text:
# New X-ray quasars behind the Small Magellanic CloudBased on observations collected at the Magellan Baade 6.5-m telescope.

## 1 Introduction

Recent developments in the observations of the Magellanic Clouds — optical monitoring campaigns (such as OGLE and MACHO), which provide astrometry and variability information for a large number of objects, and the observations with the Chandra X-ray Observatory, which provide excellent positional accuracy in X-rays — opened previously unavailable windows for searches for quasars behind the Clouds. As a result, in recent months there was a large increase in the number of known quasars near and behind the LMC and SMC (Geha et al. 2003; Dobrzycki et al. 2002, 2003).

In Dobrzycki et al. (2002) we presented an approach to searches for such quasars based on matching of the serendipitous X-ray sources found by Chandra with the optical information from the OGLE-II database (Udalski et al. 1998; Żebruń et al. 2001). Excellent source positions from Chandra match very well with the OGLE data, which typically have very good seeing and low source confusion. The method is perfectly suited for searches in the densest parts of the Clouds, as it is very well shown by the quasars behind the LMC. While $``$50 quasars are now known in the general direction of the LMC, only a handful of them are behind the dense parts of the LMC bar, and three of those are Chandra sources.

The downside of the method is the fact that Chandra performs pointed observations only and therefore provides sparse sky coverage. For example, at present there are only five Chandra targets that coincide with the OGLE fields in the LMC.

In this paper, we applied our method to the quasar search behind the Small Magellanic Cloud. There are two Chandra targets in the SMC that coincide with the OGLE fields, and both are very interesting. The first is NGC 346, which was observed for 100 ks. The second is a Chandra calibration source, SNR 1E 0102.2–7219, which has so far been observed 83 times. However, the individual observations of the calibration source placed it at various off-axis angles on various ACIS CCD chips, making the X-ray data analysis complicated.

Quasars behind nearby galaxies, such as the Clouds, are of great astrophysical interest. First, they can provide a fixed reference frame for the proper motion studies. Second, they can provide background sources for the analysis of absorption in the foreground galaxy. Last, but certainly not least, a hunt for X-ray quasars behind the Magellanic Clouds has a potential for a very interesting result. Under favorable conditions (X-ray bright and highly variable quasar) the scattering of X-rays on the dust particles in the LMC or SMC could lead to a direct, geometrical measurement of the distance to the galaxy (for discussion of the concepts involved see, e.g., Trümper & Schönfelder 1973; Paczyński 1991; Klose 1994; Predehl et al. 2000; and references therein).

## 2 Candidate selection

From the Chandra archive we retrieved all imaging (i.e. with no grating inserted) observations which overlapped the OGLE fields. We reduced and analyzed the X-ray data using tools available in the CIAO 2.3 and SHERPA software packages.111http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/ We applied newest gain and aspect corrections to the event lists. We cleaned the electronic streaks in ACIS-S4 chip using DESTREAK. We searched the data for serendipitous point sources using both WAVDETECT and CELLDETECT source detection tools. Searching for sources was straightforward in the case of the observation of NGC 346. For 1E 0102.2–7219 it was more complicated. We concentrated on those observations for which the aim point and large part of the field of view overlapped the OGLE fields. We ran detection tools on all individual observations, but also, whenever it was practical (i.e. when aim points were close enough — typically within 2 arcmin — so that the point spread function size was not dramatically varying from observation to observation) we merged the individual observations in an attempt to improve the photon statistics, and ran detection tools on the merged data sets. However, merging was possible in only a handful of cases. We combined the outputs of all detect runs. As expected, this process led to several spurious sources and duplicate detections. We examined the resulting list of candidates and removed the obvious artifacts and reconciled multiple detections.

Chandra X-ray positions are typically accurate to better than 1 arcsec.222http://cxc.harvard.edu/cal/ASPECT/celmon/; see also Garmire et al. (2000). For each X-ray source, we identified both the closest OGLE object and the closest OGLE variable. We used a conservative threshold of 5 arcsec for the position match. The resulting list contained 80 candidates in both fields.

To aid quasar candidate selection, whenever the net number of source X-ray photons allowed it, we performed a quick spectral analysis, identifying sources with power-law intrinsic spectra and/or higher than typical absorption, which are primary candidates for being QSOs. However, this was only used for prioritizing the follow-up observations and we did not exclude any objects based on this characteristics.

## 3 Observations and identifications

The optical follow-up spectra were obtained on 2002 September 16-18 with the Magellan Baade 6.5-meter telescope. We used the LDSS-2 imaging spectrograph, with the 1.03 arcsec slit and the 300 l/mm grism, yielding a nominal resolution of 13.3 Å. Exposure times ranged from 120 to 600 seconds. All observations were carried out with the slit oriented in the east-west direction. Additionally, we observed two spectrophotometric standards, LTT 1788 and LTT 7379 (Hamuy et al. 1992). Following each observation, a He-Ne arc lamp spectrum was acquired for wavelength calibration purposes. Spectra were reduced in the standard way using IRAF.

We identified five quasars among 39 observed candidates; we show their optical spectra in Figure 1. We will discuss the properties of the individual objects in detail in the following section. We note that only one of the new quasars, QSO J005719.84–722533.5, was identified by OGLE as a variable. This is a clear indication that the variability- and X-ray-based quasar selections should be considered as complementing one another.

The efficiency of the method is similar to the one seen in the LMC (Dobrzycki et al. 2002). The other objects identified in the follow-up observations were primarily early type stars and X-ray binaries. We will present the analysis of those objects in a forthcoming paper.

On Figure 2 we show the locations of the new X-ray quasars, and the positions of the variability-selected quasars from Geha et al. (2003) and Dobrzycki et al. (2003). We also show the locations of quasars known prior to 2002. As it can be clearly seen, the methods proposed in the recent papers made a significant difference in both the coverage and the number of known objects. Until mid-2002, there were no known QSOs behind the dense parts of the SMC. Variability-based techniques revealed twelve such quasars. This is still a rather low number, and with the identification of the X-ray QSOs, the number of known quasars behind the dense parts of the SMC has risen by more than 40%.

## 4 Object properties

### 4.1 QSO J005719.84–722533.5

This is a relatively bright ($`I=17.5`$) quasar at $`z_{\mathrm{em}}=0.15`$. It is seen serendipitously at a large (17 arcmin) off-axis angle in a 100 ks Chandra/ACIS observation (ObsID 1881) of NGC 346 done on 2001 May 15. As luck would have it, the quasar happened to fall on the backside-illuminated CCD chip ACIS-S3, which has better efficiency at low energies than the frontside-illuminated chips. It is the brightest X-ray quasar from the objects presented here. The event pileup is not a problem due to the large off-axis angle.

Even though the source is very far off-axis in the Chandra observation, where the point spread function is very large, the X-ray and OGLE positions agree remarkably well, to better than 1 arcsec. The quasar lies in the vicinity of a known, but previously unclassified X-ray source 2E 0055.6-7241 (see Table 1).

QSO J005719.84–722533.5 is the only object among the quasars presented here which is classified in Żebruń et al. (2001) as variable. Its $`I`$ light curve (Figure 3) clearly shows slow irregular variability with an amplitude of $``$0.2 mag. However, this object failed two initial criteria for inclusion in the Eyer (2002) variability-based analysis: it did not have $`B`$ photometry available and it was too red in the $`VI`$ color. Therefore, it was not considered by Eyer to be a quasar candidate.

The X-ray observation yielded $``$2800 source photons with $`E0.3`$ keV, sufficient to establish basic X-ray properties of the quasar. We excluded photons with energies below 0.3 keV since there are large calibration uncertainties for soft X-rays. We extracted source and background spectra using DMEXTRACT. Figure 4 shows the X-ray spectrum. Significant absorption in low energies is clearly visible.

We performed spectral fits with SHERPA. We fitted the spectrum assuming the intrinsic quasar spectrum to be a power law and fixed Galactic absorption towards the SMC. The Milky Way absorbing column alone is not sufficient to explain the dip in the spectrum in the low energies, and additional source of absorption is needed.

In Table 1 we list fit results for two scenarios. First, we attributed the additional absorption to the SMC material alone (in all fits presented in this paper, we assumed the SMC metallicity to be 20% solar; Russell & Dopita 1990, 1992). In Table 1 we also list, for comparison, the SMC hydrogen column density from the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) 21 cm measurements by Stanimirović et al. (1999). The fit was satisfactory in this scenario, but one can see that the SMC column density necessary to account for the X-ray absorption is ca. two times higher than the ATCA measurement. In principle, this is not an irreconcilable difference. The discrepancy can be reasonably explained by the fact that the ATCA measurements are effectively averaged over a spatial resolution element of 98 arcsec ($``$30 pc at the SMC), while the X-ray absorption is probing a specific line of sight. It is well known that the distribution of hydrogen in the SMC is very inhomogeneous (Staveley-Smith et al. 1997; Stanimirović et al. 1999), and the difference between the ATCA and X-ray fit values for the absorbing column is not dramatically large. Further uncertainly comes from the fact that it is possible that the assumed SMC metallicity may not apply to this specific line of sight, which may affect the estimate of the X-ray absorbing column. Thus it is in principle possible that the absorption is in fact caused only by the material in the SMC.

In the second scenario, we fixed the SMC absorbing column at the ATCA value and attributed the additional absorption to the material at quasar redshift, assumed to have solar abundances. This scenario gave a marginally better fit than the first case. The required quasar intrinsic absorption, $`N_{\mathrm{H},\mathrm{Q}}=3.5\times 10^{22}`$ cm2, is in the moderate-to-high range, but well within the range seen among AGN (see, e.g., Malizia et al. 1997; Risaliti, Elvis, & Nicastro 2002).

Both scenarios give virtually identical intrinsic spectral properties for the quasar. The spectrum appears to be rather typical (e.g. Mushotzky, Done, & Pounds 1993; Fiore et al. 1998; Reeves & Turner 2000). Figure 4 shows the X-ray spectrum and the model fits to the second scenario; the difference between the fits in both scenarios is too small to be visible on the plot.

We also considered a third scenario, in which both the SMC and redshifted absorption column densities were allowed to vary, but the resulting improvement in the fit did not justify the additional degree of freedom. We need to add that it is, of course, possible that neither scenario is entirely correct and that there are additional absorbers on the line of sight to the quasar, possibly a strong associated absorber or an intervening damped Ly-$`\alpha `$ system (see, e.g., Bechtold et al. 2001). This possibility cannot be explored with the available data.

The X-ray spectral fits were very good, but we note that there are some features seen in the fit residuals, suggesting that the spectrum may be more complex. In particular, we note that there is a small hump near $`E=5.6`$ keV, which is $``$6.4 keV in the quasar rest frame, i.e. just where one would expect to see the iron K$`\alpha `$ line. We note, however, that adding a Gaussian line to the modeled spectrum did not improve the fit.

It is well established that quasars are often variable in X-rays on short timescales (e.g. Mushotzky, Done, & Pounds 1993; Fabian et al. 2002). QSO J005719.84–722533.5 is no exception; it is variable at very high confidence level. We show its X-ray light curve in Figure 5 (we note that in this plot we included events with $`E<0.3`$ keV, since low energy calibration uncertainties are not relevant to this issue). During the ca. 28 hours in which the quasar was continuously observed, its ACIS-S3 count rate varied by a factor of two; we note that the background light curve shows no signs of variability during the observation. The characteristic timescale for X-ray variability is $``$2.5 hours, again well within the typical range for quasars.

### 4.2 Quasars in the vicinity of SNR 1E 0102.2–7219.

As mentioned above, four of the quasars lie in the vicinity of the Chandra calibration source, SNR 1E 0102.2–7219. This object has been repeatedly observed every few months during the course of the mission, giving a unique opportunity to study variability of the quasars in the timescales of the order of months (see, e.g., Nandra et al. 1997; Bauer et al. 2002; Maoz et al. 2002; Uttley et al. 2003).

Neither of the quasars was classified by OGLE as variable and were therefore not considered in the variability-based search for quasar candidates of Eyer (2002). However, post factum analysis of the OGLE light curves (Figure 6; the data were kindly provided to us by A. Udalski) qualitatively suggests that at least some of them are in fact variable.

Since in various Chandra observations 1E 0102.2–7219 was placed on various ACIS chips at various off-axis angles, it was a matter of coincidence whether any of the quasars happened to be in the field of view in any single observation, and which ACIS CCD chip it happened to be observed with. As a result, the X-ray data for any of the objects is a mix of data taken at various off-axis angles at various readout chips and even various nodes within one chip. Also, the sources were usually observed far off-axis, where the Chandra’s PSF is large, which forced us to use large source regions, and we typically have a substantial number of background events in the source regions. In addition to that, the selection of background regions is severely constrained, in both spatial and temporal domains. The background counts had to be taken from regions with comparable responses to the source regions, excluding regions containing all known sources, and they had to be observation-specific. All those effects result in rather large uncertainties for derived source parameters, especially when temporal properties of the sources are analyzed.

For all quasars, we followed a similar procedure: we extracted data from source and background regions in all observations in which the quasar was in the field of view. We performed the spectral analysis using SHERPA, simultaneously fitting a single model to all datasets. Again, we excluded photons with energies below 0.3 keV, and we fitted the spectrum assuming the intrinsic quasar spectrum to be a power law, with fixed Galactic absorption and additional absorption from the SMC. In one case we also investigated the possibility that the absorbing material could be associated with the quasar.

We note that the errors quoted in Table 1 are formal uncertainties as determined from the spectral fits. However, in some cases there may be hard to quantify, systematic effects. In particular, the estimates of the absorbing column density may be affected by the fact that many of the Chandra observations of our quasars were done with the frontside-illuminated ACIS CCD chips, which have low quantum efficiency in the energy range where absorption is primarily felt, below $``$1 keV.

We analyzed the long-timescale variability of the quasars by grouping the observations that occurred within few days from one another and performing individual spectral fits on those groups. The group selection was straightforward, since the calibration observations were always done in batches that were separated by several months. Since the number of events in such groups was often small, we used a simplified procedure for spectral fits. We froze the spectral slope and absorbing column and allowed only the spectrum normalization amplitude to vary.

Notes about the individual objects follow.

#### 4.2.1 QSO J010131.45–720702.6

This is a $`I=18.5`$ quasar at $`z_{\mathrm{em}}=0.64`$. Even though it has the noisiest optical spectrum of all objects presented here, its quasar nature seems certain. The spectrum contains two broad features, near 4580 and 7970 Å, identified as Mg II and H$`\beta `$.

There are no previously known X-ray sources in the vicinity of this object.

This object was in the Chandra/ACIS field of view in 27 observations. It is, however, faint in X-rays. Even though the combined exposure time for this object was 211.5 ksec, it yielded only 212 net photons with energies above 0.3 keV. This enabled only very limited X-ray spectral analysis.

We fixed the X-ray spectral slope photon power law index to the canonical value of 1.7 and the SMC absorption to the Stanimirović et al. (1999) value, $`4.09\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2, and we only allowed the spectrum normalization to vary. We list the results in Table 1.

We would like to note that the observed spectrum contains relatively few soft photons, and that we get much better fit if we set the absorption column to values much higher than the value quoted above. It is, of course, possible that the intrinsic X-ray spectrum is harder than the assumed $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.7`$, which would allow for lower absorbing column. However, even for the photon index as low as 1.2 we get the best fit for the column density $``$50% higher than the ATCA value. This may indicate that there are other sources of absorption on the line of sight to the quasar.

Not surprisingly, individual data points on the X-ray light curve have large uncertainties (see Figure 7), driven by low signal-to-noise ratio in individual observations. The quasar is clearly too faint to draw any far reaching conclusions, but we can qualitatively say that it shows no indication of variability.

#### 4.2.2 QSO J010522.51–715649.7

This is a $`z_{\mathrm{em}}=1.64`$ quasar with $`I=18.3`$. No X-ray sources were previously known in its vicinity. It was observed by Chandra 36 times for the total of 278 ks, yielding 1166 source photons with $`E0.3`$ keV.

In this particular case the X-ray dataset is not well suited for determination of the absorbing column, since vast majority (32 out of 36) of Chandra observations of this quasar were done with the frontside-illuminated ACIS CCD chips. We thus fixed the SMC absorbing column at the value from Stanimirović et al. (1999) and only allowed the power law index and normalization to vary. The results of the X-ray spectral analysis are shown in Table 1. While still within the typical range, this quasar shows a somewhat steep X-ray spectrum.

QSO J010522.51–715649.7 has the best long baseline time coverage of all the quasars in our sample. While its X-ray light curve (Fig. 7) hints at variability in the 1-1.5 year timescales, with the amplitude variation of 30-40%, we note that this result is not highly significant.

#### 4.2.3 QSO J010656.98–722448.1

This $`z_{\mathrm{em}}=0.51`$ quasar is the second brightest in X-rays of the quasars presented in this paper. It is however faint in the optical/near IR range ($`I=19.2`$). The quasar entered the Chandra/ACIS field of view in just ten observations, in four epochs, with the combined exposure time of $``$75 ksec. The observations yielded 1160 source photons with $`E0.3`$ keV.

QSO J010656.98–722448.1 was observed in X-rays with ROSAT (Tab. 1), but was not identified as a quasar.

The quasar has very typical X-ray properties. The SMC absorbing column in the fit is in good agreement with the ATCA measurement; the small discrepancy can be reasonably explained by the clumpiness of hydrogen content in the SMC. We also attempted a fit with the SMC column density fixed at the ATCA value allowing for intrinsic absorption at the quasar. Since the result from the SMC-only scenario is close to the ATCA value to begin with, the resulting quasar absorption is — not surprisingly — only weakly constrained.

Since the object has been observed in X-rays in only four epochs, there is limited variability information available, even though the quasar is relatively bright in X-rays and individual measurements are reliable. We note that the light curve (Fig. 7) is statistically consistent with a constant flux.

#### 4.2.4 QSO J010717.66–722418.3

This is the quasar with highest redshift, $`z_{\mathrm{em}}=1.81`$, but it is faint in both the optical range ($`I=19.3`$) and in X-rays. It was observed by Chandra only seven times, in only three epochs, with the combined exposure of $``$52 ksec. The total yield was 142 source photons with energies higher than 0.3 keV, allowing for only very limited spectral analysis. We fixed the spectral slope at 1.7 and the SMC absorption at the ATCA value, $`3.55\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2, and only allowed the spectrum normalization to vary. The result is listed in Table 1. For completeness, we show the X-ray light curve of the quasar in Fig. 7. The quasar is clearly too faint for any meaningful variability analysis; we only note that the data are consistent with no variability.

The position of the quasar agrees very well with the position of a weak, unclassified source observed in X-rays with ROSAT (Haberl et al. 2000).

## 5 Discussion

We present five X-ray-selected quasars behind the dense parts of the Small Magellanic Cloud, increasing the number of known such quasars by $``$40%. Their positions make them excellent reference points for the proper motion studies. The efficiency of our quasar detection method in the SMC is comparable to the efficiency seen earlier in the LMC (Dobrzycki et al. 2002).

Only one of the five quasars was classified by OGLE as a variable object. This is a clear confirmation of the fact that X-ray-based quasar searches are complimentary to variability-based searches (Eyer 2002; Dobrzycki et al. 2003; Geha et al. 2003).

The quasars presented here show typical X-ray properties. It was feasible to analyze X-ray absorption in only two of the available lines of sight (of the other objects, two were too faint in X-rays and one had little usable data below 1 keV). In one case, QSO J005719.84–722533.5, there appears to be some evidence that the absorbing column in the SMC may not be enough to explain the observed dip in the spectrum at low energies and that there is additional source of absorption, possibly associated with the quasar. In the second case, QSO J010656.98–722448.1, SMC absorbing column alone seems to satisfactory explain the observed absorption.

One of the five quasars — QSO J005719.84–722533.5 — is particularly interesting. At $`I=17.5`$ it is sufficiently bright in the optical/near IR range to allow future spectroscopy with the Cosmic Origin Spectrograph aboard the Hubble Space Telescope. It is also relatively bright in X-rays and it could be the quasar that would provide direct determination of the distance to the SMC. Ideally, such a quasar would show a quick, in the timescale of days, rise in X-ray flux. That would enable measurement of the growth of the angular size of the X-ray halo scattered on the dust in the SMC and a geometrical determination of the distance to the Cloud. Such rapid rises in X-ray brightness are not unheard of (see, e.g., Maoz et al. 2002; Uttley et al. 2003). Currently, we only have a direct evidence of short-timescale variability in X-rays for this quasar. However, there are indications that at least in some cases long-timescale variations in X-rays and in the optical range do correlate (Peterson et al. 2000; Uttley et al. 2003; but see also Maoz et al. 2002). This quasar is optically variable with the characteristic timescale of several days (Figure 3), and it is continuously monitored by the OGLE project. It is thus viable to set up X-ray monitoring based on the behavior of the optical brightness of the quasar.

We thank B. Draine, L. Eyer, B. Paczyński, and A. Siemiginowska for helpful discussions, A. Udalski for providing us with unpublished data, and the referee for very helpful comments. This research has made use of the Chandra Data Archive (CDA), which is the part of the Chandra X-Ray Observatory Science Center (CXC), operated for NASA by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED), operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with NASA, and of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France. AD acknowledges support from NASA Contract No. NAS8-39073 (CXC). LMM was supported by the Hubble Fellowship grant HF-01153.01-A from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555.


format: text

text:
# Nonextensive statistical mechanics and economics

## Acknowledgments

One of us (CT) is very pleased to dedicate his invited talk to his old friend Idahlia Stanley. Two of us (CT and LB) thank Prof. H.E. Stanley and the organizers for their invitation to participate at the Bali meeting. This work has been partially supported by PRONEX/MCT, CNPq, and FAPERJ (Brazilian agencies).

Captions for figures

Figure 1: Implied volatilities as a function of the strike price for call options on JY currency futures, traded on May 16 2002, with 147 days left to expiration. In this example the current price of a contract on Japanese futures is $ 79, and the risk-free rate of return is 5.5 %. Circles correspond to volatilities implied by the market, whereas triangles correspond to volatilities implied by our model with $`q=1.4`$ and $`\sigma =10.2\%`$. The dotted line is a guide to the eye.

Figure 2: Empirical distributions (points) and q-Gaussians (solid lines) for normalized returns of the 10 top-volume stocks in the NYSE in 2001. The dotted line is the Gaussian distribution. The 2- and 3-min curves are moved vertically for display purposes.

Figure 3: Same as Fig. 2, but for the NASDAQ.

Figure 4: Empirical distributions (points) and q-exponential-like fits (solid lines) for normalized volumes of the 10 top-volume stocks in the NYSE in 2001.

Figure 5: Same as Fig. 4, but for the NASDAQ.

Figure 6: Lévy distributions $`L_\gamma (x)\frac{1}{2\pi }{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}dk\mathrm{cos}kx\mathrm{e}^{\alpha |k|^\gamma }`$, with $`0<\gamma <2`$ and $`\alpha >0`$ (black curves), and $`q`$-Gaussians $`P_q(x)[1(1q)\beta x^2]^{1/(1q)}/Z_q`$, with $`5/3<q<3`$, $`\beta >0`$ and $`Z_q=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{\beta (q1)}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3q}{2(q1)})/\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{q1})`$ (red curves). Parameters $`(q,\gamma )`$ are related through $`q=\frac{\gamma +3}{\gamma +1}`$ so that the tails of both distributions decay with the same power-law exponent. Without loss of generality, we have taken $`\beta =1`$ which corresponds to a simple rescaling; $`\alpha `$ was chosen such that $`P_q(0)=L_\gamma (0)`$.


text:
# Narrowing of the Balance Function with Centrality in Au+Au Collisions at √𝑠_{𝑁𝑁} = 130 GeV

## Abstract

The balance function is a new observable based on the principle that charge is locally conserved when particles are pair produced. Balance functions have been measured for charged particle pairs and identified charged pion pairs in Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}`$ = 130 GeV at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider using STAR. Balance functions for peripheral collisions have widths consistent with model predictions based on a superposition of nucleon-nucleon scattering. Widths in central collisions are smaller, consistent with trends predicted by models incorporating late hadronization.

Collisions of Au nuclei at ultra-relativistic energies can produce large energy densities and high temperatures. At these densities and temperatures, the produced matter may be best portrayed by partonic (quark/gluon) degrees of freedom as opposed to those characterizing a hot hadronic phase. This partonic phase would necessarily be followed by a transition to normal hadronic particles, which are ultimately measured QGP . Numerous probes of the high density medium have been proposed signatures , including observables related to fluctuations and correlations charge\_fluct ; charge\_fluct2 ; fluct3 ; fluct4 ; fluct5 .

One such observable, the balance function, is sensitive to whether the transition to a hadronic phase was delayed, as expected if the quark-gluon phase were to persist for a substantial time balance\_paper . The authors of Ref. balance\_paper  formulate the balance function as follows in this paragraph. As a result of local charge conservation, when particles and their anti-particles are pair produced, they are correlated initially in coordinate space. If hadronization occurs early, the members of a charge/anti-charge pair would be expected to separate in rapidity due to expansion and re-scattering in the strongly interacting medium. Alternatively, delayed hadronization would lead to a stronger correlation in rapidity between the particles of charge/anti-charge pairs in the final state. Measuring this correlation involves subtracting uncorrelated charge/anti-charge pairs on an event-by-event basis. The remaining charge/anti-charge particle pairs are examined to determine the correlation as a function of the relative rapidity, $`\mathrm{\Delta }y`$, between the members of the pairs. The balance function is expected to be narrower for a scenario with delayed hadronization, and is therefore sensitive to the conjecture that a quark-gluon plasma may be produced.

The balance function is a new observable for heavy ion collisions. This function is similar in form to the observable used in Drijard  to study the associated charged density balance from both p+p and $`e^++e^{}`$ collisions Aihara .

In this analysis the balance function is used to examine the pseudorapidity correlation of non-identified charged particles and the rapidity correlation of identified charged pions. The balance function is calculated as:

$`B={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_+\mathrm{\Delta }_{++}}{N_+}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_+\mathrm{\Delta }_{}}{N_{}}}\right\}`$ (1)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ in the case of identified charged pion pairs denotes the number of identified charged pion pairs in a given rapidity range $`\mathrm{\Delta }y=|y(\pi ^+)y(\pi ^{})|`$, similarly for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{++}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$. In the case of non-identified charged particle pairs, pseudorapidity ($`\eta `$) is used. The terms $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{++}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ are calculated using pairs from a given event and the resulting distributions are summed over all events. Specifically, the distribution $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ is calculated by taking in turn each positive particle in an event and incrementing a histogram in $`\mathrm{\Delta }y`$ ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta `$) with respect to all the negative particles in that event. The distribution $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ is then summed over all events. A similar procedure is followed for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{++}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$. $`N_{+()}`$ is the number of positive(negative) pions or non-identified charged particles summed over all events. The balance function is calculated for all charged pion or charged particle pairs for a given centrality bin. The balance function, in addition to being proportional to opposite charge correlations, is also proportional to the acceptance for each $`\mathrm{\Delta }y`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta `$ bin. Thus the measured balance functions presented in this paper are narrower than model calculations assuming no detector acceptance effects.

The data used in this analysis were measured using the Solenoidal Tracker at RHIC (STAR) detector for Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}`$ = 130 GeV. The main detector used for this analysis was the Time Projection Chamber (TPC) STARcdr  located in a solenoidal magnetic field of 0.25 T TPCref . The TPC provided tracking information for charged particles having transverse momentum $`p_t>`$ 100 MeV/c and $`|\eta |<1.3`$ with complete azimuthal acceptance. Minimum bias events were defined by the coincidence of two Zero Degree Calorimeters (ZDCs) ZDC  located $`\pm `$ 18 m from the center of the interaction region. Central collisions were defined using both the ZDCs and the Central Trigger Barrel (CTB), an array of scintillator slats surrounding the outside of the TPC. A coincidence in the ZDCs accompanied by a signal in the CTB above a threshold empirically determined to correspond to approximately the 15% most central events was used to define the central collision trigger. Centrality was determined using the charged particle multiplicity distributions. Central collisions correspond to 0 \- 10%, mid-central 10 - 40%, mid-peripheral 40 - 70%, and peripheral 70 - 96% of the integrated total. Only events with five or more tracks in the TPC were used in this analysis.

For this analysis 150,777 minimum bias and 111,142 centrally triggered events were used. Only charged particle tracks having more than 15 space points along the trajectory were accepted. In addition the reconstructed trajectory was required to point within 1 cm of the primary vertex. To suppress double counting due to track splitting, the ratio of reconstructed space points to possible space points along the track was required to be greater than 0.52. Tracks were further required to have a momentum 0.1 $`<p<`$ 2 GeV/c. Simulations of TPC performance indicate the tracking efficiency for tracks within this acceptance and momentum range is 85-90% calderon .

Charged pion identification was accomplished by selecting particles within 2 standard deviations of the expected $`dE/dx`$ for a given momentum, which provided pion identification for momenta less than 0.7 GeV/c. Kaon contamination of the pions is negligible at low momentum and is estimated to be 5% at 0.7 GeV/c. Electrons were removed by requiring the measured $`dE/dx`$ to be more than 2 standard deviations away from the expected value for an electron of the measured momentum. An estimated 1% of the electron contamination remains in the pion sample after these cuts are made. The lowest $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta `$ ($`\mathrm{\Delta }y`$) bin, which was estimated to contain 90% of the remaining electron contamination, was not used in the calculation of the width of the balance function.

Theoretical simulations of the balance function for Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}`$ = 130 GeV were carried out using version 1.36 of HIJING hijing  with the default settings for impact parameters ranging from 0 to 15 fm. A realistic distribution was used for event vertices within the interaction region. HIJING events were processed using GEANT geant  and the TPC track reconstruction software. The same cuts were applied to the HIJING events that were applied to the data. None of the features of the balance functions computed from the filtered simulations show any dependence on centrality marguerite . Thus the STAR results are compared to HIJING integrated over centrality.

Figure 1a shows the balance function (Eq. 1) measured for charged particles for the central and peripheral Au+Au collision samples. The errors shown are statistical. The systematic error in the balance function is estimated to be 5% due to systematic variations in tracking efficiency, the measurement of pseudorapidity, and contamination of electrons. The comparable balance function derived for HIJING events simulated in the STAR detector using GEANT is shown in Figure 1b.

The area under the balance function is constrained by global charge conservation and STAR’s acceptance Pratt . Physical effects over and above this constraint can be discerned by comparison to a reference data set that preserves global charge conservation, while removing effects of dynamical particle correlations. A relevant reference is provided in Figure 1b for central and peripheral collision samples independently by calculating the balance function after the pseudorapidities of all charged particles within each measured event have been randomly shuffled. Dynamical correlations in Au+Au are reflected in the deviation of the results in Figure 1a from the shuffled pseudorapidity results in Figure 1b. In addition Figure 1a also shows the balance functions generated from conventional mixed-event samples constructed marguerite  by choosing random particles from different measured events with similar event vertex positions and centralities. The balance function for mixed events integrates to zero because global charge conservation has been removed. The fact that the balance function is zero for all $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta `$ for all centralities demonstrates that STAR’s acceptance in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta `$ is smooth. For both the mixed events and shuffled pseudorapidity samples, the measured inclusive pseudorapidity distributions are preserved.

Within this area constraint, the variation of the balance function with centrality can be effectively characterized by the single parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta `$, the mean pseudorapidity difference weighted by the balance function (excluding the lowest bin in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta `$ to reduce the background correlation from electron contamination). We refer to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta `$ below as the “width” of the balance function. The measured widths for four centrality classes are shown in Figure 2 as a function of the impact parameter fraction $`b/b_{max}`$, which is determined using a simple geometrical picture fireball  to relate impact parameter to fractions of the total cross section. In Figure 2, the width of the balance function measured for central collisions is significantly smaller than that for peripheral collisions. The results for the mid-peripheral and mid-central centrality classes decrease smoothly and monotonically from the peripheral collision value. Figure 2 indicates that while the width observed in peripheral collisions is consistent with the HIJING prediction, the balance function for central collisions is significantly narrower, suggesting a variation in the underlying particle production dynamics between these two classes of events. In Figure 2 the widths from the shuffled pseudorapidity events are also shown. These widths show little centrality dependence and are wider than those of the data or HIJING. The widths from shuffled pseudorapidity events represent the maximum possible width of a balance function measured with the STAR detector.

The results for identified charged pion pairs are similar to those for non-identified charged particles as indicated in Figure 3. The overall shape of the balance function is similar to that in Figure 1. However, the data for pions have a dip near $`\mathrm{\Delta }y=0`$ (Figure 3a). As shown in reference Pratt , this dip can be understood as the combined effect of Bose-Einstein correlations and Coulomb interactions between charged pions. HIJING does not account for these effects, and the balance function predicted in Figure 3b therefore does not show a dip, although the enhancement of the lowest bin due to electron contamination is still apparent.

The width of the balance functions for the four centrality classes is shown in Figure 4, where the lowest two bins in $`\mathrm{\Delta }y`$ have been excluded to avoid the effects of Bose-Einstein correlations and Coulomb interactions and enable a valid comparison with HIJING. The results indicate that the width of the balance function for peripheral events is consistent with that expected from HIJING, while the width for central events is significantly smaller as was observed with charged particle pairs.

To gain some insight into the observed widths in central collisions, we compared with the thermal model (final temperature of 165 MeV) presented in balance\_paper  filtered through the acceptance of STAR. We find that the predicted widths are larger than those we observe in central collisions. Thermal model calculations have also been done at low final temperature (105 MeV) and high transverse velocity (0.77 c), while maintaining the same average transverse momentum. These calculations predict a balance function width consistent with our observations in central collisions. Thus the observed narrowing of the balance function in central collisions can be parametrized in a thermal model incorporating both strong transverse flow and a constraint that the balancing particles are emitted close together in space-time Pratt\_workshop . This constraint could arise from delayed hadronization compared with the characteristic 1 fm/c hadronization time or from some other phenomena such as anomalously short diffusion of particle pairs Pratt\_workshop . Other effects besides flow may also narrow the balance function with centrality. One effect is the decay of resonances such as the $`\rho ^0`$ that have lifetimes similar to the proposed time of delayed hadronization. Another effect could be opacity opacity  where pairs with large opening angles are absorbed leading to a narrower balance function.

In summary, measurement of the balance function for Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}`$=130 GeV has been stimulated by the prediction balance\_paper  that the width of the balance function should be significantly reduced by late hadronization. We indeed observe a narrowing of the balance function for more central collisions for all charged particle and for charged pion pairs. Only for peripheral collisions is the width consistent with HIJING predictions treating the Au+Au collision as a superposition of independent nucleon-nucleon scatterings. Interpretation of the observed narrowing requires more detailed study of its sensitivity to such other effects as flow, resonance production and opacity, in addition to late hadronization.

###### Acknowledgements.

We wish to thank the RHIC Operations Group and the RHIC Computing Facility at Brookhaven National Laboratory, and the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for their support. This work was supported by the Division of Nuclear Physics and the Division of High Energy Physics of the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. National Science Foundation, the Bundesministerium fuer Bildung und Forschung of Germany, the Institut National de la Physique Nucleaire et de la Physique des Particules of France, the United Kingdom Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo, Brazil, the Russian Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Education of China, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and the Swedish National Science Foundation.


text:
# Nonextensive statistical mechanics - Applications to nuclear and high energy physics To appear in the Proceedings of the X International Workshop on Multiparticle Production - Correlations and Fluctuations in QCD (8-15 June 2002, Crete), ed. N. Antoniou (World Scientific, Singapore, 2003)

## I introduction

The foundation of statistical mechanics comes from mechanics (classical, quantum, relativistic, or any other elementary dynamical theory). Consistently, in our opinion, the expression of entropy to be adopted for formulating statistical mechanics (and ultimately thermodynamics) depends on the particular type of occupancy of phase space (or Hilbert space, or Fock space, or analogous space) that the microscopic dynamics of the system under study collectively favors. In other words, it appears to be nowadays strong evidence that statistical mechanics is larger than Boltzmann-Gibbs (BG) statistical mechanics, that the concept of physical entropy can be larger than

$`S_{BG}=k{\displaystyle \underset{i}{\overset{W}{}}}p_i\mathrm{ln}p_i`$ (1)
(hence $`S_{BG}=k\mathrm{ln}W`$ for equal probabilities), pretty much as geometry is known today to be larger than Euclidean geometry, since Euclid’s celebrated parallel postulate can be properly generalized in mathematically and physically very interesting manners.

Let us remind the words of A. Einstein  expressing his understanding of Eq. (1):

Usually $`W`$ is put equal to the number of complexions \[…\]. In order to calculate $`W`$, one needs a complete (molecular-mechanical) theory of the system under consideration. Therefore it is dubious whether the Boltzmann principle has any meaning without a complete molecular-mechanical theory or some other theory which describes the elementary processes. $`S=\frac{R}{𝒩}\mathrm{log}W+\mathrm{const}.`$ seems without content, from a phenomenological point of view, without giving in addition such an Elementartheorie.

This standpoint is, in our opinion, quite similar to the position that Riemann adopted when he began his study of “the concepts which lie at the base of Geometry”. Along this line, it is our understanding that the entropy expressed in Eq. (1) is, on physical grounds, no more irreducibly universal than Euclidean geometry with regard to all possible geometries, which, by the way, also include the fractal one, which inspired the theory addressed in this paper. Nonextensive statistical mechanics , to which this brief review is dedicated, is based on the following expression

$`S_q=k{\displaystyle \frac{1_i^Wp_i^q}{q1}}(q;S_1=S_{BG}).`$ (2)
It is well known that for microscopic dynamics which relax on an ergodic occupation of phase space, the adequate entropic form to be used is that of Eq. (1). Such assumption is ubiquitously satisfied, and constitutes the physical basis for the great success of BG thermostatistics since over a century. We believe that a variety of more complex occupations of phase space may be handled with more complex entropies. In particular, it seems that Eq. (2), associated with an index $`q`$ which is dictated by the microscopic dynamics (and which generically differs from unity), is adequate for a vast class of stationary states ubiquitously found in Nature. In recent papers, E.G.D. Cohen  and M. Baranger  also have addressed this question.

A significant amount of systems, e.g., turbulent fluids ( and references therein), electron-positron annihilation , collisions of heavy nuclei , solar neutrinos , quark-gluon plasma , cosmic rays , self-gravitating systems , peculiar velocities of galaxy clusters , cosmology , chemical reactions , economics , motion of Hydra viridissima , theory of anomalous kinetics , classical chaos , quantum chaos , quantum entanglement , anomalous diffusion , long-range-interacting many-body classical Hamiltonian systems ( and references therein), internet dynamics , and others, are known nowadays which in no trivial way accommodate within BG statistical mechanical concepts. Systems like these have been handled with the functions and concepts which naturally emerge within nonextensive statistical mechanics .

We may think of $`q`$ as a biasing parameter: $`q<1`$ privileges rare events, while $`q>1`$ privileges common events. Indeed, $`p<1`$ raised to a power $`q<1`$ yields a value larger than $`p`$, and the relative increase $`p^q/p=p^{q1}`$ is a decreasing function of $`p`$, i.e., values of $`p`$ closer to 0 (rare events) are benefited. Correspondingly, for $`q>1`$, values of $`p`$ closer to 1 (common events) are privileged. Therefore, the BG theory (i.e., $`q=1`$) is the unbiased statistics. A concrete consequence of this is that the BG formalism yields exponential equilibrium distributions (and time behavior of typical relaxation functions), whereas nonextensive statistics yields (asymptotic) power-law distributions (and relaxation functions). Since the BG exponential is recovered as a limiting case, we are talking of a generalization, not an alternative.

To obtain the probability distribution associated with the relevant stationary state (thermal equilibrium or metaequilibrium) of our system we must optimize the entropic form (2) under the following constraints :

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}p_i=1,`$ (3)
and

$`{\displaystyle \frac{_ip_i^qE_i}{_ip_i^q}}=U_q,`$ (4)
where $`\{E_i\}`$ is the set of eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian (with specific boundary conditions), and $`U_q`$ is a fixed and finite number. This optimization yields

$`p_i={\displaystyle \frac{[1(1q)\beta _q(E_iU_q)]^{1/(1q)}}{Z_q}},`$ (5)
where

$`Z_q{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}[1(1q)\beta _q(E_jU_q)]^{1/(1q)},`$ (6)
and

$`\beta _q{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{_jp_j^q}},`$ (7)
$`\beta `$ being the optimization Lagrange parameter associated with the generalized internal energy $`U_q`$. Equation (5) can be rewritten as

$`p_i[1(1q)\beta ^{}E_i]^{1/(1q)}e_q^{\beta ^{}E_i},`$ (8)
where $`\beta ^{}`$ is a renormalized inverse “temperature”, and the $`q`$-exponential function is defined as $`e_q^x[1+(1q)x]^{1/(1q)}=1/[1(q1)x]^{1/(q1)}`$ (with $`e_1^x=e^x`$). This function replaces, in a vast number of relations and phenomena, the usual BG factor. In particular, the ubiquitous Gaussian distribution $`e^{ax^2}`$ becomes generalized into the distribution $`e_q^{a_qx^2}=1/[1+(q1)a_qx^2]^{1/(q1)}`$ (fat-tailed if $`q>1`$).

## II Generalizing nonextensive statistical mechanics

Nonextensive statistical mechanics generalizes the BG theory. It presumably addresses (multi)fractal-like occupancy of phase space at the associated stationary states (e.g., metaequilibrium), instead of the usual, homogeneous, occupancy which satisfies ergodicity. Is there any fundamental reason for stopping here? We do not think so. In fact, roads pointing towards generalizations of (or alternatives for) nonextensive statistical mechanics are already open in the literature. Let us mention here two of them (already exhibiting some successes), namely (i) crossovers between $`q`$-statistics and $`q^{}`$-statistics ( and references therein), and (ii) the recently introduced Beck-Cohen superstatistics . Both of them address the energy distributions corresponding to the stationary states, and are perfectly compatible, as we shall show. More precisely, the first type can be thought as a particular case of the second type. However, statistical mechanics is much more than a distribution correctly corresponding to the stationary state. Indeed, if any given entropy $`S(\{p_i\})`$ is optimized by a specific distribution $`p_i`$, all entropic forms which are monotonic functions of $`S`$ will be optimized by the same distribution. Nevertheless, only a very restricted class of such entropic forms can be considered as serious candidates for constructing a full thermostatistical theory, eventually connected with thermodynamics. In particular, one expects the correct entropy to be concave and stable. Such is the case  of $`S_q`$ as well as of the generalized entropy recently proposed  for the just mentioned superstatistics . We briefly address these questions in this Section.

Let us first consider the following differential equation:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{dx}}=ay(y(0)=1).`$ (9)
The solution is given by

$`y=e^{ax}.`$ (10)
We can use this result in at least three manners which are of interest in statistical mechanics:

(i) We may refer to the sensitivity to the initial conditions, and consider $`xt`$, where $`t`$ is time, $`y\xi lim_{\mathrm{\Delta }x(0)0}\mathrm{\Delta }x(t)/\mathrm{\Delta }x(0)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }x(t)`$ denotes the discrepancy of two initial conditions in a one-dimensional map (or, for higher-dimensional systems, the analogous situation for the axis along which the maximum dynamical instability occurs), and $`a\lambda _10`$, where $`\lambda _1`$ is the Lyapunov exponent. In this case Eq. (10) reads in the familiar form:

$`\xi (t)=e^{\lambda _1t}.`$ (11)
(ii) We may refer to the relaxation towards the stationary state (thermal equilibrium), and consider $`xt`$, $`y[𝒪(t)𝒪(\mathrm{})]/[𝒪(0)𝒪(\mathrm{})]`$, where $`𝒪`$ is the average value of a generic observable, and $`a1/\tau <0`$, where $`\tau `$ is a relaxation time. In this case Eq. (10) reads in the typical form:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒪(t)𝒪(\mathrm{})}{𝒪(0)𝒪(\mathrm{})}}=e^{t/\tau }.`$ (12)
(iii) We may refer to the energy distribution at thermal equilibrium of a Hamiltonian system, and consider $`xE_i`$, where $`E_i`$ is the energy of the $`i`$-th microscopic state, $`y=Zp(E_i)`$, where $`p`$ is the energy probability and $`Z`$ the partition function, and $`a\beta `$ is the inverse temperature. In this case Eq. (10) reads in the familiar BG form:

$`p(E_i)={\displaystyle \frac{e^{\beta E_i}}{Z}}(Z{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}e^{\beta E_j}).`$ (13)
This distribution is of course the one that optimizes the entropy $`S_{BG}`$ under the standard constraints for the canonical ensemble.

Let us next generalize Eq. (9) as follows:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{dx}}=ay^q(y(0)=1).`$ (14)
The solution is given by

$`y=e_q^{ax}[1+(1q)ax]^{1/(1q)},`$ (15)
$`e_q^x`$ being from now on referred to as the $`q`$-exponential function ($`e_1^x=e^x`$). The three above possible physical interpretations of such solution now become

(i) For the sensitivity to the initial conditions,

$`\xi (t)=e_q^{\lambda _qt}=[1+(1q)\lambda _qt]^{1/(1q)},`$ (16)
where $`\lambda _q0`$ is the generalized Lyapunov coefficient (see ), and, at the edge of chaos, $`\lambda _q>0`$ and $`q<1`$.

(ii) For the relaxation,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒪(t)𝒪(\mathrm{})}{𝒪(0)𝒪(\mathrm{})}}=e_q^{t_q/\tau }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{[1+(q1)\tau _qt]^{1/(q1)}}},`$ (17)
where $`\tau _q>0`$ is a generalized relaxation time, and typically $`q1`$ .

(iii) For the energy distribution, we get the form which emerges in nonextensive statistical mechanics, namely

$`p(E_i)={\displaystyle \frac{e_q^{\beta _q^{}E_i}}{Z_q^{}}}={\displaystyle \frac{(Z_q^{})^1}{[1+(q1)\beta _q^{}E_i]^{1/(q1)}}}(Z_q^{}{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}e_q^{\beta _q^{}E_j}),`$ (18)
where usually, but not necessarily, $`\beta _q^{}>0`$ and $`q1`$. This distribution is the one that optimizes the entropy $`S_q`$ under appropriate constraints for the canonical ensemble.

Let us next unify Eqs. (9) and (14) as follows:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{dx}}=a_1y+a_qy^q(y(0)=1).`$ (19)
This is a simple particular case of Bernoulli equation, and its solution is given by

$`y=\left[\left(e^{(1q)a_1x}1\right){\displaystyle \frac{a_q}{a_1}}+1\right]^{\frac{1}{1q}}`$ (20)
This solution reproduces Eq. (10) if $`a_q=0`$, and Eq. (15) if $`a_1=0`$. It corresponds to a crossover from a $`q1`$ behavior at small values of $`x`$, to a $`q=1`$ behavior at large values of $`x`$. The crossover occurs at $`x_c1/[(q1)a_1]`$ .

## III applications

Let us now briefly review five recent applications of the ideas associated with nonextensive statistical mechanics to phenomena in nuclear and high energy physics, namely electron-positron annihilation , collisions of heavy nuclei , the solar neutrino deficit , quark anomalous diffusion , and the flux of cosmic rays .

Electron-positron annihilation:

In high energy collisions of an electron with a positron, annihilation occurs and, immediately after, typically two or three hadronic jets are produced. The probability distribution of their transverse momenta is non-Boltzmannian, more strongly so with increasing energy of collision. This phenomenon has defied theoreticians since several decades, particularly since Hagedorn  quantitatively analyzed such data in the frame of BG statistical mechanics. A phenomenological theory has been recently proposed by Bediaga et al , which beautifully fits the data. The fitting parameters are two, namely the temperature $`T`$ and the entropic index $`q`$. For each energy collision $`E_c`$ a set of $`(T,q)`$ is determined. It numerically comes out that $`q`$ depends on the energy (like $`q(\mathrm{})q(E_c)E_c^{1/2}`$ for increasingly large $`E_c`$, and $`q(E_c0)1`$), but $`T`$ does not! This invariance of $`T`$ with respect to the collision energy constitutes the central hypothesis of the physical scenario advanced long ago by Hagedorn. This scenario is now confirmed. The ingredients for a microscopic model within this approach have also been proposed .

Heavy nuclei collisions:

A variety of high-energy collisions have been discussed in terms of the present nonextensive formalism. Examples include proton-proton, central Pb-Pb and other nuclear collisions . Along related lines, entropic inequalities applied to pion-nucleon experimental phase shifts have provided strong evidence of nonextensive quantum statistics .

Solar neutrino problem:

The solar plasma is believed to produce large amounts of neutrinos through a variety of mechanisms (e.g., the proton-proton chain). The calculation done using the so called Solar Standard Model (SSM) results in a neutrino flux over the Earth, which is roughly the double of what is measured. This is sometimes referred to as the neutrino problem or the neutrino enigma. There is by no means proof that this neutrino flux defect is due to a single cause. It has recently been verified that neutrino oscillations do seem to exist ( and references therein), which would account for part of the deficit. But it is not at all clear that it would account for the entire discrepancy. Quarati and collaborators  argue that part of it – even, perhaps, an appreciable part of it – could be due to the fact that BG statistical mechanics is used within the SSM. The solar plasma involves turbulence, long-range interactions, possibly long-range memory processes, all of them phenomena that could easily defy the applicability of the BG formalism. Then they show  in great detail how the modification of the “tail” of the energy distribution could considerably modify the neutrino flux to be expected. Consequently, small departures from $`q=1`$ (e.g., $`|q1|`$ of the order of $`0.1`$) would be enough to produce as much as $`50\%`$ difference in the flux. This is due to the fact that most of the neutrino flux occurs at what is called the Gamow peak. This peak occurs at energies quite above the temperature, i.e., at energies in the tail of the distribution.

Quark diffusion:

The anomalous diffusion of a charm quark in a quark-gluon plasma has been analyzed by Walton and Rafelski  through both nonextensive statistical mechanical arguments and quantum chromodynamics. The results coincide, as they should, only for $`q=1.114`$.

Cosmic rays:

The flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of cosmic rays arriving on Earth is a quantity whose measured range is among the widest experimentally known ($`33`$ decades in fact). This distribution refers to a range of energies $`E`$ which also is impressive ($`13`$ decades). This distribution is very far from exponential: See Figs. 1 and 2. This basically indicates that no BG thermal equilibrium is achieved, but some other (either stationary, or relatively slow varying) state, characterized in fact by a power law. If the distribution is analyzed with more detail, one verifies that two, and not one, power-law regimes are involved, separated by what is called the “knee” (slightly below $`10^{16}eV`$). At very high energies, the power-law seems to be interrupted by what is called the “ankle” (close to $`10^{19}eV`$) and perhaps a cutoff. The momenta $`M_l(EE)^l=[_0^{E_{cutoff}}𝑑E\mathrm{\Phi }(E)(EE)^l]/[_0^{E_{cutoff}}𝑑E\mathrm{\Phi }(E)]`$ ($`l=1,2,3`$) as functions of the cutoff energy $`E_{cutoff}`$ (assumed to be abrupt for simplicity) are calculated as well: See Figs. 3, 4 and 5. At high cutoff energies, $`E`$ saturates at $`2.48944\mathrm{}\times 10^9eV`$ , a value which is over ten times larger than the Hagedorn temperature (close to $`1.8\times 10^8eV`$ ). In the same limit, we obtain for the specific-heat-like quantity $`M_2E^26.29\times 10^{21}(eV)^2`$. Finally, $`M_3E^3`$ diverges with increasing $`E_{cutoff}`$. This is of course due to the fact that, in the high energy limit, $`\mathrm{\Phi }1/E^{\frac{1}{q1}2}1/E^{3.4}`$; consequently the third moment integrand vanishes like $`1/E^{0.4}`$, which is not integrable at infinity.

One may guess that, along such wide ranges (of both fluxes and energies), a variety of complex intra- and inter-galactic phenomena are involved, related to both the sources of the cosmic rays as well as the media they cross before arriving on Earth. However, from a phenomenological viewpoint, the overall results amount to something quite simple. Indeed, by solving a simple differential equation, a quite remarkable agreement is obtained . This differential equation is the following one:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dp_i}{dE_i}}=b^{}p_i^q^{}bp_i^q.`$ (21)
This differential equation has remarkable particular cases. The most famous one is $`(q^{},q)=(1,2)`$, since it precisely corresponds to the differential equation which enabled Planck, in his October 1900 paper, to (essentially) guess the black-body radiation distribution, thus opening (together with his December 1900 paper) the road to quantum mechanics. The more general case $`q^{}=1`$ and arbitrary $`q`$ is a simple particular instance of the Bernoulli equation, and, as such, has a simple explicit solution (Eq. (20) with $`a_1=b^{}`$ and $`a_q=b`$). This solution has proved its efficiency in a variety of problems, including in generalizing the Zipf-Mandelbrot law for quantitative linguistics (for a review, see Montemurro’s article in the Gell-Mann–Tsallis volume ). Finally, the generic case $`q>q^{}>1`$ also has an explicit solution (though not particularly simple, but in terms of two hypergeometric functions; see ) and produces, taking also into account the ultra-relativistic ideal gas density of states, the above mentioned quite good agreement with the observed fluxes. Indeed, if we assume $`0<b^{}<<b`$ and $`q^{}<q`$, the distribution makes a neat crossover from a power-law characterized by $`q`$ at low energies to a power-law characterized by $`q^{}`$ at high energies, which is exactly what the cosmic rays exhibit to a quite good approximation. Let us finally mention that the first possible microscopic interpretation of our phenomenological theory has just been suggested .

For possible effects of a slightly nonextensive black-body radiation on cosmic rays see . Finally, other aspects related to cosmic rays have been shown to exhibit fingerprints of nonextensivity .

## IV conclusions

In nuclear and high energy physics, there is a considerable amount of anomalous phenomena that benefit from a thermostatistical treatment which exceeds the usual capabilities of Boltzmann-Gibbs statistical mechanics. This fact is due to the relevance of long-range forces, as well as to a variety of dynamical nonlinear dynamical aspects, possibly leading to nonmarkovian processes, i.e., long-term microscopic memory. Some of these phenomena appear to be tractable within nonextensive statistical mechanics, and we have illustrated this with a few typical examples. For the particular case of cosmic rays, we have indicated their average energy $`E2.48944\mathrm{}\times 10^9eV`$, and the specific-heat-like quantity $`E^2E^26.29\times 10^{21}(eV)^2`$, with the hope that they might be usefully compared to related astrophysical quantities, either already available in the literature, or to be studied. Along the same vein we have also presented the dependence of such momenta on a possibly existing high-energy cutoff.

In addition to this, we have sketched the possible generalization of nonextensive statistical mechanics on the basis of a recently introduced entropic form , whose stationary state is the Beck-Cohen superstatistics . The metaequilibrium distribution associated with a crossover between $`q`$-statistics and $`q^{}`$-statistics can be seen as a particular case of this generalized nonextensive statistical mechanics.

It is worthy to mention at this point that the present attempts for further generalization of BG statistical mechanics are to be understood on physical grounds, and by no means as informational quantities that can be freely introduced to deal with specific tasks, and which can in principle depend on as many free (or fitting) parameters as one wishes. Examples of such informational quantities are the Renyi entropy (depending on one parameter and being usefully applied in the multifractal characterization of chaos), Sharma-Mittal entropy (which contains both Renyi entropy and $`S_q`$ as particular cases), and very many others that are available in the literature. The precise criteria for an entropic form to be considered a possible physical entropy are yet not fully understood, although it is already clear that it must have a microscopic dynamical foundation. It seems however reasonable to exclude, at this stage, those forms which, in contrast with $`S_{BG}`$ and $`S_q`$, (i) are not concave (or convex), since this would seriously damage the capability for thermodynamical stability and for satisfactory thermalization of different systems put in thermodynamical contact, or (ii) are not stable, since this would imply that the associated quantity would not be robust under experimental measurements. These crucial points, and several others (probably equally important, such as the finite entropy production per unit time), have been disregarded by Luzzi et al  in their recent criticism of nonextensive statistical mechanics. Indeed, Renyi entropy, Sharma-Mittal entropy (that Luzzi et al mention without any justification at the same epistemological level as $`S_q`$) are neither concave nor stable for arbitrary values of their parameters. These and other information measures (most of them not concave and/or not stable) have been freely introduced, along various decades, as optimizing tools for specific tasks. They can certainly be useful for various purposes, which do not necessarily include the specific one we are addressing here: a thermodynamically meaningful generalization of the Boltzmann-Gibbs physical entropy.

## Acknowledgments

We are indebted to T. Kodama, G. Wilk, I. Bediaga, E.G.D. Cohen, M. Baranger and J. Anjos for useful remarks that we have received along the years. One of us (CT) is grateful to M. Gell-Mann for many and invaluable discussions on this subject. This work has been partially supported by PRONEX/MCT, CNPq, and FAPERJ (Brazilian agencies).