text:
# Introduction

## Introduction

The evidence for dark energy ”DE” and dark matter ”DM” has been established in the last few years. The measurements of high redshift supernovae  show that the universe is expanding in an accelerating way requiring an energy density with negative pressure. In conjunction with the CMB spectrum  and the study of structure formation  show that the universe is flat and with a matter content $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b0.05`$ (baryonic), $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DM}=0.25\pm 0.1`$ and a DE $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DE}=0.7\pm 0.1`$ and an equation of state parameter $`w_{DEo}<0.78`$ (from now on the subscript o represents present day quantities). Recent analysis show that is must be smaller and closer to $`0.9`$ .

The physical process that gives rise to dark matter and dark energy is yet unclear. Here we study the possibility that these two kinds of energies which make $`95\%`$ of the universe are originated from the same physical process. This connection allows for a deeper insight into the nature of DE and DM.

The restrictions on DM is that it must account for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DM}=0.25\pm 0.1`$ and it should allow for structure formation at scales larger than Mpc. As we will see later our models have a warm DM with a mass of the order of $`keV`$. There are still problems with cold and warm DM models. Cold DM have an overproduction of substructure of galactic halos which a warm DM model does not have . On the other hand, recent observations on the reionization redshift  seem to indicate that warm dark matter is not a good candidate. However, the value of the parameters used are still not well established which makes the conclusion not definite . So, we believe that further studies need to be done in order to fully set the nature of dark matter.

The DE is probably best described in terms of scalar fields or quintessence. The possibility of having the quintessence field parameterized by the condensate of a gauge group has been studied in . Here, we want to study the possibility that a gauge group contains at the same time the field responsible for giving an accelerated universe at present time, i.e quintessence, and on the other hand it gives the necessary amount of DM needed for structure formation.

The starting point is a dark gauge group ”DG” whose particles interact with the standard model ”SM” only via gravity. The requirement on the gauge group is that its gauge coupling constant becomes strong at lower energies. When the coupling becomes strong it will bind the elementary dark fields together at the phase transition or condensation scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ (from now on the subscript-c stands for quantities defined at the condensation scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$). Above this scale the particles are massless and at the condensation scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ they acquire a mass of the order of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$. The elementary fields will form gauge invariant particles due to the strong coupling. These particles are dark ”mesons” and dark ”baryons”. The dark mesons acquire a non-trivial scalar potential $`V`$ below $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ and give rise to the DE or quintessence field. Using Affleck-Dine-Seiberg superpotential, which receives no quantum corrections, the scalar potential takes the form of an inverse power law potential $`V\varphi ^n`$ with $`n`$ the inverse power law ”IPL” parameter. Besides the scalar field responsible for quintessence we will have massive stable matter fields and its precisely these fields that account for the DM. The appearance of the quintessence field is only below the phase transition scale and a late time accelerating epoch can be understood as the consequence of having a small $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$.

We can further constrain the gauge group by requiring that its gauge coupling is unified with the standard model gauge couplings . As an example we present our preferred model  which has an $`SU\left(3\right)`$ gauge group with $`N_f=6`$ chiral + antichiral fields with $`g_{DG}=97.5`$ degrees of freedom, a condensation scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c=42eV`$ and an inverse power potential with $`V=\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^{4+n}\varphi ^n`$, $`n=2/3`$. This model gives a warm DM with a free streaming scale $`\lambda _{fs}0.6Mpc`$ and an equation of state parameter for the DE $`w_{DEo}=0.9`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.27,\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEo}=0.73`$.

## Initial Conditions

Let us now determine the condition on the initial (i.e. at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$) dark energy densities for DM and DE. Just before the phase transition scale all dark particles are massless and the energy density of the DG can be written as $`\rho _{DG}=\frac{\pi ^2}{30}g_{DG}T_D^4`$ where $`T_D`$ is the temperature of the dark particles and in general it will be different than the photon temperature $`T_\gamma `$. The degrees of freedom for a supersymmetric gauge group with $`SU\left(N_c\right)`$ and $`N_f`$ chiral plus antichiral fields is simply given by $`g_{DG}=\left(1+7/8\right)\left(2\left(N_c^21\right)+2N_fN_c\right)`$ (the 7/8 count the fermionic while 1 the bosonic degrees of freedom). After the phase transition we will assume that the DE and DM have $`g_{DE},g_{DM}`$ degrees of freedom, respectively, with $`g_{DE}+g_{DM}=g_{DG}`$ and $`\rho _{DG}=\rho _{DE}+\rho _{DM}`$ where $`\rho _{DE}=\left(\pi ^2/30\right)g_{DE}T_D^4,\rho _{DM}=\left(\pi ^2/30\right)g_{DM}T_D^4`$ are the energy density of the DE and DM, respectively. At the condensation scale we can easily estimate the fraction of the energy density for DM or DE in terms of the energy density of the dark gauge group and their respective degrees of freedom giving $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMc}=\left(g_{DMc}/g_{DGc}\right)\mathrm{\Omega }_{DG}=\left(g_{DMc}/g_{DEc}\right)\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_i=\rho _i/\rho _{tot}`$ where $`\rho _{tot}`$ is the total energy density which includes all the SM particles. We are also assuming that there is conservation of energy within the DG, i.e. the energy before and after the phase transition in the DG is the same . We find it convenient to express the DM a and DE in terms of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DG}`$ and $`g_{DMc},gDEc`$ because it shows that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMc},\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}`$ cannot be arbitrary small (or large) since $`g_{DMc},gDEc`$ must take values between one and $`g_{DG}`$. Furthermore, $`g_{DMc},gDEc`$ have clear interpretation in terms of particle physics.

The number of the relativistic degrees of freedom is a time (energy) dependent quantity and therefore we write a subscript $`c`$ on the degrees of freedom at the condensation scale. At later times $`g_{DM}`$ may be smaller than $`g_{DMc}`$ since dark matter particles will decay into the lightest stable particles, the dark ”LSP”.

The standard model and the DG will in general not have the same temperature, i.e. $`T_DT_\gamma `$. We can use $`T_D`$ and $`T_\gamma `$ as independent variables or without loss of generality we can express $`T_D`$ as a function of $`T_\gamma `$ and $`g_{dec}`$ (we still have two independent variables), the number of degree of freedom of the SM at an energy scale where $`T_\gamma =T_D`$. However, we chose to take $`T_\gamma `$ and $`g_{dec}`$ as the independent variables since we can relate $`g_{dec}`$ more directly to particle physics.

If the standard model and the DG have the same initial temperature we can use entropy conservation to determine the relative temperature between the standard model $`T_\gamma `$ (photon’s temperature) and the DG $`T_D`$ at a lower scale. Since these groups (SM and DG) interact via gravity only they would not maintain a thermal equilibrium with each other. The same initial temperature can be obtained if the gauge groups are unified at the unification scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{gut}=10^{16}GeV`$ and/or if the reheating process after inflation is gauge blind and gives the same amount of energy to all relativistic degrees of freedom, the democratic reheating. So, from entropy conservation we obtain the relative temperature between the standard model $`T_\gamma `$ and the DG $`T_D`$ for relativistic degrees of freedom $`T_D=T_\gamma \left(g_{smf}g_{DGdec}/g_{smdec}g_{DGf}\right)^{1/3}`$ where $`g_{dec}g_{smdec},g_{smf},g_{DGdec},g_{DGf}`$ are the relativistic degrees of freedom at a final stage and at decoupling scale (which is not $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$) for SM and DG, respectively. The energy ratio is given by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DGf}=g_{DGf}\left(T_D/T_\gamma \right)^4/\left(g_{smf}^{}+g_{DGf}\left(T_D/T_\gamma \right)^4\right)`$ where $`g_{smf}^{}`$ takes into account all SM relativistic degrees. For a neutrino one has at decoupling $`g_{dec}=11/2,g_{smf}=2`$ and with $`g_{DGf}=g_{DGdec}`$ one has $`T_\nu =T_\gamma \left(4/11\right)^{1/3}=\left(1/1.76\right)T_\gamma `$. However, if the decoupling is at a high energy scale, say $`T10^3GeV`$, then all particles of the standard model are still relativistic and $`T_D=T_\gamma \left(43/11/g_{dec}\right)^{1/3}`$ for $`T_\gamma <1MeV`$ ($`g_{smf}=43/11`$ takes into account neutrino decoupling). We get a temperature $`T_D\left(1/3\right)T_\gamma `$ for the SM with $`g_{dec}=106.75`$ and $`T_D\left(1/3.88\right)T_\gamma `$ for the minimal supersymmetric SM (MSSM) with $`g_{dec}=228.75`$. The temperature of DG is in these cases $`34`$ times smaller then the photon temperature and $`23`$ times smaller then $`T_\nu `$. If there are more relativistic degrees of freedom coupled to the susy-SM (could be Kaluza-Klein states or other gauge groups, e.g. gauge group responsible for susy breaking ) at decoupling then $`T_D`$ would be even smaller.

### Limits on the Gauge Group Degrees of Freedom

We can set an upper and lower limit to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DG}`$. The smallest number of degrees of freedom would be for a gauge group with $`N_c=2,N_f=1`$ giving $`g_{DG}=18.75`$. While the upper limit on $`g_{DG}`$ comes from Nucleosynthesis ”NS” bounds which requires an upper limit to any extra energy density. This limit is $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DG}\left(NS\right)0.10.2`$ . Since $`g_{DG}/g_{dec}^{4/3}=\left(10.75\right)^{1/3}\mathrm{\Omega }_{DG}\left(NS\right)/\left(1\mathrm{\Omega }_{DG}\left(NS\right)\right)`$ the NS bound sets un upper limit $`g_{DG}0.05g_{dec}^{4/3},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.113}g_{dec}^{4/3}`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DG}\left(NS\right)0.1,0.2`$, respectively. Taking $`g_{DG}0.113g_{dec}^{4/3}`$ we obtain un upper limit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DGc}0.17`$ at any condensation scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ below $`1MeV`$. We have $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DGc}<\mathrm{\Omega }_{DG}\left(NS\right)`$ for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c<1MeV`$ due to neutrino decoupling and the electron and positron acquiring a mass.

## Dark Matter

### Free Streaming Scale

Before studying the dynamics of the DG let us determine the constraint on the temperature and mass for DM in order to agree with structure formation. The free streaming scale $`\lambda _{fs}`$ gives the minimum size at which perturbations survive. For scales smaller than the $`\lambda _{fs}`$ the perturbations are wiped out. For structure formation it is required that $`\lambda _{fs}O\left(1\right)Mpc`$. One has

$`\lambda _{fs}`$ $``$ $`0.2\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_{DM}h^2\right)^{1/3}\left(1.5/g_{DM}^{}\right)^{1/3}\left(keV/m\right)^{4/3}`$
$`=`$ $`0.079\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_{DM}h^2\right)^1\left(g_{DM}^{}/1.5\right)\left(228/g_{dec}\right)^{4/3}`$
where $`g_{DM}^{}=g_{bDM}+3/4g_{fDM}`$ with $`g_{bDM}`$ the bosonic, $`g_{bfDM}`$ the fermion degrees of freedom of DM, i.e. the LSP, and we used eq.(2) in the second equality of eq.(Free Streaming Scale).

### Constraint on the Mass of the Dark Matter Particle

Lets us now study the constraint on the mass of the LSP. The energy density of the DG will be divided in DE (quintessence) and DM. For DM the entropy conservation gives $`n_{DM}/n_\gamma =\left(g_{DM}^{}/2\right)\left(T_D/T_\gamma \right)^3`$ where $`n_{DM},n_\gamma =2\left(\zeta \left(3\right)/\pi ^2\right)T_\gamma ^3`$ are the number density for DM and photon respectively. Since the energy density for matter is $`\rho _m=nm`$ and using $`\rho _\gamma =n_\gamma \left(\pi ^4/30\zeta \left(3\right)\right)T_\gamma `$ we can write $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\gamma o}\left(\zeta \left(3\right)30/\pi ^4\right)\left(n_{DM}/n_\gamma \right)\left(m/T_{\gamma o}\right)=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\gamma o}\left(\zeta \left(3\right)30/\pi ^4\right)\left(g_{DM}^{}/2\right)\left(m/T_{\gamma o}\right)\left(T_D/T_\gamma \right)^3`$ giving

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=0.25\left(\frac{0.71}{h_o}\right)^2\left(\frac{g_{DM}^{}m}{g_{dec}1.66eV}\right)$$
(2)
where we have used in the last equation the present day quantities $`h_o^2\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma =2.47\times 10^5`$, $`T_{\gamma o}=2.37\times 10^{13}GeV`$. Eq.(2) is valid for all DM that decouples at temperature $`T_i10^3GeV`$ from the susy-SM. Taking the central values of wmap  $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}h_o^2=0.1350.0224=0.1126`$ (where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2=0.0224`$) one gets a neutrino mass $`m=12eV`$ and $`\lambda _{fs}=36Mpc`$ giving the usual hot DM problem. It cannot form structure at small scales. For a model that decouples from the susy-SM at $`T10^3GeV`$ one has $`T_D/T_\gamma 1/3.88`$ with $`g_{dec}228`$, a mass $`m254eV`$ for $`g_{DM}^{}=1.5`$ (i.e. a fermion) and eq.(Free Streaming Scale) gives $`\lambda _{fs}0.41Mpc`$. Allowing for a more conservative variation of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=0.25\pm 0.1`$ and $`h_o=0.7\pm 0.05`$ the constraint on $`g_{DM}^{}m/g_{dec}`$ from eq.(2) is $`0.83g_{dec}eVg_{DM}^{}m2.59g_{dec}eV`$. The number of degrees of freedom $`g_{DM}^{}`$ is not arbitrary since $`0.113g_{dec}^{4/3}g_{DG}>g_{DM}^{}1`$, as discussed above. This bound implies that the mass of the DM particle must be

$$1.2\left(228/g_{dec}\right)^{1/3}eVm593\left(g_{dec}/228\right)eV.$$
(3)
For $`g_{dec}228`$ we have $`m593eV`$ and we would get a larger mass $`m750eV,1keV`$ if $`g_{dec}675,900`$ for $`g_{DM}^{}=1.5`$.

### Constraint on the Condensation Scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ and on the IPL parameter $`n`$

In order to connect the dynamics of the dark energy (quintessence) and the constraint on dark matter density we evolve the DM from present day to the phase transition scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ where the particles acquired a mass.

The evolution of the DM is $`\rho _{DMo}=\rho _{DM}\left(a/a_o\right)^3`$ where $`a\left(t\right)`$ is the scale factor. In terms of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DM}=3H^2\rho _{DM}`$ (we have taken $`8\pi G=1/m_{pl}^2=1`$) we can write the DM energy density as

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMc}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_{ro}/\mathrm{\Omega }_{rc}\right)^{\frac{3}{4}}\left(H_c^2/H_o^2\right)^{\frac{1}{4}}$$
(4)
where we have expressed the scale factor $`a`$ in terms of the relativistic energy densities, $`a_c/a_o=\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_{ro}H_o^2/\mathrm{\Omega }_{rc}H_c^2\right)^{1/4}`$. The evolution of the DE depends on the specific potential. However, the non-abelian gauge dynamics leads to an inverse power potential of the form

$$V=\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^{4+n}\varphi ^n$$
(5)
where $`\varphi =<\overline{Q}Q>`$ is the condensate of the elementary fields. Here we will treat $`n`$ as a free parameter but it can be related to $`N_c,N_f`$ by $`n=2+4\nu /\left(N_cN_f\right)`$ and $`\nu `$ counts the number of light condensates . When the kinetic term is much smaller than the potential energy one has $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DE}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^{4+n}\varphi ^n/3H^2`$. This is certainly valid for present day since we require $`\rho _{DE}`$ to accelerate the universe and the slow roll condition $`E_kV`$ must be satisfied. Since the beginning of an accelerated epoch is very recently one has $`\varphi _o1`$ . Of course, a numerical analysis must be performed  in order to obtain the precise values of $`\varphi _o,w_{\varphi o}`$ but the analytic solution is a reasonable approximation. At the condensation scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ the initial value of the condensate $`\varphi _c`$ must be giving by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ and taking $`\varphi _c=\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$  we have

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^4}{3H_c^2},\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEo}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^{n+4}}{3H_o^2}.$$
(6)
Using eqs.(4) and (6) we can write

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMc}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_{ro}/\mathrm{\Omega }_{rc}\right)^{\frac{3}{4}}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEo}/\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}\right)^{\frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^{\frac{n}{4}}$$
(7)
where we have used $`H_o^2/H_c^2=\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}/\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEo}\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^n`$. An easy estimate of the order of magnitude for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ and $`n`$ can be obtained from eqs.(6) and eq.(7) using $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=0.25,\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEo}=0.7,\mathrm{\Omega }_{ro}=O\left(10^5\right)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMc}=O\left(10^2\right),\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}=O\left(10^1\right),\mathrm{\Omega }_{rc}=O\left(1\right)`$ giving

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ $``$ $`H_o^{2/\left(4+n\right)}10^{120/\left(4+n\right)}`$ (8)
$``$ $`10^{20/n}`$ (9)
where we have used $`H_o10^{60}`$ (in Planck units). From eqs.(8) and (9) we get a rough solution for the IPL parameter $`n`$ and condensation scale,

$$n4/5,\mathrm{\Lambda }_c200eV.$$
(10)
In general eq.(7) depends also on $`g_{dec},g_{DG},g_{DMc}`$ through $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMc},\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}`$. Taking as a concrete example a dark gauge group with $`g_{DG}=97`$ with $`g_{DMc}=1.5`$ and the central wmap values $`h_o=0.71,`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=0.25`$  we find from eqs.(6) and eq.(7) for the MSSM $`g_{dec}=228`$ and for $`g_{dec}=900`$ an inverse power parameter $`n=0.78,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.9}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c=189,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}745}eV`$, respectively.

We can determine the allowed range of values of $`n`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$, which is quite limited, if we allow for a more conservative variation $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=0.25\pm 0.1`$, $`h_o=0.7\pm 0.05`$, $`228g_{dec}900`$ (the upper value gives a dark mass of $`m1keV`$ (see below eq.(3))) and with $`1g_{DMc}g_{DGc}1`$. The range for $`n`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ if we take a dark gauge group with $`g_{DGc}=97`$ and the largest gauge group allowed by NS $`g_{DGc}=0.113g_{dec}^{4/3}`$ (results in parenthesis) is shown in table 1 for different values of $`g_{dec}`$, the MSSM $`g_{dec}=228`$, $`g_{dec}=675`$ (this value gives a dark mass $`m750eV`$) and $`g_{dec}=900`$. In all cases the lowest limit is given by $`g_{DMc}=g_{DGc}1,h_o=0.65,\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=0.15`$ while the upper limit has $`g_{DMc}=1,h_o=0.75,\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=0.35`$.

From table 1 we see that the allowed range is

$$0.28n1.04\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0.21}eV\mathrm{\Lambda }_c3639eV$$
(11)
valid for $`g_{dec}900`$. Increasing $`g_{dec}`$ would enlarge the range of $`n,\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ but not significantly, the variation in $`n`$ from $`g_{dec}=228`$ to 900 (i.e. almost $`400\%`$) increases the upper value of $`n`$ by $`13\%`$ while it has a linear effect on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$. In fig.1 we show the behavior of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}`$ as a function of $`n`$ for different values of $`g_{DGc}=0.113g_{dec}^{4/3}`$ with $`g_{dec}=228,675,900`$ (solid,dashed and dotted lines, respectively) for the extreme values of $`g_{DMc}`$ given by $`g_{DG}1g_{DMc}1`$. The allowed region is in between the horizontal lines $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMo}=0.150.35`$. From eq.(11) we see that there is only a limited range of condensation energy scales and IPL parameter $`n`$ that allows for a gauge group to give the correct DM and DE densities. It is also interesting to note that the lower limit on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ is very similar to the one obtain by CMB analysis  where the minimum scale was $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c=0.2eV`$. On the other hand, the evolution of quintessence requires for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}<0.17`$ an IPL parameter $`n`$ to be smaller than $`n1.6`$ for $`w_{DEo}0.78`$ which is the upper value of wmap. For smaller $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}`$ we will need a smaller $`n`$, e.g. $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}=0.05`$ requires $`n1.05`$. So, once again there is a consistency within the acceptable values of $`n`$ coming form different considerations (amount of DM and observable $`w_{DEo}`$).

The constraint on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ is very similar to the constraint obtained for the DM particle mass $`m`$ obtained in eq.(3). The similarity $`m\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ is required by non-abelian gauge dynamics and it is indeed satisfied as can be verified using eqs.(2), (6) and (7)

$$c\frac{m}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c}=\frac{\pi ^4}{\zeta \left(3\right)30}\frac{g_{DMc}}{g_{DM}^{}}$$
(12)
with $`\pi ^4/\left(\zeta \left(3\right)30\right)2.7`$. There is a subtle point on the values of $`g_{DMc},g_{DM}^{}`$. The ”true” degrees of freedom of the dark matter particles (i.e. the lightest field of the dark gauge group) are given by $`g_{DM}^{}`$ while $`g_{DMc}`$ and $`g_{DEc}`$ represent the proportion of energy density that goes into $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DMc}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DEc}`$. It is reasonable to assume that the particles of the dark group will decay into the lightest state. Therefore we expect $`g_{DMc}>g_{DM}^{}`$ and $`m>\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$.

## Dark Energy

Having established the necessary condition on the initial DM we will study the dark gauge group. The idea is based on the work  and details can be obtained there. Here we will only sketch the arguments. If a gauge group has a gauge coupling constant that increase with decreasing energy than the elementary fields in the group will be bind together at the phase transition scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ where the coupling becomes strong. At strong coupling the dynamics becomes non-perturbative and for non-abelian gauge group we can use the superpotential of Affleck-Dine-Seiberg ”ADS”  to determine the scalar potential generated at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$. This superpotential is exact since it receives no quantum corrections. For $`N_c>N_f`$ the only gauge singlet fields that arise are dark ”mesons” in the form of $`<\overline{Q}Q>`$ (as meson fields in QCD). It is this field (more precisely it is the lightest meson field) that is the quintessence field $`\varphi `$ and gives the DE. The potential generated by ADS is given by eq.(5)  $`V\left(\varphi \right)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^{4+n}\varphi ^n`$ where the quintessence field is $`\varphi ^2=<\overline{Q}Q>`$ and the parameter $`n`$ is $`n=2+4\nu /\left(N_cN_f\right)`$, where $`N_c,N_f,\nu `$ are the number of colors, chiral fields and lightest meson field. It is reasonable to assume that at the condensation scale $`\varphi _c=\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ since it is the relevant scale of the physical process. If we have $`N_c<N_f`$ then on top of the gauge singlet meson fields we can have gauge singlet dark baryons $`B^{i,\mathrm{},N_c}=_i^{N_c}Q^i`$ and anti baryons. These particles get a non-vanishing mass due to non-perturbative effects (like protons and neutrons in QCD). These baryons could be degenerated in mass or there could be a lightest massive stable baryon. The order of magnitude of the mass of the DM particle can be estimated by the condensation

$$m=c\mathrm{\Lambda }_c$$
(13)
with $`c=O\left(1\right)`$ a constant. Eq.(13) should be compared with eq.(12). Eqs.(5) and (13) set the cosmological evolution for DE and DM. In this picture we have at high energies $`E>\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ a DG, i.e. a non-abelian gauge group that interacts with the standard model only via gravity, with massless particles and redshifting as radiation. At $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ non-perturbative effects, due to a strong coupling, generate a mass for dark baryons and a scalar potential for dark meson. The DM is the massive stable particle with mass given by eq.(13) while the quintessence with potential (5) gives the DE. The free parameters of the models are $`n,\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ and the energy density at the condensation scale. All these quantities can be determined in terms of the number of degrees of freedom (i.e number of particles). Different values of $`n,\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ may lead to different acceptable models.

## Conclusions

Let us conclude and summarize the main results. We have studied the possibility that a dark gauge group contains the dark matter and dark energy. The allowed values of the different parameters are severely restricted by different considerations. The NS constrain on $`g_{DG}`$ sets a limit to the dark energy density at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DGc}0.17`$. The evolution and acceptable values of DM and DE leads to a constrain of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ and $`n`$ giving $`0.21eV\mathrm{\Lambda }_c3639eV`$ and $`0.28n1.04`$ for $`g_{dec}900`$. The mass of the dark particle would be of the order of $`110^3eV`$, depending on the value of $`g_{dec}`$, giving a warm dark matter. For larger values of $`g_{dec}`$ one gets a larger mass.

On the other hand, the analysis of the CMB spectrum sets also a lower scale for the condensation scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c>0.2eV`$ with $`n>0.27`$. The evolution of the quintessence field requires also a small $`n`$ in order to have a small $`w_{DEo}`$. For $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{DE}0.17`$ and $`w_{DEo}0.78`$ one needs $`n<1.6`$. So, from three different analysis (quintessence, DM and CMB spectrum) we are led to conclude that the most acceptable models have a low condensation scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ of the order of $`110^3eV`$. The fact that the condensation is low explains why the acceleration of the universe is at such a late time.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by CONACYT project 32415-E and DGAPA, UNAM project IN-110200.


format: text

text:
# Electronic transmission of a nanowire partly irradiated under terahertz electromagnetic field

1Department of Physics, Hu’nan Normal University, Changsha 410081, Hunan, P. R. China

2International Center for Materials Physics,
Chinese Academy of Science, Shenyang 110015, P. R. China

Abstract

We theoretically study the electronic transport of a nanowire partly irradiated under an external terahertz (THz) electromagnetic field. Although the electrons in the ballistic nanowires only suffer lateral collision with photons the reflection of electrons also takes place in this partly irradiated case. Using free-electron model and scattering matrix approach we showed that at resonance there exists a step decrement of $`50`$ percent for the transmission probability as the amplitude of field increases to a certain volume. And the coherent structure of transmission for the system apparently appears when the field irradiate the middle part of nanowire only. This sensitive transmission property of the system may be used in the THz detection.

Key words: THz electromagnetic field; nanowires; scattering matrix

PACS: 73.23.-b; 72.40.+w; 78.67.Lt

Since 1980’s mesoscopic physics has been extensively studied due to its potential practice in the future. Nowadays increasingly progressive arts and crafts of nano-technologies allow men to realize some real mesoscopic system in laboratory. One can confine two dimensional electron gas in an ultra narrow channel on the heterojunction of semiconductors by applying a confinement electronic potential (two-dimensional nanowire1). Recently, three-dimensional metallic nanowire have been constructed when probe pin apart from a metal film.2 The sizes of these low-dimensional systems are of the order of a few nanometers which is comparable to the Fermi wave length. In ballistic regime and at low temperatures quantum coherent effect will dominate the electronic transport properties of these nanowires. The most basic and important feature is that the conductance shows histogram structure when the lateral size of nanowire varies and each step has a height of $`2e^2/h`$ or integer times of it.3

The electronic transport of nanowires can be affected by many factors. The lateral shape varying in space leads to a mixture of different modes in nanowires. If the shape varies slow enough to satisfy adiabatic approximation, the step-like structure of conductance is still preserved but it is totally determined by the narrowest neck part of the whole nanowire.4 Also, when a nanowire is exposed to a static magnetic field the transverse energy levels will be modified so the position of the conductance steps will be altered.5 Moreover, when a nanowire is irradiated under a proper external electromagnetic field many new features arise because of the nonelastic scattering by photons.6,7 When the Fermi level is below the lowest transverse level in the neck part of nanowire electrons can not go though without external field. But under the external field irradiation electrons can absorb energy of photons and go though this geometric barrier.6,7 Therefore, in the regime of barrier the electron reflection may be induced by the combination effect of the field and the lateral shape variation.6-9 However, the pure external field effect on the transport (photonconductance) has not drawn attention yet, and this effect is important for both basic physics knowledge and nanotechnology application.

The typical value of transverse level separation is of the order of 1$``$10 meV for both types of the nanowires.6-9 This corresponds to match frequencies of the order of 1$``$10 THz, which are available as the development of the ultrafast laser technology.10 Recently there is great interest in new solid state devices that could detect and emit THz radiation in a selective and tunable way.11-12 The nanowire system may be used to detect THz radiation in such a way.

In this letter we focus our eyesight on external field induced electron reflection by solving the problem of a straight cylindrical nanowire (either two-dimensional semiconductor nanowire or three-dimensional metallic one) partly irradiated under an external THz field. When the external field transversely irradiate a part of a nanowire the displacement symmetry along the wire is violated so that the longitudinal momentum is not a conservative quantity and reflection must arise in general. However, if the full nanowire is transversely irradiated there will be no electron reflection in the ideal case. Using the method of time-dependent mode matching we demonstrated an interesting field induced step-structure of electronic transmission. And this new effect has not been reported previously for such a quantum wire system.

The system configuration is depicted as in Fig.1. A three-dimensional model system consists of a nanowire connecting two reservoirs. The longitudinal z-axis is along the wire, and the x- and y-axes are in the transverse directions. We assume the boundary of the wire is perfect and there is no impurities in the body, then the free electron model is adapted. The THz field transversely irradiate the interval of $`0zl`$ of wire in an unspecified way. The field is described by the vector potential $`\stackrel{}{A}(t)=(\epsilon /\omega )\mathrm{cos}\omega t\widehat{e}_y`$, where $`\omega `$ and $`\epsilon `$ are the angular frequency and amplitude of field, respectively, $`\widehat{e}_y`$ is the unit vector in the y direction (polarized direction). Therefore, the time-dependent Schrödinger equation of the field irradiated part of wire is

$$\left[\frac{1}{2m^{}}\left(\widehat{p}+e\stackrel{}{A}\right)^2+U(x,y)\right]\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,z,t)=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,z,t),$$
(1)
where $`\widehat{p}=i\mathrm{}`$ is the momentum, $`m^{}`$ is the effective mass of an electron and the potential $`U(x,y)`$ is in the form of either hard-wall or parabolic which confines the electron to the wire and to the reservoirs. We assume the electronic wave function has a separation form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_k=e^{ikz}\underset{n}{}a_n\left(t\right)\varphi _n(x,y),$$
(2)
where $`k`$ is the longitudinal momentum, $`a_n(t)`$ is the time-dependent state amplitude and $`\varphi _n(x,y)`$ are eigenfunctions of the transverse motion without field, which depend on the specified conforming potential $`U(x,y)`$. For simplicity we consider only the two lowest transverse energy levels with Fermi level between them and ignore other higher levels in the system. Then inserting ansatz (2) into Eq.(1) we obtain an equation of the matrix form under the weak field approximation ($`A^20`$)

$$i\frac{}{t}\left[\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}a_1& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ a_2& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right]=k^2\left[\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}a_1& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ a_2& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right]+\left[\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}E_1& M\mathrm{cos}\omega t& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ M\mathrm{cos}\omega t& E_2& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right]\left[\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}a_1& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ a_2& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right],$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{}=2m^{}=1`$ is adapted, $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ are eigenvalues of the the transverse modes and the interaction energy between the two modes $`M=|\frac{2e\epsilon }{\omega }\varphi _1^{}\frac{}{y}\varphi _2𝑑x𝑑y|\epsilon `$. Using the rotating wave approximation we finally obtain the electronic wavefunction

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,z,t)=\underset{k}{}\left[C_{k,+}|+e^{i\left(\lambda _++k^2\right)t}+C_{k,}|e^{i\left(\lambda _{}+k^2\right)t}\right]e^{ikz},$$
(4)
where $`C_{k,\pm }`$ are arbitrary constants, $`\lambda _\pm =\pm \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\delta ^2+M^2}`$, $`\delta =\omega (E_2E_1)`$ is the detune and $`|\pm `$ are two eigenvectors

$$|\pm =e^{i\left(\frac{\delta }{2}E_1\right)t}\varphi _1+A_\pm e^{i\left(\frac{\delta }{2}+E_2\right)t}\varphi _2,A_\pm =\frac{1}{M}\left(\delta \pm \sqrt{\delta ^2+M^2}\right).$$
(5)
Firstly, we consider the case of field irradiating the right part of nanowire. The electron wavefunction in the unirradiated part (the left part) can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,z,t)=\left[e^{i\left(k_1zEt\right)}+C_1e^{i\left(k_1z+Et\right)}\right]\varphi _1+C_2e^{i\left[k_2z+\left(E+\omega \right)t\right]}\varphi _2,$$
(6)
here we assumed the electron with unity amplitude of total energy $`E`$ and momentum $`k_1`$ emission from left, $`k_1=\sqrt{EE_1}`$, $`k_2=\sqrt{EE_2+\omega }`$ and $`C_1,C_2`$ are constants. Now we match the time-dependent wave functions at the boundary of irradiated and unirradiated part to calculate the transmission of the system (i.e., the two wave functions and their differentials continuum at point $`z=0`$), and the conductance connects the transmission probability through Landauer-Büttiker formula.13 The numerically calculated transmission probability versus with detune $`\delta (\omega )`$ is shown in Fig.2. In the regime of $`\left|\delta \right|>0.5`$, the transmission probability remains unchanged as the situation without external field, but it decreases rapidly from near $`1`$ to $`0.5`$ as $`\delta `$ is near to zero (i.e., $`\omega E_2E_1`$). This apparent resonance peak implies that the quantum wire system is sensitive to the frequency of external field and may be applicable to the detection of THz irradiation.

Since the main physics may appear at the vicinity of the resonant frequency so we only give the result of resonant case $`\delta =0`$ in the following sections. In this case Eq.(4) only sum over $`k_+`$ and $`k_{}`$. After a straightforward manipulation the transmission probability for the system can be evaluated analytically

$$T=2\left[\left|\frac{\sqrt{k_1k_+}}{k_1+k_+}\right|^2\theta \left(k_+^2\right)+\left|\frac{\sqrt{k_1k_{}}}{k_1+k_{}}\right|^2\theta \left(k_{}^2\right)\right],$$
(7)
where $`k_\pm =\sqrt{EE_1M}`$ and $`\theta (x)`$ is the step function. Fig.3 shows the transmission probability vs interaction energy $`M(\epsilon )`$ in the resonant case. One can see that the transmission decreases gradually starting from $`1`$ when $`M`$ is small, then it drops to $`0.5`$ rapidly as $`M`$ reaches to $`0.2`$. After the step-like structure the transmission decreases linearly and slowly to $`0.42`$ as $`M`$ increases. This phenomenon can be explained as follows. When electron penetrate though the boundary, due to the field effect the transverse modes of the nanowire are dressed and one electron mode is split into two time-dependent modes $`|+e^{i(M/2+k_+^2)t}`$ and $`|e^{i(M/2+k_{}^2)t}`$ with longitudinal momentums $`k_+`$ and $`k_{}`$ respectively. When $`M<0.2`$ both $`k_+`$ and $`k_{}`$ are real and contribute to the transmission. When $`M>0.2`$, $`k_+`$ is unreal so the mode $`|+e^{i(M/2+k_+^2)t}`$ corresponds to a evanescent (nonpropagating) channel which contributes nothing to the transmission. Therefore the step occur at the point of $`M=0.2`$ when total electron energy $`E=1.2`$. Because electron at each mode has two momentum $`k_+`$ and $`k_{}`$, the Rabi oscillation in space with wavelength $`2\pi /(k_{}k_+)`$ arises in the field part of nanowire, and this phenomenon also has been predicated in Ref..

Next, we consider the case of field irradiating the middle part of nanowire. In this case the system contains two boundaries of irradiated and unirradiated. To obtain the total transmission through the two boundaries with the length of field irradiated part $`l`$ (see Fig.1), we use the approach recently developed by Torres and Saénz.14 This approach need to derive the total scattering matrix which can be expressed in the transmission matrix and reflection matrix on each boundary. Because of the similarity of the two boundaries one has not to match the wave function at the right boundary. The total transmission matrix is just the anti-diagonal submatrix for the symmetry case. The detail knowledge about this is refereed to Ref. and is not presented here. After some manipulation one can get the total transmission matrix

$$t_{total}=t\left(1Ur^{}Ur^{}\right)^1Ut^{},U=\left[\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccc}e^{ik_+z}& 0& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ 0& e^{ik_{}z}& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \end{array}\right],$$
(8)
where $`t^{}(t)`$ is the transmission matrix from left(right) to right(left) of the first boundary, $`r^{}`$ is the reflection matrix from right to left of the first boundary and $`U`$ is propagating matrix.12 And the total transmission probability reads

$`T_{total}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{Tr}\left[t_{total}^{}t_{total}\right]`$ (9)
$`=2\left|{\displaystyle \frac{2k_1k_+}{e^{ik_+l}\left(k_1+k_+\right)^2e^{ik_+l}\left(k_1k_+\right)^2}}\right|^2`$
$`+2\left|{\displaystyle \frac{2k_1k_{}}{e^{ik_{}l}\left(k_1+k_{}\right)^2e^{ik_{}l}\left(k_1k_{}\right)^2}}\right|^2.`$
In Fig.4 we show the calculated total transmission probability of Eq.(9) as a function of the interaction energy $`M`$. One can see that for the same reason as in Fig.3 the curve also has a step structure at point $`M=0.2`$. However, it shows apparently coherence pattern. When an electron propagate in the middle part of nanowire, the electron occupies two time-dependent states with longitudinal momentum $`k_+`$ and $`k_{}`$ respectively. When $`M>0.2`$ the mode corresponding to $`k_+`$ become a evanescent one so that the total transmission probability is suppressed to around 0.4. As the length of the field irradiated middle part $`l`$ is an integer time of $`\pi /k_{}`$ the coherent peaks appear. However, when $`M<0.2`$ the both two modes are propagating and the total transmission is the coherence superposition of these two modes. One can find that the curve in Fig.4 is just the one in Fig.3 superimposed with some coherence structure due to the interference of the forward-going wave and backward-going wave in the middle part.

In summary, we have theoretically studied the electronic transport property of a nanowire (or sometimes quantum wire, electron waveguide, etc.) partially irradiated by an external THz field. We find that the reflection will arise when the electrons suffer only lateral collision with photons. Whether the field irradiate the right part or the middle part of nanowire the transmission always show an interesting step structure in the resonant case when the amplitude of external field increases to a critical volume. But in the later case the transmission curve apparently shows coherent structure. This interesting electronic transport property of the nanowire system may be useful for the detection of THz irradiation.

This work was partially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Hunan under Grant No.0210138 and by the Research Foundation of Hunan Normal University under Grant No.00206.


text:
# A catalog of warps in spiral and lenticular galaxies in the Southern hemisphere

## 1 Introduction

As peripheral features, disc warps are better observed in 21 cm. This has been the preferred observational technique since their discovery by Sancisi (sancisi (1976)) and the study by Bosma (bosma (1981)) until more recent samples such as those analyzed by García-Ruíz (garciaruiz01a (2001)) and García-Ruíz et al. (garciaruiz01b (2000)). Optical observations provide an important complementary tool. Even if the relation between optical and radio warps remains unclear (García-Ruíz garciaruiz01a (2001)), the great advantage of optical observations lies in the much larger samples available. Catalogs of warped galaxies have been useful to establish observational restrictions to explain warps. Sánchez-Saavedra et al. (sanchez-saavedra (1990)) first produced a catalog of 42 optical warps in the northern hemisphere out of a sample of 86 galaxies analyzed. The most noticeable result was that, taking into account the probability of non-detection of warps when the line of nodes lies in the plane of the sky, nearly all galaxies are warped, confirming the suggestion made by Bosma (bosma (1981)) for HI warps. Warps are therefore a universal feature, common for nearly all spiral galaxies. Even this large frequency is a severe restriction for theoretical models. As Reshetnikov and Combes said : “Differential precession wraps any warp”, in contrast with the large frequency of real warped galaxies.

Reshetnikov & Combes (reshetnikov99 (1999)) studied 540 edge-on galaxies, from which a sub-sample of 60 warped galaxies was presented. One of the most noticeable new results reported in their work was that warps were more frequent in denser environments. They also found that the warping mechanism is equally efficient in all types of spirals.

Detailed studies of particular warped galaxies in the optical, such as those by Florido et al. (florido (1991)) and by de Grijs (grijs (1997)), the latter including 44 galaxies, are also of great interest, evidently , but the production of catalogs has greater statistical power.

Here, we have examined all the galaxies contained in LEDA, with logr25 (log10 of axis ratio (major/minor axis)) $`>`$ 0.60, $`B_t`$ (total B-magnitude) $`<`$ 14.5, $`\delta `$(2000) $`<`$ 0o, -2.5 $`<`$ t (morphological type code) $`<`$ 7. The number of galaxies fulfilling these requirements is 276, which is our basis for this work, in which the galaxies were analyzed by means of the DSS. Only discs with a warp angle *wa* (measured from the galactic center to the last observable point with respect to the galactic plane) larger than 4o are considered to be warped.

To determine the warp angle, *wa*, and other geometrical parameters of a warp, or even the very existence of a warp, subjective criteria were used in previous catalogs and are in turn used in the present one. Objective procedures (Jiménez-Vicente jimenez98a (1998), Jiménez-Vicente et al. jimenez98b (1998)) present some problems when applied to a very large number of galaxies and were disregarded. More specifically, in some galaxies it was necessary to apply the automatic star removing procedure to an excessively large number of stars, rendering the map highly distorted. Also the separation of real warps and spiral arms was difficult to define, even for galaxies where this separation is clear to the human eye.

Our work presents 150 warps extracted from 276 edge-on galaxies. The recent study by Reshetnikov & Combes (reshetnikov98 (1998), reshetnikov99 (1999)) extracted 60 warps from 540 edge-on galaxies. It is evident that these authors used stricter criteria to define when a galaxy is definitely warped. Our sample and scope are complementary. The Reshetnikov & Combes sample is limited by coordinates 0h $``$ $`\alpha `$ (1950) $``$ 14h, $`\delta `$ (1950) $``$ -17.5o ; ours by $`\delta `$(2000) $``$ 0o only. That implies that the study by Reshetnikov & Combes covers 17% of the whole sky, whereas ours covers 50%. This, however, is not strictly true because a large part of the Southern Sky is covered by the Zone of Avoidance due to the large extinction near the galactic plane. Taking into account this Avoidance Zone (-15o $``$ b $``$ 15o) our sample would cover about 40% of the whole sky. Even if based on a smaller number of edge-on galaxies, this large coverage renders the present study more useful for certain statistical tasks, such as the distribution of the orientation of warps.

Another important difference between the work by Reshetnikov & Combes and the present study is that the former only pays attention to the discs of spiral galaxies while ours includes lenticular galaxies. This inclusion is very important from the theoretical point of view because, roughly speaking, lenticulars have a disc but not gas; in other words, the distribution of stars in lenticulars is very similar to that in spiral galaxies. This is an overgeneralisation, because even if the amount of gas in lenticulars is less than in even late-type spirals, lenticulars do process some gas in the outer parts. Another important difference between lenticulars and spirals is that the former have a dominant bulge. This fact makes analysis less simple, as huge bulges could in principle affect the formation of warps. In any case observations of warps in lenticulars have yet to be made and may introduce decisive restrictions on the mechanisms behind warps.

A large number of theories can be found in the literature: non-spherical dark halos misaligned with the disc (Sparke & Casertano sparke (1988); Dubinski & Kuijken dubinski (1995)), gas infall into the dark matter halo (Ostriker & Binney ostriker (1989); Binney binney (1992)) or directly into the disc (López-Corredoira et al. lopez-corredoira (2002)), interactions with companions or small satellites (Weinberg weinberg (1998)), intergalactic magnetic fields (Battaner et al. battaner (1990)), etc. Kuijken & García-Ruíz (kuijken (2001)) recently presented a concise review summarizing several mechanisms proposed to explain warps.

The large fraction of warped galaxies seems to exclude one of the most obvious models, based on interactions, but this hypothesis has been reconsidered by Weinberg (weinberg (1998)), assuming a strong tidal amplification by the gravitational wake of a satellite, although this fact was not confirmed by García-Ruíz (garciaruiz01a (2001)) who also argued that the warp of the Milky Way induced by the Magellanic Clouds should have been predicted to have a very different orientation from that observed. Warps are common in merging systems (Schwarzkopf & Dettmar schwarzkopf (2001)) but it remains unclear whether mergers or interactions can explain all, or at least most, warps.

Warps are more frequent in denser environments (Reshetnikov & Combes reshetnikov99 (1999)). Early $`z1`$ warps were considered by Reshetnikov et al. (reshetnikov2002 (2002)). Early warps were larger, which favors the interaction model. Other models cannot be completely excluded from the observation of early $`z1`$ warps. Magnetic fields were also much stronger and the rate of infall of matter onto a galaxy was higher.

García-Ruíz (garciaruiz01a (2001)) observed that, even if galaxies with extended discs may be warped, extended discs are less frequent in denser environments.

The observational study of warps in lenticular galaxies is crucial. If warps are absent or are less common in lenticular galaxies which are gas-poor, those models based on gravitation alone would have difficulty in explaining this fact. Models in which a permanent torque acts on the gas of the galaxy would have the preference. For instance, models like that by Kahn & Woltjer (kant (1959)) or its more recent version by López-Corredoira et al. (lopez-corredoira (2002)) would be favored. Note that neither model requires the assumption that galaxies have a large dark matter halo. The magnetic model, in which intergalactic magnetic fields maintain the warp structure, would acquire additional support from this fact.

It therefore seems that the compilation of large samples of warped galaxies, even if they contain just a few parameters about their position, the parent galaxy and the magnitude and shape of the warping, contributies as much as the detailed examination of the HI maps of a few galaxies.

## 2 The new catalog

The catalog presented here is shown in Table 1. Col. 1 gives the pgc number, Col. 2 the galaxy-name or the alternate name, Cols. 3 and 4 the source position for the epoch J2000, the right ascension (al2000, hours decimal value) and declination (de2000, degrees decimal value), Col. 5 the log10 of apparent diameter (d25 in 0.1’), Col. 6 the log10 of the axis ratio (major axis/minor axis) and Col. 7 the morphological type code (t), (directly adopted from LEDA). Cols. 8, 9, 10 and 11 are the result of our analysis, with the following meaning:

Col. 8, labelled *N/S*, specifies the apparent warp rotation, *S* clockwise, *N* counterclockwise. The *N* and *S* shapes are really two sides of the same galaxy. This difference is therefore completely unimportant from the physical point of view. However, we have kept the entries information because it is needed when studying the distribution of warps in space, for instance, when considering the orientation of warps in a cluster of galaxies (see for instance, Battaner et al. 1991) *L* means that only one of the two sides of the galaxy is warped. *U* means that the two warps are not antisymmetric, i.e. that the apparent warp rotation on the two sides of the edge-on galaxies has opposite directions. In this column, “-”means unwarped and “?” unclear.

Col. 9, labelled *(wa)E-W*, gives the warp angle, defined as the angle between the outermost detected point and the mean position of the plane of symmetry, as defined by the internal unwarped region. *E* indicates the side of the galaxy closer to the east. *W*, the side of the galaxy closer to the west. In this column, c indicates the presence of noticeable corrugations, and b means that the observed apparent warps could actually be arms. These are not included as true warps.

The angle $`\beta `$ in Col. 10 is the angle between the outermost detected point and the point where the warp starts (see Fig. 1).

Finally, Col. 11 gives $`\alpha _s`$, the degree of asymmetry, defined as

$$\alpha _s=\frac{|wa(E)wa(W)|}{wa(E)+wa(W)}$$
(1)
The catalog for lenticular galaxies is presented independently in Table 7. In this case, we have considered 26 galaxies with the same limits as those used for spiral galaxies. In addition, galaxies with logr25 $`>`$ 0.57 were considered. This enlarged the sample by another 12 lenticulars. This sample is complete with the above-mentioned limits.

## 3 Basic results

Fig. 2 gives the distribution of types of warped spiral galaxies, together with the distribution of types for the complete (warped + unwarped) sample. Neither differs significantly from the general distribution of all spirals. The two distributions are so similar, differing only in the size of the sample, that it can be clearly concluded that for spiral galaxies the frequency of warps is completely independent of the type.

The degree of warping is independent of the type, both as defined by the warp angle *(wa)* (see Fig. 3) and the angle $`\beta `$ (see Fig. 4). This important property was pointed out by Reshetnikov & Combes (reshetnikov99 (1999)).

In the case of lenticular galaxies, the result is noticeably different, however. None of the 38 lenticular galaxies in our sample is warped. Warping distorts discs with a similar frequency and amount for t $`>`$ 0, but the transition at t=0 is very sharp for this feature. This fact could be interpreted in two ways.

Firstly, the lenticular dominant bulges could hamper the formation of warps. There is no obvious theoretical argument favoring this interpretation. On the other hand, the fact that all types of spirals have the same warp frequency and as the size of the bulge is a decreasing function of type, the bulge mass seems to have a small influence on the magnitude of the warp. Therefore, it might be suggested that for a galaxy to be warped it must have large amounts of gas.

Fig. 5 shows the relation between *wa* and $`\beta `$, which gives some geometrical characteristics of the warp. For moderate warps, there is a clear correlation between *wa* and $`\beta `$, as expected. However, for very large values of $`\beta `$, *wa* remains constant. Actually, a threshold value for *wa* seems to exist at around 140. The farther away the warp starts, the steeper it rises. Theoretical work should pay attention to this fact.

Asymmetry seems to be unrelated to the morphological type. Fig. 6 shows that no large asymmetric warps are found in early types, but as the frequency of these early types is much lower, this result cannot be considered significant.

The frequency of warps is summarized in the following table:

| *Total frequency of warped spiral galaxies* | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Total frequency of warps, 60$`\%`$ | | | |
| Within warped galaxies, the frequencies are: | | | |
| *N* | *S* | *L* | *U* |
| 50$`\%`$ | 38$`\%`$ | 5$`\%`$ | 7$`\%`$ |

The *N* and *S* frequencies are similar, as expected, as these characteristics depend on the observer rather than on the galaxy. The difference, 50$`\%`$ and 38$`\%`$, is not significant (it is within the statistical errors). The frequency of *U* warps is a parameter of theoretical importance, however, the different scenarios predicting different values. As stated by Castro-Rodríguez et al. (nieves (2002)) an *L* warp, or even any asymmetric warp can be interpreted as a (*N+U*) or as a (*S+U*) warp.

## 4 Conclusions

1. This catalog contains a large sample of warped galaxies (150), covering the complete southern hemisphere. We present the whole sample of 250 spirals and 26 lenticulars, with limits logr25 $`>`$ 0.60, $`B_t<`$ 14.5, $`\delta `$ $`<`$ 0o, -2.5 $`<`$ t $`<`$ 7. It is especially suitable for statistical analysis and, indeed, has already been used to study the relation between intrinsic parameters and warps by Castro-Rodríguez et al. (nieves (2002)). The catalog may obviously be used to choose which galaxies are to be observed in detail.
2. There is the unavoidable problem of the existence of other contaminant effects that could present the appearance of warps. Reshetnikov & Combes (reshetnikov98 (1998)) estimated that about 20$`\%`$ of the features assumed to be warps could actually be spiral arms. This value could be applied here. This effect introduces small errors into our calculated frequencies, which should be taken into account in statistical studies.
3. We confirm that warps appear to be a universal feature in spiral galaxies. The frequency of warps is very high (60%), and because of the difficulty (or impossibility) of detecting warps with the line of nodes in the plane of sky, it is concluded that most (if not all) galaxies are warped. Bosma (bosma (1981)), Sánchez-Saavedra et al. (sanchez-saavedra (1990)) and Reshetnikov & Combes (reshetnikov99 (1999)) previously reached this conclusion.
4. We also confirm, by means of a larger amount of data, the finding by Reshetnikov & Combes (reshetnikov99 (1999)) that warps are equally present in all types of spirals. The distribution of warps for the different types of spirals coincides with the distribution of galaxies with type. The maximum observed warp angle either from the center (*wa*) or from the starting radius of the warps ($`\beta `$) has no relation with the type of spiral. We have observed that very large values of $`\beta `$ do not correspond to large warp angles of *wa*. Shorter warps are steeper.
5. We found no warped lenticular galaxies at all among the 26 galaxies within our limits, with logr25 $`>`$ 0.60. We enlarged the sample to reach logr25 $`>`$ 0.57 and again, none of the 38 lenticulars was warped. There is a sudden transition at t=0. All spirals are warped; no lenticular is warped. The main difference between spirals and lenticulars is probably that the former are gas rich and the latter gas poor. Gas seems to be a necessary ingredient in the warp mechanism. Models based on gravitation alone would have serious difficulties in explaining this.

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowledge the use of the LEDA database (http://leda.univ-lyon1.fr) and the Digitized Sky Survey (DSS) of NASA’s SkyView facility (http://skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov) located at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.


text:
# An XMM-Newton observation of the globular cluster Omega Centauri

## 1 Introduction

Omega Centauri (NGC 5139, $`\omega `$ Cen) is one of the best studied objects of our galaxy. It is the most massive globular cluster (5.1 $`\times 10^6`$ M, Meylan et al. 1995). It is characterized by large core and half mass radii (154.88 $`\mathrm{}`$ and 250.8 $`\mathrm{}`$ respectively, Harris 1996). Binaries are expected to be present in $`\omega `$ Cen either as a result of the evolution of primordial binaries, or through close encounters between stars in the cluster (Di Stefano & Rappaport 1992, 1994; Davies & Benz 1995; Verbunt 2002a). Binaries such as CVs, low mass X-ray binaries either with a neutron star or a black hole, or active X-ray binaries (RS CVn or BY Dra systems), millisecond pulsars could thus form. Some of these binaries have already been found as faint X-ray sources in $`\omega `$ Cen (Verbunt 2001).

Faint X-ray sources were first detected in $`\omega `$ Cen by the EINSTEIN X-ray satellite. EINSTEIN detected 5 faint point sources (one in the core, Hertz & Grindlay 1983) and a possible extended emission region, within the half mass radius (Hartwick et al. 1982). A decade after EINSTEIN, ROSAT detected 22 faint sources in the line of sight of $`\omega `$ Cen (Johnston et al. 1994; Verbunt & Johnston 2000). ROSAT confirmed the EINSTEIN sources, and resolved the core source into three components (Verbunt & Johnston 2000). However, ROSAT did not find any evidence for the diffuse emission seen by EINSTEIN (Johnston et al. 1994).

More recently, Chandra observed $`\omega `$ Cen and detected over 140 faint X-ray sources (Cool et al. 2002). From follow-up observations using the accurate Chandra positions, Cool et al. (2002) claimed that there were at least three classes of binaries present in the detected sample. Two of the three ROSAT core sources (ROSAT R9a and R9b) may be CVs (Carson et al. 2000). The third ROSAT core source (R20, Verbunt & Johnston 2000) was associated with a main sequence optical counterpart, showing weak H$`\alpha `$ emission, suggesting a BY Dra system rather than a CV. In addition, two more Chandra core sources were detected with HST/WFPC2, with properties matching those of RS CVn or active-corona binaries (Cool et al. 2002). Finally, Cool et al. (2002) found the X-ray counterparts of two variable binaries discovered far out from the cluster center by Kaluzny et al. (1996). Based on their light curve properties, these two systems are proposed to be RS CVn binaries (Kaluzny et al. 1996, 2002). Beside these three classes of binaries, by looking at the spectral characteristics of the Chandra sources, Rutledge et al. (2002) noticed that one relatively bright object had an extremely soft X-ray spectrum. This spectrum was found to be consistent with those observed from field quiescent neutron star binaries (Rutledge et al. 2002). X-rays would then come from the neutron star surface maintained at a high temperature by episodic mass accretion from a binary companion. In total, up to four different types of binaries may have already been found in the cluster.

We have initiated a survey of nearby globular clusters with XMM-Newton (M22, Webb et al. 2002a, M13, NGC 6366, Gendre et al., in preparation and $`\omega `$ Cen). Because of the limited angular resolution of XMM-Newton, we have selected nearby clusters with large core radii. Taking advantage of the large collecting area of XMM-Newton ($``$ 6 times that of Chandra), we wish to obtain the best possible spectral and timing information for the widest possible sample of faint X-ray sources.

In this paper, we present the first results of our deep XMM-Newton observation of $`\omega `$ Cen. We describe the general properties of the population of faint X-ray sources detected in the cluster (section 2). Using the publicly available Chandra observation, we have correlated the XMM-Newton and Chandra data (sections 3 and 4) to improve the XMM-Newton positions and search for intensity variations between the two data sets (section 5). We also present the spectra of the brightest objects in the field, with the emphasis on those for which an identification already exists (section 6). We briefly discuss the implications of our findings in section 7.

## 2 General properties of the faint X-ray sources in Omega Cen

### 2.1 The XMM-Newton observation

We observed $`\omega `$ Cen on 2001 August 13 with the XMM-Newton EPIC MOS (Turner et al. 2001) and PN (Strüder et al. 2001) cameras, using a full frame window mode and a medium filter. The observation was 40 kilosecond long with a low and stable background. The data were analyzed with the latest version (5.3.3) of the XMM-Newton Science Analysis Software (SAS). We used the calibration chains of the EPIC cameras, emchain and epchain, using the embadpixfind task to flag bad pixels and bad columns. We filtered the event files produced for good time intervals and non astrophysical events (electronic noise, cosmic rays). We used the predefined patterns, keeping only patterns 0-12 for the MOS detectors and patterns 0-4 for the PN, and we rejected all the events flagged as ’bad’ by the calibration chains. Finally, we also rejected events with energies below 0.4 keV and above 10 keV, because of a high number of bad patterns.

### 2.2 Source detection

Sources were searched between 0.5 and 5.0 keV, a range which encloses the peak of the effective area of the EPIC cameras. A wavelet detection algorithm was used111see the ewavelet documentation available at http://xmm.vilspa.esa.es/external/xmm\_user\_support/documentation/sas\_pkg\_frame.shtml. It is better suited to crowded fields than the sliding box algorithm. Given the early development stage of the task, we used a conservative 4 $`\sigma `$ as the detection threshold. For each camera, the source list so obtained was used as an input to the task emldetect. emldetect computes for each source a maximum likelihood, taking into account the point spread function of the instrument. For each source, the task returns its best fit position, the statistical errors on this position ($`1\sigma `$ or 68% confidence level), its count rate, and a maximum likelihood detection value. We used a maximum likelihood threshold of 12. In order to estimate the statistical error at the 90% confidence level for the source positions, we modified the public version of emldetect following the recommendation of the task author (for a two parameter fit, the 90 % confidence limit level is given by likelihood + 6.18, G. Lamer, private communication). Three PN sources were removed because their best fit positions fell onto bad columns. The cleaned PN, MOS1 and MOS2 source lists were then correlated using a customized version of the task srcmatch. srcmatch returns the positions of the correlated sources weighted by their statistical errors as derived for each instrument separately. The maximum likelihood of a correlated source is the sum of the individual maximum likelihoods.

The majority of the correlated sources are detected by the PN camera because it is more sensitive than the MOS cameras. There are however some sources missed by the PN, due to CCD gaps, or bad columns and the smaller field of view of the PN compared to the MOS; these sources are marked MOS only in Tables 1 and 2.

146 sources were detected by the EPIC cameras; 59 are seen only by the PN, 9 are MOS only (and all of them are seen in MOS 1 and MOS 2), and the remaining 78 are detected in the PN and at least one MOS camera. We present a false color combined PN and MOS image of the field of view in Fig. 1. The positions and statistical errors given at the 90% confidence level, the 0.5-5.0 keV source count rate and associated error are listed in Table 1 for those sources lying within the half mass radius and in Table 2 for the remaining sources. In EPIC-PN, a count rate of $`10^2`$ counts s-1 corresponds to an unabsorbed flux of $`2.7\times 10^{14}`$ ergs s-1 cm-2 for a 0.6 keV blackbody model absorbed through the interstellar absorption derived from the optical extinction (NH = $`8.4\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2, Djorgovski 1993; Predehl & Schmitt 1995). Assuming a 3 keV thermal Bremsstrahlung and a power law of photon index 2, the corresponding fluxes are $`2.5\times 10^{14}`$ ergs s-1 cm-2 and $`2.4\times 10^{14}`$ ergs s-1 cm-2 respectively.

For the blackbody model, this flux translates to a luminosity of $`10^{32}`$ ergs s-1 at the distance of $`\omega `$ Cen (5.3 kpc, Harris 1996; Thompson et al. 2001). Thus in Tables 1 and 2 one can see that the bulk of sources have luminosities in the range $`10^{31}10^{32}`$ ergs s-1.

### 2.3 Background sources

Some of the sources listed in Tables 1 and 2 are extragalactic background sources unrelated to the cluster. In order to estimate their number, we used the statistical Log N-Log S relationship of extragalactic sources derived from the Lockman Hole XMM-Newton data (Hasinger et al. 2001). To account for the vignetting function of the XMM-Newton mirrors, we have computed limiting count rates (for source detection) within different annuli (all centered on the cluster center), using an approach similar to Cool et al. (2002). The radius of each annulus is computed such that the annulus contains a large ($``$ 25) number of sources (the radius varies between 2.5 and 4.2′). This allows us to set the limiting count rate to the count rate of the weakest source detected in that annulus. The limiting count rate is a factor of $`2`$ larger in the outer annulus than in the inner annulus. For direct comparison with the Log N - Log S curve of Hasinger et al. (2001), these count rates have then been converted into unabsorbed 0.5-2.0 keV fluxes using a power law model of index 2.0 absorbed through the cluster NH. Following this procedure, after a proper surface normalization, one expects 4, 9, 35 and 65 background sources within the core, half mass, twice the half mass and a 12.5′ radii (the values so obtained were rounded to the nearest integer). Beyond 12.5′, where we do not expect any cluster sources, the number of detected sources matched the one estimated with this procedure.

As an indication, we have computed the error on the above estimates assuming a 10% uncertainty on the limiting count rate estimate and a 10% uncertainty in the XMM-Newton calibration (note that the Log N-Log S relationship was derived from a processing of the Lockman hole data with the SAS prior to its first public release). This gives an error of 1 and 2 on the estimated number of background sources within the core and half mass radii.

### 2.4 Color-color and hardness-intensity diagrams

In order to investigate the general properties of the sources detected by XMM-Newton, we have computed X-ray color-color and hardness-intensity diagrams. For this purpose, we have produced PN images in three adjacent energy bands: 0.5-1.5 keV, 1.5-3.0 keV, 3.0-10.0 keV (similar bands were used by Grindlay et al. 2001). From these images, we have computed the net exposure corrected source count rate. To produce meaningful diagrams we have considered only sources detected with more than 3 counts in each band. There are 71 sources fitting this criteria. Two sets of diagrams have been computed: one for the sources found within a region of radius equal to twice the half mass radius and one for the whole field of view. They are presented in Fig. 2 and 3.

## 3 Cross-correlation with a previous Chandra observation

The mean statistical error on the positions of the sources detected by XMM-Newton is of the order of $`4`$″ (see Tables 1 and 2). To get the final positional error, one must add quadratically, the systematic error on the pointing direction of the XMM-Newton satellite, which is about 4″ (Jansen et al. 2001). This means that on average the position error will be around 6″.

However, this can be improved by using the most accurate positions provided by Chandra. For this purpose, we have analyzed the publicly available Chandra observation. The Chandra observation took place on 2000 January 24-25, in imaging mode using the ACIS-I detector placed in the focus of the telescope. The observation was $``$ 70 kiloseconds long. These data have already been presented by Cool et al. (2002) and Rutledge et al. (2002)

We retrieved the data from the archives and used CIAO version 2.2.1 and CALDB version 2.12 to calibrate the event files (using the CIAO task acis\_process\_events). During the Chandra observation, the background was low and stable. We then filtered the events file for non astrophysical events using the ASCA grades 0, 2, 3, 4, 6, and for good time intervals using the provided GTI222This is the standard choice for filtering the data; see the Chandra Proposers Observatory Guide available from the Chandra web site for details.. We also rejected events with energies below 0.2 keV. We made a basic detection scheme, using the CIAO task wavdetect. As recommended in the CIAO detect manual, we used a conservative spurious detection threshold of $`10^5`$ as input to wavdetect. As for XMM-Newton, sources were searched in the 0.5-5.0 keV range.

We found 129 sources within the ACIS-I field of view, to be compared to 146 in Cool et al. (2002) (Rutledge et al. 2002, used a sliding box algorithm and a very conservative detection threshold and reported 40 sources only). Even if we take into account a 1″ systematic error in the attitude reconstruction of Chandra, the mean error on the source positions remains very small, typically $`1.5`$″.

The Chandra positions were then used to compute the astrometric correction for the XMM-Newton observation. We have selected three XMM-Newton sources (sources 2, 8, and 15, see Tables 1 and 2), properly spaced within the field of view, far away from CCD gaps and bad columns, and among the brightest sources (i.e. with a small statistical error on their position). These sources are also clearly detected by Chandra. The astrometric correction was then computed with the three reference positions provided by Chandra, using the starast Interactive Data Language tools of the astrolib library. The positions listed in Tables 1 and 2 reflect this correction.

With this correction applied, 11 and 27 sources are detected by XMM-Newton within the core and half mass radii. For comparison, Chandra detected 22 and 46 sources within the same regions.

This correction further allows us to get rid of the systematic error and to cross-correlate the Chandra and XMM-Newton source positions. The positions of the Chandra sources found within the statistical error box of the XMM-Newton sources are given in Table 3. Sixty three XMM-Newton sources have a Chandra counterpart. We present in Fig. 4 the Chandra field of view and sources overlaid with the XMM-Newton image.

It is beyond the scope of this paper to investigate the error box content of each XMM-Newton source, and we have focussed the present paper on sources for which a previous identification has been reported. Two EINSTEIN sources were detected by both XMM-Newton and Chandra (sources B and C), and due to its larger field of view, XMM-Newton also detected the EINSTEIN sources A and D (these ones were missed by Chandra). EINSTEIN sources A and D (XMM-Newton sources 3 and 7) are associated with foreground M dwarfs (Cool et al. 1995). The source EINSTEIN C was resolved into sources R9a and R9b in ROSAT (Verbunt & Johnston 2000). These two core sources which are detected as XMM-Newton sources 2 and 5 are the two CV candidates (Carson et al. 2000; Cool et al. 2002). The ROSAT source R20 (detected by Chandra and proposed to be a BY Dra system, Cool et al. 2002) is not detected by XMM-Newton. The proposed quiescent neutron star binary is detected as source 4 by XMM-Newton. Finally, the source identified by Verbunt & Johnston (2000) as HD116789 is detected as source 28 (see Table 3).

We have estimated the limiting count rate of the XMM-Newton observation as the count rate needed for a detection of a source placed at a mean off-axis angle of 7.5′ which is half the radius of the EPIC-PN field of view. In the 0.5-5.0 keV band, the limiting count rate is $`1.4\times 10^3`$ counts s-1. For comparison the limiting count rate of a source on-axis is $`1.0\times 10^3`$ counts s-1. For Chandra, the limiting count rate estimated with the same method is $`1.5\times 10^4`$ counts s-1 for an on-axis source and $`1.6\times 10^4`$ counts s-1 for a source at 7.5′.

The limiting count rates have been converted into limiting fluxes using two spectral models; a blackbody of 0.6 keV and a thermal Bremsstrahlung of 3 keV. This gives $`3.8\times 10^{15}`$ ergs s-1 cm-2 and $`3.5\times 10^{15}`$ ergs s-1 cm-2 respectively for XMM-Newton and $`1.2\times 10^{15}`$ ergs s-1 cm-2 and $`1.3\times 10^{15}`$ ergs s-1 cm-2 for Chandra. At the distance of 5.3 kpc, these fluxes translate to 0.5-5.0 keV bolometric luminosities of $`1.3\times 10^{31}`$ ergs s-1 and $`4.2\times 10^{30}`$ ergs s-1 for XMM-Newton and Chandra respectively for the blackbody model.

As said above XMM-Newton detected 146 sources, and 63 of them have a Chandra counterpart. Of the 83 remaining XMM-Newton sources, 55 were outside the field of view of Chandra. Of the remaining 28, 2 were missed by ACIS-I because of CCD gaps and noisy columns (one is in the core). This leaves a total of 26 sources detected by XMM-Newton and not detected by Chandra. We have reprocessed the Chandra data with a less conservative spurious detection threshold ($`10^4`$) to search for fainter objects. The above number decreases from 26 to 23. Since the Chandra observations were more sensitive than the XMM-Newton one, one needs to investigate why 26 sources seen by XMM-Newton were not detected by Chandra. Part of the discrepancy resides in the presence of a region of extended emission.

## 4 Region of extended emission

Hartwick et al. (1982) found a region of extended emission in the EINSTEIN images. This region extended from the core to the west and the east of the cluster up to outside the half mass radius. However, ROSAT did not confirm the presence of such emission (Johnston et al. 1994). The XMM-Newton image presented in Fig. 5 with the Chandra sources shows that there is a region outside the half mass radius which contains 16 point sources superposed on a residual extended emission (on the right of the image). It is contained in a circle of $``$100$`\mathrm{}`$ radius and centered at $`\alpha `$ = $`13^h26^m05^s`$, $`\delta `$ = $`47\mathrm{°}29\mathrm{}21\mathrm{}`$. It is also present, though with less significance in the Chandra image. A zoom on this region with the detected Chandra and XMM-Newton sources is shown in Fig 5 (right). It shows that only 6 of the 16 XMM-Newton sources are also detected by Chandra. It is therefore likely that the 10 additional XMM-Newton sources may not be real point sources, but instead fluctuations of the extended emission which confused the detection algorithm. This and the origin of this emission will be discussed elsewhere. If we take out these 10 sources, there remains 16 XMM-Newton sources which would have been detected by Chandra; had their luminosity remained constant between the two observations. As we will show later, we have found evidence for variable sources in other regions of the images, including the cluster core.

The extended emission region seen by EINSTEIN also included the core of the cluster. The core now contains many faint X-ray sources as shown in Fig. 5, and we have no evidence for any residual extended emission.

## 5 Search for short and long term time variability

### 5.1 Variable sources within the XMM-Newton observation

We have extracted the light curves of the 26 strongest X-ray sources within the EPIC-PN field of view. The bin time of the light curve was chosen to ensure a sufficient number of count within each bin (typically larger than $`20`$). The light curves were searched for variability using the lcstat FTOOLs. Using a $`\chi ^2`$ test, we found that 4 sources have a probability of being constant of less than 0.1%. The light curves of these 4 objects are shown in Fig 6. Only one lies in the core (source 24). The three others lie outside the half mass radius.

### 5.2 Variable sources between the Chandra and XMM-Newton observations

As shown above, all XMM-Newton sources should have been detected by Chandra, providing that their X-ray intensity had remained constant. In the core this is the case, as the only XMM-Newton source not detected by Chandra fell on an ACIS-I CCD gap. Within the half mass radius, 4 XMM-Newton sources were not detected by Chandra and must have therefore varied by at least a factor of $`34`$.

We have converted the count rate of the Chandra sources to XMM-Newton count rates for comparison with our count rate detection threshold. We have found that 7 Chandra sources that lie within the half mass radius should have been detected by XMM-Newton and were not (this number rises to 20 if one considers the whole field of view). Finally, within the half mass radius there are 4 sources (13 in the whole field of view) detected by both Chandra and XMM-Newton but with different luminosities (a factor of two or higher variations). These sources are listed in Table 4. From this we conclude that 15 sources contained in the half mass radius have shown variability between the XMM-Newton and Chandra observations spaced by $`1.5`$ year.

### 5.3 Variable sources between the XMM-Newton and ROSAT observations

$`\omega `$ Cen was observed between August 1992 and January 1997 by ROSAT (Verbunt & Johnston 2000). The luminosity limit of the ROSAT observations was about $`7\times 10^{31}`$ ergs s-1 in the 0.5-2.5 keV range (Verbunt & Johnston 2000). We have computed the luminosity of the XMM-Newton sources in this same energy band. From this, we found that 1 source (source 13) should have been detected by ROSAT. Obviously, XMM-Newton which is more sensitive than ROSAT should have detected all ROSAT sources. This is not the case, as 1 ROSAT core source (source R20) is not present in the XMM-Newton image (it is however detected by Chandra).

## 6 Spectral analysis of the brightest objects

We have extracted spectra for the brightest sources; those with a total number of counts exceeding $`100`$ in the most sensitive EPIC-PN camera. There are 26 sources satisfying this criterion. In this paper, we limit the spectral analysis to the 16 sources lying within twice the half mass radius.

To accumulate spectra, we chose an extraction radius of $``$ 0.7 ′, except when another source was closer than 1.5 ′(two extraction radii). We extracted the background using an adjacent area of the same surface, at the same off axis angle on the same CCD. We generated ancillary response files and redistribution matrix files with the SAS tasks arfgen and rmfgen of the 5.3.3 release.

Whenever possible, we binned the spectra to contain at least twenty net counts in each bin, in order to use $`\chi ^2`$ statistics. Otherwise we used the Cash statistics. For the spectra with the largest number of counts, we have left the interstellar column density as a free parameter of the fit. Note however that in all but one case, the fitted NH is consistent within error bars with the value expected from the optical extinction in the direction of the cluster. We used XSPEC v11.1 (Arnaud 1996) to fit the spectra. The limited statistics does not allow us to use spectral models more sophisticated than thermal Bremsstrahlung, blackbody, and power law.

### 6.1 Sources within the core and the half mass radii

There are three sources in the core for which a spectrum can be extracted (sources 2, 5 and 24), two more between the core and half mass radii (sources 9 and 20) and the proposed quiescent neutron star binary which is just at the border of the half mass radius (source number 4).

The three core sources are the two proposed CV candidates (Carson et al. 2000) and source 24 which was found to be variable within the XMM-Newton observation (see section 5 and Fig 5). The best fit spectral results are listed in Table 5. For the two CV candidates, the spectra can be accurately fitted with a thermal Bremsstrahlung (or alternatively with power laws of index $`1.4`$). Such spectra are expected from such systems (Richman 1996). Thus our spectral observations reinforce the classification of these two objects as CVs. Their unfolded spectra are shown in Fig. 7. These are to date the highest quality spectra ever measured from faint globular cluster X-ray sources.

For the third variable source, its spectrum is also consistent with a power law, but given the limited statistics it could be also fitted with a thermal bremsstrahlung. Despite the source faintness, we have searched for spectral variations within the observation. Two spectra were extracted, one during its steady state and another one during the flaring state. As can be seen in Table 5, the two spectra are consistent. Best fit results for the two additional sources found between the core and half mass radii are also listed in Table 5.

### 6.2 The quiescent neutron star binary

Rutledge et al. (2002) showed that the Chandra spectrum of the quiescent neutron star binary candidate can be fitted with a pure hydrogen neutron star atmosphere model (Pavlov et al. 1992; Zavlin et al. 1996). This source is also clearly detected in our observation, as the fourth brightest source in the field of view. Taking advantage of the better statistics of the XMM-Newton spectrum, we have also fitted its spectrum with the same neutron star atmosphere model. The parameters of the latter model are the temperature, the radius, the mass of the neutron star and its distance. The temperature and the radius were derived as measured by an observer at infinity. The best fit result with the mass of the neutron star and the source distance frozen are listed in Table 6. There is a remarkable consistency between the results reported in Rutledge et al. (2002) and ours, but thanks to the improved statistics the error bars on the fitted parameters are much smaller with the present data. We did not find any evidence for the presence of a power law tail. Assuming a power law with photon index of 2, an upper limit of 10 % of the total flux (90% confidence limit) can be derived for such a power law tail. The 0.1-5.0 keV bolometric luminosity measured by XMM-Newton is consistent within error bars with the Chandra value. The unfolded combined EPIC-PN and MOS spectrum is presented in Fig. 8. This is one of the best spectra of a quiescent neutron star binary obtained so far. Our observation thus strengthens the quiescent neutron star binary hypothesis for this object.

### 6.3 Notes on remaining sources within the field of view

In Fig. 9, we show the unfolded spectra of four more sources whose positions are between one and two half mass radii. All spectra are relatively hard, corresponding to colors in Fig 3 similar to the colors measured from the CVs. Their luminosities, just around $`10^{32}`$ are also consistent with the CV hypothesis. Note however that some of them may also be background sources.

In addition, there are two other sources in the field of view which deserve some attention. The first one is the brightest object (it was detected by both Chandra and ROSAT, see Table 3). Its unfolded spectrum together with its best power law fit is presented in Fig. 10. The high NH derived from the fit and its relatively large angular distance from the cluster center (about 8.5′) calls into question its membership to $`\omega `$ Cen. However, its unusual properties (time variability and hard spectrum) make it an interesting target for follow-up investigations. There are no counterparts listed in the USNO A2.0 catalog within 2” of the Chandra position.

The second object is the third brightest object in the field (source 3). It has an M dwarf counterpart (USNO-A2 0375-18249604, Cool et al. 1995). Its spectrum is well fitted by a 2 temperature Raymond-Smith model (2T) expected from such a system (Singh et al. 1996). The best fit parameters of all these objects are also given in Table 5.

## 7 Discussion

We have presented the first results of our deep XMM-Newton observation of the globular cluster $`\omega `$ Cen, emphasizing the general properties of the population of faint X-ray sources present in the cluster. We have detected 11 and 27 faint X-ray sources within the core and half-mass radii respectively. We have estimated that $`4\pm 1`$ and $`9\pm 2`$ of these objects could be unrelated background sources. Comparing the Chandra ACIS-I and XMM-Newton EPIC observations, we have found that 63 XMM-Newton sources have a Chandra counterpart. Fifteen sources that lie within the half mass radius have shown variability between the two observations. Intensity variations for several sources were also found within the XMM-Newton observation and between the XMM-Newton and previous ROSAT observations. We have also presented the first X-ray spectra of the brightest and peculiar objects in the field, in particular the proposed quiescent neutron star low mass X-ray binary for which the EPIC spectrum strengthens its classification. We have shown that the spectra of the two brightest core sources strongly support the proposal that they are CVs. We have found objects with similar spectra in the cluster. In the following, we briefly discuss what appears to be the main implications of our observation.

First of all, what is striking from our data is the excess of sources located in the vicinity of the cluster (just outside the half mass radius). This has already been noted by Cool et al. (2002) and Verbunt (2002a). For instance between 1 and 2 half-mass radii, there is an excess of $`25`$ sources, over the expected number of background sources. Obviously, some of them may be foreground stars. However, some may also belong to the cluster, and may have already been found as active binaries (RS CVn). Two of the OGLEGC sources located at relatively large off-axis (more than 2.5 core radii) were detected by Chandra (OGLEGC15 and OGLEGC22, Cool et al. 2002). Another one (OGLEGC30) has a position coincident with our XMM-Newton source 29. All are proposed to be RS CVn stars (Kaluzny et al. 1996, 2002). Their X-ray luminosity is not atypical of such systems $`13\times 10^{31}`$ ergs s-1, though on the bright end of their luminosity distribution (Dempsey et al. 1997).

Due to mass segregation effects, binaries which are more massive than lonely stars are expected to lie close to cluster center (e.g. Meylan & Heggie 1997). In $`\omega `$ Cen the mass segregation is very low, and that might explain the large population of binaries outside the core (e.g. Verbunt & Johnston 2000). Some of these binaries might also have been ejected outside the cluster through three-body interactions (an encounter of a binary with a single star). Another possibility could be that the potential well of the cluster was recently disrupted by the accretion of a discrete component of another stellar system. The recent discovery of a metal-rich stellar population in the cluster (Pancino et al. 2000) with a coherent bulk motion with respect to the other stars (Ferraro et al. 2002) was explained by the accretion of an independent stellar system by $`\omega `$ Cen. The presence of faint X-ray sources in the vicinity of $`\omega `$ Cen might thus be a consequence of an unusual dynamical evolution of the cluster.

The second most striking feature of our data is the lack of soft X-ray sources and the large number of sources showing long term variability. In Fig. 2 and 3, there is an obvious clustering of sources around the two previously identified CVs (which are spectrally hard). There are only two sources in the soft area: the star identified by Cool et al. (1995) and the proposed quiescent neutron star binary (note that these two objects are also among the brightest, see Fig. 3). The sources clustering below the two CV candidates (sources 2 and 5, represented by two filled squares) in the hardness intensity plot (see Fig. 3) have luminosities in the range $`2\times 10^{31}`$ to $`6\times 10^{32}`$ ergs s-1. The spectra of four of these objects are shown in Fig. 8. Similar spectra and luminosities are observed from disk and globular cluster CVs (e.g. Pooley et al. 2002a). CVs are well known to be variable, and might thus account for some of the variable sources present in the cluster (note that one core CV, source 5, showed variability by a factor of $`1.7`$ between the XMM-Newton and Chandra observations).

However, we note that one of the proposed RS CVns (OGLEGC30, Kaluzny et al. 1996, the counterpart of the XMM-Newton source 29) has colors similar to the two CVs (the statistic was unfortunately too poor to fit its spectrum). This source was not detected by Chandra and must have varied by at least a factor of $`34`$ between the two observations. The two OGLEGC sources (RS CVn candidates) detected by Chandra were not detected by XMM-Newton: the Chandra luminosity of OGLEGC 15 was below the XMM-Newton sensitivity threshold, on the other hand OGLEGC 22 should have been detected. Another example of variability is given by the ROSAT source R20, associated with a BY Dra (Cool et al. 2002). This source was detected by Chandra but not by XMM-Newton. These objects are variable, and will be preferentially detected during flaring outbursts, due to their low quiescent X-ray luminosities. The large number of variable sources in $`\omega `$ Cen (15 within the half mass radius between the Chandra and XMM-Newton observations) is also suggestive of a large population of RS CVns (including BY Dra) in the cluster. During snapshot X-ray observations, only a fraction could be seen. These sources could account for the population of the lower luminosity ($`10^{31}`$ergs s-1) sources found in $`\omega `$ Cen.

Some of the faint and persistent sources of the hardness-intensity diagram ($`10`$, see Fig. 3) have colors consistent with power law like spectra, with indices of the order of $`2`$. Such power laws could result from magnetospheric emission of millisecond pulsars (Becker & Trümper 1998; Webb et al. 2002b). However, these sources are unlikely to be millisecond pulsars, because no such radio pulsars are presently known in the cluster (Freire 2002). Furthermore, Grindlay et al. (2002) have recently shown that the emission of the millisecond pulsars detected in 47 Tuc is dominated by the thermal emission from the polar caps of the neutron star. Such emission is much softer than the magnetospheric emission. These sources with soft thermal X-ray emission should lie on figure 3 between vertical lines passing through the two CV candidates and the quiescent neutron star binary. There are no sources in that region. Our observation would thus support the idea that $`\omega `$ Cen lacks millisecond pulsars. Obviously the difficulties in retaining neutron stars in a globular cluster and the low collision frequency of $`\omega `$ Cen could provide an explanation (see e.g. Pfahl et al. 2002; Verbunt 2002a).

In the disk, quiescent neutron star binaries have luminosities in the range $`10^{32}10^{33}`$ erg s-1 (Narayan et al. 2002). Furthermore, they all have extremely soft X-ray spectra (Rutledge et al. 2000). In our observation, there is one single object with these characteristics. If globular cluster quiescent neutron star binaries behave similarly to those in the disk, then our observation should provide a complete census of the content of such objects in $`\omega `$ Cen (a similar conclusion was derived by Rutledge et al. 2002, from the Chandra observations). Some of these objects have also been found in other clusters (Edmonds 2002; Grindlay et al. 2001; Pooley et al. 2002b). In globular clusters, these systems are certainly formed from a close encounter between a neutron star with a single star or with a binary (see Verbunt 2002b, for a recent review). The presence of one such system in $`\omega `$ Cen is consistent with its lower collision frequency compared to other clusters (Verbunt 2002b). The presence of this object far away from the core remains somewhat puzzling in that regard. It might have been ejected from the core during a three-body interaction (Verbunt 2002b). The presence of a single candidate quiescent neutron star binary together with the apparent lack of millisecond pulsars in the cluster makes $`\omega `$ Cen clearly different from clusters like 47 Tuc in which a large population of binaries with neutron star primaries are being discovered (e.g. Grindlay et al. 2001; Camilo et al. 2000). This difference, if confirmed, should help us in understanding how neutron stars form and evolve in globular clusters.

Finally, some of the faint sources could be quiescent black hole binaries (one black hole may have just been discovered in the globular cluster M15, and some are being found in globular clusters in other galaxies, Gerssen et al. 2002; Verbunt 2002b). Most quiescent black hole binaries within the galactic disk have been observed with luminosities of $`10^{31}`$ erg s-1 (Kong et al. 2002; Hameury et al. 2003). Their spectra are well fitted with power laws, with spectral indices of 1.5-2 (Kong et al. 2002). Such spectra correspond to hardness ratios in the range 0.4-0.9 in Fig. 3. About 10 objects have colors and luminosities consistent with a quiescent black hole binary nature. This hypothesis is however poorly constrained from our X-ray observations alone, as many faint sources could be background active galactic nuclei.

## 8 Conclusions

The main results of our XMM-Newton observation are that in Omega Cen the binaries do not seem be confined to the core or even within the half mass radius, as previously thought, and that the majority of the faint X-ray sources may be CVs, RS CVn or BY Dra binaries. Obviously, the small number of identifications currently available prevents us from reaching definite conclusions. The spectral and timing information provided by XMM-Newton, together with the accurate positions provided by Chandra for a wide sample of faint X-ray sources should encourage follow-up investigations at other wavelengths (optical, UV, radio). In particular, these observations should tell us whether those sources found well outside the core of $`\omega `$ Cen really belong to the cluster. More identifications are also required before reliable comparisons between $`\omega `$ Cen and other clusters with different structural parameters can be drawn. Such comparisons are critical to a better understanding of the dynamical evolution of globular clusters in general.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors would like to thank A. Cool and F. Verbunt for helpful discussions and the referee, H. Johnston for valuable comments. We would also like to thank M. Watson and P. Marty for their help during the analysis of the extended emission region, V. E. Zavlin for providing us with the pure H neutron star atmosphere model, and G. Hasinger for discussions about the interpretation of the Lockman Hole results. Finally, we are grateful to G. Lamer and J. Tedds for help with the astrometric correction.