text:
# Black Hole Growth in Dark Matter and the 𝑀_{𝑏ℎ}-𝜎 Relation

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Recent results by Gebhardt *et al.* (2000) and by Ferrarese & Merritt (2000) that establish a strong correlation between central black hole mass $`M_{bh}`$ and the velocity dispersion $`\sigma _e`$, measured at $`r_e/8`$, indicate that the central black hole is intimately related to the dynamical structure of the galaxy. An earlier result by Magorrian *et al.* (1998) relates $`M_{bh}`$ linearly to the mass of the bulge, which suggests a similar conclusion, while Merrifield, Forbes, & Terlevich (2000) establish a link between $`M_{bh}`$ and the age of the stellar system: a massive central black hole seems to grow over a period of a Gyr or so.

These results have already stimulated the emission of various theories that create a feed-back mechanism between bulge star formation and accretion of gas onto the black hole (Burkert & Silk, 2001). These theories generally tend to establish the desired correlations but at the cost of some rather complicated physics simply, perhaps oversimply, described.

The object of the present paper is to first revisit the correlations established by the adiabatic growth of a black hole in a galaxy, since this process is relatively free of physical assumptions once the initial distribution function (DF) is chosen. This part of the work is very much in the spirit of van der Marel (1999), who examined the effect of the black hole on the fundamental plane relations, but did not consider explicitly the $`M_{bh}\sigma `$ relation. We choose distribution functions moreover that are appropriate for collisionless dark matter halos, the philosophy being that these are the dynamically dominant components of massive galaxies and should therefore dictate the observed velocities. These are chosen to be an isothermal or Gaussian DF (to test our code against previous work and because this may be the maximum entropy state according to Nakamura (2000)), an isotropic steady-state power law DF found by Henriksen & Widrow (1995) for comparison purposes, and the DF that corresponds to the NFW density profile, as approximated by Widrow (2000), as the best measured approximation to a dark-matter halo.

Such an approach does not, of course, explain the origin of the black hole, but rather yields only the perturbed DF that is created by its adiabatically established presence. An earlier attempt to grow the black hole during the formation of the galaxy (Ostriker, 2000) relied on dissipative dark matter which is fraught unfortunately with badly known parameters. In the present approach the black hole growth is limited to the particle flux across the event horizon of a seed black hole that is peculiar to the initial or adiabatically modified DF.

The adiabatic approach fails to yield either the correct form or extent of the observed correlations between the black hole mass and the modified galaxy. We therefore suggest a possible explanation of the correlations based on a non-adiabatic process of black hole growth on the formation timescale of the dark matter halo. The argument is essentially dimensional at this stage and must be examined numerically in greater detail.

In section 2 we review the adiabatic growth approximation and verify our code with the isothermal DF. In section 3 we give the results in the power law and NFW distribution functions. In section 4 we discuss the resulting $`M_{bh}`$ versus $`\sigma _e`$ in the various distribution functions and show the extent of the black hole influence in the galaxy. In section 5 we give our dimensional derivation of the observed relations based on a self-similar (but not necessarily spherically symmetric) growth of black hole and dark halo. Finally we give our conclusions.

## 2 ADIABATIC GROWTH

### 2.1 History

We consider the slow growth of an initially small seed black hole (BH) located at the centre of a collisionless, spherical system of stars and dark matter. Using an algorithm that makes use of the fact that, under these circumstances, the radial and transverse actions are conserved, the final state of the system containing a supermassive BH can be calculated.

This technique was first suggested by Peebles (1972), who used it to show that an adiabatic cusp with $`\varrho R^{3/2}`$ would form in an isothermal sphere. This work was confirmed numerically by Young (1980). His algorithm is used here essentially unchanged. Lee & Goodman (1989) used Young’s algorithm to explore the more general case of a stellar system with a net rotation, although they treat the potential as spherically symmetric rather than axisymmetric. They found that, while the rotation to dispersion ratio $`v/\sigma `$ was larger after adiabatic growth, the gain was not enough to match the observed values. A variety of systems were examined in detail by Quinlan *et al.* (1995), and van der Marel (1999) used their code to explain a number of observational properties of galaxies. Finally, the adiabatic growth model was used by Gondolo & Silk (1999) to examine how dark matter annhilations in the cusp that would form in our own galaxy could be used as a probe of the dynamics or of the nature of dark matter. They suggest that searching for a neutrino signal from the central density spike (the neutrino flux increases with an increase in cusp slope) could set upper bounds to the dark matter cusp in our galaxy, or, alternatively, clarify the nature of dark matter.

Although these studies serve to demonstrate the utility and topicality of the technique, they have not studied explicitly the relation between dark matter distribution functions and the central black hole mass that is our concern below.

### 2.2 Units

For convenience, we use here dimensionless units, characterized by the variables

$$\begin{array}{ccc}R\hfill & =\hfill & r/r_0,\hfill \\ \varrho \hfill & =\hfill & \rho /\rho _0,\hfill \\ \epsilon \hfill & =\hfill & (E\mathrm{\Phi }_0)/(4\pi G\rho _0r_0^2),\hfill \\ \psi \hfill & =\hfill & (\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }_0)/(4\pi G\rho _0r_0^2),\hfill \\ j\hfill & =\hfill & J/[4\pi G\rho _0r_0^4]^{1/2},\hfill \\ F\hfill & =\hfill & (4\pi G)^{3/2}\rho ^{1/2}r_0^3f,\hfill \\ m\hfill & =\hfill & M/(4\pi \rho _0r_0^3),\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
The fiducial quantities $`r_0`$ and $`\rho _0`$ are usually taken to be the core radius of the galaxy, similar to the usual definition of the King radius, and the density at this radius (where the surface density is about one half of its central value in a fitted isothermal sphere).

### 2.3 Theory

The initial system, containing the negligible mass BH, can be described by a distribution function $`F(\epsilon ,j)`$, and the density of the system can be calculated from

$$\varrho (R)=4\pi _{\psi (R)}^{\psi (\mathrm{})}d\epsilon _0^{j_{max}}\frac{j\mathrm{d}j}{R^2V_R}F(\epsilon ,j),$$
(2)
where the radial velocity is expressed as $`V_R=[2(\epsilon \psi )j^2/R^2]^{1/2}`$ and $`j_{max}=[2R^2(\epsilon \psi )]^{1/2}`$ is the maximum angular momentum. The potential of the system can then be calculated from Poisson’s equation,

$$\frac{1}{R^2}\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}R}\left(R^2\frac{\mathrm{d}\psi }{\mathrm{d}R}\right)=\varrho .$$
(3)
The integral form of Poisson’s equation is often more convenient, however. We take the reference potential to be zero at the centre of the system and we suppose the halo mass to tend to zero there, which is true for a density profile less steep than $`R^3`$. Hence $`\psi =\mathrm{d}\psi /\mathrm{d}R=0`$ for $`R=0`$, and we have

$$\psi (R)=_0^R\varrho (s)sds\frac{m(R)}{R},$$
(4)
where the total mass of the system is

$$m(R)=_0^r\varrho (s)s^2ds+m_{bh},$$
(5)
and $`m_{bh}`$ is the mass of a central object, if one exists.

Now, if the growth of the central seed black hole is much slower than the dynamical time of the system, the radial and transverse actions of the system are conserved. These so-called adiabatic invariants are given by (Young, 1980)

$$\begin{array}{ccc}i_R\hfill & =\hfill & 2_R_{}^{R_+}V_RdR\hfill \\ & =\hfill & 2_R_{}^{R_+}\sqrt{2(\epsilon \psi )j^2/R^2}dR,\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
where $`R_\pm `$ are the turning points of the orbit (zeros of the integrand), and

$$\begin{array}{ccc}i_T\hfill & =\hfill & _0^{2\pi }V_T\mathrm{d}(R\theta )\hfill \\ & =\hfill & 2\pi j,\hfill \end{array}$$
(7)
so that the angular momentum is an action variable.

The adiabatic growth framework is then as follows. A particle of the initial system with energy $`\epsilon `$ and angular momentum $`j`$ will have a different energy $`\epsilon ^{}`$ (but identical angular momentum $`j`$) after the BH has grown. However, its radial action $`i_R`$ will be the same before and after growth; thus, it is possible to invert $`i_R^{}(\epsilon ^{},j)`$ to get $`\epsilon `$ as a function of $`(\epsilon ^{},j)`$. The final DF is then found from $`F^{}(\epsilon ^{},j)=F(\epsilon (\epsilon ^{},j),j)`$.

This is implemented in an algorithm similar to that used first by Young (1980). See Appendix A for details.

### 2.4 The Isothermal Sphere

We apply the adiabatic growth framework first to the isothermal sphere, characterized by the Gaussian DF

$$F(\epsilon )=(2\pi )^{3/2}e^\epsilon .$$
(8)
This is a well-studied distribution, and was Young’s (1980) initial system. We present the adiabatic results for the isothermal sphere here mainly as a check that the code developed gave the same results that Young (1980) found. There are in fact reasons to believe (Nakamura, 2000; Henriksen & Le Delliou, 2001) that this is ultimately the DF of interest, especially near the centre of the system. Of course the system may not be fully relaxed when the black hole is growing.

Results are shown in Figure 1 for black hole masses from zero through $`0.001`$, $`0.01`$, $`0.1`$ and $`1.0`$ as labelled by increasing effect. These dimensionless masses correspond to physical masses in the range of about $`10^7`$ to $`10^{10}`$ $`M_{}`$ if we use the values of $`\rho _0`$ and $`r_0`$ given in section 3.3.

We find the same characteristic density cusp of $`R^{3/2}`$ as obtained by Young (1980), and the radial velocity profiles are also similar. Although Young (1980) did not show results for the anisotropy parameter, defined as $`\beta =1<V_T^2>/<2V_R^2>`$, our results do agree with the prediction of Quinlan *et al.* (1995) for distributions of this type. We observe that there is at most about a $`10`$% anisotropy in favour of tangential motion, due to the increasing binding energy of a particle and the resultant decrease in eccentricity at constant angular momentum. Moreover the perturbation extends as far as the core radius only when the mass is comparable to that of the core, as is to be expected. These results are the main test of our program.

## 3 CUSPY DARK MATTER HALOS

We explore here the adiabatic growth of a central black hole in a collisionless dark matter halo that possesses a central cusp. For initial systems, we choose two very different starting points. The first is an isotropic self-similar system, meant to represent the final state of a halo undergoing self-similar relaxation (Henriksen & Widrow, 1995). The other system is the NFW system of Navarro, Frenk & White (1996), which fits a wide range of dark matter halo sizes.

### 3.1 Self-similar Distribution

The self-similar system is described by the DF

$$F(\epsilon )=F_0|\epsilon |^{\frac{3\delta 1}{2\delta 2}},$$
(9)
where $`\delta `$ is a free parameter ($`2/3<\delta <1,\delta >1`$) that essentially controls the logarithmic slope of the initial density and potential, given by

$$\varrho =R^{2/\delta }\mathrm{and}$$
(10)
$$\psi =R^{22/\delta }.$$
(11)
The constant $`F_0`$ depends only on the value of $`\delta `$, and can be solved for in terms of the core radius $`r_0`$ and the density $`\rho _0`$ by using equations (2) and (4).

Using this system as a starting point for the adiabatic algorithm discussed above leads to rather different results than are found for the isothermal sphere. The results for two different choices of $`\delta `$ are given; Figure 2 is for the parameter $`\delta =2`$, while Figure 3 shows results with $`\delta =3/4`$.

As can be in Figure 2, the initial density profile of the self-similar system with $`\delta =2`$ is a power law with a logarithmic slope of $`1`$. Adding an adiabatically grown BH to the system induces a steeper cusp region at small radii, and the outer radius at which this region begins depends of course on the final BH mass. The new cusp slope is $`7/3`$, greater than the density cusp induced in the isothermal sphere, but the difference between the before-and-after slopes are not as great here as in the isothermal case (a gain of $`1.3`$ here versus $`1.5`$ for the isothermal sphere). The major difference with the isothermal sphere however is best seen in the anisotropy parameter. The system becomes quite tangentially anisotropic at small radii.

That the cusp slope will not increase as greatly for an initial system which already has a steep density cusp is shown best in Figure 3, where the grown BH seems to have left no visible mark on the density slope (to within graphical resolution: the initial density slope is $`8/3`$ while the measured final slope is $`11/4`$). This result is for $`\delta =3/4`$. Notice, however, that the BH growth has disturbed the radial velocity, which takes on the same $`1/R`$ shape (although only for the largest masses) seen previously in both the $`\delta =2`$ self-similar system and the isothermal sphere. That these systems all have similar velocities at small radii is simply indicative of their similar Keplerian potentials there.

### 3.2 The NFW Profile

The NFW system, given by the universal density profile

$$\varrho =\frac{1}{R(1+R)^2},$$
(12)
is more complicated to describe than the other two systems discussed above, since it does not have an analytic distribution function. We use here an analytic fit of a numerical calculation of the DF (Widrow, 2000), which in our units is

$$F(\epsilon )=F_1(1\epsilon )^{3/2}\epsilon ^{5/2}\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}(1\epsilon )}{\epsilon }\right)^qe^P,$$
(13)
where $`P=_ip_i\epsilon ^i`$ and the parameters are:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}F_1\hfill & =\hfill & 9.1967\times 10^2\hfill \\ q\hfill & =\hfill & 2.7419\hfill \\ p_1\hfill & =\hfill & 0.3625\hfill \\ p_2\hfill & =\hfill & 0.5669\hfill \\ p_3\hfill & =\hfill & 0.0802\hfill \\ p_4\hfill & =\hfill & 0.4945.\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
The results for this system are given in Figure 4. As expected, the BH growth induces cusps in both the density and velocity. The logarithmic slope for the density is $`7/3`$, which is the same as for the self-similar system with $`\delta =2`$; they also both began with the same slope ($`\varrho 1/R`$) in the inner region where the BH disturbance is greatest. The velocity cusp is the usual $`1/R`$. We notice that the velocity tangential anisotropy is also comparable to the system with $`\delta =2`$ at small radii for all black hole masses, and that the velocity perturbation can extend nearly to the core radius for $`m_{bh}0.1`$.

### 3.3 Growth Timescales

It is of some interest to explore the rate at which a black hole would grow in the above dark matter distributions in view of the black hole mass galactic age relation reported by Merrifield *et al.* (2000). Such growth represents an alternative to advection dominated accretion flow (ADAF; see Narayan, Igumenshchev & Abramowicz (2000) and references therein) as a means to grow a black hole invisibly. We consider as an illustration the time to grow the black hole by a factor of ten in the various DFs.

In order to calculate the timescale for the BH to grow by a factor of ten, we use the following expression for the growth of the BH as it accretes matter:

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}M_{bh}}{\mathrm{d}t}=4\pi r_x^2\rho (r_x)<v_r>|_{r_x},$$
(15)
where $`r_x`$ is the radius of the last stable orbit, $`r_x=3R_s`$, and $`R_s=2GM_{bh}/c^2`$ is the Schwarschild radius of the BH. In our units, and with $`<v_r>`$ given as an integral over the distribution function, this expression becomes

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}M_{bh}}{\mathrm{d}t}=8\pi ^2(4\pi G)^{1/2}\rho _0^{3/2}r_0^3_{\psi _x}^{\psi (\mathrm{})}d\epsilon _0^{j_{max}}jdjF(\epsilon ,j),$$
(16)
where $`\psi _x=\psi (r_x)`$ is the potential evaluated at the radius of the last stable orbit. Note that this equation requires the central density $`\rho _0`$ and the core radius $`r_0`$. These two parameters control the size and shape of the system; for simplicity, we choose the values

$$\begin{array}{ccc}r_0\hfill & =\hfill & 500\mathrm{pc},\hfill \\ \rho _0\hfill & =\hfill & 30M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3;\hfill \end{array}$$
(17)
these values are averages of the systems van der Marel (1999) used in fitting the adiabatic growth model to a variety of different galaxies.

We carry out the calculation (16) numerically, taking the DF dependence on black hole mass to be given by assuming adiabatic growth. This was done for 30 different black hole masses, resulting in an equation of the form

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}M_{bh}}{\mathrm{d}t}=\kappa M_{bh}^b,$$
(18)
with $`b`$ close to 2 for the isothermal system, but rather different in the other cases. Such an equation is readily integrated to give the growth time scale. The mass is not subtracted from the DF itself as both our trials and those of Quinlan *et al.* (1995) suggest that the effect on the results is small, at least for $`m_{bh}0.5`$.

We first report the calculation for the isothermal sphere (containing an adiabatically grown BH). Numerical calculation of equation (16) gives $`b=2`$ and $`\kappa =10^{18}`$ $`M_{}^1`$yrs-1; integration of (18) with a seed BH mass of $`10^8M_{}`$ then results in a timescale of about nine billion years. This is close to what is interesting, since this is about the time available since the quasar epoch.

If we instead use the self-similar DF, modified by the adiabatic growth of a central BH, the timescale becomes absurdly short. For $`\delta =3/4`$, we calculate $`b1/2`$ and $`\kappa =10^{42}`$ $`M_{}^{3/2}`$yrs-1, leading to a very rapid growth (using again a seed mass of $`10^8`$ $`M_{}`$): it would take only $`10^{30}`$ years to grow the BH by a factor of ten! The DF for $`\delta <1`$ increases with increasingly negative energy and the density profile is very steep. Moreover, the orbits tend to remain rather isotropic as the BH grows, so that essentially all of the mass falls in on a central dynamical timescale. Setting $`\delta >1`$ does slow this growth down substantially; for $`\delta =2`$, for example, we get $`\kappa =250`$ $`M_{}^{2/3}`$yrs-1 with $`b=1/3`$, giving a timescale of about 5,000 years. Increasing $`\delta `$ increases this time to at most a few hundred thousand years.

The NFW system (modified by the BH growth) is similar in some respects to the self-similar system with $`\delta =2`$; both share the same density and radial velocity profiles at small radii. Indeed, the timescale calculation for the NFW system yields results similar to the $`\delta =2`$ case, with the only difference being a smaller value for constant, at $`\kappa =115`$ $`M_{}^{2/3}`$yrs-1. This smaller constant gives a timescale of just over 10,000 years for the BH to grow ten times larger than its initial mass of $`10^8`$ $`M_{}`$. This may be accounted for by the more pronounced anisotropy of the NFW DF at larger radii.

It should be noted that changing the initial constants ($`r_0`$, $`\rho _0`$, and the initial BH mass $`M_0`$) can vary these numbers by a few orders of magnitude in both directions. From the work of van der Marel (1999), which fits an isothermal sphere to a variety of galaxies, it seems that the core radius can be as small as a few tens of parsecs for “power-law” galaxies and as large as a few kiloparsecs for “core” galaxies. Assuming the same scaling laws van der Marel (1999) uses, the density $`\rho _0`$ will depend on the value we take for the core radius. According to these scaing laws, a radius of $`r_0=20`$ pc, for example, corresponds to a denisty of $`\rho _0=8360`$ $`M_{}`$ pc-3, while at $`r_0=2000`$ pc the density will be $`\rho _0=3`$ $`M_{}`$ pc-3. Using these two sets of values, and assuming that the initial seed BH mass can vary between $`10^5`$ $`M_{}`$ and $`10^9`$ $`M_{}`$, we see that the isothermal sphere can grow by a factor of ten anywhere between a million years and $`10^{14}`$ years. For the self-similar system with $`\delta <1`$, changing the constants has essentially no effect, since the timescale is too short; for $`\delta 1`$, however, the timescale can approach a few billion years. The timescale for the NFW system will not go beyond a few hundred million years.

It seems, then, that only the isothermal or Gaussian DF can yield a black hole mass age relation of the type detected by Merrifield *et al.* (2000) by adiabatic growth from a collisionless DF. The other systems studied here grow more quickly than the isothermal sphere, mainly because of their stronger central density cusp.

## 4 THE ADIABATIC $`M_{bh}\sigma `$ RELATIONSHIP

Recent observations (Ferrarese & Merritt, 2000; Gebhardt *et al.*, 2000) have found a strong correlation between the mass of the central BH and the line-of-sight velocity dispersion in the bulge of its host galaxy. Although various theories have been suggested to explain this relationship (e.g., Haehnelt & Kauffmann (2000); Adams *et al.* (2001)), none have yet to be proven conclusively. This relationship has been shown to follow

$$M_{bh}\sigma ^\alpha ,$$
(19)
where $`\alpha `$ is somewhere between 3.5 and 5.

The adiabatic growth model has been used by van der Marel (1999) to explain various observational properties of black holes, such as the central density cusp and its correlation with the luminosity of the galactic bulge. His analysis included properties both intrinsic to the adiabatic growth as well as scaling relations based on fundamental-plane-like observations. We repeat his analysis here to explore the $`M_{bh}\sigma `$ relation.

First we calculate any intrinsic relation between the BH mass and the velocity dispersion of the bulge that may arise naturally from the adiabatic growth of the central BH. Keep in mind, however, that the calculations that follow cannot be compared directly with observations, since they are noise-free and have an infinite resolution. Regardless, they should give a sense of whether or not the BH growth can give a relation like (19).

The line-of-sight velocity dispersion is found by projecting the radial and transverse velocity moments on the plane of the sky. The velocity moments are calculated from

$$<V_R^mV_T^n>=\frac{4\pi }{\varrho }_{\psi (R)}^{\psi (\mathrm{})}d\epsilon _0^{j_{max}}\frac{j\mathrm{d}j}{r^2V_R}F(\epsilon ,j)V_R^mV_T^n;$$
(20)
projecting them on the sky gives

$$<V_P^2>(R_p)=\frac{2}{\mathrm{\Sigma }(R_p)}_{R_p}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}RR\rho }{\sqrt{R^2R_p^2}}\left[\left(1\frac{R_p^2}{R^2}\right)<V_R^2>+\frac{R_p^2}{2R^2}<V_T^2>\right],$$
(21)
where $`R_p`$ is the projected radius, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the projected density, given by

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(R_p)=2_{R_p}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}RR\rho }{\sqrt{R^2R_p^2}}.$$
(22)
It is a simple matter to predict the dispersion near the centre of the system. As stated above, the velocity moments simply reflect the Keplerian potential near the BH; thus they take the form

$$<V^2>\frac{m_{bh}}{R},$$
(23)
and this form is identical regardless of the intial system. Writing the dispersion as $`\sigma =[<V^2>]^{1/2}`$, this relation is simply

$$m_{bh}=\sigma ^2.$$
(24)
Of course, this relation is applicable only in the innermost regions. Observations are usually done much farther from the centre – typically near the effective, or half-light, radius of the bulge. This radius corresponds to the core radius $`r_0`$ for the unperturbed isothermal sphere. To calculate any relationship between the BH mass and the velocity dispersion away from the centre of the system, we must use the DF calculated from the adiabatic growth framework.

Figure 5 shows the results for the three systems studied, calculated at three different radii: $`R=10^3`$, near the centre; $`R=1`$, at the core radius; and $`R=100`$, well outside of the central region. The simple predictions made above (24) are confirmed to exist in this model asymptotically as the mass of the hole becomes large (the solid lines in Figure 5). As the calculations are done farther out, however, the relation exists only at larger and larger masses (the dashed and dotted lines in Figure 5).

Similar calculations for the self-similar and NFW distributions yield almost identical results. The NFW DF is notable for attaining the asymptotic relation at smaller black hole masses than for the isothermal case (the self-similar DF is intermediate), but in all cases no linear relation steeper than that of equation (24) is found to exist. There is, as can be seen in the figures, a steep shoulder during the approach to the asymptotic limit but this is non-linear and of insignificant extent.

So it seems that the required relation does not arise naturally in the adiabatic growth framework. This is not suprising, of course; after all, the BH does not create a disturbance much further than the radius $`R=m_{bh}`$. Thus only the largest black holes can reach out to the typical radius at which observations are taken, and then they establish a much flatter relation.

In the next section therefore we consider an alternative to adiabatic growth wherein the central black hole and the dark matter halo form together on the dynamical time scale.

## 5 DYNAMICALLY GROWN BLACK HOLES

The argument in this section is somewhat more speculative than in the preceding sections, and it must ultimately be checked by extensive numerical calculations. However the argument is compelling on dimensional grounds and is consistent with well known solutions and simulations in spherical symmetry (Henriksen & Widrow, 1999; Fillmore & Goldreich, 1984; Bertschinger, 1985).

We assume that the galaxy forms by the extended collapse of a “halo” composed of collisionless matter, and that simultaneously the central black hole is growing proportionally to the halo as matter continues to fall in. We do not assume spherical symmetry.

The preceding assumption is equivalent to the assumption of multi-dimensional self-similarity as defined in (Carter & Henriksen, 1991) and in Henriksen (1997). The technique was used in spherical symmetry in Henriksen & Widrow (1995). The essential idea is that under this assumption one can write the mass inside any surface (the surface in space would be defined by holding $`M`$ constant at a fixed time) in the halo as

$$M=(𝑿)e^{(3\delta 2\alpha )T}.$$
(25)
Here the vector $`𝑿𝒓e^{(\delta T)}`$ is a scaled position vector and $`e^{(\alpha T)}\alpha t`$. The quantities $`\delta `$ and $`\alpha `$ are scales in space and time that allow dimensional information to be included in the expressions for the various quantities. Thus the mass scale $`\mu `$ is determined in terms of $`\delta `$ and $`\alpha `$ by the condition that $`G`$ is a constant of the problem. This yields $`\mu =3\delta 2\alpha `$ as used above.

The velocity of any particle in the halo may be written consistently as

$$𝒗=𝒀e^{(\delta \alpha )T}.$$
(26)
The quantities $`𝑿`$ and $`𝒀`$ are independent of $`T`$ during the self-similar collapse and so define a steady-state phase space. Consequently on a fixed spatial surface and averaged over the line of sight rms velocity we can eliminate $`T`$ between equation (25) and the averaged equation (26) to obtain

$$\mathrm{log}M\left(\frac{3\delta /\alpha 2}{\delta /\alpha 1}\right)\mathrm{log}\sigma ,$$
(27)
where $`\sigma `$ is the velocity dispersion along the line of sight. It does not matter which mass surface is chosen in the system if it is truly self-similar of course. Thus the preceding relation applies to the “bulge” mass at the bulge scale and to the black hole mass on the black hole scale. However the black hole mass will be simply proportional to the bulge mass during self-similar growth so that *both* masses will obey relation (27). This of course also requires that the black hole mass and the bulge mass are also proportional but, given that we are talking about total masses and recalling the vagaries of star formation, this would not necessarily imply a tight bulge luminosity black hole mass correlation.

We may proceed to require that the constant of proportionality in equation (27) is equal to the observed (Gebhardt *et al.*, 2000; Ferrarese & Merritt, 2000) constant, say $`a`$. Then we find that

$$\frac{\delta }{\alpha }=\frac{a2}{a3},$$
(28)
so that, for example, if $`a=4`$, then $`\delta /\alpha =2`$; and if $`a=4.5`$ then $`\delta /\alpha =5/3`$. Should $`a<4`$ (but $`>3`$ which appears here as a kind of lower permissible limit) say $`15/4`$, then $`\delta /\alpha =7/3`$. The principal numerical fact to note is that $`\delta /\alpha `$ is greater than or less than 2 depending on whether $`a`$ is less than or greater than 4.

The reason for the numerical discussion of the preceding paragraph is that the value $`\delta /\alpha =2`$ is highly significant in spherical models of dark matter halo growth (see e.g. Henriksen & Widrow (1999) for a summary). In these models this ratio is given in terms of the power law index $`ϵ`$ of the initial cosmological density perturbation by

$$\frac{\delta }{\alpha }=\frac{2}{3}\left(1+\frac{1}{ϵ}\right).$$
(29)
Consequently we can infer from equations (28,29) that the initial cosmological overdensity had the power $`ϵ`$ where

$$ϵ=2\left(1\frac{3}{a}\right).$$
(30)
If finally we relate $`ϵ`$ to the power spectrum index $`n`$ of the primordial density through the rms profile of such perturbations (other choices are possible, e.g. Hoffman & Shaham (1985), but similar results are found), then

$$n=2ϵ3.$$
(31)
Consequently we arrive at a direct link between $`a`$ and the primordial power spectrum index on the scale of galaxy halos as

$$n=1\frac{12}{a}.$$
(32)
Thus under our interpretation of the black hole mass-velocity-dispersion correlation we are led to conclude that the primordial power spectrum on the scale of galaxies has the index $`n`$ of equation (32). For $`a=4`$ this yields $`n=2`$, while $`a=15/4`$ and $`a=9/2`$ yield $`n=11/5`$ and $`n=5/3`$ respectively. These values for $`n`$ on the scale of galaxies are all in good agreement with observation, which favours a value near $`n=2`$. We conclude that our interpretation of the mass-velocity-dispersion relation as originating in the primordial density profile is consistent with cosmological evidence.

## 6 CONCLUSIONS

In this paper we have explored the implications of growing a black hole in various dark matter halo distribution functions. Our principal approach was to assume that the black hole grows adiabatically on a time scale long compared with the dynamical time of the halo. The method gives definite predictions for the modified density, radial velocity and anisotropy profiles in the isothermal, self-similar “power law” and NFW dark matter distributions. The isothermal calculations reproduced and extended slightly previous work, but the calculations for the self-similar and NFW dark matter halos are new. Depending on the mass of the black hole the disturbances can be noticeable out to nearly the core radius of the galaxy. Moreover, estimates of black hole growth time scales in the adiabatically modified distribution functions are given. Only in the isothermal DF is there found a reasonable black hole mass-galactic age relation. In no case however does the adiabatic argument give an $`M_{bh}\sigma `$ relation that is close to that observed.

Thus in the concluding section we explored by dimensional argument based on the concept of multidimensional self-similarity (Carter & Henriksen, 1991; Henriksen, 1997) the possibility that the central black hole grew on a dynamical time scale with the dark matter halo. A simple argument predicts $`a=3/(1ϵ/2)`$ where $`a`$ is the observed power in the $`M_{bh}\sigma `$ relation and $`ϵ`$ is the power in $`r`$ of the initial cosmolgical density perturbation that produced the galactic halo. Under certain assumptions this power can in turn be related to the power $`n`$ of the primordial cosmological power spectrum on the scale of galactic halos, so that reasonably, $`a=12/(1n)`$. This gives $`n=2`$ for $`a=4`$, which is close to that observed in both cases. We conclude that this suggestion is promising and more work should be done to confirm or infirm the idea that the black hole can grow self-similarly with the dark matter core.

This work was supported by the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We thank the anonymous referee for helpful comments.

## Appendix A Algorithm

This appendix describes the framework that was used to calculate the adiabatic growth models presented above.

We implement this framework using an algorithm similar to Young’s (1980), which solves directly for the final state of the system containing the supermassive black hole. Given a DF that describes the intial system, we

1. Compute the self-consistent potential $`\psi `$ and density $`\varrho `$ for the initial system (eqs. (2) and (4)).
2. Compute the radial action $`i_R(\epsilon ,j)`$ (eq. (6)) for the intial potential $`\psi `$.
3. Approximate the final potential $`\psi ^{}`$ for a given black hole mass by

$$\psi ^{}=\psi \frac{m_{bh}}{R}.$$
(A1)
4. Calculate the radial action $`i_R^{}(\epsilon ,j)`$ for this new potential $`\psi ^{}`$.
5. Equate the intial radial action $`i_R(\epsilon ,j)`$ and the final action $`i_R^{}(\epsilon ,j)`$ to find the energy $`\epsilon `$ that has become $`\epsilon ^{}`$. Then the new DF will be

$$F^{}(\epsilon ^{},j)=F(\epsilon (\epsilon ^{},j),j).$$
(A2)
6. Compute a self-consistent density $`\varrho ^{}`$ and new potential $`\psi ^{}`$ using $`F^{}`$. Continue back to step 4 and iterate until the density has converged.

The convergence criterion for the algorithm was taken to be when $`\varrho ^{}`$ changed by less than $`10^4`$ at all radii.

The computer program developed to implement this algorithm, written in C, uses a radial grid $`R_i`$, with points spaced logarithmically between an inner radius of $`R=10^5`$ and an outer of $`R=10^5`$. The various properties of the system are described on this grid; $`\varrho _i=\varrho (R_i)`$, $`\psi _i=\psi (R_i)`$, and so on. The DF is described on a grid of energy and angular momentum points, where the energy points have for convenience the values of the potential on the radial grid, $`\epsilon _i=\psi _i`$, and the angular momentum is evaluated as $`x=j/j_c`$, where $`j_c`$ is the circular angular momentum and $`x`$ goes from zero to one.


format: text

text:
# Hole-doped, High-Temperature Superconductors 𝐿𝑖_𝑥𝐵𝐶, 𝑁𝑎_𝑥𝐵𝐶 and 𝐶_𝑥 : A Coherent-Potential-Based Prediction

## Abstract

Using density-functional-based methods, we show that the hole-doped $`Li_xBC`$ and $`Na_xBC`$ in $`P6_3/mmc`$ crystal structure and $`C_x`$ in graphite structure are capable of showing superconductivity, possibly with a $`T_c`$ much higher than that of $`MgB_2.`$ We use full-potential methods to obtain the optimized lattice constants $`a`$ and $`c`$, coherent-potential approximation to describe the effects of disorder, Gaspari-Gyorffy formalism to obtain the electron-phonon coupling constant $`\lambda `$, and Allen-Dynes equation to calculate $`T_c`$ as a function of hole concentration in these alloys.

The search for new $`MgB_2`$-*like* superconductors  has proved to be elusive so far, in spite of intense experimental effort. The difficulty in finding new materials with superconducting properties similar to that of $`MgB_2`$  may partly be due to the delicate nature of interaction responsible for superconductivity (SC) . In $`MgB_2,`$ the relatively high superconducting transition temperature, $`T_c`$, of $`39K`$ is achieved through a coming together of various aspects of phonon-mediated electron-electron interaction, such as (i) strong in-plane $`BB`$ covalent bonding , (ii) electron and hole-like cylindrical Fermi sheets along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`A`$ , (iii) a strong coupling of the $`\sigma `$ states to the in-plane $`BB`$ bond-stretching mode  including an-harmonic effects , (iv) $`Bp_{x(y)}`$ contribution to the total density of states (DOS) at the Fermi energy, $`E_F,`$ and the total DOS at $`E_F`$ , and others.

Most of the experimental as well as theoretical efforts have used *layered and metallic* materials as the starting point to obtain materials with above-mentioned electronic properties leading to high-temperature SC but without success. It may be that we have to follow a different route to obtain new $`MgB_2`$-like superconductors with high $`T_c.`$ Such an alternative route is provided by hole-doping of the *layered but semiconducting or insulating* materials .

With the aim of developing materials with $`MgB_2`$-like electronic properties, we have studied how hole-doping can be used to tailor the electronic structure of $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys. In particular, it turns out that the hole-doping makes $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys similar to $`MgB_2`$ in more ways than one, making these alloys promising candidates for showing high-temperature SC.

In the following, we present the results of (i) fully-relaxed, full-potential electronic structure calculations for $`LiBC`$ and $`NaBC`$ in $`P6_3/mmc`$ crystal structure and $`C`$ in graphite structure, using density-functional-based methods, (ii) charge-self-consistent, coherent-potential-based electronic structure calculations for the hole-doped $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys, and (iii) the calculations of $`T_c`$ in hole-doped $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys with $`x`$ ranging from $`1`$ to $`0.2`$ (hole concentration is equal to $`(1x)`$ ).

For full-potential calculations, we have used ABINIT code , based on psuedopotentials and planewaves, and optimized the lattice constants $`a`$ and $`c`$ of $`LiBC`$, $`NaBC`$ and $`C`$. The effects of hole doping in $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys have been studied using Korringa-Kohn-Rostoker coherent-potential approximation in the atomic-sphere approximation (KKR-ASA CPA) method . For calculating $`T_c`$ as a function of $`x`$ in $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys, we have used the Gaspari-Gyorffy formalism  to evaluate the electron-phonon (EP) coupling constant $`\lambda `$, and Allen-Dynes equation  to calculate $`T_c`$.

Based on our calculations, described below, we find that the hole-doped $`Li_xBC`$ and $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ are capable of showing SC, possibly with a $`T_c`$ as high as $`105K`$ for $`Li_{0.5}BC`$ , $`106K`$ for $`Na_{0.6}BC`$ and $`60K`$ for $`C_{0.4}.`$ Such a high $`T_c`$ in these alloys becomes possible partly because the hole-doping modifies the electronic structure, discussed in terms of the density of states and spectral function along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`A`$ direction, and brings it closer to that of $`MgB_2`$.

Before describing our results in detail, we provide some of the computational details. The structural relaxation of $`LiBC`$, $`NaBC`$ and $`C`$ was carried out by the molecular dynamics program ABINIT as described in Ref. . The charge self-consistent electronic structure of $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys as a function of $`x`$ has been calculated using the KKR-ASA CPA method. We have used the CPA rather than a rigid-band model because CPA has been found to reliably describe the effects of disorder in metallic alloys , including $`MgB_2`$ alloys . We parametrized the exchange-correlation potential as suggested by Perdew-Wang  within the generalized gradient approximation. The Brillouin zone (BZ) integrations for charge self-consistency and the DOS calculations were carried out using $`1215`$ and $`4900`$ k-points in the irreducible part of the BZ, respectively. For DOS (spectral function) calculation, we added a small imaginary component of $`1(2)`$ $`mRy`$ to the energy. The lattice constants for $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys as a function of $`x`$ were kept fixed to the values given in Table I. To reduce ASA-related errors in open structures we introduced empty spheres. The Wigner- Seitz radii for $`Li`$ and $`Na`$ were slightly larger than that of $`B`$ and $`C`$. The maximum $`l`$ value used was $`l_{max}`$ = $`2`$.

The $`\lambda `$ was calculated using Gaspari-Gyorffy formalism with the potentials of $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ obtained with the KKR-ASA CPA method. Subsequently, the variation of $`T_c`$ with $`x`$ was calculated using Allen-Dynes equation. The average value of phonon frequency $`\omega _{ln}`$ for $`MgB_2`$ was taken from Ref. , while the value of $`\mu ^{}`$ was kept fixed at $`0.09`$.

First, we discuss the changes brought about by hole-doping in the various aspects of the electronic structure of $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys in terms of (i) total DOS, (ii) partial $`B`$ and $`Cp`$-contributions to the total DOS at $`E_F`$, and (iii) spectral function along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`A`$ evaluated at $`E_F`$. Then we describe the calculated $`T_c`$ for these alloys as a function of hole concentration, which is the main result of the present work.

We show in Fig. 1 the total DOS for $`LiBC`$, $`NaBC`$ and $`C`$ alloys calculated using the ABINIT program at the optimized lattice constants as given in Table I. For comparison we also show the DOS for $`MgB_2`$ obtained as described in Ref. . The compound $`NaBC`$ has a higher $`c/a`$ than $`LiBC`$ primarily because of the larger $`Na`$ atoms. The difference in $`c/a`$ ratio leads to significant changes between the electronic structure of $`LiBC`$ and $`NaBC`$. By comparing the DOS of $`LiBC`$, $`NaBC`$ and $`C`$ with $`MgB_2`$, it is clear that if $`E_F`$ can be moved suitably inside the valence band then the DOS at $`E_F`$ in these alloys can be made comparable to the DOS at $`E_F`$ in $`MgB_2.`$ One of the ways of moving the $`E_F`$ inside the valence band is through hole-doping, as described next.

The changes in the electronic structure of $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys as a function of $`x`$ has been studied for $`x`$ ranging from $`1`$ to $`0.2.`$ We find that with increasing hole concentration $`E_F`$ moves inside, as expected, and consequently these alloys become metallic. As an example, we show in Fig. 2 the total DOS of $`Li_{0.5}BC`$, $`Na_{0.5}BC`$ and $`C_{0.5}`$ alloys, calculated as described earlier. From a comparison with the DOS of $`MgB_2`$, calculated using the same approach and also shown in Fig. 2, it is clear that the DOS around $`E_F`$ in $`Li_{0.5}BC`$, $`Na_{0.5}BC`$ and $`C_{0.5}`$ alloys are comparable to that of $`MgB_2.`$ Our calculation shows that the hole concentrations of $`50\%80\%`$ are ideal for matching the total DOS of $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys with that of $`MgB_2.`$ Knowing the importance of the total DOS as well as the in-plane $`Bp`$-contribution to the total DOS at $`E_F`$ in $`MgB_2`$, the alloys $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ will be good candidates for showing SC only if the $`B`$ and $`Cp`$-contributions to the total DOS at $`E_F`$ are comparable to that of $`MgB_2.`$

In Fig. 3 we compare the $`p_{x(y)}`$ contributions of $`B`$ and $`C`$ to the total DOS around $`E_F`$ with the corresponding contribution from $`MgB_2.`$ The $`Bp_{x(y)}`$ contribution in $`Li_{0.5}BC`$ is almost identical to that of $`MgB_2`$, while the $`Cp_{x(y)}`$ contribution is slightly higher, indicating a strong $`BC`$ covalent bonding. In $`Na_{0.5}BC`$ the $`Bp_{x(y)}`$ contribution is slightly lower than that in $`MgB_2.`$ Thus a further increase in hole concentration will enhance the $`p_{x(y)}`$ contribution to the total DOS. On the other hand in the case of $`C_{0.5}`$ the $`Cp_{x(y)}`$ DOS is identical to that of the $`Bp_{x(y)}`$ contribution in $`MgB_2.`$

For $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys to remain in the contention for showing $`MgB_2`$-like superconducting properties, a favorable matching of the total DOS and the partial $`Bp_{x(y)}`$ and/or $`Cp_{x(y)}`$ contributions to the total DOS at $`E_F`$ must be followed by similarities in the Fermi surfaces of these hole-doped alloys with that of $`MgB_2`$, especially along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`A`$. A measure of this similarity is provided by comparing the spectral function, $`A(𝐤,E_F)`$, of $`MgB_2`$ with $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`A`$ . Such a comparison is shown in Fig. 4, where we have plotted $`A(𝐤,E_F)`$ along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`A`$ for $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys with $`x=0.3`$ and $`0.5`$, as well as for $`MgB_2.`$ We find that $`A(𝐤,E_F)`$ for $`Li_{0.5}BC`$ is closest to that of $`MgB_2,`$ indicating similarities in the Fermi surfaces of the two compounds along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`A`$. In $`C_x`$ the spectral functions for $`x=0.3`$ and $`0.5`$ are $`78`$ times larger than the corresponding values in $`MgB_2`$, while in $`Na_{0.3}BC`$ it is $`4045`$ times larger. Based on the comparison of the various aspects of the electronic structure of $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys with $`MgB_2`$, we find $`Li_xBC`$ to be the most promising candidate for showing $`MgB_2`$-*like* SC followed by $`C_x.`$ Such a conclusion is borne out by our explicit calculation of $`T_c`$ as a function of hole concentration in $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys.

The calculated $`T_c`$ as a function of hole concentration in $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys is shown in Fig. 5, where we also show the variation in $`T_c`$ in $`MgB_2.`$ Clearly, hole-doped $`Li_xBC`$, expected to have a $`T_c`$ of around $`105K`$ with $`50\%`$ hole concentration, offers the best hope for improving the $`T_c`$ of $`MgB_2`$-type superconductors. The EP coupling is much stronger in $`Li_xBC`$ ($`\lambda 1.7`$ for $`x=0.5`$) than in $`MgB_2`$ or any other alloys that we have considered. Our results for $`Li_xBC`$ are consistent with the results of Ref.. Our calculation also shows that $`Na_xBC`$, *if it can be synthesized*, will also have a $`T_c`$ comparable to that of $`Li_xBC`$ albeit at a higher hole concentration. The change in $`T_c`$ of $`MgB_2`$ with increasing hole concentration is not large. Surprisingly, $`C_x`$ is also found to show SC at elevated temperature.

The work presented here can be further improved by optimizing the lattice constants $`a`$ and possibly $`c`$ , within the CPA, as a function of hole concentration. However, the results presented in this paper are very robust and, in our opinion, a slight change in lattice constants due to optimization will not change the main conclusions of the present work.

In conclusion, we have presented the results of a fully-relaxed, full-potential electronic structure calculations for $`LiBC`$ and $`NaBC`$ in $`P6_3/mmc`$ crystal structure and $`C`$ in graphite structure. Using CPA, we have discussed the effects of hole-doping in $`Li_xBC`$, $`Na_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ alloys in terms of (i) total DOS as well as $`Bp`$ contribution to it and, (ii) the spectral function along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`A`$, and shown that the electronic structure of the hole-doped alloys is similar to that of $`MgB_2.`$ Our calculated $`T_c`$ clearly shows $`Li_xBC`$ and $`C_x`$ to be superconducting in the range $`0.2x0.8`$, and $`Na_xBC`$ to be superconducting in the range $`0.2x0.65`$, with $`Li_{0.5}BC`$ showing a possible $`T_c`$ of $`105K.`$


text:
# AGB Stars: Summary and Warning

## 1 Introduction

The Asymptotic Giant Branch (AGB) phase is very short but its importance is seen in its nucleosynthesis. A revolution in stellar modelling has taken place in the last 20 years, inspired jointly by this rich nucleosynthesis and partly by new data. For example, the isotopic data coming from pre-solar grains (see this volume) forces theorists to include species that were previously ignored, species which are energetically of no importance (i.e. they play no role in determining the stellar structure) but which can be used to constrain the models. Nucleosynthesis is now important as a tracer of temperature and mixing, and not simply a by-product of energy generation. But along with these advances come more quantitative demands. It is now increasingly important to know what is known well and what is less sure. This is the goal of this paper.

## 2 AGB Evolution and Nucleosynthesis

All stars between about 1–8 $`M_{}`$ will pass through the AGB phase. A star will begin its AGB phase following core helium exhaustion. It is worth emphasizing again the tiny size of the core (essentially a white dwarf) in comparison to the enormous envelope, which extends over a few hundred solar radii. In more familiar terms, if the entire AGB star envelope were reduced to 1km in diameter then the core which powers it would be the size of a marble, or 1cm across. When we apply our simple models to such a complex system, it is worth remembering the enormous range of scales we are trying to understand.

The structure is that of a tiny C-O core surrounded by a He-burning shell and a H-burning shell, and then an enormous convective envelope. Following core He exhaustion the ignition of the He-burning shell is accompanied by a large increase in the energy burning rate, at least for the more massive stars. This energy output causes the star to expand and the H-burning shell is extinguished. Regions progressively further inward become unstable to convection and thus the depth of the convective envelope increases, mixing the products of H burning to the surface in what is called the “second dredge-up”. Note that this only occurs for masses above about 4 $`M_{}`$, depending on the composition. In any event, during this so-called “early AGB” (E-AGB) phase the He shell forms and advances outward to meet the H shell. If second dredge-up occurs, it hastens the coming together of these two shells.

Soon after this the output of the He shell becomes unstable, resulting in a thermal pulse or shell flash. Space prevents us from discussing the details of this, but basically it is caused by the high temperature dependence of the He-burning reactions as well as the geometric thinness of the shell, which prevents if from responding to perturbations in the temperature. For details see Härm & Schwarzschild (1972), Despain & Scalo (1976), Sackmann (1977), Despain (1981). Shell flashes are divided into four phases. During the “on” phase the He-shell provides the energy, and drives a convective zone from the He shell almost all the way to the H-shell (see Figure 1). This region contains about 75% He and about 25% C. During the “power-down” phase the convection dies away and the star expands in response to the energy input from the He burning. This expansion causes the outer regions to cool and the H shell is essentially extinguished. Just as happened during the second dredge-up, we find the bottom of the convective envelope moves inward (in mass) and can penetrate the region which was previously part of the intershell convective zone. This is called the “dredge-up” phase, and it mixes the freshly produced C to the surface. Finally the dredge-up stops, the star contracts again, the H shell is reignited and the star enters the “off” or “interpulse” phase. During this, the longest phase (about $`10^4`$ or $`10^5`$ y), the star is powered primarily by the H shell with negligible energy provided by the He shell.

These thermal pulses recur as the star ascends the AGB. The evolution ends when the H shell runs out of fuel, i.e. when there is no longer an envelope for it to consume. Although the advance of the H shell is eating away at the bottom of the envelope, the dominant effect is mass-loss from the top of the envelope, as stressed by Schönberner (1979). It is mass-loss which terminates the AGB evolution. But is it through steady loss? Or perhaps planetary nebula ejection? Or a combination? Does it depend on mass? Or on binarity? This is one of the major uncertainties (see below). We should note also that all AGB stars are long period variables of various kinds (eg Mira).

We have seen how the thermal pulses produce C and hence can make carbon stars. Observations show that AGB stars are usually enriched in s-process elements, and given the low temperatures seen in most of these (lower mass) stars, it seems that the neutron source is 13C$`(\alpha ,n)^{16}`$O. The obvious source of 13C is from CN cycling in the H shell, but this is not enough to produce the observed s-process enhancements. Pioneering work by Iben & Renzini (1982a, b) showed that some partial mixing can occur at the bottom of the H envelope during the dredge-up phase. If this happens, then some protons are deposited in the intershell region, which is about 25% C. During the subsequent contraction, this 12C captures a proton to make 13C. If there are many protons then proton capture can continue and produce 14N (this is simply the CN cycle), so we do not want too many protons mixed into this region. In any event, there will now be a layer of enhanced 13C abundance, referred to as a 13C pocket (see figure 2). During the subsequent interpulse phases this 13C produces neutron via $`\alpha `$-capture and these neutrons are captured by Fe (et al) and s-processing occurs in the 13C-pocket. During the next pulse this zone and its s-process elements is mixed into the convective shell. Also the higher temperatures at the bottom of the shell provide a brief burst of neutrons from 22Ne$`(\alpha ,n)^{25}`$Mg. (The 22Ne has been produced by $`\alpha `$-captures on 14N which in turn was produced by the CNO cycle from the initial CNO.) Then the dredge-up phase mixes the resulting s-process elements to the surface of the star, where they are observed by spectroscopists. Many detailed calculations of this process have been published by the Torino group (eg Gallino et al, 1998).

Another important issue is the production of 19F, which is observed to correlate with the C/O ratio (Jorissen et al, 1992). Theoretical studies show that F is indeed produced in pulses (space limitations prevent us from going into the details), but also requires an additional 13C source to explain the most abundant cases (eg Mowlavi et al, 1998).

We have seen that 22Ne is abundant in the intershell. Hence thermal pulses can make 25Mg and 26Mg via $`(\alpha ,n)`$ and $`(\alpha ,\gamma )`$ respectively. Dredge-up then enriches the surface in these species. Similarly, the Ne-Na cycle can produce 23Na (Mowlavi, 1999a).

For more massive stars (above about $`4M_{}`$, depending on composition) the bottom of the envelope extends into the top of the H burning shell. This means that some processing occurs in the envelope: this is called “hot bottom burning” (hereafter HBB). The first consequence of this is the production of 7Li via the Cameron-Fowler mechanism (Sackmann & Boothroyd, 1992). Basically, mixing takes the 7Be (made by 3H+4He) to cooler regions where it can produce 7Li rather than completing the PPII and PPIII chains. This matches observations of super-Li rich AGB stars in the Magellanic Clouds. Of course, CN cycling will also occur when HBB exists (Boothroyd et al, 1993), so we expect 12C to be processed into 13C and 14N. Note that this can stop a star from becoming a carbon star, as the (primary) 12C mixed to the surface is then burned into (primary) 13C and 14N. Hence another signature of HBB (as well as enriched 7Li) is an equilibrium ratio of the C isotopes. We also see Ne-Na cycling and Mg-Al cycling, producing enrichments in 26Al, for example, although this element is also made in the H shell and enriched during dredge-up also (Mowlavi & Meynet, 2000).

## 3 From Giant to Giant: Aluminium in Globular Clusters

An active area at present involves Mg and Al, which is relevant to this meeting because of the decay of 26Al to 26Mg. It also involves AGB star nucleosynthesis and abundance anomalies in present day globular cluster stars.

Globular clusters (GCs) are traditionally thought of as chemically homogeneous, and this is true if one considers the Fe/H ratio for stars in a given cluster. The Fe content is pretty constant from star to star within a GC, although it varies substantially from one GC to another. At this stage we should note that most observations are done in the brightest giants, because of the difficulty of obtaining high resolution spectra for fainter stars.

But we soon discovered that other elements were less homogeneous. The first anomaly was an anti-correlation of C with N—in stars where C was depleted, N was enhanced. This was soon extended to O and Na, which also anti-correlate. For reviews see Kraft (1994) and Da Costa (1997). These correlations clearly implicate hydrogen burning, and it was suggested by Sweigart & Mengel (1979) that the data could be understood as reflecting varying amounts of H-burning at the top of the hydrogen-shell. They proposed that some form of “extra-mixing”, possibly meridional mixing, may circulate the surface material down to the top of the H-shell where processing can occur, and then return the burnt material to the surface. Evidence for this was the clear decrease in C content with luminosity on the giant-branch for some clusters (such as NGC6397 and M92). More recently, the abundance anomalies in GC red-giants (GCRGs) have included a Mg-Al anti-correlation, as would be expected for the operation of the Mg-Al cycle. But the story gets very messy very quickly.

There are two major complications with the proposed mixing mechanism. Firstly, very recent observations with 8m-class telescopes have shown that some of these correlations exist in unevolved stars in some clusters! eg 47 Tuc shows the C-N anti-correlation on the main-sequence (Cannon et al, 1998) and NGC6752 shown the O-Na and Mg-Al anti-correlation at the base of the giant-branch and at the turn-off (Gratton, et al, 2001). It is hard to see how this could arise from “deep mixing”. Rather, this is evidence for the abundance anomalies being present in the gas from which the present-day GCRGs formed. In other words, this is evidence for what is called the “primordial” explanation.

The second complication comes from the only successful measurement of the abundances of the Mg isotopes, by Shetrone (1996). He showed that in M13 there is an anti-correlation between 24Mg and Al, with the sum 25Mg$`+^{26}`$Mg being constant (Shetrone was unable to separate the two heavier Mg isotopes from each other, spectroscopically). He also found that as the Mg abundance decreased, it was 24Mg that was decreasing, and not the heavier isotopes! This implies that 24Mg is being burned into Al (presumably 27Al, because the evolution timescale for these stars exceeds $`10^8`$ years). This is contrary to our understanding of the Mg-Al cycle and, if correct, poses a problem for theory.

So the current situation is that some GCRGs show evidence for “deep mixing” bringing the products of H-burning to their surfaces (eg abundance variations correlating with evolutionary state on the giant branch), and others show evidence for primordial inhomogeneities (eg abundance variations in unevolved stars on the main-sequence). It appears that both processes occur, although the details probably depend on the mass and metallicity of the GC. It is worth pointing out that red-giants in the field show little, if any, of these effects! It is something peculiar to the GC environment.

But how does this relate to AGB stars? Well, whatever stars polluted the GC must not have altered the Fe abundance, but they did alter the abundances of those things that take part in H-burning, such as O, Na, Mg and Al. It is thus very likely that the polluters were intermediate mass AGB stars (Denissenkov et al, 1998). Dredge-up will produce large amounts of the heavy Mg isotopes, and HBB will cycle these into both 26Al and 27Al, and the 26Al will then decay back to 26Mg. Also, if one starts with an intermediate mass AGB star with a composition appropriate to a mixture of Big Bang material and supernova ejecta, then the initial Mg isotope ratios are about 98:1:1. Yet after some thermal pulsing the ratio goes closer to 50:25:25 due to the strong dredge-up of the heavy Mg isotopes. Further, Messenger (2000) has shown that if the initial 24Mg is underabundant compared to 25Mg and 26Mg then it becomes easier to match the observed Mg-Al correlations.

A recent development, and one of great interest to this meeting, is the suggestion by Denissenkov & Weiss (2001) that the Al enhancements seen in the GCRGs are actually 26Al rather than 27Al. It appears than with the best reaction rates, it is simply impossible to make 27Al inthe required amounts. However the 26Al is more easily made, in larger amounts, and at lower temperatures, so that there is 26Al available for deep-mixing to transport to the surface. It is an intriguing idea, and may soon be open to an observational test.

Clearly the story is still unfolding, but it appears that earlier generations of intermediate mass AGB stars, with highly non-solar compositions, have polluted the gas from which some GCRGs have formed. This may explain the abundance anomalies seen on the main-sequence. As these stars evolve, they also experience “deep mixing” which further alters their surface compositions. This combined scenario (Denissenkov et al, 1998) explains many features, qualitatively, but needs to be investigated with quantitative models.

## 4 Warnings and Uncertainties

It is usual to quote the basic input physics as uncertainties: such things as opacity and reaction rates. While it would be foolhardy to claim that the opacity is now known, it does appear that the recent work of the OPAL and OP groups have removed the biggest uncertainties. We do not think that opacity is a major uncertainty in AGB stars, but we do note that the resultant C-rich envelopes require appropriate opacity tables. Uncertainties in the reaction rates certainly remain a major problem, and we defer to Arnould et al (1999) for a recent survey of this area.

Quantitatively the biggest uncertainties are in the areas of dredge-up and mass-loss. There is no good theory for mass-loss in very cool giants. One is forced to resort to empirical fits of observations. Although many formulae exist (see those listed in Groenewegen & de Jong (1994) for example) none is clearly superior, although the Reimers formula does not produce the very high mass loss rates seen at the tip of the AGB.

Although it is common to bemoan the lack of a good convection theory, the main limitation in modelling AGB stars is in determining the convective boundaries. Some debate exists about how to apply the Schwarzschild criterion (eg see Mowlavi (1999b)) and the details of the numerical implementation (Frost & Lattanzio, 1996). These things greatly affect the depth of dredge-up, and limit the quantitative predictability of the models.

Related to this is the formation of the 13C pocket, which is clearly associated with the dredge-up problem. A partial mixing algorithm (Herwig, 2000) may provide a solution to this problem, but it contains some parameters which must be fixed somehow. Note that our current understanding has the 13C pocket produced by mass motions of some kind (possibly shear at the bottom of a rotating envelope, possibly overshooting, etc) and that this should not be very dependent on the composition. Hence the number of neutrons produced should be almost independent of the metallicity of the star. So as \[Fe/H\] decreases, we expect a larger number of neutrons per seed, and a different s-process to occur in the very metal-poor stars. This does not seem to be the case (Aoki et al, 2000) and is another challenge for theorists!

## 5 Summary

An AGB star is a complicated thing, but that is what makes it interesting. The interplay of different kinds of physics is fascinating. Reliable quantitative estimates of their behaviour require addressing the areas of uncertainty we mention above. Before placing too much faith in these estimates, look carefully to see which assumptions went into the details-there lies the devil, as always.


text:
# Cosmological implications of old galaxies at high redshifts

## Abstract

Old high-$`z`$ galaxies are important tools for understanding the structure formation problem and may become the key to determine the ultimate fate of the Universe. In this letter, the inferred ages of the three oldest galaxies at high redshifts reported in the literature are used to constrain the first epoch of galaxy formation and to reanalyse the high-z time scale crisis. The lower limits on the formation redshift $`z_f`$ depends on the quantity of cold dark matter in the Universe. In particular, if $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m0.37`$ these galaxies are not formed in FRW cosmologies with no dark energy. This result is in line with the Supernovae type Ia measurements which suggest that the bulk of energy in the Universe is repulsive and appears like an unknown form of dark energy component. In a complementar analysis, unlike recent claims favoring the end of the age problem, it is shown that the Einstein-de Sitter model is excluded at high-z by $`3\sigma `$.

The existence of old high-redshift galaxies (OHRGs) provides one of the best methods for constraining the age of the Universe , and, in a similar vein, may be an important key for determining the first epoch of galaxy formation. Recently, different groups \[3-7\] announced the discoveries of three extremely red radio galaxies at $`z=1.175`$ (3C 65), $`z=1.55`$ (53W091) and $`z=1.43`$ (53W069) with a minimal stellar age of 4.0 Gyr, 3.0 Gyr and 4.0 Gyr, respectively. These discoveries accentuated even further the already classical “age crisis” and gave rise to a new variant of this problem, which could be named the high-$`z`$ time scale crisis: the underestimated ages of these galaxies contradict the predictions of the standard Einstein-de Sitter model for values of $`h>0.45`$ . For comparison, if one considers $`h=H_o/100\mathrm{K}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1=0.6`$, the age of the Universe predicted by the Einstein-de Sitter CDM model at redshifts $`z=1.175`$ and $`z=1.55`$ is $`t_z=3.35`$ Gyr and $`t_z=2.5`$ Gyr, respectively. Such discrepancies become even larger if one takes into account the radio galaxy at $`z=1.43`$ with a minimal stellar age of 4.0 Gyr. In this case, the predicted age is $`t_z=2.85`$ Gyr, which yields an age difference greather than 1 Gyr. It is still worth noticing that such estimates do not include an incubation time of at least 0.5 - 1 Gyr, which would be more in accordance to the chemo-dynamical evolution models for such objects. As it appears, the problem raised by the ages of these galaxies to the standard CDM model is a strong indication that OHRGs may also constrain appreciably the formation redshift ($`z_f`$), i.e., the epoch where the first structures were actually formed. In brief, this is the aim of this letter. In what follows, robust lower limits on $`z_f`$ are derived for open cold dark matter (OCDM) and flat $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM models from the estimated ages of the quoted old high-$`z`$ galaxies. For completeness, we also present a new quantitative approach for analysing the high-$`z`$ time scale crisis.

Many attempts for determining the first epoch of galaxy formation have been done in the past, and the overall conclusion is that the major period of galaxy formation lies in the redshift interval $`1z3`$, that is, at relatively low redshifts . Such results are consistent with the simplest cold dark matter (CDM) scenario for structure formation, although its modified version ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM) gave a more natural explanation for the excess of power observed in the galaxy distribution . In spite of that, recent findings of galaxy candidates at $`z>4.0`$ \[13-15\] suggest that our Universe contains more collapsed objects than believed some few years ago, and all this activity at high redshifts cannot be easily accommodated in the CDM scenarios . Since such studies do not exclude the possibility that rare events of galaxy formation took place at higher redshifts, the very beginning of the structure formation process remains as one of the most challenging problems in modern cosmology.

Let us first recall that for the class of passively evolving elliptic radio galaxies, almost all amount of gas is believed to be processed into stars in a single episode of star formation, in such a way that the assumption of an instantaneous burst is considered a good approximation for modeling their evolution. For lookback time calculations, an instantaneous burst of star formation means that the age of these OHRGs can be expressed as being almost exactly the time taken by the Universe to evolve from $`z_f`$ to the observed redshift $`z_{obs}`$. In the framework of Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) models with cosmological constant such condition can be translated as

$$t(z_{obs})t(z_f)=H_{o}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}_{(1+z_f)^1}^{(1+z_{obs})^1}\frac{dx}{\sqrt{1\mathrm{\Omega }_m+\mathrm{\Omega }_mx^1+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(x^21)}}t_g,$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ stand for the present-day matter and vacuum density parameters, respectively. The inequality signal on the r.h.s. of the above expression comes from the fact that the Universe is older than or at least has the same age of any observed structure. Since this natural argument also holds for any time interval, a finite value for the redshift $`z_f`$ provides the lower bound for the galaxy formation allowed by the aged object located at $`z_{obs}`$. Models for which $`z_f\mathrm{}`$ are clearly incompatible with the existence of the specific galaxy, being ruled out in a natural way.

Before discussing the resulting diagrams, an important point of principle should be stressed. To assure the robustness of the limits on $`z_f`$, we addopt (1) the minimal value for the Hubble parameter, and (2) the underestimated age for all OHRGs. Both conditions are almost self-explanatory. First, as we know, the smaller the value of $`H_o`$, the larger the age predicted by the model and, second, objects with smaller ages are theoretically more easily accommodated, thereby guaranteeing that the models are always favored in the present estimates. For the Hubble parameter we consider the value obtained by the HST Key project which is in agreement with other independent estimates , i.e., the round number value $`H_o=60\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{sec}/\mathrm{Mpc}`$ . Indeed, we are being rather conservative since this lower limit was recently updated to nearly $`10\%`$ of accuracy ($`h=0.70\pm 0.07`$, $`1\sigma `$) by Friedman , and the data from SNe also point consistently to $`h>0.6`$ or even higher .

In Fig. 1a we show the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_mz_f`$ plane allowed by the existence of these OHRG’s for OCDM models. The shadowed horizontal region corresponds to the observed range $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}=0.20.4`$ , which is used to fix the lower limits on $`z_f`$. As should be physically expected, if the matter contribution increases, a larger value of $`z_f`$ is required in order to account for the existence of these OHRGs within these models. Conversely, for each object, the absolute minimal value of $`z_f`$ is obtained for an empty universe ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}0`$). In the observed range of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ the allowed values for the formation redshift are unexpectedly high. For example, by considering $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}=0.3`$, as indicated from dynamic estimates on scales up to about 2$`h^1`$ Mpc , the ages of 3C 65, 53W091 and 53W069 provide, respectively, $`z_f6.3`$, $`z_f10.5`$ and $`z_f18`$. Such values suggest that these galaxies were formed about 12.5 Gyr ago, or by considering the most recent lower limits for the age of the Universe , that such objects were formed when the Universe was $``$ 1.0 Gyr old. However, since almost all the age of the Universe is at low redshifts ($`z=02`$), these galaxies may have been formed nearly at the same epoch, regardless of their constraints on the redshift space.

Figure 1b shows similar plots for flat $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM models. In this case, the effect of the equation of state associated to the “vacuum medium” ($`p_v=\rho _v`$) is to accelerate the cosmic expansion. In particular, this means that the lookback time between $`z_{obs}`$ and $`z_f`$ is larger than in the standard scenario and, therefore, the galaxy formation process may start relatively late in comparison to the corresponding OCDM model. For example, if the density parameter is around the central value, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}=0.3`$, the ages of 3C 65, 53W091 and 53W069 restrict the formation redshift by $`z_f3.6`$, $`z_f5.2`$ and $`z_f5.8`$, respectively. The value of $`z_f`$ is also proportional to the quantity of dark matter. As one may check, in the limiting case of a universe dominated only by dark energy, the lower limit is $`z_f2`$. It is worth noticing that for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}0.37`$, the lower limit inferred from the age of 59W069 is $`z_f\mathrm{}`$. This result is consistent with recent studies based on the age-redshift relation, and means that the standard cosmological model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}0.37`$ and $`h0.6`$ is (beyond doubt) incompatible with the existence of this galaxy. We also stress that the present constraints on the formation redshift are indeed rather conservative since the lower limit on $`H_o`$ has been considered in all the estimates. Finally, we stress that these lower limits on $`z_f`$ provide a new theoretical evidence that galaxies are not uncommum objects at very large redshifts, say, at $`z>5`$, and also reinforce the interest on the observational search for galaxies and other collapsed objects within the redshift interval $`5z10`$ (For a discussion about the influence of an arbitrary equation of state $`p_x=\omega \rho _x`$ ($`\omega 1`$) on the redshift formation, see ).

Another important implication of age dating of high-$`z`$ objects is on the expanding age of the Universe. As before, a crucial point is concerned to the measurements the Hubble parameter. Recently, Sandage et al.  argued for the end of the age crisis by concluding that there is no time scale crisis in cosmology if $`H_o=55\pm 5\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$ as inferred by the Hubble diagram of 52 fiducial SNe Ia. For $`h=0.55\pm 0.05`$ and by taking $`t_o=12\pm 1`$ (1$`\sigma `$) as the median value for the estimated ages of globular clusters , we find $`H_ot_o=0.67\pm 0.09`$ which is clearly compatible with the prediction of the Einstein-de Sitter model ($`t_o=\frac{2}{3}H_o^1`$). Moreover, even by adding 1 Gyr as incubation time  we find $`H_ot_o=0.73\pm 0.1`$ which is also compatible with the standard flat CDM model. However, what can be said about a similar analysis at high redshift?

In Fig. 2a we assume 0.5 Gyr as incubation time for the LBDS 53W069 and show the dimensionless product $`H_ot_z`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}`$. Two different cases are illustrated: the standard CDM and the flat $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM models. Dotted lines indicate the $`\pm 2\sigma `$ limits of the age-parameter by considering $`h=0.55\pm 0.05`$ whereas dashed lines indicate the $`\pm 2\sigma `$ limits for $`h=0.7\pm 0.1`$, the value obtained by the HST Key Project  and by other independent estimates . At this redshift ($`z=1.43`$), the prediction of the flat matter-dominated model is $`H_ot_z0.17`$ whereas for $`h=0.55\pm 0.05`$ this galaxy yields $`H_ot_z=0.22\pm 0.03`$, which rules out the Einstein-de Sitter case by $``$ 2 standard deviations. In the case of the LBDS 53W091 (at $`z=1.55`$), the prediction of the Einstein-de Sitter model is $`H_ot_z0.16`$, and similar analysis provides $`H_ot_z=0.20\pm 0.03`$. As expected, such discrepancies become even larger if one considers $`h=0.7\pm 0.1`$. In this case, we find for the LBDS 53W091 and LBDS 53W069 $`H_ot_z=0.29\pm 0.04`$ and $`H_ot_z=0.25\pm 0.05`$, which excludes the Einstein-de Sitter model by $`2\sigma `$ and $`3\sigma `$, respectively. Therefore, if the estimated age of these objects are correct, we may conclude, at light of the above analysis that there is a high-$`z`$ time scale crisis in the standard cosmology, even by considering low values for the Hubble parameter. Naturally, such a result is in agreement with the latest measurements from Supernovae type Ia which point to the existence of a repulsive energy component dominating the bulk of matter-energy in the Universe, thereby implying that the Universe is necessarely older than the age predicted by the Einstein-de Sitter model.

Acknowledgements

This research was partially supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Pronex/FINEP. (no. 41.96.0908.00) and FAPESP (no. 00/06695-0)


text:
# Untitled Document

Experimental tests of curvature couplings of Fermions in General Relativity
S. Mohanty, B. Mukhopadhyay and A. R. Prasanna

Physical Research Laboratory

Ahmedabad 380 009, India

Abstract

Spin $`\frac{1}{2}`$ particles in geodesic trajectories experience no gravitational potential but they still have non-zero couplings to the curvature tensor. The effect of space time curvature on fermions can be parameterized by a vector and a pseudo-vector potential. These apparent $`CPT`$ violating terms can be measured with satellite based spin-polarized torsion balance and clock comparison experiments. The Earth’s curvature effect is of the order of $`10^{37}Gev`$ which is not far from the present bounds of $`10^{29}Gev`$ on such $`CPT`$ violating couplings.

The effect of gravitational potential on quantum mechanics of elementary particles was observed in the classic COW experiment  using neutron interferometry. In general relativity it is possible to choose a local inertial (free fall) frame where the gravitational potential on an elementary particle is zero. The curvature tensor in such frames however cannot be made to vanish even locally. The experimental tests of this curvature coupling would be an important test of general relativity. The couplings of spin $`1/2`$ particle to curved space background have been studied by many authors \[2-9\]. Parker  studied the effect of Riemann curvature of the Schwarschild metric on the energy levels of hydrogen atoms. It was found that the energy level shift on the surface of the sun is of the order of $`GM_{}/(R^3m_e)10^{51}Gev`$ which is too tiny to have any observational consequence. The effect of rotation in the curved space metric on spin $`1/2`$ particles have been studied in \[3-9\].

In this paper we show that the gravitational curvature couplings can be parameterised as an external vector $`\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu a_\mu \psi `$ and a pseudo-vector $`\overline{\psi }\gamma ^5\gamma ^\mu b_\mu \psi `$ interaction term in the Lagrangian. In a rotating inertial frame (like in the frame of a satellite orbiting the earth) both $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu `$ have some non-zero components while in a non-rotating free fall frame only $`a_\mu `$ is non-zero. From the phenomenological point of view a non-zero $`b_\mu `$ is of interest as it can be measured in various experiments \[11-18\] discussed below. The magnitude of $`|\stackrel{}{b}|`$ in earth orbiting satellites is of the order of $`6.5\times 10^{37}Gev`$. This can be compared with the sensitivity of experiments \[12-14\] like spin polarised torsion balance and spin magnetisation measurement which can measure upto $`|\stackrel{}{b}|10^{29}Gev`$. The best prospects for measuring curvature effects on fermions is by using macroscopic spin polariased substances in earth orbit satellites.

The general invariant coupling of spin $`\frac{1}{2}`$ particles to gravity is described by the Lagrangian \[2-9\]

$$=\sqrt{g}\left(\overline{\psi }i\gamma ^aD_a\psi m\overline{\psi }\psi \right)$$
(1)
where

$$D_a=e_a^\mu \left(_\mu \frac{i}{4}\omega _{bc\mu }\sigma ^{bc}\right),$$
$`(2a)`$
$$\sigma ^{bc}=\frac{i}{2}[\gamma ^b,\gamma ^c],$$
$`(2b)`$
$$\omega _{bc\mu }=e_{b\lambda }\left(_\mu e_c^\lambda +\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\gamma \mu }^\lambda e_c^\gamma \right)$$

where $`a,b,c`$ etc. denote flat space indices and $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$ etc. are the curved space indices. We use coordinates which are locally inertial along the entire geodesic trajectory of the particles (called the Fermi normal coordinates ). The metric in these coordinates to second order takes the form

$$g_{00}=1R_{0\mathrm{}0m}X^{\mathrm{}}X^m$$
$`(3a)`$
$$g_{0i}=g^{0i}=\frac{2}{3}R_{0\mathrm{}im}X^{\mathrm{}}X^m$$
$`(3b)`$
$$g_{ij}=\delta _{ij}\frac{1}{3}R_{i\mathrm{}jm}X^{\mathrm{}}X^m$$
$`(3c)`$
where $`X^i`$ are the spatial coordinates of an event occurring at time $`X^0`$. The corresponding vierbeins are given by

$$e_{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}}^\alpha =\delta _{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}}^\alpha \frac{1}{2}R_{\mathrm{}0m}^\alpha X^{\mathrm{}}X^m$$
$`(4a)`$
$$e_i^\alpha =\delta _i^\alpha \frac{1}{6}R_{\mathrm{}im}^\alpha X^{\mathrm{}}X^m.$$
$`(4b)`$
In this coordinate system Chritoffel connections $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }^\alpha =0`$, on a geodesic, but their first derivatives are non-zero and are related to the Riemann tensor as given by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0},\nu }^\alpha =R_{\mu \nu 0}^\alpha $$
$`(5a)`$
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij,k}^\mu =\frac{1}{3}\left(R_{ijk}^\mu +R_{jik}^\mu \right)$$
$`(5b)`$
on any point along the geodesic. Using the coordinates described in equations (3)-(5), it can be shown, after some algebra, that the Dirac Lagrangian (1) can be written in the form

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill & =\hfill & i\left(dete\right)\overline{\psi }\left[\gamma ^0_0+\gamma ^i_ia_0\gamma ^0a_i\gamma ^ib_0\gamma _5\gamma ^0b_i\gamma _5\gamma ^i+im\right]\psi \hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
(where $`i=1,2,3`$), the vector $`(a_0,\stackrel{}{a})`$ is given by

$$a_0=\frac{1}{4}R_{0im}^iX^m$$
$`(7a)`$
$$a_i=\frac{1}{2}R_{i00m}X^m\frac{1}{4}R_{ijm}^jX^m$$
$`(7b)`$
and the pseudovector $`(b_0,\stackrel{}{b}_i)`$ is given by

$$b_0=\frac{1}{8}ϵ_{0ijk}R_m^{jki}X^m$$
$`(8a)`$
$$b_i=\frac{1}{4}ϵ_{0kji}R_{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}m}^{kj}X^m+\frac{1}{4}ϵ_{0kji}R_m^{0jk}X^m.$$
$`(8b)`$
From (6), we see that the effect of space time curvature appears as an external vector coupling $`\gamma ^\mu a_\mu `$ and pseudovector coupling $`\gamma ^5\gamma ^\mu b_\mu `$ and is formally similar to the effective $`CPT`$ and Lorentz violating Lagrangian \[11-18\].

Although the terms arising from gravitational curvature couplings in (6) are the same as in the explicit $`CPT`$ violating interactions studied in \[11-18\] there is a fundamental difference between the two, in that, for the case of gravitational couplings there is no $`CPT`$ of Lorentz symmetry violation. If one treats the vectors $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu `$ as fixed external vectors which do not transform under $`CPT`$ (as is done in ref. \[11-18\]) then since both $`\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu \psi `$ and $`\overline{\psi }\gamma _5\gamma ^\mu \psi `$ are odd under $`CPT`$  the interaction terms $`a_\mu \overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu \psi `$ and $`b_\mu \overline{\psi }\gamma _5\gamma ^\mu \psi `$ explicitly violate $`CPT`$. Similarly the existence of preferred external four vector $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu `$ explicitly violates the Lorentz invariance of vacuum. In the case of gravitational couplings (6) however, it can be checked explicitly that if one transforms the source currents which generate $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu `$ correctly under $`CPT`$ then the interaction terms in (6) do not violate $`CPT`$. One can check this explicitly from the expressions for $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu `$ given in (10) and (12) respectively for the case of a satellite orbiting a central body with angular velocity $`\omega `$. Under time reversal operation $`T:\omega \omega `$ and under parity $`P`$ the spatial three vector $`(X,Y,Z)(X,Y,Z)`$. One can see explicitly from the expressions for $`a_\mu `$ (10) and $`b_\mu `$ (12) that under $`CPT`$ both $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu `$ pick up negative signs which compensate for the negative signs picked up by the fermion bilinears $`\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu \psi `$ and $`\overline{\psi }\gamma _5\gamma ^\mu \psi `$ under $`CPT`$ transformation; and the gravitational curvature terms (6) do not violate $`CPT`$ . Similarly since both $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu `$ transform as four vectors under Lorentz transformation the interaction terms in (6) are Lorentz invariant. If one considers the dynamics of fermions in a background gravitational field and neglect the back-reaction of the fermions to the gravitating sources, then the phenomenological effects of gravitational curvature couplings in (6) will be the same as that of an external fixed vector fields as studied in ref. \[11-18\] and the experiments which can be used for testing $`CPT`$ violation using fermions as test particles can also be used in principle for looking for gravitational curvature couplings.

We consider a coordinate system in a free fall orbit around a gravitating body. Such a system of coordinates would ideally describe satellite based experiments. For Earth-based experiments, the gravitational source would be the Sun. Choosing without loss of generality orbital angular momentum around the Z-axis, $`\stackrel{}{\omega }=(0,0,\omega )`$, we can write the non-zero components of the Riemann tensor in the orbital free fall coordinates as follows:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}R_{1010}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{2GM}{R^3}\hfill \\ R_{0202}\hfill & =\hfill & R_{0303}=\frac{GM}{R^3}\hfill \\ R_{1212}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{GM}{R^3}\left(1+\omega ^2\left(Y^2+2X^2\right)\right)\hfill \\ R_{1313}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{GM}{R^3}\left(1\omega ^2Y^2\right)\hfill \\ R_{2323}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{GM}{R^3}\left(2+\omega ^2X^2\right)\hfill \\ R_{1202}\hfill & =\hfill & R_{1303}=\frac{GM}{R^3}\omega Y\hfill \\ R_{2101}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{2GM}{R^3}\omega X\hfill \\ R_{2303}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{GM}{R^3}\omega X\hfill \\ R_{2313}\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{GM}{R^3}\omega ^2XY\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
where we have chosen $`X`$ along the radial direction and $`Y`$ along the tangential direction of the orbit. Using the curvature components (9), we can compute the vector $`a_\mu `$ and pseudovector $`b_\mu `$ given in (7) and (8) for a free fall coordinate rotating with angular velocity $`\omega `$ around the $`Z`$-axis as follows. The vector couplings $`\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu a_\mu \psi `$ of fermions is given by $`a_\mu `$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}a_0\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{3}{4}\frac{GM\omega }{R^3}XY\hfill \\ a_1\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{GMX}{2R^3}+\frac{GM\omega ^2X}{4R^3}\left(2X^2Y^2\right)\hfill \\ a_2\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{GMY}{4R^3}\left[1+\omega ^2\left(2X^2Y^2\right)\right]\hfill \\ a_3\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{GMZ}{4R^3}\left[1\omega ^2\left(X^2+Y^2\right)\right].\hfill \end{array}$$
(10)
The vector field $`a_\mu `$ can arise in a Schwarzschild metric . In a solar mass star it can split the $`2P_{3/2}`$ levels of a hydrogen atom by amounts

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E\left(2P\right)\frac{GM}{R^3}\left(\frac{1}{m_e}\right).$$
(11)
On the surface of the Sun, this level split is 3.8$`\times `$10$`{}_{}{}^{51}Gev`$ and on the surface of Earth, the hydrogen $`3P_{3/2}`$ levels will split by 1.2$`\times `$10$`{}_{}{}^{51}Gev`$. This energy is unobservably small and at present there are no known experiments which can hope to measure the gravity induced vector potential $`a_\mu `$.

The effective pseudo-vector couplings $`\overline{\psi }\gamma ^5\gamma ^\mu b_\mu \psi `$ are described by components of $`b_\mu `$:

$$(b_0,b_1,b_2,b_3)=(0,0,0,\frac{GM\omega }{R^3}X^2).$$
(12)
Much more stringent bounds can be put on the pseudovector $`b_\mu `$ from CPT and Lorentz violation tests \[11-18\]. The pseudo-vector term in the non-relativistic limit is equivalent to the interaction energy

$$H_I=\stackrel{}{s}\stackrel{}{b}$$
(13)
due to the interaction of the fermion spin $`\stackrel{}{s}`$ with the external field $`\stackrel{}{b}`$. In experiments where a macroscopic number of fermions can be polarised in the same direction, this interaction energy may be measurable. In the Eot-Wash II experiment  , the spin-polarised torsion balance has $`N=8\times 10^{22}`$ aligned spins (with negligible net magnetic moment). There will be a torque on such a torsion balance of the magnitude $`\tau =(N/\pi )\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=|\stackrel{}{b}|`$ is the energy difference between the fermion spins polarised parallel and anti-parallel to the external $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ field. From the results of this experiment  it is possible to measure upto $`|\stackrel{}{b}|10^{28}Gev`$ .

Another method of probing $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ is to measure the net magnetisation in a paramagnetic material using a squid . An external $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ field appears as an effective magnetic field of strength $`\stackrel{}{B}_{eff}=(\stackrel{}{b}/\mu _B)`$. The magnitude of the effective magnetic field which can be probed in this experiment is $`B_{eff}=10^{12}gauss`$ which translates to a measurent of the $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ field at the level of $`10^{29}Gev`$ .

Bounds on spatial components of $`b_\mu `$ can also be put from muon properties , tests of QED in Penning traps  spectroscopy of hydrogen and anti-hydrogen  and in future clock-comparison tests with satellite based atom clocks .

We have shown above that a non-zero $`b_\mu `$ arises due to curvature couplings of fermion in a rotating frame. On a satellite orbiting the Earth with a typical velocity of 7.5 km/sec the value of $`b_3=\left(\frac{GM_{}}{R_{}}\right)\omega =`$ 6.5$`\times `$10$`{}_{}{}^{37}Gev`$ . This is a factor of 10<sup>-6</sup> smaller than the best available bounds at present, but it may be possible to measure curvature effects in future satellite based experiments. If one considers the Earth’s motion around the Sun, $`b_3=\left(\frac{GM_{}}{R_{ES}}\right)\omega =1.2\times 10^{40}GeV`$ is much smaller. On the Mercury orbit around the Sun, taking Mercury-Sun distance $`55\times 10^6km`$ and period of Mercury orbit $`0.24`$ years, $`b_3=2.1\times 10^{39}Gev`$. These estimates show that the best prospect of observing the curvature effects on fermions is probably by spin-polarised torsion balance experiments in low orbit Earth satellites.

There can be some interesting cosmological application of gravitational curvature couplings in early universe where curvature effects of the expanding universe is likely to be large. It has been shown by Bertolami et al.  that explicit $`CPT`$ violating terms in the Lagrangian can give rise to a net chemical potential for baryon number and generate a net baryon asymmetry in the presence of baryon number violating processes. In a separate paper  we show that $`T`$ violation induced by the expanding universe R-W metric gives rise to a $`CP`$ violating interaction term in the Lagrangian which can give rise to net baryon asymmetry in the present universe.

References

1. R. Colella, A. W. Overhauser and S. A. Werner (1975) Phys. Rev. Lett. 34, 1472.
2. L. Parker (1980) Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 1559;
L. Parker (1980) Phy. Rev. D22, 1922.
3. F. W. Hehl and W. T. Ni (1980) Phy. Rev. 42, 2045.
4. E. Fischbach, B. S. Freeman and W. K. Cheng (1981) Phys. Rev. D23 , 2157.
5. D. Choudhary, N. D. Hari Dass and M. V. N. Murthy (1989) Class. Quan. Grav. 6, L167.
6. C. Q. Xia and Y. L. Wu (1989) Phys. Lett. A141, 251.
7. Z. Lalak, S. Pokorski and J. Wess (1995), Phys. Lett. B 355, 453.
8. S. Wajima, M. Kasai and T. Futamase (1999) Phys. Rev. D 55, 1964.
9. K. Varju and L. H. Ryder (2000) Phys. Rev. D 62, 024016.
10. F. K. Manasse and C. W. Misner (1963) J. Math. Phys. 4, 735.
11. D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecky (1997), Phys. Rev. D55, 6760;
V. A. Kostelecky (Ed.) (1999) CPT and Lorentz Symmetry, World Scientific, Singapore.
12. E. G. Adelberger et al. in P. Herczag et al. Eds. (1999) , Physics beyond the standard model. p717, World Scientific, Singapore.
13. R. Bluhm and V. A. Kostelecky (2000) Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1381.
14. W.-T. Ni et al. (1999) Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2439.
15. R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecky and C. D. Lane (2000) Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1098.
16. H. Dehmelt et al. (1999) Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4694;
G. Gabrielse et al. (1999) Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3198;
R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecky and N. Russel (1997) Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1432.
17. R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecky and N. Russel (1999) Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2254.
18. R. Bluhm et al. (2000) Clock-Comparison Tests of Lorentz and CPT Symmetry in Space, hep-ph/0111141.
19. C. Itzykson and J-B Zuber (1985) Quantum Field Theory , Pg 157, McGraw Hill Book Co.- Singapore.
20. O. Bertolami, D. Colladay, V. A. Kostelecky and R. Potting (1997), Phys. Lett. B 395, 178.
21. S. Mohanty, B. Mukhopadhyay and A. R. Prasanna, T violation by curvature couplings of fermions in early universe and baryogenesis. under preparation.