text:
# Interpreting data from WIMP direct detection experiments

## 1 Introduction

Arguably the best motivated non-baryonic dark matter candidate is the neutralino (the lightest supersymmetric particle), and current direct detection experiments are just reaching the sensitivity required to probe the relevant region of parameter space . The most stringent exclusion limits on Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) in general currently come from the Edelweiss  and Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (CDMS) experiments , with competitive constraints also having been produced by experiments which have been optimized for double-beta decay such as Heidelberg-Moscow (HM)  and IGEX . The exclusion limits from these experiments, calculated assuming a standard maxwellian halo, are plotted in Fig. 1 along with the region of parameter space corresponding to the DAMA collaboration’s annual modulation signal . Given the experimental progress, and the tension between the DAMA collaboration’s annual modulation signal and the exclusion limits from other experiments, it is crucial to examine the assumptions involved in interpreting data from these experiments.

We focus on two separate issues: the calculation of exclusion limits with the correct coverage (i.e. which correspond to the stated degree of confidence) and the effect of halo modeling on exclusion limits. In Sec. 2 we show that the method previously used to calculate confidence limits from experiments without background subtraction and binned data (such as HM and IGEX) produces erroneously tight exclusion limits, and discuss alternative criteria for calculating exclusion limits. In Sec. 3 we turn our attention to the dependence of the theoretical differential event rate on the WIMP speed distribution. We discuss the properties of galactic halos and examine how models which reproduce these properties affect the exclusion limits from the HM and IGEX experiments.

## 2 Calculating exclusion limits

In experiments without background subtraction, such as Heidelberg-Moscow (HM)  and IGEX , any set of WIMP parameters (mass and cross-section) which would produce more events than are observed, at some confidence level, can be excluded at that confidence level. The HM and IGEX collaborations have data in bins of width 1 keV (42 bins from 9 keV for HM and 45 bins from 4 keV for IGEX) and in their analysis  the 90$`\%`$ confidence exclusion limit on the cross-section, $`\sigma _\mathrm{p}`$, is calculated by finding for each $`m_\chi `$ the value of $`\sigma _\mathrm{p}`$ for which the theoretical event rate in one of the bins just exceeds the 90$`\%`$ confidence limit on the event rate in that bin. By definition a 90$`\%`$ upper confidence limit means that there is a 10$`\%`$ probability that a theoretical number of events greater than the 90$`\%`$ confidence limit produced the observed number of events, for any given bin.

We will now consider an ensemble of bins, where $`N_\mathrm{t}`$ is the total number of bins, $`N_\mathrm{e}`$ is the number of bins for which the theoretical number of events exceeds the 90$`\%`$ bin confidence limit and $`P(N_\mathrm{e})`$ is the probability distribution of $`N_\mathrm{e}`$. For an ensemble of bins

$`P(N_\mathrm{e}>0)`$ $`=`$ $`1P(N_\mathrm{e}=0)=1(0.9)^{N_\mathrm{t}}`$ (1)
$`>`$ $`0.1\mathrm{if}N_\mathrm{t}>1.`$
In other words the exclusion limits found using the standard analysis actually correspond to a lower degree of confidence than 90$`\%`$, and are hence erroneously tight.

The probability distribution of the number of bins $`N_\mathrm{e}`$ exceeding their $`100p\%`$ (where $`0<p<1`$) bin confidence limit can be used to formulate criteria which produce true 90$`\%`$ minimum confidence exclusion limits (see Ref.  for further details). Firstly, for any given total number of bins, we can vary $`p`$ and find the confidence level $`cl`$ for which the probability that none of the bins exceed their $`100cl\%`$ bin confidence is 90$`\%`$. For $`N_\mathrm{t}=45`$, $`cl=0.9977`$. We can also take $`p=0.9`$ and calculate the 90$`\%`$ minimum upper confidence limit on the number of bins which exceed their 90$`\%`$ bin confidence limit. For $`N_\mathrm{t}=45`$, $`P(N_\mathrm{e}<8)=0.924`$. Since $`N_\mathrm{e}`$ can only take on integer values this criteria does not produce exact 90$`\%`$ exclusion limits, but the amount by which the confidence limits are stronger than 90$`\%`$ is known, and fixed for fixed $`N_\mathrm{t}`$. A simple minded way to avoid the problem of calculating correct overall confidence limits would be to discard all but one of the energy bins; $`N_\mathrm{t}=1`$ then and the 90$`\%`$ bin confidence limit gives an overall 90$`\%`$ confidence limit. The obvious choice for the energy bin to use is the lowest, threshold, energy bin, since $`\mathrm{d}R/\mathrm{d}E_\mathrm{R}`$ decreases roughly exponentially with increasing $`E_\mathrm{R}`$ for the standard Maxwellian halo model so that this bin is often the most constraining. This wasteful method will of course produce weaker exclusion limits than can be found using the entire data set though.

The exclusion limits resulting from these criteria, assuming a standard maxwellian halo, are plotted in Fig. 2 for the IGEX 60 kg-day data . We see that the standard technique produces exclusion limits that are erroneously tight (by roughly $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{log}_{10}\sigma _\mathrm{p})0.2.`$ for $`m_\chi >80`$ GeV). No more than 7 bins exceeding their 90$`\%`$ bin confidence limit produces exclusion limits which are especially weak for small $`m_\chi `$ and does not produce exactly 90$`\%`$ exclusion limits, since the number of bins is an integer. Only using one of the energy bins is wasteful and produces substantially weaker exclusion limits than could be found using the entire data set. Requiring that no bin exceeds its 99.75$`\%`$ bin confidence limit therefore appears to be the best of these methods for producing genuine 90$`\%`$ overall confidence limits.

Several other techniques have been proposed for dealing with this problem. The CRESST collaboration  carry out a maximum likelihood fit of their measured signal with an empirical function to effectively find the maximum WIMP signal which can be ‘hidden’ behind the background. Yellin  has devised an ‘optimal interval method’ for use with low background unbinned data, which has been used by the CDMS collaboration to calculate a limit from their data without Monte Carlo subtraction of the neutron background . This method effectively chooses the binning of the data which gives the tightest exclusion limit, while taking into account the statistical ‘penalty’ associated with the freedom in the binning.

## 3 Milky Way halo modeling

The direct detection event rate and its energy distribution are determined in part by the WIMP speed distribution (see eq. 3 below). Data analyzes nearly always assume a standard smooth halo model with isotropic maxwellian velocity distribution. Belli et. al.  have recently reanalyzed the DAMA collaboration’s annual modulation signal  for a range of halo models, finding that the allowed region of WIMP mass–cross-section parameter space is significantly enlarged. Models with triaxiality or velocity anisotropy may produce a significant change even in the mean differential event rate . Furthermore all of the non-standard halo models which have previously been considered are essentially smooth, while N-body simulations produce dark matter halos which contain significant amounts of substructure .

We first review the global and local properties of dark matter halos and then examine how these properties may affect the calculation of exclusion limits.

### 3.1 Review of halo properties

#### 3.1.1 Global properties

Observational constraints on the structure of dark matter halos depend on the relation of luminous tracer populations to the underlying density distribution, and are complicated by galactic structure and projection effects (see e.g. Ref. ). Given the difficulties involved in ‘observing’ dark matter halos it makes sense to turn to numerical simulations for information on their possible properties. In CDM cosmologies structure forms hierarchically, from the top down . Small objects (often known as subhalos) form first, with larger objects being formed progressively via mergers and accretion. The internal structure of large galaxy size halos is determined by the dynamical processes which act on the accreted components, for instance the tidal field of the main halo can strip material away from a subhalo  producing tidal streams along its orbit .

Current simulations of galaxy halos within a cosmological context can resolve sub-kpc scales (see e.g. ). Discrepancies between the halos produced in these simulations (which have lots of surviving dwarf galaxy sized subhalos and steep central profiles) and observations, have led to claims of a crisis for the cold dark matter model (see Ref.  and references therein for an extensive discussion). Most relevant for the local dark matter distribution is the subhalo problem which may be, at least partly, due to complications in comparing the observed luminous matter with the dark matter distribution from the simulations. In particular it has been argued that gas accretion onto low mass halos may be inhibited after reionization so that a large fraction of the subhalos remain dark . It has also been shown that if the observed dwarf galaxies themselves have dark halos, then their masses have been underestimated and correcting for this would go toward resolving the discrepancy with observations . The survival of subhalos is at least partly due to their concentrated profiles, so any modification to the simulations which produced halos with shallower central profiles could also reduce the number of surviving subhalos, however. Despite the ongoing debate regarding the detailed comparison of the small scale properties of simulated halos with observations, cosmological simulations may still provide us with useful information about the global properties of galactic halos.

The shape of simulated halos varies, not just between different halos of the same mass, but also as a function of radius within a single halo, strongly if the halo has undergone a major merger relatively recently. Two high resolution Local Group halos studied in detail in Ref.  have axis ratios of $`1:0.78:0.48`$ and $`1:\mathrm{0.45.0.38}`$ at the solar radius and $`1:0.64:0.40`$ and $`1:0.87:0.67`$ at the virial radius. Adding dissipative gas to simulations tends to preserve the short-to-long axis ratio while increasing the intermediate-to-long axis ratio .

The anisotropy parameter $`\beta (r)`$, defined as

$$\beta (r)=1\frac{<v_\theta ^2>+<v_\varphi ^2>}{2<v_\mathrm{r}^2>},$$
(2)
where $`<v_\theta ^2>`$, $`<v_\varphi ^2>`$ and $`<v_\mathrm{r}^2>`$ are the means of the squares of the velocity components, also varies with radius. Typically $`\beta (r)`$ grows, although not monotonically, from roughly zero in the center of the halo to close to one at the virial radius, with non-negligible variation between halos (see Fig. 23 of Ref. ). The high resolution galactic mass halos studied in Ref.  have $`\beta (R_{})`$ in the the range 0.1-0.4, corresponding to radially biased orbits.

This broad picture, that galaxy halos are triaxial with anisotropic velocity distributions, is supported by various observations (see e.g. Refs. ).

#### 3.1.2 Local dark matter distribution

The local dark matter distribution, which is crucial for direct detection experiments, can not be probed directly by cosmological simulations; the smallest subhalos resolvable in the highest resolution simulations have mass of order $`10^7M_{}`$ and it is not possible to fully resolve substructure within subhalos. Little substructure is found within the central regions of simulated halos, however it is not known whether the subhalos have been destroyed by tidal stripping or if this is purely a resolution effect . This is relevant for the local dark matter distribution as the solar radius ($`R_{}8`$ kpc) is small compared with the radius of the MW halo. The computing power required to directly probe the local dark matter distribution will probably not be available for a decade or so , therefore other numerical  and semi-analytic  approaches have been used to address the problem. This work is reviewed in detail in Ref. . In summary, there is currently no consensus on the local dark matter velocity distribution, with the results obtained depending on the method used to extrapolate to small scales below the resolution limit of the cosmological simulations. The local dark matter velocity distribution may be well approximated by a smooth multi-variate gaussian, with clumps of high velocity particles present if the MW halo has undergone a recent major merger , on the other hand it is possible that the local dark matter density could be zero or that a single dark matter stream with small velocity dispersion could dominate or that many tidal streams could overlap to give a smooth distribution .

### 3.2 Effect on exclusion limits

The differential WIMP event rate due to scalar interactions can be written in terms of the WIMP scattering cross section on the proton, $`\sigma _\mathrm{p}`$ :

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}R}{\mathrm{d}E}=\zeta \sigma _\mathrm{p}\left[\frac{\rho _{0.3}}{\sqrt{\pi }v_0}\frac{(m_\mathrm{p}+m_\chi )^2}{m_\mathrm{p}^2m_\chi ^3}A^2T(E)F^2(q)\right],$$
(3)
where the local WIMP density, $`\rho _\chi `$ is normalized to a fiducial value $`\rho _{0.3}=0.3\mathrm{GeV}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$, such that $`\zeta =\rho _\chi /\rho _{0.3}`$, $`m_A`$ is the atomic mass of the target nuclei, $`E`$ is the recoil energy of the detector nucleus, and $`T(E)`$ is defined as

$$T(E)=\frac{\sqrt{\pi }v_0}{2}_{v_{\mathrm{min}}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{f_v}{v}dv,$$
(4)
where $`f_v`$ is the WIMP speed distribution in the rest frame of the detector, normalized to unity, and $`v_{\mathrm{min}}`$ is the minimum detectable WIMP speed

$$v_{\mathrm{min}}=\left(\frac{E(m_\chi +m_A)^2}{2m_\chi ^2m_A}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(5)
We will first examine the change in the WIMP speed distribution, and hence the exclusion limits, for triaxial and anisotropic, but still smooth, halo models. To date two self-consistent triaxial and/or anisotropic halo models have been studied in relation to WIMP direct detection: the logarithmic ellipsoidal model  and the Osipkov-Merritt anisotropy model , studied in Ref. . We extend the previous work by focusing on parameters which span the range of observed and simulated halo properties.

The logarithmic ellipsoidal model  is the simplest triaxial generalization of the isothermal sphere and the velocity distribution can be approximated by a multi-variate gaussian on either the long or the intermediate axis 111Of course there is no reason to expect the Sun to be located on one of the axes of the halo.. We consider parameter values $`p=0.9,q=0.8`$ corresponding to axial ratios $`1:0.78:0.48`$ and $`p=0.72,q=0.70`$ corresponding to $`1:0.45:0.38`$, and values of the anisotropy parameter which give $`\beta =0.1`$ and $`0.4`$. The speed distributions on the intermediate axis, in the rest frame of the Sun normalized to unity, are plotted in Fig. 3 along with that for the standard maxwellian halo model. For both positions the triaxial models have a wider spread in speeds than the standard model, so that the differential event rate will decrease less rapidly with increasing recoil energy, but the change is small on the major axis. This is because the change in the speed distribution is largely determined by the velocity dispersion in the $`\varphi `$ direction. On the major axis, for parameter values which give $`0.1<\beta <0.4`$, all three components of the velocity have roughly the same dispersion, whereas on the intermediate axis the velocity dispersion in the $`\varphi `$ direction is significantly larger than that in the $`z`$ direction.

In the Osipkov-Merritt (OM) model, which assumes a spherically symmetric density profile, the velocity anisotropy varies as a function of radius as

$$\beta (r)=\frac{r^2}{r^2+r_\mathrm{a}^2},$$
(6)
so that the degree of anisotropy increases with increasing radius, as is found in numerical simulations. Following Ref.  we assume a NFW  density profile with scale radius $`r_\mathrm{s}=20`$ kpc. We use values of the anisotropy radius $`r_\mathrm{a}=20,12,`$ and $`9.8`$ kpc which correspond to $`\beta (R_0)=0.14,0.31`$ and $`0.4`$ respectively. The resulting speed distributions are plotted in Fig. 3. The excess at large $`v`$ is due to the increased number of particles on very elongated, nearly radial orbits .

To assess the effect of changes in the speed distribution on exclusion limits we need to take into account the detector response, including the difference between the observed energy of an event and the actual recoil energy, non-zero energy threshold and energy resolution (see Ref.  for further details), as these factors may blur out the effects of changes in the speed distribution. In Fig. 4 we plot the exclusion limits found from the IGEX data by requiring that the data in no more than one energy bin exceeds its 99.77$`\%`$ confidence limit, so as to produce 90$`\%`$ overall confidence limits (see above and Ref. ), for the logarithmic ellipsoidal model and for the OM anisotropy model. We also plot the exclusion limits from the Heidelberg-Moscow (HM) experiment  for the OM anisotropy model in Fig. 5. Comparing Figs. 4 and 5 we see that the change in the exclusion limits depends not only on the halo model under consideration, but also on the data being used; for IGEX the change in the exclusion limits is largest for large $`m_\chi `$, while for HM the change is largest for small $`m_\chi `$. For different $`m_\chi `$, different energy ranges can be most constraining; for the IGEX data the lowest energy bin is always the most constraining, while for HM as $`m_\chi `$ increases the constraint comes from higher energy bins. It should therefore be borne in mind when comparing exclusion limits from different experiments, that changing the assumed WIMP speed distribution will affect the limits from different experiments differently.

The change in the exclusion limits is not huge (of order tens of per-cent) for the experiments we have considered, however these experiments are not optimized for WIMP detection. The change in the differential event rate, and hence the exclusion limit, would be significantly larger for an experiment with better energy resolution and lower threshold energy (see Ref. ). We have also seen that different models with the same value for the anisotropy parameter $`\beta `$ have very different speed distributions, and hence a different effect on the exclusion limits . Furthermore it is conceivable that the local WIMP speed distribution may deviate even further from the standard maxwellian distribution than the models that we have considered.

We will now turn our attention to the possibility that the local dark matter distribution is not smooth. Even if dynamical processes produce a smooth background dark matter distribution, late accreting clumps may lead to a local density enhancement and velocity clumping , producing a shoulder in the differential event rate, if their density and velocity with respect to the earth are large enough . For the experiments we have been considering the lower energy bins are most constraining, so that only very rare high density and velocity streams would have a non-negligible effect on the exclusion limits. The effect of these late accreting clumps on the annual modulation and directional signals would be more significant however .

Finally we look at the consequences of the more speculative possibility that small subhalos may survive at the solar radius. We could then be located within a subhalo with local density in excess of the mean value of $`0.3\mathrm{GeVcm}^3`$, on the other hand it is even possible that we could be in a region between clumps and streams where the WIMP density is zero . In the latter case all attempts at WIMP direct detection would be doomed to failure, and exclusion limits would tell us nothing about the WIMP cross-section. At the other extreme a tiny subhalo at the earth’s location would produce a distinctive signal and, due to its high density, an enhanced event rate, making it easier to detect WIMPs of a given cross-section. Subhalos with $`M10^9M_{}`$ would have negligible velocity dispersion and hence a delta-function speed distribution . The resulting theoretical differential event rate would be a step function with amplitude inversely proportional to the speed of the subhalo with respect to the earth, and position increasing with increasing relative speed and WIMP mass. Consequently for small subhalo velocities and WIMP masses there would be no constraint on the WIMP cross-section (no WIMPs would have sufficient energy to cause an observable recoil), but as the WIMP mass is increased the constraints would become much tighter as then all the WIMPs would be energetic enough to cause events of a given recoil energy.

In summary, triaxiality and velocity anisotropy lead to non-negligible changes in the exclusion limits, even for non-optimized detectors. Furthermore the changes are different for different data sets and depend on how the anisotropy is modeled. If the local WIMP distribution is dominated by small scale clumps then the density in the solar neighborhood may be zero (making it impossible to detect WIMPs) or significantly enhanced (making it easier to detect WIMPs with a given cross-section), and the exclusion limits are changed dramatically. Clearly the survival of subhalos at the solar radius is a very important issue for WIMP direct detection.

## 4 Conclusions

We have examined two aspects of the interpretation of data from WIMP direct detection experiments. We have seen that care needs to be taken when calculating exclusion limits from experiments without background subtraction so as to produce correct limits. Yellin’s optimal interval method provides a sophisticated and robust solution to this problem for experiments with unbinned data and relatively small numbers of events , in other cases Poisson statistics can be used to formulate criteria which produce correct limits .

We have also seen that even if the local WIMP distribution is smooth its speed distribution may deviate significantly from the standard maxwellian, and this has a non-negligible effect on exclusion limits and, crucially, effects the limits from different experiments differently. Constraints (and in the future possibly best fits) calculated assuming a standard maxwellian halo could be erroneous . The derivation of reliable constraints on WIMP parameters and comparison of results for different experiments requires a theoretical framework for dealing with the uncertainty in the WIMP speed distribution. On the other hand, more optimistically, it might be possible to derive useful information about the local velocity distribution, and hence the formation of the galactic halo, if WIMPs were detected .

## References


format: text

text:
# Optimized phase switching using a single atom nonlinearity

## Abstract

We show that a nonlinear phase shift of $`\pi `$ can be obtained by using a single two level atom in a one sided cavity with negligible losses. This result implies that the use of a one sided cavity can significantly improve the $`\pi /18`$ phase shift previously observed by Turchette et al. \[Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4710 (1995)\].

One of the most significant achievements in the field of quantum optics is the realization of strong nonlinear effects by enhancing the coupling between single atoms and the light field. In particular, the possibility of obtaining large conditional phase shifts has attracted much attention because of its potential usefulness in the realization of phase gates for optical quantum computation and similar manipulations of quantum states at the few photon level Tho98 ; Tur95 ; Nie ; Wer99 ; Reb99 ; Poi92 . In order to optimize controlled phase shifts, it is desirable to avoid losses while moving close to the resonance of the two level atom causing the nonlinear phase shift. In the experiment by Turchette et al.Tur95 , the nonlinearity of the atom was observed in the phase change of the light transmitted through the atom-cavity system. However, the transmission of a two sided cavity at the atomic resonance is very low, so the experiment was conducted at frequencies significantly detuned from this resonance. As a result, the phase shift observed was limited to only about $`\pi /18`$. In order to improve this phase shift, it is necessary to move closer to resonance while avoiding dissipative losses. In this paper, we therefore propose the use of a one sided cavity with negligible losses to non-cavity modes. In such a geometry, the total reflection is always close to one and all dissipation is suppressed. The nonlinearity then has the maximal effect on the phase of the light field while leaving the intensity unchanged. This makes it possible to realize a nonlinear phase shift of $`\pi `$ at the atomic resonance. Figure 1 shows an illustration of this dissipation free setup. Effectively, the cavity confines the light field interacting with the two level atom to a single beam with a well defined transversal profile. The suppression of losses to non-cavity modes can be achieved by covering a large solid angle of emission with the confocal cavity mirrors. Further improvements may be possible by using dielectric materials, e.g. in a photonic crystal geometry.

The most simple case of this dissipation free setup is obtained in the bad cavity regime, where the cavity lifetime is so short that the cavity field can be adiabatically eliminated. In terms of the conventional cavity quantum electrodynamics parameters this regime is characterized by $`\kappa g`$, where $`\kappa `$ is the cavity damping rate and $`g`$ is the dipole coupling between the atom and the cavity. The effective dipole damping rate caused by emissions through the cavity is then given by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=g^2/\kappa `$ and the rate of spontaneous emission through the cavity is equal to $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Note that this emission rate also includes any effects of cavity enhancement of spontaneous emission. If the transverse atomic decay rate to noncavity modes $`\gamma `$ is negligible ($`\gamma 2g^2/\kappa `$), nearly all emissions from the atom can be confined to the cavity and the total spontaneous emission rate of the excited atom in the cavity will be given by $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. With these parameters, the relevant dynamics can be described by the well known Bloch equations of the driven two level atom. For a two level system with a ground state $`G`$ and an excited state $`E`$, the Bloch equations can be expressed in terms of the complex dipole operator $`\widehat{\sigma }_{}=GE`$ and the inversion operator $`\widehat{\sigma }_z=1/2(EEGG)`$. For a coherent driving field $`b_{\text{in}}(t)`$, the Bloch equations then read

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\widehat{\sigma }_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\widehat{\sigma }_{}+2\sqrt{2\mathrm{\Gamma }}b_{\text{in}}(t)\widehat{\sigma }_z`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\widehat{\sigma }_z`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\widehat{\sigma }_z+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\sqrt{2\mathrm{\Gamma }}\left(b_{\text{in}}^{}(t)\widehat{\sigma }_{}+b_{\text{in}}(t)\widehat{\sigma }_{}^{}\right).`$ (1)
Note that these equations of motion correctly describe the open system quantum dynamics of the two level atom. In particular, the effects of quantum fluctuations in the coherent driving field are fully included in the relaxation dynamics of the atom. This can be seen clearly in the case of $`b_{\text{in}}=0`$, where the incoming field is in the vacuum state. The correct quantum mechanical description of this situation is then given by spontaneous emission dynamics that automatically include the dynamics of vacuum fluctuations Wis93 ; Hof98 ; Hof98b . Since the noise properties of a coherent state are no different from the vacuum, the full quantum mechanical effect of a coherent driving field is indeed properly represented by equations (Optimized phase switching using a single atom nonlinearity).

The signal from the atom will now be observed in the reflected light, where it interferes with the directly reflected component of the input field Foot . The coherent amplitude of the output field can then be described according to input-output theory Wal  as

$$b_{\text{out}}(t)=b_{\text{in}}(t)+\sqrt{2\mathrm{\Gamma }}\widehat{\sigma }_{}.$$
(2)
The normalization of the light field amplitudes $`b_{\text{in}}(t)`$ and $`b_{\text{out}}(t)`$ has been chosen so that the squares of the amplitudes correspond to the photon current associated with the fields.

Equations (Optimized phase switching using a single atom nonlinearity) and (2) fully describe the coherent dynamics of the field-atom system. In particular, equation (2) correctly describes the expectation value of the output field, as observed in homodyne or heterodyne detection Wis93 ; Hof98 ; Hof98b . However, this is not sufficient to predict the average emitted photon number, which can only be observed in precise photon detection experiments Wis93 . This photon emission rate also includes a noisy component $`P_{\text{noise}}`$ corresponding to random phase emissions. The total intensity of the emitted field can therefore be separated into a coherent contribution $`|b_{\text{out}}|^2`$ and an incoherent contribution $`P_{\text{noise}}`$. Energy conservation requires that any difference between the output intensity and the input intensity $`|b_{\text{in}}|^2`$ results in a corresponding change of the atomic energy given by $`\sigma _z`$. Therefore, the proper value of the emission noise in a dissipation free geometry can be obtained from

$$\frac{d}{dt}\widehat{\sigma }_z=|b_{\text{in}}|^2|b_{\text{out}}|^2P_{\text{noise}}.$$
(3)
In order to identify the physical origin of noisy emissions, it is useful to compare the total change in atomic energy given by $`d/dt\sigma _z`$ with the change in coherent field energy, $`|b_{\text{out}}|^2|b_{\text{in}}|^2`$,

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\frac{d}{dt}\widehat{\sigma }_z& =& 2\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\widehat{\sigma }_z+\frac{1}{2}\right)& +& \sqrt{2\mathrm{\Gamma }}\left(b_{\text{in}}^{}(t)\widehat{\sigma }_{}+b_{\text{in}}(t)\widehat{\sigma }_{}^{}\right)\\ |b_{\text{out}}|^2|b_{\text{in}}|^2& =& 2\mathrm{\Gamma }|\widehat{\sigma }_{}|^2& +& \sqrt{2\mathrm{\Gamma }}\left(b_{\text{in}}^{}(t)\widehat{\sigma }_{}+b_{\text{in}}(t)\widehat{\sigma }_{}^{}\right).\end{array}$$
(4)
The change in coherent field energy $`|b_{\text{out}}|^2|b_{\text{in}}|^2`$ depends only on the coherent dipole expectation value $`\widehat{\sigma }_{}`$ and corresponds exactly to the classical result for dipole emission without fluctuations. In the total change of energy at the atom, the square of the dipole expectation value $`\widehat{\sigma }_{}^2`$ is replaced by $`\widehat{\sigma }_z+1/2`$. This replacement suggests that the difference $`P_{\text{noise}}`$ between the two terms can be interpreted as emission from dipole fluctuations, where $`\widehat{\sigma }_z+1/2`$ represents the average of the squared dipole. In terms of the atomic variables, the incoherent emission now reads

$`P_{\text{noise}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\widehat{\sigma }_z\right)\left(|b_{\text{out}}|^2|b_{\text{in}}|^2\right)`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\widehat{\sigma }_z+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\widehat{\sigma }_{}|^2\right).`$
It is important to note that this result fundamentally limits the coherence in the emission obtained from a single two level atom, since the dipole expectation value is limited by the maximal length of the Bloch vector, $`|\widehat{\sigma }_{}|^2+\widehat{\sigma }_z^21/4`$. With this limitation, the minimal incoherent emission is given by

$$P_{\text{noise}}2\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\widehat{\sigma }_z+\frac{1}{2}\right)^2.$$
(6)
Incoherent spontaneous emission is therefore an unavoidable side effect of the saturation of a two level transition and should be taken into account in the characterization of this kind of nonlinearity.

It should be noted that the average rate of photon emission can also be obtained using quantum trajectory theory Wis93 . However, the result of such an analysis is necessarily identical to the one obtained from the energy conservation argument applied above. Effectively, quantum trajectory theory does not modify the averaged results obtained in this paper. A more detailed analysis of the relationship between field and dipole fluctuations in the spontaneous emission of a two level atom mainly provides a time resolved description of the noise dynamics, showing that the minimal noise given by equation (6) is related to unavoidable diffusion effects in the open system dynamics of the fully coherent atomic Bloch vector Hof98 . Quantum trajectory theory thus confirms the identification of $`P_{\text{noise}}`$ with time dependent dipole fluctuations in the atomic system suggested by equations (5) and (6).

The nonlinear response of the atomic system at resonance can now be derived using equations (Optimized phase switching using a single atom nonlinearity) and (2). If the input field is given by a constant amplitude $`b_{\text{in}}(t)=b_{\text{in}}`$, the stationary solution of the atom-field dynamics reads

$`\widehat{\sigma }_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }+8|b_{\text{in}}|^2}}`$
$`\widehat{\sigma }_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2\mathrm{\Gamma }}b_{\text{in}}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }+4|b_{\text{in}}|^2}}`$
$`b_{\text{out}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }+4|b_{\text{in}}|^2}}\right)b_{\text{in}}.`$ (7)
The nonlinearity of the response function is given by the ratio of $`b_{\text{out}}`$ and $`b_{\text{in}}`$,

$$\frac{b_{\text{out}}}{b_{\text{in}}}=\frac{4|b_{\text{in}}|^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }1}{4|b_{\text{in}}|^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }+1}.$$
(8)
Figure 2 illustrates this nonlinearity of the atomic response function. Experimentally, this response function can be directly observed using homodyne detection. Note that this was also done in Tur95 , but the data was separated into a transmitted amplitude and a phase. In our case, this separation would create the impression of a sudden jump from a phase shift of $`\pi `$ associated with a negative response function to a phase shift of zero associated with a positive response function at a switching intensity of $`|b_{\text{in}}|^2=\mathrm{\Gamma }/4`$. The resonant configuration shown in figure 1 therefore allows an optimization of the phase shift observed in Tur95  to the ideal case of a seemingly instantaneous phase change of $`\pi `$.

However, equation (8) also indicates that the coherent amplitude of the response changes during the switching process. This change of amplitude is due to the incoherent emission $`P_{\text{noise}}`$ described by equation (5). As shown by the noise limit (6), this incoherent contribution is unavoidable when the nonlinearity originates from the saturation of a two level atom. The relative contributions of coherent response and incoherent noise to the total output intensity are given by

$`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{b_{\text{out}}}{b_{\text{in}}}}\right|^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(4|b_{\text{in}}|^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }1)^2}{(4|b_{\text{in}}|^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }+1)^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{P_{\text{noise}}}{|b_{\text{in}}|^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16|b_{\text{in}}|^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }}{(4|b_{\text{in}}|^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }+1)^2}}.`$ (9)
Figure 3 illustrates this intensity dependence of the noise in the output field. The phase flip at $`|b_{\text{in}}|^2=\mathrm{\Gamma }/4`$ is clearly associated with a complete phase randomization in the emitted field. A look at the steady state described by equation(Optimized phase switching using a single atom nonlinearity) shows that the coherent dipole is reduced to one half its linear value at this intensity. As a result, the amplitudes of dipole emission and of directly reflected light are exactly equal and the coherent output component is eliminated by the destructive interference of these two amplitudes. The remaining emission at $`|b_{\text{in}}|^2=\mathrm{\Gamma }/4`$ is therefore a completely incoherent random phase emission originating entirely from quantum fluctuations in the light-atom interaction. The gradual change in amplitude shown in figure 2 is thus associated with a rather drastic increase of noise at the switching point. Note that this kind of noise increase at the switching threshold is also typical for classical bistable systems. The quantum mechanical properties of a single two level system thus appear to be very similar to the noise properties of classical nonlinear systems.

A fully coherent output is only obtained in the linear limit given by $`|b_{\text{in}}|^2\mathrm{\Gamma }/4`$, and in the fully saturated limit, given by $`|b_{\text{in}}|^2\mathrm{\Gamma }/4`$. It is therefore necessary to consider the sensitivity of various applications to this noise effect. In particular, there is a great difference between an application to interference effects with coherent light and the single photon switching envisioned in Tur95 ; Nie , since the interference measurments allow an averaging of the signal, whereas single photon experiments do not allow this. The adiabatic elimination used in our model suggests that the average photon number in the cavity is not a useful criterion of the strength of the nonlinearity at the quantum level. Rather, it is more appropriate to compare the rate of incoming photons with the spontaneous emission rate of the excited atom. In the configuration discussed here, the switching intensity $`|b_{\text{in}}|^2=\mathrm{\Gamma }/4`$ is only one eighth of the spontaneous emission rate. This means that on average, only one eighth of a photon arrives at the atom during the spontaneous emission lifetime $`\tau _{\text{sp.}}=1/(2\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Since switching is possible at such a low photon density, it may be possible to use the dissipation free two level nonlinearity to implement a conditional phase shift of $`\pi `$ for exactly two photons. Specifically, the average intensity $`2/T`$ of a two photon pulse of pulse duration $`T`$ would exceed the switching intensity for pulse durations of $`T<8/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This pulse length may indeed be sufficient to justify the analogy between the coherent input field and the two photon state claimed in Tur95 . However, it should be noted that the switching noise in the two photon interaction will reduce the single photon coherence. A detailed investigation of this effect therefore requires a fully quantum mechanical treatment of the spatiotemporal two photon wavefunction Koj02 ; Hof03 .

In general, an experimental realization of the dissipation free nonlinearity described in this paper requires that losses to non-cavity modes are negligible ($`\gamma 2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$). In order to understand how restrictive this limitation is, it may be useful to consider the modification of the linear response of the atom in the presence of losses. These losses can be included in the Bloch equations (Optimized phase switching using a single atom nonlinearity) by increasing the decay rates of the dipole and the inversion to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }+\gamma /2`$ and to $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }+\gamma `$, respectively. This increase can also be represented by the spontaneous emission ratio $`\beta =\mathrm{\Gamma }/(\mathrm{\Gamma }+\gamma /2)`$, which is defined as the fraction of spontaneous emission that is emitted through the cavity mode. The total spontaneous emission rate of the atom is then given by $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }/\beta `$. In the linear case, the effect of this increased damping rate in the atomic response simply reduces the dipole response by a factor of $`\beta `$. According to equation (2), the linear output field amplitude is then given by

$$b_{\text{out}}=(12\beta )b_{\text{in}}.$$
(10)
Thus, spontaneous emission into non-cavity modes gradually convert the phase shift of $`\pi `$ caused by the resonant dipole response back into absorption losses note . The linear phase shift of $`\pi `$ can be observed as long as more than half of the spontaneous emission is emitted through the cavity. Since the saturation of the two level atom will eventually result in a phase shift of zero, a nonlinear phase change from phase $`\pi `$ to phase zero can be obtained whenever the linear phase shift is equal to $`\pi `$. The condition for an experimental observation of the nonlinear phase change is therefore the realization of optical confinement with $`\beta >1/2`$. At present, the most promising technology for the experimental realization of the dissipation free nonlinear phase shift seems to be the microcavity system presented in Tho98 ; Tur95 . In particular, the parameters given in Tur95  correspond to a value of $`\beta 0.7`$. If the setup illustrated in figure 1 were to be realized using exactly the same elements as in Tur95 , this should already be sufficient to observe the phase flip described in this paper. However, $`\beta 0.7`$ still implies that more than $`80\%`$ of the input photons are lost in the linear response case, so further improvements of cavity geometries may be needed for an implementation of a nearly dissipation free device. Moreover, the reflection geometry proposed in this paper requires that special care should be taken to achieve proper mode matching between the cavity mode and the pump beam. In principle, this problem is very similar to the mode matching required to match the local oscillator beam to the cavity output in the transmission geometry. However, the effect of additional reflections of mismatched pump light may increase the effect of mode matching errors. The reflection geometry proposed here could therefore be more challenging to realize than the transmission geometry reported in Tho98 ; Tur95 . Nevertheless our theoretical predictions for this geometry indicate that the realization of such a geometry may well be worth the effort.

In conclusion, we have shown that the maximal nonlinear phase shift of $`\pi `$ can be obtained by using a single two level atom in a one sided cavity with negligible losses. It is then possible to use resonant light to obtain a nonlinearity sensitive to individual excitations of the atom. The reflection geometry illustrated in figure 1 thus optimizes the nonlinear phase shifts previously obtained in the experiment by Turchette et al. Tur95 .

Part of this work was supported by the program ”Research and Development on Quantum Communication Technology” of the Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications of Japan.


text:
# Testing intermediate-age stellar evolution models with VLT photometry of LMC clusters. I. The dataBased on observations collected at the European Southern Observatory, Paranal, Chile (ESO No 64.L-0385)

## 1 INTRODUCTION

In an epoch of extraordinary discoveries on the high-z Universe, we still have gaps in our understanding of stellar evolution, which is in fact essential for the correct interpretation of the light of distant galaxies. Galactic star clusters have traditionally provided a major way to study stellar evolution. However, our Galaxy only contains stars in age and chemical composition domains which reflect its particular history, and these are the domains which have been relatively well explored. Extrapolation outside the limits of the well explored age and metallicity range is not always safe. For instance, it has become increasingly apparent in recent years that metal content can affect stellar evolution in unexpected ways. The UV upturn in elliptical galaxies is a case in point. Studies of very metal rich stellar systems revealed that, contrary to simple expectations, old metal rich stellar populations do not simply become redder in all wavebands as they evolve, but rather produce a population of UV bright stars (Greggio & Renzini, 1990; Horch, Demarque & Pinsonneault, 1992; Fagotto et al. 1994; Yi, Demarque & Oemler 1998). On the other hand, understanding the evolution of extremely metal-poor and metal-free (Population III) stars will similarly be essential for the interpretation of primordial, high-z stellar populations.

In intermediate-age stellar populations, the color-magnitude diagram (CMD) and the luminosity function are affected by convective core overshoot. While there is not a general agreement on the efficiency of this process, and its extent is not well established, most researchers agree that this parameter affects significantly the morphology of the CMD of these clusters and naturally the determination of their ages as well (e.g. Rosvick & VandenBerg 1998; Keller, Da Costa & Bessell 2001; Meynet, Mermilliod & Maeder 1993; Carraro et al. 1993; Demarque, Sarajedini & Guo 1994). This uncertainty is thus also a problem for the spectral dating of distant stellar systems from their integrated light (Heap et al. 1998; Yi et al. 2000). In addition, deep CMDs of intermediate-age clusters are essential to help disentangle the relative importance of other poorly determined parameters, such as mass loss during red giant branch (RGB) evolution, internal rotation (important for the more massive objects), and helium content. In particular, the adopted value of the parameter $`\delta Y/\delta Z`$ of helium enrichment significantly affects the mass luminosity relation of stellar models, and consequently their evolutionary lifetimes.

The papers in this series deal mainly with the problem of convective core overshoot in intermediate-age stellar populations, and therefore we will briefly review some of the recent work in the subject. Early observational arguments in favor of convective core overshoot come from clusters like Pleiades (Maeder & Mermilliod 1981; Mazzei & Pigatto 1989) and from other Galactic clusters, as discussed in great detail by Maeder & Mermilliod (1981) and Mermilliod & Maeder (1986). Barbaro & Pigatto (1984) and Chiosi & Pigatto (1986) argued for overshoot in stars with masses in the range $`1.52.2M_{}`$ by pointing out that the base of the RGB is not well populated in clusters with age 1 – 2 Gyr (whereas it is in older clusters), as if degenerate He-ignition and He-flash were avoided for this mass range, in contrast with classical models. More recent studies include those of Aparicio et al. (1990), Carraro et al. (1993), Meynet et al. (1993); Rosvick & VandenBerg (1998); Demarque et al. (1994); Dinescu et al. (1995); Kozhurina-Platais et al. (1997) which deal with Galactic open clusters of ages 1.0 to 6.0 Gyr. All conclude that a certain amount of convective core overshoot is preferred to reproduce the CMDs. Being Galactic, all these clusters have metallicity close to solar, and therefore do not allow the possibility of testing the dependence of convective core overshoot on metallicity.

The Magellanic Clouds (MC) offer an unusual opportunity to test stellar evolution since populous clusters of a wide variety of ages and chemical compositions can be observed and compared at effectively the same distance. In particular, they contain young and intermediate-age metal-poor stellar populations that are absent in the Galaxy. A number of young MC clusters (age $``$ 500 Myr) have been used by Lattanzio et al (1991), Vallenari et al. (1991, 1994), Stothers & Chin (1992), Brocato, Castellani & Piersimoni (1994), Chiosi et al. (1995), Testa et al. (1999) and Barmina et al. (2002) to constrain evolutionary models of young stars. It is interesting to note that these different studies do not always agree on the preferred amount of convective core overshoot to best reproduce the observed CMDs. In particular there is a long lasting debate about the young LMC cluster NGC 1866, where turnoff stars have about $`45M_{}`$: Chiosi et al. (1989a,b) and Brocato & Castellani (1988), Lattanzio et al. (1991) and Brocato et al. (1994), Testa et al. (1999) and Barmina et al. (2002), are pairs of papers presenting systematically opposite conclusions (for or against overshooting). To briefly summarize only the most recent ones, Testa et al. (1999) obtained deep photometry ($`V<24`$) of a wide region of this cluster, and concluded that the best fit to both the integrated luminosity function and the magnitude of the horizontal branch is achieved by classical models, without overshooting, provided that a 30$`\%`$ fraction of binaries is allowed. However, a new analysis of the same data with a more accurate completeness correction and normalization, by Barmina et al. (2002), showed that models with overshoot give a better fit to both the overall morphology of the CMD and to the integrated luminosity function of main sequence stars, reproducing the correct ratio of main sequence to post-main sequence stars.

Thanks to the brightness of the stars in the young MC clusters, the above mentioned observations were feasible using medium size telescopes. Instead, our aim is to explore the less studied regime of intermediate-age, low metallicity clusters, which turnoff is by definition fainter, and therefore only 8-meter size telescopes under excellent seeing conditions, or the HST, can give the necessary high quality photometry. Our intention is also to independently analyze the data with two of the most recent sets of stellar evolutionary models widely in use, namely, those of Padova (Girardi et al. 2000) and Yonsei-Yale (Yi et al. 2001, $`Y^2`$ thereafter).

In this paper, we discuss the project setup (Sec. 2), and we present the data obtained with VLT: the observations, photometry and crowding tests are presented in Sec. 3, while the procedure used to statistically substract the LMC field stars from the cluster CMDs is discussed in Sec. 4. In Sec. 5, we briefly discuss the main differences between the stellar evolution models of Girardi et al. (2000) and Yi et al. (2001). In Sec. 6, a preliminary comparison of the cluster CMDs with these stellar evolutionary models is performed. In two forthcoming papers that follow in this same issue, these data are independently analyzed in detail with both the $`Y^2`$ (Woo et al. 2002) and Padova (Bertelli et al. 2002) models, in such a way that some feedback on the stellar evolution models used can be provided.

## 2 OBSERVATIONAL GOAL AND TARGET SELECTION

The goal of this project was to obtain accurate $`V,R`$ photometry down to about 4 magnitudes below the main sequence turnoff of a number of intermediate-age MC clusters, in order to construct CMDs and luminosity functions to be used as test for stellar evolutionary models computed independently by members of the Yale Group (Demarque, Yi, Woo)and the Padova Group (Bertelli, Chiosi, Girardi, Nasi).

We originally proposed to observe eight clusters, in pairs of 1, 2, 3 and 5 Gyr each (according to the ages quoted in the literature) to be able to check the extent of the fluctuations in the properties of clusters (e.g. luminosity function) of the same age. The candidates were selected according to: a) their age (from Geisler et al. 1997; Sarajedini 1998; Mighell, Sarajedini & French 1998), b) their position in the galaxy, trying to avoid areas densely populated by field stars, and c) their richness. The original list of clusters included NGC 2209 and NGC 2249 ($``$ 1 Gyr old), NGC 1651 and NGC 2162 ($``$ 2 Gyr old), NGC 2173 and SL 556 ($``$ 3 Gyr old) and NGC 2155 and Kron 3 ($``$ 5 Gyr old). The first four younger clusters were to be observed with NTT down to a limiting magnitude of V=23.5 and 24.5, while the rest were proposed for FORS1@VLT, with the goal of reaching limiting magnitudes V=25.5 (for NGC 2173 and SL 556), V=26.0 for NGC 2155 and V=26.3 for Kron 3. Due to the high resolution needed to obtain accurate photometry in such rich and distant clusters, we requested service mode observations imposing a seeing constraint of FWHM $``$0.6″. In the end, due to observational problems and restrictions, no observations with NTT were performed for this program, while 3 out of the 4 clusters to be observed with VLT were indeed observed, namely, NGC 2155, NGC 2173 and SL 556.

In what follows we summarize the results of previous studies of these clusters, concentrating in particular on the metallicity determinations, being this an important input parameter for our analysis. The distance modulus of the LMC, being the first step of the distance scale ladders, has been the subject of an intense debate in recent years and trying to summarize it goes beyond the scope of this paper: the generally accepted value of $`(mM)_V=18.5`$ (Benedict et al. 2002) has been adopted, allowing a variation of $`\pm 0.2`$ in the isochrone fit, which can be justified by volume effect of the LMC on the distance modulus of each cluster. Small variation of the reddening around $`E(BV)0.04`$ along the different lines of sight of the three clusters, will be allowed in our analysis as well.

Available determinations of the metallicity of these clusters are very inhomogeneous, first of all because of the different methods applied, and second because some of them lead to the determination of the global metallicity, \[M/H\]=$`logZ/Z_{}logX/X_{}`$ (e.g. when using isochrone fitting), while some others give a measure of the iron abundance, \[Fe/H\]=$`logFe/Fe_{}logX/X_{}`$ (e.g. spectroscopic or photometric methods calibrated against \[Fe/H\]). Obviously the two quantities are different if the alpha-element ratio of the cluster stars is different from solar, as it is for galactic globular clusters. Since there currently is no high dispersion spectral analysis of the MC clusters from which one could infer their alpha-element enhancement, in what follows we will keep the distinction among the two chemical abundances, as measured by the various authors, reminding the reader that if the alpha-element enhancement of these LMC clusters were the same as that of galactic globular clusters (i.e., \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]$``$ 0.3, Carney 1996) then their global metal abundance \[M/H\] can be assumed to be $`0.21`$ dex higher than the iron content \[Fe/H\] (Salaris, Chieffi & Straniero 1993).

Low resolution spectra of four stars in NGC 2173 were obtained by Cohen (1982), who found a global metallicity of \[M/H\]=–0.75. A lower value (\[Fe/H\]=–1.4) was obtained by Bica, Dottori and Pastoriza (1986) with integrated photometry, while the Ca triplet analysis of two stars, by Olszewski et al. (1991), gave \[Fe/H\]=–0.24. $`B,V`$ photometry for this cluster has been published by Mould, Da Costa & Wieland (1986), who estimate \[M/H\]=–0.8 from the RGB slope. They found an age of either 1.4 or 2 Gyr, when adopting a long (18.7) or short (18.2) absolute distance modulus, respectively. More recent photometry for NGC 2173 has been published by Corsi et al. (1994), who were looking for global properties of intermediate-age populations and therefore do not analyze the CMD of this cluster individually, but only superimposed to that of 10 other clusters. Finally, Geisler et al. (1997), adopting the metallicity \[Fe/H\]=–0.24, as found by Olszewski et al. (1991), estimate a cluster age of 2 Gyr, in agreement with that found by Mould et al. (1986).

SL 556 (Hodge 4) is a relatively less studied cluster. No spectroscopic studies have been carried on so far. $`U,B,V`$ photometry has been published by Mateo & Hodge (1986) who estimate a metallicity of \[Fe/H\]=–0.7 using various photometric indexes. Olzewski et al. (1991) determined \[Fe/H\]=–0.15, while more recent photometric studies have been published by Sarajedini (1998) and Rich et al. (2001), who analyzed the same HST data, and, adopting a metallicity \[M/H\]=–0.68 both found an age between 2 and 2.5 Gyr.

NGC 2155 has been studied by Bica et al. (1986) who performed DDO integrated photometry of a number of MC clusters. They estimated a metallicity of \[Fe/H\]=–1.2. More recently, a significantly higher value (\[Fe/H\]=–0.55) has been found by Olszewski et al. (1991) who performed Ca II triplet spectroscopy of three cluster giants. Although possibly more accurate than the previous integrated photometry, this method is not very accurate because its calibration in the metal-rich (\[Fe/H\]$`>1`$), relatively young populations is more uncertain than for the old, metal poor ones (Pont et al. 2002). Indeed, for the three clusters studied here, the metallicities quoted in Olszewski et al. (1991) are systematically higher (by $`0.5`$) than any other published value. A more recent determination of the cluster metallicity from the RGB slope comes from the HST photometry published by Sarajedini (1998). The latter estimates \[Fe/H\]=–1.1, and an age of $`4`$ Gyr. The same HST data used by Sarajedini have been re-analyzed by Rich et al. (2001) and compared with the isochrones by Girardi et al. (2000), giving a global metallicity of \[M/H\]=–0.68 and an age of 3.2 Gyr.

## 3 THE DATA

The three LMC clusters NGC 2173, SL 556 and NGC 2155 were observed with FORS1@VLT-UT1, in service mode, through the filters $`V`$ and $`R`$. Figure 1 shows a median of all the frames for SL 556, as an example of the image quality of the data. FORS1 was used in normal resolution: its pixel size of 0.2 <sup>′′</sup>/px allows a good PSF sampling, while the relatively large field of view ($`6.8\times 6.8`$ arcmin) allowed us to sample, in the field outermost regions, a good portion of the background LMC field. Total exposure times and average seeing conditions for each cluster are listed in Table 1.

De-biasing and flat-fielding were performed with standard IRAF packages, using the calibration frames (bias and sky flat fields) obtained during the same night of the target observations, or one night before. Photometric reduction was carried out with the DAOPHOT II/ALLFRAME package (Stetson 1987, 1994). Stellar PSF models for each frame were obtained by means of a large set of uncrowded and unsaturated stars. After performing aperture photometry on each frame, spatial transformations were determined among all the frames of each cluster, in order to be able to register them and obtain a median image free from cosmic rays and having high S/N ratio. This image was used for star finding, in order to obtain a deeper catalog to use as input for the simultaneous profile-fitting photometry of all the frames, made with ALLFRAME.

According to the log file of the service observations, the present data were obtained under unstable photometric conditions: only part of the nights were photometric, and some cirrus seemed to be always present close to the horizon. Therefore, calibration to the Johnson standard photometric system was performed by comparison of the stars in common with another set of images of the same clusters, obtained by our group at the CTIO 4m telescope using the MOSAIC camera, on the nights Nov. 30th to Dec 1st 1999, which were devoted to a different project (Gallart et al. 2002). Those images, although not deep enough for our purpose, were obtained under photometric conditions, and were already reduced and calibrated, by means of a set of Landolt (1992) standard fields observed on the same nights. The $`V,R`$ cluster images were obtained on chip#2 of the MOSAIC camera, on which we observed around 50 Landolt standards on the color range $`(VR)=0÷1`$. No color terms were considered necessary on the photometric transformation, and zero-points had typical errors of $`\pm `$ 0.004. Aperture corrections for the cluster stars were obtained from a list of $``$ 70 relatively isolated, bright stars in each cluster, with standard errors of $`\pm 0.002`$ mag. Therefore the total maximum zero-point in the calibration of the CTIO images is of $`\pm `$ 0.005 magnitudes. The FORS1 data were then calibrated by means of the $`100`$ brightest and most isolated stars in common with the CTIO data, from which we derived a zero point and a color term, with a total error (including the one quoted above) of $`\pm 0.006`$.

In the two following papers in this series, we will use both the morphology and the number of observed stars in different regions of the CMDs as compared with theoretical predictions. To this end, it is crucial to correct the observed counts for completeness. Completeness corrections were determined by means of artificial-star experiments. A total of about 30,000 stars were added to the original frames, with magnitudes and colors consistent with the main branches of the cluster and field CMD. In order to avoid overcrowding, while optimizing the CPU time, the artificial stars were added along the corners of an hexagonal grid, as explained in Zoccali et al. (2000), in five independent experiments. As usual, photometry of the artificial frames was performed in a way identical to that of the original ones.

## 4 UNVEILING THE CLUSTER CMDs: SUBTRACTION OF THE LMC FIELD STARS

Figure 2 shows the CMDs of the three LMC clusters NGC 2173, SL 556 and NGC 2155. All the stars measured with good precision in the whole FORS1 frames are plotted here: therefore the CMDs include both cluster and field stars. In order to obtain a cleaner cluster CMD, we proceeded in the following way.

For each cluster, an annulus around the center was selected with the criterion of being large enough to contain most cluster stars, but small enough to minimize the background contribution. The CMD for the stars in this annulus are shown in the upper left panel (panel a) of Figs. 3 to 5, together with the inner and outer radii of the selected annuli. The small circular region containing the very center of the cluster was excluded because stars in these areas were too crowded, and therefore their photometry was rather poor. A CMD typical of LMC field stars was extracted from a second region, outside a given radius around the cluster center, selected with the criterion of containing a number of stars large enough to insure good statistics, but far enough from the cluster not to contain a significant fraction of cluster stars. The CMDs extracted from these “field” regions are shown in the upper right panels (b) of Figs. 3 to 5, together with the inner boundary of the region. The outer boundary is set by the edges of the frame.

For each star in the field CMD (panel b) we picked up the closest (see below) star in the cluster CMD (panel a), and decided whether to subtract it or not according to a factor given by the ratio of the areas of the two regions, multiplied by the ratio of the completeness factors for the two regions (being less crowded, the field CMD is more complete than the cluster one). The distance, $`d`$, from the field star to each cluster star on the CMD was actually computed by enhancing the difference in color by a factor of 7 with respect to the difference in magnitude, i.e.:

$$d=\sqrt{[7\times \mathrm{\Delta }(VR)]^2+\mathrm{\Delta }V^2}.$$

which defines an ellipse with major axis along the magnitudes and minor axis along the colors. The reason for this is that given a certain star in the field CMD, its “twin” in the cluster CMD has a color that is better constrained than the magnitude, because any small difference in either distance, reddening, or mass between the two would result in a difference in magnitude larger than that in color. If there were no stars closer than a maximum distance of $`d=0.42`$ magnitudes then no star was subtracted from the cluster CMD, and the field star was flagged as unsubtracted. Both the enhancement factor and the maximum distance are somewhat arbitrary, and they were chosen after various experiments, according to two criteria: i. The CMD of the subtracted stars (panel d) should be as similar as possible to that of the field stars (panel b) and ii. the number of field stars flagged as unsubtracted should be as small as possible.

The result of this procedure (i.e., the CMD in panel c) is indeed satisfactory, since in general only the CMD of a single intermediate-age population is present in this plot. Some younger main sequence stars are still present in the decontaminated CMD of NGC 2155, due to the fact that, being the young LMC population intrinsically clumpy (like any young stellar population in galaxies), the assumption we make here, that the stars we measure just outside the cluster boundary are representative of a population identical to that contaminating the cluster CMD, is true only as a first approximation.

## 5 A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE YONSEI-YALE AND PADOVA STELLAR EVOLUTIONARY MODELS

The goal of this project is to compare the observed and theoretical CMD of intermediate-age, metal-poor clusters, in order to constrain some of the still uncertain parameters used in stellar evolutionary models. In the following two papers of this series, the data presented here will be independently analyzed by members of the Yale and the Padova stellar evolution groups, with the aim of calibrating both sets of models, and also to better identify the effects of different assumptions on the simulated CMDs. In view of this, here we present a comparison between the sets of isochrones published by the two groups, in the range of ages and metallicity spanned by the observed clusters, namely 1$`÷`$3 Gyr and Z=0.004$`÷`$0.008. We consider this as a “first-order” comparison because we are considering only the published models, without any fine tuning of the input parameters, that will be performed in the following two papers. Because the two grids of models and isochrones were derived independently, a comparison between them can provide a measure of the uncertainties in isochrone fitting, as well as the robustness of the ages derived for LMC star clusters.

Figure 6 shows a set of isochrones of ages 1, 2 and 3 Gyr, and Z=0.004, obtained from Girardi et al. (2000) and Yi et al. (2001) in the theoretical \[log $`L/L_{}`$,log $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$\] and in the observational $`[V,(VR)]`$ plane. The two sets of isochrones are quite close to one another up to the main sequence turnoffs in the theoretical plane. Above that, the Y<sup>2</sup> isochrones are slightly brighter than the Padova ones, while the RGB is slightly cooler. Another apparent difference is in the 3 Gyr old isochrone, which is calculated from models with a moderate amount of core overshooting (gradually increasing with mass in the range between 1.0 and $`1.5M_{}`$, see Girardi et al. 2000) in the Padova set, but with no overshooting for Y<sup>2</sup> isochrones by Yi et al. (2001), who adopted some overshooting only for isochrones younger than 3 Gyrs. The differences are more important in the observational plane (right panel), where the uncertainties in the color transformations add up. In the following we will discuss in some detail the differences in the input physics and color transformations between both sets of models, which may explain the differences apparent in the figures.

In the theoretical log $`L/L_{}`$ vs. log $`T_{eff}`$ plane shown in the left-hand panel of Figure 6, the differences must be due to differences in the stellar models used in constructing the isochrones. Regarding the input physics, both sets of isochrones make use of the OPAL opacities (Rogers & Iglesias 1995) for the stellar interiors, and of the Alexander & Ferguson (1994) opacities at low temperatures. But they differ in the choice of the equation of state in the interior. While the Y<sup>2</sup> isochrones are based on the OPAL equation of state (Rogers, Swenson & Iglesias 1996), the Padova isochrones use the prescription by Straniero (1988) and the MHD equation of state (Mihalas, Däppen & Hummer 1988). Also different are the energy generation rates and the details of the solar calibration, which determine the choice of two important input parameters, the initial helium abundance and the mixing length in the convective zone. The mass-luminosity relation for stars depends significantly on the chosen helium abundance, and the mixing length parameter in the convection zone of cool stars affects the radius of cool star models.

Within the conventional method of overshoot parameterization Padova isochrones differ from Y<sup>2</sup> ones in the adopted constraints to the overshoot efficiency, as described by Bressan et al. (1981) and Girardi et al. (2000), and by Yi et al. (2001) and Woo & Demarque (2001). In the Y<sup>2</sup> models, the extension of the convective motions beyond the formal boundary of the convective core defined by the Schwarzschild criterion is measured from the convective core boundary outward (i.e. above the convective boundary). Its magnitude is expressed as a fraction of the local pressure scale height $`H_p`$ at the convection boundary. In the Y<sup>2</sup> models, OS=0.2 (meaning 0.2$`H_p`$) is adopted for younger isochrones ($``$ 2 Gyr) and OS=0.0 for older ones ($``$ 3 Gyr). In the Padova models, the overshoot length $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ is measured across the formal Schwarzschild convective boundary (i.e. it is measured from inside the convective core and it straddles the convective boundary). The overshooting parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ is so defined that overshoot of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ = 0.5 (Padova) corresponds to approximately OS = 0.25 $`H_p`$ in the Yale code. Understanding this difference will be important to correctly interpret the conclusions on the need of a particular amount of overshoot in the models, in the next two papers in this series.

Despite these main differences and some minor others in the construction of the stellar models, it is encouraging to note the generally good agreement in the log $`L/L_{}`$ vs. log T<sub>eff</sub> plane, and in the derived ages.

In the CMD, shown on the right-hand side in Figure 6, the differences between the Y<sup>2</sup> and Padova isochrones are more pronounced. This emphasizes the still large uncertainties in the color transformation, used to translate the isochrones from the theoretical log $`L/L_{}`$ vs. log $`T_{eff}`$ plane into the observational $`M_V`$ vs. $`(VR)`$ plane. Bertelli et al. (1994) and Girardi et al. (2000) isochrones are based on the Kurucz (1992) library of stellar spectral energy distributions, convolved with filter spectral responses (extended at high temperature with black-body spectra and at low temperature with empirical M stars spectra as described in those paper).

The Y<sup>2</sup> isochrones used here are instead based on the semi-empirical Lejeune, Cuisinier & Buser (1998) color transformations (BaSeL colors). The spectral libraries assembled by Lejeune et al. are based on the Kurucz (1995) library, extended to low temperatures based on empirical data and low-temperature stellar models: for M giants, spectra from Fluks et al. (1994) and Bessell et al. (1989,1991), and for M dwarfs, synthetic spectra from Allard & Hauschildt (1995), were used to correct spectral distributions with semi-empirical calibrations. There is also a version of the Y<sup>2</sup> set of isochrones using the color transformations by Green et al. (1987), but those transformed with the Lejeune et al. (1998) tables have been selected as those better reproducing the observed CMDs.

The effects of the different color transformations are apparent in the \[$`V,(VR)`$\] plane shown in the rigth panel. The Padova isochrones (Girardi et al. 2000) are slightly redder than the Y<sup>2</sup> ones along the unevolved main sequence and in the RGB, an effect that must be attributed to the color transformation alone since these parts of the isochrones match closely in the theoretical plane. The differences in the sub giant branch (SGB) region, mainly consisting in the Y<sup>2</sup> isochrones being brighter, are a combination of the differences in luminosity already noted in the theoretical plane, and the effects of the color transformation. In any case, the uncertainty in color is within the errors of the Hipparcos subdwarf data.

## 6 ISOCHRONE FITTING TO THE CLUSTER CMDs

Figure 7 displays a comparison among the fiducial lines of the three clusters. The cluster loci have been superimposed with no correction for possible differences in reddening or distance modulus. Note that, due to the presence of binary stars (see discussion in Paper II), drawing a fiducial sequence in the SGB region just above the main sequence turnoff is not straightforward, especially for SL 556. Nevertheless, it is still evident from Figure 7 that the clusters show a trend in the $`V`$ magnitude of the main sequence turnoff, and a (opposite) trend in the magnitude of the red-clump. The main sequence trend is clearly one in age, while the variation of the red-clump luminosity is consistent with the prediction by Girardi & Salaris (2001) about the luminosity evolution of the red-clump in the age interval 1-3 Gyr.

### 6.1 NGC 2173

Figure 8 shows the comparison between the CMD of NGC 2173 and the Y<sup>2</sup> (left) and Padova (right) theoretical isochrones. The same apparent distance modulus $`(mM)_V=18.6`$ and metallicity Z=0.004, have been used in both cases, while due to the differences in the color transformations shown in Fig. 6, slightly different reddenings and ages are required for a good match with the two models. Both models reproduce quite well the main sequence, turnoff and SGB region, while they both fail to reproduce the color location of the RGB. A small change in slope would be needed to bring the theoretical Y<sup>2</sup> RGB on top of the observed one, while a substantially different slope would be required to bring the Padova model into agreement with the data. In both cases a higher metallicity would improve the RGB fit, while the fit to the rest of the CMD remains similarly good. We adopt Z=0.004 for consistency with the two following papers in this series. The magnitude of the red-clump of the Padova models matches very well the observed one, while the color is slightly too blue, as all the AGB. Our crude estimate of the cluster age is therefore $``$ 1.5 Gyr.

### 6.2 SL 556

Figure 9 shows the comparison between the CMD of SL 556 and the theoretical isochrones from Y<sup>2</sup> (left) and Padova (right). A distance modulus of $`(mM)_V=18.5`$ and a metallicity of Z=0.004 has been adopted in both cases, while slightly different reddening and age were used for the two models. The shape of the SGB region of this cluster is rather peculiar, and apparently quite different from theoretical predictions. As it will be shown in the next papers of this series, this shape can be explained by the presence of a fraction of binaries, also evident from the fact that there seems to be a second sequence, on the right, and parallel, to the cluster main sequence. Excluding this SGB region just above the turnoff, both models reproduce well the observed CMD. The Y<sup>2</sup> models also predict a correct RGB slope all the way up to the tip, while the Padova ones are steeper than the observed RGB, for magnitudes brighter than the red-clump. Also in this case, the fit would be improved by adopting a higher metallicity, but then also a negative reddening would be required.

### 6.3 NGC 2155

Figure 10 shows the CMD of NGC 2155 compared with Y<sup>2</sup> (left) and Padova theoretical isochrones (right). Also for this cluster the same apparent distance modulus $`(mM)_V=18.5`$ and metallicity Z=0.004, have been used in both cases, while slightly different reddenings and ages were required to achieve a good fit with the two models. Two isochrones are shown in the left panel, with or without core overshooting, the difference being only evident in the shape of the turnoff and SGB; some intermediate value of overshooting seems to be needed for a better fit of the observed points (see discussion in Paper II). The RGB is well reproduced by the $`Y^2`$ model all the way up to the tip, while the Padova one, due to the use of different transformations, starts to deviate from the observed points towards brighter magnitudes. A higher metallicity would improve the fit of the RGB slope, but then the other sequences would be too red in the model. The red-clump, only available in the Padova isochrones, perfectly matches the observed one, while the theoretical AGB is of course too blue, as the upper RGB. Using these models, our best estimate of the cluster age in this preliminary analysis is therefore between 2.5 and 3 Gyr.

## 7 SUMMARY

This preliminary investigation on three intermediate age LMC clusters, namely NGC 2173, SL 556 and NGC 2155 is the starting point for a very detailed analysis aiming at a test on input physics for stellar models. In principle there is the opportunity to check the efficiency of convective core overshoot for star masses between 1.1 and 1.5 $`M_{}`$ by comparison of these CMDs with synthetic CMDs and isochrones. The isochrone fitting to the CMDs of the clusters gives some information on their age and metallicity, but we must take into account that there are also uncertainties in the LMC distance modulus and interstellar reddening. Only a more refined analysis, considering also the star distribution in several regions of the CMD, will give reliable results. In the following two papers of this series, the synthetic CMD technique will be used independently by members of the Padova and Yale groups to determine the cluster characteristics, taking into account the uncertainties in the observations and in stellar evolutionary models, and to give some feed-back into the stellar evolutionary models themselves.

Our data was collected as part of an ESO Service Mode run. C.G. acknowledges partial support from chilean CONICYT through FONDECYT grant number 1990638. This research has also been supported in part by NASA grant NAG5-8406 (P.D.).


text:
# Comment on “First observation of doubly charmed baryon 𝚵_𝐜𝐜⁺”

## Abstract

We speculate on a possible interpretation of events selected by the SELEX collaboration and stress an insufficient evidence for the observation of doubly charmed baryon.

In the recent paper selex  the SELEX collaboration reported on the first observation of doubly charmed baryon. In this comment we argue the following:

1. Given the reported events would be caused by the doubly charmed baryons, the observed particle would have extremely exotic characteristics as concerns for the lifetime as well as the production rate and signature.
2. The events observed by the SELEX collaboration as described in selex  could be ordinary treated as associated pair production of charmed particles with no involvement of doubly charmed baryons.

In the analysis of SELEX data, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ sample contains 1630 events with the full reconstruction of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+pK^{}\pi ^+`$ decay mode. It is important that the products of decay were identified by use of the Ring-Imaging Cherenkov detector (RICH), and the secondary vertex shifted from the interaction point of incoming particle with the target was resolved due to the silicon vertex detector. Further, the Cabbibo-allowed decay of $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+K^{}\pi ^+`$ was searched for, and, thus, one expected the strong correlation of charged kaon-sign in decays of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$. The collaboration chosen to investigate the position of additional $`K^{}\pi ^+`$ vertex between the primary one and that of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$. This condition could remove a lot of events under interest, but the further analysis in selex  shown that it is not so restrictive for the candidate events.

Let us assume that the SELEX collaboration can prove the observation of doubly charmed baryon $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$ as claimed in selex . Then the measurement of $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$ lifetime in accordance with Table 1 in selex  shows the preferable value of 0.012 ps with the upper limit of 0.033 ps at the 90% confidence level. This result is in a deep contradiction with the theoretical predictions revqq ; OPEQQq  based on the Operator Product Expansion generalized to the systems composed of two heavy quarks and a single light quark. The total width of the doubly charmed baryon up to subleading terms is given by the sum of two basic terms. The first is the double total width of free charmed quark, i.e. the spectator contribution corrected by the coupled effects, which are mainly determined by the negative correction due to the time dilution of heavy quark motion in the rest frame of baryon,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_c[\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+]\mathrm{\Gamma }_c^{\mathrm{spect}}\left(1\frac{v_c^2}{2}\right).$$

The spectator width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_c^{\mathrm{spect}}`$ slightly depends on the normalization scale coming from the higher-order corrections in QCD, so that it is, with a good accuracy, independent of hadron state containing the charmed quark. Therefore, the value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_c^{\mathrm{spect}}`$ cannot be essentially changed with respect to that of in $`D`$ mesons. The averaged square of charmed quark velocity in the baryon can be estimated in the model-dependent way. Its value is about 0.15, which gives a typical size of subleading corrections. The second numerically-essential term in the total width of $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$ is determined by the weak rescattering of charmed and $`d`$ quarks $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{WS}[\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+]`$. Its value parametrically depends on the wave function of baryon, which was in detail studied in Ref. revqq . Thus, the total width is equal to

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{tot}}[\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+]2\mathrm{\Gamma }_c[\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+]+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{WS}[\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+],$$

where the numerical contribution of weak scattering contribution is about 60%. Then the lifetime is predicted by the estimate

$$\tau [\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+]=0.16\pm 0.05\mathrm{ps},$$

which is much greater than the measured value for the candidates reported by the SELEX collaboration. Note, that the extremely short lifetime would point to the unexpected breaking of OPE in the doubly heavy baryons, since one should essentially change the mass of charmed quark as well as drastically enlarge the baryon wave function in contradiction with the description of hadrons containing a single charmed quark111The very strict and pessimistic approach to the accuracy of theoretical predictions for the lifetimes of hadrons with the charmed quark gives the uncertainty about 50%, but not the factor of 20.. We have to emphasize that the analysis of lifetime in Ref. revqq  was performed in a consistent way with the data on the lifetimes of baryons with the single charmed quark, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }_c^{+,0}`$. Thus, the lifetime of candidates observed by the SELEX collaboration is extremely exotic for the doubly charmed baryon $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$. In addition, the measured lifetime is even shorter than the lifetime of so-called “sideband region” events (about 0.038 ps), and it is close to the single-event resolution of 0.020 ps.

Next, the production rate of selected candidates if they are really the events with the production of doubly charmed baryon, is extremely high. Indeed, the SELEX collaboration found that about 20% of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ events in its total sample are produced by $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$ selex . The mechanism for the production of doubly charmed baryons in the strong interactions supposes the production of two pairs $`c\overline{c}`$, i.e. four heavy quarks (see review in revqq ). At high energies of parton subprocesses as the gluon fusion $`ggcc\overline{c}\overline{c}`$ and the quark-antiquark annihilation $`q\overline{q}cc\overline{c}\overline{c}`$, the hard production of heavy quarks is suppressed in comparison with the production of single pair $`c\overline{c}`$ by the factor of $`10^2`$, that is smaller than the reported contents of doubly heavy baryons in the production of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$. This theoretical expectation is strongly convinced, since it is based on the direct measurement of probability for the gluon splitting into the pair of $`c\overline{c}`$ by the L3, ALEPH and OPAL collaborations in the electron-positron annihilation at $`Z`$ boson peak, where one got $`P(gc\overline{c})310^2`$ annihil . In the process of gluon fusion dominant at the SELEX energies, the total energy in the parton subprocess is essentially less than the center-of-mass energy of hadron collisions because of the parton luminosity. In this way, the hard production supposes a strong threshold effect for four heavy quarks. This threshold suppression is significant for the energies of SELEX operation, so that it results in the additional factor of $`10^2`$ hadr ; prodQQq . One should take into account the fact that the hadronization of four heavy quarks results in a fraction of doubly heavy baryons about 10%, since an essential part of events with two charmed quarks gives the production of two mesons or baryons each containing the single charmed quark222The physical picture for such the suppression is quite transparent: the hard production of charmed quarks takes place in the volume about the Compton length cubed, while the baryon wave function determines the size of doubly charmed diquark by a transfer momentum $`pm_cv`$ with the relative velocity of charmed quark motion $`v1`$, so that the probability of the baryon production is given by the ratio $`p^3/m_c^3v^31`$ in contrast to the continuum contribution formed by the hadrons containing a single heavy quark.. Thus, the hard production mechanism gives the suppression of doubly heavy baryon production by the factor of $`10^5`$ at the energies of fixed target experiments333We stress that the discrepancy of measured $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$ yield with the theoretical expectations reaches the value about $`10^4`$, while the result of BELLE Abe:2002rb  mentioned in selex  as concerns for the production rate for $`J/\psi c\overline{c}`$ disagrees within the factor of 10.. Another possibility is the production mechanism with the intrinsic charm contents in the initial hadrons intrinsic . In this case the threshold suppression is absent, but the normalization of intrinsic structure functions is suppressed by the factor of $`10^2`$, so that the production rate for the doubly charmed baryons is about $`10^3`$ of the total charm rate. Anyway, the SELEX candidates for the doubly charmed baryon $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$ have exotically high production rate in comparison with theoretical expectations. Moreover, a low observed value of mean transverse momentum for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ from $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$ points to the preference of intrinsic charm mechanism, but with extremely high, and, hence, unacceptable, normalization of charm distribution in the initial hadrons. As for the signature of events with the $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$ candidates, the conservation of flavor in the strong interactions supposes the associative production of hadrons containing two anti-charmed quarks. These quarks should decay and produce two additional vertices shifted from the primary one as well as result in the additional charged multiplicity in the decays. The SELEX collaboration did not report on the enhancement of charged multiplicity in the selected evens or on the appearence of additional decay vertices. So, the question is where are two anti-charmed quarks? Do they preferably disappear by decays in the primary vertex with a low charged multiplicity? What is a probability of such the conditions?

The main problem of the interpretation is that the particle identification in the additional vertex of two charged particles was not possible, since the momenta were insufficient in order to reach the RICH. In this case the analysis loses the most strong evidence for the production of two charmed quarks in contrast to the dominant process with the yield of $`c\overline{c}`$ pair. This main process, then, can lead to the associative production of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ with the neutral anti-charmed particle decaying to two charged tracks of opposite signs with an unobserved neutral component lost by the silicon vertex detector as well as in the system of magnets. For example, the branching fraction of $`\overline{D}^0K^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$ is equal to $`13.9\pm 0.9`$% PDG . In that case, since the neutral pion is lost from the analysis, one cannot reconstruct $`D^0`$, in part, its momentum. Therefore, one cannot draw a conclusion on the Lorentz-factor of the charmed meson in order to make some claims on its decay vertex444At low momenta, the decay vertex of charmed meson could be rather close to the primary one.. Thus, there is no evidence against the ordinary treatment for the events reported by the SELEX collaboration in selex  as the associative production555The associative production of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}_c^0`$ decaying to $`K^+\pi ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}^0`$ is also possible, while the neutral anti-baryon further decays to $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\pi ^0`$. of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\overline{D}^0`$. Moreover, the appropriate assignment of charged tracks leads to the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+K^+\pi ^{}`$ mass distribution presented in Fig. 2(b) of Ref. selex , where we can see a rather smooth histogram, which does not contain any significant peaks, but it exhibits a slow increase of events in the mass region of $`3.74.0`$ GeV. This behaviour could be expected if we suppose the associative production of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ with the charmed particle, since in the case of full reconstruction one should observe an ordinary threshold distribution starting at the energy $`M[\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+]+M[\overline{D}^0]4.1`$ GeV, while the lose of neutral component in the decays of $`\overline{D}^0`$ results in the smearing of threshold effect at lower masses. Unfortunately, the SELEX collaboration did not present a comparison of mass distributions in the production of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ with the expected form calculated with a Monte Carlo generator well describing the events processed by the apparatus. Next, the number of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ events with the additional vertex is suppressed in comparison with the total rate of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$. We do not find a direct claim on the number of events with the vertex separation greater than a fixed cut-off, so that we extract the amount of events under interest from the data on Fig. 2 in selex , where in the region of $`3.24.0`$ GeV one can count several hundreds events. The value of suppression is given by a typical efficiency for the reconstruction of additional vertex (something about several per cents), only, while one should expect a stronger suppression, because the production cross section for the doubly charmed baryons has to be significantly less than the cross section for the inclusive production of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$. Finally, the wrong-assignment of kinematics can result in the fake peaks shown in Fig. 2 (a) and (c) of selex .

In conclusion, we show that the SELEX paper does not provide sufficient support for its claim of evidence for the observation of doubly charmed baryon $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{cc}^+`$.

This work is supported in part by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, grants 01-02-99315, 01-02-16585, and 00-15-96645.


text:
# Comment on: Experimental Simulation of Two-Particle Quantum Entanglement using Classical Fields

In a recent Letter Lee and Thomas (LT) report on an experiment technique that enabled them to *simulation* (emphasis added) “a four particle entangled state”LT  Their results conform precisely with those seen is similar experiments in which the observed correlations are those obtained in demonstrations of GHZ 4-fold ‘photon’ experiments, as reported elsewhere; e.g.:Pan  These latter experiments are taken to demonstrate the quantum mechanical nature of EPR correlations, in particular the multi-particle GHZ correlations. The observation of the identical correlations among classical fields evokes the question: how can a “quantum” phenomena be rendered classically? This question is particularly acute in view of the conclusion of Bell’s “Theorem,” which states that such correlations are impossible in “local, realistic,” circumstances, i.e., for *all* classical phenomena.Bell

The premise of this comment is based on the proposition that nature does not *“simulate”* itself, and that the conceptual implications of LT’s experiment are therefore that it is an empirical counterexample to Bell’s Theorem, rigorously establishing its invalidity.

While this observation is in sharp contrast with much prevailing opinion regarding the significance of Bell’s analysis, in fact it is supported by an ever increasing body of research which in various ways also leads to the conclusion that there is a fatal error in Bell’s Theorem. This critical research falls into three categories: 1.) the logical deconstruction of Bell and Bell-Kochen-Specker Theorems, 2.) the construction of local realistic models and simulations of EPR correlations, i.e., theoretical counterexamples, and 3.) empirical counterexamples, of which LT’s is only the most recent. Additionally, there is much similar research which achieves only partial or specialized results, e.g., FPP . There is, however, only fragmented agreement on the logical interrelationships among these results. None of it, in any case, has been seriously refuted although all of it is oft rejected on the basis of conservative antipathy.

Apparently the first category was initiated by Jaynes.Jaynes  He argued that Bell’s fundamental premise, namely that “locality” demands that the coincident correlation for EPR situations factor according to: $`P(a,b,\lambda )=P(a|\lambda )P(b|\lambda )P(\lambda )`$, is a misconstrual of Bayes’ formula, namely: $`P(a,b,\lambda )=P(a|b,\lambda )P(b|\lambda )P(\lambda )`$.Feller  Bayes’s formula does not imply instantaneous communication between the two space-like separated detectors as it also accommodates “common-cause” correlation. This result has been rediscovered independently in various styles of argument at least five times.Per -LBL  Similarly, Barut seems to have been first to find the lacuna in Kochen-Specker type, inequality-free proofs of Bell’s Theorem.Barut  The error there consists in failing to discern which spin operators are physically relevant *at the same time*. See also mepris .

Model-making turns out to be rather simple so long as no effort is made to simultaneously satisfy Bell’s factorization. Utterly straightforward models exist for all the standard EPR-B (EPR-Bohm; i.e., polarization entangled) experiments.Entang  Numerical, “Monte Carlo,” simulations devoid of ‘quantum structure’ for 2-fold EPR experiments also have violated Bell Inequalities.WH

In addition to LT’s 4-fold experiment, Evdokimov et al. reported on a 2-fold EPR “simulation.”Evdo  Again, the terminology employed respects sensibilities at the expense of precision; in fact any classical phenomena that exhibit EPR correlations, contradict Bell.

Finally, note that rejecting the concept of “quantum nonlocal correlation” has scant effect on the discipline of physics except to expunge paradoxical jargon. However, the larger issue brought up by EPR, i.e., the search for a deeper theory completing Quantum Mechanics, in accord with these conclusions, can not be considered a quixotic endeavor.