text:
# X-RAY LINES AND ABSORPTION EDGES IN GRBS AND THEIR AFTERGLOWS

## SUMMARY OF OBSERVED X-RAY LINES AND ABSORPTION FEATURES

The precise localization of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) by the BeppoSAX satellite, launched in 1996, has facilitated the subsequent discovery of X-ray and optical GRB afterglows, the measurement of redshifts of GRBs and the firm establishment of their cosmological distance scale (at least for long GRBs with durations $`t_{90}\stackrel{>}{}2`$ s) beyond any reasonable doubt. The physics of the radio through X-ray continuum afterglow emission are now believed to be rather well understood in terms of the external synchrotron shock model (for a recent review see, e.g., Mészáros 2002 or Dermer 2002). However, in spite of these significant advances, the ultimate source of GRBs is still a matter of vital debate. This is mainly due to the fact that the continuum GRB afterglows are the “smoking gun” of the GRB explosion, revealing only very little information about the initial energy source.

However, even without a direct observation of the central engines of GRBs, it might be possible to infer their nature indirectly if detailed probes of the structure and composition of their immediate vicinity can be found. A promising candidate for such a probe is high-quality, time resolved X-ray spectroscopy of GRB afterglows, which is now becoming available with the new generation of X-ray telescopes like Chandra and XMM-Newton, and the planned Swift mission, scheduled for launch in September 2003. Previous and currently operating X-ray telescopes have so far (status: November 2002) revealed marginal evidence for X-ray emission lines (mostly consistent with Fe K$`\alpha `$ fluorescence lines) or radiative recombination edges in 5 GRBs, and one case of a transient X-ray absorption feature at an energy consistent with an iron K absorption edge.

In the remainder of this section, I will give a brief review of the observed X-ray spectral features in GRBs, before I turn to the implications of those observations in general terms. This will be followed by a summary of the currently discussed GRB models which could give rise to the conditions required to produce the observed spectral features.

### X-ray emission lines in GRB afterglows

Marginal evidence for transient X-ray emission line features in GRB afterglows have been reported for 5 Gamma-ray bursts: GRB 970508 (Piro et al. 1999), GRB 970828 (Yoshida et al. 2000), GRB 991216 (Piro et al. 2000), GRB 000214 (Antonelli et al. 2000), and 011211 (Reeves et al. 2002a). Tab. 1 lists the key observational features of these five GRB line detections: (1) the GRB identification, (2) the redshift, (3) the time interval of the respective line detection, (4) the isotropic luminosity of the emission line, (5) the instrument with which the detection was made, (6) additional remarks concerning the line detection, and (7) the reference to the detection and important contributions through re-analysis of the respective observations. Note that the beginning of the time intervals listed in column (3) are generally set by the beginning of the respective observations and might thus not be representative of the onset of the line emission.

In the BeppoSAX NFI observation of the afterglow of GRB 970508, Piro et al. (1999) detected evidence, at the $`3\sigma `$ level, for an emission line feature consistent with a 6.7 keV Fe K$`\alpha `$ line from highly ionized iron, at the redshift of the burst at $`z=0.835`$. The X-ray afterglow of this burst exhibited a secondary outburst after $`6\times 10^4`$ s, and the disappearance of the line from the X-ray spectrum seemed to be coincident with the onset of this secondary X-ray outburst (Piro et al. 1999). Paehrels et al. (2000) re-analyzed the NFI spectrum containing the line. Fitting the spectrum with a plasma emission model in photoionization equilibrium, assuming an illuminating continuum identical to the GRB afterglow emission, they found that such a fit would either require too large a redshift, inconsistent with the redshift of the burst, or too high a temperature, inconsistent with the a priori assumption of the ionization state of the line-emitting medium being dominated by photoionization. Paehrels et al. (2000) interpreted this inconsistency as possible evidence for thermal plasma emission rather than emission from a photoionized plasma.

Interestingly, the second GRB for which evidence for an X-ray emission feature in the redshifted Fe K$`\alpha `$ energy regime was found, appears to be opposite in that respect. Before the redshift of GRB 970828 could be determined, Yoshida et al. inferred a redshift of $`z=0.33`$ from the energy of the line feature in the ASCA spectrum of the afterglow of this GRB, assuming that it corresponds to an Fe K$`\alpha `$ line at 6.4 keV in the burst rest frame. In a later re-analysis, after the likely host-galaxy identification of GRB 970828, associated with a redshift of $`z=0.958`$ (Djorgovski et al. 2001), Yoshida et al. (2001) and Yonetoku et al. (2001) argued that the emission feature is consistent with this redshift if it is a radiative recombination continuum (RRC) edge rather than a fluorescence or recombination line. They argue that the electron temperature in the plasma responsible for the emission feature is inconsistent with the ionization temperature in thermal equilibrium, and would therefore indicate photoionization as the dominant ionization mechanism.

Marginal evidence for a RRC was also reported for the Chandra ACIS-S+HETG spectrum of the afterglow of GRB 991216 (Piro et al. 2000). Piro et al. (2000) interpret the width and the apparently blue-shifted best-fit energy of the iron line with respect to the redshift of the host galaxy at $`z=1.00`$ as the signature of a directed outflow velocity of $`v0.1c`$ of the source of the recombination line and the RRC. If this interpretation is correct, it might be indicative of a supernova explosion a few months prior to the GRB.

For GRB 000214, no optical counterpart could be identified. In this case, the only information concerning its redshift comes from the X-ray emission line detected by the BeppoSAX NFI, and was estimated to be $`z=0.47`$, if the emission line at $`E=(4.7\pm 0.2)`$ keV is interpreted as the redshifted Fe K$`\alpha `$ line from hydrogen-like iron (Antonellii et al. 2000).

Recently, Reeves et al. (2002a,b) reported the marginal detection of a set of emission lines in the XMM-Newton spectrum of the early afterglow of GRB 011211. If real, these features would be peculiar in that they show evidence for K$`\alpha `$ lines from the hydrogen-like ions of lighter elements, such as Si XIV, S XVI, Ar XVIII, and CA XX, but no indication of an Fe K$`\alpha `$ line or RRC edge. Those lines appear to be blue-shifted by an average of $`v0.1c`$ with respect to the likely redshift of the burst, $`z=2.14`$. Reeves et al. (2002b) find that the addition of the low-Z metal line system to a pure power-law fit to the XMM-Newton EPIC-pn spectrum improves the $`\chi ^2/d.o.f.`$ from $`51.5/28`$ to $`21.9/22`$. However, Borozdin & Trudolyubov (2002) have pointed out several caveats of the tentative line detections in GRB 011211. (1) The set of low-Z metal emission lines appeared only in the first $`5`$ ksec, prior to a re-pointing of the XMM-Newton spacecraft. During that time, the source was located very close to the edge of the CCD chip of the EPIC-pn detector. Repeating the analysis of Reeves et al. (2002a), but excluding 22 % of the counts from the immediate vicinity of the chip edge, they found that the significance of the lines dropped disproportionally. (2) Evidence for the lines appears only in the EPIC-pn detector, with no such indication in the EPIC-MOS detectors. (3) The measured centroid energy of the most prominent line at $`E=0.70\pm 0.02`$ keV (attributed to Si XIV by Reeves et al. 2002b), is coincident with a line in the background from a region on the chip in the immediate vicinity of the edge. (4) In their analysis, Borozdin & Trudolyubov (2002) find the XMM-Newton spectrum of GRB 011211 consistent with a pure power law, with no evidence for spectral evolution in consecutive time intervals. The addition of an emission line system lowers the reduced $`\chi ^2`$ from 1.03 to 0.82 (with 8 additional free parameters), which might be an indication of over-fitting, rather than a statistically significant improvement of the fit.

### The Transient Absorption Feature in GRB 990705

Atomic X-ray absorption features in GRB afterglows are rather common. However, in order to distinguish such features from foreground absorption and to associate them physically with the GRB, one needs to find evidence for variability of those absorption features on the GRB / early afterglow time scale (Perna & Loeb 1998, Böttcher et al. 1999). Until now, only one such case has been observed: GRB 990705 (Amati et al. 2000). In this burst, a transient absorption feature has been found at $`(3.8\pm 0.3)`$ keV, consistent with an Fe K absorption edge from neutral iron at $`z=0.86\pm 0.17`$ at the redshift of the host galaxy at $`z=0.84`$ (Lazzati et al. 2001). This absorption edge was only seen in the first 13 s of the GRB, while no evidence for excess absorption was found in later segments of the BeppoSAX WFC observations. The best fit to the segment with the most significant detection of the absorption edge (6 – 13 sec.), assuming an underlying power-law absorbed by a neutral absorbing column $`N_H`$ with solar abundances and an additional absorption edge yielded a depth of the absorption feature of $`\tau =1.4\pm 0.4`$ and $`N_H=(3.5\pm 1.4)\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2. Leaving the iron abundance in the neutral absorber as a free parameter in a power-law fit to the spectrum in this time segment resulted in $`N_H=(1.32\pm 0.3)\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2 and a relative overabundance of iron with respect to solar abundances of $`X_{\mathrm{Fe}}=75\pm 19`$. Implications and possible interpretations of these results will be discussed in the final section of this review.

## GENERAL CONSTRAINTS FROM EMISSION LINE FEATURES

Analytic estimates of the fluorescence and/or recombination line emission in photoionized media in GRB environments have been presented by many authors (e.g., Mészáros & Rees 1998, Ghisellini et al. 1999, Lazzati et al. 1999, Böttcher 2000). A very general estimate of the amount of iron required to produce the observed iron line features can be derived from considering that in the course of complete photoionization of iron, on average $`5`$ Fe K$`\alpha `$ photons are emitted, since it takes on average $`12`$ X-ray photons to ionize an initially neutral iron atom completely (taking into account the Auger effect), and the K$`\alpha `$ fluorescence yield is in the range 0.3 – 0.4 for the various ionization stages of iron. In dilute media, if recombination is negligible, it would then take $`N_{\mathrm{Fe}}2\times 10^{56}L_{44}t_5`$ iron atoms to produce an iron line of isotropic luminosity $`L_{\mathrm{line}}=10^{44}L_{44}`$ ergs s-1 over a time scale of $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=10^5t_5`$ s. If recombination and multiple ionization of the same iron atom enhance the efficiency of line production, one can introduce an ehnancement factor $`f`$, counting the number of times that a single iron atom can effectively contribute 5 K$`\alpha `$ photons in the process of repeated cycles of ionization and recombination. One then arrives at a general estimate of

$$M_{\mathrm{Fe}}0.16\frac{L_{44}t_5}{f}M_{}$$
(1)
In dilute, extended media, where recombination is inefficient, $`f1`$, while in dense media with efficient recombination, $`f1`$. Due to light travel time effects, the duration of the line emission will be at least $`t_{\mathrm{line}}>R(1+z)(1\mathrm{cos}\theta _{\mathrm{obs}})/c`$, where $`R`$ is the extent of the reprocessing material. Thus, the size limit, together with the restriction that in the GRBs with line detections, there is no indication for excess X-ray absorption, leads to typical mass estimates of $`M_{\mathrm{Fe}}0.1`$ – 1 $`M_{}`$ of iron, confined in $`R\stackrel{<}{}10^3`$ pc, if the line emission were to originate in a dilute, quasi-isotropic environment. This is unlikely to be realized in any astrophysical setting, and may thus be ruled out (Ghisellini et al. 1998, Böttcher et al. 1999). We therefore find that inhomogeneous media with significant density enhancement outside our line of sight toward the GRB source are required (e.g., Lazzati et al. 1999, Böttcher 2000).

At this point, several geometries and general scenarios will have to be distinguished. First, the duration $`t_{\mathrm{line}}`$ of the line detection can be set either by the light travel time effect, which puts the reprocessor at distances of $`10^{15}\mathrm{cm}\stackrel{<}{}R\stackrel{<}{}10^{16}`$ cm. These types of configurations are referred to as distant reprocessor models. Alternatively, the duration of the line emission can be determined by the duration of the illumination by a more persistent, gradually decaying central source. In that case, the reprocessor can be located much closer to the source than in the case of the distant reprocessor models. For this reason, these scenarios are referred to as nearby reprocessor models (see fig. 1). Second, we need to distinguish between different mechanisms ionizing the line-emitting iron atoms. The scenarios considered above are generally based on photoionization being the dominant ionization mechanism. However, it is very well conceivable that the material in the vicinity of GRBs is energized by shocks associated with the GRB explosion, and heated to temperatures of $`T10^7`$$`10^8`$ K (e.g., Vietri et al. 1999). In this case, and for sufficiently high densities, collisional ionization may dominate over photoionization, and the iron K$`\alpha `$ line emission will be dominated by the recombination lines of H and He-like iron, accompanied by a radiative recombination continuum. We will refer to these models as “thermal models”, as opposed to the “photoionization models” mentioned above.

## PHOTOIONIZATION MODELS

General parameter studies on photoionization models have been done by many authors. An important complication keep in mind is the fact that the continuum illuminating the reprocessing material might not be identical or even similar to the observed afterglow emission. Most importantly, if the reprocessor is located at a distance of $`R=10^{15}R_{15}`$ cm, and illuminated by GRB (and early afterglow) emission from a relativistic blast wave advancing at a coasting speed corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=100\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$, then it will be swept up by the blast wave after a typical illumination time of

$$t_{\mathrm{ill}}2\frac{R_{15}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^2}\mathrm{s}$$
(2)
unless the blast wave deceleration radius $`r_{\mathrm{dec}}=5\times 10^{16}(E_{52}/n_0\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^2)^{1/3}`$ cm is much less than $`10^{15}`$ cm. Here, $`E_{52}`$ is the isotropic equivalent energy of the GRB explosion in units of $`10^{52}`$ ergs s-1 and $`n_0`$ is the density of the (homogeneous) surrounding medium in units of cm-3. The condition $`r_{\mathrm{dec}}10^{15}`$ cm would require a very low explosion energy directed toward the reprocessor, a large density of the decelerating external medium, and/or a very high bulk Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, i. e. a very low baryon contamination.

General studies of the reprocessing efficiency and spectral and temporal signatures of reprocessor models for X-ray emission lines in GRB environments (e.g., Ballantyne & Ramirez-Ruiz 2001, Lazzati et al. 2002, Ghisellini et al. 2002, Kallman et al. 2002) have yielded very useful insight into the general properties of such reprocessing features. The above caveat needs to be taken into account very carefully when applying these results to real GRBs and scaling illuminating spectra, ionization parameters etc., to properties derived from observed continuum afterglows of GRBs.

In a parameter-independent study, Lazzati et al. (2002) have calculated the efficiency of reprocessing a given ionizing flux into fluorescence and/or recombination line flux as a function of ionization parameter. This efficiency is generally at most $`1`$ % and dependent on the precise spectral shape of the illuminating spectrum. This implies that the observed iron lines listed in Tab. 1 require a total energy in the ionizing continuum of at least $`10^{51}`$ ergs (Ghisellini et al. 2002). The reprocessing efficiency is drastically decreasing for high ionization parameters $`\xi \stackrel{>}{}10^3`$. Lazzati et al. (2002) suggest that this may provide a diagnostic between distant and nearby reprocessor models.

Another important aspect associated with iron K$`\alpha `$ line emission is related to radioactive decay of $`{}_{}{}^{56}\mathrm{Ni}{}_{}{}^{56}\mathrm{Co}{}_{}{}^{56}\mathrm{Fe}`$ in the ejecta of a supernova which may be associated with the GRB (Lazzati et al. 2001, McLaughlin et al. 2002, McLaughlin & Wijers 2002). Since it is primarily 56Ni that is produced in the final stages of a supernova progenitor, any emission line features should gradually shift in energy from 8 keV for Nickel to 7.4 keV for Cobalt and 6.9 keV for hydrogen-like iron on the radioactive decay time scales of 6.1 d and 78.8 d for 56Ni and 56Co, respectively. However, McLaughlin et al. (2002) and McLaughlin & Wijers (2002) point out the curious detail that 56Ni would usually predominantly decay via electron capture. Thus, if the reprocessing material happens to be highly ionized, the decay time scale may be significantly delayed w.r.t. the standard decay of neutral 56Ni. Consequently, for detailed modeling of the “iron” line emission in GRB afterglows, a rest-frame line energy of $`8`$ keV might actually be a more appropriate assumption than the standard value of 6.4 – 6.97 keV. In the remainder of this review, I will, for simplicity, continue to refer to any line feature around $`E7`$ keV in the GRB rest frame as “iron line”, keeping in mind that it might have a significant contribution from Ni and Co.

In addition to light-travel time effects, standard constraints on reprocessor models are obtained considering the ionization and recombination time scales. The ionization time scale may be estimated as

$$t_{\mathrm{ion}}\frac{12}{_{E_{\mathrm{thr}}}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{ion}}(E)\sigma _{\mathrm{pi}}(E)𝑑E}\frac{12(\alpha +2)}{\sigma _0\mathrm{\Phi }_0E_{\mathrm{thr}}},$$
(3)
where $`E_{\mathrm{thr}}`$ is the photoionization threshold energy, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{pi}}(E)\sigma _0(E/E_{\mathrm{thr}})^3`$ is the photoionization cross section, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(E)=\mathrm{\Phi }_0(E/E_{\mathrm{thr}})^\alpha `$ is the ionizing photon flux, assumed to be a straight power-law above the ionization threshold. Appropriate averages for the various ionization stages of iron are $`E_{\mathrm{thr}}8`$ keV and $`\sigma _03.5\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2. The recombination time scale can be approximated as

$$t_{\mathrm{rec}}=\frac{1}{n_e\alpha _{\mathrm{rec}}}\frac{10^9T_4^{3/4}}{n_H(Z_{\mathrm{eff}}/26)^2}\mathrm{s},$$
(4)
where $`\alpha _{\mathrm{rec}}`$ is the recombination coefficient, $`Z_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is the effective nuclear charge, $`T_4`$ is the electron temperature in units of $`10^4`$ K, and $`n_H`$ is the hydrogen number density in units of cm-3. The approximation for the recombination rate used above assumes that recombination is dominated by radiative recombination, which becomes inaccurate for ionization states lower than Fe XXV at temperatures above $`10^5`$ K.

Additional model constraints are derived from considerations concerning optical-depth effects due to resonance scattering out of the line of sight (for the resonant Ly$`\alpha `$ line of Fe XXVI) and Thomson scattering, which define a maximum depth in the reprocessor beyond which the material will effectively no longer contribute to the line emission.

### Distant Reprocessor Models

Distant reprocessor models, in which the duration of the line emission is dominated by the light travel time difference, $`t_{\mathrm{line}}R(1+z)(1\mathrm{cos}\theta _{\mathrm{obs}})/c`$, were the first to be discussed after it became clear that quasi-isotropic fluorescence line emission scenarios were infeasible to explain the observed iron line features (e.g., Lazzati et al. 1999, Böttcher 2000). Generally, in these models, a photoionizing continuum from the central source, emitted in tandem with the prompt and early afterglow radiation, is impinging on a torus of dense, pre-ejected material. Recall, however, that the ionizing continuum does by no means have to be identical or even similar to the observed GRB and afterglow emission. The pre-ejected tori could plausibly be the result of a common-envelope phase preceding the GRB event. All types of GRB models pertaining to the class of black-hole accretion-disk models, including the collapsar/hypernova and the He-merger (see, e.g., Fryer, Woosley & Hartman for a review) are likely to have undergone a common-envelope phase prior to the primary’s core collapse. The material ejected during such a common-envelope phase is expected to have a directed velocity of the order of the escape velocity from the secondary, $`v\sqrt{2GM_{\mathrm{sec}}/R_{\mathrm{sec}}}6\times 10^7(m/r)^{1/2}`$ cm s-1, where $`M_{\mathrm{sec}}=mM_{}`$ and $`R_{\mathrm{sec}}=rR_{}`$ are the secondary’s mass and radius. For a detailed discussion of the expected structure of pre-ejected disks / tori, see Böttcher & Fryer (2001) and references therein. In the collapsar/hypernova models, the delay between the ejection of the primary’s hydrogen envelope and the GRB may be as large as 100,000 years, although significant uncertainties about the actual delay time scale remain. Such a long delay would place the pre-ejected material at radii $`R10^{16}`$ cm, probably too large to be consistent with the observed time delays of the GRB X-ray emission line features.

Much smaller delays are expected in the He-merger scenario (Zhang & Fryer 2001) and the supranova model (Vietri & Stella 1998). In the He-merger model, time delays of a few hundred years to a few times 10,000 years may be typical, allowing for both nearby and distant reprocessor scenarios. The supranova model predicts delays of the order of the spin-down time scale of the supramassive neutron star, $`t_{\mathrm{sd}}10j_{0.6}\omega _4^4B_{12}^2`$ yr, where $`j_{0.6}`$ is the angular-momentum parameter in units of 0.6, $`\omega _4`$ is the angular velocity in units of $`10^4`$ s-1, and $`B_{12}`$ is the surface magnetic field in units of $`10^{12}`$ G. Since the typical magnetic field strength is very poorly constrained, delays of several months to several thousands of years might be possible for this model. The ejecta velocity in this case should be more typical of supernova ejecta, $`v10^9`$ cm s-1. Thus it appears that the supranova model may be able to accomodate both distant and nearby reprocessor models as well as the thermal models discussed in the following section.

Different geometrical variations of distant reprocessor models have been discussed in more detail by Lazzati et al. (2000) and Vietri et al. (2001). Analytical estimates as well as detailed numerical simulations of distant reprocessor scenarios (e.g., Böttcher 2000, Weth et al. 2000) seem to converge to a mass requirement of $`M_{\mathrm{fe}}10^5`$$`10^4M_{}`$ for most of the observed Fe K$`\alpha `$ emission line features observed to date. Note, however, that Vietri et al. (2001) derive a significantly higher mass estimate of $`M_{\mathrm{Fe}}1M_{}`$ for GRB 991216, the most extreme case in terms of total energy emitted in the Fe K$`\alpha `$ line.

### Nearby Reprocessor Models

Nearby reprocessors, at typical distances of $`\stackrel{<}{}10^{13}`$ cm, can either consist of pre-GRB ejecta (see discussion above) or the expanding envelope of a super-giant GRB progenitor (e.g., Rees & Mészáros 2000, McLaughlin et al. 2002). In the latter case, if the energy release in the GRB is strongly beamed, the envelope of the progenitor star is expected to remain in a quasi-stable state for a time of the order of the sound-crossing time through the progenitor, $`t_{\mathrm{sc}}30m_1^{1/2}R_{13}^{3/2}`$ d, where $`m_1`$ is the progenitor mass in units of $`10M_{}`$, and $`R_{13}`$ is its radius in units of $`10^{13}`$ cm. It can thus plausibly survive the break-through of an ultrarelativistic jet, and provide a scattering funnel for persistent ionizing radiation throughout the prompt and early afterglow phase of the GRB.

In this class of models, the highly collimated ultrarelativistic outflow, most probably associated with the prompt GRB and the continuum afterglow emission, has moved far past the nearby reprocessor and can obviously not contribute to the illuminating continuum. Thus, these models require a persistent source of ionizing radiation over at least the duration over which the iron line is observed. Rees & Mészáros (2000) suggest that such a source could be provided by the gradually decaying energy flux from a magnetically driven relativistic wind from a fast-rotating, strongly magnetized neutron star (magnetar), if the primary GRB mechanism does not result in the formation of a black hole. They arrive at a required mass of $`M_{\mathrm{Fe}}10^8M_{}`$ of iron in a very thin, ionized skin of the funnel in order to reproduce an iron line with properties as observed in GRB 991216. However, if a similar abundance of iron is distributed throughout the entire stellar envelope, then a mass estimate more in line with the distant reprocessor models ($`M_{\mathrm{Fe}}10^5`$$`10^4M_{}`$) results.

These estimates could be reduced if the line emission originates in a dense medium with relativistic electron densities of $`n_{e,rel}10^{10}`$$`10^{11}`$ cm-3. In such an environment, the line emission could be enhanced by the Čerenkov effect, as recently pointed out by Wang et al. (2002). Another variation of nearby reprocessor models has recently been proposed by Kumar & Narayan (2002). They suggest the formation of a scattering screen at a distance of $`10^{14}`$$`10^{15}`$ cm from the GRB source, possibly as a result of $`\gamma \gamma `$ pair creation on back-scattered GRB radiation. GRB emission from later (internal) shocks traveling along the jetted ejecta, are scattered back onto the outside of the stellar envelope of the progenitor (the supernova ejecta), and thus provide the ionizing flux for fluorescence line emission. This model requires a smaller iron content in the ejecta than previous models since it utilizes a larger fraction of the surface area of the progenitor’s stellar envelope. Kumar & Narayan (2002) discuss this model in particular in light of the low-Z emission lines in GRB 011211 (Reeves et al. 2002). In this specific case, their model would require a relatively large pre-GRB outflow rate, producing a density in the surrounding medium of $`n_07\times 10^7`$ cm-3, leading to an external-shock deceleration radius of $`r_{\mathrm{dec}}\stackrel{<}{}5\times 10^{14}`$ cm. This would correspond to an observed deceleration time scale of $`t_{\mathrm{dec}}\stackrel{<}{}0.8\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^2`$ s, which seems to be in conflict with the duration of $`t_{\mathrm{dur}}270`$ s of GRB 011211, with no indication of rapid variability on the time scale of the order of $`t_{\mathrm{dec}}`$.

## THERMAL MODELS

As an alternative to photoionization models, Vietri et al. (1999) had suggested a thermal model in the framework of the supranova model. They argue that a relativistic fireball associated with the GRB might hit the pre-GRB supernova remnant within $`10^3`$ s and heat the ejecta to $`T3\times 10^7`$ K. At such temperatures, the plasma emission is expected to show strong thermal bremsstrahlung emission as well as line emission, in particular strong Fe K$`\alpha `$ recombination line emission. They suggest that the bremsstrahlung and recombination continuum may explain the secondary X-ray outburst observed in GRB 970508. Since the supranova model seems to be consistent with a large range of SN – GRB delays, one might expect that secondary X-ray outbursts and delayed X-ray emission line features on a variety of time scales can be explained with this type of models. General constraints on thermal emission scenarios for Fe K$`\alpha `$ lines have also been considered by Lazzati et al. (1999).

Böttcher & Fryer have investigated the thermal X-ray emission from shock-heated pre-ejected material in alternative progenitor models (i.e. other than the supranova model), such as the collapsar/hypernova and the He-merger model. They found that the He-merger scenario provides a feasible setting for the production of transient Fe K$`\alpha `$ line emission in the range of luminosities and durations observed. Since both the He-merger and the hypernova/collapsar models are also consistent with much larger SN – GRB delays, they predict that many GRBs may display late-time, thermal X-ray flashes from the shock-heating of pre-ejected material from a common-envelope phase, which could be detected out to redshifts of $`1`$ with currently operating X-ray telescopes.

An alternative scenario based on thermal emission has recently been suggested by Mészáros & Rees (2001). As the collimated outflow from the central engine of a collapsar is piercing through the stellar envelope of the progenitor, a substantial amount of energy is deposited into the stellar material, which might be highly magnetized. After the jet breaks out of the stellar envelope, this plasma bubble becomes buoyant and emerges through the evacuated funnel of the envelope within $`10^4`$$`10^5`$ s. At that time, it may have attained a temperature of $`10^6`$$`10^7`$ K, sufficient to produce iron lines, but potentially also a plasma emission spectrum dominated by lower-energy lines, as possibly observed in GRB 011211.

## MODEL IMPLICATIONS OF THE TRANSIENT ABSORPTION FEATURE

In principle, inferring constraints on parameters of the circumburster material from observed GRB properties is an easier task than inferring them from emission lines, because in the case of absorption features the continuum responsible for photoionization is identical to the observed GRB and afterglow continuum. Time-dependent X-ray absorption features had been studied for generic, quasi-homogeneous environments by Böttcher et al. (1999) and Ghisellini et al. (1999), and for more general cases, including radial gradients, by Lazzati et al. (2001) and Lazzati & Perna (2002). For given values of the depth $`\tau _{\mathrm{edge}}`$ of an absorption edge and the time scale $`t_{\mathrm{edge}}`$ within which it is disappearing, one can directly infer a characteristic radius (by setting $`t_{\mathrm{ion}}=t_{\mathrm{edge}}`$). Combined with the column density derived from $`\tau _{\mathrm{line}}`$, this allows a direct estimate of the (isotropic) amount of iron in the absorber.

It came as a big surprise that these estimates, applied to the parameters of the transient absorption line in GRB 990705 (Amati et al. 2000), yielded an estimate of $`M_{\mathrm{Fe}}44\mathrm{\Omega }M_{}`$ within $`R\stackrel{<}{}1.3`$ pc, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the solid angle covered by the absorber as seen from the GRB source. Since this does obviously not seem realistic in any known astrophysical setting, additional effects due to clumping of the absorber in small clouds, in which recombination would become efficient (e.g., Böttcher et al. 2001), or resonance scattering of the Fe XXVI Ly$`\alpha `$ line out of the line of sight (Lazzati et al. 2001) had been considered. Both of these effects could plausibly reduce the necessary amount of iron in the absorber to $`M_{\mathrm{Fe}}\stackrel{<}{}1M_{}`$, but require a rather extreme degree of clumping, with densities of $`n10^{11}`$ cm-3 in the clumps and distance/size ratios of $`x/r10^3`$$`10^5`$.

Böttcher et al. (2002) have scaled the required parameters of the absorber to the clumping properties of supernova ejecta, derived from detailed 3-D hydrodynamics simulations of supernovae. The results were parameterized in terms of the total mass contained in the dense absorbing clouds, $`M_{\mathrm{cl}}`$, and the time delay $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ between the supernova producing the absorbing ejecta, and the GRB. In the case of a supranova scenario, $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ is the delay between the progenitor supernova and the GRB, while in the He-merger scenario, $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ represents the time between the primary’s supernova explosion and the He-merger-triggered GRB. Other progenitor models, such as the collapsar/hypernova models, would possess too dilute environments in order to be consistent with the observed properties of GRB 990705. The results of Böttcher et al. (2002) are summarized in Fig. 2, and illustrate that all currently discussed GRB models seem to be hard-pressed in order to produce the required environments to reproduce the transient absorption feature in GRB 990705, with the possible exception of the supranova scenario.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

TAUP 2728-2002

30 December, 2002

Relativistic Brownian Motion

O. Oron and L.P. Horwitz**Also at Department of Physics, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 529000, Israel

School of Physics and Astronomy

Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences

Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv 69978, Israel

Abstract:

We solve the problem of formulating Brownian motion in a relativistically covariant framework in $`1+1`$ and $`3+1`$ dimensions. We obtain covariant Fokker-Planck equations with (for the isotropic case) a differential operator of invariant d’Alembert form. Treating the spacelike and timelike fluctuations separately, we show that it is essential to take into account the analytic continuation of “unphysical” fluctuations in order to achieve these results.

Introduction

Nelson1, in 1966, constructed the Schrödinger equation from an analysis of Brownian motion by identifying the forward and backward average velocities of a Brownian particle with the real and imaginary parts of a wave function. He pointed out that the basic process involved is defined nonrelativistically, and can be used if relativistic effects can be safely neglected. The development of a relativistically covariant formulation of Brownian motion could therefore provide some insight into the structure of a relativistic quantum theory.

In recent years, Brownian motion has been applied as a mechanism for the description of irreversible evolution of quantum mechnical states, for example, collapse of wave functions as result of measurement. One finds that the wave function with a stochastic term added to the Schrödinger equation (represented in the Hilbert space of states2 or in their projective representation3) evolves to a mixed state of alternative outcomes of a measurement with the same probability distribution as given by the calculation of a priori (Born) probabilities in the framework of the standard quantum theory 2,3. One of the motivations for the work of Adler and Horwitz3 was based on the existence of a statistical mechanics, developed by Adler4 and Adler and Millard5 for the description of the equilibrium state of a general class of quantum fields; in this theory, the thermal average of commutator expressions take on the values implied by the familiar complex canonical quantum theory and quantum field theory. The Brownian motion corrections to the standard theories may be thought of as arising from the fluctuations around the equilibrium state. The development of a relativistically covariant theory of Brownian motion could make an extension of these ideas to relativistic quantum theory and quantum field theory more accessible.

The program of stochastic quantization of Parisi and Wu6 assumes the existence of relativistic wave equations, and applies a statistical approach closely related to path integrals. The Wiener distribution of nonrelativistic Brownian motion, as is well known, is associated with (imaginary time) path integral formulations, and one would expect that covariant Brownian motion would similarly be associated with Parisi-Wu stochastic quantization.

Nelson1 has pointed out that the formulation of his stochastic mechanics in the context of general relativity is an important open question. The Riemannian metric spaces one can achieve, in principle, which arise due to nontrivial correlations between fluctuations in spacetime directions, could, in the framework of a covariant theory of Brownian motion, lead to spacetime pseudo-Riemannian metrics in the structure of diffusion and Schrödinger equations.

In this paper we shall study the structure a covariant theory of Brownian motion.

We first point out some of the obvious difficulties in reaching a covariant theory of Brownian motion, and indicate the directions we have chosen to solve these problems.

Brownian motion, thought of as a series of “jumps” of a particle along its path, necessarily involves an ordered sequence. In the nonrelativistic theory, this ordering is naturally provided by the Newtonian time parameter. In a relativistic framework, the Einstein time $`t`$ does not provide a suitable parameter. If we contemplate jumps in spacetime, to accomodate a covariant formulation, a possible spacelike interval between two jumps may appear in two orderings in different Lorentz frames. We therefore adopt the invariant parameter $`\tau `$ introduced by Stueckelberg7 in his construction of a relativistically covariant classical and quantum dynamics. For the many body theory, Piron and Horwitz8 postulated that this parameter is universal, as the Newtonian time in the nonrelativistic theory, and drives the classical particle trajectories $`x_i^\mu (\tau )`$ (worldlines labelled $`i=1,2,3,\mathrm{}.N`$) through equations of motion, and the evolution of the wave function in the Hilbert space $`L^2(R^{4N})`$, $`\psi _\tau (\{x_i^\mu \})`$ through the Stueckelberg-Schrödinger equation (the differential form of the action of a one-parameter unitary group with parameter $`\tau `$).

A second fundamental difficulty in formulating a covariant theory of Brownian motion lies in the form of the correlation function of the random variables of spacetime. The straightforward generalization of the usual Brownian correlation property to special relativity, i.e.,

$$<dw_\mu (\tau )dw_\nu (\tau ^{})>=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & \tau \tau ^{}\hfill \\ 2\alpha \eta _{\mu \nu }d\tau \hfill & \tau =\tau ^{}\text{,}\hfill \end{array}$$

contains the serious problem that $`<dw_0(\tau )dw_0(\tau )><0,`$ which is impossible. Brownian motion in spacetime, however, should be a generalization of the nonrelativistic problem, constructed by observing the nonrelativistic process from a moving frame according to the transformation laws of special relativity. Hence, as a first step, the process taking place in space in the nonrelativistic theory should be replaced by a spacetime process in which the Brownian jumps are spacelike. The pure time (negative) self-correlation does therefore not occur. In order to meet this requirement, we shall use a coordinatization in terms of generalized polar coordinates which assure that all jumps are spacelike. In this case, one would expect a distribution function of the form $`e^{\frac{\mu ^2}{ad\tau }}`$, where $`\mu `$ is the invariant spacelike interval of the jump, and $`a`$ is some constant. As we shall see, a Brownian motion based on purely spacelike jumps does not yield the correct form for an invariant diffusion process. We must therefore consider the possibility as well that, in the framework of relativistic dynamics, there are timelike jumps. In a frame in which the timelike jumps are pure time, the construction of the Gaussian distribution from the central limit theorem can again be applied. The distribution would be expected to be of the form $`e^{\frac{\sigma ^2}{bd\tau }}`$, where $`\sigma `$ is the timelike interval of these jumps, and $`b`$ is some constant. By suitably weighting the occurrence of the spacelike process (which we take for our main discussion to be “physical”, since its nonrelativistic limit coincides with the usual Brownian motion) and an analytic continuation of the timelike process, we show that one indeed obtains a Lorentz invariant Fokker-Planck equation in which the d’Alembert operator appears in place of the Laplace operator of the 3D Fokker-Planck equation. One may, alternatively, consider the timelike process as “physical” and analytically continue the spacelike (“unphysical”) process to achieve a d’Alembert operator with opposite sign.

2. Brownian motion in 1+1 dimensions

We consider a Brownian path in $`1+1`$ dimensions of the form

$$dx^\mu (\tau )=K^\mu (x(\tau ))d\tau +dw^\mu (\tau ).$$
$`(2.1)`$
We start by considering the second order term in the series expansion of a function of position of the particle on the world line, $`f(x^\mu (\tau )+\mathrm{\Delta }x^\mu )`$, involving the operator

$$𝒪=\mathrm{\Delta }x^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }x^\nu \frac{}{x^\mu }\frac{}{x^\nu }.$$
$`(2.2)`$
We have remarked that one of the difficulties in describing Brownian motion in spacetime is the possible occurrence of a negative value for the second moment of some component of the Lorentz four vector random variable. If the Brownian jump is timelike, or spacelike, however, the components of the four vector are not independent, but must satisfy the timelike or spacelike constraint. Such constraints can be realized by using parametrizations for the jumps in which they are restricted geometrically to be timelike or spacelike. We now separate the jumps into spacelike jumps and timelike jumps accordingly, i.e., for the spacelike jumps,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }x=\mu \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }t=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\alpha $$
$`(2.3)`$
and for the timelike jumps,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }x=\sigma \mathrm{sinh}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }t=\sigma \mathrm{cosh}\alpha $$
$`(2.3^{})`$
Here we assumed that the two sectors have the same distribution on the hyperbolic variable. We first look for the effects of a particle experiencing spacelike jumps only. In that case the operator $`𝒪`$ takes the following form:

$$𝒪=\mu ^2[\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha \frac{^2}{x^2}+2\mathrm{sinh}\alpha \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \frac{^2}{xt}+\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha \frac{^2}{t^2}]$$
$`(2.4)`$
If the particle going under timelike jumps only we find the operator $`𝒪`$ takes the following form:

$$𝒪=\sigma ^2[\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha \frac{^2}{x^2}+2\mathrm{sinh}\alpha \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \frac{^2}{xt}+\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha \frac{^2}{t^2}]$$
$`(2.5)`$
In order to obtain the relativistically invariant d’Alembert diffusion operator, the expression obtained in the timelike region must be subtracted from the expression for the spacelike region, and furthermore, the amplitudes must be identified. In the physical timelike region, the coefficient $`\sigma ^2`$ is, of course, positive, and using the law of large numbers on the random distribution, one obtains a Gaussian distribution analogous to that of the spacelike case.

We see, however, that we can obtain the d’Alembert operator only by considering the analytic continuation of the timelike process to the spacelike domain. This procedure is analogous to the effect, well-known in relativistic quantum scattering theory, of a physical process in the crossed ($`t`$)channel on the observed process in the direct ($`s`$) channel. Although we are dealing with an apparently classical process, as Nelson has shown, the Brownian motion problem gives rise to a Schrödinger equation, and therefore contains properties of the quantum theory. We thus see the remarkable fact that one must take into account the physical effect of the analytic continuation of processes occurring in a non-physical, in this case timelike, domain, on the total observed behavior of the system.

In the non-stochastic case, Einstein’s relativity identifies $`\mathrm{\Delta }x/\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ with $`p/E`$, where $`p`$ and $`E`$ are the components of the energy-momentum four-vector of the particle. If we make an analogous identification, assigning these variables as properties of the fluctuations, then

$$\sigma ^2=(\mathrm{\Delta }t)^2(\mathrm{\Delta }x)^2(E^2p^2),$$
$`(2.7)`$
defining a stochastic mass squared associated with the Brownian particle. If the relation between $`E`$ and $`p`$ becomes spacelike, the notion of stochastic mass can be retained undere the transformation to an imaginary representation $`EiE^{}`$ and $`pip^{}`$, for $`E^{},p^{}`$ real§ This transformation is similar to the analytic continuation $`pip^{}`$ in nonrelativistic tunneling, for which the particle appears as an instanton., so the relation $`p^{}/E^{}>1`$ remains, but $`p^2E^2>0`$. We assume sufficient symmetry in the spacelike and timelike distributions so that the absolute values of $`<\sigma ^2>`$ and $`<\mu ^2>`$ are equal. The preservation of the mean magnitude of the interval reflects the conservation of a mass-like property which remains, as an intrinsic property of the particle, for both spacelike and timelike jumps.

With these assumptions, the cross-term in hyperbolic functions cancels in the sum, which now takes the form

$$𝒪=<\mu ^2>\left[\frac{^2}{x^2}\frac{^2}{t^2}\right]$$
$`(2.8)`$
Taking into account the drift term in $`(2.1)`$, one then finds the relativistic Fokker-Planck equation

$$\frac{D(x,\tau )}{\tau }=\left\{\frac{}{x^\mu }K^\mu +\mu ^2\frac{^2}{x^\mu x_\mu }\right\}D(x,\tau ),$$
$`(2.9)`$
where $`/x^\mu `$ operates on both $`K^\mu `$ and $`D`$.

We see that the procedure we have followed permits us to construct the Lorentz invariant d’Alembertian operator, as required for obtaining a relativistically covariant diffusion equation. Furthermore, since the expectation of $`\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha ,\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha `$ could be infinite (e.g., for a uniform distribution on $`\alpha `$), the result we obtain in this way constitutes an effective regularization.

3. Brownian motion in $`3+1`$ dimensions

In the $`3+1`$ case, we again separate the jumps into timelike and spacelike types. The spacelike jumps may be parametrized, in a given frame, by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Delta }t=& \mu \mathrm{sinh}\alpha \hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }x=& \mu \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\varphi \mathrm{sin}\vartheta \hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }y=& \mu \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\varphi \mathrm{sin}\vartheta \hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Delta }z=& \mu \mathrm{cosh}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\vartheta \hfill \end{array}$$
$`(3.1)`$
We assume the four variables $`\mu ,\alpha ,\vartheta ,\varphi `$ are independent random variables. In addition we demand in this frame that $`\vartheta `$ and $`\varphi `$ are uniformly distributed in their ranges $`(0,\pi )`$ and $`(0,2\pi )`$, respectively. In this case, we may average over the trigonometric angles, i.e., $`\vartheta `$ and $`\varphi `$ and find that:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill <\mathrm{\Delta }x^2>_{\varphi ,\vartheta }& =<\mathrm{\Delta }y^2>_{\varphi ,\vartheta }=<\mathrm{\Delta }z^2>_{\varphi ,\vartheta }=\frac{\mu ^2}{3}\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha \hfill \\ \hfill <\mathrm{\Delta }t^2>_{\varphi ,\vartheta }=& \mu ^2\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha \hfill \end{array}$$
$`(3.2)`$
We may obtain the averages over the trigonometric angles of the timelike jumps by replacing everywhere in Eq.$`(3.2)`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha & \mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha \hfill \\ \hfill \mu ^2& \sigma ^2\hfill \end{array}$$

to obtain

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill <\mathrm{\Delta }x^2>_{\varphi ,\vartheta }& =<\mathrm{\Delta }y^2>_{\varphi ,\vartheta }=<\mathrm{\Delta }z^2>_{\varphi ,\vartheta }=\frac{\sigma ^2}{3}\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha \hfill \\ \hfill <\mathrm{\Delta }t^2>_{\varphi ,\vartheta }=& \sigma ^2\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha ,\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(3.3)`$
where $`\sigma `$ is a real random variable, the invariant timelike interval. Assuming, as in the $`1+1`$ case, that the likelihood of the jumps being in either the spacelike or (virtual) timelike phases are equal, and making an analytic continuation for which $`\sigma ^2\lambda ^2`$, the total average of the operator $`𝒪`$, including the contributions of the remaining degrees of freedom $`\mu ,\lambda `$ and $`\alpha `$ is

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill <𝒪>=& \left(<\mu ^2><\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha ><\lambda ^2><\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha >\right)\frac{^2}{t^2}+\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{3}\left(<\mu ^2><\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha ><\lambda ^2><\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha >\right)\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(3.4)`$
If we now insist that the operator $`<𝒪>`$ be invariant under Lorentz transformations (i.e. the d’Alembertian) we impose the condition

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill <\mu ^2><\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha ><\lambda ^2>& <\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha >=\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{3}\left(<\mu ^2><\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha ><\lambda ^2><\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha >\right)\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(3.5)`$
Using the fact that $`<\mathrm{cosh}^2\alpha ><\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha >=1`$, and defining $`\gamma <\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha >`$, we find that

$$<\lambda ^2>=\frac{1+4\gamma }{3+4\gamma }<\mu ^2>$$
$`(3.6)`$
The Fokker-Planck equation then takes on the same form as in the $`1+1`$ case, i.e., the form $`(2.9)`$. We remark that for the $`1+1`$ case, one finds in the corresponding expression that the $`3`$ in the denominator is replaced by unity, and the coefficients $`4`$ are replaced by $`2`$; in this case the requirement reduces to $`<\mu ^2>=<\lambda ^2>`$ and there is no $`\gamma `$ dependence.

We see that in the limit of a uniform distribution in $`\alpha `$, for which $`\gamma \mathrm{}`$, $`<\lambda ^2><\mu ^2>`$. In this case, the relativistic generalization of a nonrelativistic Gaussian distribution of the form $`e^{\frac{𝐫^2}{dt}}`$ becomes of the form $`e^{\frac{\mu ^2}{d\tau }}`$, which is Lorentz invariant. As in the $`1+1`$ case, the result $`(3.6)`$ corresponds to a regularization.

4. Conclusions and Discussion

We have constructed a relativistic generalization of Brownian motion, using an invariant world-time to order the Brownian fluctuations, and separated consideration of spacelike and timelike jumps to avoid the problems of negative second moments which might otherwise follow from the Minkowski signature. Associating the Brownian fluctuations with an underlying dynamical process, one may think of $`\gamma `$ in the $`3+1`$ case as an order parameter, where the distribution function (over $`\alpha `$), associated with the velocities, is determined by the temperature of the underlying dynamical system (as we have remarked, the result for the $`1+1`$ case is independent of the distribution on the hyperbolic variable).

At equilbrium, where $`D/\tau =0,`$ the resulting diffusion equation turns into a classical wave equation which, in the absence of a drift term $`K^\mu `$, is the wave equation for a massless field. An exponentially decreasing distribution in $`\tau `$ of the form $`\mathrm{exp}\kappa \tau `$ would correspond to a Klein-Gordon equation for a particle in a tachyonic state (mass squared $`\kappa `$). We have considered the spacelike jumps as “physical” since they result in the usual Brownian motion in the nonrelativistic limit. If the timelike jumps were considered as “physical”, one would analytically continue the “unphysical” spacelike process. The resulting diffusion equation would have the opposite sign for the d’Alembert operator, and an exponentially decreasing distribution would then result in a Klein-Gordon equation in a timelike particle state.

Nelson1 has shown that non-relativistic Brownian motion can be associated with a Schrödinger equation. Equipped with the procedures we presented here, constructing relativistic Brownian motion, Nelson’s methods can be generalized. One then can construct relativistic equations of Schrödinger (Schrödinger-Stueckelberg) type. The eigenvalue equations for these relativistic forms are also Klein-Gordon type equations. Moreover one can also generalize the case where the fluctuations are not correlated in different directions into the case where correlations exist, as discussed by Nelson1 for three dimensional Riemannian spaces. In this case the resulting equation is a quantum equation in a curved Riemannian spacetime; as pointed out in ref.$`10`$, the eikonal approximation to the solutions of such an equation contains the geodesic motion of classical general relativity. The medium supporting the Brownian motion may be identified with an “ether” 11 (Nelson1 has remarked that the self-interaction of charged particles might provide a mechanism for the Brownian motion) for which the problem of local Lorentz symmetry is solved. This generalization of Nelson’s method will be discussed elsewhere.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Linda Reichl, W.C. Schieve and Sungyan Kim at the Ilya Prigogine Center for Statistical Mechanics and Complex Systems at the University of Texas at Austin for helpful and stimulating discussions.

References

1. Edward Nelson, Dynamical Theories of Brownian Motion, Princeton University Press, Princeton (1967); Edward Nelson, Quantum Fluctuations, Princeton University Press Princeton (1985). See also, Ph. Blanchard, Ph. Combe and W. Zheng, Mathematical and Physical Aspects of Stochastic Mechanics, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (1987), for further helpful discussion.

2. For example, G.C. Ghirardi, P. Pearle and A. Rimini, Phys. Rev. A42, 78 (1990).

3. L.P. Hughston, Proc. Roy. Soc. London A452, 953 (1996), and references cited there; S.L. Adler and L.P. Horwitz, Jour. Math. Phys. 41, 2485 (2000).

4. S.L. Adler, Nuc. Phys. B415, 195 (1994); S.L. Adler, Quaternionic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Fields, Oxford Univ. Press, N.Y. (1995); S.L. Adler, hep-th/0206120.

5. S.L. Adler and A.C. Millard, Nuc. Phys. B473, 199 (1996).

6. G. Parisi, Y. Wu, Sci.Sin. 24 483 ; Mikio Namiki Stochastic Quantization , (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1992).

7. E.C.G. Stueckelberg, Helv. Phys. Acta 14, 322 (1941); 14, 588 (1941).

8. L.P. Horwitz and C. Piron, Helv. Phys. Acta 46, 316 (1973).

9. See, for example, S.S. Schweber, An Introduction to Relativistic Quantum Field Theory, Harper and Row, N.Y. (1961).

10. L.P.Horwitz , O.Oron, hep-ph/0205018

11. S. Liberati, S. Sonego and M. Visser, Ann. Phys. 167 298 (2002).


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Deep inelastic scattering (DIS) experiments have played an important role in the understanding of the partonic structure of matter and in establishing the strong interaction sector of the Standard Model (SM): QCD.

In the past decade, the HERA experiments H1 and ZEUS have been providing more and more precise data for modern global fits allowing parton density functions (PDFs) be determined with steadily increasing precision. The precision of the PDFs is of importance as it is needed to have reliable predictions for precision measurements and for new physics searches at future hadron colliders such as LHC.

In this talk, I shall first present the latest new structure function measurements from H1, then try to answer two following questions: i) Can HERA I cross section or structure function (SF) data measured so far be described by QCD? and ii) What is the impact of the HERA I data?

## 2 New Measurements and Impact of HERA I Data

Four new preliminary measurements  from H1 have been submitted to this conference. Thanks to the increased proton beam energy from 820 GeV to 920 GeV since 1998 (the center-of-mass energy $`\sqrt{s}`$ is accordingly increased from 300 GeV to 320 GeV), the fully installed backward silicon tracker, the new capability of triggering low energy scattered electrons111It refers generically to both electrons and positrons unless stated otherwise. down to 3 GeV, and the special runs where data were taken by shifting the nominal interaction vertex in the proton beam direction by 70 cm, the kinematical domain has been substantially extended with respect to previous measurements both to lower $`Q^2`$ and to smaller $`x`$. On the other extreme at high $`Q^2`$ and large $`x`$, the new measurements of both neutral current (NC) and charged current (CC) processes are obtained with improved precision using the highest data sample taken before the HERA machine was upgraded for the second phase.

Part of the new measurements at low $`Q^2`$, the so-called reduced cross sections $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$ (or $`\sigma _\mathrm{r}`$), are shown in Fig. 1. The reduced cross section for the NC interaction may be expressed in terms of SFs as

$$\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{\mathrm{NC}}(e^\pm p)=F_2\frac{y^2}{Y_+}F_L\frac{Y_{}}{Y_+}xF_3$$
(1)
where $`Y_\pm =1\pm (1y)^2`$ with $`y=Q^2/(xs)`$, $`F_2`$ is the dominant contribution, the contribution of the longitudinal SF $`F_L`$ is suppressed at low $`y`$ by $`y^2/Y_+`$, and the SF $`xF_3`$, which arises mainly from the photon-$`Z^0`$ interference and has been previously determined  at $`Q^21500`$ GeV2, becomes non-negligible only at such large $`Q^2`$ values. The reduced cross section differs from the experimentally measured double differential cross section $`\mathrm{d}^2\sigma /\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}Q^2`$ by a kinematical factor of $`2\pi \alpha ^2Y_+/xQ^4`$, where $`\alpha `$ is the fine structure constant.

From Fig. 1, one observes that the new measurements extend now down to $`x510^6`$ at $`Q^2=0.35`$ GeV2. The rise of $`F_2`$ as $`x`$ decreases, the first important observation at HERA and being related to increasing gluon density $`xg`$ at small $`x`$, persists even at $`Q^2<1`$ GeV2 although with a reduced magnitude. The same observation is also obtained from the measurement of $`\mathrm{d}\mathrm{ln}F_2/\mathrm{d}\mathrm{ln}x`$ (not shown here).

As $`Q^2`$ increases, the measured $`\sigma _\mathrm{r}`$ is observed to deviate from the dashed curves at high $`y`$ in which the $`F_L`$ is set to zero, but agree with the full curves where a non-zero $`F_L`$ according to a dipole model is included. Such a sensitivity to $`F_L`$ has been exploited by H1 to determine experimentally $`F_L`$, which is shown in Fig. 2. The new determination (shown in triangle) thus extends the previous determination  to smaller $`x`$ and higher $`Q^2`$. It should be pointed out that such a determination, though not a direct measurement which needs different beam energies, does provide a non-trivial consistency test as the determination gives a direct measure of $`xg`$ while the expectation from a QCD fit was based on an indirect $`xg`$ derived from the scaling violation of the $`F_2`$.

Moving to even higher $`Q^2`$ (100–30 000 GeV2) region, new preliminary cross section measurements based on the $`e^+p`$ 1999-2000 at $`\sqrt{s}=320`$ GeV  are combined with those measured with the $`e^+p`$ 1994-1997 at 320 GeV  taking into account a small correction due to the increased $`\sqrt{s}`$. The combined cross sections in $`e^+p`$ scattering can be compared with those in $`e^{}p`$ scattering . In Fig. 3, the single differential NC and CC cross sections from H1  and ZEUS  are shown and compared with the SM expectation from a global QCD fit (CTEQ5 ). While the NC $`e^+p`$ and $`e^{}p`$ cross sections are indistinguishable at low $`Q^2`$ as expected from the photon ($`\gamma `$) exchange, they are different at high $`Q^2`$ due to the positive (negative) $`\gamma Z^0`$ exchange in $`e^{}p(e^+p)`$ interactions. The CC $`e^+p`$ and $`e^{}p`$ cross sections are different over the entire $`Q^2`$ region measured originating from different quarks probed by negatively and positively charged W bosons exchanged in the interactions and from different helicity structures involved. At $`Q^2M_{Z,W}^2`$, all four cross sections (NC, CC and $`e^+p`$, $`e^{}p`$) are comparable demonstrating the universal coupling strength of electroweak interactions. It is also remarkable that the cross sections which vary over many orders of magnitude are described by the global fit which to some extent is independent of the data.

HERA data have been important for constraining the gluon density $`xg`$ at small $`x`$. Indeed, in an earlier QCD analysis performed by H1 using the H1 low $`Q^2`$ precision data and part of the H1 high $`Q^2`$ $`e^+p`$ data available then, the gluon density $`xg`$ was determined with an experimental precision of about 3% . In addition, the strong coupling constant $`\alpha _s`$ was determined with an experimental uncertainty of 1.5%  using the same data together with the proton data from BCDMS  for constraining $`xg`$ at large $`x`$. This determination at next-to-leading order (NLO) is unfortunately limited theoretically by the large scale uncertainty showing the necessity of having next-to-NLO calculations for improvements.

Presented at this conference is a further NLO QCD analysis performed by H1 using the low $`Q^2`$ precision data and all high $`Q^2`$ cross section data. The analysis aims at a determination of the quark momentum distributions, besides $`xg`$. A novel feature of the analysis is the way in which the various structure functions are decomposed in terms of different parton densities. The quark densities used by H1, the upper and down types of quarks ($`xU`$, $`xD`$) and their anti-quarks ($`x\overline{U}`$, $`x\overline{D}`$), directly enter the NC and CC cross sections contrary to an effective sea distribution or valence quark distributions. The latter follow from the differences $`u_v=U\overline{U}`$ and $`d_v=D\overline{D}`$. The initial distributions are parametrized in an MRST-like functional form for $`Q_0^2`$ at 4 GeV2. The results of the fit are shown in Fig. 4 as a function of $`x`$. In the fit with the full HERA I data plus the BCDMS proton and deuterium data , the experimental uncertainty shown in dark error band reaches a precision of a few percent. Shown in light error band is the model uncertainty, which includes variation of $`Q_0^2`$ and other parameters in the fits. The results of the fit using the H1 data only is shown with the solid curves. It is remarkable that the fit using HERA data only is able to give consistent results on the parton density functions with the combined fit which uses additional data at low $`Q^2`$ and large $`x`$.

The impact of the HERA I data at large $`x`$ is best seen on the u and d quark densities at valence quark region, determined by two complementary methods (Fig. 5). In one method, the densities are determined from the fit, where the precision is optimal, while in the second method, the densities ($`xq_{\mathrm{exp}}`$) are extracted locally from the measured cross sections $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{\mathrm{meas}}(x,Q^2)`$, $`xq_{\mathrm{exp}}=\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{\mathrm{meas}}[xq/\stackrel{~}{\sigma }]_{\mathrm{fit}}`$. The latter method has the advantage that the resulting $`u`$ and $`d`$ densities do not depend on the $`Q^2`$ evolution and are thus free from any nuclear corrections.

## 3 Conclusion

To conclude, the structure function data from almost a decade’s operation in HERA phase I have enabled the theory of QCD be tested to a new level of precision in deep inelastic scattering and revealed its impact on the parton densities both for the gluon at small $`x`$ and for the $`u`$ and $`d`$ at large $`x`$. The full HERA I data at large $`x`$ and high $`Q^2`$ are still statistically limited. New data to be taken during the next years in HERA phase II are therefore important not only to improve the precision of the structure functions but also to fully explore the very high $`Q^2`$ region up to the kinematical limit $`s10^5`$ GeV2.


text:
# Ion induced quark-gluon implosion

## Abstract

We investigate nuclear fragmentation in the central proton-nucleus and nucleus - nucleus collisions at the energies of CERN LHC. Within the semiclassical approximation we argue that each nucleon is stripped in the average process off “soft” partons and fragments into a collection of leading quarks and gluons with large $`p_t`$ because of the fast increase with energy of the cross sections of soft and hard interactions. Valence quarks and gluons are streaming in the opposite directions when viewed in the c.m. of the produced system. The resulting pattern of the fragmentation of the colliding nuclei leads to an implosion of the quark and gluon constituents of the nuclei. The non-equilibrium state produced at the initial stage in the nucleus fragmentation region is estimated to have densities $``$ 50 GeV/fm3 at the LHC energies and probably $``$ 10 GeV/fm3 at BNL RHIC.

One of challenging theoretical phenomena is the fact that perturbative QCD interactions become strong at sufficiently small x due to fast increase with energy of gluon densities. A number of models were suggested for the theoretical description of this new QCD regime see, e.g.  for reviews. A common feature of all these models is that in the case of proton scattering off heavy nuclei with large radius $`R_A`$, the high-energy cross section for most important quark-gluon configurations in the projectile nucleon reaches the black body limit(BBL) $`\sigma _{tot}=2\pi R_A^2`$ . They have this feature because, for the majority of the quark-gluon components of the nucleon wave function, the interaction cross section satisfies the condition: $`\sigma 2\rho R_A1`$. Therefore, most components are absorbed by the nuclear target. Here $`\rho `$ 0.16 fm-3 is the nuclear density. For the central nucleus-nucleus collisions, the cross section of hard interaction is even more enhanced by the factor $`\left[g_A(x,Q^2)/\pi R_A^2\right]/(g_N/\pi r_N^2)A^{1/3}(g_A/Ag_N)6`$ for $`A200`$. Part of the enhancement disappears because of the leading twist nuclear shadowing phenomenon. Evidently, the soft QCD interactions in the nucleon-heavy nucleus collisions at the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC) should also be close to the BBL because of $`\sigma _{tot}(pN)100mb`$.

The numerical estimates indicate that already for $`x10^4`$ the perturbative cross section of the interaction of $`q\overline{q}`$ dipoles of transverse sizes $`d`$0.15fm with nuclei calculated within the framework of the QCD factorization theorem reaches BBL while for the octet dipoles of similar sizes this regime may start at x about 10 times larger. For the recent numerical studies see . Hence, the proton (ion) - heavy ion collisions at LHC will be qualitatively different from those at fixed target energies and as well as at BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) where typical $`x10^2`$ for the central rapidities. This should lead to a number of novel soft and hard phenomena .

Here we will argue that in this new regime, at the initial stage of the heavy ion collisions, a very dense non-equilibrium quark-gluon state will be formed in the nucleus fragmentation region. Before addressing the case of heavy ion collisions, we briefly discuss the case of the central $`pA`$ collisions. To visualize the space time picture of the BBL in the proton-nucleus collisions, let us consider the rest frame of the nucleus. Within the semiclassical approximation valence partons keep the momentum of energetic parent projectiles. This property of the infinite momentum frame Schr$`\ddot{\mathrm{o}}`$dinger wave function is well known in the non-relativistic quantum mechanics, in the pQCD approximations, in the parton model approach. It is valid also in BBL where a strong PQCD interaction is important for the large intervals in rapidity only. But because of dominance in this case of the kind of two body kinematics such interaction does not change fraction of projectile momentum carried by the valence partons. At the same time the distribution of small $`x`$ bare particles is far from understood because the operator of the number of bare particles is not the integral of motion in QCD. So, the spectrum of leading hadrons, the probability of the gap in rapidity between projectile, and target fragmentation may depend on atomic number. The semiclassical approximation agrees well with the conventional picture of high energy hadron-hadron collisions. Fast partons in a nucleon with momentum $`p_N`$ are contracted to a pancake of transverse radius $`r_N`$ and a small longitudinal size $`z=r_Nm_N/p_N`$ while the small $`x`$ partons form a pancake of $`x_V/x`$ times larger longitudinal size ($`x_V0.2`$ is the average $`x`$ of the valence quarks). The strong interaction of a nucleon with a target occurs when the longitudinal size of the fast nucleon becomes comparable with nucleon radius. It is small $`x`$ partons of longitudinal size $`1fm`$ which eventually interact with the target. Thus valence quarks and gluons of the projectile keep practically the same longitudinal momentum during collision. It is the distribution of small x partons which is influenced by the nucleus medium. This phenomenon is the essence of the parton model, and of the Dokshitzer-Gribov-Lipatov-Altarelli-Parisi (DGLAP) evolution of hard processes and current models for the energy losses . In the next discussion, we will use this property of QCD.

A parton with sufficiently large $`x`$ belonging to a fast proton emits a virtual photon (hard gluon) long before the target and it interacts with the target, in a black regime releasing the fluctuation, e.g. a Drell-Yan pair. This leads to a qualitative change in the interactions for the partons with $`x_p,p_t`$ satisfying the condition that

$$x_A=4p_t^2/(x_ps_{NN}),$$
(1)
is in the black body kinematics for the resolution scale $`p_tp_t^{b.b.l.}(x_A)`$. Here, $`p_t^{b.b.l.}(x_A)`$ is the maximum $`p_t`$ for which the black body approximation is applicable. In the kinematics of LHC, $`Q^24(p_t^{b.b.l.})^2`$ can be estimated by using formulae derived in . At minimal $`x_A`$ $`p_t^{b.b.l.}`$ may reach 4 GeV/c. All the partons with such $`x_p`$ will obtain $`p_t(jet)p_t^{b.b.l.}(x_A)`$ leading to the multijet production. The blackbody regime will extend down in $`x_p`$ with increasing the incident energy. For LHC, for $`p_t3GeV/c`$, this regime may cover the whole region of $`x_p0.01`$ where of the order of ten partons reside. Hence, in this limit most of the final states will correspond to multiparton collisions. For $`p_t2GeV/c`$ the region extends to $`x_p0.001`$. At LHC fragmentation of such partons result in the generation of hadrons at central rapidities. The dynamics of conversion of the high $`p_t`$ partons with similar rapidities to hadrons is certainly a collective effect which deserves a special consideration.

The total inclusive cross sections in $`pA`$ scattering can be calculated within BBL using a similar method to that used in $`\gamma ^{}`$ \- nucleus scattering . In particular, the total cross section of the dimuon production is:

$$\frac{d\sigma (p+A\mu ^+\mu ^{}+X)}{dx_Adx_p}=\frac{4\pi \alpha ^2}{9}\frac{K(x_A,x_p,M^2)}{M^2}F_{2p}(x_p,Q^2)\frac{1}{6\pi ^2}M^22\pi R_A^2\mathrm{ln}(x_0/x_A).$$
(2)
Here the $`K`$-factor has the same meaning as in the leading twist case, but $`K1`$ should be smaller since it originates from the gluon emissions from the parton belonging to the proton only. $`x_0`$ is the maximal $`x`$ for which BBL is valid. For the smallest $`x_A`$ (forward kinematics) Eq.2 may be valid at LHC for $`M^260GeV^2`$. Obviously, Eq.2 prediction for the $`M^2`$, $`x_A`$ dependence of the cross section are distinctively different from the DGLAP limit. This difference would be less pronounced in the case of $`pp`$ scattering where scattering at large impact parameters may mask the BBL contribution. Another signal for the onset of the BBL is a broadening of the $`p_t`$ distribution of the dimuons as compared to the DGLAP expectations, see  for a calculation of this effect in the color glass condensate model. This effect is similar to the case of $`p_t`$ distribution of leading partons in the deep inelastic scattering .

As $`x_A`$ decreases further, the formulae for BBL will probably overestimate cross section because the interaction with heavy nucleus of sea quarks and gluons in the projectile proton would become black as well.

The onset of the BBL will lead also to gross changes in the hadron production: there is a much stronger drop with $`x_F`$ of the spectrum in the proton fragmentation region accompanied by a significant $`p_t`$ broadening of the spectrum. There is also the enhancement of hadron production, at smaller rapidities. Indeed, the individual partons in this limit are resolved at the virtuality scale corresponding to transverse momenta $`p_t^{b.b.l.}`$ without losing a finite fraction of the light cone momentum. Hence, the limit of independent parton fragmentation  will be realized with an important amplification since the leading partons will have much larger transverse momenta  than that expected from the the estimate of  based on the $`p_t`$ broadening observed at the fixed target energies. We want to emphasize here that the the approximation of zero fractional losses holds in the pQCD regime and appears to hold in the various models of the onset of the BBL, see e.g. . At RHIC this regime may hold for the very forward hadrons and could be checked  by studying the production of leading hadrons in the central p(2H)A collisions . The propagation of a proton interacting in the BBL results in the removal of all partons in the nucleus with the proton impact parameter and $`p_tp_t^{b.b.l.}`$. This leads to the formation of a $`1`$ fm radius tube in a perturbative phase. Thus, the essence of the BBL is the striping of nucleons off the soft QCD modes and releasing the gas of free quarks and gluons with large transverse momenta. Remember that the pQCD interactions between quarks and gluons within the same fragmentation region is small. Thus, we conclude that the effects of the BBL should be first manifested in the projectile fragmentation region and should gradually expand towards central rapidities. The detectors with a forward acceptance would be optimal for this physics.

Let us now discuss the nucleus fragmentation region in the central heavy ion collisions. It was discussed previously in the framework of the soft dynamics, see  and references therein, and a significant increase of the densities was found. Let us demonstrate now that even more striking effects are expected in the BBL regime. In this case (in difference from $`pA`$ collisions) soft modes will be stripped off in the whole volume of the nucleus. To calculate the properties of the quark - gluon state produced in the tube of radius $`R_A`$ in the target fragmentation region we first evaluate the main characteristics of the process in the rest frame of the fragmenting ion. The incoming nucleus is a pancake shape with the longitudinal length $`1fm`$ for the soft interactions and the longitudinal length $`r_N(m_N/p_N)(x_V/x)`$ for hard interactions. Hence, the nucleons at different locations along the collision axis are hit one after another. In the BBL no spectators are left. The hit partons are produced with the same $`x`$ that they had in the nucleus (since the energy losses are $`1/s`$). We also have average, $`p_tp_t^{b.b.l.}`$ and virtuality, $`\mu ^2(p_t^{b.b.l.})^2`$. The partons move in the direction of the projectile nucleus. Since they are emitted at finite angles their longitudinal velocity is smaller than the speed of light. Hence, they are left behind the projectile wave. However, since the emission angles are small the shock wave is formed compressing the produced system in the nucleus rest frame, see discussion below.

To estimate the produced densities, we first calculate the emission angles. Since the parton’s $`x`$ is not changed,

$$(E_ip_i^z)=xm_N,$$
(3)
leading to

$$p_z=(\mu ^2+p_t^2)/2xm_Nxm_N/2p_t^2/2xm_N.$$
(4)
Here in the last equation we have neglected $`\mu ^2`$ compared to $`p_t^2`$ which is legitimate in the leading order. Since $`\mu ^20`$, neglected terms would increase $`p_z`$ making the emission angles, $`\theta `$, even smaller. Thus in the BBL the angles $`\theta `$

$$\theta p_t/p_z2xm_N/p_t,$$
(5)
are small. So the length of the produced wave package is reduced from a naive value of 2 $`R_A`$ by a large factor

$$S=1/(1\mathrm{cos}\theta )p_t^2/2x^2m_N^2.$$
(6)
However, we must also take into account that the products of the nucleon fragmentation as a whole move forward in the target rest frame. The four-momentum of the system can be calculated from the condition that this parton system carries almost all of the light-cone momentum of the initial nucleon:

$$(\sqrt{M^2+p_z^2}p_z)/m_N=1,$$
(7)
where $`M^2=_ip_{i,t}^2/x_i`$ is the square of the invariant mass of the system. Hence, $`p_z=M^2/2m_N`$, and the Lorentz factor

$$\gamma =E/M=\sqrt{M^2+(M^2/2m_N)^2}/MM/2m_N.$$
(8)
Combining Eqs.6, 8 we find for the decrease of volume relative to the nucleus volume:

$$D=(2m_N/M)<p_t^2/2m_N^2x^2>.$$
(9)
First, to make simple numerical estimates we assume that all relevant partons carry equal light cone fractions 1/N. (The dispersion in $`x_i`$ leads for a further decrease of the volume and hence to a larger density of the produced system, see below.) In this case we obtain

$$D=M/m_N=Np_t/m_N.$$
(10)
Thus, we have demonstrated that the volume is indeed significantly smaller than the nuclear volume.

The next step is to estimate the energy per unit volume, $`R_E`$. It is convenient to present it in units the energy density of nuclear matter which equals 0.16 GeV/fm3. The lower limit on $`R_E`$ is obtained by neglecting the dispersion in $`x_i`$ and taking $`x_i=1/N`$,

$$R_E=DNp_t/m_N=N^2p_t^2/m_N^2.$$
(11)
At LHC for $`x0.01`$ the BBL extends up to $`p_t=2÷3`$ GeV/c, and the number of partons for such x and virtualities is $`8÷10`$. This leads to

$$R_E>250.$$
(12)
If we take into account the dispersion in $`x_i`$ we find:

$$R_E=\underset{i}{}p_{it}^2/m_N^2x_i^2.$$
(13)
Though in the first approximation the dispersion can be neglected for valence quarks and probably for the gluons separately, the quarks carry an average $`x`$ that is a factor of two larger than gluons. This leads to a further increase in the energy density. Taking $`N_q=3,x_q=1/6,N_g=6,x_g=1/12`$, we find a rather modest increase of $`R_E`$ (a factor of 4/3) for the same $`N=9`$, corresponding to the energy densities $`50GeV/fm^3`$. (If we assume proximity of BBL at RHIC for the fragmentation region for $`p_t1GeV/c`$, we find quark-gluon energy densities $`10GeV/fm^3`$.) More significantly, the difference in average x’s of quarks and gluons leads to a different direction of the flow of the quarks and gluons in the c.m. frame of the produced system. For the above numerical example, $`k_3/k_t0.6`$ for quarks and $`0.3`$ for gluons. Obviously, this pattern will enhance the interactions of quarks and gluons at the next stage of the interactions, making equilibration more likely.

Let us briefly discuss these interactions and the possible experimental signals. It follows from Eqs.9 \- 13 that at LHC in the first stage of collisions a strongly compressed hot quark-gluon state of the ellipsoidal shape is formed with the small principal axis of $`1fm`$ and density $`\rho 25`$ partons per $`fm^3`$. At the higher rapidity end, this ellipsoid boarders essentially parton free space; on the end close to central rapidities, it boarders a hot $`q\overline{q}g`$ state. The scattering length for parton $`i`$ can be estimated as $`l_i=1/(_jN_j\sigma _{ij})`$, corresponding to the scattering length being smaller than 1 fm for $`\sigma 0.5mb`$. To estimate the interaction cross section, we note that the average invariant energy $`s2p_t^28GeV^2`$. The initial stage of reinteractions certainly is a highly non-equilibrium process. Nevertheless to do a perturbative estimate we can conservatively introduce a cutoff on the momentum transfer $`p\frac{\pi }{2}\rho ^{1/3}`$, leading to the leading order estimate for the gluon - gluon cross section $`1mb`$. Nonperturbative effects, which remain strong in the gluon sector up to $`\sqrt{s}3`$ GeV, are likely to increase these interactions further. Consequently, we expect partons to rescatter strongly at the second stage, though much more detailed modeling is required to find out whether the system may reach thermal equilibrium. The large angle rescatterings of partons will lead to production of partons at higher rapidities and re-population of the cool region. In particular, two gluons have the right energies to produce near threshold $`c\overline{c}`$ pairs and in particular $`\chi _c`$-mesons with rather small transverse momenta and $`x_F(c\overline{c})2x_g0.1`$. Also leading photons can be produced in the $`qg\gamma q`$ subprocesses, though in difference from the central region the $`q\overline{q}\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ production will be suppressed due to the lack of antiquarks. Another high density effect is production of leading nucleons via recombination of quarks with subsequent escape to the cool region. Hence we expect a rather paradoxical situation that the production of leading hadrons in $`AA`$ collisions will be stronger than in the central pA collisions.

To summarize, we have demonstrated that the onset of the black body regime in the interactions in the target fragmentation region which is likely at LHC for a large range of virtualities, will lead to the formation of a new superdense initial state in the nuclei fragmentation region with densities exceeding nuclear densities at least by a factor of 300. Our reasoning is however insufficient to demonstrate whether thermalization processes will be strong enough for the system to reach equilibrium necessary for formation of metastable states - new QCD phases suggested in a number of recent papers, see the review in .

Further studies of the experimental manifestations of the formation of high density quark-gluon states are needed as well as an investigation of hard processes in the central proton-nucleus collisions which will allow a determination of whether this new state of valence quark-gluon matter can be formed at RHIC energies. Similar effects, like correlation of high $`p_t`$ hadron production in the fragmentation regions, should be present in the central $`pp`$ collisions at LHC (where jet production at central rapidities is used as a trigger of the centrality ).

We thank D.Kharzeev, A.Mueller, E.Shuryak, D.Son, R.Venugopalan for useful discussions and GIF and DOE for support.