text:
# Soft X-ray Absorption due to a Foreground Edge-On Spiral Galaxy Toward the Core of Abell 2029

## 1. Introduction

In this paper we report on the serendipitous detection of a foreground edge-on galaxy seen in absorption against the X-ray core of a cooling flow galaxy cluster. The cluster, Abell 2029, is a nearby ($`z=0.0767`$) cluster which contains a central cD galaxy whose diffuse light extends up to 850 kpc (Uson, Boughn, & Kuhn, 1991). It has been (re)classified by Dressler (1978) as richness class 4.4. X-ray studies of the cluster show that it is a very relaxed system, and is one of the most luminous galaxy clusters \[$`L_x(210\mathrm{keV})=1.1\times 10^{45}`$ ergs s-1\]. We have examined the archival $`Chandra`$ image of the cluster to study the structure of the thermal intracluster medium (ICM) in the core of the cluster and the interaction of the central radio source with the ICM (T. E. Clarke et al., in preparation, hereafter Paper II). While analyzing the $`Chandra`$ image, we discovered a linear absorption feature roughly 1$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5 south of the cluster core.

This feature is due to the galaxy UZC J151054.6+054313 (hereafter UZC J151054), which is a beautiful example of a late-type spiral galaxy seen (nearly) edge-on in the foreground of the dense cluster Abell 2029. It has a distinctive bulge component and a rather thin disk with a disk-to-bulge ratio of $`6`$, consistent with the parameters of an Sb/Sc galaxy (Figure 1a). Dressler (1981) measured redshifts of 31 galaxies toward Abell 2029 and found UZC J151054 to be in the foreground of the cluster, at a redshift of $`z=0.0221`$, while the cluster is at a redshift of $`z=0.0767`$. The linear feature is due to photoelectric absorption of soft X-rays in the disk of the spiral galaxy which is seen against the diffuse thermal intracluster medium. In § 2, we discuss the X-ray, optical, and radio observations and reductions for this galaxy. The optical and H i details of the system are given in § 3 and § 4, respectively. § 5 presents the X-ray absorption due to the foreground spiral, and in § 6 we discuss the results of these observations.

Throughout this paper, we adopt a luminosity distance of 90 Mpc for UZC J151054. We express the physical properties in terms of this distance, and scale quantities with $`d_{90}`$. This distance is consistent with a pure Hubble Flow and WMAP cosmology (Bennett et al., 2003), which gives $`D_L`$=93.2 Mpc. This is also in agreement with the Tully-Fisher distance of $`D_L`$ 83 Mpc (see § 4 below). At a distance of 90 Mpc, the scale is 0.44 kpc/arcsec.

## 2. Observations and Data Reduction

### 2.1. X-Ray

The central region of Abell 2029 was observed with the $`Chandra`$ X-ray Observatory on 2000 April 12 for a total time of 19.8 ksec (OBSID 891). The observations were centered on the back-illuminated ACIS-S3 chip. We present a detailed description of the data reductions in Paper II and only provide a brief summary here. The data were analyzed using CIAO version 2.3 and CALDB 2.18. The events were filtered for energy (0.3–10 keV) and grade (ASCA 0,2,3,4, and 6). The background light-curve was determined from the S1 chip and showed no strong flares, and we removed only 128 seconds of data due to high background.

The background for the observation was determined from the blank sky background files collected by M. Markevitch111See http://cxc.harvard.edu/contrib/maxim/acisbg/COOKBOOK. For the purposes of studying the absorption due to the foreground galaxy, it is the soft X-ray background in the 0.3–1 keV band which is most important. The soft background, which is mainly Galactic, varies by a factor of $``$2 even at high Galactic latitudes (Abell 2029 is at $`b=50\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}5`$). Thus, it would be preferable to use an in-situ background from the observation. Unfortunately, the $`ROSAT`$ PSPC image of Abell 2029 (Sarazin, Wise, & Markevitch, 1998) shows that the thermal X-ray emission from the cluster covers the entire S3 chip, and even extends beyond the $`Chandra`$ S1 chip (the other backside-illuminated chip). As a result, it is difficult to determine an in-situ background from the observation. For this absorption study, it would also be useful to separate the background into particle and Galactic foregrounds and cosmological X-ray background. Although the correct background is thus uncertain by a factor of about two, the dominant “background” in these measurement is actually the diffuse cluster emission from Abell 2029, and the results presented here are affected by less than 10% by this uncertainty in the real background. The sense of the variation is that, if the background is higher than we have assumed (the likely sense of the variation), we have underestimated the absorption by the spiral galaxy, albeit very slightly.

Figure 1b,c shows Gaussian smoothed ($`\sigma `$=1″) images in the soft and hard X-ray bands of the region around the spiral galaxy UZC J151054, both corrected for exposure and background. The emission gradient seen from north to south in the image is due to the thermal ICM of the core of the cluster Abell 2029. Detailed X-ray images of the galaxy cluster are presented in Paper II. The X-ray image was compared to the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS; Cutri et al., 2001) to check the positional accuracy. There are three 2MASS IDs which are associated (within 1″) with X-ray sources, and comparison of positions shows no significant shift between the two coordinate systems.

### 2.2. Optical

$`B`$, $`V`$, $`R`$, and $`I`$ band photometry has been obtained for a different project by one of us (JMU) in collaboration with S. P. Boughn (Haverford) and J. R. Kuhn (Hawaii). The observations were taken with the 0.9 m telescope on Kitt Peak National Observatory on 1987 May 20 and 1988 May 10 ($`R`$), 1988 May 8 ($`V`$), and 1988 May 14 ($`B`$). The No. 3 RCA CCD was used for these observations mounted at the f:7.5 Cassegrain focus, which resulted in square pixels of 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$86 on a side. The seeing was $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}4`$. The observations produced mosaics of Abell 2029 which included the foreground spiral galaxy that we discuss in this paper (see Uson et al., 1991, for details of the observing and data reduction techniques). $`I`$ band photometry of Abell 2029 was obtained on 1998 April 19 using the T2KA camera mounted at the f:7.5 Cassegrain focus, which resulted in square pixels of 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$68 on a side. Throughout the run the seeing was excellent, between 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$7 and 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$9, which resulted in an effective seeing of $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$2 due to the available pixel size. The spatially-overlapping exposures were used to make a mosaic of about 35$`\mathrm{}`$ (RA) by 58$`\mathrm{}`$ (Dec) again including the galaxy discussed here (Dale & Uson, 2000). Figure 1a shows our galaxy immersed in the diffuse halo that pervades the center of Abell 2029 and extends about 850 kpc from the cluster center (Uson et al., 1991). The coordinate system of the $`I`$ band image of the spiral galaxy was tied to the 2MASS position frame using five matches in the field.

### 2.3. Radio Continuum

A $`\lambda 23`$ cm continuum image has been obtained from a deep HI survey of Abell 2029. The NRAO Very Large Array (VLA) was used in its C configuration to cover the frequency range of 1300.7 MHz to 1335.2 MHz appropriate to the redshift range of the cluster. Although the frequency range precluded the observation of H i at the redshift of the foreground spiral, it yields a good continuum image of the field, with a resolution of $`16`$″ and an rms noise of $`58`$ $`\mu `$Jy/beam. Figure 2 shows that the spiral galaxy is undetected in the radio continuum; we derive an integrated flux of $`36\pm 82`$ $`\mu `$Jy which leads to a $`2\sigma `$ upper limit of 200 $`\mu `$Jy over the full area of the galaxy (270 arcsec2).

### 2.4. H i Observations

H i observations were obtained for us by Jodie Martin (UVa) and John Hibbard (NRAO) in two 10 minute observations with the NRAO Green Bank Telescope (GBT). The observations were made with the Spectral Processor using two orthogonal polarizations with bandwidths of 10 MHz with a frequency resolution of 9.8 kHz. The elevation was $`22`$ degrees which caused a fair amount of radio frequency interference (RFI) pickup. The data were (twice) Hanning-smoothed off-line in order to minimize a ripple due to strong out-of-band RFI, giving a final resolution of $`8.6`$ km s-1. The data were reduced using the DISH package in AIPS++. Even in the presence of RFI, the spectral stability was quite adequate and we have only subtracted a linear baseline from the data. The calibration was referenced to 3C295 which was observed about 12 hours after the galaxy at about the same elevation. We adopt a value for the flux of 3C295 of 22.46 Jy at our observing frequency (1391 MHz) from the Baars et al. (1977) scale which leads to the spectrum shown in Figure 3. From the scatter of the data in the line free channels, we estimate the 1-$`\sigma `$ error per channel for the two polarizations to be 3.5 mJy (continuous line) and 4.4 mJy (dashed line).

The average redshift is 6438 km s-1 (optical definition, heliocentric) in good agreement with the value of $`6442\pm 3`$ km s-1 listed in the Updated Zwicky Catalog (Falco et al., 1999), which was obtained by Haynes et al. (1997) using the Arecibo telescope. Correction to the frame of the cosmic microwave background radiation yields a redshift of c$`z_{\mathrm{cmb}}=6620`$ km s-1 placing the galaxy at a distance of $`90`$ Mpc assuming a pure Hubble flow. We shall use this distance to derive physical quantities below but express those values in units of $`d_{90}`$ where appropriate.

## 3. Optical Properties

We have used the prescription in Tully et al. (1998) to determine the inclination and find a most-likely value of $`87^{}`$, assuming an intrinsic aspect ratio of 10:1 for the disk. The lower limit is $`84^{}`$ if we assume that the galaxy is thin. We have adopted a value of $`87^{}\pm 3^{}`$. The Holmberg diameter is barely reached by the observations and has a value of $`24.3`$ $`d_{90}`$ kpc.

Table 1 shows the results of the photometry. Given the seeing differences we only determine the photometry for the center of the galaxy (a $`6\mathrm{}\times 6\mathrm{}`$ box), the bulge, the disk, and the galaxy as a whole. To define the regions used for photometry we took an average of the $`B`$, $`V`$, $`R`$, and $`I`$ frames to make masks and used the same area for all bands in the photometry. The values are corrected for foreground extinction using the prescription of Schlegel, Finkbeiner, & Davis (1998); but are not corrected for internal extinction (see below). The background was determined by first masking all sources visible in any of the four bands, then estimating the average and gradient due to the cD halo from the remaining pixels on either side of the nucleus both above and below the disk. We estimate the photometry to be accurate to $`0.03`$ mag given the difficulty to estimate the local “background” levels in the presence of faint cluster galaxies and the large envelope of the cD galaxy that dominates Abell 2029. Similarly, we estimate the colors to be accurate to $``$ 0.05 – 0.1 mag.

The $`VI`$ colors are consistent with those of Scd galaxies given by Frei & Gunn (1994) with the $`k`$-corrections interpolated linearly to $`z=0.023`$. For example, the global color is $`VI=0.77`$ when 0.82 (1.14) is the corresponding “average” color of an Scd (Sbc) galaxy. The $`RI`$ color is a bit blue (0.34) where 0.53 is expected for a typical Scd galaxy (0.77 for an Sbc), and could be affected by a contribution from H$`\alpha `$ as well. The $`BI`$ color is even bluer (1.17 when 1.37 is expected for an Scd galaxy and 1.76 for an Sbc), which might be an indication of recent star formation.

These colors are uncorrected for internal extinction which would, of course, make them even bluer. There is a long-standing debate on the optical depth of (late) spiral galaxies (e.g., Masters, Giovanelli, & Haynes, 2003, and references therein). The correction to a face-on orientation is usually parametrized in terms of the aspect ratio as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }M_I=\gamma _I\mathrm{log}(a/b),$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_I`$ is the correction to the I band magnitude, $`a`$ and $`b`$ are the apparent semi-major and semi-minor axes of the galaxy, and $`\gamma _I`$ is an empirical coefficient. Because our galaxy is about 2 magnitudes dimmer than $`L^{}`$, $`\gamma _I=0.5`$ (Giovanelli et al., 1994) leading to a correction of $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_I0.48`$. For comparison, we have used the two relations offered by Tully and collaborators (Tully et al., 1998) to compute the same correction, which in our case lead to values of $`\gamma _I=0.3`$ using the relation that depends on the absolute magnitude, and $`\gamma _I=0.6`$ using the dependence on the velocity width. Given the statistical character of these prescriptions, we find their agreement quite encouraging. Adding a $`k`$-correction of $`0.025`$ magnitudes from Frei & Gunn (1994) leads to an $`I`$ band estimate of the luminosity of $`L_I=(1.1\pm 0.2)\times 10^9d_{90}^2`$ $`L_{}`$. The expected stellar mass-to-light ratio of UZC J151054 is $`M_{}/L_I=1.7`$ in solar units (de Jong, 1996) yielding an estimate of the total stellar mass of the galaxy of $`M_{}1.9\times 10^9d_{90}^2M_{}`$.

We have opted to use the average of both of the Tully et al. (1998) methods to similarly estimate a correction to the $`B`$ band photometry, which yields a value of $`\gamma _B=0.8`$. This allows us to estimate an absolute magnitude of $`M_B=17.79`$ (which includes a $`k`$-correction of $`0.075`$ from Frei & Gunn, 1994) corrected to face-on but not for any residual effects from scattering or internal extinction. Our (final) estimate of the $`B`$ band luminosity of this galaxy is thus $`L_B(2.0\pm 0.3)\times 10^9d_{90}^2`$ $`L_{}`$. The expected stellar mass-to-light ratio of UZC J151054 is $`M_{}/L_B=1.4`$ in solar units (de Jong, 1996). Thus, the total stellar mass of the galaxy is expected to be $`M_{}2.8\times 10^9d_{90}^2M_{}`$ in good agreement with the estimate from the $`I`$ band photometry.

## 4. H i

The H i spectrum shows an asymptotic velocity of $`v_t=108`$ km s-1. Although the H i emission often extends beyond the optical emission, we derive a lower limit to the total mass of the galaxy by estimating the mass internal to the optical radius of 12 $`d_{90}`$ kpc as $`M_T3.3\times 10^{10}d_{90}`$$`M_{}`$.

Integration of the H i spectra yield estimates of the total fluxes of $`S_1=1.71\pm 0.15`$ Jy km s-1 and $`S_2=1.09\pm 0.19`$ Jy km s-1 for polarizations one and two, respectively, where the errors are derived from the scatter of the line-free channels and do not include calibration errors. As seen in Figure 3, the second polarization is corrupted by RFI, so that we shall ignore it henceforth (although it does offer confirmation of the velocity extent of the H i). After our analysis was completed, we have received the spectrum from Haynes et al. (1997) electronically. Their measured total flux is $`S_H=1.67`$ Jy km s-1, which we have been told should be increased by perhaps 5% to account for pointing errors and should be accurate to about 15% (M. Haynes, private communication). Given our short integration, we consider the agreement of the two derived total fluxes somewhat coincidental.

Nevertheless, we are encouraged to derive an H i mass from our spectrum and arrive at a value of $`M_{HI}=3.1\times 10^9d_{90}^2`$ $`M_{}`$ which is accurate to $``$ 10%. Thus, the galaxy shares in the common “dark matter” problem with ratios of $`M_T/M_{HI}10d_{90}^1`$, $`M_T/L_B15d_{90}^1`$ (in solar units). The total of the stellar and H i mass is approximately $`6\times 10^9d_{90}^2M_{}`$, which is still about five times smaller than the total mass from the rotation velocity. Thus, the dark matter mass of the galaxy is approximately $`M_{\mathrm{DM}}2.7\times 10^{10}d_{90}`$$`M_{}`$, out to a radius of $`12d_{90}`$ kpc.

We have also used the “Baryonic Tully-Fisher” relation derived by McGaugh et al. (2000) to estimate the distance to UZC J151054. Given the uncertainty that recent star formation adds to the $`B`$ band determination of the stellar mass, we have used the stellar mass derived above from the $`I`$ band photometry ($`M_{}1.9\times 10^9d_{90}^2M_{}`$). Equation 2 of McGaugh et al. (2000) yields an estimate of the mass in stars and gas of $`M(stars+gas)=5.3\times 10^9`$ $`M_{}`$. Correcting the H i mass for the He fraction yields a value of $`d_{90}=0.92`$ and a luminosity distance of $`D_{TF}`$=83 Mpc, in good agreement with the Hubble flow distance given the uncertainties and the unknown peculiar velocity of UZC J151054. Using a value of $`M_{}/L_I=1.3`$ appropriate for an 8 Gyr Sc galaxy with approximately continuous star formation (de Jong, 1996), instead of our adopted value of 1.7 (corresponding to a 12 Gyr Sc galaxy) would lead to $`D_{TF}`$=87 Mpc.

## 5. X-Ray Absorption

Examination of Figure 1 shows that the X-ray absorption region is roughly the size of the optical disk of UZC J151054. Comparison of the hard (1.0–7.0 keV) and soft (0.3–1.0 keV) X-ray images indicates that the absorption is more prominent in the soft X-ray band as expected for photoelectric absorption. The $`Chandra`$ 0.3–1.0 keV image contains 82 counts in the region of absorption, compared to 197 and 184 counts in the same size region above and below the absorption feature. This corresponds to a $`>8\sigma `$ detection of the foreground spiral galaxy absorption feature. A careful comparison of the position angle of the optical galaxy and the X-ray absorption feature shows that the X-ray absorption may be slightly tilted ($`\mathrm{\Delta }PA3^{}`$) relative to the galaxy disk (Figure 1) . Such a misalignment could be the result of a warp in the HI disk relative to the optical disk in UZC J151054.

The extent of the absorption region was determined by taking cuts through the X-ray images. We used square regions of width 3$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$6 running roughly east to west (PA=87$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$2) along the X-ray absorption feature and determined the counts in each region from the 0.3–1.0 keV $`Chandra`$ image. The box height is approximately the size of the optical spiral disk and the width was set small enough to allow several boxes to be placed along the absorption feature with sufficient counts to determine the extent of the absorption region. In Figure 4 we show a series of exposure and background corrected counts from 34 regions running east to west along the absorption feature. Figure 4 also shows the results from shifting the boxes up and down by one box height and determining the counts both above and below the absorption feature.

In Figure 5 we show a similar plot for a set of 31 regions of size 55″ $`\times `$ 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5 running north-south parallel to the disk. Note that the PSF of the $`Chandra`$ ACIS-S3 detector at these positions and energies is mainly determined by the pixel size on the detector, and the 80% encircled energy radius is about 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$7. Thus, the absorption from the disk is resolved perpendicular to the disk.

The limited number of counts in the absorption region preclude any detailed modeling of the spatial structure of the absorption. The full width of the absorption along the disk is about 56″ (25 kpc). The dashed vertical lines in Figure 4 show the approximate I-band optical extent of the galaxy. The width of the absorption feature agrees fairly well with the optical width of the galaxy. In some ways, this might be surprising, since many spiral galaxies have H i disks which extend beyond their optical disks. On the other hand, the X-ray absorption at these energies is mainly due to heavy elements (primarily oxygen), and the abundances of heavy elements are likely to be low outside of the optical disk. In the vertical direction, the width of the absorption disk is about 5″ (2.2 kpc), after making a small correction for the PSF of the $`Chandra`$ ACIS-S3. The size and strength of the X-ray absorption can also be characterized by the equivalent width, or the width of a region with complete absorption and the same reduction in flux as that of the spiral galaxy absorption feature. Using the 0.3–1.0 keV data, we determine an equivalent width of $``$ 34″ (15 kpc) along the disk, and $``$ 3″ (1.3 kpc) perpendicular to it. These values are smaller than the full width of the feature because the absorption is not complete.

To analyze in more detail the absorption due to the spiral disk, we extracted spectra from the feature and a larger surrounding “background” area. The spectra were binned to a minimum of 25 cts/bin to provide good statistics. The region of the absorption feature and the surrounding thermal ICM were fit in XSPEC with a WABS * ZWABS * MEKAL model after applying a correction for the quantum efficiency degradation. The MEKAL model represents the background cluster emission, while the ZWABS is the absorption from the foreground spiral. The Galactic column in WABS was set to $`3.14\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 as determined from Dickey & Lockman (1990)222Typical variations in the Galactic column determined from Dickey & Lockman (1990) around the location of UZC J151054 ($`b=50\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}5`$) are less than 10%. We also allowed the Galactic column to be free in the fits and found a best fit value lower than the Galactic value ($`N_H`$ = $`1.3\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2). This low Galactic hydrogen column density is consistent with that found by Lewis, Stocke, & Buote (2002) for the outer regions of the cluster. Using the lower Galactic column for the fits results in less than a 5% change in the excess absorption column due to the foreground spiral galaxy.. In the fit to the absorption feature, the temperature and metallicity for the cluster emission were fixed at the value determined by the surrounding “background” region, but the excess absorption was allowed to vary. The surrounding thermal ICM is best fit with a temperature of 7.1 keV ($`\chi ^2`$/d.o.f. = 141/175), slightly lower than the deprojected temperature found by Lewis, Stocke, & Buote (2002). The model fits in XSPEC were taken for the energy range of 0.5–10.0 keV. We extended the model fits down to 0.3 keV and found consistent results although there were significantly larger residuals at the lowest energies in the fits of the surrounding region.

The best fit model ($`\chi ^2`$/d.o.f. = 152/193) to the X-ray spectrum (Figure 6) gives an excess absorbing column (with 90% confidence interval) of $`(2.0\pm 0.4)\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2. At these columns, almost all of the absorption is due to heavy elements, particularly oxygen. Thus, this measurement is most directly interpretable as a measurement of the column density of oxygen (in any form containing K-shell electrons) of $`N_O=(1.7\pm 0.3)\times 10^{18}`$ cm-2 (assuming the metallicity of Anders & Grevesse, 1989). The column density of hydrogen can thus be written as $`(2.0\pm 0.4)\times 10^{21}[(O/H)/(O/H)_{}]^1`$ cm-2, where $`(O/H)/(O/H)_{}`$ is the oxygen abundance in units of the solar abundance. This corresponds to a mass of $`M_H=(6.2\pm 1.2)\times 10^8[(O/H)/(O/H)_{}]^1d_{90}^2`$ $`M_{}`$, assuming that the absorber is spread uniformly over the 55$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$6 by 3$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$6 region covered by the disk of the galaxy. Of course, it is likely that the interstellar gas and dust in UZC J151054 are concentrated to the center of the galaxy and the middle of the disk, and that the absorption is not uniform. Thus, it is likely that the column density and derived mass are really lower limits to the total amount of absorbing material. We note that the hydrogen mass determined from the X-ray absorption (assuming a uniform absorber and solar abundances) is about a factor of 5 smaller than the atomic hydrogen mass from the 21 cm observations. This may be due to a non-uniform distribution of the absorber, or due to a lower than solar metallicity in the interstellar medium (ISM) in UZC J151054.

The X-ray absorption feature appears to be limited vertically to the approximate width of the optical disk in UZC J151054. In order to limit the absorption due to material in the halo of this galaxy, we also extracted the spectra from regions which were 55$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$6 by 3$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$6 but shifted by 3$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$6 above and below the disk. The spectra of the two regions above and below the disk were combined, and fit in the same way as the absorption from the disk. The best-fit model had an excess absorption of $`1.3_{1.3}^{+2.7}\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 ($`\chi ^2`$/d.o.f. = 173/217). Since the excess is consistent with zero at the 90% confidence level, we interpret this measurement as a 90% confidence upper limit of $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_H<4.0\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2.

## 6. Discussion

We have found a deep X-ray absorption feature due to a foreground spiral galaxy seen in projection against the core of the galaxy cluster Abell 2029. Based on the 0.3–1.0 keV $`Chandra`$ data, the X-ray deficit associated with the spiral disk of UZC J151054 is detected at $`>`$ 8$`\sigma `$ significance. The X-ray absorption is strongest at low energies, as expected for photoelectric absorption. From the X-ray spectrum of the absorption feature, we find an absorbing column of $`(2.0\pm 0.4)\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2, assuming solar abundances. This corresponds to a mass of $`(6.2\pm 1.2)\times 10^8M_{}`$ of hydrogen in the spiral disk, if the absorber is uniformly distributed over the region of the spiral disk. If the absorber is not uniform, as seems more likely, the required mass of the absorber is higher.

An analysis of the optical data shows that the galaxy colors are consistent with those of an Scd galaxy, while the axial ratio gives an inclination of $`87^{}\pm 3^{}`$. We fail to detect radio continuum emission from UZC J151054.6+054313 at a reasonably low level. Our limit of $`S(1317\mathrm{MHz})200\mu `$Jy is consistent with the lack of significant emission in the IR; the galaxy is barely detectable in the 2MASS survey images (Cutri et al., 2001).

The detected X-ray absorption is smaller than that expected from the amount of neutral hydrogen detected in 21-cm emission from the disk of UZC J151054. This may indicate that the ISM in UZC J151054 is not uniformly distributed over the absorption region, or that the metallicity is low. The X-ray absorption measurements also provide an upper limit on any additional diffuse gas or dust in this galaxy. We note that X-ray absorption is relatively insensitive to the physical state of the diffuse material. Any form of gas or dust at temperatures below $`10^6`$ K would produce absorption. At the columns of interest here, most of the absorption is due to the K-shell electrons in oxygen. The measurements directly give the column density of oxygen, rather than hydrogen. Thus, the limits of the mass of the absorbing material depend inversely on the abundance of oxygen relative to hydrogen.

The mass of the absorbing material we detect, $`M_H=(6.2\pm 1.2)\times 10^8d_{90}^2`$ $`M_{}`$, is much less than the total mass of the galaxy or the dark matter mass, $`M_{\mathrm{DM}}2.7\times 10^{10}d_{90}`$$`M_{}`$. Thus, our measurements limit the possibility that the dark matter is diffuse baryonic gas. If the dark matter is in the form of a roughly spherical halo, then our limits on the absorption outside the disk yield a limit on the mass of $`9\times 10^9M_{}`$, which is about a factor of three smaller than the dark matter mass. If the dark matter is in the disk and is uniformly distributed, then the limit on its mass is certainly less than the total absorbing mass determined for the disk of $`6\times 10^8M_{}`$. Thus, the dark matter cannot be diffuse gas, unless it either has very low metal abundances or is very inhomogeneous in its distribution.

In recent years, there have been a number of suggestions that dark matter in galaxies is indeed baryonic, and is due to dense clouds of gas (e.g., Pfenniger, Combes, & Martinet, 1994; Ortwin & Silk, 1996). This gas might either be located in a thick disk (Pfenniger et al., 1994) or in a more spherical halo (Ortwin & Silk, 1996). However, in either model, the clouds of gas are rather small and dense, and have a small covering factor. Thus, the maximum optical depth for absorption across the galaxy is limited by this covering factor. As a result, our measurements for UZC J151054 do not refute or strongly constrain these theories.

Finally, we note that a much longer (80 ksec) Chandra observation of the center of Abell 2029 is planned for Cycle 5. Among other aims, this observation should allow the absorption feature due to UZC J151054 to be studied in more detail. It would also be useful to have a 21 cm line image of the galaxy to compare the emission line with absorption from the interstellar medium.

We thank Renzo Sancisi for a very interesting conversation about baryonic dark matter in galaxies. We thank Steve Boughn for useful comments on $`k`$-corrections, Riccardo Giovanelli and Mort Roberts for their insights on internal extinction in late-spiral galaxies. We also thank Jodie Martin and John Hibbard for donating the 20 minute observation with the GBT and collecting the data for us as well as for the initial reduction of the data with the DISH package. Martha Haynes kindly sent us a digitized copy of the Arecibo spectrum of UZC J151054.6+054313. Support for this work was provided by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration through Chandra Award Numbers GO2-3159X and GO2-3160X, issued by the Chandra X-ray Observatory Center, which is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory for and on behalf of NASA under contract NAS8-39073. Support for E. L. B. was provided by NASA through the Chandra Fellowship Program, grant award number PF1-20017, under NASA contract number NAS8-39073. We have used the software packages AIPS and DISH/AIPS++ of the NRAO. The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is operated by Associated Universities, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation. This publication makes use of data products from the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation. This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.


format: text

text:
# Cosmology and neutrino masses - an update

## 1 Introduction

The absolute value of neutrino masses are very difficult to measure experimentally. On the other hand, mass differences between neutrino mass eigenstates, $`(m_1,m_2,m_3)`$, can be measured in neutrino oscillation experiments.

The combination of all currently available data suggests two important mass differences in the neutrino mass hierarchy. The solar mass difference of $`\delta m_{12}^27\times 10^5`$ eV2 and the atmospheric mass difference $`\delta m_{23}^22.6\times 10^3`$ eV2 Maltoni:2003da ; Aliani:2003ns ; deHolanda:2003nj  (see also the contribution by C. Giunti to the present volume).

In the simplest case where neutrino masses are hierarchical these results suggest that $`m_10`$, $`m_2\delta m_{\mathrm{solar}}`$, and $`m_3\delta m_{\mathrm{atmospheric}}`$. If the hierarchy is inverted Kostelecky:1993dm ; Fuller:1995tz ; Caldwell:1995vi ; Bilenky:1996cb ; King:2000ce ; He:2002rv  one instead finds $`m_30`$, $`m_2\delta m_{\mathrm{atmospheric}}`$, and $`m_1\delta m_{\mathrm{atmospheric}}`$. However, it is also possible that neutrino masses are degenerate Ioannisian:1994nx ; Bamert:vc ; Mohapatra:1994bg ; Minakata:1996vs ; Vissani:1997pa ; Minakata:1997ja ; Ellis:1999my ; Casas:1999tp ; Casas:1999ac ; Ma:1999xq ; Adhikari:2000as , $`m_1m_2m_3\delta m_{\mathrm{atmospheric}}`$, in which case oscillation experiments are not useful for determining the absolute mass scale.

Experiments which rely on kinematical effects of the neutrino mass offer the strongest probe of this overall mass scale. Tritium decay measurements have been able to put an upper limit on the electron neutrino mass of 2.2-2.3 eV (95% conf.) Bonn:tw  (see also the contribution by C. Kraus in the present volume). However, cosmology at present yields an even stronger limit which is also based on the kinematics of neutrino mass.

Neutrinos decouple at a temperature of 1-2 MeV in the early universe, shortly before electron-positron annihilation. Therefore their temperature is lower than the photon temperature by a factor $`(4/11)^{1/3}`$. This again means that the total neutrino number density is related to the photon number density by

$$n_\nu =\frac{9}{11}n_\gamma $$
(1)
Massive neutrinos with masses $`mT_02.4\times 10^4`$ eV are non-relativistic at present and therefore contribute to the cosmological matter density Hannestad:1995rs ; Dolgov:1997mb ; Mangano:2001iu

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^2=\frac{m_\nu }{92.5\mathrm{eV}},$$
(2)
calculated for a present day photon temperature $`T_0=2.728`$K. Here, $`m_\nu =m_1+m_2+m_3`$. However, because they are so light these neutrinos free stream on a scale of roughly $`k0.03m_{\mathrm{eV}}\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{1/2}h\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$ dzs ; Doroshkevich:tq ; Hu:1997mj . Below this scale neutrino perturbations are completely erased and therefore the matter power spectrum is suppressed, roughly by $`\mathrm{\Delta }P/P8\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu /\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ Hu:1997mj .

This power spectrum suppression allows for a determination of the neutrino mass from measurements of the matter power spectrum on large scales. This matter spectrum is related to the galaxy correlation spectrum measured in large scale structure (LSS) surveys via the bias parameter, $`b^2P_g(k)/P_m(k)`$. Such analyses have been performed several times before Croft:1999mm ; Fukugita:1999as , most recently using data from the 2dF galaxy survey Elgaroy:2002bi .

However, using large scale structure data alone does not allow for a precise determination of neutrino masses, because the power spectrum suppression can also be caused by changes in other parameters, such as the matter density or the Hubble parameter.

Therefore it is necessary to add information on other parameters from the cosmic microwave background (CMB). This has been done in the past Elgaroy:2002bi ; Hannestad:2002xv ; Lewis:2002ah , using ealier CMB data. More recently the precise data from WMAP map1  has been used for this purpose map2 ; steen03 ; el03  to derive a limit of 0.7-1.0 eV for the sum of neutrino masses.

## 2 Cosmological data and likelihood analysis

The extraction of cosmological parameters from cosmological data is a difficult process since for both CMB and LSS the power spectra depend on a plethora of different parameters. Furthermore, since the CMB and matter power spectra depend on many different parameters one might worry that an analysis which is too restricted in parameter space could give spuriously strong limits on a given parameter.

The most recent cosmological data is in excellent agreement with a flat $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model, the only non-standard feature being the apparently very high optical depth to reionization. Therefore the natural benchmark against which non-standard neutrino physics can be tested is a model with the following free parameters: $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$, the matter density, the curvature parameter, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b`$, the baryon density, $`H_0`$, the Hubble parameter, $`n_s`$, the scalar spectral index of the primordial fluctuation spectrum, $`\tau `$, the optical depth to reionization, $`Q`$, the normalization of the CMB power spectrum, $`b`$, the bias parameter, and finally the two parameters related to neutrino physics, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^2`$ and $`N_\nu `$. The analysis can be restricted to geometrically flat models, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_m+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$. For the purpose of actual power spectrum calculations, the CMBFAST package CMBFAST  can be used.

### 2.1 LSS data

At present, by far the largest survey available is the 2dFGRS 2dFGRS  of which about 147,000 galaxies have so far been analyzed. Tegmark, Hamilton and Xu THX  have calculated a power spectrum, $`P(k)`$, from this data, which we use in the present work. The 2dFGRS data extends to very small scales where there are large effects of non-linearity. Since we only calculate linear power spectra, we use (in accordance with standard procedure) only data on scales larger than $`k=0.2h\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$, where effects of non-linearity should be minimal Hannestad:2002cn . Making this cut reduces the number of power spectrum data points to 18.

### 2.2 CMB data

The CMB temperature fluctuations are conveniently described in terms of the spherical harmonics power spectrum $`C_l|a_{lm}|^2`$, where $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T}{T}(\theta ,\varphi )=_{lm}a_{lm}Y_{lm}(\theta ,\varphi )`$. Since Thomson scattering polarizes light there are also power spectra coming from the polarization. The polarization can be divided into a curl-free $`(E)`$ and a curl $`(B)`$ component, yielding four independent power spectra: $`C_{T,l},C_{E,l},C_{B,l}`$ and the temperature $`E`$-polarization cross-correlation $`C_{TE,l}`$.

The WMAP experiment have reported data only on $`C_{T,l}`$ and $`C_{TE,l}`$, as described in Ref. map1 ; map2 ; map3 ; map4 ; map5

We have performed the likelihood analysis using the prescription given by the WMAP collaboration which includes the correlation between different $`C_l`$’s map1 ; map2 ; map3 ; map4 ; map5 . Foreground contamination has already been subtracted from their published data.

In parts of the data analysis we also add other CMB data from the compilation by Wang et al. wang3  which includes data at high $`l`$. Altogether this data set has 28 data points.

## 3 Neutrino mass bounds

The analysis presented here was originally published in Ref. steen03 , and more details can be found there.

We have calculated $`\chi ^2`$ as a function of neutrino mass while marginalizing over all other cosmological parameters. This has been done using the data sets described above. In the first case we have calculated the constraint using the WMAP $`C_{T,l}`$ combined with the 2dFGRS data, and in the second case we have added the polarization measurement from WMAP. Finally we have added the additional constraint from the HST key project and the Supernova Cosmology Project. It should also be noted that when constraining the neutrino mass it has in all cases been assumed that $`N_\nu `$ is equal to the standard model value of 3.04. Later we relax this condition in order to study the LSND bound.

The result is shown in Fig. 1. As can be seen from the figure the 95% confidence upper limit on the sum of neutrino masses is $`m_\nu 1.01`$ eV (95% conf.) using the case with priors. This value is completely consistent with what is found in Ref. el03  where simple Gaussian priors from WMAP were added to the 2dFGRS data analysis. For the three cases studied the upper limits on $`m_\nu `$ can be found in Table 1.

In the middle panel of Fig. 1 we show the best fit value of $`H_0`$ for a given $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^2`$. It is clear that an increasing value of $`m_\nu `$ can be compensated by a decrease in $`H_0`$. Even though the data yields a strong constraint on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_mh^2`$ there is no independent constraint on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ in itself. Therefore, an decreasing $`H_0`$ leads to an increasing $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$. This can be seen in the bottom panel of Fig. 1.

When the HST prior on $`H_0`$ is relaxed a higher value of $`m_\nu `$ is allowed, in the case with only WMAP and 2dFGRS data the upper bound is $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^20.023`$ (95% conf.), corresponding to a neutrino mass of 0.71 eV for each of the three neutrinos.

This effect was also found by Elgarøy and Lahav el03  in their analysis of the effects of priors on the determination of $`m_\nu `$.

However, as can also be seen from the figure, the addition of high-$`l`$ CMB data from the Want et al. compilation also shrinks the allowed range of $`m_\nu `$ significantly. The reason is that there is a significant overlap of the scales probed by high-$`l`$ CMB experiments and the 2dFGRS survey. Therefore, even though we use bias as a free fitting parameter, it is strongly constrained by the fact that the CMB and 2dFGRS data essentially cover much of the same range in $`k`$-space.

It should be noted that Elgarøy and Lahav el03  find that bias does not play any role in determining the bound on $`m_\nu `$. At first this seems to contradict the discussion here, and also what was found from a Fisher matrix analysis in Ref. Hannestad:2002xv . The reason is that in Ref. el03 , redshift distortions are included in the 2dFGRS data analysis. Given a constraint on the amplitude of fluctuations from CMB data, and a constraint on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_mh^2`$ , this effectively constrains the bias parameter. Therefore adding a further constraint on bias in their analysis does not change the results.

Neutrinoless double beta decay – Recently it was claimed that the Heidelberg-Moscow experiment yields positive evidence for neutrinoless double beta decay. Such experiments probe the ‘effective electron neutrino mass $`m_{ee}=|_jU_{ej}^2m_{\nu _j}|`$. Given the uncertainties in the involved nuclear matrix elements the Heidelberg-Moscow result leads to a mass of $`m_{ee}=0.31.4`$ eV. If this is true then the mass eigenstates are necessarily degenerate, and $`m_\nu 3m_{ee}`$. Taking the WMAP result of $`m_\nu 0.70`$ eV at face value seems to be inconsistent with the Heidelberg-Moscow result Pierce:2003uh . However, already if Ly-$`\alpha `$ forest data and a constraint on the bias parameter is not used in the analysis the upper bound of $`m_\nu 1.01`$ eV is still consistent. For this reason it is probably premature to rule out the claimed evidence for neutrinoless double beta decay.

Evidence for a non-zero neutrino mass – In a recent paper Allen:2003pt  it was noted that there is a preference for a non-zero neutrino mass if a measurement of the bias parameter from X-ray clusters is added to the CMB and large scale structure data. This result arises because the X-ray data prefers a low value of $`\sigma _8`$ (bias), which is incompatible with the WMAP and 2dF result at the 2$`\sigma `$ level. While this is an interesting finding it is clear that the X-ray data is subject to a serious problem with systematic uncertainties, such as the calibration of the mass-temperature relation. Therefore the result more likely points to a problem with the interpretation of the X-ray data than to evidence of a non-zero neutrino mass.

## 4 Sterile neutrinos

In Ref. steen03  it was shown that there is a degeneracy between the neutrino mass ($`m_\nu `$) and the relativistic energy density, parameterized in terms of the effective number of neutrino species, $`N_\nu `$.

As can be seen from Fig. 2, the best fit actually is actually shifted to higher $`m_\nu `$ when $`N_\nu `$ increases, and the conclusion is that a model with high neutrino mass and additional relativistic energy density can provide acceptable fits to the data. As a function of $`N_\nu `$ the upper bound on $`m_\nu `$ (at 95% confidence) can be seen in Table 2.

This has significant implications for attempts to constrain the LSND experiment using the present cosmological data. Pierce and Murayama conclude from the present MAP limit that the LSND result is excluded Pierce:2003uh  (see also Ref. Giunti:2003cf ).

However, for several reasons this conclusion does not follow trivially from the present data. In general the three mass differences implied by Solar, atmospheric and the LSND neutrino measurements can be arranged into either 2+2 or 3+1 schemes. Recent analyses Maltoni:2002xd  of experimental data have shown that the 2+2 models are ruled out. The 3+1 scheme with a single massive state, $`m_4`$, which makes up the LSND mass gap, is still marginally allowed in a few small windows in the $`(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta )`$ plane. These gaps are at $`(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta )(0.8\mathrm{eV}^2,2\times 10^3),(1.8\mathrm{eV}^2,8\times 10^4),(6\mathrm{eV}^2,1.5\times 10^3)`$ and $`(10\mathrm{eV}^2,1.5\times 10^3)`$. These four windows corresponds to masses of $`0.9,1.4,2.5`$ and 3.2 eV respectively. From the Solar and atmospheric neutrino results the three light mass eigenstates contribute only about 0.1 eV of mass if they are hierarchical. This means that the sum of all mass eigenstate is close to $`m_4`$.

The limit for $`N_\nu =4`$ which corresponds roughly to the LSND scenario is $`m_\nu 1.4`$ eV, which still leaves the lowest of the remaining windows. The second window at $`m1.8`$ eV is disfavoured by the data, but not at very high significance.

## 5 Discussion

We have calculated improved constraints on neutrino masses and the cosmological relativistic energy density, using the new WMAP data together with data from the 2dFGRS galaxy survey.

Using CMB and LSS data together with a prior from the HST key project on $`H_0`$ yielded an upper bound of $`m_\nu 1.01`$ eV (95% conf.). While this excludes most of the parameter range suggested by the claimed evidence for neutrinoless double beta decay in the Heidelberg-Moscow experiment, it seems premature to rule out this claim based on cosmological observations.

Another issue where the cosmological upper bound on neutrino masses is very important is for the prospects of directly measuring neutrino masses in tritium endpoint measurements. The successor to the Mainz experiment, KATRIN, is designed to measure an electron neutrino mass of roughly 0.2 eV, or in terms of the sum of neutrino mass eigenstates, $`m_\nu 0.75`$ eV (see contribution by Guido Drexlin to the present volume). The WMAP result of $`m_\nu 0.7`$ eV (95% conf.) already seems to exclude a positive measurement of mass in KATRIN. However, this very tight limit depends on priors, as well as Ly-$`\alpha `$ forest data, and the more conservative present limit of $`m_\nu 1.01`$ eV (95% conf.) does not exclude that KATRIN will detect a neutrino mass.

Finally, we also found that the neutrino mass bound depends on the total number of light neutrino species. In scenarios with sterile neutrinos this is an important factor. For instance in 3+1 models the mass bound increases from 1.0 eV to 1.4 eV, meaning that the LSND result is not ruled out by cosmological observations yet.


text:
# Proton induced reaction cross section measurements on Se isotopes for the astrophysical 𝑝 process

## I Introduction

Details of the nature of the astrophysical $`p`$ process woosley90 ; rayet95  producing the rare, proton-rich, stable isotopes of elements beyond Ni still remain elusive. It has been shown that such proton-rich isotopes can be produced by photodisintegrations in massive stars rau02 ; arn03 , involving ($`\gamma `$,n), ($`\gamma `$,p), and ($`\gamma `$,$`\alpha `$) reactions at stellar temperatures exceeding 109 K. Depending on intricate details of the stellar structure and evolution, $`p`$ nuclides are mostly produced in the final explosion of a massive star ($`M>8M_{}`$) as a core-collapse supernova or in pre-explosive oxygen burning episodes rau02 ; arn03 . Despite the fact that $`p`$ nuclei can be produced consistently with solar ratios over a wide range of nuclei in such scenarios, there remain deficiencies in a few regions, for mass numbers $`A<124`$ and $`168A200`$. The problem is especially pronounced in the Mo-Ru region where the $`p`$ isotopes are strongly underproduced. This fact motivates the search for alternative or additional ways to produce these nuclides. Proton capture and photodisintegration processes in exploding carbon-oxygen white dwarfs have been suggested as a source how91 ; jose02 , or thermonuclear explosions in the proton-rich layer accreted on the surface of a neutron star in a binary system with mass flow from the main-sequence companion star schatz ; schatz01 .

Common to all approaches is that the modelling requires a large network of hundreds of nuclear reactions involving stable nuclei as well as unstable, proton-rich nuclides. It is well known that ($`\gamma `$,$`\alpha `$) reactions are important at higher masses, whereas ($`\gamma `$,p) or proton capture is important for the production of the less massive $`p`$ nuclei. The relevant astrophysical reaction rates calculated from the cross sections are inputs to this network, therefore their knowledge is essential for $`p`$ process calculations. While there are compilations of neutron capture data along the line of stability, there are still very few charged-particle cross sections determined experimentally ful96 ; sau97 ; som98 ; bork98 ; chlo99 ; haris01 ; gyurky01 ; ozkan02 ; galanopulos03 , despite big experimental efforts in recent years. Thus, the $`p`$ process rates involving charged projectiles are still based mainly on (largely untested) theoretical cross sections obtained from Hauser-Feshbach statistical model calculations.

The aim of our systematic study is to contribute to the existing database of measured cross sections relevant to the astrophysical $`p`$ process, and to check the reliability of the statistical model calculations over an extensive set of nuclides. This way the uncertainties in the $`p`$ process abundance calculations arising from nuclear physics input can be constrained.

In this paper we present measurements of the 74Se(p,$`\gamma `$)75Br, 76Se(p,$`\gamma `$)77Br, and 82Se(p,n)82Br reactions in the astrophysically relevant energy range using an activation technique. The two proton capture reactions and their inverses are directly playing a role in the synthesis of 74Se, whereas the (p,n) reaction can be used as a further test of statistical model calculations. The choice of these reactions is further elaborated in Sec. II and the experimental method is described in Sec. III. The resulting cross sections and astrophysical $`S`$ factors (given in Sec. IV) are compared with results obtained with the two Hauser-Feshbach statistical model codes NON-SMOKER nonsmoker ; nonsmoker0 ; nonsmoker1  and MOST most  in Sec. V. Both codes are based on the statistical theory of Hauser and Feshbach hau  but use different models for the nuclear ingredients of the calculations. By using both codes we are able to investigate the effects of a broader range of nuclear level densities and optical model potentials. The astrophysical reaction rates derived from our new experimental data are given in the concluding Sec. VI.

## II Investigated reactions

The element Se has six stable isotopes with mass numbers $`A=74`$, 76, 77, 78, 80 and 82 having isotopic abundances of 0.89%, 9.36%, 7.63%, 23.78%, 49.61% and 8.73%, respectively. Proton capture reactions on these isotopes lead to Br isotopes among which 79Br and 81Br are stable. Therefore the cross sections of the 78,80Se(p,$`\gamma `$)79,81Br reactions cannot be measured using an activation technique. The half life of 78Br, i.e. the reaction product of 77Se(p,$`\gamma `$)78Br, is too short (T1/2 = 6.49 min.) for our experimental method (see experimental details). Thus the aim of the measurement was to determine the proton capture cross section of three reactions: 74,76,82Se(p,$`\gamma `$)75,77,83Br. However, in the case of 82Se the (p,n) channel opens already at $`E_{\mathrm{lab}}`$ = 891 keV and, therefore, competes strongly with the (p,$`\gamma `$) reaction in the whole energy range investigated in the present work. Moreover, the strongest $`\gamma `$ transition following the $`\beta `$ decay of 83Br has a very low relative intensity (only 1.2 % of the decays lead to the emission of this 529.6 keV $`\gamma `$-ray). The latter two facts made it impossible to observe the decay of 83Br and to measure the 82Se(p,$`\gamma `$)83Br cross section. However, the 82Se(p,n)82Br cross section could be determined.

In summary, the cross sections of three reactions have been measured: 74,76Se(p,$`\gamma `$)75,77Br, and 82Se(p,n)82Br. The astrophysically relevant energy range (Gamow–window) for these reactions in the temperature range from T = 1.8$`\times 10^9`$K to 3.3$`\times 10^9`$K spans from 1.25 to 3.87 MeV. This energy region was covered by the experiment. The relevant part of the chart of nuclides can be seen in Fig. 1 where the proton induced reactions and the decay of the reaction products can also be seen. The decay parameters used for the analysis are summarized in Table 1.

## III Experimental procedure

### III.1 Target properties

The targets were made by evaporating metallic Se with natural isotopic abundance onto a thick Al backing. Natural targets have the advantage that the three investigated reactions can be studied simultaneously in a single activation procedure. Aluminum is ideal as backing material because no long-lived activity is produced during its bombardment with protons in the investigated energy range. Moreover, Al can easily be distinguished from the Se in the RBS spectrum (RBS was used to monitor the target stability, see below).

The target thickness was measured with the proton induced X-ray emission (PIXE) technique at the PIXE set-up of the ATOMKI PIXE . According to PIXE results, the target thickness was ranging from 200 to 700 $`\mu `$g/cm2, corresponding to a proton energy loss of 10 keV (at 3.6 MeV) to 60 keV (at 1.3 MeV), respectively. The thicker targets (500-700 $`\mu `$g/cm2) were used at the lower part of the bombarding energy range, where the low cross section results in very low induced $`\gamma `$-activity. The proton energy loss has been calculated with the SRIM code SRIM .

### III.2 Activation

The activations were carried out at the 5 MV Van de Graaff accelerator of the ATOMKI by irradiating the Se targets with a proton beam. The energy range from Ep=1.3 to 3.6 MeV was covered with 100 – 300 keV steps. The schematic view of the target chamber can be seen in Fig. 2. After the last beam defining aperture the whole chamber served as a Faraday-cup to collect the accumulated charge. A secondary electron suppression voltage of $`300`$ V was applied at the entrance of the chamber. Each irradiation lasted about 10 hours with a beam current of typically 5 to 10 $`\mu `$A. Thus, the collected charge varied between 180 and 360 mC. The current was kept as stable as possible but to follow the changes the current integrator counts were recorded in multichannel scaling mode, stepping the channel in every minute. This recorded current integrator spectrum was then used for the analysis solving the differential equation of the population and decay of the reaction products numerically (see eqs. 5-10 in ref sau97 ).

A surface barrier detector was built into the chamber at $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$=150 relative to the beam direction to detect the backscattered protons and to monitor the target stability this way. The RBS spectra were taken continuously and stored regularly during the irradiation. In those cases when target deterioration was found, the irradiation was repeated with another target. Final cross section results were derived only from those measurements where no noticable target deterioration was found, i. e. the growth of the Se peak area in the RBS spectrum was uniform with collected charge within the statistical uncertainty (below 1%).

The beam was wobbled across the last diaphragm to have a uniformly irradiated spot of diameter of 8 mm on the target. The target backing was directly water cooled with an isolated water circulating system.

Between the irradiation and $`\gamma `$-counting, a waiting time of 30 minutes was inserted in order to let the disturbing short lived activities decay.

### III.3 Detection of induced $`\gamma `$-radiation

The $`\gamma `$ radiation following the $`\beta `$-decay of the produced Br isotopes was measured with a HPGe detector of 40% relative efficiency. The target was mounted in a holder at a distance of 10 cm from the end of the detector cap. The whole system was shielded by 10 cm thick lead against laboratory background.

The $`\gamma `$ spectra were taken for at least 12 hours and stored regularly in order to follow the decay of the different reaction products.

The absolute efficiency of the detector was measured with calibrated 133Ba, 60Co and 152Eu sources in the same geometry used for the measurement. Effect of the finite sample size (beam spot of 8 mm in diameter) was measured by moving the point-like calibration sources over this surface and measuring the difference in efficiency. This was then included in the 7% error of detector efficiency.

Fig. 3 shows an off-line $`\gamma `$-spectrum taken after irradiation with 2.5 MeV protons in the first 1h counting interval. The $`\gamma `$ lines used for the analysis are indicated by arrows.

Taking into account the detector efficiency and the relative intensity of the emitted gamma-rays, coincidence summing effects were for all three reactions below 1% and were neglected.

## IV Experimental results

Tables 24 summarize the experimental results for the three studied reactions. The quoted errors of the center-of-mass energies given in the first column correspond to the energy loss in the targets calculated with the SRIM code. The error of the cross section ($`S`$ factor) values is the quadratic sum of the following partial errors: efficiency of the HPGe detector ($``$7%), number of target atoms ($``$6%), current measurement (3%), uncertainty of the level parameters found in literature ($``$6%), counting statistics (0.1 to 15%).

At $`E_\mathrm{p}`$ = 2.176 MeV proton bombarding energy the 77Se(p,n)77Br reaction channel opens, having the same final nucleus as 76Se(p,$`\gamma `$)77Br. Thus, above this energy these two reactions cannot be distinguished with the activation technique using targets with natural isotopic abundance. The measured cross section and S–factor values above the threshold are actually the weighted sum of the two cross sections: $`\sigma _{\mathrm{exp}}`$ = $`\sigma _1`$ \+ 0.82$``$$`\sigma _2`$, where $`\sigma _1`$ and $`\sigma _2`$ are the cross sections of 76Se(p,$`\gamma `$)77Br and 77Se(p,n)77Br, respectively and 0.82 stands for the isotopic ratio of 77Se and 76Se: 7.63%/9.36%.

## V COMPARISON WITH PREDICTIONS

In Figs. 46 we show the comparison of the experimental data with theoretical results. At first, we discuss the standard predictions of the Hauser-Feshbach codes MOST and NON-SMOKER, shown in the part (a) of each figure. Two different combinations of nuclear level densities (NLD) and optical potentials (OMP) are used by each code, the OMP of bau  with the NLD of dem  in MOST, and the OMP of jeu  with the NLD of rau  in NON-SMOKER. From the figures it is apparent that for the Se isotopes studied herein, the results of the former combination are systematically higher (by a factor of 2) than the latter at all studied energies. Concerning the energy dependence, a decrease at low energy is seen for 82Se(p,n)82Br which seems not to be present in the data. The predictions of the latter input combination are in very good agreement with the data for energies larger than 1.7 MeV in 74Se(p,$`\gamma `$)75Br, but cannot reproduce the observed energy dependence at smaller energies. They are higher than experiment by factors 1.25–2 for 76Se(p,$`\gamma `$)77Br above 1.8 MeV and cannot reproduce the experimental variation in the $`S`$ factor at lower energies. They are able to reproduce the data very well for the 82Se(p,n)82Br reaction above 1.7 MeV. Again, the features in the experimental $`S`$ factors below that energy cannot be reproduced. However, the deviations do not exceed a factor of 1.5. As will become evident in Sec. VI, these deviations at the lower end of the measured energy range do not contribute significantly to the astrophysical reaction rate for the temperatures given there.

In summary, contrary to some previous measurements of (p,$`\gamma `$) reactions (see e.g. gyurky01 ), the standard predictions using the nuclear inputs of jeu ; rau  are in good agreement with the present experimental data and most of other proton capture data111Note: Ref. bork98  points out that the theoretical values in sau97  were mistakenly given too high. Using the correct value, there is good agreement also with the experiment of sau97 .. Even more so, if one considers that the calculations use global parameters which are not fine-tuned to the specific nuclei involved. For such global calculations, a 30% deviation averaged over all nuclei is not unusual, similarly to what was found for neutron capture rau . Locally, larger errors are possible, of course. Within this range of uncertainty the predictions agree very well, especially regarding the astrophysical rates as given in Sec. VI. However, as can already be seen from the comparison of the standard predictions, the results are sensitive to the nuclear inputs, even though the reaction mechanism, and thus the reaction model to be applied, is unambiguous. Therefore, to better understand the contributions of different model inputs it is necessary to disentangle the effects of mainly the NLD and the OMP. This will also help to constrain future, improved parametrizations of these nuclear properties. For this purpose, additional calculations were performed using both codes and varying the NLD and OMP models. The combination of NLDs and OMPs used in each calculation are summarized in Table 5. In the following sections, we discuss each reaction separately.

### V.1 74Se(p,$`\gamma `$)75Br

The comparison of the results for different NLDs and OMPs is shown in the parts (b) and (c) of Fig. 4. The labels are explained in Table 5. It should be noted that INP-1 and INP-5 are the default predictions also shown on part (a) in Fig. 4. Moreover, INP-4 and INP-10 both use the same level density and optical potential. The remaining difference between them has to be attributed to further differences in other nuclear inputs (such as the photon width) because the basic approach is the same in both calculations. One has to keep in mind this additional small difference when comparing results obtained from the two codes (results INP-1 to INP-4 and INP-5 to INP-10, respectively).

As can be seen from the figure, the dependence on the OMP is much stronger than the sensitivity to the NLD, especially at the lower end of the studied energy range. All of the calculations with the same OMP but different NLDs show a similar energy dependence whereas a change in the potential not only leads to different absolute values but also to different excitation functions. At the low energies studied here, with no other open channels than (p,$`\gamma `$), the cross section depends only on the incident proton transmission coefficients, the NLD in the compound nucleus determining the photon widths, and the NLD in the target entering the compound-elastic proton channel. The effect of the NLD in the latter channel is small, as transitions with higher proton energies to low-lying states will be dominating and because these states are experimentally and explicitly included in the calculation. From Fig. 4 part (c) it is evident that none of the OMPs are able to reproduce the data at low energies, except for the ones of kon  (INP-3) and holm  (INP-6). The equivalent square-well potential of holm  and the phenomenological OMP of kon  are able to give the most satisfactory overall description of the data. The latter phenomenological potential has been obtained for energies from 1 keV up to 200 MeV, using a unique, flat functional form for the energy dependence. This may be the reason why it gives a relatively flatter variation with energy compared to the other OMPs. What is somewhat surprising, is the good agreement obtained with the simple equivalent square-well potential.

The OMPs with the largest deviation are the ones of bec  (INP-7) and bau  (INP-1). The former OMP has been derived for energies above 20 MeV, so it is not surprising that it fails. The latter is based on microscopic nuclear matter calculations to start with, but has been subsequently re-adjusted to reproduce an extensive database of reaction observables. However, the reliability of the resulting renormalization coefficients has only been tested for energies in the 10–30 MeV range. The overprediction of the data could thus be attributed to inappropriate values of the renormalization coefficients at low energies. Another important effect might be caused by deformation which we further discuss in Sec. VI.

### V.2 76Se(p,$`\gamma `$)77Br

In this case, the data cannot be straightforwardly compared with the predictions because of the complication with the 77Se(p,n) channel. As discussed in Sec. IV, the experiment was not able to distinguish between 76Se(p,$`\gamma `$) and 77Se(p,n) because they have the same final nucleus 77Br. Therefore, only the points measured below the (p,n) threshold at $`E_\mathrm{p}`$ = 2.176 MeV, are included in the comparison.

The effect of varying the NLDs and the OMPs is shown in Fig. 5. The labels are explained in Table 5. What was said for 74Se(p,$`\gamma `$) applies equally here. Again, the dependence on the OMP is the strongest one and a large spread in absolute values and energy dependence is found. The OMPs of bec  and bau  significantly overestimate the data, for the possible reasons mentioned in the previous section. The OMPs of holm  and kon  give a very flat energy dependence which describes the data well over most of the energy region. On the other hand, the slightly steeper excitation functions obtained with the OMPs of per  and jeu  are able to give an overall reasonable account of the data.

The low-energy structure found in the experiment (first and fourth data point at the lowest energies) cannot be reproduced by any of the OMPs and it is doubtful whether such a behavior of the $`S`$ factor could be found in a statistical model calculation at all.

### V.3 82Se(p,n)82Br

The effect of different NLDs and OMPs is shown in Fig. 6. The labels are explained in Table 5. What was said for 74Se(p,$`\gamma `$) in Sec. V.1 applies similarly here.

For this case, the dependence on the optical potential is much stronger than the sensitivity to the NLDs over the whole energy region. The neutron emission channel opens at the energy of 0.8 MeV and rapidly becomes the most dominant channel at all measured energies. In such a case, the HF cross section depends mainly on the incident proton transmission coefficients which is exactly what is observed in the figures. Similar to the results obtained for the other Se isotopes, the OMP of bau  (INP-1) and bec  (INP-7) overpredict the data by at least a factor of 2. Here, also the potential of per  (INP-8) yields a significantly higher $`S`$ factor although the shape of the energy dependence agrees well. Much better is the agreement of the OMP of kon  (INP-3). However, its energy dependence is slightly too flat. Again, very good agreement with the data over the whole energy range is found with the equivalent square-well potential of holm  (INP-6). The microscopic potential of jeu  (INP-2, INP-5) describes well the data above 1.7 MeV but shows a different energy dependence below that energy.

## VI Summary and conclusions

We have measured three proton-induced reactions in the astrophysically relevant energy range: 74,76Se(p,$`\gamma `$)75,77Br, and 82Se(p,n)82Br. Using an activation technique we were able to obtain reaction cross sections and $`S`$ factors in the energy range relevant to the astrophysical $`p`$ process. The new data were compared with predictions of the Hauser-Feshbach statistical theory using global models of OMPs and NLDs. An extensive investigation of the sensitivity of the theoretical calculations to the different inputs was presented. As expected, in this astrophysically relevant low-energy region the results are more sensitive to the OMP than to the NLD. The best overall agreement is obtained with the global microscopic optical potential of jeu  and an equivalent square-well potential holm . The latter, somewhat surprising, observation seems to be in contradiction with a previous comparison of rates using these two potentials hoff , where the largest deviations between them were found in the mass range $`A>70`$. However, this is strongly energy dependent since in Fig. 4 of hoff  the largest deviations arise at even lower proton energies and the differences vanish quickly at higher energies. Likewise, we expect to find larger differences between the predictions with the two potentials when going to even lower energy.

Further good agreement with absolute values of the present data is found with the potential of kon . However, the obtained energy dependence of the $`S`$ factor remains slightly too flat. This is caused by the functional dependence on the energy assumed in the definition of this potential.

The Se isotopes considered here are deformed and therefore deformation effects might be important. For the calculations using the OMPs of jeu ; bec  the well-known approach of employing a spherical equivalent to a deformed potential (with a larger diffuseness parameter) was used. However, from our analyses above it can be seen that even a purely spherical potential, such as the equivalent square well, can yield satisfactory results. On the other hand, deformation is important for interpreting the results obtained with the OMP of bau . A significant fraction of the shown deviations is due to the spherical treatment. A further investigation of dependencies on the OMP parameters and how to include deformation effects in OMPs, and more particularly coupled channels calculations, is beyond the scope of this paper.

Reaction rates are the relevant quantities in astrophysical applications. In Tables 68 we give such astrophysical reaction rates computed from our data including errors. The temperature range for each reaction was chosen numerically so that all significant contributions to the integration over the proton energy came from within the energy range of our data. Also shown is a comparison to the rates from the standard NON-SMOKER prediction nonsmoker1 ; reaction rates for the cases INP-1 to INP-10 can be derived considering the fact that rates from slowly varying $`S`$ factors scale approximately with the $`S`$ factor. Excellent agreement is found for 74Se(p,$`\gamma `$)75Br and 82Se(p,n)82Br. This illustrates how deviations with respect to the data are averaged out by the integration involved in the calculation of the reaction rate, especially at the edge of the respective Gamow window. The prediction overestimates the rate of 76Se(p,$`\gamma `$)77Br + 77Se(p,n)77Br (Table 7) by factors of 1.18–1.77, with better agreement at lower temperature. Thus, the present work confirms the trend seen in previous investigations of proton-induced reactions for intermediate mass targets, namely that there is overall acceptable or good agreement between data and global predictions. Apart from a few cases where some deviations seem to persist independent of nuclear input (Sr isotopes studied in gyurky01 ), the discrepancies between theoretical calculations are not as large as those observed for different optical $`\alpha `$ potentials (see, e.g., som98 ; gled ; dem02 ). This seems to hold for the mass range $`70A100`$ ful96 ; sau97 ; som98 ; bork98 ; chlo99 ; haris01 ; gyurky01 ; ozkan02 ; galanopulos03 . Nevertheless, more measurements are required to completely cover the relevant mass region and provide constraints on the nuclear input used in Hauser-Feshbach calculations.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was partially supported by OTKA (T034259, T042733, F043408), the NATO CRG program (CRG961086), the Greek-Hungarian bilateral collaboration program (GSRT/Demokritos/E797), and the Swiss NSF (2000-061031.02). The authors are grateful to I. Borbély-Kiss for carrying out the PIXE measurements. Gy. Gy. and Zs. F. are Bolyai fellows. T. R. is a PROFIL professor (Swiss NSF 2024-067428.01).