text:
# Robust Nuclear Observables and Constraints on Random Interactions

## Abstract

The predictions of the IBM two-body random ensemble are compared to empirical results on nuclei from Z=8 to 100. Heretofore unrecognized but robust empirical trends are identified and related both to the distribution of valence nucleon numbers and to the need for and applicability of specific, non-random interactions. Applications to expected trends in exotic nuclei are discussed.

Recently there has been renewed interest in the spectroscopic properties of Hamiltonians with random interactions . Scrutiny has focused on nuclear systems but applications exist in other many body quantal systems such as quantum dots or metallic clusters. In the nuclear case, analyses have been carried out in the frameworks of the Shell Model  and the Interacting Boson Model (IBM) .

These studies are extremely important because they explore the origins of fundamental features of nuclear structure. The upshot of these studies has been surprising recognition that some of the most hallowed aspects of structure, such as $`0^+`$ ground states for even-even nuclei, and even vibrational spectra, arise with randomly distributed interactions.

It is the purpose of this Letter to confront calculations with random and non-random interactions with robust experimental results to study which pervasive features of nuclei arise from the basis space and the generic type of interaction (e.g., 2-body) and which depend on the details of the interaction. We will use the insights developed in this analysis to better understand structural evolution and its relation to shell structure, and to project the behavior of exotic nuclei.

First, it is useful to succinctly summarize existing studies. In Shell model  and IBM  approaches for many-body systems, the majority (typically $``$70%) of calculated ground states have $`J^\pi =0^+`$ even though $`0^+`$ states comprise a much smaller fraction of the basis space than other angular momenta. While it might be suspected that such a ”pairing” property could emerge as a consequence of time reversal invariance, it has been shown  that this is not the case. Comparison of ground state wave functions in nuclei differing by two nucleons shows  further evidence for a pairing relationship, reflecting the generalized seniority scheme . The analysis also extends to excited states. In the Shell Model, modest probabilities were found  for vibration-like spectra, defined by energy level ratios $`R_{4/2}E(4_1^+)/E(2_1^+)`$ near 2.0. However it was not possible to produce significant numbers of spectra with rotational character, $`R_{4/2}10/3`$.

In the IBM analyses  a similar preponderance of $`0^+`$ ground states was found. Here, however, in contrast to the Shell Model, the interactions in an s-d boson space lead rapidly, with increasing boson number $`N_B`$, to large probabilities for both vibrational \[$`R_{4/2}2.0`$\] and rotational \[$`R_{4/2}3.33`$\] spectra. Indeed, the IBM treatments produced no concentrations of $`R_{4/2}`$ values near $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑛𝑦}\mathrm{𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟}`$ values, as noted in Refs. . These results are reminiscent of empirical correlations  of $`4_1^+`$ and $`2_1^+`$ energies which give evidence for anharmonic vibrator and rotor behavior.

These studies  are both surprising and important, and potentially impact our understanding of the origins of some of the most characteristic features of nuclear spectra. Such features seem to emerge primarily from the nature of the basis space and the rank (2-body) of the interaction.

Despite all this recent work, there has been no explicit comparison with experiment. It is therefore one of the purposes of the present Letter to do so, with data on level energies spanning the entire nuclear chart. This is the first time that detailed data on the low-lying nuclear spectra have been compared with predictions obtained from random ensembles. In the process, some previously unrecognized features of the data themselves will be discerned, which are not in fact produced with random interactions, giving us the kind of information needed to define favored interactions.

To proceed, we use two IBM Hamiltonian ensembles, the full, most general, Hamiltonian (denoted $`H_{IBM}`$) with two 1-body and seven 2-body interactions, and the more “focused” Hamiltonian $`H_{ϵ\kappa }=ϵn_d\kappa QQ`$ of the extended consistent Q formalism (ECQF) , where $`Q=s^{}\stackrel{~}{d}+d^{}s+\chi [d^{}\stackrel{~}{d}]^{(2)}`$. We use either uniform, random $`\chi [0,\sqrt{7}/2]`$ or fixed $`\chi `$, as specified in each set of calculations below. The ensembles are defined by choosing random Gaussian interaction strengths in the Hamiltonians $`H_{IBM}`$ and $`H_{ϵ\kappa }`$ as in ref.. The full Hamiltonian gives results essentially identical to those in Ref. , with peaks at $`R_{4/2}2.0`$ and 3.33, and growing probability for the latter as $`N_B`$ increases. The focused ECQF Hamiltonian (with random $`\chi `$ in the Q operator) gives similar but “cleaner” $`R_{4/2}`$ distributions. Both results are shown in the inset to Fig. 1. It is interesting to examine the correlations of $`E(4_1^+)`$ vs. $`E(2_1^+)`$. Empirically, this correlation has been shown  to be extremely robust, exhibiting a bi-modal character with slopes of 2.0 and 3.33 in collective nuclei. Comparisons of these data with calculations using the full HIBM for boson number NB=16 are shown in Fig. 1. The overall energy scale is fixed to the data by choosing the width of the Gaussian distributions. Similar results are obtained for other $`N_B`$.

While the overall agreement is excellent, the trends of Fig. 1 only show part of the story. They do not easily reveal the $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦}`$ distribution along the trajectory, that is, the probability distribution of nuclei as a $`\mathrm{𝑓𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛}`$ of $`R_{4/2}`$. And it is from this perspective that specific empirical features appear that are not described by calculations unless the range of interactions is constrained. To see this, consider Fig. 2(left) which shows empirical $`R_{4/2}`$ values for the entire nuclear chart from Z=8-100. In light nuclei, there is little evidence for collective $`R_{4/2}`$ values. In the lowest medium mass region, $`28<Z<50`$, however, a peak at $`R_{4/2}2.3`$ begins to emerge. In heavier nuclei this peak remains but is now accompanied by nuclei with larger $`R_{4/2}`$ values and, in particular, a sharp enhancement near $`R_{4/2}3.33`$. Fig 3a shows the composite distribution of $`R_{4/2}`$ values for all $`N_B`$. The peak at $`R_{4/2}2.3`$ persists.

Is this preference a fundamental feature of nuclear spectra or a result of some bias in the data? To study this we consider in Fig. 2(middle) a different cut through the available $`R_{4/2}`$ data, namely, distributions for different ranges of boson numbers (i.e., valence nucleon numbers: $`N_{val}=2N_B`$). Pre-collective nuclei ($`N_B3`$) show few $`R_{4/2}`$ values above 2.0. Nuclei with $`N_B13`$ are nearly all rotational, and those with $`N_B`$ in the range of 4-12 are transitional. Surprisingly, no range of valence nucleon number shows an enhancement at $`R_{4/2}2.0`$, contrary to the results of the random ensembles. (In this context we recall that the slope of 2.0 in Fig. 1 does not imply $`R_{4/2}=2.0`$ due to the finite intercept of this segment.) However, the second panel of Fig. 2(middle) shows that the peak centered on $`R_{4/2}=2.3`$, mentioned above, is specifically associated with nuclei with $`818`$ valence nucleons. To our knowledge, this striking feature has not been pointed out explicitly before but, as we shall see, leads to an empirical constraint on interactions that is not evident from Fig. 1 alone.

Part of the explanation of the shell-by-shell results in Fig. 2(left) therefore merely reflects changing shell sizes and hence the distribution of possible $`N_B`$ values. However, this is not sufficient. It does not, for example, explain the overwhelming preference for rotational $`R_{4/2}`$ values in regions like $`82<Z<102`$ where nuclei with small numbers of valence nucleons also exist, or the abundance of $`R_{4/2}`$ values near 2.3 in the $`50<Z<82`$ shell. The data also reflect $`\mathrm{𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑐ℎ}`$ nuclei are $`\mathrm{𝑘𝑛𝑜𝑤𝑛}`$ in each region. For example, most known nuclei with $`Z>82`$ have large $`N_B`$.

If we assume the universality of the empirical distributions in Fig. 2(middle), we can construct expected $`R_{4/2}`$ distributions for any region of nuclei simply by tallying the number of occurrences of a given $`N_B`$ for a range of N and Z values and multiplying that number by the relevant empirical $`R_{4/2}`$ distribution. In Fig 3b, we show the $`R_{4/2}`$ distribution for all nuclei with Z$`<`$82 assuming that, for each proton shell, all $`R_{4/2}`$ values are known for neutrons filling both the same shell and the next shell (regardless of where the drip lines are). So, for example, for $`8Z<20`$, we compile the $`R_{4/2}`$ distribution for $`8N<28`$. For $`28Z<50`$, we use $`28N<82`$. The peak at $`R_{4/2}2.3`$ persists, reflecting simply the fact that boson numbers from 4-9 appear frequently in virtually all shells. Fig. 3c shows similar results for $`82Z<126`$ and $`82N<184`$. The peak at $`R_{4/2}2.3`$ remains, but with a proliferation of larger boson numbers, a large abundance of rotational $`R_{4/2}`$ values near 3.33 also appears.

It is an important component of this Letter to see if calculations with random interactions can reproduce these $`R_{4/2}`$ distributions. Such calculations (for both $`H_{IBM}`$ and $`H_{ϵ\kappa }`$) are shown in Fig. 2(right) for comparison with the data in Fig. 2(middle). Some results agree with the empirical trends such as the lack of structure for low boson numbers with $`H_{IBM}`$ and the abundance of $`R_{4/2}`$3.33 values for large $`N_B`$. However, these random calculations tend to give a peak at $`R_{4/2}`$2 and nowhere do they show a peak at 2.3.

We will see momentarily that this points towards the need for specific non-random interactions. First, though, it is important to note that, although the interactions used in $`H_{ϵ\kappa }`$ are random, they actually contain an implicit bias in $`R_{4/2}`$ values. For $`N_B=7`$ and $`ϵ/\kappa `$ values from $`\mathrm{}`$ down to $`50`$, IBM spectra are vibrational. For $`ϵ/\kappa 20`$ rotational spectra result. Thus, for a random interaction, which effectively samples an infinitely large range of $`ϵ/\kappa `$ values, the measures of the vibrational and rotational regions far exceed that of the transitional region, which accounts for the high frequencies of calculated $`R_{4/2}`$ values near 2.0 and 3.33. (Similar arguments apply, but for shifted ranges of $`ϵ/\kappa `$, for the other $`N_B`$ values.) The Gaussian random numbers also enhance the O(6) values of $`R_{4/2}`$ ($`2.5`$) for small $`N_B`$, as seen in Fig. 2 (right column, dashes).

We carried out a large sampling of calculations to determine the specific range of interactions that yield a given $`R_{4/2}`$ value and, in particular, $`R_{4/2}2.3`$ for $`N_B=49`$. Figure 4 shows the statistical ranges of $`ϵ/\kappa `$ and $`\chi `$ values that give $`R_{4/2}`$ in the ranges of 2.2-2.4 and 2.8 - 3.0 for $`N_B`$=7. Given the discussion just above, it is not surprising that $`R_{4/2}2.3`$ values require intermediate ranges of $`ϵ/\kappa `$ near 20-30.

Thus, the empirical preference for $`R_{4/2}2.3`$ values reflects $`\mathrm{𝑡𝑤𝑜}\mathrm{𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦}\mathrm{𝑛𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑎𝑟𝑦}`$ ingredients: the relevant interactions, and the $`\mathrm{𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑢𝑠}`$ of accessible nuclei. Had the valley of stability lain elsewhere, or had the $`ϵ/\kappa `$ and $`\chi `$ values been different, the $`R_{4/2}`$ distribution would have been different. Comparison of measured $`R_{4/2}`$ distributions in new, unmapped regions with expectations (as in Figs. 3(b)-(c)) can thus be used to deduce information either on shell structure (e.g., magic numbers) or on the interactions applicable to these new nuclei.

Another example of characteristic nuclear data that constrains the interaction comes from rotational nuclei, namely, the energies of gamma vibrational modes, $`E(2_2^+)`$, in deformed nuclei. In Fig. 5a we show the results for $`H_{IBM}`$ with $`N_B=16`$ (to approximate the mean boson number for the deformed rare earth nuclei). There is no evidence for a peak in $`R_{2/2}E(2_2^+)/E(2_1^+)`$ at any value larger than 2. In heavy nuclei, however, such excitations are well known to occur at 10-20 times the $`2_1^+`$ energy. Fig. 5b shows a collection of empirical results for $`R_{2/2}`$ for the rare earth region showing a broad bump centered on $`R_{2/2}15`$. If we now truncate the interaction space to that relevant for deformed nuclei, that is, $`ϵ/\kappa <26`$ we see, as shown in Fig. 5c, that, for each $`\chi `$ value, a distinct peak in $`R_{2/2}`$ probability appears. The peak for $`\chi =0.4`$ (solid), which is the traditional value for deformed nuclei, gives an excellent reproduction of the data. Once again, therefore, specific data on actual nuclei help identify and constrain the nature and relative importance of the 1- and 2-body residual interactions.

To summarize, we presented a confrontation of the data for Z=8-100 with the predictions of nuclear structure calculations with random interactions, in the framework of the IBM. (a) General features of nuclear spectra, such as $`0^+`$ ground states and the appearance of vibrational and rotational nuclei, and the global $`E(4_1^+)vs.E(2_1^+)`$ trajectory, are typical of calculations with random interactions; (b) Heretofore unrecognized features of the data such as the absence of an abundance peak at the vibrator value $`R_{4/2}`$ = 2.0 and a frequency enhancement at $`R_{4/2}2.3`$, in nuclei with intermediate numbers of valence nucleons, were discovered. (c) Such robust features of nuclear data, or others such as the characteristic energies of $`\gamma `$-vibrational modes in deformed nuclei, point to specific ranges of interactions. In particular, we showed that data such as these depend $`\mathrm{𝑏𝑜𝑡ℎ}`$ on the relevant valence nucleon numbers (i.e., the nuclei that are known) and on the interactions. If the residual interactions change in new nuclei (e.g., near the drip lines), then so will the distributions of $`R_{4/2}`$ values and the collective features of exotic nuclei. If the locus of newly accessible nuclei favors certain shell regions, the distribution of $`R_{4/2}`$ values and the nature of collective modes will reflect this as well. Conversely, valence nucleon number, and hence shell structure and the locations of magic nuclei, can be estimated from empirical knowledge of $`R_{4/2}`$ values, even when the magic nuclei themselves are not accessible. The usefulness of this result in studies of exotic nuclei, where issues of shell structure or the nature of residual interactions are paramount, is obvious.

We are grateful to Alejandro Frank, Roelof Bijker, Stuart Pittel and Franco Iachello for discussions that initiated and motivated this work. Work supported by the U.S. DOE under Grant numbers DE-FG02-91ER-40609, DE-FG02-91ER-40608, and DE-FG02-88ER40417.


format: text

text:
# Antikaon condensation and the metastability of protoneutron stars

## I Introduction

It was suggested by Woosley et al.  that progenitor stars heavier than $`25M_{}`$ would collapse into black holes. In this scenario, stars first explode; exhibit light curves of type II supernova and return matter to the galaxy before going into black holes. This issue got impetus after the explosion of SN 1987A. One of the revealing features of SN 1987A is that a neutrino was observed in Kamiokande II at the twelveth second. So far there has been no observation of a pulsar within it. Moreover, the light curve fades away leading to the speculation that the compact object in SN 1987A has collapsed into a low mass black hole. If this picture of low mass black hole formation is true for SN 1987A, the newly born hot and neutrino rich star, called protoneutron star, was stable over twelve seconds or more before collapsing into a black hole.

In recent years, there have been several works by various groups  to understand what is the mechanism behind the stability of protoneutron stars for short times. In the ”conventional” scenario where (proto)neutron stars are made up of nucleons and leptons, the protoneutron star has a slightly smaller maximum mass than that of the neutron star. The ”window” of maximum masses is very small in this case. However, the scenario dramatically changes with the formation of $`K^{}`$ condensation in dense matter as found in previous calculations . They showed that leptons could stabilize much larger maximum mass for a protoneutron star in the presence of $`K^{}`$ condensation during the evolution. In the following paragraph, we briefly review the previous calculations of $`K^{}`$ condensation in dense matter relevant to (proto)neutron stars.

With the pioneering work of Kaplan and Nelson , a considerable interest has been generated in the study of antikaon ($`\overline{K}`$) condensation in dense matter in recent years. In a chiral $`SU(3)_L\times SU(3)_R`$ model, baryons directly couples with (anti)kaons. The effective mass $`m_K^{}`$ of antikaons decreases with density because of the strongly attractive $`K^{}`$-baryon interaction in dense matter. Consequently, the in-medium energy ($`\omega _K^{}`$) of $`K^{}`$ meson in the zero momentum state also decreases with density. The $`s`$-wave $`K^{}`$ condensation sets in when $`\omega _K^{}`$ equals to the chemical potential of $`K^{}`$ meson. Later, this chiral model was adopted by other groups to study $`K^{}`$ condensation in the core of neutron stars  using kaon-nucleon scattering data  and $`K^{}`$ atomic data . On the other hand, $`K^{}`$ condensation has been studied in a different kind of model which is an extension of the Walecka model . In this model, kaons interact with baryons through the exchange of mesons. It is found that the threshold density of $`K^{}`$ condensation in various calculations depends on the equation of state and parameters, in particular on the antikaon optical potential. The net effect of $`K^{}`$ condensation in neutron star matter is that $`K^{}`$ condensate replaces electrons in maintaining charge neutrality and softens the equation of state. Due to the softening of the equation of state, the masses of the stars are reduced in the presence of $`K^{}`$ condensate . It was also found that in the presence of hyperons, $`K^{}`$ condensation was delayed to higher density and might not even exist in the maximum mass stars. Protoneutron stars with $`K^{}`$ condensate were studied by various groups  and shown to have maximum masses larger than those of cold neutron stars - a reversal from the ”conventional scenario”. The theoretical studies based on the above mentioned models  and also on Nambu$``$Jona-Lasinio model , yield a repulsive optical potential for $`K^+`$ in nuclear medium. Therefore, $`K^+`$ condensation may not be a possibility in (proto)neutron stars.

In a recent calculation , the formation of $`\overline{K}^0`$-meson condensation in neutron stars has been investigated within a relativistic mean field approach  where the interaction between the baryons and antikaons are generated by the exchange of $`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$, and $`\rho `$ mesons. It is found that the $`\rho `$-meson field is repulsive for $`K^{}`$ meson, whereas it is attractive for $`\overline{K}^0`$ meson which is an isodoublet partner of $`K^{}`$ meson. Consequently, the in-medium energy ($`\omega _{\overline{K}^0}`$) of $`\overline{K}^0`$ meson is lowered compared with that of $`K^{}`$ meson thereby making $`\overline{K}^0`$ meson condensation more favorable in neutron star matter. The critical density for $`s`$-wave neutral $`\overline{K}^0`$ meson condensation is governed by the condition $`\omega _{\overline{K}^0}=0`$. It was found that the critical densities for $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation depended sensitively on the choice of the antikaon optical potential depth and more strongly on the nuclear equation of state (EOS). The threshold density of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation always lie above that of $`K^{}`$ condensation. With the appearance of $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate, the overall equation of state becomes softer than the situation without antikaon condensation leading to a reduction in the maximum masses of neutron stars. With the onset of only $`K^{}`$ condensation, the proton fraction rises dramatically and even crosses the neutron fraction at some density because of charge neutrality. With the onset of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation, there is a competition in the formation of $`K^{}p`$ and $`\overline{K}^0n`$ pairs resulting in a perfectly symmetric matter for nucleons and antikaons inside neutron stars. In the presence of hyperons, it was found that the formation of antikaon condensation was delayed to higher densities and the maximum mass neutron star contained $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate for larger values of the antikaon potential depth .

So far, there is no calculation of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation and its impact on the gross properties of protoneutron stars. In this paper, we investigate the effect of antikaon condensation with emphasis on the role of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate to determine the composition and structure of protoneutron stars in the standard meson exchange model . In this calculation, we adopt the usual relativistic mean field Lagrangian  for baryons interacting via meson exchanges. Also, we include the self-interaction of the scalar meson and the nonlinear $`\omega `$ meson term in the calculation . (Anti)kaon-baryon interaction is treated on the same footing as the baryon-baryon interaction. The Lagrangian density for (anti)kaons is taken from Ref. . We shall show within this model that $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate may also exist inside a protoneutron star and has a significant influence on the star’s properties and evolution.

The paper is organized as follows. In section II we describe the relativistic mean field (RMF) model of strong interactions. The relevant equations for (proto)neutron star matter with antikaon condensates are summarized in this model. In section III the parameters of the model are discussed and results of antikaon condensates in (proto)neutron star matter are presented. Section IV is devoted to the summary and conclusions.

## II The Formalism

We describe the charge neutral and beta-equilibrated matter consisting of baryons, electrons, muons and electron type neutrinos in the presence of antikaon condensates. The starting point in the present approach is a relativistic field theoretical model of baryons and (anti)kaons interacting by the exchange of scalar $`\sigma `$, isoscalar vector $`\omega `$, and vector isovector $`\rho `$ mesons and two additional hidden-strangeness mesons, the scalar meson $`f_0`$(975) (denoted hereafter as $`\sigma ^{}`$) and the vector meson $`\varphi `$(1020) to allow for hyperon-hyperon interaction . The total Lagrangian density consists of the baryonic, kaonic and leptonic parts, i.e. $`=_B+_K+_l`$, Here we consider all the species of the baryon octet $`B\{n,p,\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Sigma }^+,\mathrm{\Sigma }^{},\mathrm{\Sigma }^0,\mathrm{\Xi }^{},\mathrm{\Xi }^0\}`$. The baryonic Lagrangian density is given by

$`_B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}\overline{\psi }_B\left(i\gamma _\mu ^\mu m_B+g_{\sigma B}\sigma g_{\omega B}\gamma _\mu \omega ^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{\rho B}\gamma _\mu 𝝉_B𝝆^\mu \right)\psi _B`$ (3)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(_\mu \sigma ^\mu \sigma m_\sigma ^2\sigma ^2\right)U(\sigma )`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\omega _{\mu \nu }\omega ^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\omega ^2\omega _\mu \omega ^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}𝝆_{\mu \nu }𝝆^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\rho ^2𝝆_\mu 𝝆^\mu +_{YY}.`$
Here $`\psi _B`$ denotes the Dirac spinor for baryon B with vacuum mass $`m_B`$ and isospin operator $`𝝉_B`$. The scalar self-interaction term  is,

$$U(\sigma )=\frac{1}{3}g_2\sigma ^3+\frac{1}{4}g_3\sigma ^4.$$
(4)
The Lagrangian density ($`_{YY}`$) responsible for hyperon-hyperon interaction is given by,

$`_{YY}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}\overline{\psi }_B\left(g_{\sigma ^{}B}\sigma ^{}g_{\varphi B}\gamma _\mu \varphi ^\mu \right)\psi _B`$ (6)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(_\mu \sigma ^{}^\mu \sigma ^{}m_\sigma ^{}^2\sigma ^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\varphi _{\mu \nu }\varphi ^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\varphi ^2\varphi _\mu \varphi ^\mu .`$
The Lagrangian density for (anti)kaons in the minimal coupling scheme is given by

$$_K=D_\mu ^{}\overline{K}D^\mu Km_K^2\overline{K}K,$$
(7)
where the covariant derivative $`D_\mu =_\mu +ig_{\omega K}\omega _\mu +ig_{\varphi K}\varphi _\mu +ig_{\rho K}𝝉_K𝝆_\mu `$. The isospin doublet for kaons is denoted by $`K(K^+,K^0)`$ and that for antikaons is $`\overline{K}(K^{},\overline{K}^0)`$. The effective mass of (anti)kaons in this minimal coupling scheme is given by

$$m_K^{}=m_Kg_{\sigma K}\sigma g_{\sigma ^{}K}\sigma ^{},$$
(8)
where $`m_K`$ is the bare kaon mass. In the mean field approximation (MFA)  adopted here, the meson fields are replaced by their expectation values. Only the time-like components of the vector fields, and the isospin 3-component of $`\rho `$-meson field have non-vanishing values in a uniform and static matter. The mean meson fields are denoted by $`\sigma `$, $`\sigma ^{}`$, $`\omega _0`$, $`\varphi _0`$ and $`\rho _{03}`$.

The dispersion relation representing the in-medium energies of $`\overline{K}(K^{},\overline{K}^0)`$ for $`s`$-wave ($`𝐤=0`$) condensation is given by

$$\omega _{K^{},\overline{K}^0}=m_K^{}g_{\omega K}\omega _0g_{\varphi K}\varphi _0\frac{1}{2}g_{\rho K}\rho _{03},$$
(9)
where the isospin projection $`I_{3\overline{K}}=1/2`$ for the mesons $`K^{}`$ ($``$ sign) and $`\overline{K}^0`$ (+ sign) are explicitly written in the expression. Since the $`\sigma `$ and $`\omega `$ fields generally increase with density and both the terms containing $`\sigma `$ and $`\omega `$ fields in Eq.(6) are attractive for antikaons, the in-medium energies of $`\overline{K}`$ decrease in nuclear medium. On the other hand, in nucleon-only matter $`\rho _{03}n_pn_n`$ ($`n_p`$ and $`n_n`$ are the proton and neutron densities) is negative; thus the $`\rho `$-meson field favors the formation of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation over that of $`K^{}`$ condensation. In hyperon matter, the repulsive $`\varphi `$ meson term may delay the onset of antikaon condensation . The in-medium energies of kaons $`K(K^+,K^0)`$ are given by,

$$\omega _{K^+,K^0}=m_K^{}+g_{\omega K}\omega _0+g_{\varphi K}\varphi _0\pm \frac{1}{2}g_{\rho K}\rho _{03}.$$
(10)
It is to be noted here that kaon condensation may be impossible in the neutron star matter because the $`\omega `$-meson term is repulsive for kaons and dominates over the attractive $`\sigma `$-meson term at higher densities. However, the attractive $`\varphi `$ meson term may decrease kaon energies in the presence of hyperons .

The meson field equations in the presence of baryons and antikaon condensates are derived from Eqs. (1)-(4) as

$`m_\sigma ^2\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{U}{\sigma }}+{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}g_{\sigma B}n_B^S+g_{\sigma K}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{K}}{}}n_{\overline{K}},`$ (11)
$`m_\sigma ^{}^2\sigma ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}g_{\sigma ^{}B}n_B^S+g_{\sigma ^{}K}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{K}}{}}n_{\overline{K}},`$ (12)
$`m_\omega ^2\omega _0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}g_{\omega B}n_Bg_{\omega K}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{K}}{}}n_{\overline{K}},`$ (13)
$`m_\varphi ^2\varphi _0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}g_{\varphi B}n_Bg_{\varphi K}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{K}}{}}n_{\overline{K}},`$ (14)
$`m_\rho ^2\rho _{03}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}g_{\rho B}I_{3B}n_B+g_{\rho K}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{K}}{}}I_{3\overline{K}}n_{\overline{K}}.`$ (15)
Here the scalar and number density of baryon $`B`$ are respectively

$`n_B^S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2J_B+1}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{k_{F_B}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_B^{}}{(k^2+m_B^2)^{1/2}}}k^2𝑑k,`$ (16)
$`n_B`$ $`=`$ $`(2J_B+1){\displaystyle \frac{k_{F_B}^3}{6\pi ^2}},`$ (17)
with effective baryonic mass $`m_B^{}=m_Bg_{\sigma B}\sigma g_{\sigma ^{}B}\sigma ^{}`$, Fermi momentum $`k_{F_B}`$, spin $`J_B`$, and isospin projection $`I_{3B}`$. Note that for $`s`$-wave $`\overline{K}`$ condensation, the scalar and vector densities of antikaons are same and those are given by

$$n_{K^{},\overline{K}^0}=2\left(\omega _{K^{},\overline{K}^0}+g_{\omega K}\omega _0+g_{\varphi K}\varphi _0\pm \frac{1}{2}g_{\rho K}\rho _{03}\right)\overline{K}K=2m_K^{}\overline{K}K.$$
(18)
The total energy density $`\epsilon =\epsilon _B+\epsilon _l+\epsilon _{\overline{K}}`$ has contributions from baryons, leptons, and antikaons. The baryonic plus leptonic energy density is

$`\epsilon _B+\epsilon _l`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\sigma ^2\sigma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}g_2\sigma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}g_3\sigma ^4+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\sigma ^{}^2\sigma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\omega ^2\omega _0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\varphi ^2\varphi _0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\rho ^2\rho _{03}^2`$ (20)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{2J_B+1}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{k_{F_B}}}(k^2+m_B^2)^{1/2}k^2𝑑k+{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{K_{F_l}}}(k^2+m_l^2)^{1/2}k^2𝑑k+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _{\nu _e}^4}{8\pi ^2}},`$
where $`l`$ goes over electrons and muons. The last term corresponds to the energy density of neutrinos as required in a protoneutron star matter. The energy density for antikaons is

$$\epsilon _{\overline{K}}=m_K^{}\left(n_K^{}+n_{\overline{K}^0}\right).$$
(21)
Since antikaons form $`s`$-wave Bose condensates, they do not directly contribute to the pressure so that the pressure is due to baryons and leptons only

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\sigma ^2\sigma ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}g_2\sigma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}g_3\sigma ^4{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\sigma ^{}^2\sigma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\omega ^2\omega _0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\varphi ^2\varphi _0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_\rho ^2\rho _{03}^2`$ (23)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \underset{B}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{2J_B+1}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{k_{F_B}}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^4dk}{(k^2+m_B^2)^{1/2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{K_{F_l}}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^4dk}{(k^2+m_l^2)^{1/2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _{\nu _e}^4}{24\pi ^2}}.`$
Here, the last term is the contribution of neutrinos to the pressure. The pressure due to antikaons is contained entirely in the meson fields via their field equations (8)-(12).

At the interior of (proto)neutron stars, baryons are in chemical equilibrium under weak processes. Therefore the chemical potentials of baryons and leptons are governed by the equilibrium conditions

$$\mu _i=b_i\mu _nq_i\left(\mu _e\mu _{\nu _e}\right),$$
(24)
where $`\mu _i`$, $`\mu _n`$, $`\mu _e`$, and $`\mu _{\nu _e}`$ are respectively the chemical potentials of the ith baryon, neutrons, electrons, and neutrinos with $`\mu _i=(k_{F_i}^2+m_i^2)^{1/2}+g_{\omega i}\omega _0+g_{\varphi i}\varphi _0+I_{3i}g_{\rho i}\rho _{03}`$ and $`b_i`$ and $`q_i`$ are baryon and electric charge of ith baryon respectively. In neutron stars, electrons are converted to muons by $`e^{}\mu ^{}+\overline{\nu }_\mu +\nu _e`$ when the electron chemical potential becomes equal to the muon mass. Therefore, we have $`\mu _e=\mu _\mu `$ in a neutron star. On the other hand, muons are absent in a protoneutron star. With the onset of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation, various strangeness changing processes may occur in (proto)neutron stars such as, $`NN+\overline{K}`$ and $`e^{}K^{}+\nu _e`$, where $`N(n,p)`$ and $`\overline{K}(K^{},\overline{K}^0)`$ denote the isospin doublets for nucleons and antikaons, respectively. The requirement of chemical equilibrium yields

$`\mu _n\mu _p`$ $`=`$ $`\mu _K^{}=\mu _e\mu _{\nu _e},`$ (25)
$`\mu _{\overline{K}^0}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (26)
where $`\mu _K^{}`$ and $`\mu _{\overline{K}^0}`$ are respectively the chemical potentials of $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$. The above conditions determine the onset of antikaon condensations in the neutrino trapped matter. When the effective energy of $`K^{}`$ meson ($`\omega _K^{}`$) equals to its chemical potential ($`\mu _K^{}`$) which, in turn, is equal to $`\mu _e\mu _{\nu _e}`$, a $`K^{}`$ condensate is formed. Similarly, $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation is formed when its in-medium energy satisfies the condition $`\omega _{\overline{K}^0}=\mu _{\overline{K}^0}=0`$. It is to be noted here that the neutrino chemical potential ($`\mu _{\nu _e}`$) is zero for neutrino free case corresponding to neutron stars. For (proto)neutron star matter we need to include also the charge neutrality condition, which in the presence of antikaon condensate is expressed as

$$\underset{i}{}q_in_in_K^{}n_en_\mu =0,$$
(27)
where $`q_i`$ and $`n_i`$ are the electric charge and density of ith baryon respectively. The other constraint in protoneutron stars is the number of leptons per baryon. Gravitational core collapse calculations of massive stars indicate that the lepton fraction at the onset of trapping is $`Y_{L_e}=Y_e+Y_{\nu _e}0.4`$ and it is conserved on a dynamical time scale .

## III Results and discussions

In the effective field theoretic approach adopted here, we first consider nucleon-only matter where two distinct sets of coupling constants for nucleons and kaons associated with the exchange of $`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$, and $`\rho `$ mesons are required. The nucleon-meson coupling constants generated by reproducing the nuclear matter saturation properties are taken from Glendenning and Moszkowski of Ref. . This set is referred to as GM1 and listed in Table I.

Now we determine the kaon-meson coupling constants. According to the quark model and isospin counting rule, the vector coupling constants are given by

$$g_{\omega K}=\frac{1}{3}g_{\omega N}\mathrm{and}g_{\rho K}=g_{\rho N}.$$
(28)
The scalar coupling constant is obtained from the real part of the $`K^{}`$ optical potential at normal nuclear matter density

$$U_{\overline{K}}\left(n_0\right)=g_{\sigma K}\sigma g_{\omega K}\omega _0.$$
(29)
The negative sign in the vector meson potential is due to G-parity. The critical density of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation should therefore strongly depend on the $`K^{}`$ optical potential.

It has been demonstrated in various calculations that antikaons feel an attractive potential in normal nuclear matter . The analysis of $`K^{}`$ atomic data  in a hybrid model comprising of the relativistic mean field approach in the nuclear interior and a phenomenological density dependent potential at low density, revealed that the real part of the antikaon optical potential could be as large as $`U_{\overline{K}}=180\pm 20`$ MeV at normal nuclear matter density and repulsive at low density in accordance with the low density theorem. In the coupled channel calculation  for antikaons, the attractive antikaon potential depth was estimated to be $`U_{\overline{K}}=100`$ MeV, whereas the chirally motivated coupled channel approach predicted a depth of $`U_{\overline{K}}=120`$ MeV . The wide range of values of the antikaon potential depth as found in various calculations may be attributed to the different treatments of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$-resonance which is considered to be an unstable $`\overline{K}N`$ bound state just below the $`K^{}p`$ threshold. Therefore, we determine the $`K\sigma `$ coupling constant $`g_{\sigma K}`$ from a set of values of $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)`$ starting from $`100`$ MeV to $`180`$ MeV. This is listed in Table II for the set GM1. Since the $`\omega `$-meson potential for $`\overline{K}`$ in this model is $`V_\omega ^K(n_0)=g_{\omega K}\omega _072`$ MeV, a rather large sigma-kaon coupling constant of $`g_{\sigma K}=3.674`$ is required to reproduce a depth of $`180`$ MeV. It is to be noted that for this large depth, the value of the scalar coupling is similar to the prediction in the simple quark model i.e., $`g_{\sigma K}=g_{\sigma N}/3`$. In an alternative approach the kaon-meson coupling constants were also determined from the $`s`$-wave kaon-nucleon ($`KN`$) scattering length .

We now present results for (proto)neutron star matter containing nucleons, leptons and $`\overline{K}`$ condensates for the parameter set GM1 in Tables I and II. In Figure 1, the scalar and vector potentials are displayed as a function of baryon density normalized to the equilibrium value of $`n_0=0.153fm^3`$ with the $`K^{}`$ optical potential depth of $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)=160`$ MeV for the neutrino free (top panel) and neutrino trapped (bottom panel) cases. In both cases, the scalar ($`\sigma `$) and vector ($`\omega `$) potentials increase with density before the onset of antikaon condensation. In the neutrino free case, two curves touch each other just at the onset of $`K^{}`$ condensation, whereas the curve of the vector ($`\omega `$) potential crosses the curve of the scalar potential before the appearance of antikaon condensation in the neutrino trapped case. After the formation of $`\overline{K}`$ condensates, the curves change slope i.e. the rate of increase of the fields is altered with respect to the previous situations. With the appearance of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate, the isovector potential approaches zero with increasing density in the neutrino free case, whereas it goes to zero and then bounces back for the neutrino trapped case. It is found that the scalar potential for the neutrino free matter becomes larger after the onset of antikaon condensation than that of the neutrino trapped matter. It follows from Eq. (8) and the reasoning that the onsets of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation are delayed to higher densities in the neutrino trapped matter. Though the vector potentials are comparable in both the cases up to $`2.5n_0`$, it is higher for the neutrino trapped case at higher densities. On the other hand, the isovector potential in the neutrino trapped matter is always smaller compared with that of the neutrino free matter. Those variations in the meson fields may be attributed to the different behaviour of the source terms in the field equations of motion (Eqs. (8),(10) and (12)) and the composition of matter in two cases.

The effective mass ratio of antikaons, $`m_K^{}/m_K`$, are shown in Figure 2 as a function of normalised baryon density for $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV. The solid line represents the neutrino free case, whereas the dotted line denotes the neutrino trapped situation. It is found that the effective mass in the neutrino free matter is smaller than that of the neutrino trapped matter at higher densities. This may be attributed to the larger scalar potential at higher densities in the former case.

Figure 3 shows the s-wave antikaon condensation energies for the neutrino free and neutrino trapped nuclear matter as a function of baryon density. The calculation is done with the antikaon potential depth of $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV. The solid lines correspond to the energy of $`K^{}`$ meson, $`\omega _K^{}`$, whereas the dashed lines indicate that of $`\overline{K}^0`$ meson, $`\omega _{\overline{K}^0}`$. Also, the electron chemical potential ($`\mu _e`$) for the neutrino free case and the difference between electron and neutrino chemical potentials, $`\mu _e\mu _{\nu _e}`$, for the neutrino trapped case in the absence of $`\overline{K}`$ condensate are depicted in the figure. In the neutrino trapped matter, the in-medium energy of $`K^{}`$ meson is lower compared with that of the neutrino free matter. This difference in the energies of $`K^{}`$ meson stems from different behaviours of the meson fields in two cases as is evident from Fig. 1. The threshold densities of $`K^{}`$ condensation in the neutrino free and neutrino trapped matter are 2.43$`n_0`$ and 3.07$`n_0`$, respectively. In the presence of trapped neutrinos, the onset of $`K^{}`$ condensation is shifted to higher density because the difference of electron and neutrino chemical potentials ($`\mu _e\mu _{\nu _e}`$) intersects the $`\omega _K^{}`$ curve at higher density. On the other hand, the threshold condition for $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation is always $`\omega _{\overline{K}}=0`$. Unlike the situation with $`K^{}`$ meson, we find that the in-medium energy of $`\overline{K}^0`$ meson in the neutrino trapped matter is higher than that of the neutrino free case. The threshold densities for $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation are 3.59$`n_0`$ and 3.81$`n_0`$ for the neutrino free and neutrino trapped matter, respectively. The early appearance of $`K^{}`$ condensate delays the formation of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate in the neutrino free(trapped) matter to a higher density. Due to the presence of neutrinos, the shift in the threshold density of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation is smaller with respect to the neutrino free case than the corresponding situation with $`K^{}`$ condensation. We note that the difference between the energies of $`\overline{K}^0`$ and $`K^{}`$ in the neutrino trapped case is smaller than that of the neutrino free case because the isovector potential is smaller in the former case. Threshold densities of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation for the GM1 set and other values of $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)`$ are given in Table III. The values given in the parentheses correspond to the neutrino free matter.

The populations of various particles in proto(neutron) star matter with $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation for $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV are shown in Figure 4. In the top panel we exhibit the particle abundances of the neutrino free star matter. In the neutrino free matter, once $`K^{}`$ condensate sets in at $`2.43n_0`$, it rapidly increases with density replacing the leptons in maintaining the charge neutrality. The proton density becomes equal to $`K^{}`$ condensate density because of the charge neutrality. With the onset of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate at 3.59$`n_0`$, the neutron and proton abundances become identical resulting in a symmetric matter of nucleons and antikaons . In the previous calculation of $`K^{}`$ condensation in neutron star matter , it was found that protons were more abundant than neutrons at higher densities. In the bottom panel of Fig. 4, we show the particle fractions with both $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensates for the neutrino trapped matter. We have a somewhat different picture here. With the formation of $`K^{}`$ condensate at 3.07$`n_0`$, it can not replace electrons totally like the neutrino free case because of the constraint $`Y_{L_e}=0.4`$ in the system. At higher baryon densities, the electron density slowly falls and the density of $`K^{}`$ condensate becomes higher than the electron density. As soon as $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate is formed at 3.81$`n_0`$, the neutron density becomes equal to the proton density and it continues in the high density regime. Like the neutrino free case (top panel), the neutrino trapped matter becomes symmetric nuclear matter just with the formation of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate. On the other hand, the density of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate increases with baryon density uninterruptedly and even becomes larger than the density of $`K^{}`$ condensate beyond $`4n_0`$. As a result, the $`\rho `$ meson field becomes zero at the onset of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation and then bounces back (see Fig. 1) unlike the situation in the neutrino free matter where the isovector field is zero at and beyond the onset of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation. It is interesting to note that the beta equilibrated and charge neutral neutrino trapped matter is mainly dominated by $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate than $`K^{}`$ condensate after the formation of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate.

The equation of state (EOS) or the pressure ($`P`$) versus energy density ($`ϵ`$) for the neutrino free and neutrino trapped matter is displayed in Figure 5. The top panel represents the nucleon-only matter. Here, the dashed line stands for the neutrino trapped case and the solid line implies the neutrino free case. The overall EOS of the neutrino trapped matter is softer compared with that of the neutrino free matter. It is the delicate interplay of the contributions of the symmetry and lepton terms to the energy density (pressure) in both cases. As trapped neutrinos leave the system, the conversion of protons to neutrons increases the energy density (pressure) more than it is decreased by the loss of neutrinos. This scenario is changed in the presence of antikaon condensation. This is demonstrated in the bottom panel of Fig. 5 with $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV. We find that the overall EOS of the neutrino trapped matter is now stiffer than that of the neutrino free matter. During deleptonization, the contribution of the nuclear symmetry term to the energy density (pressure) does not change at all in this case with $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate at higher densities. This happens because both the neutrino free and neutrino trapped matter become isospin saturated nuclear matter at the onset of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation. Such a situation does not arise for (proto)neutron star matter with $`K^{}`$ condensate because more protons than neutrons are favoured by $`K^{}`$ condensate due to the charge neutrality. Therefore, it is the lepton contribution which makes the difference between the EOS of the neutrino free and neutrino trapped matter including both $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate. It is important to note here that the incompressibility of matter ($`K=9dP/dn_B`$) becomes negative with the formation of $`\overline{K}`$ condensates in the neutrino free matter as is evident from Fig. 5. To get rid of those unphysical regions from the energy density versus pressure curve and maintain a positive incompressibility, the Maxwell construction is done here. This implies a first order phase transition. We note that the phase transition is second order for lower values of the antikaon potential. It is worth mentioning here that the condensation of $`K^{}`$ meson was treated as first order phase transition using Gibbs criteria . In this case, the matter would have a normal phase of baryons and leptons at low density followed by a mixed phase of $`K^{}`$ condensate and baryons and a pure phase of $`K^{}`$ condensate at higher densities. This scenario would be more complicated with further appearance of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate because $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation have to be treated as two separate first order phase transitions. Therefore, the treatment of such a problem is beyond the scope of this work.

Now we present the results of static structures of (proto)neutron stars calculated using Tolmann-Oppenheimer-Volkov (TOV) equations. The static (proto)neutron star sequences representing the stellar masses $`M/M_{}`$ and the corresponding central energy density $`\epsilon _c`$ are shown in Figure 6 for the GM1 set. The neutrino free stars are denoted by the solid lines and the neutrino trapped stars are represented by the dashed lines in Fig. 6. The ”conventional” scenario i.e. stars made of nucleons, leptons and no $`\overline{K}`$ condensation is shown in the top panel. The maximum masses ($`M_{max}`$) and central densities ($`n_c`$) of the neutrino trapped and neutrino free stars are respectively given by 2.283(2.364)$`M_{}`$ and 5.84(5.63)$`n_0`$. The protoneutron star has a smaller mass compared with that of the neutron star because the EOS is softer in the former case. In the bottom panel, the masses of (proto)neutron stars with both $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation and $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)=160`$ MeV are plotted with central energy density. In this case, the maximum masses of the (proto)neutron stars are 1.97(1.55)$`M_{}`$ corresponding to the central densities 4.89(3.59)$`n_0`$, respectively. In this case, the maximum masses of the (proto)neutron stars are smaller than those of the ”conventional” scenario. This can be attributed to the softening of the EOS due to the presence of $`\overline{K}`$ condensates. In the previous calculations including $`K^{}`$ condensate  this kind of softening in the EOS and reduction in the maximum mass of the star was observed. The net result of $`K^{}`$ condensation is that the maximum mass stars contain more protons than neutrons at higher densities. Brown and collaborators  called those stars as ”nuclear matter” stars rather than neutron stars. In the neutrino trapped case, the additional softening in the EOS due to $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate results in a smaller maximum mass for the star compared with the corresponding situation with only $`K^{}`$ condensate. In the bottom panel and Table III, we find that the threshold density of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation for the neutrino trapped case lies well inside the central density of the maximum mass star. This implies that a significant region of the protoneutron star may contain $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate along with $`K^{}`$ condensate. In the neutrino free case, the threshold density of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation coincides with the central density of the maximum mass star. It is interesting to note that the maximum mass stars in the presence of $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate contain exactly equal number of protons and neutrons at higher densities. Therefore, those stars may be called as ”symmetric nuclear matter” stars. We have also calculated maximum masses and central densities of the (proto)neutron stars for the GM1 set and other values of $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)`$ and those are tabulated in Table III. The values given in the parentheses correspond to the neutrino free matter.

In a recent calculation for the neutrino free matter including $`\overline{K}`$ condensates, it has been noted that the critical densities of antikaon condensation are sensitive to the nuclear equation of state apart from its dependence on the antikaon potential depth . Therefore, we also study the formation of $`\overline{K}`$ condensates in the neutrino trapped matter using a softer EOS. In this calculation, the model Lagrangian density contains a nonlinear $`\omega `$ meson term  besides the self interaction term for the scalar meson. The form of the nonlinear $`\omega `$ meson term is,

$$_{\omega ^4}=\frac{1}{4}g_4\left(\omega _\mu \omega ^\mu \right)^2.$$
(30)
Sugahara and Toki  showed that such a model agreed with the relativistic Brueckner Hartree Fock results reasonably well. The parameters of the model were obtained by fitting the experimental data for binding energies and charge radii of heavy nuclei. This set of parameters is known as the TM1 set . The nucleon-meson couplings of the TM1 set are shown in Table I and $`g_{\sigma K}`$ couplings for various $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)`$ are given in Table II. Now we present the results for the calculation of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation in the neutrino trapped nucleon-only matter using the TM1 set. The critical densities of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation, maximum masses of (proto)neutron stars with their corresponding central densities for the TM1 set are shown in Table IV. The values in the parentheses correspond to the neutrino free cases. Because of the presence of the nonlinear $`\omega `$ meson term, the TM1 set results in a softer EOS than that with the GM1 set. As a result, the critical densities of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation for the TM1 set are shifted to higher densities compared with those of the GM1 set. It is found that $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation is formed inside the maximum mass neutron stars for $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)160`$ MeV and inside the maximum mass protoneutron star only for $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)=180`$ MeV in the TM1 set. It is important to note that the phase transition is of second order for all values of the antikaon potential depth in the TM1 set .

Now we discuss the situations when hyperons are included in the calculation in addition to nucleons. It was noted earlier that the presence of hyperons delayed the onsets of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation to much higher density . Since the core of a (proto)neutron star may be hyperon rich, we include hyperon-hyperon interaction besides hyperon-nucleon interaction in our calculation. This is accounted by considering two additional hidden-strangeness mesons - the scalar meson $`f_0`$(975) (denoted by $`\sigma ^{}`$) and the vector meson $`\varphi `$(1020). The vector coupling constants for hyperons are determined from the SU(6) symmetry as,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{\omega \mathrm{\Lambda }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{\omega \mathrm{\Sigma }}=g_{\omega \mathrm{\Xi }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}g_{\omega N},`$ (31)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{\rho \mathrm{\Sigma }}=g_{\rho \mathrm{\Xi }}=g_{\rho N};g_{\rho \mathrm{\Lambda }}=0,`$ (32)
$`2g_{\varphi \mathrm{\Lambda }}=2g_{\varphi \mathrm{\Sigma }}=g_{\varphi \mathrm{\Xi }}={\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3}}g_{\omega N}.`$ (33)
The scalar meson ($`\sigma `$) coupling to hyperons is obtained from the potential depth of a hyperon (Y) in the saturated nuclear matter

$$U_Y^N(n_0)=g_{\sigma Y}\sigma +g_{\omega Y}\omega _0.$$
(34)
The analysis of energy levels in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei suggests a well depth of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in symmetric matter $`U_\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(n_0)=30`$ MeV . On the other hand, recent analysis of a few $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$-hypernuclei events predicts a $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ well depth of $`U_\mathrm{\Xi }^N(n_0)=18`$ MeV . However, the situation for the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ potential in normal matter is very unclear. The only known bound $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$-hypernuclei is the light system $`{}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{}^{4}He`$ . The most updated analysis of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ atomic data indicates a strong isoscalar repulsion in the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$-nuclear matter interaction . Therefore, we use a repulsive $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ well depth of $`U_\mathrm{\Sigma }^N(n_0)=30`$ MeV  in our calculation.

The $`\sigma ^{}`$-Y coupling constants are obtained by fitting them to a well depth , $`U_Y^{(Y^{^{}})}(n_0)`$, for a hyperon (Y) in a hyperon ($`Y^{^{}}`$) matter at nuclear saturation density . It is given as

$$U_\mathrm{\Xi }^{(\mathrm{\Xi })}(n_0)=U_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(\mathrm{\Xi })}(n_0)=2U_\mathrm{\Xi }^{(\mathrm{\Lambda })}(n_0)=2U_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(\mathrm{\Lambda })}(n_0)=40MeV.$$
(35)
It is to be noted that nucleons do not couple to the strange mesons i.e. $`g_{\sigma ^{}N}=g_{\varphi N}=0`$.

The strange meson fields also couple with (anti)kaons. Following Ref., the $`\sigma ^{}`$-K coupling constant is determined from the decay of $`f_0`$(925) as $`g_{\sigma ^{}K}=2.65`$, whereas the vector $`\varphi `$ meson coupling with (anti)kaons is obtained from the SU(3) relation as $`\sqrt{2}g_{\varphi K}=6.04`$.

Switching off Y-Y interactions and antikaon condensation, we study the neutrino free(trapped) hyperon matter for the GM1 and TM1 set and for the above choices of hyperon-nucleon coupling constants. Here, we find that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hyperon is the first strange baryon to appear in the neutrino free(trapped) matter. It is closely followed by $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ hyperons. Because of the repulsive $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$-nucleon interaction, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ hyperons do not appear in the systems. With the appearance of hyperons , equations of state in the neutrino free(trapped) matter are softer compared with those of the nucleon-only matter excluding $`\overline{K}`$ condensation. The maximum masses and their corresponding central densities are given in the last rows of Table III and IV. The values in the parentheses correspond to the neutrino free cases. Like the situations with antikaon condensates in the neutrino free(trapped) nucleon-only matter, the maximum mass in the neutrino trapped hyperon matter is larger than that of the corresponding neutrino free case as found in the previous calculations .

Now we study the formation of antikaon condensation in neutrino free(trapped) matter including hyperon-hyperon interaction for the GM1 set. Earlier we have found that a softer EOS shifts the threshold densities of antikaon condensations to higher densities. Also, the presence of hyperons which make the EOS softer, delays the onsets of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation to higher densities . In this case, we find that antikaon condensations do not occur even at densities as large as 7.5$`n_0`$ in the neutrino free(trapped) hyperon matter for $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)<160`$ MeV. Antikaon condensations appear in hyperon rich matter with and without neutrinos for $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)160`$ MeV. The particle abundances in the presence of hyperons and antikaon condensations are shown in Figure 7 for $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV. The top panel depicts the neutrino free case whereas the neutrino trapped case is shown in the bottom panel. Here, we note that $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation set in at 2.48(3.34)$`n_0`$ and 4.06(4.18)$`n_0`$ for the neutrino free(trapped) matter, respectively. Also, we find that only $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hyperons appear both in the neutrino free and trapped matter. The $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$s are excluded from the systems because of the repulsive $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$-nucleon interaction. On the other hand, the early appearance of $`K^{}`$ condensation in the neutrino free(trapped) matter suppresses the appearance of $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ hyperons because it is energetically favourable for $`K^{}`$ condensate to maintain charge neutrality in the systems. It is worth mentioning here that $`\overline{K}`$ condensates play more dominant role than hyperons in determining various properties of the (proto)neutron stars in this case.

In Figure 8, we display the EOS (P vs. $`ϵ`$) in the top panel and the mass sequence of the (proto)neutron stars in the bottom panel for the GM1 set and $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)=160`$ MeV. The neutrino trapped matter has a stiffer EOS than that of the corresponding neutrino free matter. The maximum masses and their central densities for the neutrino free(trapped) cases are 1.57(1.98)$`M_{}`$ and 4.48(5.24)$`n_0`$ respectively.

The delayed neutrino emission and the possible black hole formation in the context of SN 1987A had been extensively discussed by Bethe and Brown . Assuming SN 1987A has collapsed into a black hole, Bethe and Brown estimated the gravitational mass for the compact remnant in it to be 1.56$`M_{}`$ from the Ni production. This maximum mass of the cold compact object is known as the Bethe-Brown limit . They argued that progenitor stars having masses in the range 18-30 $`M_{}`$ would first explode as supernovae and later the compact objects go into low mass black holes returning matter to the galaxy .

In the previous studies , it was shown that the protoneutron stars become unstable after deleptonization and cooling. The metastability occurs when exotic matter such as hyperons or antikaon condensates appears during the evolution of the protoneutron stars. Bethe-Brown exploited the idea of the formation of $`K^{}`$ condensation in dense nuclear matter  to understand the metastability of the compact object during the evolution of the protoneutron stars to low mass black holes. In the ”conventional” scenario without antikaon condensation or hyperons, the ”window” i.e. the difference of the maximum masses in the neutrino free and neutrino trapped matter consisting of nucleons is small. Later it was shown that the inclusion of thermal pressure could raise the maximum mass of the protoneutron star slightly above that of the neutron star . However, there is a different scenario with $`K^{}`$ condensation as noted by various authors . They found that mostly the lepton pressure could stabilize larger mass in the neutrino trapped case during the evolution. In our calculation with nucleons, leptons and $`K^{}`$ condensation, the ”window” is $`0.5M_{}`$ for the GM1 set and the antikaon potential depth of -160 MeV. With further inclusion of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate, the high density matter contains exactly as many protons as neutrons. As a result, the high density matter remains the symmetric nuclear matter even after the deleptonization and cooling. In the presence of both the condensates, it is exactly the lepton pressure which stabilizes larger maximum mass of the protoneutron star for short times. In this case, we obtain the maximum mass window of $`0.4M_{}`$. In our model calculation with the GM1 set and the antikaon potential of $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)=160`$ MeV, the protoneutron stars consisting of nucleons, leptons and $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate have a maximum mass $`2M_{}`$ which could be stable during the deleptonization and cooling. As the trapped neutrinos leave the system, the lepton pressure in the core decreases. At the same time, the core of the nascent star is heated up and attains a higher value of entropy . Recently, it has been shown by Pons et al.  that this thermal effect on the maximum mass is comparable to that of the trapped neutrinos. As a consequence, the compact object would be stable for much longer duration. The inclusion of the thermal pressure in the calculation would again stabilize an additional mass of $`0.1M_{}`$. As the system cools down, the compact object with a maximum mass $`2M_{}`$ which would be stable for short times in our calculation, is larger than that of the stable cold mass and the Bethe-Brown limit (1.56 $`M_{}`$). Consequently, it would collapse into a low mass black hole. We retain the same qualitative feature of the metastability of the protoneutron stars including hyperons along with antikaon condensation.

## IV Summary and Conclusions

We have studied antikaon condensation putting emphasis on the formation of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation in the neutrino trapped nuclear and hyperon matter within the relativistic mean field models. The baryon-baryon and (anti)kaon-baryon interactions are treated on the same footing in this work. Those interactions are mediated by the exchange of mesons. Two different model Lagrangians are adopted in this calculation. The model Lagrangian which contains the scalar self-interaction term, is characterised by the GM1 parameter set. Besides the scalar self-interaction term, the other model Lagrangian includes the non-linear $`\omega `$ meson term and the corresponding parameter set is denoted by the TM1 set. It is found that the threshold densities of antikaon condensations are sensitive to the equation of state and the antikaon potential in normal nuclear matter. The calculations performed with the GM1 and TM1 set show that $`K^{}`$ condensation always happens earlier than $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation. The threshold densities of $`\overline{K}`$ condensation in the TM1 set are higher than those of the GM1 set because the equation of state is softer in the former case. It is found that the threshold densities of antikaon condensation in the neutrino trapped nucleon-only matter are higher than those of the corresponding neutrino free case. In the presence of neutrinos, the shift in the threshold density of $`K^{}`$ condensation with respect to the neutrino free case is higher than that of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation.

With the onset of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation, abundances of neutrons and protons become equal and the density of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate increases rapidly and becomes larger than that of $`K^{}`$ condensate in the neutrino trapped nuclear matter. On the contrary, the neutrino free nuclear matter is not only symmetric in neutrons and protons but also in $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ mesons at high density. Therefore, it is possible that $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate in the neutrino trapped matter would play a dominant role over $`K^{}`$ condensate at higher densities. Unlike the situation in the neutrino free nuclear matter, $`K^{}`$ mesons in the condensate replace electrons partially in the neutrino trapped matter because of the lepton number constraint in the system. The presence of $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate in the neutrino trapped nuclear matter makes the overall equation of state softer compared with the situation without antikaon condensate. We find that $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate is formed well inside the maximum mass protoneutron stars for higher values of the antikaon potential in the calculation using the TM1 set. On the other hand, the calculation with the GM1 set implies that $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate occupies a significant region of the maximum mass stars for rather smaller values of the antikaon potential. In the presence of hyperons, antikaon condensate is formed for large values of $`U_{\overline{K}}160`$ MeV in the GM1 set. In this case, it is found that only $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hyperons appear in the neutrino free(trapped) hyperon matter. Therefore $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensate may play the most dominant role in determining various gross properties of (proto)neutron stars than hyperons.

We have revisited the scenario of the metastability of protoneutron stars and their evolution to low mass black holes in the context of the calculation of $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation along with $`K^{}`$ condensation in the neutrino free(trapped) nuclear and hyperon matter. It is found that the maximum mass of a protoneutron star is larger than that of the corresponding neutron star and also the Bethe-Brown limit of $`1.56M_{}`$ for a neutron star. Therefore, the protoneutron star would be stable during the deleptonization and cooling and later it may collapse into a low mass black hole.

Acknowledgment

We acknowledge many fruitful discussions with Subrata Pal.

FIG. 1. The mean meson potentials versus the baryon density $`n_B/n_0`$ in the GM1 set for the neutrino free (top panel) and neutrino trapped (bottom panel) nucleon-only star matter with the inclusion of antikaon, $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$, condensation. The $`\overline{K}`$ optical potential depth is $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV at the normal nuclear matter density of $`n_0=0.153`$ fm<sup>-3</sup>.

FIG. 2. The variation of the effective mass of (anti)kaons $`m_K^{}/m_K`$ as a function of baryon density $`n_B/n_0`$ for the neutron star matter (solid line) and protoneutron star matter (dashed line) consisting of nucleons and antikaon condensates in the GM1 set. The $`\overline{K}`$ optical potential depth at normal nuclear matter density is $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV for this calculation.

FIG. 3. The in-medium energy of $`K^{}`$ (solid lines) and $`\overline{K}^0`$ (dashed lines) versus baryon density for the neutrino free(trapped) nucleon-only matter in the GM1 set. The electro chemical potential ($`\mu _e`$) and the difference of the electro chemical potential and the neutrino chemical potential i.e. $`\mu _e\mu _{\nu _e}`$ are also shown in the figure. The $`\overline{K}`$ optical potential at normal nuclear matter density is $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV.

FIG. 4. The proper number densities $`n_i`$ of various compositions in the (proto)neutron star matter including antikaon condensates in the GM1 model. The results are for the neutrino free matter (top panel) and neutrino trapped matter (bottom panel). The $`\overline{K}`$ optical potential at normal nuclear matter density is $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV.

FIG. 5. The equation of state, pressure $`P`$ vs. energy density $`\epsilon `$ in the GM1 set. The results are for the nucleon-only ($`np`$) (proto)neutron star matter (top panel) and with further inclusion of $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation (bottom panel) calculated with the antikaon optical potential depth at normal nuclear matter density of $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV. The equation of state for the neutrino free matter is denoted by the solid line and that of the neutrino trapped matter by the dashed line.

FIG. 6. The (proto)neutron star mass sequences are plotted with central energy density in the GM1 set for the antikaon optical potential depth of $`U_{\overline{K}}=160`$ MeV. The star masses of the nucleon-only matter and with further inclusion of $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation are shown in the top and bottom panel, respectively. The solid curve corresponds to the neutrino free case whereas the dashed curve represents the neutrino trapped case. The filled circles correspond to the maximum masses.

FIG. 7. Same as FIG. 4, but for hyperon matter including $`K^{}`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ condensation in the GM1 set. The results are for the neutrino free case (top panel) and the neutrino trapped case (bottom panel).

FIG. 8. The equations of state (top panel) for the neutrino free(trapped) hyperon matter including antikaon condensates with energy density in the GM1 set. The mass sequences (bottom panel) of the (proto)neutrino stars including antikaon condensates are shown with central energy density in the GM1 set. The calculations are performed for $`U_{\overline{K}}(n_0)=160`$ MeV. The solid and dashed lines correspond to the neutrino free and trapped case, respectively. The filled circles correspond to the maximum masses.