text:
# Accretion disk wind in the AGN broad-line region: Spectroscopically resolved line profile variations in Mrk 110

## 1 Introduction

The central broad emission line region (BLR) in active galactic nuclei is unresolved. But a study of the variable ionizing continuum source and the delayed response of the broad emission lines provides indirect information about size and structure of the line emitting region and their internal kinematics. In this paper we present a detailed study of continuum and emission line profile variations in the Seyfert 1 galaxy Mrk 110. Our goal is to determine the structure and kinematics of its broad-line region on the one hand and its central black hole mass on the other hand.

The study of the kinematics in the central broad-line region of AGN requires the acquisition of high S/N spectra for analyzing in detail velocity resolved line profiles. Furthermore, a homogeneous set of spectra has to be obtained over months with spacings of days to weeks. A comparison of the evolution of line profiles with theoretical models (e.g. Welsh and Horne welsh91 (1991)) can give us information on the kinematics in the broad-line region i.e. whether radial inflow or outflow motions, turbulent/chaotic velocity fields, or Keplerian orbits are dominant.

We published first results of a variability campaign of Mrk 110 with the 9.2m Hobby-Eberly-Telescope in Kollatschny et al. kollatschny01 (2001) (hereafter called Paper I). We verified the extent and stratification of the BLR. Results on the velocity field based on H$`\beta `$ variations have been published in Kollatschny & Bischoff kollatschny02 (2002) (hereafter called Paper II) indicating that the broad-line region is connected with a central accretion disk.

Theoretical models of accretion disk outflow scenarios in AGN have been published by different authors. They investigated radiatively-driven wind models (e.g. Murray & Chiang murray97 (1997), Proga et al. proga00 (2000)) and/or magnetically-driven disk outflow models (Blandford & Payne blandford82 (1982), Bottorff et al. bottorff97 (1997), Emmering et al. emmering92 (1992), Königl & Kartje koenigl94 (1994)).

There are other pieces of evidence from multi-frequency and/or spectro-polarimetric observations in the literature that the BLR is connected with an accretion disk (Elvis elvis00 (2000), Cohen & Martel cohen02 (2002)).

In this paper we present new velocity delay maps of several Balmer and Helium emission lines in the spectrum of Mrk 110 to verify the accretion disk scenario in the BLR of this galaxy.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

The observations of this monitoring campaign were carried out at the 9.2m Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET) at McDonald Observatory. We took 26 spectra between 1999 November 13 (JD 2,451,495) and 2000 May 14 (JD 2,451,678) with a median interval of 3 days. A log of the observations is presented in Paper I.

We obtained all our spectra under identical conditions with the Low Resolution Spectrograph (LRS) located at the prime focus of the HET. A Ford Aerospace CCD (3072x1024) with 15 $`\mu `$m pixel was used throughout our monitoring run. The spectra cover a wavelength range from 4200Å to 6900Å with a resolving power of 650 at 5000Å . Exposure times were 10 to 20 minutes and yielded a S/N $`>`$ 100 per pixel in the continuum in most cases.

We reduced the spectra in a homogeneous way with IRAF reduction packages including bias subtraction, cosmic ray correction, flat-field correction, wavelength calibration, night sky subtraction and flux calibration. Great care was taken to obtain very good intensity and wavelength calibration by using the spatially unresolved forbidden emission lines in the spectra as additional internal calibrators.

We generated first a mean spectrum of our variability campaign with very high S/N. Afterwards we calculated difference spectra of all epochs with respect to this mean spectrum. We adapted our spectra by minimizing the residuals of the constant narrow emission lines in the difference spectra. The primary lines for the internal calibration were the \[OIII\]$`\lambda `$5007,$`\lambda `$4959 lines. Thus we corrected for small spectral shifts, for minor differences in the spectral resolution caused by different seeing conditions and for small scaling factors. We used the narrow components of the Balmer and Helium lines as well as the \[OI\]$`\lambda `$6300,$`\lambda `$6363, \[SII\]$`\lambda `$6717,$`\lambda `$6731, and \[NII\]$`\lambda `$6548,$`\lambda `$6584 emission lines as secondary calibrators to secure the calibration over the whole spectral range. In this way we achieved relative line fluxes with an accuracy of better than 1% in most of the spectra. The main error sources were the variable broad HeI$`\lambda `$5016,$`\lambda `$4922 emission lines blending the \[OIII\]$`\lambda `$5007,$`\lambda `$4959 calibration lines. Different seeing conditions during the observations caused slightly different stellar contributions from the underlying host galaxy in our spectra. This effected the pseudo-continuum we used to subtract from the spectra. Further sources of error are the slopes of the sensitivity functions we derived from our standard star spectra. At the edges of the spectrum one can get varieties of 1% to 3% in the sensitivity function by fitting the observed bandpasses. This impreciseness influenced especially the H$`\alpha `$ and H$`\gamma `$ line profiles. Furthermore, the H$`\gamma `$ line is heavily blended with the \[OIII\]$`\lambda `$4363 line and the H$`\alpha `$ line is heavily contaminated by the variable atmospheric absorption. The errors in the intensities of these strong Balmer line are therefore comparable to those of the weaker Helium lines.

Further details of the observations and reduction procedure are published in Papers I and II.

## 3 Results

We concentrated on integrated line intensity variations of the broad emission lines as well as on line profile variations in the H$`\beta `$ line in our Papers I and II. Here we present results on line profile variations in several Balmer and Helium lines. These line profiles must have a large S/N ratio for doing this study.

### 3.1 Integrated line intensity variations and rms line profiles

We derived mean and rms line profiles from all the spectra obtained at our HET variability campaign. The rms spectra give us the variable part of the emission lines profiles we are investigating here. The constant narrow lines in the galaxy spectra cancel out in the rms spectra. The normalized rms line profiles of the strongest Balmer (H$`\alpha `$, H$`\beta `$) and Helium emission lines (HeII$`\lambda 4686`$ , HeI$`\lambda 5876`$ ) are presented in Fig. 1 in velocity space.

We did not consider the H$`\gamma `$ line in this figure because its rms line profile is still contaminated by the strong \[OIII\]$`\lambda `$4363 line blend. The big differences in the widths of these lines are obvious. The Helium lines and especially the HeII line are much broader than the Balmer lines. We published in Paper I (Fig.7) the entire rms spectrum of Mrk 110. One can see that structures in the broad He line wings are real and not caused by noise by comparing them with the S/N ratio in the continuum. The measured rms line widths (FWHM) of these profiles are listed in Table 1.

In Paper I we derived the mean distance $`\tau _{cent}`$ of these line emitting regions from the central ionizing source. This was done by calculating the cross-correlation function of the integrated line light curves with the variable ionizing continuum light curve. These results are given in Table 1 as well for completeness.

In Fig. 2 we plot the derived time lags of the Balmer and Helium emission lines as a function of their FWHM of the rms line profiles. These time lags can be interpreted as the light-travel time across the emission region for the different broad emission lines. There is a clear correlation between line width and time lag.

We interprete the light-travel time as the characteristic distance $`R`$ of the line emitting region and the FWHM of the rms emission line width as the characteristic velocity $`v`$ of the line emitting clouds. We estimate the central masses of the central black hole under the assumption that the gas dynamics are dominated by a central massive object (see Paper I). Additionally, we calculated the relation between radius and velocity for different black hole masses. The dotted and dashed lines shown in Fig. 2 correspond to virial masses of 0.8, 1.5, 1.8, 2.2, and 2.9 $`10^7M_{}`$ (from bottom to top).

It is evident that the black hole mass of 1.8 $`10^7M_{}`$ we derived in Paper I from the observed data of the individual emission lines matches the calculated model relation. But we have to keep in mind that there might be additional systematic uncertainties in the determination of the central black hole mass due to not considered geometry and/or orientation effects of the BLR in these models.

### 3.2 Light curves of emission line segments

The light curves of the continuum flux at 5135Å and of the integrated broad emission line intensities of our HET variability campaign are published in Paper I. The strongest broad emission lines in our spectra are the H$`\alpha `$, H$`\beta `$, and H$`\gamma `$ Balmer lines and the HeII$`\lambda `$4686 and HeI$`\lambda `$5876 Helium lines.

In this paper we concentrate on variations in the emission line profile only. First results of the H$`\beta `$ profile variations have been published in Paper II. We measured the light curves of all subsequent velocity segments ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`v`$ = 400 km/s width) from $`v`$ = -5000 until +5000 km/s in the strongest Balmer and Helium lines. The intensity of the central line segment is integrated from $`v`$ = -200 until +200 km/s. The light curves of the line center as well as of blue and red line wing segments at $`v`$ = $``$ 600, 1200, 2000 km/s ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`v`$ = 400 km/s) for HeII$`\lambda `$4686, HeI$`\lambda `$5876, H$`\gamma `$, and H$`\alpha `$ are shown in Figs. 3 to 6 in addition to the continuum light curve. In Paper II we published corresponding light curves for H$`\beta `$. In that case we used segments with a velocity binning of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`v`$ = 200 km/s. But these light curves are nearly identical to those resulting with a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`v`$ = 400 km/s binning.

The H$`\gamma `$ line segment light curves are heavily contaminated by other lines. The red wing is heavily blended with the strong \[OIII\]$`\lambda `$4363 line (Paper I, Fig. 1 ) and the blue wing by FeII multiplets. The red wing of the redshifted H$`\alpha `$ line is heavily contaminated by atmospheric absorption in addition to the blending by the \[NII\]$`\lambda `$6548,6584 lines within the line profile.

The light curves of the segments in each line profile are remarkably different. There is the general trend that the pattern of the light curves varies as a function of distance to line center. On the other hand, corresponding light curves of identical red and blue segments are very similar. One can see immediately (Figs. 3 to 6) that the outer line wings follow closer the continuum light curve than the inner line wings. The errors given in the light curves indicate absolute errors. Relative errors between light curves of the different segments are smaller by about 50$`\%`$.

### 3.3 Velocity delay maps of the Balmer and Helium lines

We computed cross-correlation functions (CCF) of all line segment ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`v`$ = 400 km/s) light curves with the 5100Å continuum light curve. For details of the method see Papers I, II.

The derived delays of the segments are shown in Fig. 7 as function of distance to the line center. These velocity delay maps are presented in gray scale for the H$`\beta `$, HeI$`\lambda `$5876, HeII$`\lambda `$4686, H$`\alpha `$, and H$`\gamma `$ lines. The solid lines show contour lines of the correlation coefficient at levels between .800 and .925.

The H$`\gamma `$ line and the redshifted H$`\alpha `$ line are heavily contaminated by other emission and/or absorption lines as had been said before. Therefore, the correlation coefficient is smaller in the wings of these lines. From now on we will consider only the H$`\beta `$, HeI$`\lambda `$5876, and HeII$`\lambda `$4686 lines for a more detailed discussion.

The light curves of the line center are mostly delayed with respect to continuum variations. The outer line wings respond much faster to continuum variations respectively than the inner line profile segments. Comparing the 2-D CCFs of the different lines with each other one can identify a clear stratification within the broad line region. The same trend has been seen before in the integrated lines. The HeII$`\lambda `$4686 line responds first to continuum variations followed by HeI$`\lambda `$5876 and finally H$`\beta `$. The correlation coefficients in the line wings as well as in the line centers of the H$`\beta `$ and He lines are very similar although the intensities in the line wings are obviously smaller. But one has to keep in mind that the line wings originate closer to the nuclear ionizing source than the line centers.

The 2-D CCF($`\tau `$,$`v`$) is mathematically very similar to a 2-D response function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ (Welsh welsh01 (2001)). In the next section the observed velocity delay maps are compared in more detail with model calculations of echo images from the BLR. The BLR Keplerian disk model of Welsh & Horne (welsh91 (1991), Fig. 1c) shows remarkable coincidences with our observations. The three dashed lines overplotted additionally in Fig. 7 represent escape velocities computed for central masses of 0.5, 1., 2. $`\times 10^7M_{}`$ (from bottom to top).

### 3.4 Delay between blue and red line wings

As one part of our analysis we calculated cross-correlation functions (CCF) of the blue line wings segments with respect to the red ones to determine more accurately their relative response. This was done for all the strong emission lines. We computed the relative delays in the line wings in velocity segments of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`v`$ = 400 km/s width respectively beginning at $`\pm `$ 200 km/s. Figs. 8 to 10 show the delay of the blue line wings with respect to the red ones for the H$`\beta `$, HeI$`\lambda `$5876 and HeII$`\lambda `$4686 lines (in gray scale). Contours of the correlation coefficient are overplotted at levels between .85 and .97 (solid lines). The center of the CCFs is indicated by the short dashed lines. The long dashed lines show the centroid of the uppermost 10% of the CCF

The same trend is to be seen in all emission lines: The blue line wings show a delayed response with respect to the red ones at intermediate distances from the line center ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$v = 500 – 2000 km/s) by one to two days. Furthermore, there is a trend that the relative delay of the blue wings increases with distance to the line center.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 BLR stratification derived from integrated lines

The integrated emission lines in Mrk 110 respond with different delays to continuum variations as a function of ionization degree. This indicates a stratification in the broad-line region (BLR) of Mrk 110 (Kollatschny et al., 2001). Fig. 2 shows a clear correlation between time lag $`\tau `$ of different integrated emission lines on the one hand and their corresponding line widths $`v`$ on the other hand. The correlation is of the form

$$\tau v_{FWHM}^2$$

for distances $`R=c\tau `$ from the central ionizing source. All emission line data are consistent with a virial mass of

$$M=1.8\pm 0.310^7M_{}.$$

The higher ionized broader emission lines originate closer to the central ionizing source than the lower ionized lines.

### 4.2 BLR geometry and kinematics

We sliced the observed emission line profiles into velocity bins of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`v`$ = 400 km/s and correlated all the individual light curves with the continuum light curve. First results of this investigation have been published for the H$`\beta `$ line indicating that different line segments originate at different distances from the ionizing center.

The velocity resolved profile variations of all investigated broad lines (Fig. 7) show the same characteristics. The line segments in each profile originate at different distances from the central ionizing source. The observed trend in Mrk 110 is that the outer emission line wings originate at small radii from the central supermassive black hole. This suggests strong rotational and or turbulent motions in the BLR (see however section 4.3).

Comparing in more detail the observed velocity-delay pattern with BLR model calculations (Welsh & Horne welsh91 (1991); Perez et al. perez92 (1992); O’Brien et al. obrien94 (1994)) we can rule out that radial inflow or outflow motions – including biconical outflow – are dominant in the BLR of Mrk 110. The line wings show the shortest delay with respect to the continuum and react nearly simultaneously. Furthermore, no short delays of the central region in the Balmer and He lines are observed. This is expected in spherical BLR models with chaotic virial velocity field or randomly oriented Keplerian orbits. Therefore we can rule out a dominance of this kind of velocity field in Mrk 110. On the other hand Keplerian disk BLR models reproduce exactly the observed velocity-delay pattern i.e. the faster response of both line wings compared to the line center.

A direct comparison of the two-dimensional echo maps of the H$`\beta `$, HeI$`\lambda `$5876, and HeII$`\lambda `$4686 lines with a theoretical echo image of an Keplerian disk (Welsh & Horne welsh91 (1991), Fig. 1c) is intriguing. Our observed 2D pattern of the different lines in Mrk 110 has been predicted in theoretical models which calculated the contibution from line emitting material at different radii in the BLR. The HeII$`\lambda `$4686 line originates at radial distances of 3 – 4 light days only while H$`\beta `$ originates at distances of about 30 light days.

A coarse estimate of the inclination angle of the accretion disk can be made by comparing the echo maps (Fig. 7) with disk models viewed at different inclination angles (Welsh & Horne welsh91 (1991), Fig. 5). We observe no short delays at the inner line regions. This excludes inclination angles of the accretion disk larger than 50 in Mrk 110. At the limit of a face-on disk one expects even narrower line profiles than those we observe in Mrk 110. Therefore, a best estimate of the accretion disk inclination angle in Mrk 110 is: 30$`\pm `$20.

Other authors published further indications for a disk-like configuration of the broad-line region in AGN based on theoretical models or observational data (Bottorff et al. bottorff97 (1997), Collin-Souffrin et al. collin88 (1988), Elvis elvis00 (2000), Königl & Kartje koenigl94 (1994)).

Velocity-delay maps have been published for the Balmer lines in NGC 5548 (Kollatschny & Dietrich kollatschny96 (1996)) and NGC 4593 (Kollatschny & Dietrich kollatschny97 (1997)) before. Although the quality of their spectral data was not as good as that of this campaign they could demonstrate the same basic trend as that seen in Mrk 110: the outer line wings respond faster to continuum variations than the line center. Furthermore, the red wings responded slightly faster and stronger than the blue ones in theses galaxies, too – see next section. In the UV wavelength range the variability behaviour of the prominent CIV$`\lambda `$1550 line has been investigated in a few galaxies. Again there are hints for a stronger and faster response of the red wing in NGC 5548 (Chiang & Murray chiang96 (1996), Bottorff et al. bottorff97 (1997)) and NGC 4151 (Ulrich & Horne ulrich96 (1996)) in comparison to the blue one. Unfortunately, the CIV$`\lambda `$1550 emission lines are strongly affected by a central absorption line blend in both galaxies.

### 4.3 Accretion disk wind

In this section I will put again the main emphasis on the velocity-delay data of the H$`\beta `$, HeII$`\lambda `$4686, and HeI$`\lambda `$5876 lines (Figs. 7 to 10). A careful inspection shows that a second trend in these 2D velocity-delay maps is superimposed on the primary trend that both outer line wings respond faster than central line region: The response of the red line wings is stronger than that of the blue ones. For all line profiles the correlation coefficients of the red wing light curves with the continuum light curve are systematically higher by 5% (Fig. 7) than those ones of the blue wing. Furthermore, the red wings respond faster than the blue ones. The integrated blue wings (Figs. 7 – 10) lag the red wings by $`2_1^{+2}`$ days.

An earlier response of the red line wing compared to the blue line wing is predicted in spherical wind and disk-wind models of the BLR (Königl & Kartje koenigl94 (1994), Chiang & Murray chiang96 (1996), Blandford & Begelman blandford99 (1999)). In these models the line emitting gas shows a radial outward velocity component in addition to the rotation. Also a stronger response of the red wing is expected in the models and observed in NGC 5548 (Chiang & Murray chiang96 (1996)). But we could not verify a secondary peak in our data as predicted in the model of (Chiang & Murray chiang96 (1996)). The disk outflow/wind models are distinguished from spherical wind models that their velocity decreases with radius (this means from the outer line wings to the line center) rather than the other way around. The observed delays of the blue line wings with respect to the red ones (Figs. 8 – 10) point at an accretion disk-wind in Mrk 110. In particular one can see an increase of the blue-red delay towards the outer line wings which means that the wind velocity increases towards the center.

Furthermore, Murray & Chiang (murray97 (1997)) demonstrated that a Keplerian disk wind reproduces single-peaked broad emission lines as we see in the spectra of Mrk 110.

### 4.4 Central black hole mass

From the integrated line intensity variations of four different emission lines a virial mass of

$$M=1.8\pm 0.310^7M_{}$$

has been determined (Sect.3). We made the assumption that the characteristic velocities of the particular emission line regions are given by the FWHM of their rms profiles and the characteristic distances R are given by the centroids of the corresponding cross-correlation functions:

$$M=\frac{3}{2}v^2G^1R$$

(e.g. Koratkar & Gaskell koratkar91 (1991), Kollatschny & Dietrich kollatschny97 (1997)).

Additionally, we may compare the velocity-delay maps (Fig. 7) with escape velocity envelopes

$$v=\sqrt{2GM/c\tau }$$

for different central masses. With this method we derive a central black hole mass of

$$M=1.5\pm 110^7M_{}$$

in Mrk 110. This mass value confirms perfectly our earlier derived value.

But one has to keep in mind that there are further systematic uncertainties in the mass determination (e.g. Krolik krolik01 (2001)). Due to the unknown inclination angle of the accretion disk the derived mass may be a lower limit only. Our observed velocity-delay maps do not drop down near the line center (Fig. 3) as is expected from model calculations for edge-on disk models (Welsh & Horne welsh91 (1991); O’Brien et al. obrien94 (1994)). This is a hint for a small inclination angle of the accretion disk in Mrk 110.

Ferrarese et al. ferrarese01 (2001) measured the stellar velocity dispersion in the CaII triplet lines of the host galaxy in Mrk 110. Their derived velocity dispersion corresponds to a central mass of only

$$M=310^6M_{}$$

in their black hole mass vs. velocity dispersion diagram. This value is a factor of 5 below our black hole mass value we derived with other methods for this galaxy. But one has to consider that Mrk 110 is a galaxy system in the late stage of merging with respect to its morphology. Therefore, the derived central stellar velocity dispersion in the host galaxy of Mrk 110 might by contaminated heavily by this interaction/merging effect.

### 4.5 Schematic BLR model

We are now in the position of generating a schematic model of the innermost AGN region in Mrk 110 from all our data. The result is shown in Fig. 11.

We could demonstrate that the broad emission lines originate in the wind of an accretion disk. The distances of the line emitting regions from the central ionizing source are shown on a logarithmic scale. A central black hole mass of $`M=1.8\pm 110^7M_{}`$ is a lower limit only because of the poorly known inclination angle of the accretion disk. This value is of the order of 30. Therefore, we draw a Schwarzschild radius for a black hole mass of $`M=510^7M_{}`$ in Fig. 11.

## 5 Summary

We analyzed carefully Balmer and Helium emission line profile variations which we derived from our monitoring campaign on the Seyfert 1 galaxy Mrk 110. Three clear trends are to be seen in our generated velocity-delay maps:
\- The outer red and blue line wings of the emission profiles respond nearly simultaneously with respect to variations of the ionizing continuum and much faster than the inner regions in the emission lines. A detailed comparison of our observed velocity-delay maps with theoretical models of other authors points clearly to an accretion disk where the broad emission lines originate.
-There is the general trend starting from the Balmer lines upon the HeI line up to the HeII lines that the higher ionized lines respond systematically faster. This is to be seen in the integrated lines on the one hand as well as in the velocity resolved line profiles on the other hand. It indicates an ionization stratification in the broad-line region.
\- The response of the red line wing with respect to the ionizing continuum variations is systematically stronger and slightly faster compared to the blue line wing. This finding is the signature of an accretion disk wind in the broad-line region.
We derived from the integrated line intensity variations as well as from the line profile variations a central black hole mass of M = $`1.810^7M_{}`$. This value is a lower limit because of the unknown accretion disk orientation.

###### Acknowledgements.

WK thanks the UT Astronomy Department for warm hospitality during his visit. He thanks K. Bischoff, M. Bottorff, and M. Zetzl for valuable comments. Part of this work has been supported by the *Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG* grant KO 857/24 and DAAD.


format: text

text:
# Variation of dispersion measure: evidence of geodetic precession of binary pulsars

## I Introduction

DM within ISM can delay a radio pulse in reaching Earth by a number of seconds equal to $`DM/(2.41\times 10^4f^2)`$, where $`f`$ is the observing frequency in MHz and DM is the column density of free electrons integrated along the line of sight in unite of pc cm-3mt77 ,

$$DM=_0^ln_e𝑑z,$$
(1)
where $`l`$ is the distance to the pulsar. For many pulsars, the DM can be characterized as a constant that holds steady over years of observation.

However, millisecond pulsar in the globular cluster 47 Tucanae, i.e., PSR J0023$``$7203J (47 Tuc J), shows variations of DM as a function of orbital phasefrei . The variations of DM are independent of frequency, which indicates that the additional time delay is not likely a propagation effectfrei , since propagation effect predicts that the waves at the low-frequency and high-frequency should show very different time of arrivals (TOAs).

The galactic binary pulsar PSR J0621$`+`$1002 experiences dramatic variability in its DMspl  , with gradients as steep as 0.013 pc cm-3 yr-1. If the DM variation is interpreted as spatial fluctuation in the interstellar electron density, then it would obviously deviate from the simple power law predicted by the standard theories of ISMspl ; ric .

Therefore, as discussed by the authorsfrei ; spl , attributing the additional time delay (or residuals of (TOAs) to propagation effect, DM variation, is not very satisfactory in the comparison with the observations.

The geodetic precession induced orbital effect of a binary pulsar system can cause an additional time delay, which can well explain the long-term variabilities, such as derivatives of the semi-major axis, $`\dot{x}`$, $`\ddot{x}`$, and the orbital period, $`\dot{P}_b`$, $`\ddot{P}_b`$ measured in PSR J2051$``$0827 and PSR B1957$`+`$20go .

This paper applies the geodetic precession induced time delay in shorter time scales (relative to secular variabilities) to interpret the residuals in timing measurement of 47 Tuc J, which has been attributed to the variation of DM. The new explanation can fit the residuals and also avoid the frequency difficulty in the propagation effect.

Moreover, the geodetic precession induced variations at different time scales impose strong constraints on the intrinsic parameters of a binary pulsar system. Fitting them together, we can obtain for the first time numerical result of the spin angular momenta of the two stars as well as the moment of inertia of the pulsar which is consistent with theoretical predictions.

The significant DM variation of PSR J0621$`+`$1002 and PSR J0024$``$7204H (47 Tuc H) can also be well explained by the dynamic effect. The elimination of the additional time delay by the dynamic effect means that the DM (or ISM) of these three binary pulsars might be very stable.

The situation is similar to PSR B1855$`+`$09, which has found no unexplained perturbation in the long record of TOAs, and lead to a reduction in the upper limit of energy density in the gravitational wave background radiationlob .

In section II the geodetic precession induced orbital precession velocity in general case is introduced. In section III the additional time delay due to geodetic precession of a binary pulsar system is derived. And in section IV, V and VI the dynamic effect is applied to 47 Tuc J, PSR J0621$`+`$1002 and 47 Tuc H respectively. Section VII summarizes the relation of the geodetic precession induced effects with the time delay in two cases, and also the evidences the geodetic precession in binary pulsars.

## II orbital precession

The motion of a binary system can be regarded as the precession of three vectors, the spin angular momenta of the pulsar and its companion star, $`𝐒_1`$ and $`𝐒_2`$, and the orbital angular momentum $`𝐋`$. The change of the orbital period due to the gravitational radiation is 2.5 post-Newtonian order (2.5 PPN), whereas the geodetic precession corresponds to 1.5 PPN. So the influence of gravitational radiation on the motion of a binary system can be ignored when discussing dynamics of a binary pulsar system. Therefore, the total angular momentum, $`𝐉=𝐋+𝐒_1+𝐒_2`$, can be treated as invariable both in magnitude and direction ($`\dot{𝐉}=0`$). With $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ denoting the precession rate of $`𝐋`$ around $`𝐉`$, the spin-orbit coupling can be expressed asbo ; apo ; kid

$$𝛀_0\times 𝐋=𝛀_1\times 𝐒_1𝛀_2\times 𝐒_2,$$
(2)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ represent the precession of the pulsar and its companion star, respectively. Ignoring terms over 2 PPN, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ can be written asbo

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_1=\frac{L}{2r^3}(4+\frac{3m_2}{m_1}),\mathrm{\Omega }_2=\frac{L}{2r^3}(4+\frac{3m_1}{m_2}),$$
(3)
where $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$ are masses of the pulsar and the companion star respectively, and $`r`$ is the separation of $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$. Notice $`Lr^{1/2}`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ are 1.5 PPN.

Barker and O’Connell’s two-body equation included two spins, but the orbital precession velocity was not expressed as relative to the total angular momentum, $`𝐉`$, therefore, it cannot be compared to observation directly ($`𝐉`$ is static relative to the line of sight after counting out the proper motion of the binary system).

Apostolatos et al and Kidderapo ; kid ’s orbital precession velocity was relative to $`𝐉`$, however their velocity of orbit plane was derived in the case of one spin, i.e., $`𝐒_1=0`$. Which is suitable only for special binary systems, like pulsar-black hole binary.

Therefore, it seems contradictory that in Barker and O’Connell’s equation $`𝐋`$ doesn’t precess around $`𝐉`$, but in practical use, $`𝐋`$ is expressed as precessing around $`𝐉`$. Actually these two expressions can be consistent in the scenario which has been mentioned by Smarr and Blandfordsb . In which $`𝐋`$, $`𝐒_1`$ and $`𝐒_2`$ all precess around $`𝐉`$ rapidly (1.5PPN), whereas the velocities of $`𝐋`$ relative to $`𝐒_1`$ and $`𝐒_2`$ are very small (2PPN). And in the confrontation with observation, only the rapid precession velocity relative to $`𝐉`$, 1.5PPN, should be used.

Gonggo  derived the orbital precession velocity in a general cases, which is relative to $`𝐉`$, and includes both $`𝐒_1`$ and $`𝐒_2`$. The derivation is based on two simple assumptions: conservation of the total angular momentum, Eq(2), and the geometry constraints of the triangle formed by $`𝐉=𝐒+𝐋`$ ($`𝐒𝐒_1+𝐒_2`$). The two assumptions lead to precession rate of $`𝐋`$ around $`𝐉`$go ,

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_0=\mathrm{\Omega }_2\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LS}+(\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }_2)\frac{S_1^{}}{S}\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LS_1},$$
(4)
where $`S_1^{}=S_1\mathrm{cos}\eta _{SS1}`$, denoting the component of $`𝐒_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ in the plane determined by $`𝐒`$ and $`𝐉`$. Note that $`L\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LJ}S`$ is used in Eq(4), since $`S/L1`$. The right-hand side of Eq(4) can as well be written by replacing subscribes 1 with 2 and 2 with 1.

The geodetic precession of the orbit can cause an additional apsidal motion. In the case of $`S/L1`$, the advance of the precession of the periastron, $`\dot{\omega }`$ can be given by sb

$$\dot{\omega }^{obs}=\dot{\omega }^{GR}+\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{cos}\lambda _{LJ}\dot{\omega }^{GR}+\mathrm{\Omega }_0.$$
(5)
As given by Eq(4), $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ can be as large as $`\dot{\omega }^{GR}`$ (1.5 PPN), the GR prediction of the advance of periastron.

The effect of spin-orbit coupling on secular evolution of the orbital inclination, $`i`$, can be given by

$$\mathrm{cos}i=\mathrm{cos}\lambda _{LJ}\mathrm{cos}I\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LJ}\mathrm{sin}I\mathrm{cos}\eta _0,$$
(6)
where $`I`$ is the angle between the total angular momentum, $`𝐉`$, and the line of sight, and $`\eta _0=\mathrm{\Omega }_0t+\eta _i`$ ($`\eta _i`$ is the initial phase) is the phase of precession of $`𝐋`$. Thus $`i`$ is also a function of time. By Eq(6) the first derivative of the projected semi-major axis isgo

$$\dot{x}=x\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LJ}\mathrm{sin}\eta _0\mathrm{cot}i.$$
(7)
However, since $`𝐒_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ and $`𝐒_\mathrm{𝟐}`$ precess with different velocities, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ respectively ($`m_1m_2`$), then $`𝐒`$ varies in both magnitude and direction ($`𝐒_\mathrm{𝟏}`$, $`𝐒_\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`𝐒`$ form a triangle), then from the triangle of $`𝐒`$, $`𝐋`$ and $`𝐉`$, in react to the variation of $`𝐒`$, $`𝐋`$ must vary in direction ($`|𝐋|=`$const), which means the variation of $`\lambda _{LJ}`$ ($`𝐉`$ is invariable).

The change of $`\lambda _{LJ}`$ means that the orbital plane tilts back and forth. In turn, both $`\lambda _{LS}`$ and $`\lambda _{JS}`$ vary with time. Therefore, from Eq(4), the derivative of the rate of orbital precession can be given bygo ,

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0=\mathrm{\Omega }_2\mathrm{\Omega }_{12}X_3X_4\mathrm{\Omega }_{12}X_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_{01}X_2+\mathrm{\Omega }_{12}X_3),$$
(8)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{12}=\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{01}=\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$, $`X_1=\frac{S_1^{}}{S}\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LS_1}`$, $`X_2=\mathrm{tan}\eta _{ss1}`$, $`X_3=\frac{S_{V1}S_{V2}}{S^2}\frac{\mathrm{sin}\eta _{s1s2}}{\alpha \mathrm{sin}\lambda _{JS}}`$, and $`X_4=\frac{\mathrm{cos}^2\lambda _{LS}}{\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LS}}`$, with $`\alpha =\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{JS}+\frac{\mathrm{cos}^2\lambda _{LS}}{\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LS}}`$, $`S_{V1}=S_1\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{JS1}`$ and $`S_{V2}=S_2\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{JS2}`$ represent components of $`𝐒_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ and $`𝐒_\mathrm{𝟐}`$ that are vertical to $`𝐉`$.

Note that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ are unchanged when ignoring the orbital decay (2.5PPN), and $`\lambda _{LS_\alpha }`$ are unchanged also, since they decay much slower than the orbital decayapo . $`\ddot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0`$ can be easily obtained through Eq(8).

$`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0`$, the derivative of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$, can be absorbed by $`\dot{P}_b`$. The variation in the precession velocity of the orbit results in a variation of orbital frequency ($`\nu _b=2\pi /P_b`$), $`\nu _b^{}\nu _b=\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ . Then we have $`\dot{\nu }_b=\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0`$, thereforego ,

$$\dot{P}_b=\frac{\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0P_b^2}{2\pi }.$$
(9)
From Eq(8) and Eq(9), we can see that the contribution of $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0`$ to $`\dot{P}_b`$ can be as large as 1 PPN, which is much larger than the contribution of GR to $`\dot{P}_b`$ (2.5PPN). While $`\dot{P}_b`$ can also be much smaller than 1 PPN in special combination of parameters in Eq(8).

## III geodetic precession induced time delay

As discussed in section II, the geodetic precession induced orbital effect results an additional apsidal motion which can be absorbed by the post-Kepler parameter, $`\omega ^{obs}`$, an additional precession of orbital plane which can be absorbed by, $`\dot{x}`$, and an additional variation of orbital period which can be absorbed by $`\dot{P}_b`$go .

These additional effects of a binary system can not only cause long-term (secular) time delay, but also short-term time delay.

The essential transformation relating solar system barycentric time $`t_b`$ to pulsar proper time $`T`$ is summarized by the expressiontw

$$t_bt_0=T+\mathrm{\Delta }_R+\mathrm{\Delta }_E+\mathrm{\Delta }_S+\mathrm{\Delta }_A,$$
(10)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R`$ is the ”Roemer time delay”, is the propagation time across the binary orbit; $`\mathrm{\Delta }_E`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_S`$ are the orbital Einstein and Shapiro delays; and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_A`$ is a time delay related with aberration caused by rotation of the pulsar. The dominant time delay, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R`$ is giventw

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_R=xF(\omega +u),$$
(11)
where

$$F(\omega +u)=\mathrm{sin}\omega [\mathrm{cos}ue(1+\delta _r)]+$$

$$[1e^2(1\delta _\theta )^2]^{1/2}\mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{sin}u.$$
(12)
In calculation the small quantities, $`\delta _r`$ and $`\delta _\theta `$ due to aberration are ignored. $`u`$ and $`A_e(u)`$ are the eccentric anomaly and the true anomaly respectively. The relations of $`u`$, $`A_e(u)`$ and the longitude of periastron, $`\omega `$ are giventw

$$ue\mathrm{sin}u=2\pi [(\frac{TT_0}{P_b})\frac{\dot{P}_b}{2}(\frac{TT_0}{P_b})^2],$$
(13)
$$A_e(u)=2\mathrm{arctan}[(\frac{1+e}{1e})^{1/2}\mathrm{tan}\frac{u}{2}],$$
(14)
$$\omega =\omega _0+kA_e(u),$$
(15)
where $`k\dot{\omega }P_b/(2\pi )`$. Eq(10) to Eq(15) are the standard treatment in pulsar timing measurement. When consider the contribution of orbital precession to the time of arrival, the Roemer delay should has a different value, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R^{}`$, relative to the standard, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R`$, which doesn’t include the dynamic effect. The deviation leads to an additional time delay.

$$\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R=\mathrm{\Delta }_R^{}\mathrm{\Delta }_R=x^{}F(\omega ^{}+u^{})xF(\omega +u).$$
(16)
$`x^{}=x+\dot{x}t`$ at right-hand side of Eq(16) corresponds to an additional time delay by the precession of the orbital plane, in which $`\dot{x}`$ is given by Eq(7). $`u^{}`$ represents an additional time delay by the nutation, in which $`\dot{P}_b`$ of Eq(13)) should be given by Eq(9)). And $`\omega ^{}`$ represents an additional time delay by the apsidal motion, in which $`k`$ of Eq(15) should be written as $`k^{}=(\dot{\omega }+\mathrm{\Omega }_0)P_b/(2\pi )`$.

Thus $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R`$ of Eq(16) at two different moment, $`t`$ and $`t+\tau `$ can be given as

$$\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R^{t+\tau }\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R^t=[x^{}F(\omega ^{}+u^{})xF(\omega +u)]_{t+\tau }$$

$$[x^{}F(\omega ^{}+u^{})xF(\omega +u)]_t.$$
(17)
In other words if the true Roemer delay is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R^{}`$, which include the dynamic effect, but it is treated as the standard one $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R`$ without the dynamic effect, then additional time delay results. Following section shows that the additional time delay can be well fitted by the difference between $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R`$ given by Eq(16) and Eq(17).

## IV 47 Tuc J

### IV.1 estimations

This section shows that in the geodetic precession model, once an orbital precession velocity, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$, which is suitable to explain one secular variability, i.e., $`\dot{x}`$, then it is also suitable to explain all the other secular variabilities, like $`\dot{\omega }`$ and $`\dot{P}_b`$ and $`\dot{DM}`$ of a binary pulsar. Which indicate that the physics underlying these phenomena is most likely the geodetic precession.

With $`m_1=1.44M_{}`$, $`m_2=0.02M_{}`$, $`P_b=0.12`$d and $`x^{obs}=0.04`$frei , we have the semi-major axis, $`a=[GM/\nu _b^2]^{1/3}=8.2\times 10^{10}`$ cm, and orbital angular momentum, $`L=\nu _b\mu a^2(1e^2)^{1/2}=1.6\times 10^{50}`$g cm2s-1, with $`\mu `$ the reduced mass. Then we have $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1=4.4\times 10^{11}`$s-1, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2=2.5\times 10^9`$s-1 by Eq(3). Assume $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$, and by Eq(16) the geodetic precession induced time delay in the time interval $`\tau =1`$yr is approximately,

$$|\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R|x|\delta \mathrm{sin}(\omega )|x\mathrm{\Omega }_0\tau |\mathrm{cos}(\omega )|5.5\times 10^7(s),$$
(18)
while in the case $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$, the additional time delay in one year is $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_R|3.2\times 10^5`$. The observed one is $`\dot{DM}<2\times 10^4`$cm-3pc/yrfrei , which corresponds to $`2\times 10^6`$ s per yr.

Therefore, if $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1<\mathrm{\Omega }_0<\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$, i.e., $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_2/10`$, then the corresponding time delay, $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_R|3.2\times 10^6`$s, is close to the observational limit.

The geodetic precession induced secular variabilities, $`\dot{x}`$ and $`\dot{P}_b`$ can also be estimated. With $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ and $`\dot{x}^{obs}=(2.7\pm 0.7)\times 10^{14}`$frei , Eq(7) becomes

$$1.8\times 10^{12}\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LJ}|\mathrm{sin}\eta _0\mathrm{cot}i|2.7\times 10^{14}.$$
(19)
Thus $`\mathrm{sin}\lambda _{LJ}|\mathrm{sin}\eta _0\mathrm{cot}i|1.5\times 10^2`$. If $`|\mathrm{sin}\eta _0\mathrm{cot}i|0.1`$, then $`\lambda _{LJ}1.5\times 10^1`$, which means $`S/L1.5\times 10^1`$. With $`L`$ obtained above, we have $`S_1S2.4\times 10^{49}`$g cm2s-1. Having the measured pulsar period, $`P=2.1`$ms, the moment of inertia of the pulsar is $`I_18.0I_{45}`$ ($`I_{45}1\times 10^{45}`$g cm2). While if assuming $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$, then the moment of inertia is $`I_10.14I_{45}`$. And similarly in the case $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_2/10`$, $`I_11.4I_{45}`$. Which means the velocity that suitable for $`\dot{DM}`$ corresponds to a moment of inertia that is very close to the theoretical prediction.

As shown in Eq(9), $`\dot{P}_b`$ is determined by $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0`$, which can vary in a range of several order of magnitude by different combination of variables in Eq(8). If we assume $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0\mathrm{\Omega }_1^21.9\times 10^{21}`$s-2, then by Eq(9), we have $`\dot{P}_b0.33\times 10^{13}`$. Which is about one order of magnitude smaller than the measured one. $`\dot{P}_b^{obs}=(0.5\pm 0.13)\times 10^{12}`$. Whereas, if we assume $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2`$, then $`\dot{P}_b9.8\times 10^{11}`$. Which is two order of magnitude larger than $`\dot{P}_b^{obs}`$.

And in the case $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_2/10`$, $`\dot{P}_b9.8\times 10^{13}`$, which is close to the measured $`\dot{P}_b^{obs}`$.

Therefore, the orbital velocity of order of magnitude, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_2/10`$, can consistent with measured variabilities. Which indicates that the geodetic precession might the true mechanism that responsible for the observational results.

### IV.2 fitting

DM variation with the orbital phase is clearly detected in 47 Tuc J, as shown by the scattered points with error bars in Fig 2. The variation has been interpreted as a cometary-like phenomenon, which caused by material at a considerable distance from the companion, with much higher average electron density than that of the rest area. In other words, the plasma cloud is responsible for the additional time delay, which can be attributed to the variations of DM .

Whereas the variation of DM and the residuals of TOAs as function of orbital phase are very close at different frequencies, from 660MHz to 1486MHzfrei . Which means that the additional time delay is not likely caused by the propagation effect of ISM. Since the time delay due to DM variations should be very different at low and high-frequency.

Actually, what measured in 47 Tuc J of Fig 2 is residual of TOAs, or additional time delay, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}`$, which can be attributed to the variation of DM. And the discussion above indicates that such explanation is difficult to explain the frequency problem.

Therefore, we can transform the DM variation of Fig 2 back into the additional time delay, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}`$, and try to interpret it by the dynamic effect.

The time delay, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}`$, measured in the time interval between two moment, $`t`$ and $`t+\tau `$ (or orbital phases $`\varphi (t)`$ and $`\varphi (t+\tau )`$), corresponds to the DM variation, $`DM(t)`$ and $`DM(t+\tau )`$ respectively. The relationship between DM and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}`$ can be given bymt77

$$\delta \mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}=\frac{DM(t+\tau )}{2.41\times 10^4f^2}\frac{DM(t)}{2.41\times 10^4f^2}.$$
(20)
Thus the geodetic precession induced time delay at two moment $`t`$ and $`t+\tau `$ given by Eq(17), can be used to explain the observational one represented by Eq(20), $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}`$. The new interpretation can not only solve the difficulties in the previous explanations of 47 Tuc J, but also fit the additional time delay numerically.

The estimation above indicates that $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R`$, $`\dot{x}`$ and $`\dot{P}_b`$ can be well explained by the geodetic precession of the binary system. Now we can fit these variations numerically.

The vectors $`𝐒_1`$, $`𝐒_2`$ and $`𝐒`$ are studied in the coordinate system of the total angular momentum, in which the z-axis directs to $`𝐉`$, and the x- and y-axes are in the invariance plane. $`𝐒`$ can be represented by $`S_P`$ and $`S_V`$, the components parallel and vertical to the z-axis, respectively:

$$S=(S_V+S_P)^{1/2}.$$
(21)
$`S_P`$ and $`S_V`$ can be expressed (recall $`S_{V1}`$, $`S_{V2}`$ and $`S_V`$ form a triangle) as

$$S_P=S_1\mathrm{cos}\lambda _{JS1}+S_2\mathrm{cos}\lambda _{JS2},$$

$$S_V=(S_{V1}^2+S_{V2}^22S_{V1}S_{V2}\mathrm{cos}\eta _{S1S2})^{1/2},$$
(22)
where $`\eta _{S1S2}`$ is the misalignment angle between $`S_{V1}`$ and $`S_{V2}`$, which can be written as

$$\eta _{S1S2}=(\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }_2)t+\varphi _i.$$
(23)
Therefore, by the variation of $`S`$ as function of time (in the case of one spin, $`S=`$const), we can obtain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ as function of time through Eq(4). Thus the measured $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}`$ of Eq(20) (or $`\dot{DM}`$) can be fitted step by step through Eq(17).

$$\delta \mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}=\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R^{t+\tau }\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R^t.$$
(24)
Through Eq(9) and Eq(7), the measured secular variabilities, $`\dot{P}_b^{obs}`$ and $`\dot{x}^{obs}`$frei , can also be fitted along with $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}`$ by Monte-Carlo method. Obviously the long-term and short-term together imposes very stringent constraints on the numerical solutions. Notice that the measured mass function, $`f_1(M_{})=4.864\times 10^6`$frei  is also considered in the fitting.

As shown in Eq(9) and Eq(7), $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ is included in $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R`$ and $`\dot{x}`$, meanwhile $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0`$ is included in $`\dot{P}_b`$. Both $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ and $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0`$ contain $`S(t)`$, $`S_1`$ and angles, as shown in Eq(4) and Eq(8). Therefore, fitting the short-term and long-term parameters lead to the determination of $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$, and in turn the moment of inertia of the pulsar, $`I_1`$, since the pulsar period is known.

In numerical fitting, $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$ are fitted in the range $`[2.5\times 10^{46},1.4\times 10^{49}]`$ and $`[2.5\times 10^{46},7.6\times 10^{49}]`$ (g cm2s-1) respectively, which are enough to cover the estimated values. The best solution is shown in Table I. By Eq(20) and Eq(4), we have $`\dot{DM}\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R\mathrm{\Omega }_0S_1`$, thus the $`30\%`$ errors in the DM variation in the upper plot of Fig 2, can cause about $`30\%`$ error in the fitted results, such as $`S_1`$ and $`I_1`$.

After fitting the measured time delay by the predicted one, as Eq(24), we can transform the predicted one, at the right hand side of Eq(24) into the theoretical DM variation, as displayed by the solid curves of Fig 2. So that it can be compared with the measured ones more clearly.

The measured DM variation are slightly different at different time, i.e., 1998 June and 1999 October, as shown in Fig 2 (points with error bars), which can be explained by Eq(16) from which $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R`$ are slightly different at different time.

## V PSR J0621$`+`$1002

For PSR J0621$`+`$1002, dramatic variability of its DM has been measured, with gradient as steep as 0.013 pc cm-3yr-1, shown in Fig 3. By the standard picture, the turbulence spreads energy from longer to shorter length scales arises a power law of the structure function, which is given by $`D_{DM}(\tau )[DM(t+\tau )DM(t)]^2`$, where $`\tau `$ is the time lag between DM measurement. However the structure function obtained from observation obviously deviates from the simple power lawspl . Moreover, there is also no obvious differences in DM variation corresponding to 430 and 1410 MHzspl . Which indicates that DM variation of this binary pulsar is also independent of frequency. In the geodetic precession induced model these difficulties can be explained naturally.

Similarly, with $`m_1=1.70M_{}`$, $`m_2=0.97M_{}`$, $`e=0.00246`$, $`P_b=8.3`$d and $`x=12`$frei , we have $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1=1.4\times 10^{12}`$s-1, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2=2.2\times 10^{12}`$s-1. Assuming $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$, the geodetic precession induced time delay given by Eq(18) can be written as ($`\tau =1`$yr)

$$|\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_R|x\mathrm{\Omega }_0\tau |\mathrm{cos}(\omega )|8.3\times 10^4(s),$$
(25)
The measured maximum DM variation, $`\dot{DM}=0.013`$pc cm-3yr-1spl , corresponds to a delay of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{obs}=2.9\times 10^4`$s per year. Therefore the predicted one and the measured one can be consistent.

## VI 47 Tuc H

The DM variation of 47 Tuc H, $`\dot{DM}=0.024(3)`$cm-3pc yr-1 (equivalent $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R=5.4\times 10^4`$s per year), is one of the largest DM variations for any pulsar, and no binary parameters available can explain the trendfrei . Whereas the geodetic precession model can explain this large DM variation easily.

By the same treatment as the two binaries above, with $`m_1=1.50M_{}`$, $`m_2=0.186M_{}`$ and $`x^{obs}=2.15`$frei , the additional time delay per year is approximately, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R1.8\times 10^4`$s, in the case $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_12.7\times 10^{12}`$s-1; and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R1.2\times 10^3`$s, in the case $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }_21.7\times 10^{11}`$s-1. Therefore, the large $`\dot{DM}`$ measured in 47 Tuc H, which is $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R=5.4\times 10^4`$s per year, can be well explained by an orbital precession velocity that is in the range, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1<\mathrm{\Omega }_0<\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$.

## VII discussion

As shown in Fig 4, the the orbital precession velocity, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$, can contribute to the orbital precession, absorbed by $`\dot{x}`$; apsidal motion, absorbed by $`\dot{\omega }`$; and nutation, absorbed by $`\dot{P}_b`$ respectively.

For very special NS–NS or NS–WD binary pulsars, $`m_1=m_2`$ or one spin is ignorable (i.e, $`S_1=0`$), $`𝐒`$ is a constant vector, then $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ is a constant, which means $`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_0=0`$, and in turn $`\dot{P}_b=0`$, therefore, there will be only static orbital precession and apsidal motion but no nutation. In such special cases the additional time delay can be absorbed by $`\dot{x}`$ and $`\dot{\omega }`$, of which $`\dot{x}`$ is a function of time (or orbital phase) and $`\dot{\omega }`$ is unchanged.

While for general NS–NS or NS–WD binary pulsars, $`m_1m_2`$ and $`S_10`$, $`S_20`$, the two spins precesses at different velocities ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$), therefore, $`𝐒`$ varies both in direction and magnitude ($`𝐒=𝐒_1+𝐒_2`$). Then $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ is a function of time by Eq(4) ($`\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}_00`$), which leads to the nutation ($`\dot{P}_b0`$) by Eq(9). Therefore, for a general NS–NS or NS–WD binary pulsar, there is nutation effect beside the precession of the orbit and the apsidal motion.

Thus, for a general binary pulsar, the three constant parameters $`\dot{x}^{obs}`$, $`\dot{\omega }^{obs}`$, and $`\dot{P}_b^{obs}`$ together, can largely eliminate the trend of residuals, or the additional time delay which can be represented as $`DM`$ vs time, or $`DM`$ vs orbital phase.

Since $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ varies with time, then $`\dot{x}`$, $`\dot{\omega }`$ and $`\dot{P}_b`$ also vary with time, as shown by Eq(7), Eq(5) and Eq(9) respectively, whereas, the measured $`\dot{x}^{obs}`$, $`\dot{\omega }^{obs}`$ and $`\dot{P}_b^{obs}`$, are all constants, or the average values of the true effects, thus for such binary pulsar which have small orbital periods, i.e., a few hours ($`\dot{x}^{obs}`$ and $`\dot{P}_b^{obs}`$ vary rapidly), higher order derivatives, such as $`\ddot{x}^{obs}`$ and $`\ddot{P}_b^{obs}`$ are necessary to eliminate the trend of residuals. The fitting of the $`DM`$ vs orbital phase in 47 Tuc J in this paper actually included such higher order of derivatives, because $`\dot{x}`$, $`\dot{\omega }`$, and $`\dot{P}_b`$ used in fitting are given by Eq(7), Eq(5) and Eq(9) respectively, which are all functions of time.

The relationship of the geodetic precession induced secular variabilities and the additional Roemer time delay as well as the DM variation is summarized in Fig 3.

Therefore, comparing with the secular variations, $`\dot{x}`$ and $`\dot{P}_b`$, the variation of DM of 47 Tuc J is just the short-term effect ($`tP_b/20`$) of geodetic precession in a binary pulsar.

$`\dot{DM}`$, and secular variabilities, such as $`\dot{x}`$ and $`\dot{P}_b`$, have been interpreted separately by different models. While the geodetic precession provides an unified model which can well explain these variabilities (both short term and long-term).

On the other hand, the DM variations provide new evidences of the geodetic precession effect in binary pulsar systems, beside the secular variabilities, and the theoretical prediction of the moment of inertia of neutron stars.

The numerical results of spin angular moment of white dwarf star and the pulsar, as well as moment of inertia of the pulsar provides very useful information on both the structure of white dwarf stars and neutron stars.

The interpretation of the DM variation by the dynamic effects in the three binary pulsars (the frequency problems in the previous explanation are solved automatically) indicts that the structure of the ISM between the these pulsars and the Earth might be very stable, which is similar as PSR B1855+09lob . This might provide new information in the understanding of ISM.


text:
# Comment on “Dense coding in entangled states”

## Abstract

In a recent Brief Report, Lee et al. \[L. Lee, D. Ahn, and S.W. Hwang, Phys. Rev. A 66, 024304 (2002)\] have claimed that using pairwise entangled qubits gives rise to an exponentially more efficient dense coding when two parties are involved than using maximally entangled qubits shared among $`N`$ parties. Here, we show that their claim is not true.

Dense coding protocol as suggested by Bennett and Wiesner ref1  is to send two bits of classical information by sending just one qubit from the sender to the receiver which have a shared entanglement. So, comparing with classical world where there is no entanglement, one gets a more dense way of information transfer by using quantum channels.

Recently, Lee et al. ref2  have considered two different multiqubit schemes for dense coding and compared their efficiency. In the pairwise scheme, Alice and Bob share $`N`$ separated maximally entangled pairs, so this scheme is equivalent to $`N`$ separate dense coding schemes. In their the maximally entangled scheme, Alice has $`N`$ qubits and Bob possesses one, which are prepared in a $`N+1`$ maximally entangled qubits. The number of different unitary operators which can be constructed in the first scheme is $`4^N`$ corresponding to the number of different messages which can be sent. Since if we have $`M`$ different messages we can codify them in $`\text{log}_2M`$ bits of information, then $`\text{log}_24^N=2N`$ bits of information can be transferred by the pairwise scheme form Alice to Bob, by sending $`N`$ particles. Their essential mistake is just here by which they have concluded that number of bits is $`2^N`$, which is incorrect. Therefore the rates of information gain (bits per unit time) that they have deduced in their Eqs. (6) and (7) for the pairwise and maximally entangled schemes must change into

$`r_p={\displaystyle \frac{2N}{N(t_h+t_c)}}`$
$`r_m={\displaystyle \frac{N+1}{t_h+Nt_c}}`$ (1)
where $`t_c`$ and $`t_h`$ are operation times for CNOT and Hadamard gates, respectively. If $`t_c`$ and $`t_h`$ are assumed equal it is seen that, $`r_p=r_m=\frac{1}{t_c}`$, and there is no exponential efficiency in the pairwise scheme. Therefore considering $`N`$ different Alices or combining them as a sole Alice (which changes the number the parties involved but not the number of sent particles) cannot lead into a more efficient protocol as they have claimed. This is in accordance with the result of Bose et al. ref3 . As well, a more efficient (logarithmically) has been proposed recently in ref4 .

Also, it should be noted that a more reasonable measure of efficiency of the scheme can be the number of bits transferred in the protocol per needed time per sent particles. By considering this we have

$`r_p={\displaystyle \frac{2}{N(t_h+t_c)}}`$
$`r_m={\displaystyle \frac{N+1}{N(t_h+Nt_c)}}.`$ (2)
Now these quantities give more better sense of efficiency of the protocols, though, the number of the sent particles are the same here. This concept of efficiency also applies to the scheme of Bose et al ref3 .


text:
# 𝑣₄: A small, but sensitive observable for heavy ion collisions

\[

## Abstract

Higher order Fourier coefficients of the azimuthally dependent single particle spectra resulting from noncentral heavy ion collisions are investigated. For intermediate to large transverse momenta, these anisotropies are expected to become as large as 5 %, and should be clearly measurable. The physics content of these observables is discussed from two different extreme but complementary viewpoints, hydrodynamics and the geometric limit with extreme energy loss.

\]

Collisions of large nuclei at nonzero impact parameter exhibit the special feature of a strongly deformed overlap region. The subsequent dynamical evolution of the collision zone converts the initial spatial eccentricity into an azimuthal anisotropy of the final state observables. In particular anisotropies in momentum space  have been analyzed experimentally in great detail in recent years, as they have been shown to be generated during the earliest and hottest stages of the reaction . As momentum anisotropies are generated, the eccentricity in coordinate space is smoothed out, bringing further generation of momentum anisotropies to a stall, a process that occurs within about the first 5 fm/$`c`$ of the total 15 fm/$`c`$ lifetime of the fireball . In Au+Au collisions at RHIC (the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven National Laboratory), those anisotropies have been found  to be as large as predicted by hydrodynamic calculations that assume a short equilibration time $`\tau _{\mathrm{equ}}1`$ fm/$`c`$ . Further theoretical investigation has revealed the sensitivity of anisotropic flow on the equation of state of the expanding medium , indicating the necessity of a hard phase at high temperatures with a soft transition region of width $`\mathrm{\Delta }e1`$ GeV/fm3 to lower temperatures in order to describe the data in more detail. For these reasons anisotropic flow became one of the most attractive tools to study the nuclear equation of state of the matter created in the collision by utilizing the most abundant particles, alternatively to study statistically disadvantaged rare probes with which one tries to infer the properties of the bulk by modeling their mutual interaction with the medium they traverse. Other predictions from hydrodynamic concepts such as centrality and mass dependence of momentum anisotropies  have subsequently been confirmed to be in qualitative and quantitative agreement with experiments , as long as the applicability of hydrodynamics is not overstretched, i.e. for impact parameters not larger than $`b7`$ fm and transverse momenta not to exceed $`p_T1.5`$ GeV. Beyond these values clear deviations from the hydrodynamic predictions start to occur. This is expected as the smaller systems do not sufficiently equilibrate and the most rapid particles escape the fireball without fully participating in the collective dynamics.

To date, anisotropies at midrapidity are generally only characterized in terms of the second coefficient $`v_2`$ of the Fourier decomposition of the azimuthally sensitive momentum spectrum. With the $`z`$ direction given by the beam axis and the $`x`$ direction defined by the direction of the impact parameter (and $`y`$ perpendicular to both), the general expression for the Fourier decomposition with respect to the azimuthal angle $`\phi =\mathrm{arctan}(y/x)`$ is

$$\frac{dN}{dp_Tdyd\phi }=\frac{1}{2\pi }\frac{dN}{dp_Tdy}\left(1+\underset{n,\mathrm{even}}{}2v_n(p_T)\mathrm{cos}(n\phi )\right),$$
(1)
where no sine terms appear due to the symmetry with respect to the reaction plane, and all odd harmonics vanish at midrapidity due to the symmetry $`\phi \phi +\pi `$. (Note that the latter is not true for noncentral $`d`$-Au collisions, where $`v_1`$, $`v_3`$,… should be useful quantities to classify and study the measured spectra – even at midrapidity). In the following we will elaborate on the centrality and momentum dependence of higher anisotropy coefficients, which turn out to exhibit interesting features that, with the currently available data from RHIC’s run in 2002, might already be accessible.

Generally, higher momentum anisotropies are expected to be small, and in fact no experimental data have been published until this day. An early hydrodynamic calculation  predicted the momentum integrated value of $`v_4`$ not to exceed 0.5 % at SPS energies even in the most peripheral collisions, and shows only a slight increase with beam energy up to RHIC energies. In another study Teaney and Shuryak  calculated $`\alpha _4`$, which is the fourth coefficient of the momentum integrated differential particle spectra weighted by an additional momentum squared (which was applied to enhance the effects of transverse flow). This quantity is thus strongly biased to larger $`p_T`$. From their hydrodynamic calculation they obtain $`\alpha _41\%`$; clearly the momentum integrated value of $`v_4`$ is still smaller.

Today, experiments at RHIC achieve sufficient statistics to measure the elliptic flow coefficient $`v_2`$ differentially in momentum out to large transverse momenta up to 10 GeV . In midcentral collisions this coefficient is found to saturate starting at $`p_T2`$ GeV at a large value of 20 – 25%, indicating that three times as many particles are emitted into the reaction plane than out of the reaction plane. Such a large value also means that the first order deformation of Eq. (1) is not elliptic anymore, but that a polar plot of the azimuthal distribution resembles more a peanut than an elliptical shape, aligned with its longer axis into the reaction plane, see Fig. 1. Without any higher order coefficients, the elliptic deformation starts to develop such a waist when $`v_2`$ becomes larger than 10 %, which can be shown explicitly by discussing the term $`1+\mathrm{cos}2\phi `$ in Cartesian coordinates $`(x,y)`$ around $`x=0`$.

This raises the interesting question, whether at high $`p_T`$ Fourier coefficients of higher order might become sufficiently large to restore the elliptically deformed shape of the particle distribution. To restore the elliptic shape as much as possible only through introduction of a fourth anisotropy coefficient, $`v_4\frac{1}{34}(10v_21)`$ is required, as is derived straightforwardly from Eq. (1).*** The definition of restored ellipticity is ambiguous. Here we chose to find the value of $`v_4`$ where the second derivative of $`y(x)`$ vanishes at $`x=0`$, thus giving rise to a very smooth transition across $`\phi =\pi /2`$.  This, in consideration of the large experimental values for $`v_2`$, might indicate that $`v_4`$ could reach values around 3–5 %.

To investigate higher flow coefficients in more detail, we first revisit hydrodynamic calculations, although they find their limitations for pions of transverse momenta beyond 2 GeV, and for heavier baryons at momenta 3–4 GeV (for a recent review see Ref. ). Later on we will discuss a complementary model in terms of a simple picture for the limit of very large transverse momentum. The results presented in the following were achieved by a more modern hydrodynamic calculation than in Ref. , as it becomes important at RHIC energies to correctly account for features of chemical non-equilibrium during the hadronic evolution of the system , a feature that significantly influences the relation of energy-density and temperature . At temperatures beyond $`T_{\mathrm{crit}}=165`$ MeV the underlying equation of state turns into a hard ideal gas equation of state via a strong first order phase transition in order to mimic the transition from a gas of interacting resonances to a hard plasma phase. The initial conditions of this calculation were determined to fit single particle spectra measured in Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200`$ GeV. For further details, see Ref. .

Figure 2 shows the momentum dependence of the Fourier coefficients of pion spectra up to order 8. “Elliptic flow,” $`v_2`$ dominates the emission anisotropy at all momenta. (To use the same vertical scale for all coefficients, the second harmonic $`v_2`$ was divided by 10.) As anticipated, $`v_4`$ increases with momentum, reaching a value of about 2.8 % at $`p_T=2`$ GeV (thus not quite enough to restore the particle distribution to an elliptic shape, as $`v_2(p_T=2\mathrm{GeV})29\%`$). Also $`v_6`$ still has a sizable negative value of about 1.2%. The mass dependence of higher flow harmonics does not bring any surprises. Due to their larger masses, heavy particles pick up larger transverse momenta when they participate in the established collective flow. As for the spectra and elliptic flow, also the higher anisotropies are shifted out toward larger transverse momenta. Thus at a given transverse momentum below 2 GeV, the anisotropies of heavy resonances are smaller than of pions. Comparing hydrodynamic calculations to experimental results, it appears however that deviations from hydrodynamic behavior occur later for heavy particles, and therefore anisotropies of baryons can eventually surpass anisotropies of light mesons . From these calculations one can expect a fourth flow component of (anti-)protons of about 7 % at 4 GeV transverse momentum, a sizable quantity that should be measurable.

Surprisingly it turns out that $`v_4`$ is highly sensitive to the initial conditions of the calculations: initializing the calculation with a prehydrodynamic, isotropic radial flow field as in Ref.  does not change the magnitude of the flow anisotropies by a large amount. However we find that it completely changes the sign of $`v_4`$, while the other coefficients remain largely the same. Clearly $`v_4`$ at low and intermediate $`p_T`$ has therefore a strong potential to constrain model calculations and carries valuable information on the dynamical evolution of the system. To study how the higher flow anisotropies develop in the course of the hydrodynamic evolution we calculate moments of the transverse flow field $`(v_x,v_y)`$ through

$$\delta _n(\tau )=\frac{𝑑x𝑑ye(x,y;\tau )\gamma v_T\mathrm{cos}(n\phi _v)}{𝑑x𝑑ye(x,y;\tau )\gamma },$$
(2)
where $`e(x,y;\tau )`$ is the energy density in the transverse plane at time $`\tau `$ and $`v_T=(v_x^2+v_y^2)^{1/2}`$ is the transverse flow velocity at a given point $`(x,y)`$, $`\gamma =(1v_T^2)^{1/2}`$, and $`\phi _v=\mathrm{arctan}(v_y/v_x)`$ is the angle of the local flow velocity with respect to the reaction plane. (Note that for $`n=0`$ this reduces to the definition of the mean radial velocity used in earlier studies , but for $`n=2`$ it is slightly different from the momentum anisotropy $`ϵ_p`$ which is defined in terms of the difference in the diagonal elements of the energy momentum tensor.) Figure 3 displays the time evolution of the flow coefficients and clearly shows that radial flow $`\delta _0`$ increases throughout the lifetime of the system (which is about 15 fm/$`c`$), with a somewhat reduced acceleration while most of the system is in the mixed phase at around 4 fm/$`c`$. Quite oppositely anisotropy components quickly saturate and remain constant, as the initial geometric deformation of the source is lost. About 2/3 of the final value of $`\delta _4`$ is generated during the earliest stages of the evolution, where the system is governed by the hard equation of state of the quark gluon plasma. $`\delta _6`$ quickly achieves small negative values of the order of -0.2 % (as expected from the negative value of $`v_6`$). Due to its small values, it is subject to numerical fluctuations and therefore not shown. It is expected that the flow coefficients are monotonically related to the anisotropy coefficients in the final particle spectra. Details of this relation are subject to future study.

In a model complementary to the hydrodynamic description which is constrained to the low momentum, thermalized part of the spectrum, one can study anisotropies that result from opacity effects that the deformed initial geometry exerts on particles of high momenta . Assuming extreme opacity, or extreme jet quenching, particles of large transverse momenta from any part of the surface can only be emitted within $`\pm 90^{}`$ of the normal vector to the surface, which for this exploratory study is assumed to be given by the overlap of two hard spheres (radius $`R`$). Relaxing this geometrical constraint by adopting a finite diffuseness of the nuclei reduces the resulting asymmetries, far below the experimental results, and novel effects are required to explain those large limiting values .  In this picture, the $`n`$th Fourier coefficient of the resulting expansion is found to be (for $`n`$ even)

$$v_n=(1)^{n/2}\frac{1}{1n^2}\frac{\mathrm{sin}(n\alpha )}{n\alpha },$$
(3)
where $`\alpha =\mathrm{arccos}(b/2R)`$ characterizes the centrality in terms of the opening angle between the line through the center of one nucleus to the intersection point of the two nuclear spheres and the reaction plane. Note that as $`b`$ increases from 0 to $`2R`$, $`\alpha `$ decreases from $`\pi /2`$ to 0. For $`n=2`$, $`v_2=\mathrm{sin}(2\alpha )/(6\alpha )`$, a formula first given by Voloshin . For $`n>2`$, Eq. 3 becomes significantly more interesting (unfortunately, however, the size of the expected signal drops with $`n^3`$). Note first the oscillating sign of the prefactor which will manifest itself in an oscillation of the coefficients at large $`b`$ (small $`\alpha `$). Second, one notices that for larger $`n`$ the sine function starts changing sign upon scanning impact parameters ($`b\alpha `$), whereas for $`n=2`$, the Fourier coefficient increases linearly with impact parameter from 0 to 1/3, and is thus always positive. In particular for $`n=4`$ one observes a transition from positive to negative values at $`b=\sqrt{2}R`$, reaching the limiting value $`v_4=1/156.67\%`$ for $`b2R`$, again a rather large number. The local maximum of $`v_4`$ is at $`b0.865R`$ with $`v_41.45\%`$. The centrality dependences of the second to eighth Fourier coefficients are shown in Fig. 4 (as before $`v_2`$ is divided by a factor of 10).

Clearly, the expected values for higher expansion coefficients from this calculation are small. Applying a more realistic model does, however, not necessarily lead to a further reduction of the signal, but might in contrast increase, similarly as observed for calculations of elliptic flow . This is also suggested by the experimental data on $`v_2`$ which seem to exceed the limits given even by the most optimistic assumptions for anisotropies from geometry and energy loss. In any case, such a distinctive signal as a sign change upon variation of centrality should be preserved when model calculations get refined and should be accessible within the statistics reached by today’s experiments.

As an aside we would like to discuss a new but naive experimental way of measuring higher order flow coefficients, in particular $`v_4`$. Apart from the “straightforward” method to determine each event’s reaction plane and averaging all particles’ $`\mathrm{cos}(4\phi )`$ with respect to the reaction plane and the more recently developed cumulant technique , simply measuring the particle spectra with respect to the reaction plane might be sufficient (theoretically). Having the azimuthally sensitive particle spectra given, Eq. (1) shows directly that \[abbreviating $`dN/p_Tdp_Tdyd\phi (p_T,\phi )=n(\phi )`$\]

$`n(0)+n(\pi /2)2n(\pi /4)=`$ (4)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{dN}{p_Tdp_T}}\left[8v_4(p_T)+8v_{12}(p_T)+\mathrm{}\right].`$ (5)
From the experience gathered so far we expect $`v_{12}`$ to be negligibly small compared to $`v_4`$. Finite opening angles for the azimuthally sensitive distribution will reduce the signal again, however, the $`v_4`$ is in this approach enhanced by a factor of 8, which might still render it measurable. We propose this method thus as an interesting independent approach to measure $`v_4`$ (but also $`v_2`$, by simply subtracting spectra in and out of the reaction plane).

In summary, we have shown that $`v_4(p_T)`$ might achieve significantly large values at intermediate and large transverse momenta in noncentral heavy ion collisions and contains important physics of heavy ion collisions, a fact largely overlooked in the past. Numerical estimates for its size were given both in the limit of full thermalization with a subsequent hydrodynamic expansion as well as in the geometrical limit of extreme “jet quenching.” For the latter case a strong centrality dependence and a change of the sign of the signal for higher anisotropies was found. From both approximations we found that $`v_4`$ might reach values of the order of 5%, clearly observable with todays equipment and statistics. $`v_4`$ has been found to be highly dependent on the initial configuration of the system and its evolution and is thus an important new tool to constrain model calculations and analyze details of the system’s history. Consequently it deserves to be studied in great detail both experimentally as well as theoretically.

Acknowledgments: Discussions with J. Casalderrey-Solana, U. Heinz, B. Jacak, J. Jia, A. Poskanzer, E. Shuryak, and R. Snellings are greatly appreciated. This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-88ER40388 and by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.


text:
# Giant radio-frequency magnetoabsorption effect in the cobaltite ceramic La0.5Sr0.5CoO3

## I Introduction

In recent years much attention has been given to mixed-valence cobaltites of the type La1-xSrxCoO3-δ ($`0<x0.5`$) itoh ; ganguly ; senaris ; mahen ; golovan . Although the system was studied for more than 50 years, not a few of its unique magnetic and transport properties are still puzzling. The parent compound LaCoO3 is a non-magnetic insulator. For the doping range $`0.3<x0.5`$, the system is ferromagnetic (FM) with the Curie temperature, $`T_c`$, in the range 220-250 K itoh ; ganguly ; senaris ; mahen .

It should be pointed out that much more interest is being shown in related FM perovskite-like oxides, mixed-valence manganites, of the type La1-xAxMnO3, where A is a divalent alkaline-earth element like Ca, Sr, Ba coey ; dagotto . In these compounds, the effect of so-called colossal magnetoresistance (CMR) is found which offers applications in advanced technology. It is usual, in this connection, when considering properties of the cobaltites to compare them with those of the manganites. The magnetoresistance (MR) in manganites, defined as $`\delta (H)=[R(0)R(H)]/R(0)`$, is found to be more than 90 % at a field $`H`$ of about 60 kOe in the neighbourhood of room temperature. In spite of enormous efforts, a clear understanding of CMR is not yet available, though some models describe experimental data with an acceptable accuracy coey ; dagotto ; beznos1 . Beside this, the requirement of high magnetic fields hampers the possible application of the CMR manganites. In the Sr-doped cobaltites, the magnitude of the MR is found to be rather low (only a few per cent). It is hoped that elucidation of large difference in the MR between the manganites and cobaltites could be helpful for understanding the nature of CMR beznos1 ; beznos2 .

The study presented in this article is inspired to a certain extent by results of Ref. belev, , where transport properties in a bulk ceramic sample and a film of La0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ were measured by DC and microwave (41 GHz) methods. It was found that the film presents a highly inhomogeneous system of weakly connected FM grains. The most important finding in Ref. belev,  is the following: the microwave conductivity of the film, which should be related mainly to the conductivity within the poorly connected grains, increases by an order of magnitude at the transition to the FM state. This change is huge in comparison with the 10% decrease in the film DC resistivity found in the same temperature range. The main conclusion of Ref. belev,  is that the microwave absorption reflects more closely the temperature variations in intragrain conductivity of inhomogeneous oxides than the DC conductivity.

It is known that absorption of electromagnetic waves in FM metals is determined not only by the conductivity, but by the magnetic permeability, $`\mu `$, of absorbing media as well. At a fairly high frequency, the magnitude of $`\mu `$ is close to unity. The second feature of the microwaves is their small penetration depth, which is called the skin depth. In good conductors, the skin depth of microwaves is a few micrometers. This is quite enough for thin films, but it often causes a problem in the study of bulk samples. The surface layer of bulk samples can have differing properties from the interior. This is especially true in the case of FM oxides (including cobaltites), where a surface is often depleted in oxygen belev . It is advisable, in this connection, to use low-frequency waves to study bulk samples to ensure a fairly large skin depth. But in this case the influence of permeability on the absorption of these waves should be expected.

It follows from the results of Ref. belev,  that high-frequency wave absorption might be much more sensitive to an applied magnetic field than DC resistivity. The aim of this study was to test this assumption. The subject of investigation was a bulk sample of La0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ. Radio-frequency (RF) waves penetrating most of the sample volume were used. We have found a giant magnetoabsorption (about 38%) near the Curie temperature in a rather small magnetic field 2.1 kOe. This differs drastically from the measured MR values (the $`\delta (H)`$ is about 0.26 % in this field). The reasons for the giant magnetoabsorption effect are considered.

## II Experimental method

The ceramic samples of La0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ are all cut from the same pellet, prepared by a standard solid-state reaction technique. The pellet was polycrystalline with grain size in the range 40-70 $`\mu `$m. Some other details of the sample preparation and characterization can be found in Ref. belev, . The measurements of the AC permeability were done by an induction technique using a non-commercial magnetometer in AC magnetic field $`H_{\mathrm{ac}}=4`$ Oe and frequency 10 kHz. The DC resistance, as a function of temperature and magnetic field $`H`$ (up to 20 kOe), was measured using a standard four-point probe technique.

The sample for RF measurements (with dimensions 21.6$`\times `$7$`\times `$4 mm3) was placed in an induction coil (9.7 mm in diameter and with a height approximately equal to the longest side of the sample). This coil is a part of an LC tank circuit. The magnitude of RF magnetic field in the induction coil was not more than 0.1 Oe. The measurements of the quality factor, $`Q`$, of the LC tank with and without the sample inside the coil were taken. The measurements of the $`Q`$-factor depending on temperature or magnetic field were taken at fixed frequencies. In this article, we present the results for the frequency $`\nu =1.33`$ MHz. The available cryostat with electromagnet makes it possible to measure the $`Q`$-factor in DC magnetic fields up to 2.5 kOe. The DC and RF fields were mutually perpendicular. The temperature and magnetic-field dependences of the $`Q`$-factor were recorded on heating after the sample had been cooled down in zero field.

Consider more exactly physical properties of the sample which can be derived or, at least, judged by from the $`Q`$-factor measurements of the RF LC tank employed. In the general case, the sample behavior in an electromagnetic field can be described, using complex permittivity $`ϵ_\mathrm{c}=ϵ^{^{}}\mathrm{i}ϵ^{^{\prime \prime }}=ϵ^{^{}}\left[1\mathrm{i}\mathrm{tan}(\delta _ϵ)\right]`$ (where $`ϵ^{^{}}=ϵ_rϵ_0`$, $`\mathrm{tan}(\delta _ϵ)=\sigma _{\mathrm{rf}}/(ϵ^{^{}}\omega )`$ is the dielectric loss tangent, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rf}}`$ is the RF conductivity of the sample) and complex magnetic permeability $`\mu _\mathrm{c}=\mu ^{^{}}\mathrm{i}\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}=\mu ^{^{}}\left[1\mathrm{i}\mathrm{tan}(\delta _\mu )\right]`$, where $`\mu ^{^{}}=\mu _\mathrm{r}\mu _0`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}(\delta _\mu )=\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}/\mu ^{^{}}`$. For a plane electromagnetic wave, the complex resistance of the sample is given by relation

$$Z_\mathrm{c}=\sqrt{\frac{\mu _\mathrm{c}}{ϵ_\mathrm{c}}}=Z_0\sqrt{\frac{\mu _\mathrm{r}}{ϵ_\mathrm{r}}\left(\frac{1\mathrm{i}\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}/\mu ^{^{}}}{1\mathrm{i}\sigma _{\mathrm{rf}}/ϵ^{^{}}\omega }\right)}=R_\mathrm{c}+\mathrm{i}X_\mathrm{c},$$
(1)
where $`Z_0=120`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`R_\mathrm{c}`$ defines the energy loss in the sample, $`X_\mathrm{c}`$ is the sample reactance.

Once the sample with the wave resistance $`Z_\mathrm{c}`$ is inserted into the coil of the RF circuit, arranged from resistance, inductance and capacitance elements $`R_0`$, $`L_0`$ and $`C_0`$, a complex resistance is added to the circuit, given by

$$Z_{\mathrm{sp}}=kZ_\mathrm{c}=R_{\mathrm{sp}}+\mathrm{i}X_{\mathrm{sp}},$$
(2)
where $`k`$ is a geometrical factor determined by the sample and coil dimensions, which was about 0.38 in this study. The $`Q`$-factor of the circuit without the sample is expressed as $`Q_0=\omega L_0/R_0`$. It is often more convenient to use the damping factor (or decrement) $`d=Q^1`$. The decrement of the circuit without the sample is, therefore, $`d_0=R_0/\omega L_0`$. On inserting the sample into the coil the circuit decrement changes to $`d=(R_0+kR_\mathrm{c})/[\omega (L_0+kL_\mathrm{c})].`$ In the case that the sample causes merely small changes in the circuit inductance ($`kL_\mathrm{c}L_0`$) and the circuit quality without the sample is fairly high ($`\omega L_0/R_01`$), the expression for the difference $`dd_0=P_\mathrm{A}`$ can be written as

$$P_\mathrm{A}=k\frac{R_\mathrm{c}}{\omega L_0}=k\frac{R_\mathrm{c}}{R_0Q_0}.$$
(3)
It is seen from it that $`P_\mathrm{A}`$ is determined by the loss in the sample. For the further analysis of the situation it is useful to consider the following approximations: $`\mathrm{tan}(\delta _ϵ)1`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}(\delta _\mu )1`$. This enables us to write the Eq. 3 in the form

$$P_\mathrm{A}=k_0\left(1+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}}{\mu ^{^{}}}\right)R_s$$
(4)
where $`k_0=k/(\omega L_0)`$, $`R_s=(\omega \mu ^{^{}}/2\sigma _{\mathrm{rf}})^{1/2}=(\omega \mu ^{^{}}\rho _{\mathrm{rf}}/2)^{1/2}`$ is the surface resistance, $`\rho _{\mathrm{rf}}`$ is the RF resistivity. The Eq. 4 present a simplified way to take into account the influence of the conductivity and permeability on the RF loss.

## III Results and discussion

The temperature dependence of the real part, $`\mu _\mathrm{r}`$, of the relative AC permeability of the sample studied is shown in Fig. 1. The value of $`T_\mathrm{c}250`$ K is found if $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ is defined as the temperature of the inflection point in the $`\mu _\mathrm{r}(T)`$ curve. In general, the behavior of $`\mu _\mathrm{r}(T)`$ agrees well with the known studies of the AC susceptibilty in ceramic La0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ ganguly ; mukh ; anil . When going from high to lower temperature, the relative AC permeability increases slightly between 320 K and 250 K, then it increases sharply at $`T=T_\mathrm{c}250`$ K and reaches its maximum at a temperature $`T_{\mathrm{max}}=232`$ K. A considerable decrease in $`\mu _\mathrm{r}(T)`$ (or AC susceptibility) below $`T_{\mathrm{max}}`$ (Fig. 1) is a well-known feature of cobaltites. It is attributed to the cluster-glass behavior ganguly  or to an increase in the coercivity with decreasing temperature anil . Figure 1 demonstrates a high sensitivity of the $`\mu _\mathrm{r}(T)`$ to an external magnetic field: even a fairly low field (40 Oe) causes a considerable decrease in $`\mu _\mathrm{r}(T)`$. The effect is maximal at $`T=T_{\mathrm{max}}`$. When going to either side from $`T_{\mathrm{max}}`$, the influence of the magnetic field becomes weaker. In particular, it is negligible for $`T100`$ K.

The temperature dependence of the DC resistivity, $`\rho (T)`$, is shown in Fig. 2. The $`\rho `$-values were calculated taking into account the porosity of the sample belev . The $`\rho (T)`$ behavior is metallic ($`\mathrm{d}\rho /\mathrm{d}T>0`$) over the whole temperature range investigated, below and above $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. This behavior (and the resistivity values) agree with the known data on ceramic La0.5Sr0.5CoO3 ganguly . The $`\rho (T)`$ dependence exhibits a change of slope at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ (see insert in Fig. 2) due to a contribution from the electron scattering on the spin disorder (in addition to the usual contributions from crystal lattice defects and electron-phonon scattering) vons . This “magnetic” contribution to the resistivity, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _m`$, depends on the magnetization. The external magnetic field enhances the spin order (that is, the magnetization), which leads to a decrease in the resistivity, that is to negative MR. The magnetic-field dependences of resistance of the sample studied are shown in Fig. 3. It is seen that the MR depends strongly on temperature. The temperature dependence of the MR at $`H=20`$ kOe is presented in Fig. 4. This behavior is quite common for FM oxides (like manganites and cobaltites). The MR is maximal at $`TT_\mathrm{c}`$. It goes down rather steeply for temperature deviating to either side from $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. This temperature behavior of the MR is expected for FM oxides of fairly good crystal perfection or for polycrystalline samples with rather strong connectivity between the crystallites. Indeed, the MR amplitude is determined by the ability of an external magnetic field to increase the magnetization. It is obvious that at low temperatures ($`TT_\mathrm{c}`$), when nearly all spins are already aligned by the exchange interaction, this ability is minimal. For increasing temperature and, especially, at temperature close to $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, the magnetic order becomes weaker (the magnetization goes down) due to thermal fluctuations. In this case the possibility to strengthen the magnetic order with an external magnetic field increases profoundly. This is the reason for maximal MR magnitude near $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. Above $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, the spin arrangement becomes essentially random, the magnetization is zero, and, therefore, the MR is close to zero as well.

Consider now the behavior of the RF loss $`P_\mathrm{A}`$ in the sample studied. We begin with the temperature behavior $`P_\mathrm{A}(T)`$ in zero field (Fig. 5). In doing so we will refer to Eq. 4. It is worthwhile to mention here that certain mutual correlations in the temperature behavior of $`\mu ^{^{}}`$ and $`\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}`$ can be expected. It follows immediately from the Kramers-Kronig relations white . These are helpful in consideration of a remarkable correlation between the temperature behavior of the loss and the permeability $`\mu _\mathrm{r}`$ found in this study. The correlation is evident at once on comparing Figs. 1 and 5. It is clear that far enough above $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ the relations, $`\mu _\mathrm{r}=1`$ and $`\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}=0`$, are true. In this case, according to Eq. 4, the loss depends only on the conductivity. In FM oxides, like mixed-valence manganites and cobaltites, the FM fluctuations (or developing of small FM regions in the paramagnetic matrix) can be evident, however, fairly far above $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ for extrinsic and intrinsic sources of magnetic inhomogeneity itoh ; senaris ; mahen ; dagotto ; belev . In that event, as the $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ is approached from above, the slight increase in the susceptibility or permeability can be observed even in the range far from $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. This will cause a corresponding increase in the loss. The drastic increase in $`P_\mathrm{A}`$ occurs, however, only quite near $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ due the sharp increase in $`\mu ^{^{}}`$ at transition of the most of the sample volume to the FM state (Figs. 1 and 5). Notice that the conductivity increases with temperature decreasing in the whole temperature range studied (Fig. 2) and this (according to the Eq. 4) favors a decrease in the loss. Contribution of the permeability to temperature variations of the loss is, however, far more than that of the conductivity, so, as a result, the loss increases at the transition to the FM state. For further decrease in temperature below $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ the loss comes to some maximal value at $`T230`$ K and, after that, goes down (Fig. 5). All this correlates well with the $`\mu _\mathrm{r}(T)`$ behavior (Fig. 1). Even the temperatures of the maxima for $`P_\mathrm{A}`$ and $`\mu _\mathrm{r}(T)`$ curves are both at about 230 K.

It is seen that the RF loss is far more sensitive to strengthening of the spin order at the transition to the FM state than the DC conductivity. Really, $`\rho (T)`$ shows only a change in the slope at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ that means the steeper decrease in resistivity with temperature decreasing below $`T<T_\mathrm{c}`$ (Fig. 2). In contrast to this, the RF loss increases sharply (nearly twice) in the vicinity of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ in zero field (Fig. 5). This indicates that it is precisely the changes in the permeability that cause the large variations in the loss near $`T_\mathrm{c}`$.

From measurements of the loss, $`P_\mathrm{A}`$, at different magnetic fields we have obtained the values of the magnetoabsorption (MA), which has been defined as $`[P_\mathrm{A}(H)P_\mathrm{A}(0)]/P_\mathrm{A}(0)=\mathrm{\Delta }P_\mathrm{A}(H)/P_\mathrm{A}(0)`$. Using the above-mentioned approximation, $`\mathrm{tan}(\delta _\mu )=\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}/\mu ^{^{}}1`$, and taking into account Eq. 4, a simplified expression for MA can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P_\mathrm{A}(H)/P_\mathrm{A}(0)\frac{R_s(H)}{R_s(0)}1=\sqrt{\frac{\mu ^{^{}}(H)\rho _{\mathrm{rf}}(H)}{\mu ^{^{}}(0)\rho _{\mathrm{rf}}(0)}}1.$$
(5)
This shows immediately the correlation between the $`P_\mathrm{A}(T)`$ and $`\mu ^{^{}}(T)`$. It is clear from Eqs. 4 and 5 that owing to decrease in $`\rho _{\mathrm{rf}}`$ and $`\mu ^{^{}}`$ in an applied magnetic field, the MA should be negative. This is consistent with the results found. We actually found a high sensitivity of the RF loss to applied magnetic field (Figs. 5, 6, 7). It is remarkable that the strong magnetoabsorption effect shows itself in rather low magnetic fields. The effect is really giant when compared with the DC magnetoresistance. Not far from $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, at $`T_{\mathrm{max}}230`$ K, the MA is about 38% in field $`H=2.1`$ kOe (Fig. 6). By contrast, the MR is about 0.26 % near $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ in the above-mentioned field (Fig. 3) and it has increased no more than to about 2.15 % at field $`H=20`$ kOe (Figs. 3 and 4).

The reason why the magnetoabsorption effect is far stronger than the MR one appears rather obvious. As indicated above, the MR in the vicinity and below $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ is determined by the enhancing of the spin order (magnetization) in an applied magnetic field. This leads to the conductivity increasing (that is to the negative MR). Unlike the DC magnetoresistance, the magnetoabsorption is determined not only by influence of the magnetic field on the conductivity, but, to a much greater extent, by changes in the permeability in the magnetic field. The remarkable correlation between behaviors of the $`P_\mathrm{A}(T)`$ and the $`\mu _\mathrm{r}(T)`$ was mentioned above. No less noteworthy correlation can be found between the behaviors of $`P_\mathrm{A}`$ and the $`\mu _\mathrm{r}`$ in an applied magnetic field (compare Figs. 1 and 6).

It follows that the giant magnetoabsorption effect is qualitatively explicable taking into account a decrease in the DC permeability. The RF resistivity, $`\rho _{\mathrm{rf}}`$, decreases in magnetic field as well and, therefore, gives also some contribution to this effect. It could be expected belev , that RF resistivity is more sensitive to magnetic field than DC resistivity. We cannot, however, separate a contribution of RF resistivity to the magnetoabsorption. In any case, however, the above-described results testify that this contribution is negligible as compared to that of the permeability.

No direct measurements of $`\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}`$ in the La0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ or other Sr-doped cobaltites have been made, to our knowledge. It is known that the value of $`\mu ^{^{}}`$ decreases with increasing frequency vons , but it can be large for fairly low frequencies. This tendency, general for FM metals, is found to hold for related perovskite-like oxides as well. For example, for polycrystalline manganite La0.3Sr0.7MnO3 the magnitude of $`\mu ^{^{}}`$ is fairly close to unity at $`\nu =100`$ MHz, but in the 1-MHz-range it can be significantly larger than unity wang1 . In this case the relation, $`\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}/\mu ^{^{}}1`$, holds.

In conclusion, we found the giant negative RF magnetoabsorption effect in bulk sample of La0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ under low DC magnetic fields. The effect should be attributed primarily to the changes in the magnetic permeability in applied magnetic field. Such low-field magnetoabsorption may be of potential application in RF devices controlled by magnetic field knobel . It is clear that effective temperature range for application of any material with giant magnetoabsorption is determined by its $`T_c`$ value. For the range near or above room temperature, the manganite La1-xSrxMnO3 with $`0.25<x<0.35`$ is suggested.