text:
# Nuclear and nucleon transitions of the H di-baryon

## I Introduction

The most symmetric color-spin representation of six quarks ($`uuddss`$) is called the H dibaryon. It is flavor singlet with strangeness -2, charge 0, and spin-isospin-parity $`I(J^P)=0(0^+)`$. In 1977 Jaffe calculated its mass jaffe  to be about 2150 MeV in the MIT-bag model and thus predicted it would be a strong-interaction-stable bound state, since decay to two $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ particles would not be kinematically allowed. Since then its mass has been estimated in many different models, with results lying in the range 1 – 2.3 GeV. On the experimental side, there have been many inconclusive or unsuccessful attempts to produce and detect it. See H  for a review.

The purpose of this paper is to study several processes involving the H which are phenomenologically important if it exists: conversion of two $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s in a doubly-strange hypernucleus to an H, decay of the H to two baryons, and – if the H is light enough – conversion of two nucleons in a nucleus to an H. The amplitudes for these processes depend on the spatial wavefunction overlap of two baryons and an H. We are particularly interested in the possibility that the H is tightly bound and that it has a mass less than $`m_N+m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. In the case, as we shall see, its lifetime is longer than the age of the Universe.

If the H is tightly bound, it would be expected to be spatially compact. Hadron sizes vary considerably, for a number of reasons. For instance the nucleon is more than twice as large as the pion, with charge radius $`r_N=0.88`$ fm compared to $`r_\pi =0.38`$ fm. Lattice and instanton-liquid studies can account for these diverse radii and further predict that the glueball is even more tightly bound: $`r_G(1/41/6)r_N`$ shuryak:RG . If the analogy suggested in ref. kf:Lam1405  between H, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{1405}`$ and glueball is correct, it would suggest $`r_Hr_G\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/4r_N`$. The above size relationships make sense: the nucleon’s large size is due to the low mass of the pion which forms an extended cloud around it, while the H and glueball do not couple to pions, due to parity and flavor conservation, are thus are small compared to the nucleon. In the absence of an unquenched, high-resolution lattice QCD calculation capable of a reliable determination of the H mass and size, we will consider all values of $`m_H`$ and take $`r_H/r_N1/f`$ as a parameter, with $`f`$ in the range 2-6. For a more detailed discussion of the motivation and properties of a stable or long-lived H and a review of experimental constraints on such an H, see ref. f:stableH .

In this paper we calculate the lifetime for decay of the H to various final states, and we consider two types of experimental constraints on the transition of two baryons to an H in a nucleus, $`A_{BB}A_H^{}X`$. To estimate the rates for these processes requires calculating the overlap of initial and final quark wavefunctions. We model that overlap using an Isgur-Karl harmonic oscillator model for the baryons and H, and the Bethe-Goldstone wavefunction for a nucleus. The results depend on $`r_N/r_H`$ and the nuclear hard core radius.

Experiments observing single $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decays from double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei $`A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ags ; kek2  indicate that $`\tau (A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}A_H^{}X)\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^{10}`$ sec. Our calculations show that adequate suppression of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}A_H^{}X)`$ requires $`r_H\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/2r_N`$, consistent with expectations, Thus an H with mass $`m_H<2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can still be viable in spite of the observation of double-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei, as also found in ref. kahana .

We calculate the lifetime of the H, in three qualitatively distinct mass ranges, under the assumption that the conditions to satisfy the constraints from double-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei are met. The ranges are $`m_H<m_N+m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, in which H decay is a doubly-weak $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=2`$ process, $`m_N+m_\mathrm{\Lambda }<m_H<2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, in which the H can decay by a normal weak interaction, and $`m_H>2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, in which the H is strong-interaction unstable. The H lifetime, in these ranges respectively, is a few$`\times 10^{12}`$ yr, about a month, and $`10^9`$ sec.

Finally, if $`m_H\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}m_N`$, nuclei are unstable to $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=2`$ weak decays converting two nucleons to an H. In this case, the stability of nuclei is a more stringent constraint than the double-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclear observations, but our results show that nuclear stability bounds can also be satisfied if the H is sufficiently compact: $`r_H\stackrel{<}{}1/4r_N`$ depending on mass and nuclear hard core radius, although this option is vulnerable to experimental exclusion by SuperK.

This paper is organized as follows. In section II we describe in greater detail the two types of experimental constraints on the conversion of baryons to an H in a nucleus. In section III we setup the theoretical apparatus to calculate the wavefunction overlap between H and two baryons. We determine the weak interaction matrix elements phenomenologically in section IV. Lifetimes for various processes are computed in sections V.2 and VI. The results are reviewed and conclusions are summarized in section VII.

## II Experimental constraints

### II.1 Double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hyper-nucleus detection

There are five experiments which have reported positive results in the search for single $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decays from double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei. We will describe them briefly. The three early emulsion based experiments prowse ; danysz ; kek  suffer from ambiguities in the particle identification, and therefore we do not consider them further. In the latest emulsion experiment at KEK kek2 , an event has been observed which is interpreted with good confidence as the sequential decay of $`\mathrm{He}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}^6`$ emitted from a $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ hyperon nuclear capture at rest. The binding energy of the double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ system is obtained in this experiment to be $`B_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}=1.01\pm 0.2`$ MeV, in significant disagreement with the results of previous emulsion experiments, finding $`B_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}4.5`$ MeV.

The BNL experiment ags  used the $`(K^{},K^+)`$ reaction on a $`\mathrm{Be}^9`$ target to produce S=-2 nuclei. That experiment detected pion pairs coming from the same vertex in the Be target. Each pion in a pair indicates one unit of strangeness change from the (presumably) di-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ system. Observed peaks in the two pion spectrum have been interpreted as corresponding to two kinds of decay events. The pion kinetic energies in those peaks are (114,133) MeV and (104,114) MeV. The first peak can be understood as two independent single $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decays from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ nuclei. The energies of the second peak do not correspond to known single $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay energies in hyper-nuclei of interest. The proposed explanationags  is that they are pions from the decay of the double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ system, through some specific He resonance. The required resonance has not yet been observed experimentally, but its existence is considered plausible. This experiment does not suffer from low statistics or inherent ambiguities, and one of the measured peaks in the two pion spectrum suggests observation of consecutive weak decays of a double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hyper-nucleus. The binding energy of the double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ system $`B_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ could not be determined in this experiment.

The KEK and BNL experiments are generally accepted to demonstrate quite conclusively, in two different techniques, the observation of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decays from double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei. Therefore $`\tau _{A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}A_H^{}X}`$ cannot be much less than $`10^{10}`$s. (To give a more precise limit on $`\tau _{A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}A_H^{}X}`$ requires a detailed analysis by the experimental teams, taking into account the number of hypernuclei produced, the number of observed $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decays, the acceptance, and so on.) As will be seen below, this constraint is readily satisfied if the H is compact: $`r_H\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/2r_N`$.

### II.2 Stability of nuclei

There are a number of possible reactions by which two nucleons can convert to an H in a nucleus if that is kinematically allowed ($`m_H\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}m_N`$). The initial nucleons are most likely to be $`pn`$ or $`nn`$ in a relative s-wave, because in other cases the Coulomb barrier or relative orbital angular momentum suppresses the overlap of the nucleons at short distances which is necessary to produce the H. If $`m_H\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}m_Nnm_\pi `$111Throughout, we use this shorthand for the more precise inequality $`m_H<m_Am_A^{}m_X`$ where $`m_X`$ is the minimum invariant mass of the final decay products., the final state can be $`H\pi ^+`$ or $`H\pi ^0`$ and $`n1`$ pions with total charge 0. For $`m_H\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1740}`$ MeV, the most important reactions are $`pnHe^+\nu _e`$ or the radiative-doubly-weak reaction $`nnH\gamma `$.

The best experiments to place a limit on the stability of nuclei are proton decay experiments. Super Kamiokande (SuperK), can place the most stringent constraint due to its large mass. It is a water Cerenkov detector with a 22.5 kiloton fiducial mass, corresponding to $`810^{32}`$ oxygen nuclei. SuperK is sensitive to proton decay events in over 40 proton decay channelsSuperK . Since the signatures for the transition of two nucleons to the H are substantially different from the monitored transitions, a specific analysis by SuperK is needed to place a limit. We will discuss the order-of-magnitude of the limits which can be anticipated.

Detection is easiest if the H is light enough to be produced with a $`\pi ^+`$ or $`\pi ^0`$. The efficiency of SuperK to detect neutral pions, in the energy range of interest (KE $`0300`$ MeV), is around 70 percent. In the case that a $`\pi ^+`$ is emitted, it can charge exchange to a $`\pi ^0`$ within the detector, or be directly detected as a non-showering muon-like particle with similar efficiency. More difficult is the most interesting mass range $`m_H\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1740}`$ MeV, for which the dominant channel $`pnHe^+\nu `$ gives an electron with $`E(2m_Nm_H)/2\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}70}`$ MeV. The channel $`nnH\gamma `$, whose rate is smaller by a factor of order $`\alpha `$, would give a monochromatic photon with energy $`(2m_Nm_H)\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}100}`$ MeV.

We can estimate SuperK’s probable sensitivity as follows. The ultimate background comes primarily from atmospheric neutrino interactions, $`\nu NN^{}(e,\mu ),\nu NN^{}(e,\mu )+n\pi `$ and $`\nu N\nu N^{}+n\pi `$, for which the event rate is about 100 per kton-yr. Without a strikingly distinct signature, it would be difficult to detect a signal rate significantly smaller than this, which would imply SuperK might be able to achieve a sensitivity of order $`\tau _{A_{NN}A_H^{}X}\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{few10}^{29}`$ yr. Since the H production signature is not more favorable than the signatures for proton decay, the SuperK limit on $`\tau _{A_{NN}A_H^{}X}`$ can at best be $`0.1\tau _p`$, where $`0.1`$ is the ratio of Oxygen nuclei to protons in water. Detailed study of the spectrum of the background is needed to make a more precise statement. We can get a lower limit on the SuperK lifetime limit by noting that the SuperK trigger rate is a few HzSuperK , putting an immediate limit $`\tau _{OH+X}\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{few10}^{25}`$ yr, assuming the decays trigger SuperK.

SuperK limits will apply to specific decay channels, but other experiments potentially establish limits on the rate at which nucleons in a nucleus convert to an H which are independent of the H production reaction. These experiments place weaker constraints on this rate due to their smaller size, but they are of interest because in principle they measure the stability of nuclei directly. Among those cited in ref. pdb , only the experiment by Flerov et. al.flerov  could in principle be sensitive to transitions of two nucleons to the H. It searched for decay products from $`\mathrm{Th}^{232}`$, above the Th natural decay mode background of 4.7 MeV $`\alpha `$ particles, emitted at the rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha =0.710^{10}\mathrm{yr}^1`$. Cuts to remove the severe background of 4.7 MeV $`\alpha `$’s may or may not remove events with production of an H. Unfortunately ref. flerov  does not discuss these cuts or the experimental sensitivity in detail. An attempt to correspond with the experimental group, to determine whether their results are applicable to the H, was unsuccessful. If applicable, it would establish that the lifetime $`\tau _{\mathrm{Th}^{232}H+X}>10^{21}`$ yr.

Better channel independent limits on $`N`$ and $`NN`$ decays in nuclei have been established recently, as summarized in ref. BOREXINO . Among them, searches for the radioactive decay of isotopes created as a result of $`NN`$ decays of a parent nucleus yield the most stringent constraints. This method was first exploited in the DAMA liquid Xe detector DAMA . BOREXINO has recently improved these resultsBOREXINO  using their prototype detector, the Counting Test Facility (CTF) with parent nuclei $`\mathrm{C}^{12},\mathrm{C}^{13}\mathrm{and}\mathrm{O}^{16}`$. The signal in these experiments is the beta and gamma radiation in a specified energy range associated with deexcitation of a daughter nucleus created by decay of outer-shell nucleons in the parent nucleus. They obtain the limits $`\tau _{pp}>510^{25}`$ yr and $`\tau _{nn}>4.910^{25}`$ yr. However H production requires overlap of the nucleon wavefunctions at short distances and is therefore suppressed for outer shell nucleons, severely reducing the utility of these limits. Since the SuperK limits will probably be much better, we do not attempt to estimate the degree of suppression at this time.

Another approach could be useful if for some reason the direct SuperK search is foiled. Ref. suzuki  places a limit on the lifetime of a bound neutron, $`\tau _n>4.910^{26}`$ yr, by searching for $`\gamma `$’s with energy $`E_\gamma =1950`$ MeV in the Kamiokande detector. The idea is that after the decay of a neutron in oxygen the de-excitation of $`O^{15}`$ proceeds by emission of $`\gamma `$’s in the given energy range. The background is especially low for $`\gamma `$’s of these energies, since atmospheric neutrino events produce $`\gamma `$’s above 100 MeV. In our case, some of the photons in the de-excitation process after conversion of $`pn`$ to H, would be expected to fall in this energy window.

## III Overlap of H and two baryons

We wish to calculate the amplitudes for a variety of processes, some of which require one or more weak interactions to change strange quarks into light quarks. By working in pole approximation, we factor the problem into an H-baryon-baryon wavefunction overlap times a weak interaction matrix element between strange and non-strange baryons, which will be estimated in the next section. For instance, the matrix element for the transition of two nucleons in a nucleus $`A`$ to an H and nucleus $`A^{}`$, $`A_{NN}A_H^{}X`$, is calculated in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ pole approximation, as the product of matrix elements for two subprocesses: a transition matrix element for formation of the H from the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ system in the nucleus, $`||_{\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}HX}`$, times the amplitude for a weak doubly-strangeness-changing transition, $`||_{NN\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. We ignore mass differences between light and strange quarks and thus the spatial wavefunctions of all octet baryons are the same. In this section we are concerned with the dynamics of the process and we suppress spin-flavor indices.

### III.1 Isgur-Karl Model and generalization to the H

The Isgur-Karl (IK) non-relativistic harmonic oscillator quark modelIK ; faiman ; bhaduri  was designed to reproduce the masses of the observed resonances and it has proved to be successful in calculating baryon decay rates faiman . In the IK model, the quarks in a baryon are described by the Hamiltonian

$$H=\frac{1}{2m}(p_1^2+p_2^2+p_3^2)+\frac{1}{2}K\mathrm{\Sigma }_{i<j}^3(\stackrel{}{r}_i\stackrel{}{r}_j)^2,$$
(1)
where we have neglected constituent quark mass differences. The wave function of baryons can then be written in terms of the relative positions of quarks and the center of mass motion is factored out. The relative wave function in this model is faiman ; bhaduri

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_B(\stackrel{}{r}_1,\stackrel{}{r}_2,\stackrel{}{r}_3)=N_B\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\alpha _B^2}{6}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{i<j}^3(\stackrel{}{r}_i\stackrel{}{r}_j)^2\right],$$
(2)
where $`N_B`$ is the normalization factor, $`\alpha _B=\frac{1}{\sqrt{<r_B^2>}}=\sqrt{3Km}`$, and $`<r_B^2>`$ is the baryon mean charge radius squared. Changing variables to

$$\stackrel{}{\rho }=\frac{\stackrel{}{r_1}\stackrel{}{r_2}}{\sqrt{2}},\stackrel{}{\lambda }=\frac{\stackrel{}{r_1}+\stackrel{}{r_2}2\stackrel{}{r_3}}{\sqrt{6}}$$
(3)
reduces the wave function to two independent harmonic oscillators. In the ground state

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_B(\stackrel{}{\rho },\stackrel{}{\lambda })=\left(\frac{\alpha _B}{\sqrt{\pi }}\right)^3\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\alpha _B^2}{2}(\rho ^2+\lambda ^2)\right].$$
(4)
One of the deficiencies of the IK model is that the value of the $`\alpha _B`$ parameter needed to reproduce the mass splittings of lowest lying $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ and $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$ baryons, $`\alpha _B=0.406\mathrm{fm}^1`$, corresponds to a mean charge radius squared for the proton of $`<r_{ch}^2>=\frac{1}{\alpha _B^2}=0.49`$ fm. This is distinctly smaller than the experimental value of 0.86 fm. Our results depend on the choice of $`\alpha _B`$ and therefore we also report results using $`\alpha _B=0.221\mathrm{fm}^1`$ which reproduces the observed charge radius at the expense of the mass-splittings.

Another concern is the applicability of the non-relativistic IK model in describing quark systems, especially in the case of the tightly bound H. With $`r_H/r_N=1/f`$, the quark momenta in the H are $`f`$ times higher than in the nucleon, which makes the non-relativistic approach more questionable than in the case of nucleons. Nevertheless we adopt the IK model because it offers a tractable way of obtaining a quantitative estimate of the effect of the small size of the H on the transition rate, and there is no other alternative available at this time.

We fix the wave function for the H particle starting from the same Hamiltonian (1), but generalized to a six quark system. For the relative motion part this gives

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_H=N_H\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\alpha _H^2}{6}\underset{i<j}{\overset{6}{}}(\stackrel{}{r_i}\stackrel{}{r_j})^2\right].$$
(5)
The space part of the matrix element of interest,
$`<A_H^{}|A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}>`$, is given by the integral

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{6}{}}d^3\stackrel{}{r}_i\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^a(1,2,3)\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^b(4,5,6)\mathrm{\Psi }_H(1,2,3,4,5,6).$$
(6)
Therefore it is useful to choose variables for the H wavefunction as follows, replacing

$$\stackrel{}{r}_1,\stackrel{}{r}_2,\stackrel{}{r}_3,\stackrel{}{r}_4,\stackrel{}{r}_5,\stackrel{}{r}_6\stackrel{}{\rho }^a,\stackrel{}{\lambda }^a,\stackrel{}{\rho }^b,\stackrel{}{\lambda }^b,\stackrel{}{a},\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}$$
(7)
where $`\stackrel{}{\rho }^{a(b)}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }^{a(b)}`$ are defined as in eq (3), with $`a(b)`$ referring to coordinates $`1,2,3(4,5,6)`$. (Since we are ignoring the flavor-spin part of the wavefunction, we can consider the six quarks as distinguishable and not worry about fermi statistics at this stage.) We also define the center-of-mass position and the separation, $`\stackrel{}{a}`$, between initial baryons $`a`$ and $`b`$:

$$\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}=\frac{\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}^a+\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}^b}{2},\stackrel{}{a}=\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}^a\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}^b.$$
(8)
Using these variables, the H ground state wave function becomes

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_H`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\right)^{3/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _H}{\sqrt{\pi }}}\right)^{15/2}`$
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}[{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _H^2}{2}}(\stackrel{}{\rho ^a}^2+\stackrel{}{\lambda ^a}^2+\stackrel{}{\rho ^b}^2+\stackrel{}{\lambda ^b}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\stackrel{}{a}^2)].`$
As for the 3-quark system, $`\alpha _H=\frac{1}{\sqrt{<r_H^2>}}`$.

### III.2 Bruecker-Bethe-Goldstone Nuclear Wavefunction

To describe two $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s or nucleons in a nucleus we use solutions of the Bruecker-Bethe-Goldstone equation describing the interaction of a pair of fermions in an independent pair approximation; see, e.g., walecka . The solution of the Schrodinger equation for two fermions in the Fermi sea interacting through a potential $`v(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2)`$ takes the form

$$\psi (1,2)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{V}}e^{i\stackrel{}{P}\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}}\psi (\stackrel{}{a})$$
(10)
where $`\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ are defined as in (8). The first factor contains the center-of-mass motion and the second is the internal wave function of the interacting pair. $`\psi (\stackrel{}{a})`$ is a solution of the Bethe Goldstone equation (eq (36.15) in walecka ) which is simply the Schrodinger equation for two interacting fermions in a Fermi gas, where the Pauli principle forbids the appearance of intermediate states that are already occupied by other fermions. Both wave functions are normalized so that the space integral of the wave function modulus squared equals one. In the application of this equation to nuclear matter, the interaction of each particle from the pair with all particles in nuclei through an effective single particle potential is included, in the independent pair approximation known as Bruecker theory (see eq (41.1) and (41.5) in walecka ).

We are interested in s-wave solutions to the above equation since they are the ones that penetrate to small relative distances. Following walecka , an s-wave solution of the internal wave function is sought in the form

$$\psi (a)\frac{u(a)}{a}$$
(11)
which simplifies the Bethe Goldstone equation to

$$(\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+k^2)u(a)=v(a)u(a)_0^{\mathrm{}}\chi (a,y)v(y)u(y)𝑑y$$
(12)
where $`v(a)`$ is the single particle potential in the effective-mass approximation, and the kernel $`\chi (a,y)`$ is given by

$$\chi (a,y)=\frac{1}{\pi }\left[\frac{\mathrm{sin}k_F(ay)}{ay}\frac{\mathrm{sin}k_F(a+y)}{a+y}\right].$$
(13)
For the interaction potential between two nucleons in a nucleus we choose a hard core potential for the following reasons. The two particle potential in a nucleus is poorly known at short distances. Measurements (the observed deuteron form factors, the sums of longitudinal response of light nuclei,…) only constrain two-nucleon potentials and the wave functions they predict at internucleon distances larger than $`0.7`$ fm pandharipande . The Bethe-Goldstone equation can be solved analytically when a hard-core potential is used. While the hard-core form is surely only approximate, it is useful for our purposes because it enables us to isolate the sensitivity of the results to the short-distance behavior of the wavefunction. We stress again, that more “realistic” wavefunctions are in fact not experimentally constrained for distances below 0.7 fm. Rather, their form at short distance is chosen for technical convenience or aesthetics.

Using the hard core potential, the s-wave BG wavefunction is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{BG}(\stackrel{}{a})=\{\begin{array}{cc}N_{BG}\frac{u(k_Fa)}{k_Fa}\hfill & \text{for }a>\frac{c}{k_F}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{for }a<\frac{c}{k_F}\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
where $`\frac{c}{k_F}`$ is the hard core radius. Expressions for $`u`$ can be found in walecka , eq. (41.31). The normalization factor $`N_{BG}`$ is fixed setting the integral of $`|\psi _{BG}|^2`$ over the volume of the nucleus equal to one. The function $`u`$ vanishes at the hard core surface by construction and then rapidly approaches the unperturbed value, crossing over that value at the so called “healing distance”. At large relative distances and when the size of the normalization volume is large compared to the hard core radius, $`u(a)/a`$ approaches a plane wave and the normalization factor $`N_{BG}`$ reduces to the value $`1/\sqrt{V}`$, as

$$\psi _{BG}(a)=N_{BG}\frac{u(k_Fa)}{k_Fa}\frac{1}{\sqrt{V}}e^{ika}.$$
(15)
### III.3 Overlap Calculation

The non-relativistic transition matrix element for a transition $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H`$ inside a nucleus is given by (suppressing spin and flavor)

$`T_{\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}H}`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi i\delta (E){\displaystyle d^3ad^3R_{CM}\underset{i=a,b}{}d^3\rho ^id^3\lambda ^i}`$ (16)
$`\times `$ $`\psi _H^{}\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }^a\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }^b\psi _{nuc}e^{i(\stackrel{}{k}_H\stackrel{}{k}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }})\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}}`$
where $`\delta (E)=\delta (E_HE_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$, $`\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{a,b}=\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{a,b}(\stackrel{}{\rho }^{a,b},\stackrel{}{\lambda }^{a,b})`$, and $`\psi _{nuc}=\psi _{nuc}(\stackrel{}{a})`$ is the relative wavefunction function of the two $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}s`$ in the nucleus. The notation $`\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$ is a reminder that the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s are in a nucleus. The plane waves of the external particles contain normalization factors $`1/\sqrt{V}`$ and these volume elements cancel with volume factors associated with the final and initial phase space when calculating decay rates. The integration over the center of mass position of the system gives a 3 dimensional momentum delta function and we can rewrite the transition matrix element as

$$T_{\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}H}=(2\pi )^4i\delta ^4(k_fk_i)_{\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}H},$$
(17)
where $`||_{\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}H}`$ is the integral over the remaining internal coordinates in (16). In the case of pion or lepton emission, plane waves of the emitted particles should be included in the integrand. For brevity we use here the zero momentum transfer, $`\stackrel{}{k}=0`$ approximation, which we have checked holds with good accuracy; this is not surprising since typical momenta are $`\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.3}`$ GeV.

Inserting the IK and BBG wavefunctions and performing the Gaussian integrals analytically, the overlap of the space wave functions becomes

$`||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2f}{1+f^2}}\right)^6\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\right)^{3/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _H}{\sqrt{\pi }}}\right)^{3/2}`$
$`\times `$ $`N_{BG}{\displaystyle _{\frac{c}{k_F}}^{\mathrm{}}}d^3a{\displaystyle \frac{u(k_Fa)}{k_Fa}}e^{\frac{3}{4}\alpha _H^2a^2}`$
where the factor 1/4 comes from the probability that two nucleons are in a relative s-wave, and $`f`$ is the previously-introduced ratio of nucleon to H radius; $`\alpha _H=f\alpha _B`$. Since $`N_{BG}`$ has dimensions $`V^{1/2}`$ the spatial overlap $`_{\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}H}`$ is a dimensionless quantity, characterized by the ratio $`f`$, the Isgur-Karl oscillator parameter $`\alpha _B`$, and the value of the hard core radius. Fig. 1 shows $`||_{\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}H}^2`$ versus the hard-core radius, for a range of values of $`f`$, using the standard value of $`\alpha _B=0.406\mathrm{fm}^1`$ for the IK modelbhaduri  and also $`\alpha _B=0.221\mathrm{fm}^1`$ for comparison.

Figure 1: Log10 of $`||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2`$ versus hard core radius in fm, for ratio $`f=R_N/R_H`$ and two values of the Isgur-Karl oscillator potential, with $`\alpha _B=0.406\mathrm{fm}^1`$ (thick lines), and $`\alpha _B=0.221\mathrm{fm}^1`$ (thin lines).

## IV Weak Interaction Matrix Elements

Transition of a two nucleon system to off-shell $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ requires two strangeness changing weak reactions. Possible $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=1`$ sub-processes to consider are a weak transition with emission of a pion or lepton pair and an internal weak transition. These are illustrated in Fig. 3 for a three quark system. We estimate the amplitude for each of the sub-processes and calculate the overall matrix element for transition to the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ system as a product of the sub-process amplitudes.

Figure 3: Some relevant weak transitions for $`NNHX`$

The matrix element for weak pion emission is estimated from the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }N\pi `$ rate:

$$||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }N\pi }^2=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_2}\frac{1}{\tau _{\mathrm{\Lambda }N\pi }}=0.8\times 10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}^2.$$
(19)
By crossing symmetry this is equal to the desired $`||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi }^2`$, in the approximation of momentum-independence which should be valid for the small momenta in this application. Analogously, for lepton pair emission we have

$$||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }Ne\nu }^2=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_3}\frac{1}{\tau _{\mathrm{\Lambda }Ne\nu }}=3\times 10^{12}.$$
(20)
The matrix element for internal conversion, $`(uds)(udd)`$, is proportional to the spatial nucleon wave function when two quarks are at the same point:

$$||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }N}<\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }|\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2)|\psi _N>\frac{G_F\mathrm{sin}\theta _c\mathrm{cos}\theta _c}{m_q},$$
(21)
where $`m_q`$ is the quark mass introduced in order to make the 4 point vertex amplitude dimensionlessyaouanc . The expectation value of the delta function can be calculated in the harmonic oscillator model to be

$$<\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }|\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2)|\psi _N>=\left(\frac{\alpha _B}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\right)^3=0.4\times 10^2\mathrm{GeV}^3.$$
(22)
The delta function term can also be inferred phenomenologically in the following way, as suggested in yaouanc . The Fermi spin-spin interaction has a contact character depending on $`\stackrel{}{\sigma _1}\stackrel{}{\sigma _2}/m_q^2\delta (\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2)`$, and therefore the delta function matrix element can be determined in terms of electromagnetic or strong hyperfine splitting:

$`(m_{\mathrm{\Sigma }^0}m_{\mathrm{\Sigma }^+})(m_nm_p)=\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{3m_q^2}}<\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2)>`$ (23)
$`m_\mathrm{\Delta }m_N=\alpha _S{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{3m_q^2}}<\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2)>.`$ (24)
where $`m_q`$ is the quark mass, taken to be $`m_N/3`$. Using the first form to avoid the issue of scale dependence of $`\alpha _S`$ leads to a value three times larger than predicted by the method used in (22), namely:

$$<\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }|\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2)|\psi _N>=1.2\times 10^2\mathrm{GeV}^3.$$
(25)
We average the expectation values (22) and (25) and adopt

$$||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }N}^2=4.4\times 10^{15}.$$
(26)
In this way we have roughly estimated all the matrix elements for the relevant sub-processes based on weak-interaction phenomenology.

## V Nuclear decay rates

### V.1 Lifetime of doubly-strange nuclei

The decay rate of a doubly-strange nucleus is:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}A_H^{}\pi }`$ $``$ $`K^2(2\pi )^4{\displaystyle \frac{m_q^2}{2(2m_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }})}}`$
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2.`$
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ is the two body final phase space factor, defined as in pdb , and $`m_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ is the invariant mass of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s, $`2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The factor $`K`$ contains the transition element in spin flavor space. It can be estimated by counting the total number of flavor-spin states a $`uuddss`$ system can occupy, and taking $`K^2`$ to be the fraction of those states which have the correct quantum numbers to form the H. That gives $`K^21/1440`$, and therefore we write $`K^2=(1440\kappa _{1440})^1`$. Combining these factors we obtain the lifetime estimate

$$\tau _{A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}A_H^{}\pi }\frac{3(7)\kappa _{1440}}{||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2}10^{18}\mathrm{s},$$
(28)
where the phase space factor was evaluated for $`m_H=1.8(2)`$ GeV.

Figure 2: Log10 of $`||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2`$ versus hard core radius in fm, for f=2, 3 and 4 and two values of the Isgur-Karl oscillator potential. Thick lines refer to $`\alpha _B=0.406\mathrm{fm}^1`$, and thin lines to $`\alpha _B=0.221\mathrm{fm}^1`$.

Fig. 2 shows $`||_{\{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\}H}^2`$ in the range of $`f`$ and hard-core radius where its value is in the neighborhood of the experimental limits, for the standard choice $`\alpha _B=0.406\mathrm{fm}^1`$ and comparison value $`\alpha _B=0.221\mathrm{fm}^1`$. In order to suppress $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(A_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}A_H^{}X)`$ sufficiently that some $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s in a double-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernucleus will decay prior to formation of an H, we require $`||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^8`$. This is satisfied even for relatively large H, e.g., $`r_H\stackrel{<}{}r_N/2.3(r_N/2.1)`$ for a hard-core radius 0.4 (0.5) fm. Thus the observation of single $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay products from double-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei cannot be taken to exclude the existence of an H with mass below $`2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ unless it can be demonstrated that $`r_H1/2r_N`$.

### V.2 Nuclear conversion to an H

If the H is actually stable ($`m_H<2m_p+2m_e`$) two nucleons in a nucleus may convert to an H and cause nuclei to disintegrate. NN $``$ HX requires two weak reactions. Thus the rate for the process $`A_{NN}A_H^{}\pi \pi `$, is approximately

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{A_{NN}A_H^{}\pi \pi }`$ $``$ $`K^2{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^4}{2(2m_N)}}\mathrm{\Phi }_3`$
$`\times `$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi }^2||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}}{(2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }m_H)^2}}\right)^2`$
where the denominator is introduced to correct the dimensions in a way suggested by the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ pole approximation. Since other dimensional parameters relevant to this process, e.g., $`m_q=m_N/3`$ or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}`$, are comparable to $`2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }m_H`$ and we are only aiming for an order-of-magnitude estimate, any of them could equally well be used. The lifetime for nuclear disintegration with two pion emission is thus

$$\tau _{A_{NN}A_H^{}\pi \pi }\frac{40\kappa _{1440}}{||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2}\mathrm{yr},$$
(30)
taking $`m_H=1.5`$ GeV in the phase space factor. For the process with one pion emission and an internal conversion, our rate estimate is

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{A_{NN}A_H^{}\pi }`$ $``$ $`K^2{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^4}{2(2m_N)}}\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$
$`\times `$ $`(||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi }||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H})^2`$
leading to a lifetime, for $`m_H=1.5`$ GeV, of

$$\tau _{A_{NN}A_H^{}\pi }\frac{3\kappa _{1440}}{||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2}\mathrm{yr}.$$
(32)
If $`m_H\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1740}`$ MeV, pion emission is kinematically forbidden and the relevant final states are $`e^+\nu `$ or $`\gamma `$; we now calculate these rates. For the transition $`A_{NN}A_H^{}e\nu `$, the rate is

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{A_{NN}A_H^{}e\nu }`$ $``$ $`K^2{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^4}{2(2m_N)}}\mathrm{\Phi }_3`$
$`\times `$ $`(||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }e\nu }||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H})^2.`$
In this case, the nuclear lifetime is

$$\tau _{A_{NN}A_H^{}e\nu }\frac{\kappa _{1440}}{||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2}10^5\mathrm{yr},$$
(34)
taking $`m_H=1.8`$ GeV. For $`A_{NN}A_H^{}\gamma `$, the rate is approximately

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{A_{NN}A_H^{}\gamma }`$ $``$ $`K^2(2\pi )^4{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _{EM}m_q^2}{2(2m_N)}}`$
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2(||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H})^2,`$
leading to the lifetime estimate

$$\tau _{A_{NN}A_H^{}\gamma }\frac{2\kappa _{1440}}{||_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }H}^2}10^6\mathrm{yr},$$
(36)
for $`m_H=1.8`$ GeV.

One sees from Figure 1 that a lifetime bound of $`\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{few}10^{29}`$ yr is not a very stringent constraint on this scenario if $`m_H`$ is large enough that pion final states are not allowed. E.g., with $`\kappa _{1440}=1`$ the rhs of eqn (34) is $`\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{few}10^{29}`$ yr, for standard $`\alpha _B`$, a hard core radius of 0.45 fm, and $`r_H1/5r_N`$ – in the middle of the range expected based on the glueball analogy. If $`m_H`$ is light enough to permit pion production, experimental constraints are much more powerful. We therefore conclude that $`m_H\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1740}`$ MeV is disfavored and is likely to be excluded, depending on how strong limits SuperK can give.

## VI Decays of a Quasi-stable H

If $`2m_N\stackrel{<}{}m_H<m_N+m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the H is not stable but it proves to be very long lived if its wavefunction is compact enough to satisfy the constraints from doubly-strange hypernuclei discussed in sections II and V.1. The limits on nuclear stability discussed in the previous section do not apply here because nuclear disintegration to an H is not kinematically allowed.

### VI.1 Wavefunction Overlap

To calculate the decay rate of the H we start from the transition matrix element (16). In contrast to the calculation of nuclear conversion rates, the outgoing nucleons are asymptotically plane waves. Nonetheless, at short distances their repulsive interaction suppresses the relative wavefunction at short distances much as in a nucleus. It is instructive to compute the transition amplitude using two different approximations. First, we treat the nucleons as plane waves so the spatial amplitude is:

$`T_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi i\delta (E_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}E_H){\displaystyle \underset{i=a,b}{}d^3\rho ^id^3\lambda ^id^3ad^3R_{CM}}`$ (37)
$`\times `$ $`\psi _H\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }^a\psi _\mathrm{\Lambda }^be^{i(\stackrel{}{k}_N^a+\stackrel{}{k}_N^b\stackrel{}{k}_H)\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}}.`$
The integration over $`\stackrel{}{R}_{CM}`$ gives the usual 4D $`\delta `$ function. After performing the remaining integrations leading to $`||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, as in (17), the amplitude is:

$`||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{2f}{1+f^2}}\right)^6\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\right)^{3/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _H}{\sqrt{\pi }}}\right)^{3/2}`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}d^3ae^{\frac{3}{4}\alpha _H^2a^2i\frac{\stackrel{}{k}_N^a\stackrel{}{k}_N^b}{2}\stackrel{}{a}}`$
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{8}{3\pi }}\right)^{3/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2f}{1+f^2}}\right)^6\alpha _H^{3/2}e^{\frac{(\stackrel{}{k}_N^a\stackrel{}{k}_N^b)^2}{12\alpha _H^2}}.`$
The amplitude depends on the size of the H through the factor $`f=r_N/r_H`$. Note that the normalization $`N_{BG}`$ in the analogous result (III.3) which comes from the Bethe-Goldstone wavefunction of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s in a nucleus has been replaced in this calculation by the plane wave normalization factor $`1/\sqrt{V}`$ which cancels with the volume factors in the phase space when calculating transition rates.

Transition rates calculated using eq. (VI.1) provide an upper limit on the true rates, because the calculation neglects the repulsion of two nucleons at small distances. To estimate the effect of the repulsion between nucleons we again use the Bethe-Goldstone solution with the hard core potential. It has the desired properties of vanishing inside the hard core radius and rapidly approaching the plane wave solution away from the hard core. As noted in section III.2, $`N_{BG}1/\sqrt{V}`$, for $`a\mathrm{}`$. Therefore, we can write the transition amplitude as in (III.3), with the normalization factor $`1/\sqrt{V}`$ canceled with the phase space volume element:

$`||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{2f}{1+f^2}}\right)^6\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\right)^{3/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _H}{\sqrt{\pi }}}\right)^{3/2}`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}d^3a{\displaystyle \frac{u(k_Fa)}{k_Fa}}e^{\frac{3}{4}\alpha _H^2a^2}.`$
This should give the most realistic estimate of decay rates. Table 2 shows the overlap values for a variety of choices of $`r_H`$, hard-core radii, and $`\alpha _B`$.

### VI.2  Decay rates and lifetimes

Starting from $`||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ we can calculate the rates for H decay in various channels, as we did for nuclear conversion in the previous section. The rate of $`Hnn`$ decay is

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{Hnn}`$ $``$ $`K^2{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^4m_q^5}{2m_H}}\mathrm{\Phi }_2(m_H)`$
$`\times `$ $`(||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }})^2.`$
The lifetime for this transition, for $`m_H=1.9(2)`$ GeV, is

$$\tau _{HNN}5(2)10^{12}\kappa _{1440}\mu _0\mathrm{yr},$$
(41)
where we have introduced $`||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2710^8/\mu _0`$; values of $`\mu _01`$ are consistent with hypernuclear constraints. Thus we see that the H is stable on cosmological time scales if its mass is $`\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2.04}`$ GeV.

If $`2.04\mathrm{GeV}<m_H<2.23`$ GeV, H decay requires only a single weak interaction, so the rate in eq. (VI.2) must be divided by $`||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2`$ given in eqn (26). Thus we have

$$\tau _{HN\mathrm{\Lambda }}10^5\mathrm{sec}\kappa _{1440}\mu _0.$$
(42)
Finally, if $`m_H>2.23`$ GeV, there is no weak interaction suppression and

$$\tau _{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}10^9\kappa _{1440}\mu _0\mathrm{sec}.$$
(43)
Equations (41)-(43) with $`\mu _0=1`$ give the lower bound on the H lifetime, depending on its mass.

Our results for the H lifetime are dramatically different from the classic calculation of Donoghue, Golowich, and Holstein donoghue:Hlifetime , because we rely on experiment to put an upper limit on the wavefunction overlap $`||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2`$. The bag model is not a particularly good description of sizes of hadrons, and in the treatment of donoghue:Hlifetime  the H size appears to be fixed implicitly to some value which may not be physically realistic. Furthermore, it is hard to tell whether the bag model analysis gives a good accounting of the known hard core repulsion between nucleons. As our calculation of previous sections shows, these are crucial parameters in determining the overlap. Our treatment of the color-flavor-spin and weak interaction parts of the matrix elements is rough but should give the correct order-of-magnitude, so the difference in lifetime predictions of the two models indicates that the spatial overlap in the bag model is far larger than in our model using a standard hard core and taking $`r_H0.4`$ fm (which accounts for the suppression measured in hypernuclear experiments). The calculation of the weak interaction and color-flavor-spin matrix elements in ref. donoghue:Hlifetime  is more detailed than ours and should be more accurate. It could be combined with a phenomenological approach to the spatial wavefunction overlap to provide a more accurate yet more general analysis. We note that due to the small size of the H, the p-wave contribution should be negligible.

One would like to use experiment to place limits on the product of the local density of H’s and the H decay rate, if the H is long-lived enough to be dark matter, i.e., $`m_H<m_N+m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Estimates of the local number density of H’s at various depths in the Earth, assuming the dark matter consists of H’s and $`\overline{\mathrm{H}}`$’s, will be discussed in ref. fz:lims . The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) can probably place good limits on the rate of $`Hnn`$ in that detector. The next most important channel $`Hnn\gamma `$ should be easy to detect in SuperK for photon energy in the low-background range $`20100`$ MeV SKgamma , or in Kamland for lower photon energies.222GRF thanks T. Kajita for discussions on these issues. The rate is:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{Hnn\gamma }`$ $``$ $`K^2\alpha _{EM}{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^4m_q^3}{2m_H}}\mathrm{\Phi }_3(m_H)`$
$`\times `$ $`(||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }})^2`$
leading to

$$\tau _{HNN\gamma }210^{19}(310^{17})\kappa _{1440}\mu _0\mathrm{yr},$$
(45)
for $`m_H=1.9(2)\mathrm{GeV}`$. The lifetime for $`Hnpe\nu `$ is similar in magnitude. It is more sensitive to $`m_H`$ due to the 4-body phase space.

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{Hpne\nu }`$ $``$ $`K^2{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^4m_q}{2m_H}}\mathrm{\Phi }_4(m_H)`$
$`\times `$ $`(||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }}||_{N\mathrm{\Lambda }e\nu }||_{H\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }})^2`$
and

$$\tau _{Hpne\nu }510^{19}(310^{16})\kappa _{1440}\mu _0\mathrm{yr}.$$
(47)
for $`m_H=1.9(2)\mathrm{GeV}`$ .

## VII Summary

We have considered the constraints placed on the H di-baryon by the stability of nuclei and hypernuclei with respect to conversion to an H dibaryon, and we have calculated the lifetime of the H if it is not stable. We used the Isgur-Karl wavefunctions for quarks in baryons and the H, and the Bethe-Goldstone wavefunction for nucleons in a nucleus, to obtain a rough estimate of the H-baryon-baryon wavefunction overlap. Observation of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decays in double-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei is shown not to exclude an H as long as $`r_H\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/2r_N`$.

Combining our wavefunction overlap estimates with phenomenological weak interaction matrix elements, permits the lifetime of the H and the rate for conversion of nuclei to H to be estimated. The results depend radically on which channels are kinematically allowed, and hence on the H mass, since for each weak interaction required there is a substantial suppression in the matrix element. Our estimates have uncertainties of greater than an order of magnitude: the weak interaction matrix elements are uncertain to a factor of a few, factors of order 1 were ignored, a crude statistical estimate for the flavor-spin overlap was used, mass scales were set to $`m_N/3`$, and, most importantly, the models used to calculate the wavefunction overlap surely oversimplify the physics. The wavefunction overlap is highly uncertain because it depends on nuclear wavefunctions and hadronic dynamics which are not adequately understood at present. Nonetheless, the enormous suppression of H production and decay rates found in the model calculation means that the observation of double-$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei does not exclude $`m_H<2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. It is even conceivable that an absolutely stable H is possiblef:stableH .

We calculate the lifetime of the H for various mass ranges, taking the H wavefunction to be compact enough that hypernuclear constraints are satisfied. If the H decays through strong interactions, $`m_H>2m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, its lifetime is $`\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^9`$ sec. If its mass is in the range $`m_N+m_\mathrm{\Lambda }\stackrel{<}{}m_H\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, its lifetime is longer than a few $`10^5`$ sec, and if $`2m_N\stackrel{<}{}m_H\stackrel{<}{}m_N+m_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ the H lifetime is at least an order of magnitude greater than the lifetime of the Universe. Note that these lifetime bounds do not suffer from the large uncertainties associated with estimating the wavefunction overlap because, for a given value of $`m_H`$, the H lifetime can be related to the hypernuclear conversion rate for which we have a rough experimental upper limit. It may be that the production rate of H’s in double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei is about equal to the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay rate, so that an appreciable fraction of double $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hypernuclei produce an H. One might hope that in this case the H could be observed by reconstructing it through its decay products, e.g., $`H\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}p`$. Unfortunately, however, the long lifetimes implied by the limit on the wavefunction overlap mean that the H’s would diffuse out of the apparatus before decaying.333GRF thanks K. Imai for enlightening discussions of this topic.

SuperK can place important constraints on the conjecture of an absolutely stable H, or conceivably discover evidence of its existence, through observation of the pion(s), positron, or photon produced when two nucleons in an oxygen nucleus convert to an H. We estimate that SuperK could achieve a lifetime limit $`\tau \stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{few}10^{29}`$ yr which is in the estimated lifetime range for $`m_H\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1740}`$ MeV and $`r_H1/5r_N`$. SuperK and SNO can also place limits on signatures of H decays if it is not absolutely stable yet contributes to the dark matter of the Universe. This calculation will be reported elsewhere. The possibility that H and anti-H were produced in sufficient abundance in the early universe to account for the dark matter and baryon asymmetry will also be elaborated elsewhere.

The research of GRF was supported in part by NSF-PHY-0101738. GRF acknowledges helpful conversations with many colleagues, particularly G. Baym, A. Bondar, T. Kajita, M. May, M. Ramsey-Musolf, and P. Vogel. GZ wishes to thank Allen Mincer and Marko Kolanovic for useful advice and is grateful to Emiliano Sefusatti for many helpful comments.


format: text

text:
# The Central Engines of Radio-Loud Quasars

## 1 Introduction

According to the radio-loudness criterion proposed by Kellermann et al. (1989), quasars whose ratio of radio (5 GHz) to optical ($`B`$ band) flux exceeds 10 comprise a special population of radio-loud objects (hereafter RLQs). As reviewed by Urry & Padovani (1995), the powerful radio emission is thought to originate from relativistic jets expelled by the accretion disk around a central supermassive black hole (BH). One of the unsolved problems in astrophysics is the exact physical relation between the jet and the accretion disk. Two observational approaches have been taken to investigate this relation in RLQs and active galactic nuclei (AGNs). On large (kpc to Mpc) scales the relation between the jet radio/kinetic luminosity and the narrow-line luminosity has been examined by many authors (e.g., Baum & Heckman 1989a, 1989b; Rawlings & Saunders 1991). It has been found that the narrow-line luminosity is correlated with the kinetic luminosity from the radio lobes. On smaller scales, Celotti & Fabian (1993) and Celotti, Padovani, & Ghisellini (1997) used radio data from very long-baseline interferometry to estimate the kinetic luminosities in a large sample of radio-loud objects. Both attempts reached the same conclusion: the relativistic jet is linked with the accretion disk. A more direct connection between the jet and the accretion disk has be found in the RLQ 3C 120 (Marscher et al. 2002). However, how a relativistic jet actually forms from the accretion disk remains an outstanding puzzle (Meier 2001; Blandford 2002).

The situation in Galactic BH candidates suggests that the formation of the jet is somehow linked with the accretion rate. The radio emission from these objects becomes quenched when the system is in a soft (high accretion rate) state, as seen in GX 339$``$4 (Fender et al. 1999), GRS 1915+105 (Harmon et al. 1997; Fender et al. 1999), GRO J16655$``$40 (Harmon et al. 1995), Cynus X-3 (McCollough et al. 1999), and Cygnus X-1 (Brocksopp et al. 1999). These objects may be instructive for the case of AGNs, although we should be cautious that some of their properties do not scale linearly with BH mass. The relation between the “states” of the accretion disk and jet production in supermassive BH accretion systems is very poorly understood.

There are two impediments in solving this problem. First, the mass of the central BH is highly uncertain. BH masses derived from fitting the “big blue bump” (Shields 1978; Malkan & Sargent 1982), for example, are coupled to the accretion rate, which is not known independently. Second, the observed continuum of RLQs, even at optical and ultraviolet wavelengths, may be significantly contaminated by nonthermal emission from the relativistic jet. With the exception of objects with prominent big blue bumps, it is nontrivial to estimate the thermal component of the continuum. Thus, it is difficult to reliably deduce the state of the accretion disk, which can be described conveniently by the dimensionless accretion rate $`\dot{m}=\dot{M}/\dot{M}_{\mathrm{Edd}}`$, where $`\dot{M}`$ is the accretion rate, $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{Edd}}=2.2\times 10^8\left(\eta /0.1\right)^1\left(M_{\mathrm{BH}}/M_{}\right)`$ $`M_{}`$ yr-1 is the Eddington accretion rate defined by $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{Edd}}=L_{\mathrm{Edd}}/\eta c^2`$, $`L_{\mathrm{Edd}}=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.26}\times 10^{38}\left(M_{\mathrm{BH}}/M_{}\right)`$ erg s-1 is the Eddington luminosity, and $`\eta `$ is the radiative efficiency (Frank, King, & Raine 1992).

The situation has improved dramatically with the availability of Hubble Space Telescope (HST) observations of quasar host galaxies. Relatively reliable luminosities for the host galaxies are now available. From studies of nearby inactive galaxies, it has been established that the mass of the BH scales roughly linearly with the luminosity (or mass) of the bulge component of the host galaxy (Kormendy & Richstone 1995; Magorrian et al. 1998; Ho 1999; Kormendy & Gebhardt 2001). Thus, we can use the luminosities of the quasar host galaxies, which are largely dominated by the bulge component, to estimate BH masses for quasars.

Accretion disks have complicate structures for different $`\dot{m}`$ and the viscosity $`\alpha `$ (Chen et al. 1995). For a disk with a low accretion rate, three possible solutions have been suggested: optically thin advection-dominated accretion flows (ADAF; Narayan & Yi 1994), advection-dominated inflow-outflows (ADIOs; Blandford & Begelman 1999) and convection-dominated accretion flows (CDAF; Narayan, Igumenshchev & Abramowicz 2000; Quataert & Gruzinov 2000). Whether low $`\dot{m}`$ necessarily leads to low $`\eta `$, however, remains controversial. When $`\alpha ^2<\dot{m}<1`$, the disk has a standard optically thick, geometrically thin structure (Shakura & Sunyaev 1973, hereafter SS), which has been extensively studied. When $`\dot{m}>1`$, an optically thick ADAF or super-Eddington accretion flow (SEA) with slim geometry is formed (Begelman & Meier 1982; Abramowicz et al. 1988; Chen & Taam 1993). Such a disk has two possible structures: an inhomogeneous structure (split into rings) due to the photon-bubble instability (Begelman 2002), or a homogeneous disk with photon trapping (Wang & Zhou 1999; Ohsuga et al. 2002). Once the mass of the BH and the accretion luminosity are known, we can constrain the state of the accretion disk, which provides possible clues to jet formation.

Recently, a number of authors have suggested that flat-spectrum radio quasars, based on their very high kinetic luminosities, are powered by super-Eddington accretion flows (Ghisellini & Celotti 2001; Cavaliere & D’Elia 2002; Maraschi & Tavecchio 2003). It would be highly desirable to test this and other hypotheses by obtaining a reliable estimate of the accretion rates of RLQs. This is the purpose of this paper.

## 2 The Sample

The most reliable measurement of quasar host galaxy luminosities currently come from HST observations. Our analysis uses RLQs with available HST imaging, based mainly on three samples (see Table 1): (1) Hamilton et al. (2002), (2) McLure et al. (2001) and Dunlop et al. (2003), and (3) Boyce et al. (1998, 1999). The $`B`$ and $`V`$ magnitudes are converted into the $`R`$ band following Fukugita, Shimasaku, & Ichikawa (1995). We adopt the results from Hamilton et al. (2002) if the objects have been measured several times in order to decrease the systematic errors. Unfortunately, systematic errors in host galaxy measurements are difficult to quantify, but uncertainties on the order of 0.1–0.3 mag are not unexpected. Table 1 also lists the absolute magnitudes of the quasar nuclei, based on spatial decomposition of the HST images. Finally, we give published values of the extended radio luminosity. Following standard practice, the objects are divided into two subclasses according to their radio spectral index $`n`$, defined by $`F_\nu \nu ^n`$: flat-spectrum radio quasars (FSRQs) are those with $`n0.5`$, whereas steep-spectrum radio quasars (SSRQs) have $`n<0.5`$, where $`n`$ is generally calculated between 1.4 and 5 GHz. There are two objects without spectral index, but they do not change our conclusions (see Table 2 and 3).

The redshift range of the sample is $`0.16z0.57`$, and the host galaxy absolute magnitudes span $`21.4M_R25.0`$ (Fig. 1). For our present application, we use the empirical BH mass-bulge luminosity relation of McLure & Dunlop (2002):

$$\mathrm{log}\left(M_{\mathrm{BH}}/M_{}\right)=0.5M_R2.96.$$
(1)
For ease of comparison with literature results, distance-dependent quantities assume a Hubble constant of $`H_0`$ = 50 km s-1 Mpc-1 and a deceleration parameter of $`q_0=0.5`$.

## 3 States of the Accretion Disk

The observed optical–UV continuum of RLQs may be contaminated by nonthermal emission from the relativistic jet, rendering it difficult to estimate the thermal contribution to the continuum, and hence to estimate accretion rates. On the other hand, quasars, independent of their radio strength, usually have strong, well-observed broad emission lines, which leads to the possibility of using the broad-line region (BLR) emission-line strength to indirectly estimate the ionizing luminosity. Following Celotti et al. (1997), this is the approach we will take here. Celotti et al. (1997) showed that the BLR luminosities in RLQs are roughly equal to the kinetic luminosities of their jets. We assume that the BLR clouds are most likely photoionized by the thermal emission from the accretion disk, rather than by nonthermal emission from the jet. This assumption is supported by that the beamed radiation from the jet has great difficulties to ionize the clouds distributed within a large solid angle to produce a reasonable range of ionization parameter for emission lines. There is also ample evidence that BLR emission lines are photoionized by a thermal continuum (see, e.g., Netzer 1990). The underlying assumption here should be

quite safe in statistical test.

Table 2 lists emission-line fluxes we were able to assemble for our sample. We choose prominent broad emission lines, such as H$`\alpha `$, H$`\beta `$, H$`\gamma `$, C iv, Mg ii and Ly$`\alpha `$, that account for a large fraction of the total line luminosity. The overall similarity of the emission-line spectra of quasars suggests that the underlying physical conditions of their BLR are quite similar (Netzer 1990; Francis et al. 1991; Boroson & Green 1992; Zheng et al. 1997). To first order, therefore, the composite spectrum of quasars (Francis et al. 1991) may be used as a reasonable template to calculate the total BLR luminosity (Celotti et al. 1997). Then, from the relative contribution of individual lines to the total BLR luminosity, we obtain the total line luminosity $`L_{\mathrm{lines}}`$ (Table 2).

The fraction $`\xi `$ of the thermal disk emission reprocessed by the BLR clouds is roughly equal to the cloud covering factor. This assumption should be statistically valid for large samples since in steady state the energy absorbed by the BLR clouds is approximately that radiated as line emission. Thus, the thermal emission from the accretion disk is

$$L_{\mathrm{disk}}=\xi ^1L_{\mathrm{lines}}.$$
(2)
According to Netzer (1990), $`\xi 0.1`$.

We recognize that, for any individual object, variability and internal reddening may introduce uncertainties into $`L_{\mathrm{lines}}`$. Source-to-source variations in the covering factor or reprocessing efficiency may also add additional scatter. It is hoped, however, that the overall statistics of a large sample will not be severely affected and that they are at least internally consistent.

Following Wang, Staubert, & Ho (2002), we define the line accretion rate and its dimensionless form as

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{L_{\mathrm{lines}}}{c^2};\lambda =\frac{L_{\mathrm{lines}}}{L_{\mathrm{Edd}}}.$$
(3)
The relation between $`\lambda `$ and the dimensionless accretion rate $`\dot{m}`$, for an optically thin ADAF, is given by (Wang et al. 2002)

$$\dot{m}=2.17\times 10^2\alpha _{0.3}\xi _1^{1/2}\lambda _4^{1/2}.$$
(4)
This expression assumes that the total luminosity from the ADAF is $`L_{\mathrm{disk}}\alpha ^2M_{\mathrm{BH}}\dot{m}^2`$ (Mahadevan 1997), $`\alpha _{0.3}=\alpha /0.3`$, $`\xi _1=\xi /0.1`$, and $`\lambda _4=\lambda /10^4`$. A necessary condition for the presence of an optically thin ADAF is $`\dot{m}\alpha ^2`$ (Narayan, Mahadevan, & Quataert 1998). Equation (4) can then be rewritten as

$$\lambda _1=1.72\times 10^3\xi _1\alpha _{0.3}^2.$$
(5)
Optically thin ADAFs require $`\lambda <\lambda _1`$.

Accretion disks in the optically thick, geometrically thin SS regime obey

$$\dot{m}=\frac{L_{\mathrm{line}}}{\xi L_{\mathrm{Edd}}}=10\xi _1^1\lambda ,$$
(6)
and the condition $`1>\dot{m}\alpha ^2`$ gives

$$\lambda _2=9.0\times 10^3\xi _1\alpha _{0.3}^2,$$
(7)
above which a standard disk can exist. It is interesting to note that in the transition region between $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ the accretion flow may be in a hybrid state in which a standard disk coexists with an ADAF. The possibility of hybrid states in AGN accretion disks has been discussed by, among others, Quataert et al. (1999), Rózanska & Czerny (2000), Ho et al. (2000), and Ho (2002a). A transition from an SS disk to an ADAF is possible (Gu & Lu 2000), perhaps via evaporation (Liu et al. 1999). The transition radius depends on the accretion rate, the BH mass, and viscosity. The disk structure, however, is complicated in such a regime, largely due to uncertainties in the viscosity.

When the accretion rate reaches $`\dot{m}1`$, we have

$$\lambda _3=0.1\xi _1,$$
(8)
in which case we use

$$E_\mathrm{R}=\frac{L_{\mathrm{line}}}{\xi L_{\mathrm{Edd}}}$$
(9)
Table 3. Results

| Object | log $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ | log $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ | log $`\lambda `$ | Disk |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | ($`M_{}`$) | ($`\mathrm{g}\mathrm{s}^1`$) |  |  |
| 1 | 8.82 | 24.27 | -1.71 | SS |
| 2 | 8.91 | 24.14 | -1.92 | SS |
| 3 | 9.56 | 24.39 | -2.32 | SS+ADAF |
| 4 | 8.70 | 24.00 | -1.85 | SS |
| 5 | 9.03 | 24.01 | -2.17 | SS+ADAF |
| 6 | 9.01 | 23.26 | -2.90 | ADAF |
| 7 | 9.02 | 25.08 | -1.10 | SS |
| 8 | 7.73 | 24.58 | -0.31 | SEA |
| 9 | 8.93 | 23.48 | -2.60 | SS+ADAF |
| 10 | 8.69 | 23.68 | -2.16 | SS+ADAF |
| 11 | 8.68 | 24.03 | -1.80 | SS |
| 12 | 9.17 | 23.82 | -2.50 | SS+ADAF |
| 13 | 8.72 | 23.52 | -2.35 | SS+ADAF |
| 15 | 8.89 | 23.62 | -2.43 | SS+ADAF |
| 18 | 9.26 | 24.84 | -1.57 | SS |
| 20 | 8.52 | 23.80 | -1.87 | SS |
| 21 | 9.21 | 24.14 | -2.22 | SS+ADAF |
| 22 | 8.95 | 23.75 | -2.35 | SS+ADAF |
| 23 | 8.86 | 24.21 | -1.81 | SS |
| 24 | 8.97 | 24.30 | -1.82 | SS |
| 25 | 8.81 | 24.47 | -1.49 | SS |
| 26 | 8.24 | 23.69 | -1.70 | SS |
| 27 | 8.91 | 24.49 | -1.58 | SS |
| 28 | 9.44 | 24.26 | -2.33 | SS+ADAF |
| 29 | 8.45 | 24.13 | -1.47 | SS |
| 30 | 8.76 | 23.92 | -1.99 | SS |
| 31 | 8.73 | 23.69 | -2.19 | SS+ADAF |
| 32 | 9.39 | 24.36 | -2.18 | SS+ADAF |
| 33 | 8.80 | 23.26 | -2.69 | SS+ADAF |
| 35 | 9.18 | 23.94 | -2.39 | SS+ADAF |

to describe the accretion state, since $`\dot{m}>E_R`$ in the super-Eddington regime in which photon trapping efficiently lowers the radiated luminosity (Wang & Zhou 1999; Ohsuga et al. 2002).

Our estimation of the parameter $`\lambda `$ are subject to at least three sources of uncertainty. First, the total line luminosity is estimated from only a limited number of emission lines. Since the relative strengths of the main strong lines are relatively well determined, and quasars generally have fairly uniform spectra (e.g., Francis et al. 1991; Zheng et al. 1997), this should not introduce a large source of uncertainty. More worrisome is our assumption of a constant cloud covering factor (10%), which in reality is likely to have an intrinsic dispersion. And third, even if we assume that the host galaxy magnitudes are perfectly measured, the $`M_RM_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ relation still has a scatter of $`0.4`$ dex (McLure & Dunlop 2002). For concreteness, we assume that any individual value of $`\lambda `$ may have an uncertainty of $`0.5`$ dex. Although this is not negligible, fortunately it is not sufficiently large to obscure gross statistical trends in our sample. However, we caution against a literal interpretation of the individual values of $`\lambda `$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ listed in Table 3.

The three critical values of $`\lambda `$ define four regimes in accretion states, as shown in Figure 2b. The average values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ for FSRQs and SSRQs are, respectively, $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{FSRQ}}=24.0`$ and $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{SSRQ}}=24.1`$. The corresponding values for $`\lambda `$ are $`\mathrm{log}\lambda _{\mathrm{FSRQ}}=2.20`$ and $`\mathrm{log}\lambda _{\mathrm{SSRQ}}=2.05`$. Given the uncertainties just discussed, the two subsamples appear to be statistically indistinguishable.

Wang et al. (2002) present the distributions of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\lambda `$ for BL Lac objects and conclude that all BL Lacs have ADAFs. Comparing those objects with the RLQs presented here, we find that the distributions of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ overlap significantly, increasing smoothly from BL Lacs to RLQs. This was noted by Scarpa & Falomo (1997), who used only Mg ii as the luminosity indicator. Our result considerably strengthens theirs. A similar behavior is seen in the distribution of $`\lambda `$. As we discuss later, these trends suggest that an evolutionary sequence, characterized by different accretion states, may connect BL Lac objects to RLQs.

The normalized mass accretion rates, $`\dot{m}=\xi ^1\lambda 10\lambda `$, span over a relatively large range, from $`10^2`$ to $`10^{0.7}`$. Some of the FSRQs in our sample fall in the range of objects studied by Cavaliere & D’Elia (2002), but we suggest that some of FSRQs, like SSRQs, may have hybrid ADAF+SS disks. With the similarity in $`\dot{m}`$ between FSRQs and SSRQs, the only difference between FSRQs and SSRQs is geometrical orientation, which has been suggested (Urry & Padovani 1995).

Cavaliere & D’Elia (2002) suggest that an evolutionary sequence may be defined for blazars, depending on their dimensionless accretion rates. FSRQs have $`\dot{m}10^1`$, whereas BL Lac objects have $`\dot{m}10^3`$, the two populations separated by a significant gap. By contrast, our analysis suggests that BL Lacs and RLQs define a continuous sequence in accretion rate. Although our conclusion is based on two heterogeneous samples, we note that it is in general agreement with the evolutionary scenario proposed by Böttcher & Dermer (2002).

The states of the accretion disk listed in Table 3 can be tested by Fe K$`\alpha `$ line observations. Differences in the X-ray properties between radio-loud and radio-quite quasars have been discussed by Sambruna, Eracleous, & Mushotzky (1999) and Reeves & Turner (2000). The most important findings in these studies is that the Fe K$`\alpha `$ line tends to have complex profiles. Only a few RLQs have broad Fe K$`\alpha `$ profiles, most being undetected (Sambruna et al. 1999; Reeves & Turner 2000). There is also a clear trend that more radio-loud objects tend to have lower Fe K$`\alpha `$ equivalent widths. By analogy with the interpretation for the relativistically broadened Fe lines in Seyfert nuclei (e.g., Nandra et al. 1997), RLQs with strong broad Fe K$`\alpha `$ lines may be in the SS state, while those lacking such a feature may be in a pure ADAF or in an ADAF+SS state, according to the classification suggested in this study. This interpretation, although appealing, may not be unique. Recall that among Seyfert galaxies and radio-quiet quasars there exists an inverse correlation between Fe line strength and X-ray luminosity (Iwasawa & Taniguchi 1993), an effect that can be attributed to luminosity-dependent changes in the ionization state of the surface of the disk (Reeves & Turner 2000). Alternatively, perhaps strong relativistic jets physically modify the structure of the innermost part of the disk, thereby altering or suppressing the iron-line emitting region (see § 4.1.3).

We note that values of $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ are sensitive to $`\alpha `$. The most likely value of $`\alpha `$ is 0.3 (Narayan, Mahadevan & Quataert 1998). However if $`\alpha =0.1`$, it will follow that $`\lambda _1=1.91\times 10^4\xi _1\alpha _{0.1}^2`$ and $`\lambda _2=1.0\times 10^3\xi _1\alpha _{0.1}^2`$. All the disks listed as hybrid models of SS and ADAF will be SS disk in Table 3. In any case, this does not affect the conclusion that most of the objects have the standard accretion disks.

There is only one possible super-Eddington accretor (PKS 0454$``$22) in the present sample. This nicely agrees with the result from an independent test by Wang (2003), in which super-Eddington accretors have been searched in the present sample and no super-Eddington accretor has been found. He used the theoretical spectra emergent from slim disks (Wang et al. 1999) and the empirical reverberation relation to find a limit relation bewteen the BH mass and H$`\beta `$ width as $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}=(2.912.6)\times 10^6M_{}\left(v_{\mathrm{FWHM}}/10^3\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\right)^{6.67}`$ in AGNs with super-Eddington rates. With the help of equation (1), the BH masses can be obtained, he found all the objects in the present sample are located below this limit.

It is worth noting that, with the exception of 3C 273, our sample lacks very powerful FSRQs. This is an observational selection effect. It is difficult to measure the host galaxies of the most powerful quasars because of their very bright nuclei. We will later return to the issue of whether there exists super-Eddington RLQs that appear as very powerful FSRQs.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 Jet Formation from the Disk

Two processes have been widely advocated for jet formation in AGNs: (1) energy extraction from the spin of the BH (Blandford & Znajek 1977, hereafter BZ) and (2) energy extraction from a disk wind (Blandford & Payne 1982, hereafter BP). Several variants of the BZ and BP models have been proposed. The results of the present study allow us to set some constraints on the theoretical models. In their investigation of the BZ process in the regime of the SS disk, Livio, Ogilvie, & Pringle (1999) conclude that both the BZ and BP power, even for Kerr BHs, are negligible compared with the radiative output from the accretion disk itself. The reason is that geometrically thin disks cannot produce a strong enough poloidal magnetic field for the energy extraction to be effective.

#### 4.1.1 Model of Ghosh & Abramowicz

Ghosh & Abramowicz (1997) assume that the poloidal magnetic field can be parameterized as $`B_p^2\alpha P_{\mathrm{max}}`$, where $`P_{\mathrm{max}}`$ is the maximum pressure in the inner region if the accretion rate $`\dot{m}>10^3(\alpha _2m_9)^{1/8}`$, with $`\alpha _2=\alpha /10^2`$ and $`m_9=M_{\mathrm{BH}}/10^9M_{}`$. In such a region, the radiation pressure dominates over the gas pressure and is independent of the accretion rate. Then, the BZ power is given by

$$L_{\mathrm{BZ}}=2\times 10^{45}m_9j^2\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1,$$
(10)
where $`j=J_{\mathrm{BH}}/(GM_{\mathrm{BH}}^2c^1)`$ is the specific angular momentum. We can see that the BZ power is independent of the accretion rate, but very sensitive to the spin. The extended radio power is expected to be proportional to $`L_{\mathrm{BZ}}`$ (Meier 1999). For our sample, Figure 3 shows that the extended radio powers span $``$ 5 orders of magnitude, whereas the BH masses are confined to within roughly a factor of 10. This means that the BHs should have spins in the range $`10^2<j<1.0`$. Such a large range of values for the spin, however, is not expected in RLQs (Wilson & Colbert 1995). The model of Ghosh & Abramowicz (1997), therefore, seems to be disfavored by the present data. Additionally, the results of Lacy et al. (2001) from FIRST Bright Quasar Survey show that the radio emission depends on the accretion rate ($`\dot{m}^{1.0}`$), which does not support Equation (10). As pointed out by Livio et al. (1999), Equation (10) overestimates the BZ power because the poloidal magnetic field should be $`B_p(H/R)B_\varphi `$ rather than simply $`B_p^2/8\pi P_{\mathrm{max}}`$.

#### 4.1.2 Model of Meier

Meier (2001) considers energy extraction from the spin of the BH and from the disk itself, for both an SS disk and an ADAF. His model uses the middle-region solution for the SS disk and a self-similar solution for the ADAF; it considers both Schwarzschild and Kerr BHs. In this model the jet power for a Schwarzschild BH is only $`L_{\mathrm{jet}}=10^{41.7}`$ erg s-1 if $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}=10^9M_{}`$ and $`\dot{m}=0.1`$, whereas $`L_{\mathrm{jet}}=10^{42.7}`$ erg s-1 for a Kerr BH with the same mass and accretion rate. The present data clearly do not support this model because many RLQs have SS disks that support much higher luminosities. When the accretion disk is in an ADAF state, for example, an accretion rate of $`\dot{m}=10^{2.5}`$ onto a Schwarzschild BH radiates $`10^{42.3}`$ erg s-1, which may generate a radio power of $`10^{24.3}ϵ_2`$W Hz-1 at 1 GHz in the extended lobes, where $`ϵ_2=ϵ/10^2`$ is the fraction of the total jet power radiated in the radio band (Meier 1999). This can account for the radio emission from BL Lac objects shown in Figure 3; it also implies that the BHs of BL Lac objects may not necessarily have large spins. The jet power from an ADAF surrounding a Kerr BH is approximately $`10^{44.1}`$ erg s-1, corresponding to a radio power of $`10^{26.1}ϵ_2`$W Hz-1 at 1 GHz. This can account for RLQs in the ADAF+SS regime. But how do we explain those RLQs that have much higher radio powers and that contain pure SS disks?

#### 4.1.3 An Improved Model

From the above discussion, it is evident that the power output of the jet, whether generated through the BZ or BP processes, depends both on the model adopted for the accretion disk and the parameterization used for the poloidal magnetic field. Below we derive an improved formula for the jet power.

Following Meier (2001), the magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) power of the jet is given by

$$L_{\mathrm{jet}}=\frac{1}{32c}B_p^2R_0^4\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2,$$
(11)
where $`B_p`$ is the poloidal magnetic field and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ is the Keplerian angular velocity at the radius $`R_0`$, where the jet develops. Both the BZ and the BP process need a strong poloidal magnetic field $`B_p`$, which is produced by the toroidal magnetic field $`B_\varphi `$. Livio et al. (1999) showed that

$$B_p\left(\frac{H}{R}\right)^nB_\varphi ,$$
(12)
where $`H`$ is the height of the disk at radius $`R`$ and the index $`n1`$. Since $`H/R1`$ for an SS disk, it is generally believed that $`B_pB_\varphi `$, and hence that the extracted energy must be small (Livio et al. 1999; Meier 1999, 2001). However we should note that $`H/R0.01`$ is only valid in the middle and outer regions of the disk; in the inner region, $`H/R1`$. Meier (2001) argues that this region is thermally unstable. He only uses the middle-region solution in his calculations, and consequently obtains a reduced power from the BZ process.

The thermal instability arises from insufficient cooling. It is well known that such an instability in the innermost regions of the disk can be suppressed by advection, which acts as an efficient cooling process (Abramowicz et al. 1988; Chen & Taam 1993). Advection mainly converts the heat of the accreting gas into entropy, rather than radiation. Consequently, the sound speed ($`c_s`$) and the scale height $`H`$ are increased. It would be of interest to include the role of advection cooling in the calculation of the BZ power.

We follow Chen’s (1995) treatment of advection cooling in determining the structure of the disk. The disk is assumed to undergo Keplerian rotation at an angular velocity $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}`$, and we assume conservation of mass, conservation of angular momentum, and vertical equilibrium. Advection is included as local cooling, and we neglect the corona. The energy balance between the heat production ($`Q_{\mathrm{vis}}`$) and cooling can be written as

$$Q_{\mathrm{vis}}=Q_{\mathrm{rad}}+Q_{\mathrm{adv}},$$
(13)
where $`Q_{\mathrm{rad}}`$ and $`Q_{\mathrm{adv}}`$ represent radiative and advection cooling, respectively. The viscous heating rate per unit area is $`Q_{\mathrm{vis}}=3\dot{M}\mathrm{\Omega }^2fg/4\pi `$, where the correction terms $`f1`$ and $`g1`$ are due to the inner boundary condition and the pseudo-Newtonian potential (Chen 1995). Advection cooling can be expressed as $`Q_{\mathrm{adv}}=\dot{M}c_s^2\zeta /2\pi R^2`$, $`\zeta =5.5`$ being the advection factor. With the diffusion approximation and the assumption of radiation pressure dominance, we have $`Q_{\mathrm{rad}}=4acT^4/3\kappa _{\mathrm{es}}\mathrm{\Sigma }=2c\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}c_\mathrm{s}/\kappa _{\mathrm{es}}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the surface density of the disk, $`a=7.56\times 10^{15}`$ is the radiation density constant and $`\kappa _{\mathrm{es}}`$ = 0.34 is the electron-scattering opacity. With the help of the equations for mass and angular momentum conservation and vertical equilibrium, Equation (13) reduces to

$$\frac{\zeta \dot{M}}{2\pi R^2}c_\mathrm{s}^2+\frac{2c\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}}{\kappa _{\mathrm{es}}}c_\mathrm{s}\frac{3\dot{M}}{4\pi }\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{K}^2=0.$$
(14)
The first term represents advection cooling, which is only important at small radii or for high accretion rates, and the second represents radiative cooling. Neglecting the first term yields the standard solution for an SS disk, whereas neglecting the second gives the solution for an optically thick ADAF (or SEA). Advection cooling helps to suppress thermal instabilities that develop in the inner regions of the disk.

The solutions of the disk give the sound speed

$$a_\mathrm{s}=0.09\dot{m}_1^1r^{0.5}\left\{\sqrt{1+33\dot{m}_1^2r^2}1\right\},$$
(15)
where $`a_\mathrm{s}=c_\mathrm{s}/c`$ and $`\dot{m}_1=\dot{m}/0.1`$, the pressure

$$P=1.76\times 10^7\alpha ^1\dot{m}_1m_9^1a_\mathrm{s}^1r^3\mathrm{dyne}\mathrm{cm}^2,$$
(16)
and the vertical half-thickness

$$\frac{H}{R}=a_\mathrm{s}r^{1/2},$$
(17)
where $`r=R/R_g`$ and $`R_g=GM_{\mathrm{BH}}/c^2`$. With the help of $`B_\varphi ^2/8\pi \alpha P`$ and Equation (12), we have

$$B_p=2.02\times 10^4\dot{m}_1^{1/2}m_9^{1/2}a_\mathrm{s}^{1/2}r^1\mathrm{Gauss}.$$
(18)
Following Meier (2001), we take the characteristic radius $`R_0=7R_g`$ and $`R_0=1.5R_g`$ for a Schwarzschild and Kerr BH, respectively, and the angular velocity of the metric in the Boyer-Lindquist frame $`\omega =g_{\varphi t}/g_{\varphi \varphi }0.3j\left(GM_{\mathrm{BH}}/c^3\right)^1`$. We finally get the jet power from the accretion system. For a Schwarzschild BH,

$$L_{\mathrm{jet}}=8.60\times 10^{43}m_9\dot{m}_1\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1,$$
(19)
and for a Kerr BH,

$$L_{\mathrm{jet}}=1.87\times 10^{45}m_9\dot{m}_1(1+1.1j+0.3j^2)\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(20)
Considering that the bolometric luminosity from accretion is $`1.38\times 10^{45}m_9\dot{m}_1`$ erg s-1, the ratio of the jet power to accretion power for a Schwarzschild BH is roughly $`4\times 10^2`$, whereas for a Kerr BH it is $``$1.0.

The output powers given by Equations (19) and (20) are different from those found by Ghosh & Abramowicz (1997) and Meier (2001). First, the energy output based on Equations (19) and (20) depends on the accretion rate, whereas the model of Ghosh & Abramowicz (1997) does not. Second, the output is much higher than that given by Meier (2001) for the standard accretion disk model.

The MHD power for a Schwarzschild BH is due to the BP process. For a Kerr BH, the BP process also depends strongly on the spin because the metric itself drags the MHD fluid, which then contributes to the rotation of the magnetic field; thus, Equation (20) covers both the BP and BZ processes. The above levels of MHD power, which is extracted from the BH and the disk in the standard SS regime, are sufficient to account for the highest radio luminosities seen in RLQs.

As shown by Xu et al. (1999), the mass outflow rate from the jet is given by

$$\dot{M}_{\mathrm{jet}}\left(\frac{H}{R}\right)^{2\delta 3}\dot{M},$$
(21)
where $`\delta `$ is a constant from 1.7–3.4. For Kerr BHs, the characteristic radius $`r_0=1.5`$ leads to $`a_\mathrm{s}0.65r^{0.5}`$, and hence $`H/R0.65`$ in the jet-forming region. We then have $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{jet}}(0.190.84)\dot{M}`$: the mass outflow rate of the jet is a large fraction of the accretion rate. If the jet-formation region is an ADAF, the outflow rate will be even higher than this because $`H/R1`$. We note that such a large outflow rate may have implications for observations of the broad Fe K$`\alpha `$ line in radio-loud AGNs. The region of the disk that emits the red wing of the broad line roughly coincides with the region where the relativistic jet is formed. If strong winds accompany jets, they can substantially alter the inner structure of the disk. This may be at least partly responsible for the observed diversity of Fe-line strengths and the complexity of their profiles in RLQs (Reeves & Turner 2000).

We note that Equation (21) is not self-consistently obtained from the disk model. Such a high outflow rate may take place in ADIOS models. Here we stress that the Fe K$`\alpha `$ line in RLQs may be strongly affected by the outflow. The case of 3C 120 adds credibility to the picture that jet formation influences the innermost region of disk: “dips in X-ray emission are followed by ejections of bright superluminal knots in the radio jet” (Marscher et al. 2002). The detectability of the Fe K$`\alpha `$ line in radio-loud objects may also be influenced by contamination of the X-ray continuum by non-thermal (beamed) emission.

### 4.2 Empirical Evidence for a Disk-Jet Connection

The correlation between the extended radio and line emission has been explored by a number of authors (e.g., Baum & Heckman 1989a, 1989b; Rawlings & Saunders 1991; Rawlings 1992; Falcke, Malkan, & Biermann 1995; Xu et al. 1999; Cao & Jiang 1999; Willott et al. 1999). The present sample allows us not only to further test this correlation, but presents us with an opportunity to explain it in the context of our improved model. Figures 3a and 3b show that the extended radio emission is evidently quite closely linked with $`\lambda `$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The linear regression for the RLQs alone is

$$\mathrm{log}L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}^{\mathrm{ext}}=(28.05\pm 0.78)+(0.95\pm 0.38)\mathrm{log}\lambda ,$$
(22)
with a Pearson’s correlation coefficient $`r=0.56`$, significant at the level of $`p=3.8\times 10^3`$ according to Student’s t test. Similarly,

$$\mathrm{log}L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}^{\mathrm{ext}}=(8.65\pm 11.03)+(1.45\pm 0.46)\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Lambda },$$
(23)
with $`r=0.71`$ and $`p=6.2\times 10^5`$.

For comparison, we include the BL Lac objects studied by Wang et al. (2002) that have extended radio luminosities given by Urry et al. (2000); there are 12 high frequency-peaked (HBL) and 15 low frequency-peaked (LBL) objects. The BL Lac objects smoothly extend the sequence defined by the RLQs toward lower values of $`L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}`$, $`\lambda `$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The correlations are now enhanced, becoming

$$\mathrm{log}L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}^{\mathrm{ext}}=(27.57\pm 0.29)+(0.68\pm 0.10)\mathrm{log}\lambda ,$$
(24)
with $`r=0.65`$ and $`p=2.6\times 10^{10}`$, and

$$\mathrm{log}L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}^{\mathrm{ext}}=(4.18\pm 2.70)+(0.92\pm 0.11)\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Lambda },$$
(25)
with $`r=0.76`$ and $`p=2.1\times 10^{15}`$. In the above correlation analysis of $`L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}^{\mathrm{ext}}`$ versus $`\lambda `$, we excluded the upper limits for the BL Lac objects. A survival analysis including these upper limits shows $`\mathrm{log}L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}^{\mathrm{ext}}=(27.60\pm 0.30)+(0.64\pm 0.11)\mathrm{log}\lambda `$ with Spearman’s $`\rho =0.667`$. These correlations are striking in that they provide fairly direct evidence that the extended jet emission is somehow closely coupled to the central engine via the accretion disk. The most direct interpretation is that the extended radio emission is fed by relativistic jets that are tightly linked to the accretion disk (Rees 1984).

Following Meier (2001), we assume that 1% of the MHD energy will be radiated as radio emission with a spectral index of $`1`$. Then, for a Kerr BH and using the relation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\eta \xi \dot{M}`$, $`L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}^{\mathrm{ext}}=3.74\times 10^{26}ϵ_2m_9\dot{m}_1`$ W Hz-1, or

$`L_{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}^{\mathrm{ext}}`$ $`=`$ $`3.74\times 10^{27}ϵ_2m_9\lambda \mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1`$
$`=`$ $`2.69\times 10^2ϵ_2\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Hz}^1.`$ (26)
These expressions are in rough agreement with the observed correlations.

### 4.3 A Power Limit for Radio-Loud Quasars?

In our sample, only PKS 0454$``$22 is a super-Eddington accretor ($`E_R=10^{0.7}`$). The most powerful RLQs, which have powers in excess of $`10^{47}`$ erg s-1, potentially may be super-Eddington accretors (Ghisellini & Celotti 2001). In this section we consider the upper luminosity limit of RLQs as a threshold set by super-Eddington accretion.

For a BH accreting well above the Eddington rate, much of the dissipated energy will be advected into BH because most of the photons are trapped in the flow by Thomson scattering (Wang & Zhou 1999; Ohsuga et al. 2002). Photon trapping efficiently controls the radiated luminosity; the radiated luminosity from the disk depends very weakly on the accretion rate, $`L_{\mathrm{disk}}\mathrm{log}\dot{M}`$, tending to be saturated. For a self-similar disk (Wang & Zhou 1999), Equation (15) reduces to

$$a_\mathrm{s}0.65r^{0.5},$$
(27)
and the MHD power is given by

$$L_{\mathrm{jet}}=8.05\times 10^{46}\dot{m}_1m_9\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1$$
(28)
for a Schwarzschild BH and

$$L_{\mathrm{jet}}=3.76\times 10^{47}\dot{m}_1m_9\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1$$
(29)
for a Kerr BH, where $`\dot{m}_1=\dot{m}/10`$. The power is still proportional to the accretion rate, although the radiation from disk itself is saturated. In the super-Eddington regime, the difference in radio power between a Kerr and Schwarzschild BH is smaller.

From the total rotational energy due to the spin, $`E_{\mathrm{spin}}1.6\times 10^{62}m_9j^2\mathrm{erg}`$, it follows that the spin-down timescale due to the BZ process is

$$\tau _{\mathrm{spin}\mathrm{down}}=1.9\times 10^7\dot{m}_1^1\mathrm{yr}.$$
(30)
This is much shorter than a typical merger timescale of $`10^9`$ yr (Wilson & Colbert 1995), if the spin angular momentum comes from galaxy collisions. If the powerful jet is fed by a Schwarzschild BH via super-Eddington accretion, the $`e`$-folding timescale of the BH growth will be

$$\tau _{_{\mathrm{SEA}}}=M_{\mathrm{BH}}/\dot{M}=4.0\times 10^7\dot{m}_1^1\mathrm{yr}.$$
(31)
The lifetime of the powerful jet from an SEA is rather short unless there is continuous super-Eddington fueling. Thus, super-Eddington RLQs ought to be very rare.

### 4.4 AGN Unification

A useful diagnostic for radio galaxies, as first shown by Owen & Ledlow (1994; see also Ledlow & Owen 1996 and Owen, Ledlow, & Keel 1996), is the plot of extended radio luminosity versus optical absolute magnitude. A diagonal line well separates the two radio populations: at a given optical luminosity (which in the case of radio galaxies is dominated by the host galaxy), FR IIs have much higher radio powers than FR Is (Fanaroff & Riley 1974). The physical interpretation of the Owen-Ledlow line has been much debated. Bicknell (1995) and Gopal-Krishna & Witta (2001) suggest that it may arise naturally from the interaction of the jet with the interstellar or intracluster medium. Or perhaps the two classes reflect intrinsic differences in their central engines, such as BH spin (Baum, Zirbel, & O’Dea 1995; Meier 1999) or state of the accretion disk. Ghisellini & Celotti (2001) recently suggested that the dividing line corresponds to a transition in the accretion mode, from an SS disk (FR II) to an optically thin ADAF (FR I).

Urry et al. (2000) also examined BL Lac objects and RLQs in the $`M_RL_{\mathrm{radio}}^{\mathrm{ext}}`$ diagram, but the data for their RLQs are mostly not from HST observations. Figure 3c gives a new representation of the Owen-Ledlow diagram for RLQs and BL Lacs, where we have substituted the optical luminosity on the abscissa with BH mass $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$. We have plotted our sample of RLQs along with the sample of BL Lac objects studied by Urry et al. (2000). The diagonal line is the Owen & Ledlow (1994) line for radio galaxies, adapted from Ledlow & Owen (1996) after converting to our distance scale, the radio luminosities from 1.4 GHz to 5 GHz assuming a spectral index of $`1`$, and $`M_R`$ to $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ using Equation (1).

Several features are noteworthy in this diagram. First, the Owen-Ledlow line that divides FR I and FR II radio galaxies seems to cleanly bisect the population of beamed radio-loud objects. Nearly all HBLs fall below the line, and all but two FSRQ lies above the line. Second, the population of LBLs straddle the divide, occupying the region between HBLs and FSRQs. Third, as with the FSRQs, essentially all SSRQs line above the line. And fourth, at least some BL Lac objects, mostly of the LBL variety, appear to be more closely associated with FR II radio galaxies; this is in agreement with the suggestion of Kollgaard et al. (1996) that some radio-selected BL Lac objects may be beamed FR II sources.

The availability of accretion rates enables us to consider radio-loud AGNs in a more unified, physical context. Wang et al. (2002) show that most BL Lac objects have accretion rates below the critical value $`\dot{m}\alpha ^2`$ that demarcates the transition from a standard SS disk to an optically thin ADAF. Moreover, they find that HBLs have characteristically lower accretion rates than LBLs. This study demonstrates that nearly all RLQs have $`\dot{m}>\alpha ^2`$. It is important to note that, at least for the sample considered here, most of the sources occupy a relatively narrow range of BH masses, $`10^{8.5}`$ $`M_{}`$ with a spread of $``$0.5 dex. The various subpopulations of radio-loud AGNs can therefore be cast into a physical, perhaps evolutionary, sequence described by a single variable — accretion rate. For the beamed population, $`\dot{m}`$ decreases along the sequence FSRQ $``$ LBL $``$ HBL. When viewed at large angles to our line of sight, the sequence becomes FR II $``$ (FR II or FR I) $``$ FR I. Since the structure of the accretion flow is governed by $`\dot{m}`$, the variation in $`\dot{m}`$ along the sequence directly translates into a variation in the dominant mode of accretion. The most powerful RLQs and FR II radio galaxies may contain super-Eddington disks or optically thick ADAFs. The majority of RLQs and FR IIs have SS disks. The low-power HBLs and some LBLs have pure optically thin ADAFs. Objects that occupy the fuzzy boundary near the Owen-Ledlow line, which comprise some LBLs and a minority of FR IIs, may have a hydrid structure consisting of an SS disk plus an optically thin ADAF.

The basic elements of the above evolutionary scenario, based on complementary but different lines of evidence, have already been advocated by a number of authors (e.g., Ghisellini et al. 1998; Ghisellini & Celotti 2001, 2002; Ghisellini, Celotti, Costamante 2002; Böttcher & Dermer 2002; Cavaliere & D’Elia 2002). Böttcher & Dermer (2002) and Cavaliere & D’Elia (2002) argue that RLQs evolve into BL Lacs rather than BL Lacs into RLQs (Böttcher & Dermer 2002). If the evolutionary direction is from RLQs to BL Lacs, the BH masses of RLQS should be systematically smaller than those of BL Lacs. However, the significant overlap in the BH mass distributions of the two groups (Fig. 3c; see also Falomo 2003) does not seem to support this single evolutionary direction. Given the current uncertainties in BH mass determinations for AGNs, it is probably premature to draw strong conclusions. Here, we merely wish to note that both evolutionary paths can, and probably do, occur. The detection of quasar remnants in nearby galaxies in the form of inactive massive BHs conclusively demonstrates that the cosmic evolution of AGN activity must be episodic (Richstone et al. 1998). The duty cycle for accretion is short, such that any individual massive BH is likely to have been activated (and deactivated) many times since it was formed.

## 5 Conclusions

We attempt to constrain the accretion rates and the mode of accretion in RLQs using BH masses estimated from HST imaging of their host galaxies and accretion luminosities derived from their emission-line spectra. The quasars have large BH masses, $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}10^810^9`$ $`M_{}`$, and substantial accretion rates, $`\dot{M}0.011`$ times the Eddington rate. Their accretion rates suggest that most of the objects possess standard optically thick, geometrically thin accretion disks, perhaps in combination with an optically thin ADAF in some cases. Our sample has a deficit of objects with super-Eddington disks, although this is likely due to a selection effect in the sample.

Our data can also be used to test current ideas on jet formation. We present an improved model for a standard optically thick, geometrically thin disk that incorporates the effects of advection cooling. Our model can explain the level of radio emission observed in RLQs. We discuss some consequences of our model for the interpretation of Fe K$`\alpha `$ lines observed in the X-rays.

Finally, we combine the present sample of RLQs with a recently analyzed sample of BL Lac objects to reevaluate the unification picture for radio-loud AGNs. The strong correlation found between the luminosity of the extended radio emission and the accretion rate supports the notion that radio jets are directly coupled to the accretion disk. In agreement with prevailing ideas, our results support the proposition that FSRQs and BL Lacs are the beamed counterparts of FR II and FR I radio galaxies, respectively. However, we argue that some fraction of the low frequency-peaked BL Lac sources in fact may be more closely associated with FR II radio galaxies. The various subclasses of radio-loud AGNs — ranging from high-luminosity sources (FSRQs and FR IIs) on the one end to low-luminosity sources (BL Lacs and FR Is) on the other — can be viewed as a continuous sequence of varying accretion rate.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors are grateful to the referee for helpful comments and suggestions. J. M. W. thanks D. L. Meier for useful discussions. He is grateful to the support from Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the Hundred Talent Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the Special Funds for Major State Basic Research Projects and NSFC. The research of L. C. H. is supported by the Carnegie Institution of Washington and by NASA grants from the Space Telescope Science Institute (operated by AURA, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555).