text:
# Distribution of Faraday Rotation Measure in Jets from Active Galactic Nuclei I. Prediction from our Sweeping Magnetic Twist Model

## 1 Introduction

To explain the formation of active galactic nucleus (AGN) jets and other astrophysical jets, various models have been proposed. Among them, magnetohydorodynamic (MHD) model is one of the most promising models, since it can explain both the acceleration and the collimation of the jets. Lovelace (1976) and Blandford (1976) first proposed the magnetically driven jet from accretion disks, and Blandford & Payne (1982) discussed magneto-centrifugally driven outflow from a Keplerian disk in steady, axisymmetric and self-similar situation. Uchida & Shibata (1985) performed a time-dependent, two-dimensional axisymmetric simulation in the case of star-forming outflows. They pointed out that large amplitude torsional Alfvén waves (TAW’s) generated by the interaction between the accretion disk and a large scale magnetic field play an important role (detail is described in section 2). In this paper, we refer this model as ”sweeping magnetic twist model”. Uchida & Shibata (1986) extended the treatment to the case of AGN jets. After this work, many authors have performed time-dependent, two-dimensional axisymmetric simulations (e.g. Stone & Norman 1994, Ustyugova et al. 1995, Matsumoto et al. 1996, Ouyed & Pudritz 1997, Kudoh, Matsumoto, & Shibata 1998). Acceleration mechanisms in MHD model were studied in detail by 1.5-dimensional MHD equations (Kudoh & Shibata 1997a, 1997b).

Using the numerical data of MHD model, observational quantities such as the Faraday rotation measure (FRM) or the Stokes parameters have been derived to compare with observations of AGN jets: Laing (1981) computed the total intensity, the linear polarization, and the projected magnetic field distributions, assuming some simple magnetic field configurations and high energy particle distributions in the cylindrical jet. Clarke, Norman, & Burns (1989) performed two dimensional MHD simulations in which a supersonic jet with a dynamically passive helical magnetic field was computed, and derived distributions of the total intensity, the projected electric field, and the linear polarization. Hardee & Rosen (1999) calculated the total intensity and the projected magnetic field distributions, using 3-dimensional MHD simulations of strongly magnetized conical jets. Hardee & Rosen (2002) calculated the FRM distribution and discussed that the radio source 3C465 in Abell cluster A2634 (Eilek & Owen 2002) suggests helical twisting of the flow.

The FRM is given by the integral of $`n_eB_{}`$ along the line-of-sight between the emitter and the observer (where $`B_{}`$ is the line-of-sight component of the magnetic field, and $`n_e`$ is the electron density there). It is, in principle, not possible to specify which part on the line-of-sight the contribution comes from. However, in recent high-resolution radio observations (e.g. Eilek & Owen 2002, Asada et al. 2002), the FRM distribution seems to have good correlation with the configuration of the jet; this suggests that the FRM variation is due to the magnetized thermal plasma surrounding the emitting part of the jet. In fact, sharp FRM gradients seen in 3C273 can not be produced by a foreground Faraday screen (Taylor 1998, Asada et al. 2002). If this is the case, we can get a new information, that is, the line-of-sight component of the magnetic field, and thus can predict the 3-dimensional configuration of the magnetic field around the jet, together with the projected magnetic field.

In this paper, we calculate the FRM, projected magnetic field, and total intensity from the numerical data of MHD simulation based on our “sweeping magnetic twist model”, and discuss these model counterparts comparing with some observations. Here we consider the straight part of the jet, and thus use the data of axisymmetric simulation. In section 2, we review the physics of our ”sweeping magnetic twist model”. We introduce the method to calculate model counterparts of observational quantities in section 3, and show the results in section 4. Comparisons of model counterparts with some observations are discussed in section 5.

## 2 Brief Review of Our “Sweeping Magnetic Twist Model”

In this section, we briefly review the results of 2.5-dimensional MHD simulations based on our “sweeping magnetic twist model” to discuss the magnetic field around the straight part of jets. In the following paper, we will extend our treatment to the wiggled part of jets, which we have given an interpretation using a 3-dimensional MHD simulation based on our model (Nakamura, Uchida, & Hirose 2001).

In the original MHD model (Uchida & Shibata 1985) for bipolar outflows in star-forming regions, they considered a gravitational contraction of magnetized gas to form a star (plus an accretion disk). They attributed the large scale magnetic field to the weak field in the Galactic arms. It is strengthened in the process of gravitational contraction of the interstellar gas to the star-forming core, and plays a critical role. The toroidal field is continuously produced from the poloidal field by the rotation of the accretion disk. This causes magnetic braking to the disk material, and the material which loses angular momentum falls gradually toward the central gravitator, and releases the gravitational energy. A part of the released gravitational energy is supplied to the jets along the magnetic field. The produced toroidal magnetic field propagates into two directions along the bunched large scale magnetic field as large amplitude TAW’s. These TAW’s serve to collimate the large scale poloidal field into the shape of a slender jet by dynamically pinching it in the propagation (“sweeping pinch effect”). This process, verified in the simulation, was proposed by Uchida & Shibata (1985) as a generic magnetic effect operating in the formation of astrophysical jets utilizing gravitational energy.

The mechanism was applied to the case of AGN jets (Uchida & Shibata 1986) by supposing that a large scale intergalactic magnetic field plays the role in the case of the formation of a protogalaxy and a giant black hole at its core. They argued that the same process as in the star formation case is applicable to the AGN jet cases with more or less similar set up (having accretion disk around the central gravitator etc.), due to the similarity of the basic equation system. One of the possible differences between AGN jets and the star formation jets may be the relativistic effects. The effect of general relativity will be appreciable very close to the central giant black hole comparable to the Schwarzschild radius (Koide, Shibata, & Kudoh 1998). There are regions in which the special relativity should be taken into account when the Alfvén velocity estimated in the classical definition is close to or exceed the velocity of light. Here in this paper, we concentrate ourselves on the essential physical process in the production and collimation of the jet in the non-relativistic range.

The problem was treated with the non-linear system of MHD equations in a time dependent way for the first time when they proposed this model in 1985. The numerical approach was so-called axial 2.5-dimensional approximation, where the quantities are axisymmetric, but the azimuthal components of vectors are included to allow them play very essential roles such as centrifugal effect or pinch effect. Thus the authors were able to deal with the physical driving and collimating mechanism they proposed to be in operation for astrophysical jets.

Figure 1 shows the time development in the 2.5-dimensional MHD simulation based on our model. The rotating gas pulls the magnetic field gradually inward, which twists up the magnetic field because the rotational velocity is faster as close to the center (Figure 2). This continuously supplies large amplitude TAW’s (Poynting flux) along the external magnetic field, which pinch the poloidal magnetic field into the shape of a slender jet as discussed in the above. The gas in the surface of the torus is swirled out into two directions along the axis, both by the magnetic pressure gradient and the centrifugal effect. Thus the propagation of the torsional Alfvén wave accelerates the gas in the surface of the disk into the spinning jets.

It is noted that the accretion toward the central gravitator takes place in the form of avalanches from upper and lower surfaces of the geometrically thick torus (Matsumoto et al. 1996), because the transfer of angular momentum to the external magnetic field is most efficient there. The magnetic fields of opposite polarity, brought with the accretion flows avalanching on the surfaces of the disk, make reconnection at the innermost edge of the disk in the equatorial plane (Figure 1). This process will contribute to the supply of the “seed high energy particles” into the jet. Such particles will be re-accelerated through the Fermi-I acceleration process when two TAW fronts trapping the particles in between them approach to each other, for example, as the foregoing one is decelerated due to an encounter with high density gas blob remaining in the collapse (Uchida et al. 1999).

## 3 Method of Calculation of Model Counterparts

Using the numerical data of the 2.5-dimensional simulation explained in the previous section, we computed the distributions of the FRM, the projected magnetic field, and the total intensity with some viewing angles.

We computed the FRM distribution by integrating $`n_eB_{}`$ along the line-of-sight (Hardee & Rosen 2002). To calculate the Stokes parameters, we assume the following: (1)radiation process is synchrotron radiation, (2)synchrotron self absorption is negligible, (3)the spectral index, $`\alpha `$, is equal to unity, and (4)the projected magnetic field is perpendicular to the projected electric field. The emissivity of the synchrotron radiation is given by $`ϵ=p|B\mathrm{sin}\psi |^{\alpha +1}`$, where $`B`$ is the local magnetic field strength, $`\psi `$ is the angle between the local magnetic field and the line-of-sight, and $`p`$ is the gas pressure. In our simulation the relativistic particles are not explicitly tracked, therefore we assume that the energy and number densities of the relativistic particles are proportional to the energy and number densities of the thermal fluid (Clarke et al. 1989, Hardee & Rosen 1999, 2002). The total intensity is then given by the integration of the emissivity along the line-of-sight as $`I=ϵ𝑑s`$. Other Stokes parameters are given by $`Q=ϵ\mathrm{cos}2\chi ^{^{}}ds`$ and $`U=ϵ\mathrm{sin}2\chi ^{^{}}ds`$, where the local polarization angle $`\chi ^{^{}}`$ is determined by the direction of the local magnetic field and the direction of the line-of-sight. Using these $`U`$ and $`Q`$, the polarization angle $`\chi `$ is given by $`\chi =(1/2)\mathrm{tan}^1(U/Q)`$. Finally the projected magnetic field is determined from the polarization angle $`\chi `$ and the polarization intensity $`\sqrt{Q^2+U^2}`$.

Here we separate the Faraday rotation screen and the emitting region, and we performed the integrations only in the emitting region for the Stokes parameters, and only in the Faraday rotation screen for the FRM. We assumed this separation on the basis of the fact that linear dependence of the observed polarization angle on wavelength-squared holds in some observations (Perley, Bridle, & Willis 1984, Feretti et al. 1999, Asada et al. 2002); this would not be the case if the Faraday rotation is caused in the emitting region (Burn 1966). Figure 3 shows the emitting region (the region in the box of dashed lines) and the Faraday rotation screen (the region in the box of dotted lines) assumed in our calculations. The cylindrical shell outside the emitting region is assumed to play the main role of the Faraday rotation screen, because the temperature is lower and the toroidal field is stronger there (Figure 3) compared with those in the tenuous clouds in the intergalactic space.

We consider two types of the emitting regions; one is the layer type (type L: high energy particles exist only in the skin part of the dashed box in Figure 3(a)), and the other is the column type (type C: high energy particles fill the whole region of the dashed box). The former corresponds to the idea that the high energy particles are injected into the inner skin part of the jet due to the magnetic reconnection at the inner edge of the accretion disk as described in the previous section. The latter may happen if the high energy particles come from the pair plasma creation in the black hole magnetospheres.

## 4 Results of Numerical Observations

### 4.1 Faraday Rotation Measure

The model counterparts of the FRM distribution with different viewing angles are shown in Figure 4. When we see the jet from the direction perpendicular to its axis ($`\theta =90^{}`$, $`\theta `$ is the angle between the jet axis and the line-of-sight), we see only the toroidal component of the helical field and thus the value of the FRM is almost antisymmetric with respect to the axis (it is not perfectly antisymmetric because the radial component of the magnetic field is not equal to zero). The distribution of the FRM is distorted from antisymmetry as the viewing angle varies, but it always shows gradient across the jet axis (Figure 4-2); this gradient across the jet axis can be interpreted as the sum of the antisymmetric part due to the toroidal component of the helical field and a base-value due to the longitudinal component. When $`|\theta 90^{}|`$ is larger than the pitch angle of the helical field, this longitudinal component dominates (Figure 4-1).

### 4.2 Projected Magnetic Field and Total Intensity

Figure 5 shows the distributions of the projected magnetic field and the total intensity with different viewing angles in the case of the type L emitting region. When $`\theta `$ is equal to $`90^{}`$, the total intensity is nearly constant, but has an edge-brightening; this is because the emissivity becomes smaller away from the axis and the integration depth of the emitter has a maximum at edges. In other cases, the distribution of the total intensity is asymmetric, since the emissivity changes as $`|\mathrm{sin}\left(\theta \zeta \right)|^{\alpha +1}`$ at the left edge and $`|\mathrm{sin}\left(\theta +\zeta \right)|^{\alpha +1}`$ at the right edge, where $`\zeta `$ is the pitch angle of the clockwise (seen from the jet origin) helical field.111Note that this is opposite sense to that shown in Figure 2. Therefore, for example, it becomes dark at the left edge when $`\theta `$ is nearly equal to $`\zeta `$. As for the projected magnetic field, it is perpendicular to the jet axis in the almost entire region, which does not depend on the viewing angle. This is because the the toroidal magnetic field is dominant in the emitting region.

Figure 6 shows the distributions in the case of the type C emitting region. In this case, the intensity has the peak on the axis when $`\theta =90^{}`$, because the integration depth has a maximum at the center of the jet. When the viewing angle is not so small, the projected magnetic field is parallel to the jet axis, which corresponds to the poloidal magnetic field in the emitting region. When the viewing angle is small (e.g. $`\theta =15^{}`$), the distributions of the total intensity and the projected magnetic field are almost same as those in the type L. This is because the fraction of the magnetic field perpendicular to the line-of-sight, which contributes to the synchrotron radiation, is small in both cases.

## 5 Summary and Discussion

We calculated the FRM and the Stokes parameters using numerical data of 2.5-dimensional MHD simulation based on our “sweeping magnetic twist model”. The distribution of the FRM always has a gradient across the jet axis, which is caused by the toroidal magnetic field generated by the disk rotation. In calculating the Stokes parameters, we assumed two types of emitting regions, the column type and the layer type. In the former, the projected magnetic field tends to be parallel to the jet axis and the total intensity has the peak at the jet center. On the other hand, in the latter, the projected magnetic field is perpendicular to the axis; the total intensity has “edge-brightening”, which is observed in Centaurus A (Clarke, Burns, & Feigelson 1986), M87 (Biretta, Owen, & Hardee 1983, Junor, Biretta, & Livio 1999). In the following, we discuss the 3-dimensional magnetic field structure around the observed jets using these results of our numerical observations, especially focusing on the FRM distribution.

Figure 7 shows a recent observational result for 3C273 jet obtained by Asada et al. (2002) by using the VLBA Archive Data. In this case, the FRM distribution has a systematic gradient in the direction perpendicular to the jet axis, which can be interpreted as the sum of an antisymmetric distribution and a base value (a constant over the source). It is not likely that the foreground magnetized cloud at a large distance from the jet has a very sharp variation of either magnetic field or the density, just along the projected very thin jet (Taylor 1998, Asada et al. 2002). One likely interpretation may be that the antisymmetric contribution is due to the toroidal component of the helical magnetic field as stated in the above. The base-value may come either from the foreground large scale magnetized clouds at large distances, or from the longitudinal component of the helical magnetic field. The latest observation of the 3C273 jet shows that the systematic FRM gradient persists along a more significant length of the jet (Asada, private communication), which would be a strong evidence for the above idea.

The projected magnetic field in 3C273 is generally tilted somewhat from the axis of the jet, and the tilt angle becomes large at the blob called “anomaly”. Asada et al. (2002) attributed this to the shocks created on encountering non-uniformity. Another possibility is that the jet is bent at that point so that the jet axis has less angle from the line-of-sight; the change of the FRM value can be explained with our model counterparts of different viewing angles (see the change, for example, from (c) to (b) in Figure 4(1)).

The observation of the jet from the AGN core of NGC6251 (Perley et al. 1984) is shown in Figure 8. This may be a bit weaker evidence, but still considerably positive evidence for the systematic twist in the magnetic field. In this case, the contour lines of the FRM are nearly parallel in the central region up to 40″; therefore the distribution of the FRM has a systematic antisymmetry with a gradient in the direction perpendicular to the jet axis, if we subtract the possible contribution from the spherically condensed gas cloud probably associated with the central part of the host galaxy. The projected magnetic field is aligned and this would be consistent with the propagation of the torsional Alfvén waves.

The systematic and gradual change of the FRM value across the jet axis as seen in the above examples might suggest the existence of helical magnetic field. In the MHD models, it is naturally explained as the results of the interaction between the large-scale magnetic field and the disk rotation. Non-magnetic models may not be able to explain the FRM gradient. Although hydrodynamic models can include magnetic field as a passive ingredient, the magnetic field in such a case is expected to be carried around passively by the motions of non-magnetic gas dynamics. Such passively distorted magnetic field will produce the Faraday depolarization, rather than showing clear systematic FRM distribution.

The FRM distribution, when the Faraday rotation occurs in the external medium around the jet, can be useful to determine the 3-dimensional magnetic field structure around the jet, together with the projected magnetic field. We have demonstrated that the characteristic distribution of the FRM (systematic gradient perpendicular to the jet axis) in the straight part of some AGN jets can be explained by our “sweeping magnetic twist model”. On the basis of this success, we are extending our numerical observation to the wiggled part of jets, which can be explained as a structural helix produced by MHD kink instability in the regime of our model (Nakamura et al. 2001). The results will be reported in the following paper.

We acknowledge Mr. K. Asada for providing their precious results of the FRM distribution, and Prof. M. Inoue for discussion. We hope that more observations of the FRM distribution in AGN jets will be performed in the near future, since they are very important in determining the correct theoretical model. Numerical computations were carried out on VPP5000 at the Astronomical Data Analysis Center of the National Astronomical Observatory, Japan, which is an interuniversity research institute of astronomy operated by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology.


format: text

text:
# Early SPI/INTEGRAL constraints on the morphology of the 511 keV line emission in the 4th galactic quadrantBased on observations with INTEGRAL, an ESA project with instruments and science data centre funded by ESA member states (especially the PI countries: Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Spain), Czech Republic and Poland, and with the participation of Russia and the USA.

## 1 Introduction

Since the first detection (Johnson & Haymes johnson1973 (1973)) and the subsequent identification (Leventhal et al. leventhal1978 (1978)) of the galactic 511 keV annihilation line, the origin of galactic positrons has become a lively topic of scientific debate. Among the proposed source candidates figure compact objects such as neutron stars or black holes (Lingenfelter & Ramaty lingenfelter1983 (1983)), stars, such as supernovae, novae, red giants and Wolf-Rayet stars, expelling radioactive nuclei produced by nucleosynthesis (Ramaty, Kozlovsky & Lingenfelter ramaty1979 (1979)), cosmic-ray interactions with the interstellar medium (Kozlovsky, Lingenfelter & Ramaty kozlovsky1987 (1987)), pulsars (Sturrock sturrock1971 (1971)), gamma-ray bursts (Lingenfelter & Hueter lingenfelter1984 (1984)) and stellar flares. Yet so far the source of the galactic positrons is still unknown.

The question of the morphology of the galactic 511 keV annihilation signal is intimately related to the question of the origin of galactic positrons. The celestial distributions should be tied to the source distribution, although positron diffusion within the Galaxy may to some extent blur this link. Although earlier measurements already provided first indications of the morphology of the emission (e.g. Share et al. share1990 (1990)), it is only with the advent of the OSSE telescope onboard the Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory that a first crude skymap of the 511 keV intensity distribution became available (Cheng et al. cheng1997 (1997); Purcell et al. purcell1997 (1997); Milne et al. milne2000 (2000); Milne et al. milne2001 (2001)). The OSSE observations suggest at least two emission components, one being a spheroidal bulge and the other being a galactic disk component. Indications of a third component situated above the galactic plane have resulted in various speculations about the underlying source (von Ballmoos et al. ballmoos2003 (2003)), yet the morphology and intensity of this component is only poorly determined (e.g. Milne et al. milne2001 (2001)).

Modelling the bulge component by symmetric gaussians, the OSSE data suggest FWHM values in the range $`4^{}6^{}`$ with no significant offset from the galactic centre (Purcell et al. purcell1997 (1997); Milne et al. milne2000 (2000)). TGRS results are also consistent with no significant offset from the centre ($`2^{}`$) but suggest a somewhat broader distribution (Harris et al. harris1998 (1998)). The estimated bulge-to-disk ratio (hereafter B/D ratio) is only poorly constrained by the observations, and estimates vary from $`0.23.3`$ depending upon whether the bulge component features a halo (which leads to a large B/D ratio) or not. The total flux has been constrained to $`(2.13.1)\times 10^3`$ ph cm-2s-1 (Milne et al. milne2000 (2000)).

Clearly, more observations are needed to better constrain the 511 keV emission morphology, and thus to shed light on the origin of galactic positrons. In this paper we report a step towards this direction by exploiting a first set of data recorded by the spectrometer SPI on ESA’s INTEGRAL observatory. First results on the spectral shape of the 511 keV line obtained from the same set of data, indicating a slightly broadened line of $`2.95_{0.51}^{+0.45}`$ keV FWHM, have been reported elsewhere (Jean et al. jean2003 (2003)).

## 2 Data analysis

The data analysed in this work were accumulated during the first year’s Galactic Centre Deep Exposure (GCDE) and Galactic Plane Scan (GPS), executed as part of INTEGRAL’s guaranteed time observations (see Winkler winkler2001 (2001)). We used data from 19 orbits from March 3rd to April 30th, 2003, amounting to a total effective exposure time of 1667 ks. The GCDE consists of rectangular pointing grids covering galactic longitudes $`l=\pm 30^{}`$ and latitudes $`b=\pm 10^{}`$, with reduced exposure up to $`b=\pm 20^{}`$. The GPS consists of pointings within the band $`b=\pm 6.4^{}`$ along the galactic plane. For details see Winkler (winkler2001 (2001)). The present data are from 1199 pointings with an average exposure of 1400 seconds per pointing.

As a result of data sharing agreements, the results presented here are limited to the galactic quadrant $`l=270^{}`$$`360^{}`$ but, in accordance with those agreements, data from pointings in the entire GCDE region $`l=\pm 30^{}`$ have been taken into account in the analysis. The resulting sky exposure is depicted in Fig. 1, where black/white corresponds to regions of maximum/minimum exposure, respectively. A quite homogeneous exposure has been achieved over galactic longitudes $`\pm 25^{}`$, with a small exposure dip near the galactic centre. The latitude dependence is approximated by a gaussian centred on the galactic plane, with FWHM of $`30^{}`$.

Data preparation and modelling of the instrumental background is identical to that described in Jean et al. (jean2003 (2003)). The SPI single detector event data have been gain corrected and binned into event spectra of $`0.25`$ keV bin width for each detector and pointing, leading to a 3-dimensional data space. The background has been modelled in this data space by two components, accounting for the instrumental 511 keV line and the underlying continuum (see Eqs. 1 and 2 and Fig. 1 in Jean et al. jean2003 (2003)). The short-term variability ($`<3`$ days) of the background has been predicted using the rate of saturating events in the Ge detectors, while the long-term variability has been regarded as an unknown (see section 4).

The expected number of counts in this data space, $`E_{p,d,e}`$, where $`p`$ indicates the pointing, $`d`$ the detector, and $`e`$ the energy bin, is given by

$$E_{p,d,e}=\underset{l,b}{}R_{p,d,e}^{l,b}\mathrm{\Phi }_{l,b}+B_{p,d,e},$$
(1)
where $`R_{p,d,e}^{l,b}`$ is the instrumental response matrix (i.e. the number of counts in a data space bin that arises from a source of unit flux at the sky position $`l,b`$; see Sturner et al., this volume), $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{l,b}`$ is the 511 keV sky intensity distribution, and $`B_{p,d,e}`$ is the background model. In the following we describe two approaches that we used to extract information about $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{l,b}`$ from the measured SPI data.

## 3 Imaging

A qualitative impression about the spatial distribution of the 511 keV $`\gamma `$-ray line emission can be obtained by deconvolving the data into a celestial intensity distribution. For this purpose, we employed in this work the Richardson-Lucy algorithm (Richardson richardson1972 (1972), Lucy lucy1974 (1974)) that has been successfully applied to $`\gamma `$-ray data of earlier missions (e.g. Knödlseder et al. knoedlseder1999 (1999); Milne et al. milne2000 (2000)). The Richardson-Lucy algorithm decomposes the sky into a grid of equally sized pixels (here of $`0.5^{}\times 0.5^{}`$) and solves for the intensity $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{l,b}`$ in each of the pixels simultaneously using an iterative maximum likelihood scheme. The pixels are constrained to positive intensities. As all pixel-based deconvolution algorithms, the Richardson-Lucy scheme leads to morphology artefacts in the case of reconstructing a diffuse low significance signal since the number of free parameters (i.e. the number of image pixels) greatly exceeds the information available in the data. In order to reduce these artefacts, we added a smoothing step to the iterative scheme that effectively combines adjacent pixels and thus reduces the number of pixels in the reconstruction. As smoothing kernel, a boxcar average of $`6^{}\times 6^{}`$ has been employed.

Figure 2 shows the resulting skymap for negative longitudes (according to the above cited data right agreements we deliberately limit the image to $`l<0^{}`$). As insets, longitude and latitude profiles of the 511 keV line emission are shown that have been obtained by integrating the intensity of latitudes $`b=\pm 5deg`$ and longitude $`l=5^{}0^{}`$, respectively. The emission is concentrated in an azimuthally symmetric region near the galactic centre, with an extent of about $`9^{}`$ (FWHM). The emission maximum is slightly offset from the galactic centre, and is situated at about $`l=1^{}`$ and $`b=2^{}`$. Integrating the intensity over the feature suggests a flux of the order of $`10^3`$ ph cm-2s-1.

To asses the significance of the morphology that is seen in the skymap, we performed Monte-Carlo simulations of the deconvolution process assuming that the 511 keV line emission morphology is described by an azimuthally symmetric gaussian bulge of $`10^{}`$ FWHM centred at $`l=0^{}`$ and $`b=0^{}`$. In the ideal case the image deconvolution should reproduce the input image of an azimuthally symmetric emission centred at the galactic centre, yet the limited statistics may introduce some uncertainties in the reconstruction procedure.

Figure 3 shows the resulting simulated skymap, now shown for the entire galactic centre region. Obviously, although the underlying model has been azimuthally symmetric, the deconvolved image shows a clear emission asymmetry, with FWHM of $`8^{}`$ and $`12^{}`$ in the longitudinal and latitudinal directions, respectively. Also the emission maximum is displaced from the galactic centre, and is found at $`l=0.5^{}`$ and $`b=2.5^{}`$. These values are comparable to those found for the centroid of the emission in the 511 keV sky map, and as we will show more quantitatively in the next section, the apparent displacement in the 511 keV sky map could indeed be of purely statistical nature.

## 4 Model fitting

A more quantitative approach is possible by fitting to the data a model of the spatial distribution that has one or more components. The components can be point sources, gaussian or other geometric forms, or arbitrary maps corresponding to known distributions. The intensities of the components are adjusted to maximise the likelihood that the model gives rise to the observed distribution of counts in the line (a 5 keV wide energy band centred at 511 keV was used), binned by detector and by pointing. Along with the model intensities, 19 background model scaling factors have been adjusted for the line component by the fit, one for each orbit (factors $`G`$ in Jean et al. jean2003 (2003)); the scaling factors for the continuum component (factors $`F`$ in Jean et al. jean2003 (2003)) have been fixed to unity. Not fitting the background model introduces systematic uncertainties in the analysis that considerable biases the morphology determination.

Guided by the imaging analysis (and by previous work performed to describe the morphology of the OSSE observations, e.g. Purcell et al. purcell1997 (1997)) we used gaussian functions to describe the observed bulge emission. Assuming an azimuthally symmetric gaussian centred on $`l=0^{}`$ and $`b=0^{}`$ results in an optimum FWHM of $`9_3^{+7}`$ degrees, where the quoted uncertainties are formal statistical $`2\sigma `$ errors. Systematic uncertainties, due to different treatment of the instrumental background, hardly affect the lower boundary, while adding an additional uncertainty of $`\pm 2^{}`$ to the upper boundary. The flux in the bulge component amounts to $`9.9_{2.1}^{+4.7}\times 10^4`$ ph cm-2s-1, where the uncertainty includes (and is dominated by) the uncertainty in the gaussian width. Formally, the statistical detection significance of the 511 keV line amounts to $`12\sigma `$.

Relaxing the condition on spherical symmetry does not significantly improve the fit. Yet relaxing the condition on the location of the bulge centroid improves the likelihood by $`3.3`$ corresponding to a significance of $`2.1\sigma `$ for the displacement. The optimum centroid positions has been determined as to be $`l=1.0^{}\pm 1.3^{}`$ and $`b=1.4^{}\pm 1.3^{}`$, the optimum gaussian width at this location amounts to $`8_3^{+4}`$ degrees ($`2\sigma `$ statistical errors). Systematic uncertainties in the centroid determination amount to about $`\pm 0.2^{}`$. The flux in the displaced bulge component amounts to $`10.3_{2.2}^{+2.6}\times 10^4`$ ph cm-2s-1, including again the uncertainty in the gaussian width.

Including a galactic disk component in addition to the gaussian bulge component does not significantly improve the fit. In none of the considered cases did the fit attribute a significant flux to the disk component. From the fits we derive upper limits on the disk flux by multiplying the statistical uncertainty in the disk component by the requested significance level (we quote here $`2\sigma `$ upper limits, hence the formal $`1\sigma `$ statistical errors have been multiplied by a factor of 2). Although the disk models we tested formally cover the entire galactic plane, the effective exposure of our data is restricted to $`l\pm 40^{}`$, and hence we can only derive conclusions about this longitude range. For the bulge component we used an azimuthally symmetric gaussian centred on $`l=0^{}`$ and $`b=0^{}`$ with the width being a free parameter of the fit. In all considered cases, the best fitting FWHM amounted to $`9^{}`$, with a $`2\sigma `$ lower limit of $`6^{}`$.

The resulting limits on the disk flux strongly depend on the spatial distribution that has been assumed for the disk component. Using models of constant positron annihilation surface density throughout the galactic disk, limited to a maximum galactocentric radius of 14 kpc, provide the largest upper flux limits, comprised between $`(2.83.4)\times 10^3`$ ph cm-2s-1 for assumed exponential scale heights of 90 and 325 pc, respectively. A tracer of the old stellar population, such as the DIRBE 35 $`\mu `$m allsky map, gives a slightly smaller limit of $`2.5\times 10^3`$ ph cm-2s-1, while a massive star tracer, such as the DIRBE 240 $`\mu `$m allsky map, provides a considerably smaller limit of $`1.4\times 10^3`$ ph cm-2s-1.

## 5 Discussion

The 511 keV line emission detected by SPI from the Galaxy is so far adequately described by a gaussian shaped bulge of $`9^{}`$ FWHM. The $`2\sigma `$ lower limit on the bulge size amounts to $`6^{}`$, which is at the upper limit of the values suggested by the OSSE observations ($`4^{}6^{}`$). At this early stage of the analysis we do not emphasise this discrepancy, yet it may be taken as a first hint of morphology differences between the OSSE and SPI analyses.

The data do not suggest that the bulge geometry deviates from spherical symmetry yet a small offset of the centroid from the galactic centre direction is indicated by the data at the $`2\sigma `$ confidence limit. The present data do not yet allow to make a statement about the reality of the positive latitude enhancement that has been reported by Purcell et al. (purcell1997 (1997)).

Assuming that the bulge is indeed located at the galactic centre, at a distance of $`8.5`$ kpc, the measured 511 keV line flux converts into an annihilation rate of $`(3.46.3)\times 10^{42}`$ s-1. The observed flux is compatible with previous measurements that have been obtained using telescopes with small or moderate fields-of-view, yet it is on the low side when compared to OSSE measurements. OSSE, however, has detected an additional galactic disk component that is (so far?) not seen in the SPI data. The disk flux determined by OSSE lies in the range $`(0.72.7)\times 10^3`$ ph cm-2s-1, and strongly depends on the assumed shape of the bulge component. Our $`2\sigma `$ upper limits on the disk component of $`(1.43.4)\times 10^3`$ ph cm-2s-1 are still compatible with the OSSE measurements.

The upper flux limits on the galactic disk component may be converted into lower limits for the bulge-to-disk ratio. While the constant surface density models provide the smallest limits of $`B/D0.3`$, the DIRBE 35 $`\mu `$m and 240 $`\mu `$m maps lead to $`B/D0.4`$ and $`B/D0.6`$, respectively. We included in these limits the $`2\sigma `$ uncertainty about the bulge size which translates into a typical uncertainty of $`0.2`$ in the bulge-to-disk ratio. Again, these limits are compatible with the OSSE measurement of values in the $`0.23.3`$ range.

## 6 Conclusions

The analysis of SPI data that have been recorded during the first half of the first year’s INTEGRAL GCDE have provided initial constraints on the morphology of the galactic 511 keV line emission. The data suggest that the emission follows an azimuthally symmetric galactic bulge of $`9^{}`$ typical FWHM, yet the uncertainties on the width are still rather large ($`6^{}18^{}`$, $`2\sigma `$). The bulge seems centred on the galactic centre, yet a marginal displacement towards positive latitudes and negative longitudes may be indicated. Obviously, this displacement clearly needs confirmation by the analysis of a much larger set of data.

The available SPI observations are so far rather insensitive to a galactic disk component, and only upper limits have been derived. More data along the galactic plane are needed to better constrain the disk component. These data are, to some extent, already taken, yet the data sharing agreements do not allow for their inclusion in the present analysis. Yet we are optimistic that once combined, the complete set of SPI observation will provide unprecedented constraints on the morphology of the 511 keV line emission, and thus give us key information about the origin of the positrons in the Galaxy.

###### Acknowledgements.

The SPI project has been completed under the responsibility and leadership of CNES. We are grateful to ASI, CEA, CNES, DLR, ESA, INTA, NASA and OSTC for support.


text:
# Detection of the evolutionary stages of variables in M3

## 1 Introduction

Variable stars in globular clusters are very important objects in understanding horizontal branch (HB) stellar evolution. They are of the same age, and the spread in their metallicity, if present at all, is supposed to be rather small. Their global properties are well known, but there are still significant uncertainties in tying the basic parameters of the globular clusters (distance, age and metallicity) to absolute scales. The so called “second parameter” which defines the structure of the HB besides metallicity is still a matter of debate (see e.g. Bellazzini et al.,, 2001; Catelan,, 2000; Buonanno at al.,, 1997). The systematic differences in the mean periods of RRab stars and in the percentage of the overtone variables (Oosterhoff (Oo) dichotomy) cannot be simply connected to the HB type or the metallicity of the clusters. Lee et al., (1990) suggested an evolutionary explanation of the Oo dichotomy and the Sandage period shift, arguing that evolution away from the ZAHB can explain the observed properties of Oo II clusters. Lee & Carney, 1999b  draw a similar conclusion from the comparison of M2 (Oo II) and M3 (Oo I) but they found a 2 Gyr age difference between these clusters, also. The comparison the HB luminosities of different clusters, which is crucial both in the explanation of the Oo dichotomy and the period shift, bears, however, significant uncertainties. Thus, studying stars of different evolutionary stages in a single cluster may have crucial impact on these studies.

M3 is one of the most prominent globular clusters with a very extensive population of RR Lyrae stars (both of RRab and RRc) making the cluster an ideal target for the investigation of the HB within the instability strip. The properties of RR Lyrae stars classify M3 as an Oo I type cluster with a larger population of RRab stars than the overtones, and with a 0.561 d mean period of the RRab stars (Corwin & Carney,, 2001, hereafter CC01). The majority of the RR Lyrae stars have mean magnitudes within a $`0.3`$ mag range. The accuracy of photometric data indicates that the spread is intrinsic and may be understood in terms of HB evolution. Kaluzny et al., (1998) mentioned that the three brightest RRab stars might already be in an evolved phase of their HB evolution. Clement & Shelton, (1999) have drawn attention that these stars fit the period - amplitude (P-A) relation of Oo II clusters. This led them also to conclude that the Oo dichotomy is due to evolution and the previously assumed period-amplitude-metallicity relation was just an artifact of different selection effects. Based on their magnitudes and positions on the P-A plot, CC01 separated a group of RRab stars in M3 being probably already in the late stage of the HB evolution.

In this Letter we present details on the fine structure of the HB of M3 inside the instability strip which strengthen the results of CC01 and Clement & Shelton, (1999). The properties of the variables are explained in the context of the HB stellar evolution.

## 2 Data

Using all the available photometric V observations of M3 variables (Kaluzny et al.,, 1998; Carretta et al.,, 1998; Corwin & Carney,, 2001; Benkő et al.,, 2003, hereafter BJ03) we constructed complete, accurate light curves of about 100 RRab and 50 RRc type variables. As our aim was to investigate the differences in the shapes of the light curves, and the magnitude distribution of the variables, only those stars were used which were not affected seriously by any type of modulation (Blazhko, nonradial, double mode). Constructing the light curves by using all the available measurements can help to eliminate any defect (distortion) which might be present in any of the observations.

A comparison of the light curves from different observations and reduction processes (Jurcsik,, 2003) showed that the light curves of the inner variables in CC01 have considerably larger scatter and much less reliable mean magnitudes than the BJ03 data. For the outer variables, the scatter in the V light curves of CC01 is a bit larger than in the BJ03 and Kaluzny et al., (1998) data. Consequently, we rely on the correctness of the BJ03 data and to reach the most accurate light curve shapes we do not simply merge the different data, but if necessary, magnitude offsets of the order of 0.01 mag to the different measurements are added to match the data of the individual variables to the BJ03 light curves. The error of the intensity mean magnitudes of the variables used in the this work is typically less than 0.02 mag in BJ03, thus this is the typical accuracy of the data the present study is based on.

The accuracy of the mean magnitudes makes it possible to map the light curve shapes and periods (Fourier parameters) in the two dimensional period - magnitude plane. Assuming homogeneous composition, this plane is analogous to the color-magnitude diagram, as variables with the same magnitudes have nearly equal masses within the instability strip, thus differences in their periods are only due to their different temperatures (colors).

## 3 Results

Both the RRab and the RRc stars show a relatively wide $`0.3`$ magnitude distribution with two central peaks at around 15.67 and 15.63 mag, a flat wide range of brighter stars and a faint tail going down to 15.75 mag. The magnitude distribution of the RR Lyrae stars are shown in the top panels of Fig. 1. A comparison with HB synthesis results using the evolutionary models of Dorman, (1992) are shown in the bottom panel of Fig. 1. Uniform mass and age distributions of the HB stars in the 0.70 and $`0.60M_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`0100`$ Myear intervals are assumed, and the instability strip of RR Lyrae stars are defined as shown in Fig. 4. Synthetic HB simulations gave $`<M_{HB}>=0.64`$ and $`\sigma _M=0.02M_{\mathrm{}}`$ mean mass and mass dispersion values in M3 (Catelan et al.,, 2001). However, as different models have different mass distributions on the HB, when using Dorman, (1992) models to synthetize the HB population of M3, other values of the mean mass and mass dispersion may be obtained. Therefore, we tested the synthetic magnitude distribution within the instability strip using mean mass and mass dispersion values within the $`0.620.68`$ and $`0.020.03M_{\mathrm{}}`$ ranges. These simulations led to similar results as for uniform mass distribution, with a bit more narrow density peak when smaller mass and mass dispersion values were assumed.

The observed magnitude distributions of RR Lyrae stars and synthetic HB results are in good agreement, taking into account the uncertainties of both the observations and the models. This global agreement helps in identifying the different magnitude groups of RR Lyrae stars with different stages of the HB evolution.

As there is no clear cut between the magnitudes of the different magnitude groups identified in Fig. 1, the light curve shapes help in deciding which group a given star belongs to. In order to check the possible systematic differences between the shapes of the light curves at different mean magnitudes, we compared the progressions of their Fourier parameters as a function of their periods as shown in Fig. 2. These plots can be interpreted as changes in the light curve shapes with decreasing temperature for the four samples which have the same luminosity, composition, and there should be just a very slight ($`<0.03M_{\mathrm{}}`$) dispersion in their masses. The most dramatic differences can be seen in the Fourier parameters of the brightest sample, but the other brighter group is also slightly shifted, especially in the higher Fourier components from the fainter stars. The two faint samples seem to follow the same tracks. The larger scatter of the Fourier parameters of the faintest sample may be due to observational inaccuracies but it cannot be excluded that it reflects intrinsic differences in the light curve shapes of these stars. The observed main tracks in Fig. 2 are very similar to the predicted behaviour of the Fourier parameters of constant luminosity, mass and composition models shown by Dorfi & Feuchtinger, (1999). This result strengthens the reality that the three brighter groups represent indeed different luminosity samples.

The period - Fourier amplitude plots shown in Fig. 2 are the analogs of the P-A diagram discussed in many papers as a diagnostic tool of the Oo type. CC01 separated a sample of 13 RRab stars in M3 which defined a long period sequence on the P-A diagram. According to their observations, 11 of these stars were brighter than the average magnitude of the RR Lyrae stars. Our measurements confirm this finding, moreover in our data all these stars belong to the brightest sample including an additional member of this group; V139.

Fig. 3 shows the period distributions in the four different brightness groups, and for comparison, the period distribution in M2 as well. The period distributions of RRab stars in the four groups show definite shifts with magnitude. Both the shortest and longest periods and also the distribution of the periods in the third group are very similar to that of the two fainter groups, but are shifted by $`+0.03`$ d. The mean period of the brightest stars is 0.12 d longer than in the main group.

Jurcsik, (1998) explained the Sandage period shift (an increase of the mean period of RRab stars in globular clusters with decreasing metallicity) with the inclination of the RRab instability strip. The variables in M3 also indicate an inclination of the instability strip (CC01(Fig. 9) and Bakos & Jurcsik, (2000)). The increased luminosities of the two brighter samples account for $`0.025`$ and $`0.07`$ d longer periods, respectively, according to the linear pulsation equation. To explain the observed 0.05 and 0.12 d longer periods in these samples, cooler temperatures and/or smaller masses of these stars has to be also assumed.

The period distribution of the faintest stars is the same as that of the most populous group. For the smaller sample of the RRc stars, a similar investigation of their period distribution is not possible, however, it is worth to note that all the six longest period RRc stars belong to the brightest group.

## 4 Conclusions

Based on the comparison of our data with HB evolutionary models, the four groups at different mean brightness can be identified with different stages of the HB stellar evolution as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 4. Table 1 summarizes the observed properties and the suggested evolutionary stages of the variables belonging to the four groups. The faintest sample (27) can be identified with variables close to their ZAHB positions. Most of the stars in our sample (50) are evolving blueward on the HB. Stars belonging to the 0.05 mag brighter sample (33) are at the hottest part of the blue loops, while the brightest stars (32) are in the late, redward phase of their HB evolution. It is interesting to note that among the overtone variables most of the stars belong to this group, which indicates that in M3, on the average, RRc stars are already in a later phase of their HB evolution than the RRab variables.

If we compare the mean periods of RRab stars and the percentage of the RRc variables of the ZAHB and the blueward evolving stars with that of the brightest, most evolved sample (0.55 and 0.67 d; 22 and 56%, respectively), an Oo I and an Oo II population emerge. The Fourier parameters of RRab stars in M2, a globular cluster with the same metallicity as M3, but with Oo II properties, are also shown in Fig. 2 using Lee & Carney, 1999a  data. The 11 M2 variables and the 14 brightest RRab stars in M3 cover similar range in period and define the same sequences (V10 in M2 with 0.87 d period is not shown in Fig. 2). The large scatter of these tracks is most probably intrinsic, and is due to the larger range in the evolutionary status of the most evolved HB stars. The period distribution in M2, as shown in Fig. 3, is also similar to that of the brightest M3 sample in accordance with our conclusion that the brightest stars have Oo II characteristics. This is the first direct evidence of the Oo dichotomy in a single cluster with homogeneous metallicity.

The fact that the Oo dichotomy in M3 can be consistently explained alone by evolutionary effects is a strong constraint for its interpretation and favours to the hysteresis hypothesis originally proposed by van Albada & Baker, (1971). The hysteresis, namely, that mode switching from overtone to fundamental takes place at a lower temperature than in the opposite direction, may account for both the larger percentage of the overtones and the longer period of the fundamentals during the late redward phase of the HB. A similar conclusion has been already drawn by Clement & Shelton, (1999) from the comparison of the P-A diagrams of different metallicity clusters, and from the existence of 3 anomalously bright and large amplitude RRab stars in M3. Lee et al., (1990) and Lee & Carney, 1999b  explained the Oo dichotomy and the period shift by HB stellar evolution but their interpretation was drawn from the comparison of the properties of different clusters with order of Gyr age differences, while the age difference between the Oo I and Oo II populations in M3 is smaller than 100 Myear.

As a summary, we succeeded in discriminating the different stages of HB stellar evolution using accurate light curves and mean magnitudes of the variables in M3. A comparison with HB evolutionary models does not reveal any significant discrepancy between observations and model predictions. This result helps in studying the “fine structure” of the HB and can be the base of a more precise distance estimate of RR Lyrae variables. However, the similarity of the light curves (Fourier parameters) of variables in a $`0.15`$ mag magnitude range imposes strong limits on the accuracy of any empirical method (e.g. Kovács & Walker,, 2001) which derives the magnitudes of the stars solely form the Fourier parameters of their light curves.

This work has been supported by OTKA grant T43504 and T38437. We would like to thank the stimulating criticism of the anonymous referee which helped to improve the content of the paper significantly.