text:
# High Energy Neutrinos From Superheavy Dark Matter Annihilation

## I Introduction

It is usually assumed that the interactions of dark matter and ordinary matter are weak, at least as small as ordinary weak interactions. It is also often assumed that the dark matter is a thermal relic of the big bang. If it is a thermal relic particle, then its mass should be less than 340 TeV, the unitarity limit gk . These considerations lead to the popular picture for relic dark matter of an an electrically neutral particle, without strong interactions, and with mass less than a couple of hundred TeV. In this paper we explore a path less traveled, and assume that the dark matter is a nonthermal relic, it interacts strongly with normal matter, and it is very massive. We show that the clean signature of this possibility is a detectable flux of energetic neutrinos from the sun

It has long been appreciated that if the dark matter is massive, say larger than a few TeV, it will behave effectively as dissipationless dark matter regardless of whether it has strong or electromagnetic interactions al ; stark . However, since the upper limit to the mass of a thermal relic is a few hundred TeV, the window for very massive dark matter particles was thought to be not very wide.

The recent development of scenarios for nonthermal production of dark matter has opened the window to the possibility that the dark matter might be supermassive, independent of its interaction strength ckr ; kt ; hs99 . Of the many possibilities for producing supermassive dark matter, perhaps gravitational production is the most general ckr ; kt . In this scenario, dark matter is produced by vacuum quantum fluctuations toward the end of inflation. The resulting particle density is independent of the interaction strength of the particle, which leads to the possibility that the dark matter may be electrically charged, strongly interacting, weakly interacting, or may have only gravitational interactions with normal matter.

A particularly promising mass range for gravitational production of dark matter is the mass scale of the inflaton, about $`10^{12}`$ GeV in chaotic inflation models. If the inflaton mass heralds a new mass scale, then it would be reasonable to imagine that there are other particles of similar mass. Furthermore, gravitational production of particles with a mass comparable to the inflaton mass naturally leaves behind a cosmologically interesting density of dark matter today ckr . The particle content may include exotic quarks or other strongly interacting particles in the spectrum of new particles simps .

In this paper we will consider the case that the dark matter is strongly interacting and supermassive, a simpzilla. Although our calculations will not be sensitive to whether the simpzilla is electrically charged, there are arguments that suggest that the simpzilla must be neutral neutronstars ; esteban . The possibility that the dark matter may be very massive and strongly interacting was recently discussed by Faraggi, Olive, and Pospelov boykeith . In that paper they have a nice discussion of the particle physics motivations for the existence of a massive, stable, strongly interacting particle, and they point out that the sun and Earth may be the source of high-energy neutrinos from the annihilation of the particles.

In the next section we will calculate the trapping rate and annihilation rate of simpzillas in the sun (and Earth) as a function of the simpzilla mass and interaction cross section. In Section III we will discuss the emergent spectrum of neutrinos from simpzilla annihilation in the center of the sun. In Section IV we will calculate the event rate in cubic-kilometer underwater or underice neutrino detectors. Finally, the last section contains our conclusions.

A preview of our main conclusion is that we expect a detectable high-energy solar neutrino flux for much of the parameter range of interest.

## II Capture and Annihilation Rate

Before launching into the details of the capture-rate calculation it is useful to make some extremely crude estimates. The first estimate is for the number of simpzillas that hit the sun.

Assuming the simpzillas comprise the local dark matter density of $`0.3\mathrm{GeV}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the local number density of simpzillas is $`3\times 10^{13}M_{12}^1\mathrm{cm}^3`$, where $`M_{12}`$ is the simpzilla mass in units of $`10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}`$. Assuming a typical velocity of $`240\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ for the simpzillas, the local flux is approximately $`6\times 10^7M_{12}^1\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$. The surface area of the sun is about $`6\times 10^{22}\mathrm{cm}^2`$, and the product of the surface area and the flux, $`4\times 10^{16}M_{12}^1\mathrm{s}^1`$, is a crude estimate of the rate of simpzillas hitting the sun.

Now consider trapping of simpzillas in the sun. Assuming the simpzilla impacts the sun with the solar escape velocity of $`600\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, the kinetic energy of the simpzilla is about $`10^6M_{12}\mathrm{GeV}`$. Suppose the simpzilla scatters with nucleons with a cross section of $`\sigma =10^{24}\sigma _{24}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ crosssection , and in every collision suffers an energy loss of $`m_{\mathrm{proton}}v^2/2=2\times 10^6\mathrm{GeV}`$. Through the center of the sun is about $`2\times 10^{36}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ of material, so there will be about $`2\times 10^{12}\sigma _{24}`$ collisions with a total energy loss of $`4\times 10^6\sigma _{24}\mathrm{GeV}`$. Since the initial kinetic energy is about $`10^6M_{12}\mathrm{GeV}`$, for masses much less than $`10^{12}\sigma _{24}^1\mathrm{GeV}`$, simpzillas with average velocity hitting the sun will be trapped, but if the simpzilla mass is much larger than that, only the low-velocity tail of the phase-space distribution will be captured.

These considerations determine the gross behavior of the dependence of the simpzilla trapping rate on the simpzilla mass and its interaction cross section. For a mass of about $`10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}`$, about $`10^{17}`$ simpzillas hit the sun per second. For an interaction cross section of about $`10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2`$, most of those simpzillas are captured.

Now we turn to the details of the capture calculation. The capture of dark matter particles in the sun and Earth has been studied in detail gould87 ; pressnspergel ; here we adapt the considerations to the capture of simpzillas by the sun. The capture rate of dark matter by the sun is given in terms of an integral over $`f(u)`$, the phase-space density of dark matter in the solar neighborhood normalized such that $`_0^{\mathrm{}}f(u)𝑑u`$ gives the number density of particles at $`R`$, some sufficiently large radius where the gravitational pull of the sun is negligible. The capture rate is given by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_C=4\pi R^2\left[\frac{1}{4}f(u)udud\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \right]P(\theta ,u),$$
(1)
where $`\theta `$ is the angle between the velocity of the particle and the normal to the surface at $`R`$, and hence the expression inside the square bracket is the contribution to the inward flux at radius $`R`$ from particles at velocity $`u`$ and angle $`\theta `$. Finally, $`P(\theta ,u)`$ gives the probability that particles with the given velocity and direction at some large radius $`R`$ will be captured by the sun.

Writing the angular momentum per unit mass as $`J=Ru\mathrm{sin}\theta `$, and defining $`w_{}^2=u^2+v_{}^2`$ where $`v_{}`$ is the escape velocity at the surface of the sun, we can rewrite the above as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_C=\pi _0^{\mathrm{}}f(u)u𝑑u_0^{R_{}w_{}}\frac{dJ^2}{u^2}P(J,u),$$
(2)
where $`R_{}`$ is the solar radius, and $`P(J,u)`$ now gives the capture probability for a particle with angular momentum $`J`$ and a velocity at infinity of $`u`$.

The regime in which dark matter capture is often considered is that of weakly interacting particles, where the optical depth of the sun is much less than unity, i.e., $`n_N\sigma R_{}1`$ where $`n_N`$ is the number density of nuclei in the sun, and $`\sigma `$ is the dark-matter—nucleon cross section. In this case $`P(J,u)`$ is given by gould87 :

$$P(J,u)=\left(_0^{R_{}w_{}}\frac{dJ^2}{u^2}\right)^1_0^R_{}𝑑r_0^{rw}\frac{dJ^2}{u^2}\frac{2n_N\sigma }{\sqrt{1(J/rw)^2}}\left(1\frac{\mu u^2}{4w^2}\right)\mathrm{\Theta }\left(\frac{4}{\mu }\frac{u^2}{w^2}\right),$$
(3)
where $`w`$ now stands for $`u^2+v^2`$ where $`v`$ is the escape velocity at radius $`r`$, and $`\mu =m_X/m_N`$ where $`m_X`$ is the mass of the dark matter particle (in our case, the simpzilla) and $`m_N`$ is the average nucleon mass. The first term in square brackets is a normalizing factor, the term $`2n_N\sigma dr/\sqrt{1(J/rw)^2}`$ gives the probability of collision, and the terms in the second line give the probability that the particle gets scattered into a bound orbit. The step function $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)`$ equals $`1`$ or $`0`$ depending on whether its argument is positive or not. It is simple to show that a collision produces a fractional energy change $`\mathrm{\Delta }E/E`$ that is uniformly distributed between $`0`$ and $`4/\mu `$ where we have taken the large $`\mu `$ limit (otherwise, $`4/\mu `$ is replaced by $`4\mu /(\mu +1)^2`$).

The above assumes that the dark matter particle typically suffers at most one collision in its passage through the sun. We are here interested in the opposite regime where $`n_N\sigma R_{}1`$. For each collision, the fractional energy change is of the order of $`1/\mu `$. Therefore, after $`n_N\sigma R_{}`$ collisions in the sun, the simpzilla would get captured if $`v_{}^2\stackrel{<}{_{}}(v_{}^2+u^2)(11/\mu )^{n_N\sigma R_{}}`$, implying all particles with $`u<u_{}`$ get captured where $`u_{}=v_{}[1/(11/\mu )^{n_N\sigma R_{}}1]^{1/2}`$. For capture by the sun, it adequate to approximate $`u_{}`$ by $`u_{}=v_{}/\sqrt{\mu /(n_N\sigma R_{})1}`$ if $`\mu /n_N\sigma R_{}>1`$ or $`u_{}=\mathrm{}`$ if $`\mu /n_N\sigma R_{}1`$. In other words, we approximate $`P`$ in Eq. (2) as a step function.

Using the Maxwell–Boltzmann phase space distribution function for the simpzillas$`f(u)=4(n_X/\sqrt{\pi u_{\mathrm{th}}^2})(u/u_{\mathrm{th}})^2\mathrm{exp}(u^2/u_{\mathrm{th}}^2)`$ noteVel  with $`\rho _X=0.3(\mathrm{GeV}/m_X)\mathrm{cm}^3`$, we obtain from Eq. (2) the capture rate for simpzillas. The capture rate has two forms, depending on the efficiency of energy loss in the sun. This is parametrized by $`q`$, defined as

$$q\frac{\mu }{n_N\sigma R_{}}=20\left(\frac{m_X}{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}\right)\left(\frac{10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2}{\sigma }\right)\left(\frac{R_{}}{7\times 10^{10}\mathrm{cm}}\right)^2\left(\frac{2\times 10^{33}\mathrm{g}}{M_{}}\right).$$
(4)
If $`q1`$, the simpzilla will be efficient in losing energy in its passage through the sun, and the capture rate is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_C=10^{17}\mathrm{s}^1(1+y^2)\left(\frac{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}{m_X}\right)\left(\frac{u_{\mathrm{th}}}{240\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}\right)\left(\frac{R_{}}{7\times 10^{10}\mathrm{cm}}\right)^2,$$
(5)
where

$$y2.5\left(\frac{v_{}}{600\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}\right)\left(\frac{u_{\mathrm{th}}}{240\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}\right)^1.$$
(6)
On the other hand, if $`q>1`$, only low velocity simpzillas are captured and the capture rate is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_C=10^{17}\mathrm{s}^1\left[1+y^2\mathrm{exp}(x^2)(1+y^2+x^2)\right]\left(\frac{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}{m_X}\right)\left(\frac{u_{\mathrm{th}}}{240\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}\right)\left(\frac{R_{}}{7\times 10^{10}\mathrm{cm}}\right)^2$$
(7)
where

$$x\frac{y}{\sqrt{q1}}.$$
(8)
The capture rate as a function of simpzilla mass and cross section is shown in Fig. 1.

The captured simpzillas settle into the core of the sun on a time scale determined by their drift velocity, $`t_{\mathrm{drift}}r/v_{\mathrm{drift}}`$ where $`v_{\mathrm{drift}}`$ can be estimated by balancing gravity with the viscous drag due to scattering with nucleons gould90 : $`G\overline{\rho }r^3m_X/r^2\sigma n_Nv_{\mathrm{drift}}m_N(\overline{T}/m_N)^{1/2}`$. Here, $`\overline{\rho }`$ and $`\overline{T}`$ is the typical mass density and temperature of the sun. The timescale is very short, of order $`100\mathrm{s}(\sigma /10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2)(10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}/m_X)(\overline{T}/10^7\mathrm{K})^{1/2}`$.

The subsequent evolution of the collection of simpzillas at the core can be divided into two stages. The first stage is when $`N`$, the total number of simpzillas, is less than $`N_{SG}`$, the critical number necessary for the simpzillas to become self gravitating. In this first stage the simpzillas are supported by the thermal pressure of the surrounding plasma and the simpzilla profile follows an isothermal distribution given by $`\rho _X(r)\mathrm{exp}(r^2/2r_{}^2)`$ where $`r_{}=(3T_{}/4\pi Gm_X\rho _{})^{1/2}=5000\mathrm{cm}(10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}/m_X)^{1/2}(T_{}/10^7\mathrm{K})^{1/2}(150\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3/\rho _{})^{1/2}`$, and $`T_{}`$ and $`\rho _{}`$ are the core temperature and density respectively. The critical number is defined by $`4\pi r_{}^3\rho _{}/3N_{SG}m_X`$, and is equal to

$$N_{SG}10^{26}\left(\frac{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}{m_X}\right)^{5/2}\left(\frac{T_{}}{10^7\mathrm{K}}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{150\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3}{\rho _{}}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(9)
To determine if $`N`$ ever exceeds $`N_{SG}`$, we have to determine $`N_{EQ}`$, the number of simpzillas in the sun when there is an equilibrium between annihilation and capture. If the size is given by $`r_{}`$ above, then $`N_{EQ}`$ is found by equating the annihilation rate and the capture rate: $`2\sigma _Av(N_{EQ})^2/(4\pi r_{}^3/3)\mathrm{\Gamma }_C`$. Using the annihilation cross-section $`\sigma _Av\stackrel{<}{_{}}1/(m_X^2v)`$, we obtain

$$N_{EQ}10^{30}\left(\frac{m_X}{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{T_{}}{10^7\mathrm{K}}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{150\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3}{\rho _{}}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_C}{10^{17}\mathrm{s}^1}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{v}{10^9c}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(10)
The above means that unless $`m_X`$ is significantly smaller than $`10^{12}`$GeV, no equilibrium is reached for $`N<N_{SG}`$. With the capture rate given above, $`N`$ can reach $`N_{SG}`$ on a time-scale much shorter than the lifetime of the sun. The next stage is then set for the collapse of the simpzilla collection, whose final state will be determined by a number of factors.

First, the critical $`N_{\mathrm{Chandra}}`$, beyond which the collection of simpzillas cannot be supported by degeneracy pressure, is given by balancing $`Gm_X^2N_{\mathrm{Chandra}}/r\alpha ^{1/3}N_{\mathrm{Chandra}}^{1/3}/r`$:

$$N_{\mathrm{Chandra}}\alpha ^{1/2}10^{21}\left(\frac{m_X}{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}\right)^3,$$
(11)
where $`\alpha `$ is the ratio of electron number density to simpzilla number density. This is initially a large number, i.e., the mass density of simpzillas and the mass density of nuclei are initially comparable, which implies $`\alpha m_X/m_N`$. It is unclear how much $`\alpha `$ would be reduced in the collapse process. It depends on how effective simpzillas are in dragging along protons. If $`\alpha \stackrel{>}{_{}}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^{10}(m_X/10^{12}\mathrm{GeV})`$, $`N_{\mathrm{grav}}`$ is smaller than $`N_{\mathrm{Chandra}}`$, and so the collapse would result in a simpzilla collection supported by non-relativistic electron degeneracy pressure. If $`\alpha \stackrel{<}{_{}}10^{10}(m_X/10^{12}\mathrm{GeV})`$, the configuration will collapse to a black hole, unless sufficient annihilation occurs along the way.

Let us consider the question of whether annihilation would halt an otherwise catastrophic collapse. Following stark , the fractional change in $`N`$ can be estimated by

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }N}{N}N𝑑t3\frac{\sigma _Av}{4\pi r^3(t)}.$$
(12)
Whether sufficient annihilation occurs or not depends on whether the integral is dominated by small $`r`$ (late times) or large $`r`$ (early times). The longer the configuration spends at small radii, or in other words, the slower the acceleration, the better the chance for annihilation to work against collapse. The relation $`dr/dt(r_0/r)^2(r_0/t_{\mathrm{drift}})`$ was used in Ref. stark , where $`r_0`$ is the initial radius and $`t_{\mathrm{drift}}`$ is the drift-time given before (the timescale for collapse is set by viscous drag). A perhaps more reasonable limit to how fast a given shell can accelerate is given by free fall: $`dr/dt1/r^{1/2}`$. Integrating, one obtains:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }N}{N}\frac{N}{2\pi }\frac{\sigma _Avt_{\mathrm{drift}}}{r_0^{3/2}r_f^{3/2}},$$
(13)
where we have taken the limit of $`r_fr_0`$. Clearly, if $`r_f`$ were sufficiently small, $`\mathrm{\Delta }N/N1`$ can always be achieved. The only thing one has to make sure is that the required $`r_f`$ is larger than the Schwarzschild radius. Using $`r_0r_{}`$ and $`NN_{SG}`$, it can be verified that

$$r_f10^4\mathrm{cm}\left(\frac{N}{10^{30}}\right)^{2/3}\left(\frac{\sigma _Av}{10^{32}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1}\right)^{2/3}\left(\frac{t_{\mathrm{drift}}}{100\mathrm{s}}\right)^{2/3}\left(\frac{5000\mathrm{cm}}{r_0}\right)$$
(14)
would do the job.

After shedding a fair fraction of the simpzillas, the equilibrium configuration should in principle be one where support is provided by non-relativistic electron degeneracy pressure: $`Gm_X^2N/r\alpha ^{2/3}N^{2/3}/(2m_er^2)`$ where $`m_e`$ is the electron mass. The above, together with the requirement of the balance of annihilation and capture, gives

$`N_{EQ}10^{20}\alpha ^{2/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_C}{10^{17}\mathrm{s}^1}}\right)^{1/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}{m_X}}\right)^{4/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{5\times 10^4\mathrm{GeV}}{m_e}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{v}{10^9c}}\right)^{1/3}.`$ (15)
Comparing the above with $`N_{\mathrm{Chandra}}`$ shows that the final configuration is just barely stable, depending somewhat on the exact value of $`\alpha `$ and $`m_X`$. If not stable, then the configuration goes through another cycle of collapse and eventual halt by annihilation. It is curious that this cycle might go on indefinitely, in which case each collapse would be accompanied by enhanced annihilation and therefore a mild neutrino outburst (using for example $`\mathrm{\Delta }N10^{20}`$ and $`t_{\mathrm{drift}}100`$ s gives an annihilation rate of $`10^{19}\mathrm{s}^1`$, not overwhelmingly larger than the capture rate of $`10^{17}\mathrm{s}^1`$). We will assume for the rest of this paper that the annihilation rate is given by capture rate, or more precisely, $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }_A\mathrm{\Gamma }_C`$.

Finally, there is the possibility that $`\alpha `$ drops to a sufficiently small value later on that electron degeneracy pressure is irrelevant, and the simpzillas are supported instead by their own degeneracy pressure (or its analog if it were a boson; see e.g., Ref. liddle97 ). In this case the expression equivalent to Eq. (11) is

$$N_{\mathrm{Chandra}}10^{21}(10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}/m_X)^3,$$
(16)
and the equilibrium number will be

$$N_{EQ}10^5(\mathrm{\Gamma }_C/10^{17}\mathrm{s}^1)^{1/3}(10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}/m_X)^{7/3}(v/10^9c)^{1/3},$$
(17)
so that the final equilibrium configuration is clearly stable.

For completeness, we give the capture rate of simpzillas by Earth:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_C`$ $`=`$ $`8\times 10^{12}\mathrm{s}^1\left[1+y^2\mathrm{exp}(x^2)(1+y^2+x^2)\right]\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}{m_X}}\right),`$ (18)
where now $`y=0.04`$, and $`x`$ is given by

$$xy\left[\frac{1}{(1\mu ^1)^{N_{\mathrm{coll}}}}1\right]^{1/2},N_{\mathrm{coll}}2\times 10^9\left(\frac{\sigma }{10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2}\right),\mu 10^{12}\left(\frac{m_X}{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}\right).$$
(19)
The parameter $`N_{\mathrm{coll}}`$ is the average number of collisions the simpzilla suffers. It may be identified with $`\mu /q`$ in the case of the sun rock . The expression for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_C`$ is well approximated by the corresponding expressions in Eqs. (4) through (7) for $`y>1`$, which applies for the case of the sun. For Earth we have to resort to this more complicated expression; however, it has simple limiting forms. For $`N_{\mathrm{coll}}/\mu 1`$, one can use \[cf. Eq. (5)\]

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_C=8\times 10^{12}\mathrm{s}^1(1+y^2)\left(\frac{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}{m_X}\right).$$
(20)
For $`N_{\mathrm{coll}}/\mu 1`$, the capture rate is well approximated by \[cf. Eq. (7)\]

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_C=8\times 10^{12}\mathrm{s}^1x^2y^2\left(\frac{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}{m_X}\right)$$
(21)
with $`x=y/\sqrt{q1}`$, where $`q=5\times 10^2(m_X/10^{12}\mathrm{GeV})(10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2/\sigma )`$. For most, but not all, of the parameters of interest, it is this last regime that is relevant for capture by Earth, which gives $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_C4\times 10^4\mathrm{s}^1(10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}/m_X)^2(\sigma /10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2)`$. The total number of simpzillas captured in the lifetime of Earth, $`t_E10^{17}\mathrm{s}`$, is then $`4\times 10^{21}(10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}/m_X)^2(\sigma /10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2)`$. We can compare this with the number of simpzillas in equilibrium using Eq. (10), with the replacements $`T_{}T_{}5000`$ K, $`\rho _{}\rho _{}10\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, and $`v2\times 10^{11}c`$, obtaining $`N_{EQ}5\times 10^{18}(m_X/\mathrm{GeV})^{1/2}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_C/400\mathrm{s}^1)^{1/2}`$. Therefore, the simpzillas captured in Earth would be in equilibrium unless the mass or cross section is significantly different from what is assumed above. In general, the annihilation rate is given by:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_A=2\times 10^4\mathrm{s}^1\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_C}{4\times 10^4\mathrm{s}^1}}\right]\mathrm{tanh}^2\left[10^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^{12}\mathrm{GeV}}{m_X}}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_C}{4\times 10^4\mathrm{s}^1}}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t_E}{10^{17}\mathrm{s}}}\right)\right].`$ (22)
The capture rate for Earth is shown in Fig. 1 along with the capture rate for the sun.

## III SIMPZILLA ANNIHILATION IN THE SUN

Take a simple picture where the simpzilla annihilates and produces two quarks or two gluons, each of energy $`m_X`$ where $`m_X`$ is the mass of the simpzilla. The quarks and gluons then fragment into high multiplicity jets of hadrons and secondary decay products.

Defining $`x=E/E_{\mathrm{jet}}=E/m_X`$, one can take the fragmentation function for the total number of hadrons to be chill

$$\frac{dN_H}{dx}=ax^{3/2}(1x)^2.$$
(23)
Here $`a`$ is some constant that can be set by total energy considerations:

$$1=_0^1x\frac{dN_H}{dx}𝑑x=a\frac{16}{15},$$
(24)
so $`a=15/16`$.

The total number of hadrons produced in the fragmentation of the jet is

$$N_H=_ϵ^1\frac{dN_H}{dx}𝑑x=\frac{15}{8}\frac{1}{\sqrt{ϵ}}\left[1\frac{8}{3}\sqrt{ϵ}+2ϵϵ^2/3\right].$$
(25)
When calculating the total multiplicity, the cutoff for the integral should be $`ϵ=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_X`$. Using $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}=0.1`$ GeV and defining $`M_{12}=m_X/10^{12}`$ GeV,

$$N_H=\frac{15}{8}\left(\frac{m_X}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}}\right)^{1/2}=6\times 10^6M_{12}^{1/2}.$$
(26)
The final decay chain of the hadrons will contain all species of neutrinos.

We will be interested in the number of heavy quarks, bottom and top. If all quarks were light, then all flavors would be produced equally. However, because of the mass of the heavy quark, the number must be found by using $`ϵ=M_Q/m_X`$ in Eq. (26) rather than $`ϵ=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_X`$:

$$N_QN_H\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}}{M_Q}},$$
(27)
where $`M_Q`$ is the mass of a typical meson containing the heavy quark: 2 GeV for the charm, 5 GeV for bottom, and 175 GeV for top. Therefore, per annihilation, one expects $`N_{\mathrm{charm}}/N_H=0.23`$, $`N_{\mathrm{bottom}}/N_H=0.14`$, and $`N_{\mathrm{top}}/N_H=0.024`$. This means that each annihilation into two jets produces $`7.4\times 10^6M_{12}^{1/2}`$ light hadrons, $`2.8\times 10^6M_{12}^{1/2}`$ charmed hadrons, $`1.6\times 10^6M_{12}^{1/2}`$ bottom hadrons, and $`2.8\times 10^5M_{12}^{1/2}`$ top hadrons.

It is also possible to estimate the spectrum of the heavy-quark hadrons:

$$\frac{E_{\mathrm{min}}}{N_{\mathrm{TOTAL}}}\frac{dN}{dE}\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{E}{E_{\mathrm{min}}}\right)^{3/2},(E>E_{\mathrm{min}}),$$
(28)
where $`E_{\mathrm{min}}`$ is the mass of the top quark, bottom quark, or charm quark.

The resulting $`E^{3/2}`$ fragmentation spectrum for top hadrons is shown by the dotted line labeled “fragmentation” in Fig. 2. The minimum energy is approximately the mass of the top quark, 175 GeV.

We will assume that simpzilla annihilation occurs in a medium of density found in the center of the sun, $`\rho 200\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, or $`n10^{26}\mathrm{cm}^3`$. Using an interaction cross section of $`10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2`$, the hadronic interaction length is about $`10^2\mathrm{cm}`$. Light and charmed hadrons scatter many times before decay and the resultant neutrinos will have very low energy. The $`B`$ lifetime is about $`10^{12}\mathrm{s}`$, so the decay length is $`3\times 10^2(E/M_B)\mathrm{cm}`$, or $`6\times 10^3(E/\mathrm{GeV})\mathrm{cm}`$ using $`M_B=5\mathrm{GeV}`$. The ratio of the decay length to interaction length is $`L_D/L_I=0.6(E/\mathrm{GeV})`$. So for $`E>5\mathrm{GeV}`$ the $`B`$ will also scatter and lose energy before decay. It won’t completely stop after one scattering. Most of the cross section is diffractive production of low-energy crud and there should still be a leading $`B`$, so $`B`$ decay is a potential source of high-energy neutrinos.

However, top hadrons are a promising source. The top lifetime is short, and almost 100% of the time decays as $`tWb`$. The $`W`$ lifetime is $`3\times 10^{25}(E/80\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V})`$ s, which results in a decay length of about $`10^{16}(E/\mathrm{GeV})\mathrm{cm}`$, which will be much less than the interaction length for even the most energetic tops. The $`W`$ then decays with a branching ratio of $`1/3`$ as $`Wl\nu _l`$ (equally into $`\tau \nu _\tau `$, $`\mu \nu _\mu `$ and $`e\nu _e`$). Therefore it is reasonable to assume the top quark will produce energetic neutrinos before losing energy.

The spectrum of neutrinos produced in the chain $`tW\nu `$ is straightforward to calculate. A convenient analytic fit to the spectrum is given by

$$\frac{dN}{dE}=𝒩\frac{E+M_W}{\sqrt{\left[E+M_t\right]\left[(E+M_t)^2M_t^2\right]\left[(E+M_W)^2M_W^2\right]}},$$
(29)
where $`𝒩`$ is a normalization factor. This spectrum is shown in Fig. 2. As expected, at energies larger than the top mass the $`E^{3/2}`$ spectrum is recovered.

We will use the spectrum in Fig. 2 as the spectrum of neutrinos produced by simpzilla annihilation. Since there are about $`2.8\times 10^5M_{12}^{1/2}`$ tops produced per annihilation, and 10% of them make $`\tau \nu _\tau `$ followed by $`\tau `$ decay including a $`\nu _\tau `$, the total yield of $`\nu _\tau `$’s per annihilation is $`5.6\times 10^4M_{12}^{1/2}`$. Top (as well as $`\tau `$) decay also produces $`\mu +\nu _\mu `$ and $`e+\nu _e`$, but the electrons are absorbed and the muons are stopped before decay, so the yield of high-energy $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _e`$ per annihilation is about $`3.8\times 10^4M_{12}^{1/2}`$. Only about 20% of the neutrinos will be produced with energy above 50 GeV, so the emission rate of tau neutrinos in the core is about $`10^4M_{12}^{1/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$ with a spectrum above 50 GeV shown in the figure. This, of course, is the emission rate in the core. We now turn to the propagation of the neutrinos through the sun.

## IV The emergent spectrum of neutrinos

The total neutrino emission rate above 50 GeV from the core of the sun is $`f_{\mathrm{core}}=10^4M_{12}^{1/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$ for $`\nu _\tau `$, and half that for $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _e`$. Here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_A=\mathrm{\Gamma }_C/2`$ is the simpzilla annihilation rate. The core emission rate spectrum above 50 GeV for each neutrino species is \[see Eq. (29)\]

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{df}{dE}}\right)_{\mathrm{core}}`$ $`=`$ $`333\mathrm{GeV}^{3/2}{\displaystyle \frac{f_{\mathrm{core}}}{E_{\mathrm{min}}}}`$ (30)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{E+M_W}{\sqrt{\left[E+M_t\right]\left[(E+M_t)^2M_t^2\right]\left[(E+M_W)^2M_W^2\right]}}}\mathrm{\Theta }(EE_{\mathrm{min}}),`$
where $`E_{\mathrm{min}}=50`$ GeV and the theta-function vanishes for negative argument and is unity for positive argument. Of course $`df/dE`$ has been normalized such that

$$f_{\mathrm{core}}=_{E_{\mathrm{min}}}^{\mathrm{}}\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{core}}𝑑E.$$
(31)
But since the sun is opaque to energetic neutrinos, the emergent emission rate spectrum is not the same as the core emission rate spectrum. The emission rate spectrum of neutrinos that emerge unscathed is

$$\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{unscattered}}=\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{core}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\sigma (E)_0^{\mathrm{}}n(r)𝑑r\right),$$
(32)
where $`n(r)`$ is the radial dependence of the number density of the sun and $`\sigma _{CC}(E)`$ is the energy-dependent charged-current cross section given in Table 1. Also given in Table 1 is the neutral-current cross section.

The electrons and muons produced by charged-current interactions are rapidly thermalized, so the effect of charged-current interactions is effectively to remove $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _e`$ neutrinos above a transparency energy $`E_\kappa `$ where $`\sigma (E_\kappa )n(r)𝑑r`$ becomes unity. Using

$$n(r)=1.4\times 10^{26}\mathrm{exp}(r/0.1R_{})\mathrm{cm}^3$$
(33)
for the density profile and adopting the cross section for $`E<10^4`$ GeV, the transparency energy is $`E_\kappa =150`$ GeV, and the emission spectrum of $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _e`$ emergent from the sun is

$$\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{emergent}}=\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{core}}\mathrm{exp}(E/E_\kappa ).$$
(34)
This emission rate spectrum is shown in Fig. 3.

The situation is different for tau neutrinos. The lifetime of the tau produced in a charged-current scattering is so short that it decays before significant energy loss. Since the decay of the tau includes a $`\nu _\tau `$, the effect of the scattering and subsequent decay is simply to reduce the energy of the incident $`\nu _\tau `$ to about 20% of its incident value. Therefore, an incident tau neutrino above the transparency energy will continually suffer tau production and decay interactions, but will not be removed from the flux of high-energy neutrinos. The process will continue until the tau-neutrino energy has been degraded to the transparency energy or below, then the tau neutrino will escape.

This process has been considered by Halzen and Saltzberg francis  for very energetic neutrinos propagating through Earth. They found that the emergent spectrum of neutrinos was very well described by a lognormal distribution centered on the transparency energy with a dispersion of 0.49 decades in energy. We will assume that the flux of scattered tau neutrinos above the transparency energy emerges in a lognormal distribution peaked at $`E_\kappa =150\mathrm{GeV}`$ with a dispersion of 0.49 decades in energy.

The emergent emission spectrum of tau neutrinos has two contributions. The first contribution is the unscattered emission spectrum, given by Eq. (32). The second contribution is the fraction of the original emission above the transparency energy which will emerge as a lognormal distribution centered on the transparency energy;

$$\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{scattered}}=\frac{f_{\mathrm{core}}}{E_{\mathrm{min}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\left(\mathrm{log}E\mathrm{log}E_\kappa \right)^2/2\sigma ^2\right],$$
(35)
where $`\sigma =0.49`$ and $``$ is found by demanding that the integral of Eq. (35) results in the total number of neutrinos above 150 GeV that are scattered. (If the initial energy of the neutrino is below 150 GeV, a scattering will produce a neutrino below $`E_{\mathrm{min}}`$.) The result is $`=4.6\times 10^2`$.

So for tau neutrinos, the emergent neutrino spectrum is

$$\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{emergent}}=\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{unscattered}}+\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{scattered}}.$$
(36)
This spectrum is also shown in Fig. 3.

## V The Event Rate

In the last section we calculated the emission rate and emission rate spectrum of neutrinos from the sun. In this section we will calculate the event rate in a suppositious underice or underwater neutrino detector of approximate size of a cubic kilometer icecube . We will only consider the rate for “contained events,” where the neutrino converts inside the volume of the detector. Including “uncontained events” will not significantly alter our results because the muon range at the relevant energy range here is comparable to a kilometer. We will assume that the efficiency of detection is a step function: zero below 50 GeV and unity above 50 GeV.

The first step in calculating the event rate is the simple step of converting the emission rate spectrum calculated in the last section to a flux spectrum arriving at Earth. Since the sun-Earth distance is $`D=1.5\times 10^8`$ km, the flux spectrum is

$$\frac{dF}{dE}=\frac{1}{4\pi D^2}\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{emergent}}=3.5\times 10^{18}\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{emergent}}\mathrm{km}^2.$$
(37)
The mean-free-path of neutrinos is much larger than the size of the detector, so the fraction of the incident neutrinos of energy $`E`$ that convert inside the detector is $`n_{\mathrm{ice}}\sigma _{CC}(E)L`$ where $`n_{\mathrm{ice}}`$ is the number density of the target and $`L=1\mathrm{km}`$ is the size of the detector. The event-rate spectrum is given simply by

$$\frac{dR}{dE}=\frac{dF}{dE}\left[n_{\mathrm{ice}}\sigma _{CC}(E)L\right]A\mathrm{\Theta }(E50\mathrm{GeV}),$$
(38)
where $`A`$ is the area of the detector, assumed to be 1 km<sup>2</sup>, and the $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$-function represents the detector efficiency.

Since $`n_{\mathrm{ice}}\sigma _{CC}(E)L=4\times 10^{10}(E/1\mathrm{GeV})`$, we find for the event-rate spectrum

$$\frac{dR}{dE}=1.4\times 10^{27}\frac{E}{\mathrm{GeV}}\left(\frac{df}{dE}\right)_{\mathrm{emergent}}\mathrm{\Theta }(E50\mathrm{GeV}).$$
(39)
The total event rate is the integral of the event-rate spectrum.

For muon or electron neutrinos, the total event rate can be found using Eq. (34) for the emergent emission spectrum, with result

$$R_{\mathrm{TOTAL}}(\nu _\mu ,\nu _e)=1.6\times 10^{22}M_{12}^{1/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_A.$$
(40)
This event rate is shown in Fig. 4, and the event-rate spectrum is shown in Fig. 5.

For tau neutrinos, the total event rate is found using Eq. (36) for the emergent emission spectrum. For tau neutrinos the total event rate is

$$R_{\mathrm{TOTAL}}(\nu _\tau )=1.1\times 10^{20}M_{12}^{1/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_A.$$
(41)
This event rate is also shown in Fig. 4, along with the event-rate spectrum in Fig. 5.

The contribution of scattered tau neutrinos dominates the event rate. While the $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _e`$ events would be peaked toward the lower energy of the detector and drop rapidly, the $`\nu _\tau `$ events would have a relatively flat spectrum extending from the lower limit of the detector out to about 1000 GeV.

The mean energies of the detected neutrinos are

$`E=197`$ $`\mathrm{GeV}(\nu _\mu ,\nu _e)`$
$`E=3454`$ $`\mathrm{GeV}(\nu _\tau ).`$ (42)
We close this section by remarking on the possibility of a detectable event rate from annihilation of simpzillas captured by Earth. The ratio of the event rate for neutrinos of solar origin to the event rate for neutrinos of terrestrial origin is shown in Fig. 6. For small mass or large interaction cross section the signal from the center of Earth my be larger than the solar signal. For $`\sigma \stackrel{<}{_{}}10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ the solar signal will dominate for simpzilla masses larger than about $`10^9`$ GeV, while for $`\sigma \stackrel{<}{_{}}10^{26}\mathrm{cm}^2`$, the solar signal dominates for the entire range of simpzilla mass considered here.

## VI Conclusions

If the local dark matter is very massive and strongly interacting, it should collect in the sun and Earth in sufficient numbers that equilibrium will be maintained between the capture rate and the annihilation rate.

Annihilation or decay of very massive particles into hadronic channels in the solar core or at the center of Earth leads to the production of high-energy neutrinos. While electron and muon neutrinos above 150 GeV are mostly absorbed, energetic tau neutrinos will be emitted, and will be the signature of energetic jet fragmentation at the center of the sun.

For most of the range of parameter space, the event rate expected in kilometer-scale neutrino detectors will be well within detection limits. Such detectors should be able to exclude (or confirm!) the possibility of simpzillas as dark matter.

In this paper we have only considered production of neutrinos through top quark production and decay. Another potential source of tau neutrinos is bottom quark production and decay. While this may increase the emission rate of tau neutrinos, the spectrum is expected to be the same.

It is important to note that there is essentially no background. For example consider the background from cosmic-ray produced neutrinos. To produce a 1 TeV neutrino, a center-of-momentum energy of around $`\sqrt{s}=\sqrt{2m_{\mathrm{proton}}E}=10`$ TeV is required, where $`E`$ is the cosmic ray energy. Thus, a threshold energy of $`E_{TH}=5\times 10^{16}`$eV is required to produce a 1 TeV neutrino. The cosmic-ray flux at high energies is approximately

$$E^3\frac{dF}{dE}=10^{24.5}\frac{\mathrm{eV}^2}{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{sr}\mathrm{m}^2},$$
(43)
which when integrated to give the total flux of particles with energy greater than $`E`$ gives

$$F(E>E_{TH})=\frac{1}{2E_{TH}^2}10^{24.5}\frac{\mathrm{eV}^2}{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{sr}\mathrm{m}^2}=\frac{6.1}{\mathrm{yr}\mathrm{deg}^2\mathrm{km}^2}.$$
(44)
Since the sun subtends about a square degree, this sets the scale of the background. For much of parameter space, the signal should be well above the background.

In Fig. 7 we present out results in the $`\sigma `$ vs. $`m_X`$ plane and compare then with other limits. Clearly our considerations greatly extends the excluded region.

Indirect detection of simpzillas through annihilation in the sun is complementary to the other idea for indirect detection: wimpzilla decay producing ultra-high energy cosmic rays first ; second .

Finally, we comment on the possible role of neutrino oscillations. Neutrino oscillations will be important if

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m^2}{10^3\mathrm{eV}^2}\frac{10^2\mathrm{GeV}}{E_\nu }\frac{L}{2\times 10^9\mathrm{cm}}\stackrel{>}{_{}}1,$$
(45)
where $`L`$ is the path length. Since $`2\times 10^9\mathrm{cm}`$ is $`R_{}/35`$, if $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ is greater than or of the order of $`3\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, oscillations will occur in the sun. If $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ is greater than or of order of $`10^7\mathrm{eV}^2`$, then oscillations will be important during the neutrino’s transit to Earth. Oscillations between $`\nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _\mu `$ or $`\nu _e`$ in the sun will decrease the $`\nu _\tau `$ emission rate, while oscillations in transit will change the flavor signature of the signal.

###### Acknowledgements.

I.F.M.A. was supported in part by NSF KDI Grant 9872979. The work of E.W.K. was supported in part by NASA (grant number NAG5-7092). L.H. was supported by NASA NAG5-7047, NSF PHY-9513835, and the Taplin Fellowship at the IAS, and by the Outstanding Junior Investigator Award, DOE grant DE-FG02-92-ER40699. We would like to acknowledge useful conversations with Pasquale Blasi, Gustavo Burdman, Francis Halzen, Chris Hill and George Smoot. I.F.M.A. would like to acknowledge the hospitality of Boston University.


format: text

text:
# A 421 d Activity Cycle in the BeX Recurrent Transient A0538–66 from MACHO monitoring

## 1 Introduction

The recurrent X-ray transient A0538–66 was discovered with Ariel V when two outbursts, separated by $``$17 d, were observed (White and Carpenter 1978). Further outbursts were observed with HEAO-1 which, when the source was active, was found to have a periodicity of 16.668 d (Johnston et al. 1979; Johnston et al. 1980; Skinner et al. 1980; Skinner 1980), the precision of which led to its interpretation as being orbital. Skinner (1981) used archival plates taken over $``$50 years in order to obtain an improved value of 16.6515 d for this periodicity, based on the recurrence of the outbursts.

A0538–66 has been optically identified with a B star (V$``$15) (Johnston et al. 1980), and an X-ray pulse period of 69 ms indicates that the compact object is a neutron star (Skinner et al. 1982). In quiescence (X-ray ’off’) the colour, magnitude and radial velocity are consistent with a B2 III-IV star in the LMC (Charles et al. 1983), but during outburst (which can reach as high as V$``$12; see Densham et al. 1983) it is redder with a spectral type of B8-9 I. During long phases of inactivity (there have been no large X-ray or optical outbursts reported since 1983) there is evidence that a remnant envelope is still present in the system (Smale et al. 1984). A0538–66 has usually been interpreted as a Be-type system which exhibits extreme outbursts as a result of its neutron star companion interacting with the Be star in a highly eccentric orbit (Charles et al. 1983).

Here we exploit the fortuitous location of A0538–66 in a MACHO field and the extended ($``$5 yrs), regular ($``$nightly) monitoring by the MACHO project in order to examine the quiescent variability of this, the most X-ray luminous of all Be X-ray transients.

## 2 Observations

The MACHO observations were made using the 1.27 m telescope at Mount Stromlo Observatory, Australia. A dichroic beamsplitter and filters provide simultaneous CCD photometry in two passbands, a ’red’ band ($``$6300–7600 Å) and a ’blue’ band ($``$4500–6300 Å). The latter filter is a broader version of the Johnson V passband (see Alcock et al. 1995a, 1999 for further details).

The images were reduced with the standard MACHO photometry code sodophot, based on point-spread function fitting and differential photometry relative to bright neighbouring stars. Further details of the instrumental set-up and data processing may be found in Alcock et al. (1995b, 1999), Marshall et al. (1994) and Stubbs et al. (1993).

## 3 MACHO Project Photometry

### 3.1 Light curve

We show in Fig. 1 the ’blue’ and ’red’ photometry of A0538–66, the magnitudes of which were transformed to Johnson V and Kron-Cousins R respectively, using the absolute calibration of the MACHO fields. This absolute calibration depends on the colour of the object itself; therefore, at times when there was no red data available a mean colour for the data was used. The data consist of MACHO project observations taken during the period 1993 January 14 to 1998 May 28. There are fewer data points in the R-band because half of one of the four CCD chips in the red focal plane is inoperative. Due to the German telescope mount, the focal plane may be rotated by 0 or 180 relative to the sky (depending on hour angle), hence A0538–66 falls on the dead area in about half the observations. As the V-band light curve has denser sampling than the R-band, only the V-band light curve was used in the rest of the analysis.

### 3.2 Period analysis and folded light curve

To search for periodicities in the V-band light curve two different frequency domain techniques were employed : (i) we calculated a Lomb-Scargle (LS) periodogram (Lomb 1976; Scargle 1982) on the dataset, to search for sinusoidal modulations \[this periodogram is a modified discrete Fourier transform (DFT), with normalizations which are explicitly constructed for the general case of time sampling, including uneven sampling; see Scargle 1982\]; (ii) we constructed a phase dispersion minimisation (PDM) periodogram, which works well even for highly non-sinusoidal light curves (see Stellingwerf 1978).

As a modulation on longer timescales is clearly evident in the light curve the data were searched over the frequency range 0.001-0.01 cycle d-1 with a resolution of 1x$`10^6`$ cycle d-1 (Figure 2). To search for modulations in the region of the previously quoted 16.6 d period the long term variations were removed. The data were split into 15 sections and each section was detrended separately by subtracting a linear fit. A frequency space of 0.01-1.2 cycle d-1 was searched with a resolution of 1x$`10^4`$ cycle d-1 (Figure 5).

#### 3.2.1 The 421 d period

In the longer period search a dominant peak is found in the LS periodogram at P = 420.52 d (Figure 2). The peak in the LS has a confidence of greater than 99% as determined from a cumulative probability distribution (CDF) appropriate for the data set. By constructing the cumulative probability distribution (CDF) of the random variable $`P_X`$($`\omega `$), the power at a given frequency, where X is pure noise (Scargle 1982), we can measure the significance of the peaks in the LS periodogram. In practice the CDF was constructed using a Monte Carlo simulation method. Noise sets with the same sampling as the MACHO data were generated, and the LS periodogram was run upon each one. The peak power occurring in the periodogram due purely to noise was then recorded. This was repeated for ten-thousand noise sets, to produce good statistics. From these values the probability of obtaining a given peak power from pure noise can then be calculated and the CDF derived. In order to test the significance of peaks from a given data set, the generated noise sets should have the same variance. Therefore, each noise set was generated from a random number generator that takes values from a Gaussian distribution with the same variance as the data set. The dip in the PDM periodogram corresponding to the peak in the LS periodogram is broad and highly structured, therefore a centroiding technique was employed to calculate the mode of the dip giving a period of 420.82 d (Figure 2).

The MACHO V-band data were folded on P = 420.82 d (Figure 3, top panel), and then binned (Figure 3, middle panel), to examine the form of the modulated variability. Burst points that correspond to the 16.6 d period are evident in the data (see Section 3.2.2), these were removed and the remaining data was bin-folded (Figure 3, bottom panel). To see if the broadness of the peak (FWHM = 6.0x$`10^4`$ d-1) in the LS periodogram for the longer period search was due to it being quasi-periodic we simulated a truly sinusoidal light curve to be used in period searching. The light curve was produced using a Gaussian random number generator with the same mean and standard deviation as the data plus a sinusoid with a frequency set to the period found. A period search was performed over the frequency range 0.001-0.01 cycle d-1 with 1x$`10^6`$ cycle d-1 resolution. The resulting LS periodogram is shown as a dashed line in Figure 4. The peak produced from the simulated light curve has a FWHM = 5.5x$`10^4`$ d-1 and is almost as broad as that for the real data which shows that the modulation found is truly periodic.

In order to estimate the uncertainty in the 420.82 d dip in the PDM periodogram we performed a Monte Carlo simulation in which we created artificial light curves with the same mean and standard deviation as the V-band data. Phase dispersion minimisation periodograms were constructed and the minimum value found for each artificial dataset using the centroiding technique near the dip of interest was recorded. The results had an average scatter of $`\pm `$0.79 d.

#### 3.2.2 The 16.6 d period

The resulting LS periodogram for the short period search has a peak with much greater than 99% confidence at P = 16.6667 d, together with two marginally significant peaks around 1 d (Figure 5). To identify the origin of these peaks more simulated datasets were created, which had the same mean and standard deviation as the detrended data. These were produced using a Gaussian random number generator plus a sinusoid with period 16.6667 d. The resulting light curve was searched over a frequency range of 0.01-1.2 cycle d-1 with a resolution of 1x$`10^4`$ cycle d-1. As can be seen from the resulting LS periodogram (Figure 5) the two peaks are 1 d aliases produced due to the sampling of the dataset. Using the centroiding technique again the dip in the PDM periodogram for the short period search was found to correspond to P = 16.6510 d (Figure 5).

The detrended V-band data were folded on P = 16.6667 d and P = 16.6510 d using Skinner’s ephemeris (1982). The folded light curves showed that the modulation was highly non-sinusoidal, hence we took the PDM value for the orbital period, and the bin-folded light curve using P = 16.6510 d is shown in Figure 6. The error on the period was propagated using the same method as for the long period search producing a value of $`\pm `$0.0022 d.

## 4 Discussion

These extensive MACHO observations have revealed, not only a remarkably stable long-term modulation, but also the presence of the same 16.6 d orbital modulation (in the form of mini-outbursts) that had been seen (on a larger scale) in the 1980’s. But the key additional point is that these mini-outbursts are constrained in 421 d phase to only occur during minima, thereby establishing a physical link between the two. What can this be?

To explain the origins of the long-term variability in A0538–66 it is instructive to consider other systems that show modulations on these timescales. The soft X-ray transient (SXT) 4U 1630-47 is the shortest known recurrent black-hole SXT, with an outburst recurrence interval of $``$600-690 d (Jones et al. 1976, Priedhorsky 1986, Kuulkers et al. 1997). The outburst recurrence times vary, as do the intensities at the peak of the outburst and its duration (Kuulkers et al. 1997), this behaviour is also seen in A0538–66 (Skinner et al. 1980). Both sources also undergo transitions between high and low activity on timescales $``$1 yr (4U 1630-47; Kuulkers et al. 1997, A0538–66; Skinner et al. 1980, Pakull & Parmar 1981), and exhibit inter-outburst activity (4U 1630-47; Parmar et al. 1997, Kuulkers et al. 1997, A0538–66; Densham et al. 1983). Kuulkers et al. (1997) showed that the outburst recurrence time cannot be related to orbital variations of 4U 1630-47. Due to heavy reddening the optical counterpart has not yet been detected in 4U 1630-47, and so a Be-type secondary cannot be excluded.

Analysis of X-ray observations of another Be/X-ray transient, A0535+26, led to an orbital period of 110.3 d for the source (Finger et al. 1996). Analysis of the long term optical light curve by Clark et al. (1999) showed periodicities at $``$1400 d, $``$476 d and $``$103 d, but no evidence was found for the $``$110 d presumed orbital period of the neutron star. Clark et al. (1999) could not identify the origin of these quasi-periods, and it was not clear if they were coherent over time.

In normal Be star shell ejection events, which recur on timescales of years, the circumstellar matter lost forms an equatorial disc around the Be star due to its rapid rotation (Slettebak 1987). The Paschen continuum of the equatorial envelope is in emission and thus emits optical light which is redder in B-V than that emitted by the early type star. The formation of the disc will either add red light and increase the optical brightness of the system or will mask the early type star and make it appear fainter, depending on the inclination (Corbet et al. 1986, Janot-Pacheco et al. 1987). The photometric behaviour of the Be star in A0538–66 in the V, V-R diagram (Figure 7) shows a reddening as the source gets fainter. The fading and rising events in A0538–66’s light curve could be due to the formation and depletion of an equatorial disc seen at high inclination.

If this is the case, the fact that the neutron star is believed to be in an eccentric orbit around the Be star could set a limit on the size of the equatorial disc that can form producing the 421 d periodicity. Using this model the mini-outbursts only occur when the disc reaches the upper limit set by the neutron star’s orbit. Although Okazaki (1998) and Negueruela (1999) suggest that the presence of the neutron star in orbit around the Be star will tidally truncate the circumstellar disc of the Be star well within the orbital radius of the neutron star, thus preventing accretion, modelling by Haynes et al. (1980) and Brown and Boyle (1984) shows that matter can escape from the Be star and be spread over a domain in the vicinity of the orbit of the compact star near periastron. Therefore the ’flat’ part of A0538–66’s light curve is when we are seeing the normal B star without any equatorial disc, hence no outbursts can occur. If this is correct, the previously obtained spectra thought to be taken during ’quiescence’ were really taken during the extended dips in A0538–66’s light curve. This indicates that the true quiescent magnitude of the system is $``$V=14.4, and the quoted quiescent spectral-type must be re-determined. As the colours obtained from the MACHO data are not precise enough we cannot confirm the previously determined spectral classification for A0538–66. A study of archival data of A0538–66, including data taken before 1980, will be presented in a future publication.

Skinner (1981) found the recurrence of the outbursts of A0538–66 to be 16.6515 $`\pm `$0.0005 d or 16.6685$`\pm `$0.0005 d. We find the periodicity to be 16.6510$`\pm `$0.0022 d, which within errors confirms the first of Skinner’s previously suggested orbital periods for A0538–66.

## 5 Acknowledgements

KEM acknowledges the support of a PPARC studentship. KEM and PAC thank Malcolm Coe for useful discussions. DM is supported by Fondecyt 1990440. This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by University of California Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract No. W-7405-Eng-48.


text:
# The supernova remnant RX J0852.0–4622: radio characteristics and implications for SNR statistics

## 1 Introduction

Recently, Aschenbach (aschenbach (1998)) reported the discovery of a young supernova remnant (SNR) – designated RX J0852.0–4622 – from high-energy X-ray data from the ROSAT All-Sky Survey. This new SNR appears near the southeastern boundary of the Vela remnant (e.g. Milne milne95 (1995); Aschenbach et al. aschenbach95 (1995); Duncan et al. duncan96 (1996)), appearing in X-rays (with $`E>`$ 1.3 keV) as a nearly circular “ring” approximately $`2\mathrm{°}`$ in angular diameter. Around the circumference of this ring are a number of enhancements in the X-ray emission, the most prominent of which appears near the northwestern perimeter. The available X-ray and $`\gamma `$-ray data show the remnant to be comparatively young, with an age of $`1500`$ yr (Iyudin et al. iyudin (1998); Aschenbach et al. aschenbach99 (1999)).

Following from this X-ray detection, Combi et al. (combi (1999)) reported a radio detection of the SNR from the 2.42-GHz data of Duncan et al. (duncan95 (1995)). These authors present spatially filtered data from the Parkes 2.42-GHz survey, along with results obtained from the 30-m Villa Elisa telescope at 1.42 GHz (beamwidth $`34\mathrm{}`$).

The possibility of providing a more accurate age for this remnant was raised by Burgess & Zuber (burgess (1999)), who present a re-analysis of nitrate abundance data from an Antarctic ice core. These authors find evidence for a nearby Galactic SN $`680\pm 20`$ years ago, in addition to the known historical supernovae (e.g. Clark & Stephenson clark (1977)), although it is not possible to link this new SN definitively with RX J0852.0–4622.

In this paper, we examine three sets of radio continuum data from the Parkes telescope, at frequencies of 1.40, 2.42 and 4.85 GHz. We use these data to further investigate the radio structure of RX J0852.0–4622. Implications of the radio characteristics of this remnant for statistical studies of SNRs are then considered.

## 2 Radio data

The radio data presented here come from three principal sources, at frequencies of 4.85, 2.42 and 1.40 GHz. Characteristics of these data are given in Table 1.

First, 4.85-GHz data have been obtained from the Parkes-MIT-NRAO (PMN) survey images (Griffith & Wright griffith (1993)). These images were observed using the 64-m Parkes radio telescope, and have an angular resolution of approximately $`5\mathrm{}`$. Processing of the PMN observations has removed large-scale information ($`1\mathrm{°}`$) from the data. Nevertheless, the PMN images are a useful source of higher resolution information, and are often able to trace structures of large angular size through associated smaller-scale emission components (e.g. Duncan et al. duncan97 (1997)).

Second, 2.42-GHz data surrounding RX J0852.0–4622 have been observed as part of a larger survey presented by Duncan et al. (duncan95 (1995)). These data have a resolution of $`10\stackrel{}{.}4`$ and include linear polarisation information. Some results from these data pertaining to the Vela region have been presented by Duncan et al. (duncan96 (1996)). These data were used by Combi et al. (combi (1999)) to make the radio detection of RX J0852.0–4622.

Third, 1.40-GHz observations of the region containing the remnant were obtained in 1996 September, as part of a larger survey of the Vela region at this frequency. Some of these data have already been used by other authors (e.g. Sault et al. sault (1999)).

The observing procedure employed for these 1.40-GHz data was analogous to that used for the 2.42-GHz survey (Duncan et al. duncan95 (1995)). The telescope was scanned over a regularly-spaced coordinate grid, at a rate of $`6\mathrm{°}`$ per minute, until the region of interest had been completely covered. This procedure was then repeated, scanning the telescope in the orthogonal direction. Stokes-$`I`$, $`Q`$ and $`U`$ data were recorded. The source PKS B1934–638 was used as the primary gain calibrator for the observations. The flux density of this source was assumed to be 14.90 Jy at a frequency of 1.40 GHz. The source 3C138 was also observed, in order to calibrate the absolute polarisation position-angles. The intrinsic polarisation position-angle of 3C138 is $`169\mathrm{°}`$ (Tabara & Inoue tabara (1980)). After the calculation and subtraction of appropriate “baselevels” from each scan, each pair of orthogonally-scanned maps was combined.

## 3 Location and morphology

The radio emission from RX J0852.0–4622 is superposed upon a highly structured region of the Vela remnant. Much of this confusing emission is of similar surface brightness to that seen from the new SNR. Furthermore, the very bright, thermal region RCW 38 lies almost adjacent to the southeastern boundary of RX J0852.0–4622. The peak flux of RCW 38 is approximately 150 Jy beam-1 in the 2.42-GHz data.

The presence of this confusing radio structure, both thermal and non-thermal, meant that RX J0852.0–4622 was not recognised as an SNR from pre-existing radio observations of the region. Prior to the X-ray discovery of RX J0852.0–4622 the non-thermal emission in this region was thought to emanate from the Vela SNR.

### 3.1 The 2.42-GHz morphology

The filtered 2.42-GHz image presented by Combi et al. (combi (1999)) clearly shows the SNR to have a shell-like radio morphology. This is even apparent in unfiltered maps of the region, such as that presented in Fig. 1. Indeed, the emission now known to be associated with RX J0852.0–4622 can be recognised in the radio images presented by Duncan et al. (duncan95 (1995), duncan96 (1996)). Combi et al. (combi (1999)) also identify several additional features within their radio image, designated “A” through “D”, which they suggest may represent extensions to the radio shell. These will be considered in more detail in Sect. 3.4. It should be noted that – possibly as a result of their filtering procedure – the 2.42-GHz image presented by Combi et al. (combi (1999)) does not show either the H ii region RCW 38, or the bright, non-thermal emission from Vela-X to the west.

Fig. 2 shows a spatially-filtered image of the region surrounding RX J0852.0–4622. This image has been filtered using the “bgf” algorithm (e.g. Sofue & Reich sofue (1979)), implemented within the NOD2 software package. A number of filtering resolutions were used, and it was (qualitatively) determined that the emission from RX J0852.0–4622 was optimally enhanced with a filtering resolution of approximately $`30\mathrm{}`$ to $`40\mathrm{}`$ (in agreement with Combi et al. combi (1999)).

A filtering resolution of $`40\mathrm{}`$ was used for the radio data presented in Fig. 2. This figure shows both the emission from RX J0852.0–4622 and the confusing structure more clearly. Comparing Fig. 2 with the unfiltered data presented in Fig. 1, it can be seen that removal of the large-scale structure does not have a major effect on the appearance of the field.

The radio image of the new remnant is dominated by two opposing arcs. Some fainter radio emission is visible on the remnant’s western side, although there is no obvious counterpart to the east. The brightest section of the radio shell lies to the northwest, and appears approximately coincident with the brightest region of the X-ray image. Comparing the radio with the X-ray emission (Fig. 2, lower panel), we see that the distributions of both are generally similar, at least in as much as can be discerned from the cluttered radio field.

### 3.2 The 4.85-GHz PMN data

Fig. 3 shows data from the 4.85-GHz PMN survey from the same region as shown in the previous figures. Although this survey is not optimised for extended sources, the northern and southern sections of the limb-brightened shell stand out clearly.

The black circle near the centre of Fig. 3 fits the outer boundary of the radio emission from both Figs 2 and 3 well, and represents what we take to be the outer boundary of the radio emission from RX J0852.0–46221. This boundary is $`1\stackrel{}{.}8\pm 0\stackrel{}{.}2`$ in angular diameter, and is centred on the X-ray centre of the SNR (as given by Aschenbach aschenbach (1998)). Within the uncertainties, this diameter is in agreement with that estimated by Combi et al. (combi (1999)), who quote a value of $`2\stackrel{}{.}1`$, based upon the (lower resolution) Parkes 2.42-GHz data alone.

Both the radio and X-ray data are consistent with a remnant centred on Galactic longitude $`266\stackrel{}{.}2`$, latitude $`1\stackrel{}{.}2`$. Thus, we suggest a Galactic designation of G266.2–01.2 for this SNR.

### 3.3 Confusing structure within the field

As can be seen from Fig. 2, a good deal of additional radio structure is visible in the vicinity of RX J0852.0–4622. Over the remnant itself, most of this structure takes the form of two diffuse “filaments”, each of which is $`20\mathrm{}`$ wide. These filaments are oriented approximately north–south over the new SNR. Beyond the northern boundary of the remnant, the filaments begin to curve towards the west.

From larger images of the Vela region, such as have been presented by Duncan et al. (duncan95 (1995), duncan96 (1996)), these filaments are known to curve around Vela-X, forming almost a full quadrant of a circle. The eastern arc (as seen in Fig. 2) is highly polarised (e.g. Duncan et al. duncan96 (1996)), and appears to represent the current boundary of the shock from the Vela supernova event.

Interestingly, the confusing filaments from Fig. 2 are almost completely absent from the PMN data. This is because of the observing and data processing procedures used as part of the PMN survey, coupled with the fact that the confusing filaments lie approximately parallel to the scanning direction of the telescope over the region of sky containing RX J0852.0–4622.

### 3.4 Extensions to the radio shell?

As mentioned in Sect. 3.1, Combi et al. (combi (1999)) identify a number of additional features within their radio image. These features were designated “A” through “D” in Fig. 1 of their paper, and apparently extend for relatively large angular distances beyond the edge of the RX J0852.0–4622 shell (up to almost twice the radius of the remnant). Combi et al. (combi (1999)) argue that these features may represent extensions to the radio shell of RX J0852.0–4622 (c.f. Aschenbach et al. aschenbach95 (1995)). It is of interest to consider these in more detail.

Examining the 2.42-GHz radio image of Combi et al. (combi (1999)), we find that radio features “A” and “C” appear to be sections of the much more extensive “arc” structures discussed in Sect. 3.3. These arcs can be traced in Fig. 2 for several degrees, up to the northern edge of the figure (i.e., beyond the boundary of RX J0852.0–4622). Larger radio images of the region show that these features continue for many degrees further, in both total-power and polarised intensity. Feature “B” appears to be an isolated, slightly extended source with no obvious connection to the new remnant (even in the unfiltered image presented in Fig. 1). Finally, feature “D” corresponds to the X-ray feature “D/D” as identified by Aschenbach et al. (aschenbach95 (1995)). Aschenbach (aschenbach (1998)) notes that this feature is also a source of hard X-rays, but that this emission is associated with a much lower temperature spectrum than that from RX J0852.0–4622.

We suggest, therefore, that none of the possible “extensions” identified by Combi et al. (combi (1999)) are associated with RX J0852.0–4622.

A further argument against an association between these features and the new remnant is that the boundary of the RX J0852.0–4622 shock is well fitted (in both the PMN and Parkes 2.42-GHz survey data) by a circle. This is consistent with the radio morphologies of other young shell SNRs, such as Kepler (Dickel et al. dickel88 (1988)), Tycho (Dickel et al. dickel91 (1991)), and the remnant of SN1006 (Reynolds & Gilmore reynolds (1993)), although we caution that RX J0852.0–4622 is considerably fainter than these and other young remnants. We also note that the higher resolution PMN image (Fig. 3), although not optimised for extended emission, shows no evidence for any connections between the features noted by Combi et al. (combi (1999)) and the shell of the new remnant.

### 3.5 The quasi-central source

The PMN image shows that a point-like (i.e. unresolved at a resolution of $`5\mathrm{}`$) source lies approximately $`15\stackrel{}{.}5`$ east of the apparent centre of the remnant. This source is not coincident with either of the two compact X-ray sources near the centre of the remnant that are discussed by Aschenbach et al. (aschenbach99 (1999)). The PMN survey source catalogue (Wright et al. wright (1994)) lists this source as PMN J0853–4620, with a 4.85-GHz flux of $`136\pm 11`$ mJy. Being relatively faint, our ability to detect PMN J0853–4620 in the 2.42-GHz data is compromised somewhat by confusion, coupled with beam dilution. Nevertheless, we can establish the 2.42-GHz flux to be $`200`$ mJy. This leads to a spectral index for this source of $`\alpha 0.7`$ (with $`S\nu ^\alpha `$).

The radio spectral indices of pulsar emissions are generally much steeper than the $`0.7`$ estimated above for the source (e.g. Taylor et al. taylor (1993)). Furthermore, a flux of $`136\pm 11`$ mJy at a frequency of 4.85 GHz would be exceptionally high for a pulsar. It is much more likely, then, that the PMN J0853–4620 source is extragalactic in origin, rather than associated with RX J0852.0–4622.

### 3.6 Radio spectrum

The presence of the confusing structure noted in Sect. 3.3 makes accurate estimates of the integrated remnant flux density difficult. The values for the flux density of the SNR given below were estimated by integrating the emission within the boundary of RX J0852.0–4622, as defined by the circle seen in Fig. 3 (lower panel). The integrated area extended approximately one beamwidth beyond this circle, in order to include all the flux from the shell. The base level was determined from flux minima near the centre of the remnant, as well as beyond the eastern and southwestern edges of the shell. Fluxes contributed by the confusing “filaments” seen to the western and eastern sides of the remnant (as discussed in Sect. 3.3) were estimated and subtracted from the total, integrated flux. Note that the uncertainties in the integrated flux values are dominated by baselevel uncertainty, rather than by uncertainties in the flux estimates of the confusing structure.

We estimate the integrated fluxes of RX J0852.0–4622 at 2.42 and 1.40 GHz to be $`33\pm 6`$ Jy and $`40\pm 10`$ Jy, respectively. These values lead to a very uncertain estimate of the spectral index, with $`\alpha =0.4\pm 0.5`$ ($`S\nu ^\alpha `$). To better establish the spectral index of the remnant, the method of “T–T” plots was used (e.g. Turtle et al. turtle (1962)).

Estimates of the remnant spectral index were made from both filtered and unfiltered images, using the T–T plot technique. The northern section of the shell was found to have a consistent, non-thermal index of $`0.40\pm 0.15`$. The southern section of emission exhibited a much flatter spectrum of $`0.1\pm 0.1`$. We believe this latter value to be unreliable, due to the proximity of the southern section of the shell to the bright H ii region RCW 38 and its associated emission. At the lower angular resolution of the 1.40-GHz data (to which the 2.42-GHz data are also smoothed, for the purposes of spectral index calculation), some of this thermal emission becomes confused with the southern arc of RX J0852.0–4622. We suggest that the value determined for the northern shell section better represents the new remnant’s radio emission.

Extrapolating the measured integrated flux to a frequency of 1 GHz (using a spectral index of $`0.40\pm 0.15`$), we determine a value of $`47\pm 12`$ Jy, leading to an average surface brightness at this latter frequency of $`(6.1\pm 1.5)\times 10^{22}`$ W m-2 Hz-1 sr-1. The above values are summarised in Table 2.

## 4 Polarimetric observations

We have examined the 1.40- and 2.42-GHz polarimetric data in the field surrounding RX J0852.0–4622. These data have been used to estimate the Faraday rotation measures (RMs) across the field, and to calculate the polarisation position-angles at zero wavelength (thereby estimating the orientations of the tangential components of the magnetic fields within the regions of polarised emission). Note that these estimates assume the polarisation position-angles to vary linearly with $`\lambda ^2`$.

The polarised intensities from the 2.42-GHz data are shown in Fig. 4, at the lower resolution of $`14\stackrel{}{.}9`$. Superposed upon this grey-scale image are the orientations of the tangential component of the magnetic field. The RMs derived across the field are shown in Fig. 5.

The large circle shows the boundary of the SNR RX J0852.0–4622. Much of the polarised emission visible within the circle does not appear to be associated with the new SNR. For example, the polarisation detected from the eastern half of RX J0852.0–4622 is clearly associated with the prominent, eastern arc of total-power emission. The only region of RX J0852.0–4622 to potentially exhibit polarised emission is the northern section of the shell. If associated with the new remnant, the northern arc appears polarised to a level of approximately 20% at 2.42 GHz. Other regions of the SNR exhibit no polarised emission (such as the southern section of the shell), or are confused with polarised structure from Vela.

The magnetic field vectors on the north side of the shell appear jumbled, with no clear orientation evident. This is in contrast to the field orientations in other young, shell-type supernova remnants, which are predominantly radial; e.g. Tycho (Wood et al. wood (1992)), Kepler (Matsui et al. matsui (1984)) and SN1006 (Reynolds & Gilmore reynolds (1993)).

However, it is questionable whether the detected polarised emission in this northern section of the shell is attributable to RX J0852.0–4622. The appearance of much of this RM structure is similar to that seen from the Vela emission, beyond the RX J0852.0–4622 shell’s northwestern perimeter. Furthermore, there is no discontinuity in either the RM values or the magnetic field orientations near the boundary of the shell. We suggest, therefore, that the polarised emission seen throughout Fig. 4 originates entirely from the Vela remnant. We note that this interpretation is also consistent with the lack of polarisation observed from the southern arc of the RX J0852.0–4622 shell.

The fractional polarisation of the northern arc must then be $`<20`$% at 2.42 GHz. As noted above, we detect no polarisation in the vicinity of the bright, southern section of the shell, to a ($`5\sigma `$) limit of approximately 5% at 2.42 GHz. We note that these low fractional polarisations are not inconsistent with the polarimetric properties of other young shells, which exhibit fractional polarisations of $`15`$% when the emission is well resolved.

## 5 Discussion

### 5.1 RX J0852.0–4622: young or not so young?

Several observations of RX J0852.0–4622 suggest that it is a young SNR. Most notably, both the X-ray temperatures derived by Aschenbach (aschenbach (1998)) and the $`\gamma `$-ray work of Iyudin et al. (iyudin (1998)) imply an age of $`1500`$ yr. Further, the more recent discussion of the $`\gamma `$-ray observations by Aschenbach et al. (aschenbach99 (1999)) suggest the remnant is $`700`$ years old. This is in agreement with the approximately circular radio appearance of the remnant; a characteristic exhibited by other young, shell-type SNRs. Even the cautious upper distance limit of approximately 1 kpc provided by Aschenbach (aschenbach (1998)), which leads to a linear diameter of $`30`$ pc, implies the age of this remnant cannot be more than a few thousand years.

However, there are some radio properties of this remnant are difficult to reconcile with those of other young SNRs.

* The radio shell is far from complete. The radio image of RX J0852.0–4622 is composed primarily of two, opposing regions of emission. This is in contrast to other young, shell-type SNRs, which exhibit essentially complete radio shells. We note a possible resemblance to the structure of SN1006, however, which also shows opposing arcs of emission.
* The radio emission from this new SNR is of relatively low surface brightness. The mean radio surface brightness of this new remnant at 1 GHz (see Table 2) is a factor of 5 lower than that of SN1006. This is significant, because the SN1006 remnant has the lowest surface brightness of all the young, shell-type SNRs in current catalogues (e.g. Green green (1998)) – see the further discussion in Sect. 5.3.
* The radio spectral index of $`0.40\pm 0.15`$ determined herein for RX J0852.0–4622 is flatter than those of other young shells, which have indices of $`0.6`$ (e.g. Green green88 (1988)).

It is possible that some of the unusual radio properties of RX J0852.0–4622 may result from the SNR expanding into a hot, low-density region of the interstellar medium; Aschenbach (aschenbach (1998)) determines an upper limit to this density of approximately 0.06 cm-3. If so, this would emphasise the the role played by environmental effects on the detectability of young radio remnants. Alternatively, this SNR may be just beginning to “turn on” at radio wavelengths, although this scenario may be difficult to reconcile with the very incomplete radio shell.

Further insights into the unusual radio properties of this SNR must await more detailed investigations of the characteristics of both the remnant and the environment into which it is expanding.

### 5.2 The distance to RX J0852.0–4622

Unfortunately, the distance to RX J0852.0–4622 is highly uncertain. The X-ray data of Aschenbach (aschenbach (1998)) provide an upper limit of approximately 1 kpc, based on the lack of absorption, but suggest that the remnant’s distance could be as small as 200 pc. This lower limit is based upon a comparison of the new remnant’s surface brightness with that of SN1006. However, SN1006 is atypically faint for known, young, Galactic SNRs (this is further discussed in Sect. 5.3).

The $`\gamma `$-ray data discussed by Iyudin et al. (iyudin (1998)) and Aschenbach et al. (aschenbach99 (1999)) suggest an age of approximately 700 yr, from a comparison of the observed 44Ti line flux with that expected from SN models, which corresponds to a distance of approximately 200 pc. However, the interpretation of the $`\gamma `$-ray detection requires the assumption of both the supernova shock velocity and the 44Ti yield. Iyudin et al. (iyudin (1998)) note that increases in either of these quantities will lead to an increase in the derived distance of the remnant.

We have examined 21-cm H i observations in the region of RX J0852.0–4622, from Kerr et al. (kerr (1986)), in an attempt to find any correlating features. However, since the remnant lies in a complex region in Vela, no associated features in H i could be found.

The ice core data of Burgess & Zuber (burgess (1999)) may be able to provide an accurate age for RX J0852.0–4622, but these data are not able to constrain the distance to the SNR without further assumptions. Furthermore, as noted above, it is not possible to definitively associate the additional nitrate spike with this SNR. If we assume the age of $`700`$ yr determined by Burgess & Zuber (burgess (1999)) to be accurate, then assuming an upper limit to the mean shock velocity of $`10^4`$ km s-1 places the remnant at a distance of $`460`$ pc, with a linear diameter of $`15`$ pc.

A value of $`10^4`$ km s-1 was nominated as an upper limit to the shock velocity by Aschenbach et al. (aschenbach99 (1999)), based on their analysis of the X-ray data. Should the mean shock velocity exceed this value, the remnant would lie at a distance of $`460`$ pc, with a correspondingly larger linear diameter.

In summary, the distance is very poorly constrained by current observational data. Unfortunately, since the remnant is faint, is not detected optically, and is in a complex region, many direct techniques used to determine the distance to SNRs are not applicable in this case (e.g. H i absorption, association with other H i features or molecular clouds, or optical studies). Nevertheless, the radio properties of this remnant, even with the present uncertainty in its age and size, have some interesting implications for statistical studies of Galactic SNRs, which are discussed in the next section.

### 5.3 Statistical implications

Fig. 6 shows a surface-brightness versus diameter plot for Galactic SNRs for which there are reasonable distances available (Green green84 (1984), green91 (1991), green (1998)). RX J0852.0–4622 is plotted on this figure with a range of diameters corresponding to distances from 200 pc to 1 kpc. The surface brightness of RX J0852.0–4622, of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1\mathrm{GHz}}6\times 10^{22}`$ W m-2 Hz-1 sr-1, is faint for a known Galactic SNR – among the faintest 20% of catalogued remnants. This is less than the nominal completeness limit of many radio surveys (e.g. Green green91 (1991)). Note that although most faint remnants are thought to be old, that the remnant of the SN of AD1006 is also faint, with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1\mathrm{GHz}}3\times 10^{21}`$ W m-2 Hz-1 sr-1. We also note that, whilst RX J0852.0–4622 is one of the fainter remnants to appear on the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }D`$ plot, the only other remnant detected in 44Ti $`\gamma `$-ray emission is Cas A, which has the highest surface brightness.

From Fig. 6, it is clear that the properties of RX J0852.0–4622 are very unusual if it lies at the smaller distances suggested by the $`\gamma `$-ray data. If the SNR is at a distance $`<300`$ pc, its diameter is less than 10 pc, but its surface brightness is two or more orders of magnitude less than other known young SNRs with similar diameters (e.g. Kepler’s SN, Tycho’s SN, and 3C58). This would have important consequences for statistical studies of Galactic SNRs (see Green green91 (1991)), as the range of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ – or, equivalently, luminosity – for a given $`D`$ may be even wider than was previously thought. This in turn would imply that the observational selection effect of faint SNRs being difficult to detect is important, not only for old SNRs, but also for young SNRs. The low radio surface brightness of RX J0852.0–4622 indicates that a fraction of young SNRs may be faint at radio wavelengths. The available sample of young SNRs (i.e. historical events) is small, however, so it is not possible to meaningfully estimate this proportion.

On the other hand, if the remnant is as distant as 1 kpc, then although it is faint for it’s diameter of $`30`$ pc, it is not strikingly unusual.

## 6 Conclusions

We have presented various radio observations of the newly recognised SNR RX J0852.0–4622, which clarify its size and morphology. Several features possibly associated with the remnant by Combi et al. (combi (1999)) are examined, and it is concluded that these are probably unrelated to RX J0852.0–4622.

Although the distance and age of RX J0852.0–4622 are not well determined, its faintness has some interesting implications for the statistical study of SNRs, namely that the surface-brightness limits of current radio surveys may miss faint, young remnants, as well as faint, old remnants. Clearly an accurate distance determination for this SNR is important, although this is difficult, given its faintness and the fact that it lies in a complex region of the sky, confused with emission from the much larger Vela SNR.

###### Acknowledgements.

The Australia Telescope is funded by the Commonwealth of Australia for operation as a National Facility managed by CSIRO. ARD is an Alexander von Humboldt research Fellow and thanks the Stiftung for their support. The authors gratefully acknowledge P. Slane for helpful comments and suggestions on the manuscript.