text:
# Physical Conditions in Circumstellar Gas surrounding SN 1987A 12 Years After OutburstBased on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy Inc., under NASA Contract NAS5-26555.

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Narrow emission lines (FWHM $`<15\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) from nitrogen-enriched circumstellar gas around SN 1987A were first seen in the UV with the *International Ultraviolet Explorer (IUE)* satellite in 1987 May (Fransson et al. 1989), about 70 days after outburst. The circumstellar gas was ionized by the strong burst of extreme UV and soft X-ray radiation ($`T_{\mathrm{color}}1\times 10^6`$ K, Blinnikov et al. (2000)) produced when the shock front of the stellar explosion first broke through the surface of the star. The circumstellar gas was highly photoionized by the UV flash, reaching ioniziation level of at least N VI and O VII (Lundqvist & Fransson (1996)). The subsequent cooling of the gas has produced the ring emission observed over the last thirteen years (except for the shock interaction emission, cf. §4.3). The UV emission lines peaked in brightness at $``$ day 400 when the light paraboloid swept through the whole inner ring region and these lines have been decaying since then (Sonneborn et al. (1997)). As the emission is dominated by progressively lower density gas, the flux decay rate decreases with time. Optical emission lines (mainly \[O III\]) were first detected on about day 310 by Wampler & Richichi (1989). Subsequent ground-based imaging by Crotts, Kunkel, & McCarthy (1989) and Wampler et al. (1990) together with *Hubble Space Telescope* (HST) observations with the Faint Object Camera (Jakobsen et al. (1991)) and Wide-Field/Planetary Camera 1 (Plait et al. (1995)) showed that the brightest circumstellar material was distributed in a ring-like structure. Following the first HST Servicing Mission, the newly stigmatic HST revealed the fainter, more complex structure of the circumstellar material surrounding SN 1987A: an equatorial inner ring and two outer thin loops were clearly seen (Burrows et al. (1995)).

The UV emission lines of the inner ring revealed that the SN 1987A circumstellar material has enhanced CNO abundances (N/C $`29`$ and N/O $`13`$ times solar, Fransson et al. (1989); Lundqvist & Fransson (1996); Sonneborn et al. (1997)). This has proven to be one of the main observational constraints on the evolution of the supernova progenitor, implying that the star was in a post He-core burning phase at the time of the explosion (Podsiadlowski (1992)). Photoionization/recombination modeling of the early UV line emission showed that the peak radiation temperature at the time of shock breakout was $`1\times 10^6`$ K (Lundqvist & Fransson (1996)). This temperature is consistent with that predicted by the radiation-hydrodynamic modeling of the breakout (Ensman & Burrows (1992); Blinnikov et al. (2000)). The similar decay times derived for the different ionized states of the same element, such as N V and N III (Sonneborn et al. (1997)), cannot be fitted with a single density model (Lundqvist & Fransson (1996)). Instead, this result suggests that the inner ring consists of gas with a wide range of density $`n_\mathrm{e}7\times 10^34\times 10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$. In this non-equilibrium situation, gas of different density dominates the line emission at different times for a particular region in the ring because of the shorter recombination timescale for higher density gas (see Lundqvist & Fransson (1996) for a thorough discussion). In general, the line emission was first dominated by emission from the highest density gas, and later by successively lower density gas within the circumstellar ring.

The physical conditions of the inner ring have also been studied in optical wavelengths both from the ground and with HST. At the time of the earliest optical emission line observations, Wampler & Richichi (1989) derived a mean temperature of 45,000 – 75,000 K for electron densities below $`10^5\mathrm{cm}^3`$ from the \[O III\] $`\lambda \lambda `$4959, 5007/$`\lambda `$4363 line ratio. Subsequent analyses (Khan & Duerbeck (1991); Menzies (1991); Wang (1991)) of the \[O III\] line ratio up to $``$ day 1300 showed that the temperatures of the emitting O2+ ions remained at $``$ 30,000 K, while the \[N II\] $`\lambda \lambda `$6548, 6583/$`\lambda `$5755 line ratio indicated a temperature of $``$ 15,000 K. The electron density derived from the \[S II\] doublets $`\lambda `$6716/$`\lambda `$6731 was $`10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$. From HST/Faint Object Spectrograph observations of the brightest location in the inner ring (p.a. = 300°) taken at day 2876, Lundqvist & Sonneborn (2000, henceforth LS00) derived the \[N II\] and \[O III\] temperatures to be $`10,000`$ K, and $`27,000`$ K, respectively, and a \[S II\] density of $`9000\mathrm{cm}^3`$. Combining with the HST/WFPC2 narrow band F648N (\[N II\]$`\lambda `$6583) and F502N (\[O III\]$`\lambda `$5007) observations, the average densities around the inner ring of the \[N II\]- and \[O III\]-emitting gas were determined to be $`4000\mathrm{cm}^3`$, and $`2300\mathrm{cm}^3`$, respectively.

Compared to the inner ring, the physical conditions of the two thin outer rings have been much less studied because of their faintness (surface brightness of the outer rings are $`515`$% of that of the inner ring). Panagia et al. (1996) studied UV and optical HST/FOS spectra of the position on the northern outer ring that is coincident with the position of the SN 1987A debris. They concluded that while the ioniziation and temperature derived are similar to that of the inner ring, the outer ring gas studied is $`3`$ times less CNO enriched than the inner ring, with a slightly lower electron density $`n_\mathrm{e}800\mathrm{cm}^3`$. The lower CNO abundances lead Panagia et al. to suggest that the outer ring gas materials were ejected by the SN 1987A progenitor $`10^4`$ years before that of inner ring gas. This result contrasts with recent kinematical studies of the three rings which indicate that all three rings are coeval, created $``$ 20,000 yr before the supernova explosion (Crotts & Heathcote (2000)). As shown below in §4.2, the line emissions from the outer rings are highly time-dependent, and this effect may not have been sufficiently taken into account by Panagia et al. (1996).

In this paper we report long slit optical STIS spectroscopy of H I, \[N II\], \[O III\], and \[S II\] emission from the inner and outer circumstellar rings (§2). Multiple positions on the inner ring and the two outer rings have been observed and analyzed (§3). Ratios of these transitions form useful plasma diagnostics, with which we determine $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ of the emitting gas in the inner (§4.1) and outer rings (§4.2). A preliminary version of this analysis was presented by Iping, Sonneborn, & Pun (1999). We constructed time-dependent photoionization/recombination models for both the inner and outer rings to check the consistency of the physical conditions derived from the line ratios. Finally, we report in §4.3 the detection of a Doppler-shifted $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ emission observed in the spectra, which can be attributed to the onset of interaction between the supernova debris and the ring at p.a. = 103°.

## 2 OBSERVATIONS

SN 1987A and its rings were observed with the HST Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) on 1998 Nov 14 and 15 (4282 days after core collapse). Medium resolution optical spectra taken with gratings G430M and G750M were obtained with a long, narrow slit (52″$`\times `$ 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$2). The position of the STIS aperture is shown to scale in Figure 1(a). The center of the slit is close to the center of the debris and its orientation of position angle p.a. = 103° is close the major axis of the inner ring (p.a. $``$ 83°, Oppenheimer 1999). The spatial resolution in these spectral images is $``$ 1.4 – 1.6 pixels, or 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$07 – 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$08 (FWHM).

Crotts & Heathcote (2000; see also Cumming & Lundqvist 1997) have measured the expansion velocities of the inner equatorial ring ($`10.5\pm 0.3\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) and the two outer rings ($`26\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$). The circumstellar rings remain spectrally unresolved in the STIS medium resolution grating modes, where the spectral resolution is $`50\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. Multiple observations ($`n=45`$) centered at dithered positions 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5 apart along the slit were made with each grating setting. Cosmic rays and hot pixels were removed simultaneously when the dithered raw images were combined with the CALSTIS software developed by the STIS Investigation Definition Team at the Goddard Space Flight Center111CALSTIS Reference Guide, http://hires.gsfc.nasa.gov/stis/software/doc\_manuals.html. The grating settings used and the emission lines observed in each setting are listed in Table 1.

The long slit crossed portions of the inner ring near the east and west ansae. We refer to these positions in this paper as the “west” and “east” inner ring (WIR and EIR), as labelled in Figure 1. Assuming the ring is expanding instead of contracting, Crotts & Heathcote (1991) have shown that the northern side of the inner ring is inclined closer towards the observer. In that scenario, the WIR region is located closer towards the observer than the EIR region and emissions measured from the EIR originate from the inner ring $``$ 100 days before those received simultaneously from the WIR .

The slit also crosses the northern and southern outer rings each at two locations. However, only the emitting gas at the two intersection points farther from the supernova has sufficient brightness for our analysis. We refer to the sections of the outer rings studied in this paper as “north outer ring” (NOR) and “south outer ring” (SOR). Assuming the same geometry as the inner ring (see Figure 3 of Burrows et al. (1995) for an illustration), then the northern outer ring lies farther from the observer than the southern outer ring. And emissions from the NOR region originated $``$ 900 days before those received simultaneously from the SOR region.

## 3 EMISSION LINE ANALYSIS

The inner and outer ring spectra were extracted from the STIS spectral images. A portion of the G750M spectral image is shown in Figure 1(b). The broad horizontal streak near the center is $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ emission from the supernova debris ($`v_{\mathrm{FWHM}}2800\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, Wang et al. (1996); Chugai et al. (1997)). The spectra of the WIR and EIR were obtained by intergrating $`812`$ rows of the image where the ring flux is recorded. The extraction height varied slightly with the emission line species because of the different size and width of the circumstellar ring at each emission line (Sonneborn et al. 1997; Oppenheimer 1999). The $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ emission filling the length of the aperture in Figure 1(b) is from the diffuse LMC background and was removed by linear interpolation above and below the extracted rows. Diffuse LMC background emission is present in the Balmer lines and the \[O III\]$`\lambda \lambda `$4959, 5007 transitions. It is a source of systematic error for the ring flux measurements, especially for the outer rings, as described below. The integrated spectra were normalized to correct for the height of the extraction slit, that is, the number of rows integrated.

The flux of each spectral feature was measured by fitting a Gaussian to the line profile. The background level for each line was fit by a quadratic over a 12 to 25 Å ($`4050`$ pixels) region of the spectrum centered on the feature being measured. The best fit was determined by minimizing the total $`\chi ^2`$ in which the Gaussian and background coefficients were free parameters. All the emission lines were fitted well by Gaussian profiles. We present the \[O III\]$`\lambda `$5007 emission profile fitting as an example in Figure 2. The reduced $`\chi ^2`$, or the total $`\chi ^2`$ divided by the number of degrees of freedom, should be 1.0 for a perfect fit. The reduced $`\chi ^2`$ of our line fits were all within the range $`0.72.0`$. For each feature, the line flux and its error were computed from the best fit parameters and their associated uncertainties. The statistical errors of all the line fluxes were adjusted so that the reduced $`\chi ^2`$ for all fits is 1.0.

As mentioned above, diffuse emission from the 30 Doradus region of the LMC filled the slit and contributed to the error of flux measurements of the rings. The diffuse background flux varied by a factor of $`2`$ along the slit in the immediate vicinity ($`\pm `$2$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5) of the supernova. The diffuse background level at a given position along the slit, determined by linear interpolation, could be measured only to an accuracy of $``$ 15%. For the inner ring, the subtracted background was only a small fraction of the line emission ($`<`$5% for $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ and $`<`$10% for \[O III\]$`\lambda `$5007) and therefore the additional errors caused by background subtraction were negligible. On the other hand, the diffuse background levels were comparable to those of the measured outer ring fluxes for $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ and \[O III\]$`\lambda \lambda `$4959, 5007. The additional uncertainties due to the background subtraction were larger for the SOR than the NOR because the lower fluxes of the SOR. We included the extra uncertainty due to this background in the calculations of the total error in the outer ring flux measurements.

Results of the emission line flux measurements, normalized to $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$, are tabulated in Table 2. For the outer rings, the tabulated errors were determined by adding the uncertainties in the background flux and the statistical uncertainties in quadrature. As discussed in §4.3, the EIR $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ emission overlaps with a weak redshifted high velocity emission originating from the interaction between the supernova debris and inner ring. The EIR $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ flux listed in Table 2 has been corrected for the small contribution from this “hotspot.” The tabulated fluxes are dereddened with E($`BV`$) of 0.16 (Fitzpatrick & Walborn (1990)) and the extinction law of Cardelli, Clayton, & Mathis (1989) with an assumed RV of 3.1. The differences between the LMC extinction law and the Galactic law are negligible in the optical at low color excess and have been ignored in our analysis (Fitzpatrick (1999)).

## 4 RESULTS

### 4.1 Inner Ring

Forbidden line ratios were used to estimate the physical conditions in the circumstellar rings. We updated the methodology described by Osterbrock (1989) with multilevel model atoms and with more recent atomic data. We included five levels for S II, whereas for N II and O III we used six-level atoms. We included O III atomic data from Aggarwal (1993) and Galavis, Mendoza, & Zeippen (1997), the results of Stafford et al. (1994) and Galavis et al. (1997) for N II, and results from Keenan et al. (1993) and Ramsbottom, Bell, & Stafford (1996) for S II. Previous studies established that gas with the range $`n_\mathrm{e}10^310^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$ are present in the inner ring (Fransson et al. (1989); Lundqvist & Fransson (1996); Sonneborn et al. (1997)). Within this density range, the \[N II\] and \[O III\] line ratios,

$$R(\mathrm{N}\mathrm{II})=\frac{(I(\lambda 6548)+I(\lambda 6583))}{I(\lambda 5755)}\mathrm{and}$$

$$R(\mathrm{O}\mathrm{III})=\frac{(I(\lambda 4959)+I(\lambda 5007))}{I(\lambda 4363)},$$

are not very sensitive to electron densities $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ and provide a good measure of the electron temperature $`T_\mathrm{e}`$. Similarly, the ratio

$$R(\mathrm{S}\mathrm{II})=\frac{I(\lambda 6716)}{I(\lambda 6731)}$$

is a good diagnostic of $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ with a weak dependence on $`T_\mathrm{e}`$.

The assumption inherent in the nebular analysis technique is that the gas considered has a constant $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ within the volume. This condition is not met in the SN 1987A circumstellar gas and therefore the physical conditions derived below in §4.1.1 with the line ratios represent only an average range of $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ that can be present in the gas. The situation is further complicated by the uncertainty in the geometry of the circumstellar gas. LS00 showed that the same \[N II\] and \[O III\] line fluxes observed would imply a higher \[N II\]- and \[O III\]-emitting gas density for the case of a ionization-bounded ring than for the density-bounded, or, “truncated,” case. As a consistency check of the results obtained from the nebular analyses, we therefore constructed time-dependent photoionization/recombination models below in §4.1.2 which incorporated the geometry effect and calculated $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ self-consistently.

#### 4.1.1 Temperature and Density from plasma diagnostics

In Figure 3, we plotted the relationship between the line ratio $`R`$(N II) and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ in our atomic model. Our calculated $`R`$(N II) values were very similar to those computed by McKenna et al. (1996), as the only difference is that we used newer transition probabilities (Galavis et al. (1997)). The electron densities considered in Figure 3, $`n_\mathrm{e}=1000`$ and $`4000\mathrm{cm}^3`$, were the lower and upper density limits respectively, of the \[N II\] emitting gas based on the modeling results of \[N II\]$`\lambda `$6583 HST/WFPC2 inner ring images up to day 3478 at the EIR and WIR positions (LS00). The observed values of $`R`$(N II) for the WIR and EIR regions, as well as the derived range on $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ as constrained by the density range under consideration, are also shown in Figure 3 and listed in Table 3.

For the \[O III\] temperature, we calculated the relationship between the line ratio $`R`$(O III) and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ for electron densities of 800 and $`2400\mathrm{cm}^3`$. The range of $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ considered for \[O III\] was slightly lower than that for \[N II\], as suggested by an analysis of \[O III\]$`\lambda `$5007 HST/WFPC2 images (LS00). $`R`$(O III) and $`T_\mathrm{e}`$(O III) are also listed in Table 3. The uncertainty in the derived \[O III\] temperature was larger than that for \[N II\] because the \[O III\]$`\lambda `$4363 emission was very weak. We were only able to derive a lower limit of the temperature for the EIR region and we listed the 1-$`\sigma `$ lower limit in Table 3.

We calculated the relationship between the line ratio $`R`$(S II) and $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ for electron temperatures 5000 and 10,000 K. The temperature limits chosen were based on the results from an analysis of the day 2876 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$45 diameter aperture HST/FOS spectrum centered at p.a.=300° of the inner ring (LS00). The ring subsection sampled in the FOS spectrum lies close to the WIR region that is studied in this work. The derived range of the \[S II\] density from $`R`$(S II) is also listed in Table 3.

The temperatures measured here for the WIR and EIR are close to those reported by LS00 for the inner ring at p.a. $`=300\mathrm{°}`$, which were $`10,000`$ K for \[N II\], and $`27,000`$ K for \[O III\]. The slightly higher \[N II\] temperature found at p.a. $`=283\mathrm{°}`$ (EIR) compared with p.a. $`=103\mathrm{°}`$ (WIR) appears to be real. This indicates that the \[N II\]-emitting gas could be slightly denser at p.a. $`=103\mathrm{°}`$, which is consistent with the ongoing trend observed since day 3270 from HST/WFPC2 imaging (LS00). As discussed below, the density difference does not have to be large.

#### 4.1.2 Consistency check from modeling

We constructed photoionization/recombination models for the inner ring to check the results derived from the plasma diagnostic line ratios in the previous section. The code for the model and the input elemental abundances were the same as those used in Lundqvist (1999), except for the Si abundance which was reduced to Si/H$`=1\times 10^5`$ (cf. LS00). Recently, the spectrum from the supernova breakout has been re-calculated with the multienergy group radiation hydrodynamics code STELLA and it is in good agreement with the early (up to $``$ day 150) optical/UV light curves of SN 1987A (Blinnikov et al. (2000)). That result will be used later in a more thorough investigation of the rings (P. Lundqvist, in preparation). Here we used the model “500full1” burst spectrum of Ensman & Burrows (1992), which was accurate enough for our purposes.

Guided by the densities derived from the \[S II\] line ratio, we computed models for atomic densities in the range $`5005000\mathrm{cm}^3`$. The resulting electron density would be $``$ 17% higher if the gas is fully ionized, but is probably the same as the atomic density in the epoch that we are considering. The inner radius of the ring is assumed to be $`6.3\times 10^{17}`$ cm, as in Lundqvist & Fransson (1996). We modeled the temperature sensitive ratios $`R`$(N II) and $`R`$(O III) as a function of atomic density (Figure 4). Although the light travel time differences are not as important across the inner ring as for the outer rings (see below), we included this effect in our models. The line ratios were calculated for two cases: an ionization-bounded model, and a model where we simulated a density-bounded situation by including only the innermost 25% of the ionized gas, which we referred to as “25% truncation”. $`R`$(N II) quickly increases from low values ($`1525`$) to very large values ($`100`$) at a density in the range $`10003000\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the exact value of which depends on the degree of truncation. For example, $`R`$(N II) = 50 is reached at $`1700\mathrm{cm}^3`$ for the $`25\%`$ truncation model, and at $`2700\mathrm{cm}^3`$ for the ionization-bounded case.

In our model, the observed $`R`$(N II) ratios in the inner ring are actually very sensitive to density. This is contrary to what is expected in the standard nebular analysis where $`R`$(N II) is used to determine electron temperature because it is relatively insensitive to variations in electron densities. The reason for this discrepency is that the temperature of the emitting gas at a specific epoch in the SN 1987A inner ring depends on the density of the gas, which drops faster for the higher density component. This translates directly into different line ratios for different density components within the gas. Only models with an average temperature of the line emitting gas similar to the temperature given by the nebular analysis will give the correct line ratio.

On the other hand, the degree of truncation has only minor effects on the dependence of the \[O III\] line ratio with density. Assuming these two cases represent the range of possible models (LS00), we derived the \[N II\] density of the WIR region to be $`24003500\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and the \[O III\] density to be $`14002100\mathrm{cm}^3`$. For the EIR region, the corresponding numbers were $`17003000\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and $`2100\mathrm{cm}^3`$, respectively. This suggests that the \[S II\], \[N II\], and \[O III\] emission come from regions of progressively lower density, consistent with the findings of LS00. Moreover, the densities derived in this paper (day 4282) are somewhat lower than those in LS00 (day 3000). This is consistent with the trend that gas components of progressively lower density dominate the emission for a particular transition at later and later times. The higher the ionization potential of a line, the lower the density of the gas that emits it at a specific epoch. This has the interesting effect that the density components dominating the \[O III\] emission in the epoch studied in LS00 ($``$ day 3000), could be the same as those dominating the \[N II\] emission in this analysis (day 4282).

### 4.2 Outer Rings

With the emission from the outer rings much weaker than that from the inner ring, the uncertainties in the outer ring fluxes are much larger than those for the inner ring (cf. Table 2). Both \[N II\]$`\lambda `$5755 and \[O III\]$`\lambda `$4363 are absent, or very close to the noise limit, in our data for the outer rings. Therefore we cannot obtain a meaningful estimate of the electron temperature directly from the line ratios $`R`$(N II) and $`R`$(O III). The \[S II\]$`\lambda \lambda `$6716, 6731 lines, on the other hand, are both relatively strong and do not suffer from systematic errors in background subtraction (cf. §3). Using the $`R`$(S II) method (§4.1), we arrived at a 1-$`\sigma `$ upper limit on the electron density of the NOR (SOR) of $`n_\mathrm{e}2200(1600)\mathrm{cm}^3`$, allowing for a $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ between 5000 K and 10000 K. The derived outer ring densities are about a factor of two lower than the inner ring. The slightly higher electron density for the NOR, which lies further away from us than the SOR, may indicate that the effect of light travel time is important for the outer rings.

As a consistency check, we also computed photoionization/recombination models for the outer rings to model the observed \[S II\]/$`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$, \[N II\]/$`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$, and \[O III\]/$`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ flux ratios. The code and elemental abundances were the same as those used for the inner ring analysis (§4.1.2). We adopted $`2\times 10^{18}`$ cm as the distance of the outer rings from the supernova. This means that there is a $`900`$ day difference in age of the emission from the observed positions on the SOR and NOR (§2). We took this different light travel time into account in our models. Guided by the densities derived from $`R`$(S II) for the outer rings, we ran models for atomic densities in the range $`5002000\mathrm{cm}^3`$.

As discussed in Lundqvist & Fransson (1996), the degree of ionization of the circumstellar gas after shock breakout is sensitive to the distance of the gas to the supernova. It is particularly important for the “500full1” model by Ensman & Burrows (1992) because of the smaller number of high energy photons in the burst spectrum. At a distance 3.2 times farther away from the supernova than the inner ring, the inner part of the outer rings was dominated by C IV, N IV, and O IV shortly after breakout, instead of the higher ionized species such as N VI, and O VII that were present in the inner ring, at the density range that we are considering (Lundqvist & Fransson (1996)). We calculated that the maximum temperature reached in the outer rings from the initial UV flash was only $`7.8\times 10^4`$ K, a factor of $`2`$ smaller than that in the inner ring. At $``$ day 3500, roughly the mean epoch of emission for the SOR and NOR positions we observed, for an atomic density of $`1400\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the maximum temperature in the outer rings would be $`1.8\times 10^4`$ K, and the dominant ions C II, N II, and O II. For a density of $`500\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the dominant ions would be C III, N III, and O III instead, and the temperature would be in the range $`(1.04.5)\times 10^4`$ K. In Figure 5 we show the modeled emissions in \[S II\]$`\lambda \lambda `$6716, 6731, \[N II\]$`\lambda \lambda `$6548, 6583, and \[O III\]$`\lambda \lambda `$4959, 5007, normalized to $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ as functions of atomic density. Similar to the inner ring, we considered two limiting cases for the outer ring modeling: an ionization-bounded model and a 25% truncation model (cf. §4.1.2). We plotted the observed normalized fluxes \[N II\]/$`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$, \[O III\]/$`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$, and \[S II\]/$`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ for both the SOR and NOR regions for comparison with the models.

For the NOR, the density implied by the \[S II\]/$`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ flux ratio in the model ($`10002000\mathrm{cm}^3`$) was indeed consistent with that indicated by the line ratio $`R`$(S II) in Table 3. We concluded that the observed NOR \[S II\] lines could be interpreted with a model where the input S abundance was the same as that of the inner ring, i.e., S/H $`6\times 10^6`$. Similarly, Figure 5 also suggested that the NOR \[N II\] and \[O III\] emissions were consistent with a model where the emitting gases ($`n_\mathrm{e}1300\mathrm{cm}^3`$) were less dense than those in the inner ring, but with the same N and O abundances. Our results favor a coeval scenario for the inner and outer rings, as argued for in Crotts & Heathcote (2000). Due to large uncertainties in the measured fluxes, caused largely by uncertainties in the background subtraction, we were unable to determine whether the NOR is ionization- or density-bounded.

For the SOR, the \[S II\] density estimate from our model ($`7001500\mathrm{cm}^3`$) was again consistent with that from the $`R`$(S II) calculations. However, even for the 25% truncation model, the modeled \[N II\] emission from the SOR is $`10\%`$ higher than the observed value. In fact, only truncated models (and possibly with even more truncation, such as a $`10\%`$ truncation model) can possibly fit the results, if we assume that the N abundance in the SOR is similar to that in the inner ring. The SOR \[N II\] emission then implies a density $`1000\mathrm{cm}^3`$. However, the \[O III\] density inferred for the SOR in Figure 5 is $`1500\mathrm{cm}^3`$. This result, that the \[O III\]-emitting region has higher density than that of the \[N II\]-emitting region in the SOR, is opposite to what is expected (cf. §4.1.2). We note though, that the modeled ratio of \[N II\]/\[O III\] is the same as the observed SOR value for a density of $`1000\mathrm{cm}^3`$, which could either indicate a lower overall metal abundance in the SOR than in the NOR (although with similar relative abundances of N and O), or that the adopted value of the LMC $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ background in the SOR which we subtracted was too low. As described in §3, the SOR region is more vulnerable to background subtraction errors than the NOR because it is fainter. The observed SOR \[N II\]/$`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ flux ratio could be brought to agreement with the model if the real LMC $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ background at the position of SOR was $``$ 10% larger than the value we have adopted. Despite this problem, we note that the \[O III\]/H$`\alpha `$ ratio is very sensitive to the density, placing a lower limit on the density of the emitting regions in both of the outer rings at $`1000\mathrm{cm}^3`$.

The densities we derive, $`10002000\mathrm{cm}^3`$, are somewhat larger than estimated by Panagia et al. (1996), who found $`800\mathrm{cm}^3`$ on day 2887 for a single position of the northern outer ring. This is not necessarily a real contradiction, since the UV lines studied by Panagia et al. probe mainly hot gas (\[N III\], C III\], \[O III\]), which, in order to stay hot at these late epochs cannot be dense. However, we do not feel that their result, that the N abundance in the outer rings is a factor of $`23`$ smaller than the inner ring, is conclusive. A time dependent, and self-consistent analysis is required to study the extreme non-equilibrium conditions encountered in the rings at late epochs.

We close this discussion by noting that creating a density of $`10002000\mathrm{cm}^3`$ at the position of the outer rings poses a real challenge to models of the formation of the ring system. For example, it is a factor $`10`$ higher than indicated by the models of Blondin & Lundqvist (1993) and Martin & Arnett (1995). Multidimensional models including photoionization by the progenitor have not yet demonstrated an improvement of this situation (e.g., Chevalier (2000)). High quality spectra with good S/N are needed to accurately determine the temperature, ionization and abundances of the gas in the outer rings.

### 4.3 Spot 3 discussion

The first evidence for the collision between the supernova ejecta and the inner circumstellar ring came in 1997 April from the STIS observations of a $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ emission feature blueshifted up to $`250\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ that was projected near the inside edge of the spectral image of the ring (Sonneborn et al. (1998)). Subsequent photometric observations with HST/WFPC2 (Garnavich et al. 2000a ) and spectroscopic observations with STIS (Michael et al. (2000)) of this hotspot (Spot 1) demonstrate continued brightening plus emissions in other species such as \[O I\], \[N II\], and \[O III\]. The appearance of Spot 1 was explained as the result of the collision of the outer shock from the SN 1987A debris with a dense knot of gas protruded inward towards the supernova from the ring. Additional spots were predicted to appear once the debris collides with the rest of the ring. The presence of a new source of radiation was first reported in the CTIO He I 1.08$`\mu `$m image in 1999 December 25 by Bouchet et al. (2000). Subsequent STIS (Maran, Pun, & Sonneborn 2000) and WFPC2 (Garnavich, Kirshner, & Challis 2000b) imaging showed that 5 additional bright spots have developed around the inner ring. In Figure 1(b), we point out a redshifted component in $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ in the G750M (6581) spectral image which was first identified in this data by Lawrence & Crotts (2000). This high-velocity $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ emission originates from the inner edge of the EIR region. No similar Doppler-shifted emission is observed in our data for any other species. The position of this redshifted $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ flux coincides with that of Spot 3 (or HS2-106, using the nomenclature of Lawrence et al. (2000)), one of the recently discovered new regions of brightening on the SN 1987A inner ring reported by Garnavich et al. (2000b). Measurements of Spot 3 in the 2000 February 2 (day 4727) WFPC2 images gave a position of 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$70 away from the center of the SN 1987A debris and a position angle of 106°. This is the start of the full scale collision between the supernova ejecta and the inner circumstellar ring, as also pointed out by Lawrence et al. (2000).

The combined $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ spectrum of the Spot 3 and the overlapping portion of the EIR is extracted in a similar manner as that described in §2, except that fewer rows ($`n=4`$) are integrated for the output spectrum. The extracted $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ profile for Spot 3 and the ring is shown in Figure 6. Redshifted emission from Spot 3 is clearly observed up to $`+175\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ while the blueshifted component cannot be identified because the extracted spectrum is dominated by the EIR flux that fills the width of the aperture between $`\pm 100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. We fitted the rest of the $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ emission with a Gaussian function and a linear background. The best-fit Gaussian is shown by the dotted line in Figure 6. The $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ flux from Spot 3 derived from the best-fit parameters is $`(8\pm 4)\times 10^{17}\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ (no reddening correction). With only the redshifted profile available for fitting, the FWHM of the emission is poorly constrained to be $`100\pm 50\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. On the other hand, the emission-line width of Spot 1 in $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ measured from much better S/N STIS observations gives a FWHM width of $`253\pm 4\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Michael et al. (2000)). Subsequent monitoring of the Spot 1 $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ radiation profile suggests that the width of the radiation remains constant with time (C.S.J. Pun, in preparation). If we assume that the intrinsic width of Spots 1 and 3 are identical, then we expect the observed FWHM of the Spot 3 profile to be $`195\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, after correcting for the different position angles of the two spots on the ring. With the profile width fixed, we determined a more accurate Spot 3 flux to be $`(2.0\pm 0.6)\times 10^{16}\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ (no reddening correction). The best fit profile is shown with dashed line in Figure 6. The portion of this radiation ($``$68%, or $`1.4\times 10^{16}\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$) that lies within the 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$2 aperture has been removed for the determination of the EIR $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ inner ring flux (cf. §3). The Spot 3 flux measured in this paper was consistent with the value previously reported using the same data by Lawrence et al. (2000).

Using the CALCPHOT task in the SYNPHOT package of the STSDAS data reduction software, we converted the Spot 3 flux in 1998 November to an equivalent STMAG magnitude of 21.7 (0.4). If we assume the rate of brightness increase for Spot 3 is the same as that of Spot 1, $`2.09\pm 0.11`$ mmag day-1 (Garnavich et al. 2000a ), then the extrapolated brightness for Spot 3 on day 4727 will be 20.7 (0.4). Our predicted flux was $`1`$ mag fainter than the measured WFPC2 $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$ photometric result of 19.6 ($`1.6\times 10^{15}\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$) on day 4727 (Garnavich et al. 2000b ), probably caused by the fact that Spot 3 is not centered within the STIS aperture in our data.

Finally, we comment on the monitoring of the interaction between the SN 1987A debris and the circumstellar ring. While difference imaging in $`\mathrm{H}\alpha `$, \[N II\], and He I 1.083$`\mu `$m, where the newly-formed spots have the greatest contrast above the equatorial inner ring, may be a sensitive technique (Lawrence et al. (2000)), it is susceptable to problems in separating the flux from the newly formed spots from the noisy background. It is not surprising that by separating the emission of the slow-moving ring ($`v10\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) from that of the interacting spots ($`v250\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$), radiation from Spot 3 could be detected in the STIS data at least one year before discovery by imaging, and over six months before it could be identified in pre-discovery images. This indicates that high resolution spectroscopic monitoring provides the best technique for discovering new areas of shock interaction in SN 1987A.

We are grateful to Peter Garnavich and Arlin Crotts for useful discussions. We thank Don Lindler, Phil Plait, and the Goddard STIS team for their help with data reduction, and the Supernova Intensive Study (SINS, PI: Robert Kirshner) team for access to their unpublished data. This work was supported by NASA Guaranteed Time Observer funding to the STIS Science Team (PI: Bruce Woodgate). C.S.J.P. acknowledges funding by the STIS IDT through the National Optical Astronomy Observatories. P.L. acknowledges support from the Swedish Natural Science Research Council and the Swedish National Space Board.


format: text

text:
# Fishing for Narrow Dibaryons in 𝑝𝑑→𝑝𝑋 Reaction

## Abstract

An analysis of new experimental data, obtained at Linear Accelerator of INR, is carried out with the aim of searching for supernarrow dibaryons in the reactions $`pdp+X`$ and $`pdp+pX_1`$. Dibaryons with masses 1904$`\pm 2`$, 1926$`\pm 2`$, and 1942$`\pm 2`$ MeV have been observed in missing mass $`M_X`$ spectra. In missing mass $`M_{X_1}`$ spectra, the resonancelike states $`X_1=\gamma +n`$ at $`M_{X_1}=966\pm 2`$, 986$`\pm 2`$, and 1003$`\pm 2`$ MeV have been found. The analysis of the data obtained leads to the conclusion that the observed dibaryons are supernarrow dibaryons, the decay of which into two nucleons is forbidden by the Pauli exclusion principle.

In Ref.ksf ; yad ; prc  the study of the reaction $`pdpX`$ was performed with the aim of searching for supernarrow dibaryons (SND), the decay of which into two nucleons is forbidden by the Pauli exclusion principle mul ; fil1 ; fil2 . Such dibaryons with the mass $`M<2m_N+m_\pi `$ can decay into two nucleons, mainly emitting a photon. The experiment was carried out at 305 MeV using the two-arm spectrometer TAMS. As was shown in Ref. yad ; prc , the nucleons and the deuteron from the decay of SND into $`\gamma NN`$ and $`\gamma d`$ have to be emitted in a narrow angle cone with respect to the direction of motion of the dibaryon. On the other hand, if a dibaryon decays mainly into two nucleons, then the expected angular cone of emitted nucleons must be more than $`50^{}`$. Therefore, a detection of the scattered proton in coincidence with the proton (or the deuteron) from the decay of particle $`X`$ at correlated angles allowed to suppress essentially the contribution of the background processes and to increase the relative contribution of a possible SND production. As a result, two narrow peaks in missing mass spectra have been observed at $`M=`$1905 and 1924 MeV. The analysis of the angular distributions of the protons from the decay of particle $`X`$ showed that the peak found at 1905 MeV most likely corresponds to a SND with isotopic spin equal to 1. In Ref. prc  arguments were presented for the resonance at $`M=`$1924 MeV is a SND, too.

In the present paper we give the results of an analysis of new experimental data of $`pdp+X`$ and $`pdp+pX_1`$ reactions at 305 MeV. Experiment was performed using the spectrometer TAMS, the properties of which were described elsewhere prc . CD2 and C12 were used as targets. In this experiment, the scattered proton was detected in the left arm of the spectrometer TAMS at the angle $`\theta _L=70^{}`$. The second charged particle (either $`p`$ or $`d`$ from the decay of $`X`$ state) was detected in the right arm by three telescopes located at $`\theta _R=34^{}`$, $`36^{}`$, and $`38^{}`$.

As follows from the present experiment, the main contribution into resonances observed here is given by processes where the second charged particle is a proton. The experimental missing mass $`M_X`$ spectra obtained with the CD2 target are shown in Figs. 1(a-c), where (a), (b), and (c) correspond to a detection of the proton from the decay of $`X`$ states in the right arm detector at $`\theta _R=34^{}`$, $`36^{}`$, and $`38^{}`$, respectively.

Three peaks at $`M_X=1904\pm 2`$, 1926$`\pm 2`$, and 1942$`\pm 2`$ MeV are observed in these spectra. The first two of them confirmed the values of the dibaryon mass obtained by us earlier ksf ; yad ; prc  and the resonance at 1942 MeV is a new one. It is expected prc ; fil2  that isoscalar SNDs contribute mainly into $`\gamma d`$ channel and isovector SNDs do into $`\gamma NN`$ one. As the main decay of the found dibaryons is observed into $`pX_1`$ channel, it is possible to assume that $`X_1=\gamma +n`$ and all these states are isovector SNDs. The calculations for the SNDs $`D(T=1,J^P=1^\pm )`$ showed that the biggest contribution of such dibaryons must be at $`\theta _R=34^{}`$ and $`36^{}`$. The contribution to spectrum at $`38^{}`$ is expected to be several times smaller. These predictions are in agreement with our experimental data. If the observed states are usual $`NN`$-coupled dibaryons decaying mainly into two nucleons then their contributions to the missing mass spectra in Fig.1(a), 1(b), and 1(c) would be nearly the same and would not exceed a few events. Hence, the peaks found most likely correspond to isovector SNDs.

The summary spectrum over angles $`\theta _R=34^{}`$ and $`36^{}`$ is presented in Fig. 2a. This spectrum was interpolated by a second order polynomial (for the background) plus Gaussians (for the peaks).

The numbers of standard deviations are 6.0, 7.0, and 6.3 SD for resonances at 1904, 1926, and 1942 MeV, respectively.

An additional information about the nature of the observed states is given by study of the missing mass $`M_{X_1}`$ spectra of the reaction $`pdp+pX_1`$. If the state found is a dibaryon decaying mainly into two nucleons then $`X_1`$ is a neutron and the mass $`M_{X_1}`$ is equal to the neutron mass $`m_n`$. If the value of $`M_{X_1}`$, obtained from the experiment, differs essentially from $`m_n`$ then $`X_1=\gamma +n`$ and we have the additional indication that the observed dibaryon is SND.

The simulation of mass spectra for the reaction $`pdp+pX_1`$, where $`pX_1`$ are decay products of SNDs with masses 1904, 1926, and 1942 MeV, gave peaks at $`M_{X_1}`$=965, 987,and 1003 MeV, respectively. Fig. 2b demonstrates the missing mass $`M_{X_1}`$ spectrum obtained from the experiment for the sum of the angles $`\theta _R=34^{}`$ and $`36^{}`$. As is seen from this figure, besides the peak at neutron mass, which caused by the process $`pdp+pn`$, resonance-like behavior of the spectrum is observed at $`966\pm 2`$, $`986\pm 2`$, and $`1003\pm 2`$ MeV. These values of $`M_{X_1}`$ coincide with the ones obtained from the simulation and differ essentially from the value of the neutron mass. Hence, for all states under study, $`X_1=\gamma +n`$ and the dibaryons found are really SNDs.

It should be noted that a resonance-like behavior of $`X_1`$ at $`M_{X_1}=1003\pm 2`$ MeV corresponds to the resonance found in tat  and attributed to an excited nucleon state $`N^{}`$. In this work, the authors brought out three such states with masses 1004, 1044, and 1094 MeV. Taking into account the found connection between the SNDs and the resonance-like states $`X_1`$, it is possible to assume that the peaks, observed in tat  are not the excited nucleons, but they are resonance-like states $`X_1`$ caused by possible existence and decay of SNDs with the masses 1942, 1982, and 2033 MeV, respectively.

The following conclusion can be made. As a result of the study of the reaction $`pdpX`$ and $`pdp+pX_1`$ three narrow peaks at 1904, 1926, and 1942 MeV have been observed in the missing mass $`M_X`$ spectra. The analysis of the angular distributions of the protons from decay of $`X`$ states showed that the peaks found can be explained as a manifestation of the SNDs, the decay of which into two nucleons is forbidden by the Pauli exclusion principle. The observation of the resonance-like structures in the missing mass $`M_{X_1}`$ spectra at 966, 986, and 1003 MeV is an additional confirmation that the dibaryons found are really SNDs.


text:
# NUMEROUS OLD STARBURST GALAXIES IN THE LOCAL UNIVERSE

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Starburst galaxies (SBGs) are selected usually by optical emission lines. They originate in ionized gas around O stars. The classical examples are the Markarian SBGs, which account for 3% of the field galaxies (Balzano 1983). However, the above selection is biased toward young SBGs. The Markarian SBGs are actually at starburst ages of $``$ 20 Myr (Calzetti 1997). A starburst event generates many B stars, which live longer than O stars. With increasing the starburst age and decreasing the star formation rate, O stars become few but B stars remain numerous. Such old SBGs have not been explored, except for some case studies (Rieke, Lebofsky, & Walker 1988; Koornneef 1993). In particular, their space density is unknown. The present knowledge of SBGs is thus incomplete.

By comparing the Markarian objects with SBGs in the Palomar Survey (Ho, Filippenko, & Sargent 1997a, b, c), we propose that old SBGs outnumber classical SBGs by a factor of $``$10 and make up major constituents of the nearby galaxies. The Palomar Survey is an optical spectroscopic survey for nuclear regions on a magnitude-limited sample of 486 galaxies ($`B_T`$ $``$ 12.5 mag), is more sensitive to faint line emission than previous surveys, and thus provides a fair representation of the local galaxy population. Roughly 40% of the Palomar galaxies exhibit line emission, albeit weak, resembling those of H II regions. We find that many of these Palomar SBGs are as luminous as the Markarian SBGs in the far-infrared (FIR). However, the Palomar SBGs are not so luminous in the mid-infrared (MIR). Since the FIR and MIR continua arise from dust grains heated by B and O stars, respectively (Mouri & Taniguchi 1992), it is concluded that the Palomar SBGs are dominated by old objects where O stars are few. We confirm this conclusion with a model for infrared spectra of SBGs, and discuss some of its implications.

Throughout this Letter, the term SBG is used to represent a galaxy harboring a starburst region. Most of the Palomar and Markarian SBGs are galaxies with nuclear starbursts. This is because Ho et al. (1997a, b, c) and Balzano (1983) surveyed galaxy nuclei. We focus on SBGs dominated by starbursts, and study their total FIR and MIR emissions.

## 2 OBSERVATIONAL DATA AND THEIR STATISTICS

The present work is based on the FIR continuum fluxes at 60 and 100 $`\mu `$m as well as the MIR continuum flux at 25 $`\mu `$m, measured by the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS). For the Palomar SBGs, we use the data compiled by Ho et al. (1997a). For the Markarian SBGs, the data are from Soifer et al. (1989) and Moshir et al. (1990). These IRAS fluxes represent emissions from the whole galaxy. The IRAS apertures are large enough to encompass most of the galaxies. Spatially integrated fluxes are used for extended sources.

The statistical properties are summarized in Figure 1, where filled areas denote the Palomar SBGs and open areas denote the Markarian SBGs. Only a few objects are common to the two samples. The object numbers and median values are given in the figure caption.

Figure 1$`a`$ shows the distribution of the FIR luminosity $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$. The FIR flux between 40 and 120 $`\mu `$m is defined as $`1.26\times 10^{14}(2.58S_{60}+S_{100})`$ W m-2 (Fullmer & Lonsdale 1989). Here $`S_\lambda `$ is the flux density at $`\lambda `$ $`\mu `$m in janskys. The galaxy distances are taken from Ho et al. (1997a), or calculated from the redshifts in the cosmic-microwave-background frame with $`H_0`$ = 75 km s-1 Mpc-1. The FIR luminosity exceeds 1010 $`L_{}`$ in 30% of the Palomar SBGs and 50% of the Markarian SBGs. Hereafter we focus on these SBGs. Their FIR emission is dominated by starbursts. The archetypical SBGs such as M82 and NGC 253 actually exhibit $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ $``$ a few $`\times `$ 1010 $`L_{}`$. For most of the Palomar and Markarian SBGs with $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ $`>`$ 1010 $`L_{}`$, we find $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ $`>`$ $`L_{B_T}`$. Here $`L_{B_T}`$ is the total $`B`$-band luminosity, and $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ $`>`$ $`L_{B_T}`$ is expected for a strong starburst (Moorwood 1996; Sanders & Mirabel 1996).

Figures 1$`b`$ and 1$`c`$ show, respectively, the distributions of the spectral indices $`\alpha (25,60)`$ and $`\alpha (60,100)`$. They are defined as $`\alpha (\lambda _1,\lambda _2)`$ = $`\mathrm{log}(S_{\lambda _1}/S_{\lambda _2})/\mathrm{log}(\lambda _2/\lambda _1)`$. The Palomar SBGs prefer low values of $`\alpha (25,60)`$ and $`\alpha (60,100)`$, while the Markarian SBGs prefer high values. The probabilities that the two samples represent different distributions are $``$ 99.99%, if we apply the generalized Wilcoxon tests for data with upper limits (Feigelson & Nelson 1985) or the usual Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. When we plot $`\alpha (25,60)`$ or $`\alpha (60,100)`$ against $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$, the Palomar and Markarian SBGs are separated at each of the values of $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$. The Palomar SBGs with the lowest values of $`\alpha (25,60)`$ tend to exhibit the lowest values of $`\alpha (60,100)`$. Thus, although many of the Palomar SBGs have FIR luminosities being comparable to those of the Markarian SBGs, their IRAS colors are systematically different.

## 3 MODEL ANALYSIS

The difference in $`\alpha (25,60)`$ between the Palomar and Markarian SBGs is due to a difference in the starburst age. To demonstrate this, we reproduce the $`\alpha (25,60)`$ value with an empirical model (Mouri & Taniguchi 1992), where two emission components with fixed colors are related to the ionizing-photon flux $`N_{\mathrm{ion}}`$ and the bolometric luminosity $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}`$. They are in turn calculated with evolutionary synthesis models.

Our approach is supported by an anti-correlation between the spectral index $`\alpha (25,60)`$ and the flux ratio \[O I\] 6300Å/H$`\alpha `$ among SBGs (Mouri & Taniguchi 1992; Larkin et al. 1998). The \[O I\]/H$`\alpha `$ ratio is a measure of the number ratio of supernovae to O stars. A variation in the $`\alpha (25,60)`$ value reflects a variation in the stellar population rather than color variations in the individual emission components. The color variations, together with a variation in the excitation efficiency of the \[O I\] emission, are merely responsible for scatter around the anti-correlation.

There are two types of dust grains. Large grains are in thermal equilibrium with the ambient radiation field, while small grains are heated transiently to high temperatures by single photons. Since small grains are destroyed in the vicinity of O stars, the infrared continuum is a mixture of i) MIR emission from hot large grains within ionized gas, ii) FIR emission from warm large grains outside ionized gas, and iii) MIR emission from small grains outside ionized gas (see Fig. 1 of Mouri, Kawara, & Taniguchi 1997111 This paper has typographical errors in §2. The IRAS apertures at 12 and 25 $`\mu `$m should be read as 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$76 $`\times `$ 4$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$6. The second equation of the footnote 1 should be read as $`S_\lambda /F_{\mathrm{LG}}`$ = $`2.4\times 10^8\lambda ^5T_\mathrm{d}^6[\mathrm{exp}(14387/(\lambda T_\mathrm{d}))1]^1`$ Hz-1.). To indicate that a quantity is relevant to hot large, warm large, large, or small grains, we hereafter use the suffix HLG, WLG, LG, or SG.

We assume that grains absorb all the stellar photons, except for those used in ionizing the gas. Since some of nonionizing photons actually escape from a starburst region, our model overestimates the importance of those photons. Nevertheless, this effect is not serious. Starburst regions are quite dusty. For example, the amount of extinction derived from the Br$`\alpha `$/Br$`\gamma `$ ratio is much greater than that derived from the H$`\alpha `$/H$`\beta `$ ratio (Kawara, Nishida, & Phillips 1989).

Hot large grains are heated by Ly$`\alpha `$ and ionizing photons. Their luminosity is given by $`L_{\mathrm{HLG}}`$ = $`((1f)h\nu _{\mathrm{Ly}\alpha }+fh\nu _{\mathrm{ion}})N_{\mathrm{ion}}`$. Here $`f`$ is the fraction of ionizing photons absorbed by the grains, $`h\nu _{\mathrm{Ly}\alpha }`$ is the energy of a Ly$`\alpha `$ photon, and $`h\nu _{\mathrm{ion}}`$ $``$ $`2h\nu _{\mathrm{Ly}\alpha }`$ is the mean energy of ionizing photons. Large grains radiate as a greybody with an emissivity being proportional to $`\lambda ^1`$:

$$\frac{S_\lambda ^{\mathrm{LG}}}{F_{\mathrm{LG}}}=\frac{8.262\times 10^4\lambda ^4T_{\mathrm{LG}}^5}{\mathrm{exp}(14387/(\lambda T_{\mathrm{LG}}))1}\mathrm{Hz}^1.$$
(1)
Here the wavelength $`\lambda `$ is in microns and the grain temperature $`T_{\mathrm{LG}}`$ is in kelvins. Mouri et al. (1997) estimated as $`T_{\mathrm{LG}}`$ = $`T_{\mathrm{HLG}}`$ $``$ 140 K, from a comparison of the IRAS fluxes with the Br$`\gamma `$ flux on a sample of SBGs. Mouri et al. also found a relation $`\nu _{25}S_{25}^{\mathrm{HLG}}`$ = $`3400F_{\mathrm{Br}\gamma }`$, which yields $`f`$ $``$ 0.5 if the case B recombination (Osterbrock 1989) is assumed for the Br$`\gamma `$ emission. These values are used in our calculation. Baldwin et al. (1991) studied the Orion H II region and obtained similar results for $`T_{\mathrm{HLG}}`$ and $`f`$. The Infrared Space Observatory detected MIR emission from hot large grains in galaxies (Vigroux et al. 1996; Dale et al. 2000; see also Dultzin-Hacyan, Masegosa, & Moles 1990).

Warm large grains and small grains are heated by nonionizing photons. Their luminosities are given by $`L_{\mathrm{WLG}}`$ $`+`$ $`L_{\mathrm{SG}}`$ = $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}h\nu _{\mathrm{ion}}N_{\mathrm{ion}}`$. We use the model of Boulanger et al. (1988), which is based on the IRAS observation of the California Nebula. Small grains absorb 45% of the nonionizing photons. The emergent spectrum is $`S_{12}^{\mathrm{SG}}:S_{25}^{\mathrm{SG}}:S_{60}^{\mathrm{SG}}:S_{100}^{\mathrm{SG}}`$ = $`1:1.1:1.7:2.2`$ with $`S_{12}^{\mathrm{SG}}/(F_{\mathrm{WLG}}+F_{\mathrm{SG}})`$ = $`4\times 10^{15}`$ Hz-1. Although small grains emitting at 12 $`\mu `$m could be destroyed even outside ionized gas, this effect is negligible at $``$ 25 $`\mu `$m (Boulanger et al. 1988; Mouri et al. 1997). Warm large grains absorb the rest of the nonionizing photons and reradiate as the greybody (1). Since the median values of $`\alpha (60,100)`$ in the Palomar and Markarian SBGs correspond to $`T_{\mathrm{LG}}`$ = $`T_{\mathrm{WLG}}`$ $``$ 30–40 K, we adopt $`T_{\mathrm{WLG}}`$ = 35 K. The change of $`T_{\mathrm{WLG}}`$ between 30 and 40 K is unimportant to the value of $`\alpha (25,60)`$, as shown below in Figure 2$`c`$.

The quantities $`N_{\mathrm{ion}}`$ and $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}`$ are obtained as a function of the starburst age $`t`$ from solar-metallicity synthesis models of Leitherer et al. (1999). They adopted a Salpeter initial mass function with the lower and upper cutoffs of 1 and 100 $`M_{}`$. We convolve their instantaneous burst models to obtain the values of $`N_{\mathrm{ion}}`$ and $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}`$ for star formation rates decaying exponentially as $`\mathrm{exp}(t/\tau )`$. The starburst duration $`\tau `$ is set to be 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, or 50 Myr. We also use their constant star formation models ($`\tau `$ = $`\mathrm{}`$).

The results are summarized in Figure 2: ($`a`$) $`N_{\mathrm{ion}}`$, ($`b`$) $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$, and ($`c`$) $`\alpha (25,60)`$. The ionizing-photon flux $`N_{\mathrm{ion}}`$ and the FIR luminosity $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ are normalized by their maximum values. When the starburst is young, ionizing photons are abundant. Since the MIR emission from hot large grains is strong, the spectral index $`\alpha (25,60)`$ is flat and close to the values observed in the Markarian SBGs. With increasing the starburst age, O stars begin to disappear. The ionizing-photon flux $`N_{\mathrm{ion}}`$ decreases, but the number of B stars and hence the FIR luminosity $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ still increase. Since hot large grains are progressively unimportant, the spectral index $`\alpha (25,60)`$ becomes steep and approaches to the values observed in the Palomar SBGs.

## 4 DISCUSSION

While the Markarian SBGs are dominated by young objects ($`t`$ $``$ 10 Myr), we argue that the Palomar SBGs with $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ $`>`$ 1010 $`L_{}`$ are dominated by old objects ($`t`$ $``$ 10–100 Myr). The unbiased Palomar Survey provides a fair representation of the local galaxy population, where old SBGs are major constituents (30–40% in number).

The spectral index $`\alpha (25,60)`$ lies between $`2`$ and $`3`$ in 90% of the Palomar SBGs (Fig. 1$`b`$). This percentage agrees with our model. The starburst age and duration in classical SBGs are estimated as $`t`$ $``$ $`\tau `$ $``$ 10–20 Myr (Calzetti 1997; Leitherer 1998). For $`\tau `$ = 20 Myr, the values $`\alpha (25,60)`$ = $`2`$ and $`3`$ are reproduced, respectively, at $`t`$ $``$ 10 Myr and 100 Myr (Fig. 2$`c`$). The Markarian SBGs actually have the median value of $`\alpha (25,60)`$ = $`2.06`$.

The above estimation implies that old SBGs are $``$10 times more numerous than classical SBGs. The entire Palomar SBGs share 40% of the surveyed galaxies (Ho et al. 1997a, b, c), while the Markarian SBGs share 3% of the field galaxies (Balzano 1983). The Palomar SBGs with $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ $``$ $`10^{10}`$ $`L_{}`$ appear to be also dominated by old SBGs. The lower luminosity of their FIR emission is attributable to a weaker starburst or a greater age. Since, however, the IRAS fluxes of such objects could be contaminated by galaxy bulges and disks, we have not studied them.

Our model does not explain the difference between the Markarian and Palomar SBGs in the spectral index $`\alpha (60,100)`$, which depends primarily on the temperature of warm large grains $`T_{\mathrm{WLG}}`$. The behavior of $`\alpha (60,100)`$ is explained by the location of the warm large grains. A starburst region consists of star clusters. In young SBGs, nonionizing photons are absorbed by grains in the vicinity of the individual clusters. However, in old SBGs, supernova-driven shocks have pushed away those grains, and nonionizing photons are of lower energies, i.e., of longer wavelengths, and travel distances before absorbed by a grain. The absorption of nonionizing photons is due to grains which lie far from the clusters. Since the radiation field there is weak, the grain temperature is expected to be low.

The observed differences in the IRAS colors between the Palomar and Markarian SBGs are not attributable to a difference in the initial mass function. The initial mass function assumed in our calculation is consistent with most observations of star-forming and starburst regions, and thus expected to be universal (Leitherer 1998). Moreover, as stated above, the observed number of the Markarian SBGs requires the presence of numerous old SBGs.

The Palomar SBGs exhibit low H$`\alpha `$ luminosities, low \[O III\] 5007Å/H$`\beta `$ ratios, high \[S II\] 6716Å $`+`$ 6731Å/H$`\alpha `$ ratios, and high \[O I\] 6300Å/H$`\alpha `$ ratios, as compared with classical SBGs. Ho et al. (1997c) already interpreted these properties in terms of old starbursts, where ionizing radiation is weak and of low excitation while supernova-driven shocks contribute to the \[S II\] and \[O I\] emissions. Nevertheless, our analysis based on FIR luminosities is essential to clarify the predominance of B stars in the Palomar SBGs. Since the beam size of the Palomar Survey is too small to compare its H$`\alpha `$ luminosity with the FIR luminosity, the spectral index $`\alpha (25,60)`$ alone allows us to study the stellar population of the whole starburst region.

The Palomar SBGs prefer Hubble types equal to or later than Sbc (Ho et al. 1997b, c). We accordingly compare morphologies of the Palomar SBGs with those of the Markarian SBGs. Most of them are available in de Vaucouleurs et al. (1991). For the rest of the SBGs, we determine their morphologies on the basis of various references and optical images. The results are shown in Figure 1$`d`$. The Markarian SBGs have earlier morphologies than the Palomar SBGs (Ho et al. 1997c). Since the Markarian SBGs have optically prominent nuclei, they could be misclassified as earlier types. However, there is another possibility. Ho et al. (1997b) found that early-type galaxies from E to Sbc in the Palomar Survey preferentially harbor Seyferts and LINERs, classes of active galactic nuclei (AGNs). Young starbursts in early-type galaxies might tend to evolve into AGNs. The central engine of an AGN is a supermassive black hole, which is known to prefer a galaxy with a significant stellar bulge, corresponding to a Hubble type equal to or earlier than Sbc (Ferrarese & Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000).222 We expect that the Palomar and Markarian SBGs exhibit systematically different IRAS colors at each of the Hubble types. This expectation has been confirmed at least for the Hubble types around Sb, where the object numbers are sufficiently large. We also note that optical spectra of LINERs are close to those of shock-heated nebulae. Some of the Palomar LINERs might be old starbursts dominated by supernova-driven shocks (Larkin et al. 1998; Alonso-Herrero et al. 2000). Since, however, the galaxy morphologies are different, most of the Palomar LINERs are unlikely to have evolutionary connections with the Palomar SBGs.

Vigorous star formation is found around many AGNs. Following Glass & Moorwood (1985) and Mouri & Taniguchi (1992), it is now established that these circumnuclear starbursts are older than those in classical SBGs (Moorwood 1996). Schmitt, Storchi-Bergmann, & Cid Fernandes (1999) estimated the typical age of the circumnuclear starburst as $`t`$ $``$ 100 Myr. Very young starbursts do not exist around AGNs. The starburst occurs at radii of 100–1000 pc, while the fueling of the central engine occurs at radii of $``$ 1 pc. Since it takes time to transport gas from the circumnuclear region to the nucleus, there is a delay between the onset of the starburst and that of the AGN activity (Moorwood 1996; Schmitt et al. 1999). However, except for this difference, starbursts around AGNs are similar to those in SBGs, if the latter objects are represented by the Palomar SBGs.

Finally, we comment on objects in the IRAS Bright Galaxy Survey ($`S_{60}`$ $`>`$ 5.24 Jy; Soifer et al. 1989; see also Sanders & Mirabel 1996). The majority of these IRAS galaxies at $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ $``$ 1011 $`L_{}`$ are SBGs. With the data of Kim et al. (1995) and Veilleux et al. (1995), the median colors for 28 IRAS SBGs with $`L_{\mathrm{FIR}}`$ = 1010–1011 $`L_{}`$ are estimated as $`\alpha (25,60)`$ = $`2.30`$ and $`\alpha (60,100)`$ = $`1.16`$. They are, respectively, close to the median values for the Palomar SBGs ($`\alpha (25,60)`$ = $`2.34`$) and the Markarian SBGs ($`\alpha (60,100)`$ = $`1.01`$). Thus the IRAS SBGs are at intermediate starburst ages. The ionizing radiation has become weak, but the nonionizing radiation is still strong and heats significantly the warm large grains. The space density of the IRAS SBGs appears to be greater than that of the Markarian SBGs.

The authors are grateful to the referee for useful comments. This work was supported in part by Grant-in-Aids for the Scientific Research (Nos. 10044052, and 10304013) of the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, and Science.


text:
# Spin foam model for Lorentzian General Relativity

## I Introduction

Spin foam models provide a well defined framework for background independent diffeomorphism invariant quantum field theory. A surprising great deal of approaches have led to this type of models. In particular, due to their non perturbative features, spin foam models appear as a very attractive framework for quantum gravity.

Spin foam models provide a rigorous implementation of the Wheeler-Misner-Hawking sum over geometries formulation of quantum gravity. The 4-geometries summed over are represented by foam-like structures known as spin foams. They are defined as colored 2-complexes. A 2-complex $`J`$ is a (combinatorial) set of elements called “vertices” $`v`$, “edges” $`e`$ and “faces” $`f`$, and a boundary relation among these, such that an edge is bounded by two vertices, and a face is bounded by a cyclic sequence of contiguous edges (edges sharing a vertex). A spin foam is a 2-complex plus a “coloring” $`N`$, that is an assignment of an irreducible representation $`N_f`$ of a given group $`G`$ to each face $`f`$ and of an intertwiner $`i_e`$ to each edge $`e`$. The model is defined by the partition function

$$Z=\underset{J}{}𝒩(J)\underset{N}{}\underset{fJ}{}A_f(N_f)\underset{eJ}{}A_e(N_e)\underset{vJ}{}A_v(N_v),$$
(1)
where $`A_f`$, $`A_e`$ and $`A_v`$ correspond to the amplitude associated to faces, edges, and vertices respectively (they are given functions of the corresponding colors). $`𝒩(J)`$ is a normalization factor for each 2-complex.

Spin foam models related to gravity have been obtained as modifications of topological quantum field theories (corresponding to BF theory) by implementation of the constraints that reduce BF theory to general relativity. So far, these constructions were restricted to the Euclidean sector. A crucial step towards the definition of a physical Lorentzian model has been taken by Barrett and Crane in . In this work, Barrett and Crane construct a well defined vertex amplitude for Lorentzian quantum gravity, based on the representation theory of $`SL(2,C)`$.

Based on the work of Barrett and Crane, in this letter we complete the definition of a Lorentzian spin foam model for gravity. That is, we give an explicitly formula for the partition function of the model. To this aim, we use the technology provided by field theory over group manifolds, developed in in . In this language, spin foams (quantum 4-geometries) appear as the Feynman diagrams of a certain nonlocal scalar field theory over a group. Strikingly, the Barrett-Crane Lorentzian vertex appears completely naturally in this context.

Two important points should be emphasized. First, the theory defined in this way implements automatically the sum over 2-complexes $`J`$ in (1), and in particular, fixes the $`𝒩(J)`$ value. This sum is necessary to restore full general covariance of a theory with local degrees of freedom such as GR . Indeed, in the case of a topological field theory  the sum over 2-complexes in (1) can be dropped (for fixed topology) due to the triangulation invariance of the partition function. This is a consequence of the absence of local degrees of freedom in the topological theory. When the constraints are implemented, however, the theory acquires the local degrees of freedom of gravity and different 2-complexes carry physical information. In the language of standard QFT, they represent higher order radiative corrections. In our model, the sum over 2-complexes is automatically implemented by the formalism.

The second point is about divergences. The Euclidean model in  is defined in terms of a quantum deformation of the gauge group ($`SO_q(4)`$, with $`q^n=1`$). The quantum deformation is needed to regularize divergences in (1). In the limit in which the quantum deformation is removed ($`q1`$), these divergences appear whenever the 2-complex $`J`$ includes bubbles . In reference , using the field theory over group technology, we have defined a variant of the model, in which the basic bubble amplitudes are finite for $`q=1`$. The definition of the Lorentzian model presented here corresponds to this variant. Although further study is certainly needed, we suspect that the Lorentzian model presented here might be finite even with $`q=1`$.

Many issues remain open. In particular: (i) Can we get stronger evidence that the model gives general relativity in the classical limit? (ii) Can finiteness be proven? (iii) What is the physical meaning and the physical regime of validity of the expansion in the number of vertices? (iv) Do the transition amplitudes of the model have a direct physical interpretation? If answers to these questions turned out to be positive, the model presented here might provide an interesting candidate for a quantum theory of gravity.

In the bulk of the paper we introduce the new model and discuss its properties. In an appendix we present a compendium of known results on harmonic analysis and representation theory of $`SL(2,C)`$ on which our construction is based.

## II $`SL(2,C)`$ state sum model of Lorentzian QG

We start with a field $`\varphi (g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)`$ over $`SL(2,C)\times SL(2,C)\times SL(2,C)\times SL(2,C)`$. We assume the field has compact support and is symmetric under arbitrary permutations of its arguments*** This symmetry guarantees arbitrary 2-complexes $`J`$ to appear in the Feynman expansion.. We define the projectors $`P_\gamma `$ and $`P_u`$ as

$$P_g\varphi (g_i)𝑑\gamma \varphi (g_i\gamma ),$$
(2)
and

$$P_u\varphi (g_i)𝑑u_i\varphi (g_iu_i),$$
(3)
where $`\gamma SL(2,C)`$, and $`u_iSU(2)`$, and $`d\gamma `$, $`du`$ denote the corresponding invariant measures. We define the action of our model as

$$S[\varphi ]=𝑑g_i\left[P_\gamma \varphi (g_i)\right]^2+\frac{\lambda }{5!}𝑑g_i\left[P_\gamma P_u\varphi (g_i)\right]^5,$$
(4)
where $`\gamma _iSL(2,C)`$, $`\varphi (g_i)`$ denotes $`\varphi (g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)`$, and the fifth power in the interaction term is notation for

$$\left[\varphi (g_i)\right]^5:=\varphi (g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)\varphi (g_4,g_5,g_6,g_7)\varphi (g_7,g_3,g_8,g_9)\varphi (g_9,g_6,g_2,g_{10})\varphi (g_{10},g_8,g_5,g_1).$$
(5)
The $`\gamma `$ integration projects the field into the space of gauge invariant fields, namely, those such that $`\varphi (g_i)=\varphi (g_i\mu )`$ for $`\mu SL(2,C)`$.Because of this gauge invariance, the action (4) is proportional to the trivial diverging factor $`𝑑\gamma `$. This divergence could be fixed easily, for instance by gauge fixing and just dropping one of the group integrations. For the clarity of the presentation, however, we have preferred to keep gauge invariance manifest, use the action formally to generate the Feynman expansion, and drop the redundant group integration whenever needed. The vertex and propagator of the theory are simply given by a set of delta functions on the group, as illustrated in , to which we refer for details. Feynman diagrams correspond to arbitrary 2-complex $`J`$ with 4-valent edges (bounding four faces), and 5-valent vertices (bounding five edges). Once the configuration variables $`g_i`$ are integrated over, the Feynman amplitudes reduce to integrals over the group variables $`\gamma `$ and $`u`$ in the proyectors in (4). These end up combined as arguments of one delta functions per face . That is, a straightforward computation yields

$$A(J)=𝑑u𝑑\gamma \underset{e}{}\underset{f}{}\delta (\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(1\right)}u_{1f}\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(2\right)}u_{1f}^{}\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(3\right)}\mathrm{}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(1\right)}u_{Nf}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(2\right)}u_{Nf}^{}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(3\right)}).$$
(6)
In this equation, $`\gamma _e^{\left(1\right)}`$, and $`\gamma _e^{\left(3\right)}`$ come from the group integration in the projectors $`P_\gamma `$ in the two vertices bounding the edge $`e`$. $`\gamma _e^{\left(2\right)}`$ comes from the projector $`P_\gamma `$ in the propagator defining the edge $`e`$. Finally, $`u_{1f}`$ and $`u_{1f}^{}`$ are the $`SU(2)`$ integration variables in the projector $`P_h`$ in the two vertices. Notice that each $`u`$ integration variable appear only once in the integrand, while each $`\gamma `$ integration variable appears in four different delta’s (each edge bounds four faces). The index $`N`$ denotes the number of edges of the corresponding face. Now we use equation (A26) to expand the delta functions in terms of irreducible representations of $`SL(2,C)`$. Only the representations $`(n,\rho )`$ in the principal series contribute to this expansion. We obtain

$$A(J)=\underset{n_f}{}_{\rho _f}𝑑\rho _f\underset{f}{}(\rho _f^2+n_f^2)\underset{e}{}d\gamma du\mathrm{Tr}\left[T_{n_f\rho _f}(\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(1\right)}u_{1f}\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(2\right)}u_{1f}^{}\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(3\right)}\mathrm{}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(1\right)}u_{Nf}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(2\right)}u_{Nf}^{}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(3\right)})\right].$$
(7)
Next, we rewrite this equation in terms of the matrix elemets $`D_{j_1q_1j_2q_2}^{n\rho }(\gamma )`$ of the representation $`(n,\rho )`$ in the canonical basis, defined in the appendix. The trace becomes

$`\mathrm{Tr}\left[T_{n_f\rho _f}(\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(1\right)}u_{1f}\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(2\right)}u_{1f}^{}\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(3\right)}\mathrm{}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(1\right)}u_{Nf}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(2\right)}u_{Nf}^{}\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(3\right)})\right]=`$ (8)
$`D_{j_1q_1j_2q_2}^{n_f\rho _f}(\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(1\right)})D_{j_2q_2j_3q_3}^{n_f\rho _f}(u_{1f})D_{j_3q_3j_4q_4}^{n_f\rho _f}(\gamma _{e_1}^{\left(2\right)})\mathrm{}D_{j_.q_.j_1q_1}^{n_f\rho _f}(\gamma _{e_N}^{\left(3\right)}).`$ (9)
(Repeated indices are summed, and the range of the $`j_n`$ and $`q_n`$ indices is specified in the appendix.) According to equation (A27), each $`u`$ integration produces a projection into the subspace spanned by the simple representations $`(0,\rho )`$.This projection implements the constraint that reduces BF theory to GR. Indeed, the generators of $`SL(2,C)`$ are identified with the classical two-form field $`B`$ of BF theory. The generators of the simple representations satisfy precisely the BF to GR constraint. Namely $`B`$ has the appropriate $`ee`$ form . Notice however that the representations $`(0,\rho )`$ are not the only simple representations; there are also simple representations of the form $`(n,0)`$ with $`n=1,2\mathrm{}`$. The two sets have a simple geometrical interpretation in terms of space and time like directions (see ). We suspect that to recover full GR both set of simple representations should be included. That is, after the integration over $`u_{1f}`$, the matrix $`D^{n_f\rho _f}(u_{1f})_{j_2q_2j_3q_3}`$ collapses to $`\delta _{j_10}\delta _{j_20}`$. One of these two Kroeneker deltas appears always contracted with the indices of the $`D(\gamma )`$ associated to a vertex; while the other is contracted with a propagator. We observe that the representation matrices associated to propagators ($`\gamma _e^{(2)}`$) appear in four faces in (7). The ones associated to vertices appear also four times but combined in the ten corresponding faces converging at a vertex. Consequently, they can be paired according to the rule $`D_{jqkl}^{n\rho }(\gamma _{e_i})D_{klst}^{n\rho }(\gamma _{e_j})=D^{n\rho }(\gamma _{e_i}\gamma _{e_j})_{jqst}`$. In Fig. (1) we represent the structure described above. A continuous line represents a representation matrix, while a dark dot a contraction with a projector ($`\delta _{j0}`$). Taking all this into account, we have

$`A(J)={\displaystyle \underset{n_f}{}}{\displaystyle _{\rho _f}}{\displaystyle \underset{f}{}}(\rho _f^2+n_f^2){\displaystyle \underset{e}{}}A_e(\rho _{e_1},\mathrm{}\rho _{e_4};n_{e_1},\mathrm{}n_{e_4}){\displaystyle \underset{v}{}}A_v(\rho _{v_1},\mathrm{}\rho _{v_{10}};n_{v_1},\mathrm{}n_{v_{10}}),`$ (10)
where $`A_e`$ is given by

$$A_e(\rho _{e_1},\mathrm{}\rho _{e_4};n_{e_1},\mathrm{}n_{e_4})=\delta _{n_{e_10}}\mathrm{}\delta _{n_{e_40}}𝑑\gamma D_{0000}^{0\rho _1}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma )\mathrm{}D_{0000}^{0\rho _4}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma ),$$
(11)
and $`A_v`$ by

$`A_v(\rho _{v_1},\mathrm{}\rho _{v_{10}};n_{v_1},\mathrm{}n_{v_{10}})=\delta _{n_{v_10}}\mathrm{}\delta _{n_{v_{10}0}}`$ (12)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{5}{}}d\gamma _iD_{0000}^{0\rho _1}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _1\gamma _5^1)D_{0000}^{0\rho _2}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _1\gamma _4^1)D_{0000}^{0\rho _3}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _1\gamma _3^1)D_{0000}^{0\rho _4}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _1\gamma _2^1)}`$ (13)
$`D_{0000}^{0\rho _5}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _2\gamma _5^1)D_{0000}^{0\rho _6}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _2\gamma _4^1)D_{0000}^{0\rho _7}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _2\gamma _3^1)D_{0000}^{0\rho _8}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _3\gamma _5^1)D_{0000}^{0\rho _9}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _3\gamma _4^1)D_{0000}^{0\rho _{10}}\mathrm{SS}(\gamma _4\gamma _5^1).`$ (14)
In Fig. (1), each $`D_{0000}^{0\rho _1}(\gamma )`$ in the previous expressions corresponds to a line bounded by two dark dots.

The functions $`D_{0000}^{0\rho _1}(\gamma )`$ are known explicitly in the literature; they can be realized as functions on the hyperboloid ($`H^+`$) $`x^\mu x_\mu =1`$, $`x_0>0`$ in Minkowski spacetime in the following way. Any $`\gamma SL(2,C)`$ can be written as $`\gamma =u_1du_2`$ with $`u_iSU(2)`$ and

$$d=\left[\begin{array}{c}e^{\eta /2}0\\ 0e^{\eta /2}\end{array}\right].$$
(15)
(Any Lorentz transformation can be obtained with a rotation, a boost in the $`z`$ direction and another rotation.) In this parametrization, $`D_{0000}^{0\rho }(\gamma )`$ is a function of $`\eta `$ only. We denote it as $`K(\eta )`$. Its form is given in  (page 65) as

$$K_\rho (\eta )=\frac{2\mathrm{sin}(1/2\eta \rho )}{\rho \mathrm{sinh}(\eta )}.$$
(16)
Given $`\gamma SL(2,C)`$ then $`x_\gamma :=\gamma \gamma ^{}`$ represents a point in $`H^+`$. It is easy to see that the parameter $`\eta `$ associated to $`\gamma `$ corresponds to the hyperbolic distance from the point $`x_\gamma `$ to the apex of the hyperboloid (boost parameter). The hyperboloid is a transitive surface under the action of $`SL(2,C)`$, i.e., it is Lorentz invariant. Therefore, the parameter $`\eta `$ associated to a product $`\gamma _1\gamma _2^1SL(2,C)`$ corresponds to the hyperbolic distance of the point $`\gamma _2^1[x_{\gamma _1}]`$ to the apex §§§We denote by $`\gamma [x]`$ the usual action of $`SL(2,C)`$ matrices on $`x`$ defined as an hermitian spinor, namely, $`\gamma [x]=\gamma x\gamma ^{}`$.. Equivalently, it corresponds to the hyperbolic distance between $`x_{\gamma _1}`$ and the Lorentz transformed apex $`\gamma _2\gamma _2^{}:=x_{\gamma _2}`$(namely, $`\eta (\gamma _1\gamma _2^1)=𝒟_{H^+}(x_{\gamma _1},x_{\gamma _2})`$ ). We define

$$D_{0000}^{0\rho }(\gamma _1\gamma _2^1)=K_\rho (\eta (\gamma _1\gamma _2^1)):=K_\rho (x_1,x_2).$$
(17)
Finally, the invariant measure on $`SL(2,C)`$ is simply the product of the invariant measures of the hyperboloid and $`SU(2)`$, that is $`d\gamma =dudx`$. Using all this, the vertex and edge amplitudes can be expressed in simple form. The edge amplitude (11) becomes

$$A_e(\rho _1,\mathrm{}\rho _4)=𝑑xK_{\rho _1}(x)K_{\rho _2}(x)K_{\rho _3}(x)K_{\rho _4}(x),$$
(18)
where we have dropped the $`n`$’s from our previous notation, since now they all take the value zero. This expression is finite, and its explicit value is computed in . Finally, the vertex amplitude (12) results

$`A_v(\rho _{v_1},\mathrm{}\rho _{v_{10}})={\displaystyle 𝑑x_1\mathrm{}𝑑x_5K_{\rho _1}(x_1,x_5)K_{\rho _2}(x_1,x_4)K_{\rho _3}(x_1,x_3)K_{\rho _4}(x_1,x_2)}`$ (19)
$`K_{\rho _5}(x_2,x_5)K_{\rho _6}(x_2,x_4)K_{\rho _7}(x_2,x_3)K_{\rho _8}(x_3,x_5)K_{\rho _9}(x_3,x_4)K_{\rho _{10}}(x_4,x_5).`$ (20)
We can now remove the trivial divergence (the integration over the gauge group) by dropping one of the group integrations (see footnote II above). The vertex amplitude (19) is precisely the one defined by Barrett and Crane in . The spin foam model is finally given by

$`A(J)={\displaystyle _{\rho _f}}𝑑\rho _f{\displaystyle \underset{f}{}}\rho _f^2{\displaystyle \underset{e}{}}A_e(\rho _{e_1},\mathrm{}\rho _{e_4}){\displaystyle \underset{v}{}}A_v(\rho _{v_1},\mathrm{}\rho _{v_{10}}),`$ (21)
It corresponds to the Lorentzian generalization to the one defined in .

## III Discussion

We have carried over the generalization of the model defined in  to the Lorentzian signature. The model is given by an $`SL(2,C)`$ BF quantum theory plus a quantum implementation of the additional constraints that reduce BF theory to Lorentzian general relativity.

The analog model in the Euclidean $`SO(4)`$ case was shown to be finite up to first bubble corrections. It would be very interesting to study this issue in the Lorentzian case. Evidence in favor of the conjecture of finiteness comes from the fact that, as in the Euclidean case, the edge contribution in the model tends to regularize the amplitudes. Divergences appear when compatibility conditions at edges fail to prevent colors associated to faces to get arbitrarily large. This happens when there are close surfaces in the spin foam, namely, bubbles. In  this divergences were cured by the dumping effect of edge amplitudes. As in its Euclidean relative, in the Lorentzian model presented here the edge amplitude goes to zero for large values of the colors. More precisely, the amplitude (18) behaves like $`(\rho _1\rho _2\rho _3\rho _4)^1`$ for $`\rho _i\mathrm{}`$.

The state sum contains only representations of the form $`(0,\rho )`$. These correspond to the simple irreducible representations representing space-like directions. To obtain full general relativity, it might be necessary to generalize the present construction to include the others simple representations; that is, those of the form $`(n,0)`$, with $`n`$ an arbitrary integer, which correspond to time-like directions. A simple modification of the action (4) should allow these other balanced representation to be included.

These important issues will be investigated in the future.

## IV Acknowledgments

We thank Louis Crane for a very instructive discussion in a hot summer day Marseillais. This work was partially supported by NSF Grant PHY-9900791.

## A Representation Theory of $`SL(2,C)`$

We review a series of relevant facts about $`SL(2,C)`$ representation theory. Most of the material of this section can be found in . For a very nice presentation of the subject see also .

We denote an element of $`SL(2,C)`$ by

$$g=\left[\begin{array}{c}\alpha \beta \\ \gamma \delta \end{array}\right],$$
(A1)
with $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$, $`\delta `$ complex numbers such that $`\alpha \delta \beta \gamma =1`$. All the finite dimensional irreducible representations of $`SL(2,C)`$ can be cast as a representation over the set of polynomials of two complex variables $`z_1`$ and $`z_2`$, of order $`n_11`$ in $`z_1`$ and $`z_2`$ and of order $`n_21`$ in $`\overline{z}_1`$ and $`\overline{z}_2`$. The representation is given by the following action

$$T(g)P(z_1,z_2)=P(\alpha z_1+\gamma z_2,\beta z_1+\delta z_2).$$
(A2)
The usual spinor representations can be directly related to these ones.

The infinite dimensional representations are realized over the space of homogeneous functions of two complex variables $`z_1`$ and $`z_2`$ in the following way. A function $`f(z_1,z_2)`$ is called homogeneous of degree $`(a,b)`$, where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are complex numbers differing by an integer, if for every $`\lambda C`$ we have

$$f(\lambda z_1,\lambda z_2)=\lambda ^a\overline{\lambda }^bf(z_1,z_2),$$
(A3)
where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are required to differ by an integer in order to $`\lambda ^a\overline{\lambda }^b`$ be a singled valued function of $`\lambda `$. The infinite dimensional representations of $`SL(2,C)`$ are given by the infinitely differentiable functions $`f(z_1,z_2)`$ (in $`z_1`$ and $`z_2`$ and their complex conjugates) homogeneous of degree $`(\frac{\mu +n}{2},\frac{\mu n}{2})`$, with $`n`$ an integer and $`\mu `$ a complex number. The representations are given by the following action

$$T_{n\mu }(g)f(z_1,z_2)=f(\alpha z_1+\gamma z_2,\beta z_1+\delta z_2).$$
(A4)
One simple realization of these functions is given by the functions of one complex variables defined as

$$\varphi (z)=f(z,1).$$
(A5)
On this set of functions the representation operators act in the following way

$$T_{n\mu }(g)\varphi (z)=(\beta z+\delta )^{\frac{\mu +n}{2}1}(\overline{\beta }\overline{z}+\overline{\delta })^{\frac{\mu n}{2}1}\varphi \left(\frac{\alpha z+\gamma }{\beta z+\delta }\right).$$
(A6)
Two representations $`T_{n_1\mu _2}(g)`$ and $`T_{n_1\mu _2}(g)`$ are equivalent if $`n_1=n_2`$ and $`\mu _1=\mu _2`$.

Unitary representations of $`SL(2,C)`$ are infinite dimensional. They are a subset of the previous ones corresponding to the two possible cases: $`\mu `$ purely imaginary ($`T_{n,i\rho }(g)`$ $`\mu =i\rho `$, $`\rho =\overline{\rho }`$, known as the principal series), and $`n=0`$, $`\mu =\overline{\mu }=\rho `$, $`\rho 0`$ and $`1<\rho <1`$ ($`T_{0\rho }(g)`$the supplementary series). From now on we concentrate on the principal series unitary representations $`T_{ni\rho }(g)`$ which we denote simply as $`T_{n\rho }(g)`$ (dropping the $`i`$ in front of $`\rho `$). The invariant scalar product for the principal series is given by

$$(\varphi ,\psi )=\overline{\varphi }(z)\psi (z)𝑑z,$$
(A7)
where $`dz`$ denotes $`dRe(z)dIm(z)`$.

There is a well defined measure on $`SL(2,C)`$ which is right-left invariant and invariant under inversion (namely, $`dg=d(gg_0)=d(g_0g)=d(g^1)`$). Explicitly, in terms of the components in (A1)

$`dg=\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\right)^3{\displaystyle \frac{d\beta d\gamma d\delta }{|\delta |^2}}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\right)^3{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha d\gamma d\delta }{|\gamma |^2}}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\right)^3{\displaystyle \frac{d\beta d\alpha d\delta }{|\beta |^2}}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\right)^3{\displaystyle \frac{d\beta d\gamma d\alpha }{|\alpha |^2}},`$ (A8)
where $`d\alpha `$, $`d\beta `$, $`d\gamma `$, and $`d\delta `$ denote integration over the real and imaginary part respectively.

Every square-integrable function, i.e, $`f(g)`$ such that

$$|f(g)|^2𝑑g\mathrm{},$$
(A9)
has a well defined Fourier transform defined as

$$F(n,\rho )=f(g)T_{n,\rho }(g)𝑑g.$$
(A10)
This equation can be inverted to express $`f(g)`$ in terms of $`T_{n,\rho }(g)`$. This is known as the Plancherel theorem which generalizes the Peter-Weyl theorem for finite dimensional unitary irreducible representations of compact groups as $`SU(2)`$. Namely, every square-integrable function $`f(g)`$ can be written as

$$f(g)=\frac{1}{8\pi ^4}\underset{n}{}\mathrm{Tr}[F(n,\rho )T_{n,\rho }(g^1)](n^2+\rho ^2)𝑑\rho ,$$
(A11)
where only components corresponding to the principal series are summed over (not all unitary representations are needed)If the function $`f(g)`$ is infinitely differentiable of compact support then it can be shown that $`F(n,\rho )`$ is an analytic function of $`\rho `$ and an expansion similar to (A11) can be written in terms of non-unitary representations., and

$$\mathrm{Tr}[F(n,\rho )T_{n,\rho }(g^1)]=_{n\rho }(z_1,z_2)𝒯_{n\rho }(z_2,z_1;g)𝑑z_1𝑑z_2.$$
(A12)
$`_{n\rho }(z_1,z_2)`$, and $`𝒯_{n\rho }(z_2,z_1;g)`$ correspond to the kernels of the Fourier transform and representation respectively defined by their action on the space of functions $`\varphi (z)`$ (they are analogous to the momenta components and representation matrix elements in the case of finite dimensional representations), namely

$$F(n,\rho )\varphi (z):=f(g)T_{n\rho }(g)\varphi (z)𝑑g:=_{n\rho }(z,\stackrel{~}{z})\varphi (\stackrel{~}{z})𝑑\stackrel{~}{z},$$
(A13)
and

$$T_{n,\rho }(g)\varphi (z):=𝒯_{n\rho }(z,\stackrel{~}{z};g)\varphi (\stackrel{~}{z})𝑑\stackrel{~}{z}.$$
(A14)
From (A6) we obtain that

$$𝒯_{n\rho }(z,\stackrel{~}{z};g)=(\beta z+\delta )^{\frac{\rho +n}{2}}(\overline{\beta }\overline{z}+\overline{\delta })^{\frac{\rho n}{2}}\delta \left(\stackrel{~}{z}\frac{\alpha z+\gamma }{\beta z+\delta }\right).$$
(A15)
The “resolution of the identity” takes the form

$$\delta (g)=\frac{1}{8\pi ^4}\underset{n}{}\mathrm{Tr}[T_{n,\rho }(g)](n^2+\rho ^2)𝑑\rho .$$
(A16)
This is a key formula that we use in the paper.

There exists an alternative realization of the representations in terms of the space of homogeneous functions $`f(z_1,z_2)`$ defined above. Because of homogeneity (A3) any $`f(z_1,z_2)`$ is completely determined by its values on the sphere $`S^3`$

$$|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2=1.$$
(A17)
As it is well now there is an isomorphism between $`S^3`$ and $`SU(2)`$ given by

$$u=\left[\begin{array}{c}\overline{z}_2\overline{z}_1\\ z_1z_2\end{array}\right]$$
(A18)
for $`uSU(2)`$ and $`z_i`$ satisfying (A17). Alternatively we can define the the function $`\varphi (u)`$ of $`uSU(2)`$ as

$$\varphi (u):=f(u_{21},u_{22}),$$
(A19)
with $`f`$ as in (A3). Due to (A3) $`\varphi (u)`$ has the following “gauge” behavior

$$\varphi (\gamma u)=e^{i\omega (ab)}\varphi (u)=e^{i\omega n}\varphi (u),$$
(A20)
for $`\gamma =\left[\begin{array}{c}e^{i\omega }0\\ 0e^{i\omega }\end{array}\right]`$. The action of $`T_{n\rho }(g)`$ on $`\varphi (u)`$ is induced by its action on $`f(z_1,z_2)`$ (A4). We can now use Peter-Weyl theorem to express $`\varphi (u)`$ in terms of irreducible representations $`D_{q_1q_2}^j(u)`$ of $`SU(2)`$; however in doing that one notices that due to (A20) only the functions $`\varphi _q^j(u)=(2j+1)^{1/2}D_{nq_2}^j(u)`$ are needed (where $`j=|n|+k`$, $`k=0,1,\mathrm{}`$). Therefore $`\varphi (u)`$ can be written as

$$\varphi (u)=\underset{j=n}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{q=j}{\overset{j}{}}d_q^j\varphi _q^j(u).$$
(A21)
This set of functions is known as the canonical basis. This basis is better suited for generalizing the Euclidean spin foam models, since the notation maintains a certain degree of similarity with the one in . We can use this basis to write the matrix elements of the operators $`T_{n,\rho }(g)`$, namely

$$D_{j_1q_1j_2q_2}^{n\rho }(g)=_{SU\left(2\right)}\overline{\varphi }_{q_1}^{j_1}(u)\left[T_{n\rho }(g)\varphi _{q_2}^{j_2}(u)\right]𝑑u.$$
(A22)
Since $`T_{n_1n_2}(u_0)\varphi (u)=\varphi (u_0u)`$, invariance of the $`SU(2)`$ Haar measure implies that

$$D_{j_1q_1j_2q_2}^{n\rho }(u_0)=\delta _{j_1j_2}D_{q_1q_2}^{j_1}(u_0).$$
(A23)
In terms of these matrix elements equation (A11) acquires the more familiar form

$$f(g)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_{\rho =0}^{\mathrm{}}\left[\underset{j_1,j_2=n}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{q_1=j_1}{\overset{j_1}{}}\underset{q_2=j_2}{\overset{j_2}{}}\overline{D}_{j_1q_1j_2q_2}^{n,\rho }(g)f_{n,\rho }^{j_1q_1j_2q_2}\right](n^2+\rho ^2)𝑑\rho ,$$
(A24)
where

$$f_{n,\rho }^{j_1q_1j_2q_2}=f(g)D_{j_1q_1j_2q_2}^{n,\rho }(g)𝑑g,$$
(A25)
and the quantity in brackets represents the trace in (A11). In the same way we can translate equation (A16) obtaining

$$\delta (g)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_{\rho =0}^{\mathrm{}}\left[\underset{j=n}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{q=j}{\overset{j}{}}\overline{D}_{jqjq}^{n,\rho }(g)\right](n^2+\rho ^2)𝑑\rho .$$
(A26)
Using equations (A22) and (A23), we can compute

$`{\displaystyle _{SU\left(2\right)}}D_{j_1q_1j_2q_2}^{n,\rho }(u)𝑑u=\delta _{jj_2}{\displaystyle _{SU\left(2\right)}}D_{qq_2}^j(u)𝑑u=\delta _{j_20}\delta _{j_10},`$ (A27)
a second key equation for the paper.