text:
# The use of OH “main” lines to constrain the variation of fundamental constants

## 1  Introduction

In recent times, quasar absorption lines have emerged as an excellent probe of changes in the values of the fundamental “constants” (e.g. Webb et al. 1999; Carilli et al. 2000; Ivanchik et al. 2003). Such variations are expected in theories like extra-dimensional Kaluza-Klein models or super-string theories, where values of the coupling parameters such as the fine structure constant $`\alpha `$ or the gravitational constant $`G`$ depend on the expectation values of some cosmological scalar field(s); changes in these parameters are thus to be expected if the latter varies with space and/or time. Various experimental and observational bounds are available on the temporal evolution of different coupling constants: these include the fine structure constant, $`\alpha `$ (Ivanchik et al., 1999; Webb et al., 2001), the gravitational constant $`G`$ (Teller, 1948; Damour & Taylor, 1991), the combination $`g_p\alpha ^2`$ (where $`g_p`$ is the proton g-factor; Drinkwater et al. 1998; Carilli et al. 2000), the ratio of electron mass to proton mass $`ym_e/m_p`$ (Ivanchik et al., 2003), etc. Uzan (2003) provides a review of the available measurements.

The most interesting of the new astrophysical estimates are the recent work of Webb et al. (1999, 2001) who claim a detection of changes in the numerical value of the fine structure constant $`\alpha `$ between high redshift, $`z3.5`$, and the present epoch. The authors initially applied a new ‘many-multiplet’ method to absorbers with $`1z1.6`$ to estimate $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha =(1.88\pm 0.53)\times 10^5`$ between redshifts $`z1.6`$ and today (Webb et al., 1999). This was followed by the use of this method to estimate $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha =(0.72\pm 0.18)\times 10^5`$ over the redshift range $`0.5<z<3.5`$ (Webb et al., 2001) (see, however, Bekenstein 2003) On the other hand, Ivanchik et al. (2003) constrain the variation in $`m_e/m_p`$ to be $`(3.0\pm 2.4)\times 10^5`$ over a similar redshift range ($`0<z<3`$), comparable to the change claimed in the fine structure constant (albeit using a different absorber sample). This is somewhat surprising, given that most of the above theoretical analyses expect changes in different fundamental constants to be coupled: for example, Calmet & Fritzsch (2002) and Langacker et al. (2002) find that variations in the value of $`\alpha `$ should be accompanied by much larger changes (by $`2`$ orders of magnitude) in the value of $`m_e/m_p`$.

We have recently (Chengalur & Kanekar 2003; hereafter Paper I) demonstrated a new technique to measure (or constrain) changes in the fundamental constants using 18cm OH lines. This method uses the fact that the four OH lines arise from two very different physical phenomena, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-doubling and hyperfine structure, and thus have different dependences on the parameters $`\alpha `$, $`y`$ and $`g_p`$. Observations of all four OH 18cm transitions in a single cosmologically distant absorber can thus be used to simultaneously estimate variations in $`y`$ and $`\alpha `$, assuming that the proton g-factor remains unchanged (e.g. Webb et al. 2001; Carilli et al. 2000). We have also used the linear relationship between OH and HCO+ column densities observed both in the Milky Way and in four molecular absorbers out to $`z1`$ to argue that HCO+ and OH lines probably arise from the same spatial location and are thus unlikely to have velocity offsets relative to each other. The OH 18cm redshifts can then be combined with the redshift of a single HCO+ line to simultaneously estimate changes in all three fundamental parameters $`\alpha `$, $`g_p`$ and $`y`$, in the same object.

A problem with the above approach is that two of the equations used in the analysis (equations (10) and (11) in Paper I) involve the separation of two line frequencies. The four 18cm lines have rest frequencies of 1665.4018 MHz and 1667.3590 MHz (“main” lines, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }F=0`$), and 1612.2310 MHz and 1720.5299 MHz (“satellite” lines, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }F=1`$). The separation between the main line frequencies is a factor of $`1600`$ smaller than the sum of these frequencies while the separation between the satellite frequencies is around 30 times smaller than the above sum. This implies that the error on the redshift of the two frequency differences is worse than the error on the redshift of the sum of main line frequencies by the same factors and this large error propagates into the estimates of changes in the values of $`\alpha `$, $`y`$ and $`g_p`$. To emphasise this point, we note that the error on the sum of the main line redshifts in B0218+357 is $`5.6\times 10^6`$, while that on the difference between these redshifts is $`6.7\times 10^3`$ (Paper I); it is the latter error that dominates the accuracy of the technique in constraining any changes in the fundamental parameters (and which hence resulted in the large errors in the analysis of the OH, HCO+ and HI lines from the $`z0.6846`$ absorber towards B0218+357 in Paper I).

We describe in this Letter a new approach to simultaneously measure changes in $`\alpha `$ and $`y`$ using OH “main” lines arising from different OH rotation states. This is based on the fact that the exact $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-doubling frequency split depends on the specific quantum numbers of the state in question and has a different dependence on $`\alpha `$ and $`y`$ in each state. Since the method only uses the sum of different “main” line frequencies, it is far more sensitive than that discussed above (Paper I), which also uses the difference between pairs of measured frequencies. Further, the sum of OH main line frequencies does not depend on the proton g-factor (as the hyperfine effects cancel out); main lines from any three OH rotation states can thus be used to simultaneously measure changes in $`y`$ and $`\alpha `$. We also show that the main lines from two OH rotation states can be used in conjunction with an HCO+ transition to simultaneously measure variations in $`\alpha `$ and $`y`$. The use of OH main lines to measure changes in the fundamental constants has also been discussed by Darling (2003); this analysis was, however, based on a simpler approximation to the OH energy levels and also only considered variations in the fine structure constant $`\alpha `$.

## 2 The sum of OH “main” line frequencies

The sum of the “main” line frequencies $`\nu _s`$ in an OH rotation state essentially gives the energy split due to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-doubling; this can be written as

$$\nu _s=q_\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(J+1/2\right)\left[\left(2+\frac{A^{}}{B^{}}\right)\left(1+\frac{2A/B}{X}\right)+\frac{4\left(J+3/2\right)\left(J1/2\right)}{X}\right],$$
(1)
where $`J`$ is the rotational quantum number, $`A`$, the fine structure interaction constant and $`B`$, the rotation constant (Van Vleck, 1929; Townes & Schawlow, 1955). The quantity $`X`$ is defined by

$$X=\pm \left[\left(A/B\right)\{\left(A/B\right)4\}+4\left(J+1/2\right)^2\right]^{1/2},$$
(2)
with the negative sign for the $`{}_{}{}^{2}\mathrm{\Pi }_{3/2}^{}`$ state and the positive sign for the $`{}_{}{}^{2}\mathrm{\Pi }_{1/2}^{}`$ state (Townes & Schawlow, 1955). Further, $`q_\mathrm{\Lambda }4B^2/h\nu _e`$, where $`h\nu _e`$ is the energy difference between the ground and first excited electronic state. Numerically, $`A/B=7.547`$ and $`A^{}/B^{}=6.073`$ (Townes & Schawlow, 1955). The above quantities have the following dependences on the fundamental constants $`\alpha `$, $`y`$ and $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ : $`A^{}A\alpha ^2R_{\mathrm{}}`$, $`B^{}ByR_{\mathrm{}}`$, where $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the Rydberg constant. For the rotation constant $`B`$, we have assumed, as usual (e.g. Murphy et al. 2001), that variations in $`(m_p/M)`$, which are suppressed by a factor $`m_p/U100`$ (where $`M`$ is the reduced mass and U the binding energy) can be ignored. We thus have $`\left[A^{}/B^{}\right]\left[A/B\right]\left(\alpha ^2/y\right)`$. Finally, we note that equation (1) does not depend on the proton g-factor $`g_p`$.

Replacing the above scalings in equation (1) for $`\nu _s`$, we obtain $`\nu _sy^2R_{\mathrm{}}F\left(\alpha ^2/y\right)`$, where $`FF\left(\beta \right)`$ is a function which depends only on the ratio $`\beta A/B\alpha ^2/y`$ and is defined by

$$F\left(\beta \right)=\left[\left(2+\frac{6.073}{7.547}\beta \right)\left(1+\frac{2\beta }{X\left(\beta \right)}\right)+\frac{4\left(J+3/2\right)\left(J1/2\right)}{X\left(\beta \right)}\right].$$
(3)
Thus, the ratio of the change in the sum of any two main line frequencies $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _s`$ to their sum today is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _s}{\nu _s}}`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R_{\mathrm{}}}{R_{\mathrm{}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }F\left(\beta \right)}{F\left(\beta \right)}}`$ (4)
$`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R_{\mathrm{}}}{R_{\mathrm{}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{F}}{\displaystyle \frac{dF}{d\beta }}\left[2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}}\right]`$ (5)
$$\mathrm{where}\frac{dF}{d\beta }=C\left(1+\frac{2\beta }{X}\right)\frac{2+C\beta }{X}\left[1+\frac{2\beta }{X}\frac{dX}{d\beta }\right]\frac{4\left(J+3/2\right)\left(J1/2\right)}{X^2}\frac{dX}{d\beta }.$$
(6)
In the above, $`dX/d\beta =\left(\beta 2\right)/X`$ and $`C=(6.073/7.547)`$. Equation (5) has been evaluated for the main lines of the $`{}_{}{}^{2}\mathrm{\Pi }_{3/2}^{},J=3/2`$ state in Paper I; we extend this analysis to the main lines of other rotational states that have been detected in the Galactic interstellar medium. The results are listed below, along with the rest frequencies of the “main” lines for each state :

1. $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝚷_{\mathrm{𝟑}/\mathrm{𝟐}}^{},𝐉=\mathrm{𝟑}/\mathrm{𝟐}`$ : Rest frequencies : 1667.3590 and 1665.4018 MHz (i.e. $``$ 18cm). Equation (5) yields

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _s}{\nu _s}=2.571\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}1.141\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha }+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R_{\mathrm{}}}{R_{\mathrm{}}}$$
(7)
2. $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝚷_{\mathrm{𝟏}/\mathrm{𝟐}}^{},𝐉=\mathrm{𝟏}/\mathrm{𝟐}`$ : This state has a single main line, at a rest frequency of 4750.656 MHz ($``$ 6cm); the second main line corresponds to an F = 0–0 transition, which is forbidden by the selection rules. This might appear to be a drawback, since it would seem impossible to detect both main lines. However, it turns out that the frequency separation between the two main lines vanishes, to first order. This can be seen as the separation between the two main line frequencies $`\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _2`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\nu \nu _1\nu _2=\frac{2d\left(X2+\beta \right)}{3X}$$
(8)
where $`d`$ is a hyperfine constant (equation (46) of Dousmanis et al. 1955). Further, $`X=\beta 2`$ for $`J=1/2`$, implying that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu =0`$. Thus, the sum of the two main line frequencies for the $`J=1/2`$ case is, to first order, merely equal to twice the F = 1–1 frequency and a detection of this transition is sufficient to measure the above sum. In this case, equation (5) yields

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _s}{\nu _s}=0.509\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}+2.982\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha }+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R_{\mathrm{}}}{R_{\mathrm{}}}$$
(9)
3. $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝚷_{\mathrm{𝟑}/\mathrm{𝟐}}^{},𝐉=\mathrm{𝟓}/\mathrm{𝟐}`$ : Rest frequencies : 6030.747 MHz and 6035.092 MHz ($``$ 5cm). Equation (5) yields

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _s}{\nu _s}=2.452\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}0.903\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha }+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R_{\mathrm{}}}{R_{\mathrm{}}}$$
(10)
4. $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝚷_{\mathrm{𝟏}/\mathrm{𝟐}}^{},𝐉=\mathrm{𝟑}/\mathrm{𝟐}`$ : Rest frequencies : 7761.747 MHz and 7820.125 MHz ($``$ 3.8cm). Equation (5) yields

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _s}{\nu _s}=0.072\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}+3.857\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha }+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R_{\mathrm{}}}{R_{\mathrm{}}}$$
(11)
5. $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝚷_{\mathrm{𝟏}/\mathrm{𝟐}}^{},𝐉=\mathrm{𝟓}/\mathrm{𝟐}`$ : Rest frequencies : 8135.870 MHz and 8159.587 MHz ($``$ 3.7cm). Equation (5) yields

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _s}{\nu _s}=0.920\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}+5.840\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha }+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R_{\mathrm{}}}{R_{\mathrm{}}}$$
(12)
6. $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝚷_{\mathrm{𝟑}/\mathrm{𝟐}}^{},𝐉=\mathrm{𝟕}/\mathrm{𝟐}`$ : Rest frequencies : 13434.596 MHz and 13441.4173 MHz ($``$ 2.2cm). Equation (5) yields

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _s}{\nu _s}=2.334\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}0.678\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha }+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R_{\mathrm{}}}{R_{\mathrm{}}}$$
(13)

We note that each of the above equations (713) has the same dependence on the Rydberg constant $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$, but different dependences on $`y`$ and $`\alpha `$. If we have two transitions whose rest frequencies $`\nu _1(0)`$ and $`\nu _2(0)`$ depend on redshift, due to the evolution of various fundamental constants such as $`\alpha `$, $`y`$, etc, the first order difference between the measured redshifts is (e.g. Paper I)

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }z}{1+\overline{z}}=\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _2}{\nu _2(0)}\right]\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _1}{\nu _1(0)}\right],$$
(14)
where $`\overline{z}`$ is the mean measured redshift. Given two spectral lines (or linear combinations of line frequencies) with different dependences on some fundamental parameter, the differences between the measured redshifts can be used to constrain the evolution of the parameter in question. Clearly, any three of the equations (713) can be combined in pairs in equation (14) to yield two simultaneous equations in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }y/y`$, which can then be solved to measure any changes in both these quantities. Thus, the detection of the “main” OH lines in any three of the OH rotation states in a single absorber can be used to simultaneously measure changes in $`\alpha `$ and $`ym_e/m_p`$ at the same physical space-time location. Note that the large number of OH rotational states allows a simple self-consistency check of any such measurement, by a search for the “main” lines from a fourth OH rotation state. Since this technique uses different lines from the same species, systematic velocity offsets between the different absorption lines are unlikely to be the dominant source of error. It should be noted, however, that the higher OH rotational levels may be excited in regions with very different physical conditions from regions giving rise to OH ground state absorption; the possibility of velocity offsets between the 18cm absorbing gas and the 6cm or 5cm absorbing gas hence cannot be ruled out. However, the OH column density of the absorbing gas can be independently estimated from the different OH lines; if these estimates are found to be in agreement, it would argue that all the lines originated in the same gas cloud.

HCO+ rotational transitions also have no dependence on the proton g-factor $`g_p`$, with line frequencies proportional to $`yR_{\mathrm{}}`$. Moreover, as discussed in Paper I, the linear relation between HCO+ and OH column densities observed both in the galaxy (Liszt & Lucas, 1996) and out to $`z1`$ (Kanekar & Chengalur, 2002) (extending over more than two orders of magnitude in column density) suggests that the two species are likely to be located in the same region of a molecular cloud. This implies that one of the OH rotation states in the above analysis can be replaced with an HCO+ transition. Both 18cm main lines and a number of HCO+ transitions have already been detected in four molecular absorbers between $`z0.25`$ and $`z0.9`$ (Wiklind & Combes, 1995, 1996a, 1996b, 1997; Chengalur et al., 1999; Kanekar & Chengalur, 2002; Kanekar et al., 2003); the detection of a single 6cm “main” line in one of these absorbers (which seems the most promising of the remaining OH main lines) would thus be sufficient to carry out the above measurement. We end this discussion by setting out the two simultaneous equations obtained by using the 18cm and 6cm main lines and an HCO+ line in equation (14). Combining the sum of 18cm main line frequencies with the HCO+ frequency gives

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }z_{13}}{1+\overline{z}_{13}}=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}1.571}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}1.141\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha }.$$
(15)
Similarly, combining the frequencies of the OH 6cm main line with an HCO+ transition yields

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }z_{23}}{1+\overline{z}_{23}}=0.491\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{y}+2.983\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha }{\alpha },$$
(16)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }z_{ij}=z_jz_i`$, $`\overline{z}_{ij}=\left(z_i+z_j\right)/2`$ and the subscripts 1, 2 and 3 denote the 18cm, 6cm and HCO+ transitions respectively. A detection of the main 6cm OH lines in any of the four cosmologically distant absorbers can thus be immediately used in the above equations to measure $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }y/y`$.

It has been emphasized in the introduction that the primary drawback of our earlier analysis, using the 18cm OH lines (Paper I), is that the frequency separation between the main 18cm lines is only $`1.957/(1+z)`$ MHz, where $`z`$ is the absorption redshift. This dominated the errors in redshift measurements and hence resulted in the large final errors in the analysis of the absorption lines towards B0218+357. Of course, the advantage of this method is that it simultaneously allows a measurement of changes in three fundamental parameters, $`g_p`$, $`\alpha `$ and $`ym_e/m_p`$. In the present case, while we have a far higher accuracy in the measurement (as the frequency sum of the 18cm main lines is larger than their frequency difference by a factor of $`1600`$ and by an even higher factor for the higher order transitions), the technique only allows an estimate of changes in $`\alpha `$ and $`y`$. However, these estimates can be replaced in the equation for the separation between the satellite 18cm OH lines (equation (11) in Paper I) to constrain the evolution of the proton g-factor $`g_p`$. While this last measurement would be a factor of $`30`$ less sensitive than the measurements of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }y/y`$, it is still more than 50 times more sensitive than estimates of $`\mathrm{\Delta }g_p/g_p`$ obtained using the earlier method (Paper I); this is due to the fact that the frequency separation between the 18cm satellite lines is $`108/(1+z)`$ MHz, fifty times larger than that between the 18cm main lines.

We note, in passing, that other “Lambda-doubled” systems are known to exist in the laboratory and any of these could, in principle, be used in place of OH in a similar calculation. However, to the best of our knowledge, multiple transitions have not been detected in these other systems in astrophysical sources; we suspect that the strength of cm-wave OH lines is likely to make OH the best candidate for such analyses. Further, the present calculation is based on a perturbative treatment of the OH levels (Van Vleck, 1929; Townes & Schawlow, 1955); more recent analyses (e.g. Brown & Merer 1979) use the “effective Hamiltonian” approach, resulting in higher order effects. As pointed out in Paper I, these are unlikely to significantly affect our results.

Finally, we estimate the accuracy that could be obtained in a measurement of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha `$ by the present method, for the $`z0.885`$ absorber towards PKS 1830$``$21; the latter has the highest redshift of all known 18cm OH absorbers (Kanekar & Chengalur, 2002). We simplify the analysis by assuming that $`y`$ is constant, so that main lines of only two rotational states need be used; we will consider the $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝚷_{\mathrm{𝟑}/\mathrm{𝟐}}^{},𝐉=\mathrm{𝟑}/\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝚷_{\mathrm{𝟏}/\mathrm{𝟐}}^{},𝐉=\mathrm{𝟏}/\mathrm{𝟐}`$ states, i.e. main lines at observing frequencies of $`885`$ MHz and $`2520`$ MHz, respectively, for an absorber at $`z=0.885`$. Next, a resolution of 2 kHz is not unreasonable for radio spectroscopy with present-generation telescopes. Even if we assume that the line centroids are only determined to this accuracy (i.e. that sub-channel resolution is not obtained, via fitting to the line profile), the errors on the redshifts of the sum of main line frequencies would be $`\mathrm{\Delta }z=1\times 10^6`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }z=4\times 10^7`$, for the 18cm and 6cm lines, respectively. Combining equations (7) and (9) in equation (14) (and assuming $`y`$ to be constant) then gives $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha =1.5\times 10^7`$, the $`1\sigma `$ accuracy in a measurement of changes in $`\alpha `$ from $`z0.885`$ to today. This is significantly better than the precision obtained in the best optical studies today (e.g. $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\alpha =6\times 10^7`$; Chand et al. (2004)). Note, however, that the above errors do not take into account systematic effects, i.e. the possibility of relative motions between the 18cm and 6cm absorbing clouds; as mentioned earlier, observations of lines from other OH rotational states would help to constrain such systematics.

In summary, we have demonstrated a new technique to simultaneously measure any evolution in two fundamental constants $`\alpha `$ and $`ym_e/m_p`$, using OH “main” absorption lines. The method is $``$ three orders of magnitude more sensitive than that described by Chengalur & Kanekar (2003), which utilised the four OH 18cm lines for the analysis. The increase in sensitivity comes from the use of OH “main” lines arising from different OH rotational states, rather than the difference between the frequencies of lines arising from the same state. The technique requires the detection of main lines from three OH rotational states or, alternately, two OH states and one HCO+ transition, in the same absorber. The large number of OH rotational states also allows a simple consistency check of any measurement by a search for the main lines of one further OH state. Both 18cm main lines and a number of HCO+ transitions have been detected in absorption in four extra-galactic molecular absorbers. The detection of a single 6cm main line in any of these systems would thus be sufficient to simultaneously measure (or constrain) changes in $`\alpha `$ and $`ym_e/m_p`$.

## 3 Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Rajaram Nityananda for very useful discussions on the energy levels of the OH ground state.


format: text

text:
# Variable Star Monitoring in Local Group Dwarf Irregular Galaxies

## 1. Introduction

A magnitude limited complete census of variable stars in nearby dwarf galaxies allows important contributions to the star formation history of these systems. Measurements of some variable stars can supply improved distance determinations for the host galaxies, others will provide important constraints for the population analysis. Different classes of variables can further improve the understanding of the star formation history of these system, functioning as tracers of star formation during different epochs. We expect the data set of our long term monitoring program to be especially well suited to study the contents of red long-period variables and to re-investigate the paucity of Cepheids with $`P>10`$ days as reported by Sandage & Carlson (1985).

## 2. Observations and data reduction

We selected a sample of six local group dwarf irregular galaxies which are visible with the 0.8 m telescope of our institute at Mt. Wendelstein. The names and additional data from the literature compilation by Mateo (1998) are shown in Table 1.

The observations so far were carried out in $`R`$ and $`B`$-Band, sparsely sampling a three year period starting with test observations in 1999. This part of the data set should be sensitive for long period variable stars with periods up to $`500`$ days. Additional observations in $`R`$, $`B`$ and $`I`$-Band were obtained during 3 observing campaigns at the 1.23 m telescope on Calar Alto densely sampling three two week long periods. These observations should provide a ground for a search for variable stars with shorter periods ranging from $`1.5`$ days up to $`10`$ days.

The acquired data were bias subtracted, flat-fielded and cosmic ray rejected. Then, the images from one night were astrometrically aligned to a common reference frame and combined with individual weights proportional to their $`S/N`$. For each epoch, consisting of all the stacked images of a single night, a difference image against a common deep reference frame was created using an implementation (Gössl & Riffeser, 2002, 2003) of the Alard algorithm (Alard & Lupton, 1998). Finally, these difference images were convolved with a stellar PSF.

To extract lightcurves from the reduced data, first all pixels deviating significantly ($`3\sigma `$) from the reference image in a minimum number of epochs $`n`$ were flagged, utilizing the complete per-pixel error propagation of our data reduction pipeline. Then, using these coordinates as input, values and associated errors are read from the difference images and the lightcurve data are assembled. To search for periodic signals in the extracted difference fluxes, a Lomb (1976) algorithm using the interpretation from Scargle (1982) is applied.

The photometric calibration was conducted using the HST data published by Schulte-Ladbeck et al. (2003).

## 3. Preliminary Results

For the galaxies Leo A, and UGCA 92, we have a very good monitoring and a large fraction of the data passed already the pipeline. The Leo A data set serves as test case: A total of 26 variable star candidates were detected. Among them, we identified 16 secure long period variables (typical average values $`19.4<R<22.1`$, and $`74<`$ period \[days\] $`<590`$), and we have 8 further candidates for LPVs. In addition we were able to identify two good candidates for $`\delta `$ Cephei stars with best fitting periods of 6.4 and 1.69 days. The later candidate was previously described by Dolphin et al. (2002) as C2-V58 with a period of 1.4 days. The Dolphin et al. period solution fails in deriving a reliable lightcurve with our data, yet, applying our period value to their data set yields reasonable results. The phase convolved lightcurves for the two $`\delta `$ Cephei variables are shown in Figure 1.

## 4. Comparison with published work

The color magnitude diagram shown in the left panel of Figure 2 is based upon the HST data published by Tolstoy et al. (1996) and Schulte-Ladbeck et al. Flagged by bigger symbols are those variables from our sample that lie inside the HST field of view, two $`\delta `$ Cephei variables in the instability strip (crosses) and the candidates for long term variability (triangles) in the regime of the red giants.

Tolstoy et al. (1996) based on ground-based data found a distance modulus for Leo A of 24.2 and a resulting distance of 690 kpc (see also Schulte-Ladbeck et al.). This result got further support by the search for short periodic variables with the WIYN telescope within 3 consecutive days in Dec. 2000 (Dolphin et al. 2002). Our data complement this dataset for longer periods.

The right hand panel of Figure 2 shows the period-luminosity (PL) relation of the SMC shifted to the distance determined by Tolstoy et al. The short period variables measured by Dolphin coincide with the shown PL relation. The overplotted values for the two Cepheids from our survey (crosses) support this relation also in the regime of longer periods.

## 5. Summary

We presented preliminary results for our survey for variable stars in a sample of irregular local group dwarf galaxies. For the Leo A dwarf galaxy, the best analysed case so far, we already identified a total of 26 candidates for variability, 16 of these as long period variables and 2 $`\delta `$ Cephei stars. We compared the later with the period-luminosity relation and the short period variables discussed by Dolphin et al. (2002). We found, that our Cepheids fully support their findings and the resulting distance estimate for Leo A. This result is further in good agreement with the TRGB distance (Tolstoy et al., Schulte-Ladbeck et al.). The location of the LPVs in the color-magnitude diagram indicate that most of them are early asymptotic giant branch stars. While a complete census of these intermediate age stars is missing for most of the Local Group members, a proper statistic of their appearance can guide the reconstruction of the star formation history at the age of several Gyr by-passing the age metalicity degeneracy inherent to color magnitude diagram studies.

### Acknowledgments.

We like to thank Drs. I. Drozdovsky, C. Maraston, R.E. Schulte-Ladbeck, and E. Tolstoy for helpful discussion. We acknowledge the support of the Calar Alto and Wendelstein staff. J. Fliri and A. Riffeser carried out some of our observations. The project is supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft grant Ho 1812/3-1 and Ho 1812/3-2.

## References

Alard, C. & Lupton, R. H., ApJ, 503, 325

Dolphin, A. E. et al. 2002, AJ, 123, 3154

Gössl C. A. & Riffeser A. 2002, A&A, 381, 1095

Gössl, C. A. & Riffeser, A. 2003, ASP Conf. Ser. 295, 229

Lomb N. R. 1976, Ap&SS, 39, 447

Mateo M. L. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 435

Sandage, A. & Carlson, G. 1985, AJ, 90, 1464

Scargle J. D. 1982, ApJ, 263, 835

Schulte-Ladbeck R. et al. 2002, AJ, 124, 896

Tolstoy E. et al. 1996, AJ, 116, 1244


text:
# References

Puzzle: Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory is inconsistent

Craig Alan Feinstein

2712 Willow Glen Drive, Baltimore, Maryland 21209
E-mail: cafeinst@msn.com, BS”D

Abstract: In this note, we present a puzzle. We prove that Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory is inconsistent by proving, using Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, the false statement that any algorithm that determines whether any $`n\times n`$ matrix over $`𝔽_2`$, the finite field of order 2, is nonsingular must run in exponential time in the worst-case scenario. The object of the puzzle is to find the error in the proof.

Disclaimer: This article was authored by Craig Alan Feinstein in his private capacity. No official support or endorsement by the U.S. Government is intended or should be inferred.

In this note, we present a puzzle. Let $`M_n`$ be the set of $`n\times n`$ matrices over $`𝔽_2`$, the finite field of order 2. And let $`f_i:M_n\{0,1\}`$, for $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$, be $`m`$ functions with the following special property: For any $`j\{1,\mathrm{},m\}`$, there exist at least two $`n\times n`$ matrices, $`A`$ and $`B`$, such that $`f_i(A)=f_i(B)=1`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},j1,j+1,\mathrm{},m`$, but $`f_j(A)=0`$ and $`f_j(B)=1`$. And let $`f:M_n\{0,1\}`$ be defined as $`f(A)=_{i=1}^mf_i(A)`$ for each $`AM_n`$. We shall now prove, using Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory , the following theorem, that we shall afterwards show is false:

Theorem: For any algorithm that computes $`f(A)`$ given any matrix $`AM_n`$, the algorithm must compute $`f_i(A)`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$ whenever $`f_i(A)=1`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$, which takes at least $`m`$ steps.

Proof: We use induction on $`m`$: For $`m=1`$, the theorem is a tautology.

Assume true for $`m=k`$. We shall prove true for $`m=k+1`$: Let $`Q`$ be an algorithm that computes $`f(A)`$ given any matrix $`AM_n`$. Suppose that $`f_{k+1}(A)=1`$. Then $`f(A)=_{i=1}^kf_i(A)`$, so by the induction hypothesis, $`Q`$ must compute $`f_i(A)`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},k`$ if $`f_i(A)=1`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},k`$, which takes $`k`$ steps. Suppose that $`f_i(A)=1`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},k`$. Then $`f(A)=f_{k+1}(A)`$, so by the special property of the functions $`f_i`$ given above, $`Q`$ must compute $`f_{k+1}(A)`$, which takes at least one step. Hence, whenever $`f_i(A)=1`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},k+1`$, $`Q`$ must compute $`f_i(A)`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},k+1`$, which takes at least $`k+1`$ steps.∎

We can easily see that the above theorem is false when we let $`m=2^n1`$ and we define functions $`f_i:M_n\{0,1\}`$, where each $`i\{1,\mathrm{},m\}`$ corresponds to a vector $`𝐱𝔽_2^n\{\mathrm{𝟎}\}`$ via a bijection $`g:\{1,\mathrm{},m\}𝔽_2^n\{\mathrm{𝟎}\}`$, such that $`f_{g^1(𝐱)}(A)=0`$ if and only if $`A𝐱=\mathrm{𝟎}`$. In this situation, it is not necessary for an algorithm to take at least $`m=2^n1`$ steps in the worst-case scenario to compute $`f(A)=_{i=1}^mf_i(A)`$, since computing $`f(A)`$ is equivalent to determining whether $`A`$ is nonsingular and it is possible to determine in polynomial-time whether any matrix $`A`$ is nonsingular via Gaussian elimination . Hence, since we have proven, using Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, a statement that is known to be false, we can conclude that Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory is inconsistent. Puzzle: Where is the error? (There is an error.)


text:
# Galaxy threshing and the origin of intracluster stellar objects

## 1. UCD as an intracluster stellar object

A new type of sub-luminous and extremely compact “dwarf galaxy” has recently been discovered in an “all-object” spectroscopic survey centred on the Fornax cluster of galaxies (Drinkwater et al. 2000). While objects with this type of morphology have been observed before – the bright compact objects discovered by Hilker et al. 1999 – and the very luminous globular clusters around cD galaxies (Harris, Pritchet, & McClure 1995) – in this particular case they have been found to be members of the Fornax cluster, have intrinsic sizes of only $``$ 100 pc, and have absolute $`B`$band magnitudes ranging from $`13`$ to $`11`$ mag. Hence Drinkwater et al. have named them “ultra-compact dwarf” (UCD) galaxies. Importantly, the luminosities of UCDs are intermediate between those of globular clusters and small dwarf galaxies and are similar to those of the bright end of the luminosity function of the nuclei of nucleated dwarf ellipticals.

Radial distribution, orbital velocity dispersion, and metallicity distribution of UCDs are suggested to provide valuable information on the difference in formation histories between UCDs, ICGCs, and ICSs (Bekki et al. 2003a). The “galaxy threshing” scenario (Bekki et al. 2001) has predicted that only luminous dE,Ns with highly eccentric orbits and small pericenter distance from the center of a cluster can become UCDs after the outer dwarf envelopes are completed stripped by the cluster tidal field. ICGCs and ICSs have been demonstrated to form via tidal stripping of GCs and stars from cluster member galaxies (Bekki et al. 2003b). Here we reinvestigate the formation of UCDs/ICGCs/ICSs by using numerical simulations with larger number of particles (up to $`N10^6`$) to understand (1) how the formation histories of UCDs depend on the structure of dE,Ns (in particular, the central density of their dark matter halos, i.e., cores vs cusp), (2) the dynamical evolution of GCs in dEs orbiting the Fornax cluster , (3) whether these GCs can become UCDs in the center of dEs via merging of GCs. The details of the models for the Fornax cluster are given in Bekki et al. (2003a) and thus we briefly summarize the results here.

## 2. Galaxy threshing and UCD/ICS formation

Figures 1 and 2 summarize the dynamical evolution of the dE,N model with $`M_\mathrm{B}`$ = $`16`$ mag, the NFW dark matter halo, and the nuclear mass fraction of 0.05 (referred to as the fiducial model, FO1). As the dE,N approaches the pericenter of its orbit, the strong global tidal field of the Fornax cluster stretches the envelope of the dE’N along the direction of the dwarf’s orbit and consequently tidally strips the stars of the envelope ($`T=1.13`$ Gyr). The dark matter halo, which is more widely distributed than the envelope due to its larger core radius, is also efficiently removed from the dE,N during the pericenter passage. Since the envelope (and the dark matter halo) loses a significant fraction of its mass during the passage of the pericenter, the envelope becomes more susceptible to the tidal effects of the Fornax cluster after the pericenter passage. Therefore, each subsequent time the dwarf approaches the pericenter, it loses an increasingly larger fraction of its stellar envelope through tidal stripping (compare, for example, the $`T=2.26`$ and $`T=2.83`$ Gyr time points). Consequently, both the envelope and the dark matter halo become smaller, less massive, and more diffuse after five passages of the pericenter ($`T=3.34`$ Gyr).

The stripped stars form a long tidal stream of ICSs along the “rosette” orbit within the orbital plane ($`T=1.13`$ Gyr) and the ICSs can have metallicity of \[Fe/H\] $``$ $`0.76`$ for $`BV`$ = 1 for the dE,N. The central nucleus, on the other hand, is just weakly influenced by the tidal force as a result of its compact configuration. Because of its strongly self-gravitating nature, the nucleus loses only a small amount ($`20`$%) of its mass and thus maintains its compact morphology during its tidal interaction with the Fornax cluster. As a result, a very compact stellar system with a negligible amount of dark matter is formed from the dE,N by $`T=4.5`$ Gyr. The total mass and size of the remnant are $``$ 3.8 $`\times `$ $`10^7`$ $`M_{}`$ and $``$ 100 pc (five times the core or scale radius), consistent with the observed properties of a UCD. Hence this new study, based on fully self-consistent numerical models of dE,Ns, confirms the earlier results of Bekki et al. (2001) based on a more simplistic model.

## 3. GC evolution in cluster dEs: UCD or ICGC formation ?

Our simulations on GC merging in dEs/dIs have found the following interesting results: (1) Galactic nuclei or UCDs formed by $`1020`$ GC merging form a scaling relation that is different both from GCs and Es (Figure 3), (2) The shapes of the developed nuclei or UCDs depends on the host dwarf’s luminosity in the sense that brighter dEs have more spherical nuclei/UCDs, (3) The brighter dEs are more likely to be transformed into dE,Ns, (4) The GCs in the outer part of dEs ($`R`$ $`>`$ $`0.5R_\mathrm{e}`$) are likely to be stripped to form ICGCs within a few Gyr (thus only central GCs can be merged into the nuclei/UCDs), and (5) Structure and kinematical properties of these ICGC systems depend on the orbital properties of their host dwarfs.

The present set of numerical simulations suggest that morphological evolution of dEs/dIs with GCs can be different between these after they enter into a cluster environment: Some of them can be transformed into dE,Ns via GC merging in their central regions, if initial distributions of their GCs are more centrally concentrated. Such newly formed dE,Ns can be furthermore transformed into UCDs due to the strong cluster tidal field, if it has lower dark matter density, highly eccentric orbits, and small pericenter distance. If dE/dIs with GCs have more diffusely distributed GC systems, their GCs are tidally stripped to form ICGCs with the host dwarfs’ $`S_\mathrm{N}`$ decreasing significantly. Some fraction of the observed ICSs can originate from the disrupted dEs and dE,Ns (by galaxy threshing) in a cluster so that the spatial distribution, kinematics, and metallicity distribution of these ICSs reflect the orbital evolution and the disruption process of these dwarfs in the cluster. Thus we need to understand first the dynamical evolution of low luminosity cluster dwarfs, which are numerous and more susceptible to disruption by cluster global tidal field (and thus one of major sources of intracluster stellar objects) in order to understand the origin of UCDs, ICGCs, and ICSs.

## References

Bekki, K., Couch, W. J., & Drinkwater, M. J., 2001, ApJL, 552, 105

Bekki, K., Couch, W. J., Drinkwater, M. J., & Shioya, Y., 2003a, preprint (astro-ph/0308243)

Bekki, K., Forbes, D. A., Beasley, M. A., & Couch, W. J., 2003b, preprint (astro-ph/0308202)

Drinkwater, M. J., Jones, J. B., Gregg, M. D., & Phillipps, S., 2000b, PASA, 17, 227

Harris, W. E., Pritchet, C. J., & McClure, R. D., 1995, ApJ, 441, 120

Hilker, M., Infante, L., & Richtler, T., 1999, A&AS, 138, 55


text:
# Consistency equations in Randall–Sundrum cosmology: a test for braneworld inflation

## 1 Introduction

The idea that the world we live in has more dimensions than we can see dates back to the 1920s with the works of Kaluza  and Klein ; however, in order not to violate results coming from gravitational experiments, extra dimensions should be compactified and very tiny (of order of the Planck scale) and so almost unobservable. During recent years new models have been proposed (ADD , RS1 , RS2 ) which require dimensions with compactification scale close to the limit of modern data ($`mm`$, ADD and RS1 scenarios) or even noncompact dimensions (RS2); in these cases, the visible world is confined into a four-dimensional variety (a brane) embedded in a larger spacetime, thus called braneworld. Besides regaining classical gravity at low energies, these models have many interesting consequences, such as the mass hierarchy problem solution and the concrete possibility to test and bound the theory by means of astrophysical (supernovae) and cosmological observations (cosmic microwave background temperature fluctuations, large-scale structures) and accelerators (high-energy processes available at future LHCs). However, the problems opened by this new trend of research are far from being fully explored.

According to the inflationary paradigm, cosmological large-scale structures were originated by exponential dilatation of quantum fluctuations up to macroscopic scale, thanks to the accelerated expansion driven by a scalar field filling up the early universe. The study of microcosm allows us to investigate macrocosm in some sense, so cosmological observations are complementary to those with ground-based accelerators. Moreover, they clarify the present composition and geometrical structure of the universe, as well as those primordial elementary processes constituting the basis of our visible world.

Our aim is to apply the slow-roll formalism to a single field inflationary model on a brane in order to compute some observable quantities whose experimental determination from CMB data will be greatly improved by the WMAP and Planck missions. In particular, we want to compute up to second order scalar and tensor spectral indices and perturbation amplitudes in analogy with the four-dimensional standard approach; from these observables we will get the fundamental *consistency equations* which are typical of inflationary models. According to the lowest-order results (e.g. ), there is no way to discriminate between standard and extra-dimension scenarios, since the consistency equation is miraculously the same. The hint of our work is that second-order expressions do break this degeneracy, at least formally. The size of the effect depends on both physical assumptions and observable quantities, such as the tensor-to-scalar-amplitude ratio. Modern observations turn out to be in the range required for testing the high-energy braneworld cosmology.

This paper is organized as follows: in the rest of this section we set up the theoretical background; in section 2 we introduce the slow-roll formalism, making some additional remarks in section 3; section 4 is devoted to first-order perturbations and in section 5 we extend the analysis to second order by reasonable guesses; in section 6 observational implications of our results are considered. Section 7 is devoted to discussion.

### 1.1 Theoretical background

We will consider the RS2 scenario  in which matter, and in particular the inflationary scalar field, is confined on a single brane while gravity is free to propagate in the whole empty bulk. For a complete review of standard inflation, see . The starting point is the continuity equation,

$$\dot{\rho }+3H(\rho +p)=0,$$
(1)
and the modified Friedmann equations ,

$`H^2={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{6\lambda }}\rho (2\lambda +\rho )+{\displaystyle \frac{}{a^4}},`$ (2)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{6\lambda }}[\lambda (\rho +3p)+\rho (2\rho +3p)]{\displaystyle \frac{}{a^4}},`$ (3)
where $`H`$ is the Hubble parameter restricted to the 3-brane, $`\kappa ^28\pi /m_4^2`$ includes the effective Planck mass $`m_410^{19}\mathrm{GeV}`$, $`\lambda `$ is the brane tension, $`\rho `$ is the matter density and $`=\mathrm{const}.`$ is the *dark radiation* term which is the time-time component of the five-dimensional Weyl tensor projected on the brane. Gravity experiments impose the bulk curvature scale to be $`1\mathrm{mm}`$, that is $`\lambda ^{1/4}>100\mathrm{GeV}`$. For a homogeneous scalar field $`\varphi (t)`$ with potential $`V`$ we have

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V(\varphi ),`$ (4)
$`p`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2V(\varphi ).`$ (5)
In the following we will forget the dark radiation term since during inflation it is strongly suppressed by the exponential expansion .

On the brane, the energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field is covariantly conserved, $`^\nu T_{\mu \nu }=0`$, and the field satisfy the same 4D Klein-Gordon equation,

$$\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+V^{}(\varphi )=0.$$
(6)
A necessary and sufficient condition for inflation to start is $`\ddot{a}>0`$, which is equal to a constraint for the equation of state $`p=w\rho `$,

$$w<\frac{1}{3}\left(\frac{\lambda +2\rho }{\lambda +\rho }\right),$$
(7)
which implies

$$\dot{\varphi }^2<V\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2+2V}{8\lambda }(5\dot{\varphi }^22V).$$
(8)
Finally, we note that

$$\dot{H}=\frac{\kappa ^2}{2\lambda }(\lambda +\rho )(\rho +p)=\frac{\kappa ^2}{4\lambda }\dot{\varphi }^2[\dot{\varphi }^2+2(\lambda +V)].$$
(9)
## 2 Slow-roll parameters

The formalism of slow-roll parameters (hereafter denoted by SR) gives good control over the theoretical shape and amplitude of cosmological perturbations. During the calculation, formulae containing the smallest power of any of these parameters will be referred to as ‘first order SR’. In first order SR it is possible to drop the second derivative in the equation of motion (6), $`\dot{\varphi }V^{}/3H`$, the Hubble parameter can be considered almost constant and the expansion becomes nearly exponential. Such an approximation has been widely exploited in braneworld cosmology  and we will call it extreme slow roll (ESR).

In order to refine previous results it is necessary to push onward to second order SR and more exactly define the slow-roll parameters. In fact, in the ESR approach one drops subdominant dynamical terms thus losing information during the system evolution.

We define the following slow-roll parameters:

$`ϵ`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{3(\lambda +\rho )(\rho +p)}{\rho (\rho +2\lambda )}},`$ (10)
$`\eta `$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{\varphi }}{H\dot{\varphi }}},`$ (11)
$`\xi ^2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{H^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{\varphi }}{\dot{\varphi }}}\right)^.={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{\text{}}{\mathit{\varphi }}}{H^2\dot{\varphi }}}\eta ^2.`$ (12)
Note that $`ϵ0`$ and, since

$$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=H^2(1ϵ),$$
(13)
the condition for inflation is precisely $`ϵ<1`$ and inflation ends exactly when $`ϵ=1`$. Moreover, functional dependence of the parameters on $`\varphi `$ and $`H`$ is the same as in the standard case; this is because in both scenarios the definition of inflation is the same, $`\ddot{a}>0`$.

The equation of state for the scalar field becomes

$$p=\rho \left[\frac{\rho (\frac{1}{3}ϵ1)+\lambda (\frac{2}{3}ϵ1)}{\rho +\lambda }\right].$$
(14)
## 3 Limits

In the limit in which the brane tension $`\lambda `$ is much larger than the scalar field energy density during inflation, the quadratic term in (2) is negligible and one recovers the behaviour of the 4D standard cosmological expansion, as one can see by taking the limit $`\lambda /\rho \mathrm{}`$ in equations (2), (3), (7), (8), (9) and (14):

$`H^2{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{3}}\rho ,`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{6}}(\rho +3p),`$
$`w<\frac{1}{3},`$ $`\dot{\varphi }^2<V,`$ (15)
$`\dot{H}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}\dot{\varphi }^2,`$ $`p\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}ϵ1\right)\rho .`$
In the limit $`\rho \lambda `$ there is a deviation from the standard equations which, at least in principle, can be measured experimentally.

As has been said before, the slow-roll parameters as functions of $`H`$ and $`\varphi `$ do not change with respect to the standard case; however, since the Friedmann equations are different, some relations are no longer valid (for example, the Hamilton-Jacobi equations) and one must take care of which expression must be used to define each quantity.

In the ESR limit, the slow-roll parameters become

$`ϵ`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_4^2}{16\pi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{V^{}}{V}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{4\lambda (V+\lambda )}{(V+2\lambda )^2}},`$ (16)
$`\eta `$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_4^2}{8\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{V^{\prime \prime }}{V}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\lambda }{V+2\lambda }},`$ (17)
as in . In the limit $`V\lambda `$, equations (16) and (17) reduce to their standard form (see, e.g., ).

## 4 Cosmological perturbations – first order SR

### 4.1 Scalar perturbations

Taking the definitions of , the first-order amplitude and spectral index of the scalar perturbations are

$`A_S={\displaystyle \frac{1}{5\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{H^2}{|\dot{\varphi }|}}|_{k=aH},`$ (18)
$`n_S1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}A_S^2}{\mathrm{ln}k}},`$ (19)
where $`A_S`$ is evaluated when the wave number $`k`$ of the perturbation crosses the horizon during inflation. Notice that the amplitude has the same $`H`$ and $`\dot{\varphi }`$ dependence as in four dimensions; this is due to local conservation of the stress-energy tensor on the brane . Defining the number of e-foldings as $`N(\varphi )=_{t(\varphi )}^{t_e}H(t^{})t^{}`$, where $`t_e`$ marks the end of inflation, $`k`$ can be written as $`k(\varphi )=H(\varphi )a(\varphi )=a_eH(\varphi )\mathrm{exp}[N(\varphi )]`$, leading to the exact relation

$$\frac{\mathrm{ln}k}{\varphi }=\frac{H}{\dot{\varphi }}(1ϵ).$$
(20)
Thus, to first order the spectral index is the standard one,

$$n_S1=2\eta 4ϵ.$$
(21)
### 4.2 Tensor perturbations and the consistency equation

As regards tensor perturbations, one has

$`A_T={\displaystyle \frac{2}{5\sqrt{\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{H}{m_4}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{H}{\mu }}\right)|_{k=aH},`$ (22)
$`n_T{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}A_T^2}{\mathrm{ln}k}},`$ (23)
where $`\mu =\sqrt{4\pi \lambda /(3m_4^2)}`$ and

$$F(x)=\left[\sqrt{1+x^2}x^2\mathrm{ln}\left(1/x+\sqrt{1+1/x^2}\right)\right]^{1/2}.$$

In the limit $`\rho \lambda `$, $`F(x)1`$ and one recovers the standard spectrum:

$`A_T={\displaystyle \frac{2}{5\sqrt{\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{H}{m_4}}|_{k=aH},`$ (24)
$`n_T=2ϵ.`$ (25)
The consistency equation is, noting that $`A_T^2/A_S^2ϵ`$,

$$n_T=2\frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}.$$
(26)
In the limit $`\rho \lambda `$, $`F(x)\sqrt{3x/2}`$ and

$`A_T=\left({\displaystyle \frac{6H^3}{25\pi m_4}}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{4\pi \lambda }}\right)^{1/4}|_{k=aH},`$ (27)
$`n_T=3ϵ.`$ (28)
As one can see, the tensor index is different from the previous case and the amplitude is larger because Kaluza–Klein massive modes contribute in a considerable way in this energy regime; however, and rather surprisingly, the consistency equation is the same, equation (26) (see ).

The consistency equation reflects the common physical origin of scalar and tensor perturbation; it is a typical result from inflation that other theories of structure formation are not able to reproduce.

## 5 Cosmological perturbations – second order SR

Assuming that general relativity is valid up to the characteristic scale of the extra dimension, several steps have been made towards a full five-dimensional large-scale perturbation theory . An implementation of perturbation theory in a brane-inflationary context is still at an early stage. However, it is possible with some care to use the well known 4D formalism . As we want to make a rough estimate of braneworld effects on observable anisotropies, we can carry out the calculation with little effort by making a somewhat drastic simplification. In particular, we will neglect any effects coming from both the total anisotropic stress and the Weyl tensor. The first assumption reduces the degrees of freedom of gauge invariant scalar perturbations in the longitudinal (conformal Newtonian) gauge . The second one closes the system of equations allowing us to study brane physics without nonlocal contributions from the bulk111If one chooses a conformally flat background, $`\rho _{}=a^4=0`$, the fluctuation of dark radiation suffers an exponential damping during inflation, $`\delta \rho _{}a^4\mathrm{exp}(4Ht)`$..

This oversimplified background is justified by noting that any improvement of the physics would only confirm the breaking of degeneracy between standard and braneworld consistency equations, which is our main point. We repeat once again that the ‘softness’ of this breaking and its evidence will strongly depend on the physics, so we cannot say hardly anything *a priori* about its size in more complicated scenarios. However, as a last remark, it is important to notice that the effect of this extra-physics (fluctuations in Weyl component and anisotropic stress in a high-energy regime) will be more enhanced at small scales, since in a conformally and spatially flat background it only mildly affects the density perturbations and spectrum at large scales, $`kaH`$ . Since inflationary dynamics dominates the large-scale perturbation spectrum, in our context we will expect to find results which are close to the ‘true’ answer coming from a complete computation of the full Einstein equations with boundary conditions.

As we will see soon, the starting point is to find an exact solution of the cosmological equations such that the SR parameters are constant, thus ignoring their time derivatives. One then perturbs the solution with small variations of the parameters. For example, from equation (10) and (11) one gets

$`\dot{ϵ}`$ $`=`$ $`2Hϵ(ϵ\eta ){\displaystyle \frac{12\pi }{\lambda m_4^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\varphi }^4}{H}},`$ (29)
$`\dot{\eta }`$ $`=`$ $`H(ϵ\eta \xi ^2),`$ (30)
infinitesimal if $`ϵ`$, $`\eta `$, $`\xi `$ and $`\dot{\varphi }^4/H`$ are small enough. Hawkins and Lidsey  have found four braneworld exact models. Here we will consider just two of them.

The first one (model 1) has

$`a(T)`$ $`=`$ $`(T+\sqrt{T^21})^p,`$ (31)
$`\varphi (T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\gamma }}\mathrm{ln}(T+\sqrt{T^21}),`$ (32)
where $`p>1/3`$, $`\gamma =\sqrt{4\pi /(pm_4^2)}`$ and $`T=\sqrt{4\pi \lambda /(3p^2m_4^2)}(tt_0)`$ is the rescaled time, with $`t_0`$ being an arbitrary integration constant. Using the notation $`q_T=q/T`$ for the variable $`q`$, we have

$$\stackrel{~}{H}\frac{a_T}{a}=\frac{p}{\sqrt{T^21}}.$$
(33)
The slow-roll parameters are

$`ϵ=\eta ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}{\displaystyle \frac{T}{\sqrt{T^21}}},`$ (34)
$`\xi ^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{T^2+1}{T^21}}.`$ (35)
In the second model (model 2),

$`a(T)=(4T^21)^{p/2},`$ (36)
$`\mathrm{cosh}[\gamma \varphi (T)]=2T,`$ (37)
$`\stackrel{~}{H}={\displaystyle \frac{4pT}{4T^21}},`$ (38)
and

$`ϵ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4T^2}}\right),`$ (39)
$`\eta ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}{\displaystyle \frac{4T^21}{4T^2+1}},`$ (40)
$`\xi ^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4T^2}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{4T^21}{4T^2+1}}\right)^2.`$ (41)
In the limit $`T\mathrm{}`$, these solutions tend to power-law inflation , with $`H=p/t`$ and $`ϵ=\eta =\xi =1/p`$. This occurs both when the brane tension is very large and at large times. Actually one can fix the integration constant $`t_0`$ such that $`\varphi (t=0)=0`$, whence $`t_0m_4/\sqrt{\lambda }`$; with this choice, one can show that the approximation with constant SR parameters is valid at late times, for instance when $`t10^3t_4`$, where $`t_4=m_4^1`$ is the Planck time. Thus we have shown that there exist exact solutions with late time constant SR parameters. Anyway, the reader can convince oneself that the approximation is good by checking the behaviour of the scale factor $`a`$ near the origin of time (model 1: $`T1`$; model 2: $`T\frac{1}{2}`$). In both cases, again, one obtains a power law ($`aT^p`$ and $`at^{p/2}`$, respectively) which, combined with the asymptotic behaviour of $`\varphi (T)`$, generates constant SR parameters.

### 5.1 Scalar perturbations

Let us now see what happens to scalar metric fluctuations. The scalar field is confined on the brane and the effective action giving the equation of motion (6) reproduces standard four-dimensional cosmology. Scalar perturbations, which are related to scalar field fluctuations, can thus be treated in the standard way, following step by step the procedure we now briefly sketch (e.g. ): (1) write the linearly perturbed metric in terms of gauge-invariant scalar quantities; (2) compute the effective action of scalar field fluctuation and the associated equation of motion; (3) write the perturbation amplitude as a function of an exact solution of the equation of motion with constant SR parameters; (4) perturb this solution with small variations of the parameters.

In the extra horizon limit $`k/aH0`$, the scalar amplitude for an inflationary model with constant SR parameters is

$$A_S=\frac{2^{\nu 3/2}}{5\pi }\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3/2)}\left(\frac{1}{1ϵ}\right)^{1/2\nu }\frac{H^2}{\dot{\varphi }}|_{k=aH},$$

where $`\nu `$ is a combination of SR parameters; it does not matter which of the exact models is chosen. Let us now perturb about one of the braneworld solutions with late time constant $`ϵ`$, assuming that $`ϵ`$, $`\eta `$, $`\xi `$ and $`\dot{\varphi }^4/H`$ are small quantities. It can be shown that in both the models we are considering one has $`\dot{\varphi }^4/Ht^3`$ at late times. It follows that

$$A_S=[1(2C+1)ϵ+C\eta ]\frac{1}{5\pi }\frac{H^2}{\dot{\varphi }}|_{k=aH},$$
(42)
where $`C0.73`$ is a numerical constant. The computation of the spectral index gives

$$n_S1=[4ϵ+2\eta 8(C+1)ϵ^22C\xi ^2+2(5C+3)ϵ\eta ]+(2C+1)\frac{24\pi }{\lambda m_4^2}\frac{\dot{\varphi }^4}{H^2}[1+O(ϵ,\eta )].$$
(43)
The first additive term on the right-hand side is the standard expression for the spectral index, while the second term comes from the embedding of inflationary cosmology in a five-dimensional bulk. For $`\rho \lambda `$ one has, using (3),

$$\frac{\dot{\varphi }^4}{\lambda H^2}\frac{\rho }{\lambda }ϵ^2$$
(44)
and the extra term can be neglected, thus finding the standard result

$$n_S1=4ϵ+2\eta 8(C+1)ϵ^22C\xi ^2+2(5C+3)ϵ\eta .$$
(45)
For $`\rho \lambda `$, from equations (4), (5), (9), (10), (14) and (29) we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{12\pi }{\lambda m_4^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\varphi }^4}{H^2}}ϵ^2,`$ (46)
$`\dot{ϵ}=Hϵ(ϵ2\eta ),`$ (47)
whence

$$n_S1=4ϵ+2\eta 2(2C+3)ϵ^22C\xi ^2+2(5C+3)ϵ\eta .$$
(48)
The only difference with respect to (45) is the numerical coefficient in front of $`ϵ^2`$, $`8(C+1)2.16`$ in the first case and $`2(2C+3)3.08`$ in the second case.

### 5.2 Tensor perturbations and consistency equations

Tensor perturbations are more difficult to deal with than scalar ones since gravity is free to propagate in the whole five-dimensional spacetime. In general, the graviton zero-mode, localized on the brane, interacts with Kaluza–Klein massive modes generating an infinite tower of coupled differential equations. In some limits the analysis simplifies and the zero-mode decouples; for instance, for a de Sitter brane ($`\rho +p=0`$) the problem can be resolved and one gets equation (22) .

However, some considerations can give semi-quantitative hints about the shape of the perturbation amplitude. In fact, we know that at the lowest order in SR parameters the amplitude is given by equation (22), while in the low-energy limit we must obtain the standard 4D amplitude which is known to the next-to-lowest SR order :

$$A_T=\frac{2}{5\sqrt{\pi }}[1(C+1)ϵ]\frac{H}{m_4}|_{k=aH}.$$

Our ansatz for tensor amplitude to the second order in SR parameters is then

$$A_T=\frac{2}{5\sqrt{\pi }}[1(C+1)ϵ]\frac{H}{m_4}F\left(\frac{H}{\mu }\right)|_{k=aH}.$$
(49)
The calculation of spectral index and consistency equations is a simple task in the low ($`\rho \lambda `$) and high ($`\rho \lambda `$) energy limits, labelled by the superscripts (l) and (h), respectively. In the first case one gets the standard result :

$`n_T^{(l)}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ[2+2(2C+3)ϵ4(C+1)\eta ]`$ (50)
$`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}+(1n_S)\right].`$ (51)
Since to second order there appear only quantities present in first-order expressions, it is reasonable to consider equation (51) not as an extension of (26) but as *the* consistency equation.

For $`\rho \lambda `$ one gets

$$n_T^{(h)}=ϵ[3+(2C+5)ϵ4(C+1)\eta ].$$
(52)
Using the approximate relation

$$ϵ\frac{2}{3}\frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}[12C(ϵ\eta )]$$
(53)
and the first-order equation (21), we obtain the main result of this work

$`n_T^{(h)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}\left[32{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}+(2C)(1n_S)\right]`$ (54)
$`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}\left[10.67{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}+0.91(1n_S)\right].`$ (55)
The first-order degeneracy between the two regimes is thus (softly) broken. Note that to first order $`n_S^{(h)}=n_S^{(l)}=n_S`$.

We can get a second consistency equation by computing $`\alpha _Tn_T/\mathrm{ln}k`$ starting from equations (50), (52), (29), (47) and (20). For $`\rho \lambda `$, we have $`\alpha _T4ϵ(\eta ϵ)`$, whence, using (21) and the first-order relation $`A_T^2/A_S^2ϵ`$ ,

$$\alpha _T=2\frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}\left[2\frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}+(n_S1)\right].$$
(56)
When $`\rho \lambda `$, (47) gives $`\alpha _T3ϵ(2\eta ϵ)`$ and so, since $`A_T^2/A_S^23ϵ/2`$, one finds (56) again. In the light of the results of the previous section, this coincidence is not very striking, having used only first-order expressions for the computation.

A final consistency equation comes from the running of the scalar index, $`\alpha _Sn_S/\mathrm{ln}k`$. In the low-energy limit one finds $`\alpha _S2(4ϵ^2+5ϵ\eta \xi ^2)`$, while in the limit $`\rho \lambda `$ we have $`\alpha _S2(2ϵ^2+5ϵ\eta \xi ^2)`$. These are expressions quadratic in the SR parameters, that can be written in terms of observables thanks to the standard assumption $`\xi \mathrm{max}\{ϵ,|\eta |\}`$, which permits us to neglect the last term, thus obtaining

$`\alpha _S^{(l)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}\left[12{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}+5(n_S1)\right],`$ (57)
$`\alpha _S^{(h)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{32}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}+5(n_S1)\right].`$ (58)
For a recent study of the running of the spectral index, see .

## 6 Observational consequences

Let us now see how much the low and high energy scenarios are different by comparing the consistency equations at the two energy scales, equation (51), (54), (56)–(58):

$`n_T^{(h)}n_T^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}+(1+C)(n_S1)\right],`$ (59)
$`\alpha _T^{(h)}\alpha _T^{(l)}=0,`$ (60)
$`\alpha _S^{(h)}\alpha _S^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{44}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{A_T^2}{A_S^2}}+5(n_S1)\right].`$ (61)
The last equation remains valid if we relax the condition $`\xi \mathrm{max}\{ϵ,|\eta |\}`$ by assuming instead the parameter $`\xi `$ to be almost constant in the energy scale, $`\xi ^{(h)}\xi ^{(l)}`$. Note that the running of the tensor index does not give observational evidence of the braneworld.

The first-year data of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP)  confirm the standard scenario of a flat, adiabatic universe with Gaussian, almost scale-invariant anisotropies. Bennett et al put a bound on the amplitudes’ ratio, $`r=16A_T^2/A_S^2<0.90`$; here we will take the upper limit $`A_T^2/A_S^2=0.06`$ and the best fit for the scalar index of , $`n_S=0.93`$. Substituting these values for the observables in equation (61), we have

$$\left|\alpha _S^{(h)}\alpha _S^{(l)}\right|0.01,$$
(62)
comparable both with the error in the estimate of Bridle et al, $`\alpha _S=0.04\pm 0.03`$, coming from the combination of WMAP and 2dFGRS (2 Degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey) data, and with the uncertainty estimate of the Planck mission . However, we will get a much smaller effect if the contribution of tensor perturbations is significantly suppressed.

Data analysis carried out for WMAP makes use of the consistency equation (26) in order to fix the tensor index and its running in the space of parameters, so a direct confrontation between these quantities and an experimental result with an associate error is not possible. However, taking the above estimates and putting $`n_T0.1`$, equation (59) gives $`\left|(n_T^{(h)}n_T^{(l)})/n_T\right|0.02`$; testing this effect would require an experimental uncertainty less than 1% for the tensor index, a very difficult goal to hit for the missions of this generation.

As a last comment we note that the comparison of the observable quantities $`n_T`$, $`\alpha _T`$ and $`\alpha _S`$ must be done with the consistency equations, equations (59)–(61) and not through the SR parameters expressions, equations (50), (52) and following. This is both because we are dealing with independent expressions and because there is an evident ambiguity in relations between SR parameters and observables when considering energy-scale finite differences of the quantities of interest. For example, one would have $`\alpha _S^{(h)}\alpha _S^{(l)}=4ϵ^2`$, where $`ϵ`$ would be arbitrarily evaluated along the energy scale.

Further braneworld effects on the CMB spectrum and confrontation with WMAP data are studied e.g. in .

## 7 Discussion

Within the noncompact braneworld Randall–Sundrum model, we have computed the main theoretical quantities describing the cosmological perturbations generated from a brane-confined inflationary period. In order to find the braneworld signatures in cosmological observations we have carried out a semi-quantitative investigation starting from previous de Sitter results instead of doing actual 5D calculations, which are very complicated due to the presence of the full tower of gravitational modes (that is, the brane is not an effectively closed 4D system). In particular, we have written spectral indices and consistency equations in the low-energy and high-energy limits using slow-roll parameters, to lowest and next-to-lowest order.

To first order in the SR parameters, the braneworld consistency equation is the same as the standard one, equation (26), and so it is not possible to distinguish between the two scenarios. To second order, however, the consistency equations are formally different in the two regimes, thus permitting us, in principle, to find observational clues in favour of the braneworld model. Even if the present data do not allow such a discrimination, new data coming from WMAP and the future Planck satellite could throw more light on the problem.

Finally, there are some generalizations that can give new details of the cosmological perturbation structures. In particular, one can of course relax the condition of vanishing Weyl or energy-momentum tensor in the bulk , allowing the presence of matter outside the brane too. For the case of five-dimensional inflation, see .

The author thanks Z Berezhiani for his kind hospitality at Gran Sasso National Laboratories, L Griguolo, S Matarrese and M Pietroni for useful discussions and A Trevisiol for moral support. I am also grateful to A R Liddle who draw my attention to his recent paper with E Ramírez .

## References


text:
# A design outline for a Cherenkoff neutrino observatory

## I Introduction

The physics of neutrinos has been of increasing import among the high energy community. This has been especially true in the last ten years due in main part to the so called solar-neutrino puzzle: the measurementDavis  in which the number of observed solar neutrinos is significantly lower than that expected from the ”standard solar model”. This has given rise to a surge of interest in the neutrino-oscillation hypothesis. The oscillation hypothesis suggests that the weak interaction neutrino eigenstates are a superposition of the mass eigenstates, which therefore, whence massive, may oscillate into one another. This oscillation may in turn be responsible for the apparent deficit in the expected electron neutrino flux, during its traversal of solar matter or in the vacuum.

Terrestrial oscillation experiments have been carried out with reactor neutrinos, accelerator generated (muon-)neutrino beams, cosmic ray neutrinos, and atmospheric neutrinos. The upper limits for the oscillation parameters are summarized in fig-1. Oscillation experiments are usually analyzed in terms of a two-parameter model (assuming only two neutrino flavors) characterized by the mass parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2=m_2^2m_1^2`$ line, and the mixing strength parameterized by an angle: $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta `$ . The probability that a neutrino $`\nu _l`$ of energy $`E_\nu `$ will change into $`\nu _m`$ after travelling a distance $`L`$ (in vacuum) is given by:

$$P_{\nu _{ml}}=\mathrm{sin}^22\theta \mathrm{sin}^2\frac{1.27\mathrm{\Delta }m^2[eV^2]L[m]}{E_\nu [MeV]}.$$
(1)
While, the probability that $`\nu _l`$ will remain unchanged is given by $`P_{\nu _{ll}}=1P_{\nu _{ml}}`$.

In order to explore smaller mixing angles($`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta `$) one must increase the count rates of any given oscillation experiment. To reach smaller mass parameters($`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$), however, one must either search for longer neutrino oscillation wavelengths (implies longer separation from the source, hence less $`\nu `$-flux), or carry out the search for lower and lower energy neutrinos($`E_\nu `$), or both. Particularly for the latter approach, the low energy reactor neutrinos are the most attractive choice, in addition to their relatively large flux, and an unrivaled understanding and control of their source. In order to cover the gap in mass parameter of the exclusion plot(fig-1), and given the energy spectrum of a typical power reactor, the separation of the detector from the reactor is then fixed to a value just over 10 Kilometers.

The Fairport facility (formerly used as a proton-decay detector) is located 12.9km away from the Perry (3.8 GWatt) power reactor. Though not designed as a neutrino detector, this fortunate ”accident” makes the Fairport facility a prime candidate for an inexpensive and powerful neutrino detector. In this article we delineate a method for upgrading of the Fairport detector to, not only take advantage of the large source of neutrinos at the perfect distance, but to in fact, serve as a neutrino observatory to explore a host of neutrino related questions. These include detection of not only reactor neutrinos, but also Solar, atmospheric, and supernovae neutrinos. Moreover, the design can make possible searching for proton decay via supersymmetric or other exotic modes. Since the main point of the upgrade is a lowering of the threshold of the detector, possible future experiments with (Fermilab) accelerator neutrino beams are not precluded.

Another proposalSteinberg  has sought to take advantage of the proximity of the Perry nuclear power reactor, but using liquid scintillator as the light producing medium. Though the light produced by all forms of energetic particles is enhanced over 50-fold, many technical problems (relating to cost, handling, containment, ppt-purification, and Gd-loading of the liquid scintillator), make this alternative approach a challenge quite different from the design obstacles tackled in the water detector, described here.

In 1991, the IMB detector was decommissioned due to a leak which resulted in the loss of much of the water, and some structural damage. The discussion of this needed repair (albeit quite major), as well as other necessary civil engineering considerations are beyond the scope of our detector design synopsis, and will not be addressed here. Here we will only assume that the structure can be restored to a similar state as the original. In fact the necessary reconstruction is an opportunity to re-build a much better facility using the 12-years of operational experience, and indeed better suited to the new design. Alternatively, the design and the accumulated expertise may be transported to a whole new location at the proper distance from a nuclear reactor in a new underground, or submontane facility.

## II An Outline And The Physics Focus

The Fairport detector is a large tank which contains a total mass of 8Ktons of water, purified through reverse osmosis. The present fiducial mass is 3.3Ktons at a depth 1570 meters of water equivalent(mwe). It is located at a Morton-Thiokol corp. salt mine in Fairport, Ohio($`41.7^oN,81.3^oW`$). The tank is 18m high, 17m on the N-S side and 22.5m along the E-W direction. Presently, it is designed to hold 2048 photomultipliers(PMT) of 8-inch diameter to give a photocoverage of approximately 6% of the walls, for an effective threshold of just under 20MeV of electron energy.

Our proposal will make the primary mode of detection, the inverse beta decay of anti-neutrinos on protons in the water. This reaction produces a positron and a neutron. After thermalization, the neutron via a large capture cross section on a nucleus such as Gd-157 (=240Kb) is converted into gamma rays, and hence becomes detectable. The threshold for a clean trigger must be reduced to a few Mev gamma rays from the present 20 MeV recoil electrons. This enables the detector to see reactor anti-neutrinos whose spectrum ranges from 0 to 8 MeV.

The low energy of the neutrinos observed will allow limits on smaller mass parameters on the mixing exclusion plot. The high flux of the reactor is another attractive feature: at $`2\times 10^7/cm^2s`$ (at 12.9km) this is larger than any atmospheric, accelerator or solar source. The backgrounds in this mode of anti-neutrino detection are made very small by requiring a coincidence between the positron and the neutron signal, as the definitive signature of the anti-neutrino. Moreover, the ability to turn the source off and on, affords an unparalleled advantage in measuring backgrounds. In this manner, the proposed upgrade should inexpensively and speedily cover the exclusion plot gap between the mass parameter of $`2\times 10^2eV^2`$ to $`10^4eV^2`$ . If the parameters of the present proposal are successfully implemented, the expected rate of detected neutrinos will be around 10/day. *This would allow to close the gap in a matter of a year’s running time*. Background (reactor off) and systematic runs should take of order months. The detector may concurrently, as well as later on, observe neutrinos from other sources with much advantage over other techniques (presently in operation), as will be discussed later in this paper.

## III Discussion Of The Upgrade Task

The upgrade project may be summarized in a list of 3 items: 1. Create sensitivity to neutrons. 2. Lower the detector threshold to 5 Mev. 3. Reduce sources of potential backgrounds in this energy regime. Each of these tasks will be discussed in detail in this section.

### III.1 Neutron Sensitivity

#### III.1.1 The choice of target nucleus

The best candidate for detection of neutrons is the gadolinium(Gd) nucleus. The first use of Gd additives as a detecting agent (particularly in liquid scintillators) dates back to early 1950’s (see for example Ref-7 for an early mention in the context of large detectors). Gd is a naturally occurring element comprised of(15.7%) Gd-157 and (14.7%) Gd-155 (among its other isotopes). The average thermal neutron capture cross section for natural Gd is 49Kb. The radiative capture reaction will release approximately 8Mev of energy in an average of 3.5 gamma rays with one quantum guaranteed to have at least 5.6Mev of energy. Cherenkoff light is then produced by electrons from the Compton scattering of these gamma rays. The feasibility of a similar process has been demonstrated by Kamiokande-II Nakahata  who used a Cf-252 source as a neutron emitter embedded in a block of Nickel as the capturer. Of the 9MeV of released gamma rays, they observed 7.8MeV deposited well above backgrounds, which also agreed well with their Monte-Carlo simulations. The actual case of Gd was simulated by researchers in Sudbury Neutrino Observatory(SNO)SNO-prop  Their results shows that nearly 60% of the Gd gamma rays would be detectable with a threshold of 4.5Mev at(40% of 4$`\pi `$ -steradian light-coverage). These studies suggest that as a rule, in this energy range, gamma rays convert some 85% of their energy into electron energy (Cherenkoff light). Based on SNO’s study, the efficiency of neutron detection is plotted as a function of detector threshold (or photocoverage), in fig-2. A threshold of approximately 5MeV at 44% photocoverage seems a reasonable goal. The above value for photocoverage is not unreasonable: Kamiokande-II already has a 20% photocoverage and a threshold of about 8MeV or less, but they are not fortunate enough to be near a nuclear power reactor (see also photocoverage below).

Further candidates (see table-1) for the neutron capture target may be natural Cd which yields slightly over 9MeV of gamma rays, but at 2.5Kb cross section, one would need 20 times more Cd nuclei to match the effect of Gd. Large concentration of additives might reduce the light transmission of the water. Another candidate is natural Sm which has an average cross section of 5.8Kb, and 8MeV of gamma rays, in return its fast neutron capture cross section might help with the timing of positron coincidence and thus increase signal to noise.

| Target | Mass(amu) | $`\sigma _{thermal}`$(barn) | Concentr.(wt.%) | N($`10^{20}/cm^3`$) | Capt.Time($`\mu S`$) | $`\gamma `$ signal (Mev) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| H | 1.008 | 0.33 | 15 | 773 | 177 | 2.2 |
| Cl | 35.45 | 33.5 | 20 | 34.3 | 39.5 | 8.6 |
| Cd | 112.4 | 2450 | 1 | 0.472 | 39.3 | 8.9 |
| Sm | 150.4 | 5,800 | 0.42 | 0.150 | 43.6 | 8.0 |
| Gd | 157.3 | 49,000 | 0.05 | 0.017 | 46.0 | 8.0 |

*Table-1: Summary of candidate neutron capture nuclei and their properties.*

#### III.1.2 Containment of the Gd loaded water

Due to the need to continuously filter the water that is in contact with the electronics and cables, one may not allow the Gd loaded fiducial water to mix with the non-fiducial water. This necessitates the need for a transparent containment vessel or bag in which the water-Gd solution is contained, and is never routed to the reverse osmosis filters. These filters will very effectively extract the Gd-salt dissolved in the water. Fig-3 is a sketch of the proposed scheme: A cube of 13m (2.2Kton) on a side made of(1-2 cm thickness), transparent Teflon is suspended at the center of the detector. This bag (or vesssel) will contain highly purified(of pollutants and radioactivity) water, loaded with a Gd-salt(and possibly wavelength shifters, discussed later). Note that the transparent bag needs only to contain the fiducial mass.

In case of a breakage, all is not lost. The water may be purified and the Gd is recovered, and the fiducial volume may be reconstructed. Alternatively, one can consider a solid, transparent vessel (e.g. of Acrylic) to contain the fiducial water. The vessel material can potentially cause, a large loss of light within it. For example, SNO’s 5cm thick Acrylic vessel is meant to securely contain the very expensive heavy water, but it is responsible for a 21% loss of lightSNO-prop . Light loss can only be compensated by larger, costly photocathode area, or smaller detector volume (closer-in walls). Another consideration is the radiopurity of the bag or vessel material, This can become a major contributor in the case of acrylicSNO-prop . A thin Teflon layer however can be made at significantly lower levels of U and Th and contamination.

Teflon can also can help to bring the fiducial mass (with the added weight of Gd-salt) to neutral buoyancy. It is, furthermore, a good choice due to its physical stability, and lack of chemical interaction with other material. However, careful studies of the growth of bacteria on the Teflon are of paramount import in the present design. The growth of such bacteria on glass and plastic media has been observed, and has proven quite a nuisance despite countermeasures in the water purification process. Light loss due to bacteria growth is a universal problem which all large water-based detectors such as SNO and Kamiokande must contend with. In our case, the presence of Gd salt(s), and possibly the complex molecules of wavelength shifters (if used) may significantly affect the growth rate of these parasites. The complete lack of fresh air flow in the sealed bag may prove a favorable factor.

#### III.1.3 Photocoverage

In order to lower the threshold of the detector, more light coverage is necessary. For a 5MeV threshold, this amounts to an effective 44% photocoverage. This may be achieved by simply increasing the area of the photocathode coverage. Alternatively, with a reasonable design for light-collecting reflectors, it seems feasible to lower the photocathode coverage requirement to below 35%. These figure are not unreasonable: we note that SNO and SuperKamioka proposals call for similar or even larger figures compared to 44%.

The PMT’s are mounted on a rigid outer shell, moved inward 2m from the walls to increase photocoverage, as well as to allow a buffer region to shield from low-energy radioactivity of the rock, salt, etc. of the walls. Another purpose of the 2m region is to install a small number of the PMT’s, facing out, to act as veto triggers. Another 1m is allowed in between the containment bag (fiducial volume) and the PMT structure, to shield against radioactivity from the glass in the PMT’s, other electronics, and objects on the mounting structure. The PMT’s will need to be magnetically shielded. However, a mu-metal grid for instance, can cut the light transmission by up to 10%Nakahata  This spells out further need for added light collection by a reflector around the PMT’s.

#### III.1.4 On Adding a Wavelength Shifter to Increase Light-yield

Since the bulk of the cost of the proposed upgrade is expected to be that of the PMT price tag, further reduction in the required photocathode coverage is desirable. One method is suggested by noting that the Cherenkoff light spectrum has a significant component in the UVPorter , a region that is not detected by ordinary photocathodes. Water soluble chemical additives, called wavelength shifters, exist whose molecules will absorb the higher energy photons and re-emit lower energy(visible) photons. While this process will increase the light collected from the Cherenkoff process, its shifted component will be isotropic and will not have the directionality of the Cherenkoff cone; this light may be used in a calorimetric mode only. Unfortunately, some ( 20%) of the visible(directional) light from the Cherenkoff process may also be absorbed and re-emitted thus resulting in dilution of the original directionalityKielczewska . While This loss does not affect the energy-threshold, it will dilute the ability to reconstruct particle tracks. The latter becomes a concern, mainly in the search for proton-decay events.

A candidate for this task is beta-methylumbellapheronePorter . This liquid will shift light from the wavelength range of 250-350nm to 380-540nm, by absorbing light in the former range and re-emitting in the latter range. At a concentration of 50ppm, the average absorption length($`\alpha `$) is 5cm for $`\lambda `$nm ($`\alpha >`$ 20m for nm). At this level, a factor of 1.74 in light-yield has been shown to be gained from the addition of the wavelength shifterKielczewska . Although the loss of directionality of light is an important concern, the use of a wavelength shifter could prove a major improvement in the effective photocoverage of the detector. Perhaps the development of a customized wavelength shifter may prove worthy of the investment to address the problem of loss of directional portion of the light for better track reconstruction. To summarize, a factor of 1.74 improvement in the light yield, will reduce the final photocathode-coverage needed to 25% (and even lower with light collectors), while retaining an effective photocoverage of 44%.

#### III.1.5 Detection of neutron-positron coincidence: Electronics

The sequence of events following a neutrino interaction on a proton is as follows: first a positron (0-5.5MeV, median 1.5MeV) and a neutron are released. The positron will soon stop, giving a weak Cherenkoff signal below threshold. Given the 0.05% concentration of Gd, by 100 microseconds later, the thermal neutron is radiatively captured. The gamma cascade will last about 100 nSec. The mean neutron capture time is 46 microsecondsBoehm .

Although it is conceivable that the detection of the thermal neutron’s radiative capture will be sufficient to signify a neutrino event, a much cleaner signal would be the observation of the neutron-positron delayed coincidence. For the latter purpose, one would require an on-line (hardware) trigger on all neutron events, via the emission of nuclear gamma rays. Thereupon, the output of a system of high rate waveform digitizers, with a memory depth of approximately 100 microseconds, will be frozen for offline(software) acceptance, or veto of the subsequent neutron event. At the proposed levels of photocoverage, a neutrino event will be accepted if a 20-25 photoelectron event was preceded by a 6-7 photoelectron burst in its immediate past 100 microseconds. The accidental backgrounds for this event will be shown to be very small indeed in the following section.

A digitizing system (8 bit dynamic range) with quite similar characteristics as that needed here, has been demonstrated with a memory depth of 500 microseconds operating at 500 MHz in refAtyia .

### III.2 Background Considerations

#### III.2.1 Uncorrelated Background

Uncorrelated backgrounds are comprised of the accidental coincidences of relatively large singles rates. These are estimated and listed in table-2, assuming a 2.2Kton fiducial volume, and 5 MeV threshold. The sources labeled ”internal” are due to radioactivity within the fiducial volume and hence mostly dependent on the purity of the water. The figures are scaled based on SNO’s careful computations at 0.02 ppt water (U and Th content), and at 40% photocoverage. In SNO’s actual case, this class of noise is some 10 times largerSNO-prop , simply due to the radioactivity in the acrylic containment vessel. A mass spectroscopic analysis of the Fairport water yielded the U+Th content of 20 ppt. Thus the fiducial water must be 1000 times purer than the Cleveland city water before it is sealed in the containment bag.

| Type | Source | Reaction | Rate |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| INTERNAL | Water | Th+U at 0.02 ppt | 10/day |
|  | Water | Spontaneous fission | $``$ 1/day |
|  | PMT’s | ($`\alpha `$ ,$`p\gamma `$) at 30ppb U+Th | 10/day |
| EXTERNAL | Walls | Muon spallation on NaCl | 0.01/day |
|  | Walls | ($`\alpha `$ ,p$`\gamma `$) on Na at 30ppm U+Th | 3/day |
|  | Walls | ($`\alpha `$ ,p$`\gamma `$) on Al in concrete | 5(x%Al)/day |
|  | Walls | ($`\alpha `$,n) and(n,$`\gamma `$) on Na | 0.03/day |
| COSMIC | Muons | $`\mu O^{16}\nu _\mu N^{16}`$ | 30/day |
|  | Muons | muon decay | 2000/day |
|  | Muons | spallations | 600/day |

*Table-2: Estimated rates of singles events in the proposed detector. Figures are based on 2.2Kton fiducial water and 5MeV threshold.*

The ”external” class of backgrounds is referred to all sources of radioactivity which originate outside of the water. These sources are negligibly small, thanks to the large buffer regions allowed in between the fiducial volume and the walls.

Noise due to cosmic ray muons that interact directly with the fiducial volume are by far the largest source of uncorrelated background. These are primarily due to decay of muons inside the fiducial volume. Muons also cause break-up of nuclei present in the water. A small number of muons will convert O-16 into N-16 which will beta decay(Q=10.4 MeV) with a mean-life of 7-Seconds. Muons may decay inside the fiducial volume at a large rate. The released electron has an energy up to 100MeV. Muon induced spallations are rarer but more complex, as a variety of beta decay isotopes with $`A<16`$ may be created; they have lifetimes ranging from 10-3 to 1 second, and $`Q>10`$MeV.

Given the rates above and the coincidence window of a positron-neutron coincidence, the uncorrelated backgrounds pose little concern for the detector’s signal to noise. This is so, even without the constraint that the neutron and the positron events must appear within an approximately 8$`m^3`$ volume due to finite travel time of the thermalized neutron.

#### III.2.2 Correlated Background

Of much greater concern, are correlated sources of noise: Non-neutrino events that mimic a positron-neutron coincidence signature. This is particularly problematic in the case of muon spallations: often a neutron is knocked free in addition to the creation of beta/neutron emitters(see table-3). As the result, the two ingredients of a genuine neutrino event are mimicked. The solution to this problem is the existence of the strong muon track that precedes the electron-neutron event. In addition, if not missed, the (one or more) freed spallation neutrons will precede the beta event, which will make the event even more distinguished as a spallation reaction.

| Isotope | Lifetime | $`Q_\beta `$ | Branching ratio |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`Li^9`$ | 0.2 sec | 13 MeV | 35% |
| $`Li^{11}`$ | 10 msec | 21 MeV | 61% |
| $`C^{16}`$ | 0.7 sec | 4 MeV | 100% |

*Table-3: Spallation isotopes that decay via prompt beta-neutron emission. The expected rate of these events are estimates around 35/day before rejection due to proximity to a strong muon track.*

The detector’s larger photocoverage should further pay off here: the improved tracking of trajectories is needed to reject spallation events. The precise rate of these muon related events will also be measured during the reactor-off periods. In all, a high signal to noise ratio is in principle, achievable for detecting 10-15 reactor neutrinos per day.

## IV Non-Reactor Neutrino Physics

A host of new neutrino physics questions may be explored using the proposed low threshold water Cherenkoff detector. Perhaps the most important is the case of the Boron-8 solar neutrinos. To date, the foremost electron-neutrino scattering experiment has been that of Kamiokande-II which has a threshold of around 8MeV. Fig-4 shows the energy spectrum of these neutrinos as transformed into recoil electrons. Clearly a threshold of 5MeV will vastly improve the observation of the Boron-8 neutrino flux. Based on extrapolations from Kamiokande rates, the proposed detector will observe over 6 events per day of Boron-8 neutrinos, some 20 times larger than the present leader in this field, Kamiokande. For comparison, the proposed Super-Kamiokande detectorKitamura  will expect to see about 23 events per day.

Atmospheric neutrinos are another handle on possible oscillation phenomena. The observation of relative deficiency of muon neutrinos to electron neutrinos is fairly well established. Similarly to the case of the Boron-8 spectrum (fig-4), the upgraded Fairport detector with a low threshold, will improve observed rates over those achieved by Kamiokande-II. Moreover, there will be less difficulty with systematic errors in energy calibration, as it easily avoids very steep parts of the atmospheric neutrino energy spectra starting at just above 10MeV of electron recoil energy. With improved rates and less systematic effects, more precise comparisons of up-going vs. down-going neutrinos may be made, to search for terrestrial MSW effect.

If to occur during the life of the upgraded detector, supernovae neutrinos will yield unprecedented insight into mechanisms of stellar explosions. This is achieved because both of the expected neutrino and anti-neutrino bursts may be observed, and distinguished from one another. Neutrinos will be observed via electron scattering. The expected flux spectrum of each of these bursts are plotted in fig-5. Note that during the 1987A super-nova, Kamiokande (0.68Kton) had a threshold of about 8MeV and the Fairport (IMB-) detector (3.3Kton) had a threshold of about 20MeV. In addition, both could only observe the lower curve of neutrino-electron scattering. Whether or not there are two bursts of neutrinos, and how far apart they are in time, will confirm or refute entire classes of supernova theoriesBurrows .

Finally, search for supersymmetric proton decay could continue. In supersymmetric theories the proton may, for example, decay into a neutrino and a kaon, or a pion. Previously, The neutrino-kaon branch was searched for by looking for the muon decay of the kaon. Many new lower energy decays may be sought with a lower threshold detector. For example, one could consider the proposed recombination of nucleon-hole pairs as put forward in RefEjiri . This mode may only be investigated with a detector threshold of order 5MeV or lower.

###### Acknowledgements.

Much of the work on the details of the present proposal was done by E.Bonvin. I also wish to thankfully acknowledge numerous useful discussions with the members of the IMB group, especially: F.Reines, H. Sobel, W.Kropp, C.McGrew, And P.Halverson. This work was supported by the US Department of Energy.

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Fig-1. Exclusion limits for neutrino oscillation from experiments to date. The lower hollow region is the expected range of parameters for the MSW effect in Boron-8 solar neutrinos. The dashed curve outlines the goal of the upgraded Fairport detector.

Fig-2. Plot of neutron capture efficiency as a function of detector threshold, from ref.SNO-prop .

Fig-3. Schematic of the basic design proposed. The fiducial volume is defined by the transparent Teflon bag.

Fig-4. The recoil electron spectrum of solar Boron-8 spectrum. Kamiokande-II has a threshold around 8 MeV. Note the extent of improvement with a threshold at 5MeV and with three times the fiducial volume.

Fig-5. The theoretical recoil electron spectrum of a supernovaBurrows . Both Kamiokande and Fairport/IMB were sensitive to the lower curve only, during the SN1987a. Fairport/IMB had a threshold of around 20MeV.