ^2I_\mathrm{J}_\omega `$ $`=`$ $`\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J},\mathrm{shot}}_\omega +\left({\displaystyle \frac{I_\mathrm{J}}{T_\mathrm{e}}}\right)^2\delta ^2T_\mathrm{e}_\omega `$ (2)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^2\omega ^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_\mathrm{F}}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_\mathrm{J}}{(eV)}}\right)^2\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J},\mathrm{shot}}_\omega `$
$`+2{\displaystyle \frac{I_\mathrm{J}}{T_\mathrm{e}}}Re\left(\delta I_{\mathrm{J},\mathrm{shot}}\delta T_\mathrm{e}_\omega \right)`$
$`+2{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_\mathrm{F}}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_\mathrm{J}}{(eV)}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_\mathrm{J}}{T_\mathrm{e}}}Re\left(\delta T_\mathrm{e}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \dot{N}}{i\omega }}_\omega \right),`$
$`\delta ^2V_\omega `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega ^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_\mathrm{F}}{N}}\right)^2\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J},\mathrm{shot}}_\omega ,`$ (3)
where $`ϵ_\mathrm{F}`$ is the Fermi energy, $`N`$ is the number of electrons in the normal metal, and $`\delta ^2N_\omega =\delta ^2I_\mathrm{J}_\omega (\omega e)^2`$. We also assumed that $`(eV)/Nϵ_\mathrm{F}/N=(2/3)(ϵ_\mathrm{F}/N)`$, as for the ideal gas. The method to evaluate $`\delta ^2T_\mathrm{e}_\omega `$ and the correlation terms was given in Ref. euj1 . In each case, the amplifier noise should be added quadratically to the fluctuations above. $`\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J},\mathrm{shot}}_\omega `$ is the current Poissonian shot noise (white noise). According to Eqs. (2) and (3), in both VB and CB regimes $`\delta ^2M_\mathrm{r}_\omega \omega ^2`$ for $`\omega 0`$, which implies an “infrared” divergence of the total measured fluctuation $`\delta ^2M_\mathrm{m}`$. Apparently, this fact would make our approach totally hopeless. Fortunately we can avoid this, at least for the VB regime. From Eq. (2) we notice that $`\delta ^2I_\mathrm{J}_\omega `$ is the sum of an $`\omega `$-independent term, call it $`\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J0}}`$, and an $`\omega `$-dependent one, say $`\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{Jd}}_\omega `$. Obviously, $`\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{Jd}}_\omega 0`$ or $`\mathrm{}`$ as $`\omega \mathrm{}`$ or $`\omega 0`$, respectively. We can define the crossover between $`\omega `$-independent and $`\omega `$-dependent regimes as $`\delta ^2I_\mathrm{J}_{\omega =\omega _\mathrm{c}}^{1/2}\delta ^2I_\mathrm{J}_\omega \mathrm{}^{1/2}=2`$. If $`\omega _\mathrm{c}1/\tau `$ and since “slow” fluctuations of $`I_\mathrm{J}`$ do not influence the reading of the signal due to the photon absorption, we can approximate the total fluctuation by using a convenient cutoff of the integral at the lower end:

$`\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{Jm}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{\omega _0}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2I_\mathrm{J}_\omega }{1+(\omega \tau _\mathrm{c})^2}}𝑑\omega {\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J0}}}{\tau _\mathrm{c}}},`$ (4)
where $`\omega _\mathrm{c}\omega _01/\tau `$. From Eq. (3), we see that this procedure cannot be applied to CB regime. Moreover, evaluations of $`\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{Jm}}`$ and $`\delta ^2V_\mathrm{m}`$, using a similar cutoff show that the second regime is not practical, and in what follows we shall consider only the VB regime.

Let us focus now on the signal measurement. In the linear regime, if the photon is absorbed at $`t=0`$, then $`I_\mathrm{J}(t<0)I_\mathrm{J}(T_{\mathrm{e0}})`$, while $`I_\mathrm{J}(t0)=I_\mathrm{J}(T_{\mathrm{e0}})+i_0e^{t/\tau }`$ , where $`i_0I_\mathrm{J}[T_\mathrm{e}(0)]I_\mathrm{J}(T_{\mathrm{e0}})`$. If $`\tau _\mathrm{c}\tau _\mathrm{d}`$, the measured current is $`I_{\mathrm{Jm}}(t)=I_\mathrm{J}(T_{\mathrm{e0}})+i_\mathrm{m}(t)`$, where $`i_\mathrm{m}(t<0)=0`$ and $`i_\mathrm{m}(t0)=i_0\tau (\tau _\mathrm{c}\tau )^1\left(e^{t/\tau _\mathrm{c}}e^{t/\tau }\right)`$. If we denote $`x\tau _\mathrm{c}/\tau `$, then the maximum value of $`i_\mathrm{m}(t)`$ is $`i_{\mathrm{max}}=i_0x^{x/(1x)}`$ and provides a way to calculate the energy of the absorbed photon. According to the definition, the relative error in the determination of $`i_0`$, $`\lambda =\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{Jm}}^{1/2}i_{\mathrm{max}}^1`$, is also the ER. If $`\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{ph}}`$ is the energy of the incoming photon, in the linear approximation $`i_0(I_\mathrm{J}/T_\mathrm{e})_{T_{\mathrm{e0}}}[\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{ph}}/C_\mathrm{V}(T_{\mathrm{e0}})]I_\mathrm{J}(T_{\mathrm{e0}})`$. Plugging this together with (4) in the expression for ER, we get

$$\mathrm{ER}=x^{\frac{1+x}{2(1x)}}\sqrt{\frac{\pi \delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J0}}}{2\tau }}\frac{C_\mathrm{V}(T_\mathrm{e})}{\left(I_\mathrm{J}/T_\mathrm{e}\right)_{T_{\mathrm{e0}}}\mathrm{}\omega }.$$
(5)
Since $`x^{(1+x)/2(1x)}`$ has a minimum equal to $`e`$ for $`x=1`$, we obtain the optimum energy resolution, $`\mathrm{ER}_{\mathrm{opt}}=e\left[(\pi /2)\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J0}}/\tau \right]^{1/2}C_\mathrm{V}(T_\mathrm{e})\left[\left(I_\mathrm{J}/T_\mathrm{e}\right)\mathrm{}\omega \right]^1`$.

We now turn to concrete calculations. For this, we take a typical value: $`T_\mathrm{b}=300`$ mK, and we set our goal to $`T_{\mathrm{e0}}=100`$ mK. If we set $`\mathrm{\Omega }=2\times 10^3\mu \mathrm{m}^3`$, then $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ increases to about 200 mK after the absorption of a photon of 100 $`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ wavelength. With all these parameters fixed, Eq. (1) is an equation in the junction tunnel resistance, $`R_\mathrm{T}`$, and $`V`$. Using this equation, we write $`\mathrm{ER}_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ as a function of $`V`$. This function has a minimum at $`V=V_{\mathrm{opt}}0.85\mathrm{\Delta }/e`$ ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the gap energy in the superconductor). Setting the bias voltage at $`V_{\mathrm{opt}}`$, we obtain $`R_\mathrm{T}5.4\mathrm{k}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (Eq. 1) and $`\tau 17`$ ns. Moreover, in this case $`\tau \omega _\mathrm{c}1/231`$ which justifies the assumption behind Eq. (4) and, therefore, the expression for $`\mathrm{ER}_{\mathrm{opt}}`$. In Fig. 2, we show $`\mathrm{ER}_{\mathrm{opt}}|_{V_{\mathrm{opt}},T_{\mathrm{e0}}}`$ (which was calculated using $`\delta ^2I_{\omega =\tau ^1}`$ instead of $`\delta ^2I_{\mathrm{J0}}`$, to set an upper limit for nonlinear effects in $`\mathrm{ER}_{\mathrm{opt}}`$) as a function of the incident photon wavelength. From this plot, it appears that the device may work as a counter up to about 0.4 mm photon wavelength. For longer wavelengths, $`\mathrm{ER}_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ is above 1, so, in principle, the signal may not be distinguished from the noise. Nevertheless, the performances may be improved by decreasing $`T_\mathrm{b}`$ and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$. If $`\delta T_\mathrm{e}T_{\mathrm{e0}}`$ is not satisfied, the response time would show a variation with the temperature. If we define the temperature dependent re-equilibration time, $`\tau ^{}(T_\mathrm{e})(T_\mathrm{e}T_{\mathrm{e0}})/(dT_\mathrm{e}/dt)`$, we observe that this does not vary much in the range of interest (see inset of Fig. 2). The approximation $`\tau ^{}(T_\mathrm{e})\tau ^{}(T_{\mathrm{e0}})=\tau `$ was used for the convenience of performing analytical calculations. For a concrete experimental set-up one can calculate numerically the energy resolution, taking into account nonlinear effects. According to the evaluations above, the results should not differ significantly.

In conclusion, we presented a far-infrared photon counter formed of a small piece of normal metal, capacitively coupled to a superconducting antenna via two NIS tunnel junctions. The photon energy is released in the normal metal and the junctions serve as both an electron cooler and thermometer. At a bath temperature $`T_\mathrm{b}=300`$ mK, the electron temperature in the normal metal may be reduced to $`T_{\mathrm{e0}}=100`$ mK by the cooling effect of the junctions, which tunes the response time of the detector (time constant for the detector re-equilibration after one photon absorption) to $`\tau 17`$ ns and the tunnel resistance of each junction to $`R_\mathrm{T}5.4\mathrm{k}\mathrm{\Omega }`$. For a volume of the normal metal $`\mathrm{\Omega }=2\times 10^3\mu \mathrm{m}^3`$, the calculated ER is 0.23 at a photon wavelength $`\lambda =0.1`$ mm (Fig. 2). The ER reaches 1 (the counting limit) for $`\lambda 0.4`$ mm. To allow for counting longer-wavelength photons, one should retune the detector parameters. The technological and physical difficulties raised eventually by the construction of small tunnel junctions with such low transparencies may be overcome either by the use of ferromagnetic materials to suppress the Andreev current across the too thin barriers, as suggested by Giazotto et al. gigi , or by the use of heavily doped semiconductors, which would allow one to increase the size of the absorber pruna .

We thank A. Semenov, H. W. Hübers, G. N. Gol’tsman, for fruitful discussions. This research was supported by Swedish Institute and Research Council grants.


text:
# Chapter 1 Chandra Studies of Nonthermal Emission from Supernova Remnants and Pulsar Wind Nebulae

## Chapter 1 Chandra Studies of Nonthermal Emission from Supernova Remnants and Pulsar Wind Nebulae

### Abstract

While supernova remnants (SNRs) have long been considered prime candidates as sources of cosmic rays, it is only recently that X-ray observations have identified several shell-type SNRs dominated by nonthermal emission, thus revealing shock-accelerated electrons with energies extending far beyond the typical thermal spectrum. Two of these SNRs have been detected as sources of VHE $`\gamma `$-rays. In other remnants, discrepancies between the shock velocity and the electron temperature point to a strong cosmic ray component that has thrived at the expense of the thermal gas. Modeling of the radio, X-ray, and $`\gamma `$-ray emission provides constraints on particle acceleration as well as the properties of the medium in which the mechanism prospers.

Crab-like pulsar wind nebulae (PWNe) are characterized by a termination shock at which the wind is forced to join the slow expansion of the outer nebula. These shocks also act as sites in which particles are boosted to high energies; the X-ray emission from the Crab Nebula, as well as the inverse Compton radiation observed as VHE $`\gamma `$-rays, imply electrons with energies in excess of $`100`$ TeV. Recent X-ray observations have begun to reveal these shock zones in the Crab and other PWNe, and are now allowing us to constrain the nature of pulsar winds as well as the flow conditions in the outer nebulae. Here I present a brief overview of recent studies with the Chandra X-ray Observatory in which the properties of these shock acceleration regions are finally being revealed.

### 1. Introduction

Supernova remnants and their associated pulsars are sites in which strong shocks act to accelerate particles to extremely high energies. The connection between SNRs and the energetic cosmic rays that pervade the Galaxy has long been assumed, for example; shock acceleration by the SNR blast wave provides ample energy for the production of multi-TeV particles, and recent observations of nonthermal X-ray and VHE $`\gamma `$-ray emission from several SNRs has confirmed the presence of electrons at these high energies. At the same time, models for the structure of PWNe predict particle acceleration at the wind termination shock, and recent X-ray observations have begun to probe these acceleration sites. These X-ray measurements provide constraints on the expected higher energy emission processes, and are thus of considerable interest in the context of VHE $`\gamma `$-ray astronomy. Here I review recent Chandra studies of nonthermal X-ray emission in SNRs and PWNe, with particular emphasis on the evidence for particle acceleration to very high energies.

### 2. Nonthermal X-rays and Particle Acceleration in SNRs

The radio synchrotron emission from SNRs is testimony to the presence of energetic particles. However, this corresponds to electron energies far below the “knee” of the cosmic ray spectrum at $`10^{15}`$ eV:

$$E_{\mathrm{GeV}}\left[\frac{\nu }{16\mathrm{MHz}}B_\mu ^1\right]^{1/2}$$
(1)
where $`\nu `$ is the frequency of the radio emission and $`B_\mu `$ is the magnetic field strength in $`\mu `$G. X-ray observations allow us to probe much higher energy particles, and also characterize the thermodynamic states of SNRs and infer the dynamics of their evolution. For an ideal gas, the thermal postshock temperature is

$$T=\frac{3\mu m}{16k}V_s^2$$
(2)
where $`V_s`$ is the shock speed, $`m`$ is the proton mass, and $`\mu `$ is the mean molecular weight of the gas ($`\mu 0.6`$). This shock-heated gas yields the familiar X-ray emission, characterized by a thermal bremsstrahlung spectrum accompanied by strong emission lines.

In addition to thermal heating of the swept-up gas, some fraction of the shock energy goes into nonthermal production of relativistic particles through diffusive shock acceleration. The maximum particle energy in such a scenario can be limited by radiative losses, the finite age of the SNR, or particle escape from the accelerating region. If the relativistic particle component of the energy density becomes comparable to that of the thermal component, the shock acceleration process can become highly nonlinear. The gas becomes more compressible, which results in a higher density and enhanced acceleration. When the acceleration is very efficient, the relationship between the shock velocity and the mean postshock temperature is no longer well approximated by Eq. 2; the acceleration process depletes thermal energy, and the temperature for a given shock velocity drops below that expected in the test particle case (Decourchelle et al. 2002). This process has been considered in detail by Baring et al. (1999) who present a model for the radio to $`\gamma `$-ray emission. The broadband spectra of SNRs depend highly on ambient conditions, and X-ray studies of these SNRs reveal these conditions and can provide spectral measurements which strongly constrain the models.

In the simplest picture, the passage of material through the SNR shock results in electrons and ions being boosted to the velocity of the shock. Because of the mass difference, this means that the electrons and ions are not initially in temperature equilibrium. The maximum timescale for equilibration is that provided by Coulomb interactions, but plasma processes may reduce this considerably. The state of equilibration is important, because while the dynamics of SNR evolution are dominated by the ions (which carry the bulk of the momentum), it is the electrons that produce the X-ray emission we observe. Thus, when temperature measurements are used to infer the shock velocity, for example, the state of temperature equilibration is exceedingly important.

As an example, the blast wave speed inferred from an expansion study comparing a Chandra image of 1E 0102.2–7219 (Figure 1, left), with high resolution images taken with Einstein and ROSAT indicates a post-shock temperature which is much higher than the observed electron temperature (Hughes et al. 2001). In this case, the discrepancy appears to be larger than can be accounted for assuming Coulomb equilibration, suggesting that a significant fraction of the shock energy has gone into cosmic ray acceleration rather than thermal heating of the postshock gas. Higher resolution X-ray expansion studies of 1E 0102.2–7219 (and other young SNRs) are needed to confirm this scenario, but the notion that particle acceleration is efficient enough in some SNRs to significantly affect their dynamics has strong foundations from recent studies of other SNRs. As we discuss below, direct evidence of very energetic electrons now exists for a handful of shell-type SNRs. In addition to the two SNRs which we discuss in the following sections (and also G266.2–1.2; Slane et al. 2001), for which synchrotron radiation dominates the X-ray emission, evidence for energetic particles in the form of nonthermal filaments or hard tails in the X-ray spectra have also been observed for Cas A (Allen et al. 1997, Hughes et al. 1999, Vink et al. 1999), RCW 86 (Borkowski et al. 2001, Rho et al. 2002), and other SNRs.

#### 2.1. SN 1006

The first evidence of multi-TeV particles directly associated with a shell-type SNR was uncovered in studies of SN 1006 with the ASCA observatory (Koyama et al. 1995). While spectra from the central regions of the SNR show distinct line emission associated with shock-heated gas, the emission from the bright limbs of the remnant was shown to be completely dominated by synchrotron emission. Reynolds (1998) modeled the emission as the result of diffusive shock acceleration in a low density medium with the magnetic field orientation providing the distinct “bilateral” morphology. Subsequent observations with the CANGAROO telescope revealed VHE $`\gamma `$-ray emission from one limb of the SNR (Tanimori et al. 1998), thus confirming the presence of extremely energetic particles. The low ambient density of this remnant, which resides well above the Galactic Plane, is insufficient to explain the $`\gamma `$-ray emission as the result of $`\pi ^0`$ decay from proton-proton collisions. Rather, the emission results from inverse-Compton scattering of microwave background photons off the energetic electron population in SN 1006 (but see Berezhko – these proceedings – for an alternative picture). Using joint spectral fits to the radio as well as thermal and nonthermal X-ray emission, Dyer et al. (2001) conclude that the total energy in relativistic particles is $`100`$ times the energy in the magnetic field, confirming the notion that the nonthermal particle component contributes significantly to the dynamics of the blast wave evolution.

Chandra observations of SN 1006 (Figure 1, right) reveal sharp filamentary structure along the SNR rim. Diffuse emission beyond these filaments is observed, presumably indicating the upstream diffusion of particles accelerated in the shocks. The upstream scale length of these nonthermal filaments appears to be considerably smaller than expected for standard diffusive shock acceleration, however (Bamba et al. – these proceedings), possibly indicating an upstream field nearly parallel to the plane of the shock and a downstream magnetic field strength ($`50\mu \mathrm{G}`$) considerably higher than that previously estimated (e.g. Reynolds 1998). A program to map SN 1006 in its entirety with Chandra is underway. This will form a baseline for future expansion measurements that will bear heavily on these questions.

#### 2.2. G347.3–0.5 (RX J1713.7-3946)

ASCA observations of G347.3–0.5 (Koyama et al. 1997, Slane et al. 1999) established this as the second member of the class of shell-type SNRs for which the X-ray flux is dominated by synchrotron radiation. Unlike SN 1006, this SNR appears to have evolved in the vicinity of dense molecular clouds (Slane et al. 1999) with which the shock may now be interacting. CANGAROO observations (Muraishi et al. 2000) reveal VHE $`\gamma `$-ray emission from the vicinity of the northwest rim, which is brightest in X-rays. Combining radio measurements from the ATCA with the X-ray and $`\gamma `$-ray results, Ellison, Slane, & Gaensler (2001) used diffusive shock acceleration models to conclude that the radio and X-ray emission results from synchrotron radiation from a nonthermal electron population accelerated by the forward shock, and that the $`\gamma `$-ray emission can be self-consistently modeled as inverse-Compton emission. Combined with limits on the ambient density based on the lack of thermal X-ray emission, the models indicate very efficient particle acceleration with $`>25\%`$ of the shock kinetic energy going into relativistic ions. A comparison of Chandra observations of the northwest rim with high resolution radio maps from the ATCA shows good overall agreement with the radio and X-ray morphology in this region (Figure 2, left), consistent with the interpretation that the emission comes from the same electron population (Lazendic, et al. 2003).

The nearby unidentified EGRET source 3EG J1714-3857 has been suggested as being associated with G347.3–0.5, possibly resulting from the decay of neutral pions produced in the collision of accelerated ions with the nearby molecular clouds (Butt, et al. 2001), although this would appear inconsistent with the X-ray measurements unless the emission originates from a distinct spatial region. Most recently, Enomoto et al. (2002) have presented new CANGAROO data which, they argue, establish $`\pi ^0`$-decay as the mechanism by which the TeV $`\gamma `$-rays are produced. However, the predicted spectrum over-predicts emission from the EGRET band by a large margin (Reimer et al. 2002, Butt et al. 2002), making the claim for direct observation of ion acceleration appear problematic.

The CANGAROO spectrum can be modeled as inverse-Compton emission from the same electron spectrum that produces the synchrotron radiation, while still falling below the EGRET limits, if the strong magnetic field region in which the synchrotron emission comprises only a small fraction of the total volume over which the inverse-Compton emission is produced (Figure 2, right; Lazendic et al. 2003). The resulting magnetic field filling factor is only $`0.7\%`$, which is quite small although the long diffusion lengths for the energetic particles certainly make the inverse-Compton emitting region considerably larger than that of the compressed magnetic field region where the bulk of the synchrotron emission arises. The field strength in the synchrotron filaments must be $`50\mu \mathrm{G}`$, which is very high, though similar to values found in maser-producing regions of molecular clouds. Uchiyama et al. (2002) have also modeled the synchrotron emission in G347.3–0.5 to assess the required magnetic field conditions. For a distance of 6 kpc, they derive $`B50\mu \mathrm{G}`$ – similar to that obtained in our analysis – but require that this field be similar in the filamentary and diffuse emission regions. This leads to the conclusion that the spectral cutoff in the diffuse emission regions is due to radiative losses while that in the filaments is due to diffusive escape of the particles. The resulting inverse-Compton emission falls far below the observed CANGAROO flux, thus requiring some other mechanism to produce the TeV $`\gamma `$-ray emission.

### 3. Energetic Particles from Pulsars and Their Wind Nebulae

Our basic understanding of “Crab-like” SNRs stems from the picture presented by Rees & Gunn (1974), and expanded upon by Kennel & Coroniti (1984a,b) in which an energetic wind is injected from a pulsar into its surroundings. As illustrated schematically in Figure 3, the basic structure of a pulsar wind nebula is regulated by the input power from the pulsar and the density of the medium into which the nebula expands; the pulsar wind inflates a magnetic bubble which is confined in the outer regions by the expanding shell of ejecta or interstellar material swept up by the SNR blast wave. The boundary condition established by the expansion at the nebula radius $`r_N`$ results in the formation of a wind termination shock at which the highly relativistic pulsar wind is decelerated to $`vc/3`$ in the postshock region, ultimately merging with the particle flow in the nebula. The shock forms at the radius $`r_w`$ at which the ram pressure of the wind is balanced by the internal pressure of the pulsar wind nebula:

$$r_w^2=\dot{E}/(4\pi \eta cp)$$
(3)
where $`\dot{E}`$ is the rate at which the pulsar injects energy into the wind, $`\eta `$ is the fraction of a spherical surface covered by the wind, and $`p`$ is the total pressure outside the shock.

The dynamics of the particle flow yield $`\gamma 10^6`$ for the electrons in the postshock region (Arons & Tavani 1994). However, for typical magnetic field strengths the observed X-ray emission requires $`\gamma >10^8`$. Particle acceleration at the termination shock apparently boosts the energies of the wind particles by a factor of 100 or more, to energies in excess of $`50`$ TeV. Arons & Tavani (1994; see also Arons 2002) note that this process cannot proceed by normal diffusive shock acceleration because the magnetic field at the termination shock must be nearly perpendicular to the flow. Rather, they argue that the e<sup>±</sup> acceleration is the result of resonant cyclotron absorption of low frequency electromagnetic waves emitted by ions gyrating in the compressed $`B`$-field of the hot post-shock gas. Ultimately, the pressure in the nebula is believed to reach the equipartition value; a reasonable pressure estimate can be obtained by integrating the radio spectrum of the nebula, using standard synchrotron emission expressions, and assuming equipartition between particles and the magnetic field. Typical values yield termination shock radii of order 0.1 pc, which yields an angular size of several arcsec at distances of a few kpc.

The pulsar wind can be characterized in terms of $`\dot{E}`$ and the parameter parameter $`\sigma `$ representing the ratio of Poynting flux to particle flux. For the Crab Nebula, Kennel & Coroniti (1984a) find that small values of $`\sigma `$ ($`10^3`$) are required, indicating a particle-dominated wind. Yet current understanding of pulsar outflows predicts $`\sigma 1`$ where the wind is launched (Arons 2002). Somehow, between the pulsar light cylinder and the wind termination shock the balance between the electromagnetic energy and the kinetic energy of the flow changes dramatically. The ability to identify the termination shock and measure the emission parameters in the immediate region is now providing constraints on the nature of the wind that may ultimately help unravel this problem. Below I summarize recent X-ray investigations that have finally begun to probe this important shock region in which particle acceleration is apparently taking place.

#### 3.1. Crab Nebula

The Crab Nebula is the best known of the class of pulsar wind nebulae and has inspired much of the theoretical work on PWNe. Powered by an energetic central pulsar, it emits synchrotron radiation from radio wavelengths up beyond the hard X-ray band. Optical wisps are observed in the inner nebula, at a position interpreted as the pulsar wind termination shock (Hester 1995), and high resolution X-ray observations (Figure 4, left) reveal a distinct ring of emission in this same region as well as a jet emanating from the pulsar (Weisskopf et al. 2000). Moreover, monitoring observations of the Nebula (Hester 1995, Mori et al. 2002) show that these and other detailed features are highly dynamic. The discovery of radio wisps in inner ring region (Bietenholz et al. 2002) suggests that the acceleration site may be the same for the entire population of electrons that produce the broad-band synchrotron emission.

In addition to the jet and inner ring, the X-ray image reveals an outer toroidal structure that presumably lies in the equatorial plane, as well as fine structure correlated with optical polarization measurements, indicating that the structures trace the magnetic field. The early models of Rees & Gunn (1974) and Kennel & Coroniti (1984a,b) predict these basic properties as the result of a wound-up magnetic field, the large-scale confinement of the Nebula by the (unseen) supernova ejecta, and the termination of the pulsar wind flow by an inner shock. This picture leads to the inference of a low-$`\sigma `$ wind described above. As we describe below, recent observations of PWNe have begun to show many similar features, indicating that our basic picture – while still poorly understood in detail – can at least be said to apply to a “class” of objects.

#### 3.2. G21.5–0.9

G21.5–0.9 is a compact SNR that exhibits strong linear polarization, a flat spectrum, and centrally peaked emission in the radio band. The SNR has a lower $`L_x/L_r`$ ratio than the Crab; it is a factor of $`9`$ less luminous in the radio and a factor of $`100`$ less in X-rays. To date, there has been no detection of a central pulsar. However, Chandra observations by Slane et al. (2000) reveal a compact source of emission at the center of the remnant as well as a radial steepening of the spectral index consistent with synchrotron burn-off of high energy electrons injected from a central source. Using an empirical relationship between the total X-ray luminosity of the PWN with the spin-down power of the pulsar powering the nebula (Seward & Wang 1988) suggests the presence of a pulsar with $`\dot{E}=10^{37.5}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$, although Chevalier (2000) argues that the spectral variations in the nebula imply more efficient conversion of $`\dot{E}`$ into X-ray emission, and suggests that $`\dot{E}10^{36.7}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ is more likely for the pulsar in this PWN. Detection of pulsations from the central source are required to address this further. Using the larger $`\dot{E}`$ estimate along with pressure estimates from the radio spectrum, Eq. 3 predicts a wind termination shock at a radius of $`1.5\eta ^{1/2}`$ arcsec from the pulsar, assuming a distance of 5 kpc. As indicated in the inset to Figure 4, the brightness profile of the compact X-ray source in G21.5–0.9 is broader than that for a point source. The $`2^{\prime \prime }`$ extent of the source is consistent with the expected size of the termination shock zone.

Slane et al. (2000) also report the presence of a faint extended shell of emission surrounding G21.5–0.9 whose featureless spectrum may be associated with energetic particles accelerated by the SNR blast wave, similar to those observed for SN 1006 and other SNRs as described in Section 2.

#### 3.3. PSR J1124-5916/G292.0+1.8

G292.0+1.8 is a member of the “oxygen-rich” class of SNRs with optical emission revealing the presence of ejecta whose tell-tale composition points to a massive star progenitor. Previous studies have shown that the X-ray emission is dominated by ejecta, and have revealed a region of hard emission indicative of a pulsar-driven nebula. Chandra observations reveal an unprecedented example of a composite SNR showing both such components (Hughes et al. 2001, Park et al. 2002). Figure 5 (left) shows a soft X-ray image of the remnant. The bulk of the interior emission is dominated by ejecta, and spectra from discrete regions suggest large-scale variations in ionization state and elemental abundance within the ejecta. The bar-like structure running across the center, along with the thin filamentary structure encircling most of the SNR, has solar abundances indicative of material swept up by the forward shock. The hard-band image in Figure 5 (right) reveals a neutron star with a surrounding pulsar wind nebula, similar in size to the Crab. Recent radio observations (Camilo et al. 2002) have identified a young pulsar (PSR J1124-5916) with a 135 ms rotation period that appears to be the counterpart. The Chandra image of the compact X-ray source is marginally extended, with a size consistent with that expected for the termination shock zone of the pulsar wind.

### 4. Summary

The strong shocks in SNRs and PWNe have long been regarded as sites where particles are accelerated to extremely high energies. SNRs, in particular, are leading candidates as the source of cosmic rays up to the knee of the spectrum. X-ray emission from PWNe also require particles with higher energies than expected in the postshock flow of the pulsar wind, indicating efficient acceleration at the termination shock. X-ray observations have now begun to provide direct evidence of the energetic particles and shock structures where this such acceleration takes place. Through studies of the dynamics and nonthermal X-ray emission from SNRs, and of the wind termination shocks and associated particle outflows in PWNe, strong constraints are being placed on models of the particle acceleration process. High resolution X-ray observations promise continued advances in this area, through measurements of SNR nonthermal emission and expansion rates, and the inner structure of PWNe. In addition, $`\gamma `$-ray observations with current and upcoming Čerenkov telescopes, as well as future space-borne observatories, hold considerable promise for probing these sites of extremely energetic particles.

### Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Bryan Gaensler, Jack Hughes, Don Ellison, Jasmina Lazendic, and Steve Reynolds for their contributions as collaborators on much of the above work. I also thank the organizers of this meeting for their kind invitation to present this work. This research was funded in part by NASA Contract NAS8-39073 and Grants NAG5-9281 and GO0-1117A.

### References

1. Allen, G. E. et al. 1997, ApJ, 487, L97

2. Arons, J. 2002, in “Neutron Stars in Supernova Remnants,” ASP Conference Series, Vol. 271, eds P. O. Slane and B. M. Gaensler, p. 71

3. Arons, J. & Tavani, M. 1994, ApJS, 90, 797

4. Baring, M. G. et al. 1999, ApJ, 513, 311

5. Bietenholz, M. F., Frail, D. A., & Hester, J. J. 2001, ApJ, 560, 254

6. Borkowski et al. 2001, ApJ, 550, 334

7. Butt, Y., et al. 2001, ApJ, 562, L167

8. Butt, Y., et al. 2002, Nature, 418, 499

9. Camilo et al. 2002, ApJ, 567, L71

10. Chevalier, R. A. 2000, ApJ, 539, L45

11. Decourchelle, A., Ellison, D. C., & Ballet, J. 2002, ApJ, 543, L57

12. Dyer, K. K. et al. 2001, ApJ, 551, 439

13. Ellison, D. C., Slane, P., & Gaensler, B. M. 2001, ApJ, 563, 191

14. Enomoto, R. et al. 2002, Nature, 416, 823

15. Hester, J. J. et al. 1995, ApJ, 448, 240

16. Hughes, J. P. et al. 1999, ApJ, 528, L109

17. Hughes, J. P. et al. 2001, ApJ, 559, L153

18. Hughes, J. P., Rakowski, C. E. & Decourchelle, A. 2001, ApJ, 543, L61

19. Kennel, C. F. & Coroniti, F. V. 1984a, ApJ, 283, 694

20. Kennel, C. F. & Coroniti, F. V. 1984b, ApJ, 283, 710

21. Koyama, K. et al. 1995, Nature, 378, 255

22. Koyama, K. et al. 1997, PASJ, 49, L7

23. Lazendic, J. et al. 2003, ApJ, submitted

24. Mori, K. et al. 2002, in “Neutron Stars in Supernova Remnants,” ASP Conference Series, Vol. 271, eds P. O. Slane and B. M. Gaensler, p. 157

25. Muraishi, T. et al. 2000, A&A, 354, L57

26. Park et al. 2002, ApJ, 564, L39

27. Rees, M. J. & Gunn, R. E. 1974, MNRAS, 167, 1

28. Reimer, O. et al. 2002, A&A, 390, L43

29. Reynolds, S. P. 1998, ApJ, 493, 375

30. Seward, F. D. & Wang, Z.-R. 1988, ApJ, 332, 199

31. Slane, P. et al. 1999, ApJ, 525, 357

32. Slane, P. et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, L29

33. Slane, P. et al. 2001, ApJ, 548, 814

34. Tanimori, T. et al. 1998, ApJ, 497, L25

35. Vink, J. et al. 1999 A&A, 344, 289

36. Weisskopf, M. C. et al. 2000, 536, L81


text:
# Calibration of Geometric Distortion in the ACS Detectors

## 1 Introduction

Images from the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) suffer from strong geometric distortion: the square pixels of its detectors project to trapezoids of varying area across the field of view. The tilted focal surface with respect to the chief ray is the primary source of distortion of all three ACS detectors. In addition, The HST Optical Telescope Assembly induces distortion as does the ACS M2 and IM2 mirrors (which are designed to remove HST’s spherical aberration). The SBC’s optics include a photo-cathode and micro-channel plate which also induce distortion.

Here we describe our method of calibrating the geometric distortion using dithered observations of star clusters. The distortion solutions we derived are given in the IDC tables delivered in Nov 2002, and currently implemented in the STScI CALACS pipeline. This paper is a more up to date summary of our results than that presented at the workshop. An expanded description of our procedures is given by Meurer (2002).

## 2 Method

Observations. The ACS SMOV geometric distortion campaign consisted of two HST observing programs: 9028 which targeted the core of 47 Tucanae (NGC 104) with the WFC and HRC, and 9027 which consisted of SBC observations of NGC 6681. Additional observations from programs 9011, 9018, 9019, 9024 and 9443 were used as additional sources of data, to check the results, and to constrain the absolute pointing of the telescope.

The CCD exposures of 47 Tucanae were designed to well detect stars on the main sequence turn-off at $`m_B=17.5`$ in each frame. This allows for a high density of stars with relatively short exposures. The F475W filter (Sloan g’) was used for the CCD observations so as to minimize the number of saturated red giant branch stars in the field. For the HRC two 60s exposures were taken at each pointing, while for the WFC which has a larger time overhead, only one such exposure was obtained per pointing. Simulated images made prior to launch, as well as archival WFPC2 images from Gilliland et al. (2000) were used to check that crowding would not be an issue. For calibrating the distortion in the SBC we used exposures of NGC 6681 (300s - 450s) which was chosen for the relatively high density of UV emitters (hot horizontal branch stars). The pointing center was dithered around each star field. For the WFC and HRC pointings, the dither pattern was designed so that the offsets between all pairs of images adequately, and non-redundantly, samples all spatial scales from about 5 pixels to 3/4 the detector size. For the SBC pointings, a more regular pattern of offsets is used augmented by a series of 5 pixel offsets.

Distortion model. The heart of the distortion model relates pixel position ($`x,y`$) to sky position using a polynomial transformation (Hack & Cox, 2000) given by:

$$x_c=\underset{m=0}{\overset{k}{}}\underset{n=0}{\overset{m}{}}a_{m,n}(xx_r)^n(yy_r)^{mn},y_c=\underset{m=0}{\overset{k}{}}\underset{n=0}{\overset{m}{}}b_{m,n}(xx_r)^n(yy_r)^{mn}$$
(1)
Here $`k`$ is the order of the fit, $`x_r,y_r`$ is the reference pixel, taken to be the center of each detector, or WFC chip, and $`x_c,y_c`$ are undistorted image coordinates. The coefficients to the fits, $`a_{m,n}`$ and $`b_{m,n}`$, are free parameters. For the WFC, an offset is applied to get the two CCD chips on the same coordinate system:

$$X^{}=x_c+\mathrm{\Delta }x(\mathrm{chip}\mathrm{\#}),Y^{}=y_c+\mathrm{\Delta }y(\mathrm{chip}\mathrm{\#}).$$
(2)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }x(\mathrm{chip}\mathrm{\#}),\mathrm{\Delta }y(\mathrm{chip}\mathrm{\#})`$ are 0,0 for WFC’s chip 1 (as indicated by the FITS CCDCHIP keyword) and correspond to the separation between chips 1 and 2 for chip 2. The chip 2 offsets are free parameters in our fit. $`X^{},Y^{}`$ correspond to tangential plane positions in arcseconds which we tie to the HST $`V2,V3`$ coordinate system. Next the positions are corrected for velocity aberration: $`X=\gamma X^{}`$, $`Y=\gamma Y^{}`$, where

$$\gamma =\frac{1+𝐮𝐯/c}{1(v/c)^2}.$$
(3)
Here u is the unit vector towards the target and v is the velocity vector of the telescope (heliocentric plus orbital). Neglect of the velocity aberration correction can result in misalignments on order of a pixel for WFC images taken six months apart for targets near the ecliptic. Finally, we must transform all frames to the same coordinate grid on the sky $`X_{\mathrm{sky}},Y_{\mathrm{sky}}`$:

$$X_{\mathrm{sky}}=\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _iX\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _iY+\mathrm{\Delta }X_i,Y_{\mathrm{sky}}=\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _iX+\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _iY+\mathrm{\Delta }Y_i$$
(4)
where the free parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }X_i,\mathrm{\Delta }Y_i,\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _i`$ are the position and rotation offsets of frame $`i`$.

Calibration algorithm. We use the positions of stars observed multiple times in the dithered star fields to iteratively solve for the free parameters in the distortion solution: fit coefficients $`a_{m,n},b_{m,n}`$; chip 2 offsets $`\mathrm{\Delta }x(\mathrm{chip}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}),\mathrm{\Delta }y(\mathrm{chip}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2})`$ (WFC only); frame offsets $`\mathrm{\Delta }X_i,\mathrm{\Delta }Y_i,\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _i`$; and tangential plane position $`X_{\mathrm{sky}},Y_{\mathrm{sky}}`$ of each star used in the fit. The stars are selected by finding local maxima above a selected threshold. The centroid in a $`7\times 7`$ box about the local maximum is compared to Gaussian fits to the $`x,y`$ profiles, if the two estimates of position differ by more than 0.25 pixels, the measurement is rejected as likely being effected by a cosmic ray hit or crowding. Further details of the fit algorithm can be found in Meurer et al. (2002).

Low order terms. Originally only SMOV images taken with a single roll angle were used to define the distortion solutions. The solution using only these data is degenerate in the zeroth (absolute pointing) and linear terms (scale, skewness). So we used the largest commanded offsets with a given guide star pair to set the linear terms. However, comparison of corrected coordinates to astrometric positions showed that residual skewness in the solution remained. Hence, as of November 2002, the IDC tables for WFC and SBC are based on data from multiple roll angles. The overall plate scale is set by the largest commanded offset. For the HRC, the linear scale is set by matching HRC and WFC coordinates, since the same field was used in the SMOV observations. The zeroth order terms (position of the ACS apertures in the HST $`V2,V3`$ frame) was determined from observations of an astrometric field.

## 3 Results

The distortion in all ACS detectors is highly non-linear as illustrated in Fig. 1. We find that a quartic fit ($`k=4`$) is adequate for characterizing the distortion to an accuracy much better than our requirement of 0.2 pixels over the entire field of view. Table 1 summarizes the rms of the fits to the various datasets.

The WFC and HRC fits were all to F475W data as noted above. To check the wavelength dependence of the distortion we used data obtained with F775W (WFC and HRC) and F220W (HRC) from programs 9018 and 9019. We held the coefficients fixed and only fit the offsets in order to check whether a single distortion solution is sufficient for each detector. Table 2 shows that there is a marginal increase in the rms for the red data of the WFC, little or no increase in the fit rms for the red HRC data, but a significant increase in the rms using the UV data. An examination of the HRC F220W images reveals the most likely cause: the stellar PSF is elongated by 0.1”. A similar elongation can also be seen in SBC PSFs. We attribute this to aberration in the optics of either the ACS M1 or M2 mirrors or the HST OTA (Hartig, et al., 2002). The aberration amounts to 0.1 waves at 1600Å, but is negligible relative to optical wavelengths, hence it is not apparent in optical HRC images. While it was expected that the same distortion solution would be applicable to all filters except the polarizers, recent work (by Tom Brown, STScI, and our team) has shown that at least one other optical filter (F814W) induces a significant plate scale change (factor of $`4\times 10^5`$). In the long term, the IDC tables will be selected by filter in the STScI CALACS pipeline.

While a quartic solution is adequate for most purposes, binned residual maps (Fig. 2) show that there are significant coherent residuals in the WFC and HRC solutions. These have amplitudes up to $`0.1`$ pixels. The small-scale geometric distortion is the subject of the Anderson & King contribution to this proceedings.

## References

Hack, W., & Cox, C. 2000, ISR ACS 2000-11, STScI.

Hartig, G. et al. 2002, in “Future EUV and UV Visible Space Astrophysics Missions and Instrumentation”, eds. J.C. Blades & O.H. Siegmund, Proc. SPIE, Vol. 4854, in press \[4854-30\].

Gilliland, R.L. et al. 2000, ApJ, 545, L47.

Meurer, G.R. et al. 2002, in “Future EUV and UV Visible Space Astrophysics Missions and Instrumentation”, eds. J.C. Blades & O.H. Siegmund, Proc. SPIE, Vol. 4854, in press \[4854-30\].