text:
# Trade-off between angular resolution and straylight contamination in CMB anisotropy experiments.

## 1 Introduction

After the detection of cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies at few degree scales by COBE/DMR (Smoot et al. 1992, Bennett et al. 1996, Górski et al. 1996) and the recent balloon-borne and ground experiments (see Bersanelli et al. 2002 and references therein for a review on the pre-WMAP observational status) at high sensitivity and resolution on limited sky regions probing a universe model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{tot}1`$ (see e.g. Netterfield et al. 2002, Stompor et al. 2001, Pryke et al. 2002, and references therein) the NASA space mission WMAP (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe, see Bennett et al. 2003a) derived the CMB anisotropy angular power spectrum with unprecedent sensitivity and reliability (Hinshaw et al. 2003b, Kogut et al. 2003) and improved the accuracy in the determination of the most important cosmological parameters (Spergel et al. 2003).

Future fundamental progresses in CMB anisotropy and polarization will be based on the Planck mission by ESA 111http://astro.estec.esa.nl/Planck/ (Bersanelli et al. 1996, Tauber 2000, Villa et al. 2003), planned to be launched in the year 2007.

In particular, the Low Frequency Instrument (LFI, Mandolesi et al. 1998; see also Mandolesi et al. 2002) and the High Frequency Instrument (HFI, Puget et al. 1998; see also Lamarre et al. 2002) on-board Planck will cover together a wide frequency range (30–900 GHz) which should significantly improve the accuracy of the subtraction of foreground contamination from the primordial CMB anisotropy, providing at the same time a gold mine of cosmological as well as astrophysical information (see e.g. De Zotti et al. 1999 and references therein).

To fully reach these scientific goals, great attention has to be devoted to properly reduce and/or subtract all the possible systematic effects.

The effect of optical distortions, both in the main beam and in the near and far sidelobes, has been widely recognized as one of the most critical systematics both in balloon experiments and in space missions (Page et al. 2003, Barnes et al. 2003).

The systematic effect introduced by main beam distortions (Burigana et al. 1998) can be in part reduced by adopting aplanatic configurations for the primary mirror (Villa et al. 1998, Mandolesi et al. 2000a, Villa et al. 2002) and its effect on the CMB anisotropy power spectrum recovery, relevant at the multipoles of the acoustic peaks, can be partially removed through dedicated deconvolution codes (Arnau et al. 2002) provided that the main beam shape can be accurately reconstructed in flight (Burigana et al. 2002).

The requirement on the rejection of unwanted radiation coming from directions far from the optical axis (straylight) is stringent for Planck and does not pertain only the telescope itself, but the entire optical system, including solar panels, shielding, thermal stability and focal assembly components. The variations of the spurious straylight signal introduce contaminations in the anisotropy measurements. The removal of this effect in data analysis is in principle much more complicated than the subtraction of main beam distortion effect. This is due to the difficulty to accurately known the “real” antenna pattern (with both at ground and in flight reconstruction) at very low response levels.

The antenna response features far from the beam centre (sidelobes) are determined largely by diffraction and scattering from the edges of the mirrors and from nearby supporting structures. Therefore, they can be reduced by decreasing the illumination at the edge of the primary, i.e. increasing the edge taper (ET if expressed in dB; the linear edge taper, LET, is $`10^{\mathrm{ET}/10}`$), defined as the ratio of the power per unit area incident on the centre of the mirror to that incident on the edge. Of course, the higher is edge taper, the lower is the sidelobe level and the straylight contamination. On the other hand, increasing the edge taper has a negative impact on the angular resolution for a fixed size of the primary mirror (see e.g. Mandolesi et al. 2000b).

In the “cosmological window” between $`70`$ GHz and $`300`$ GHz, where foreground contamination is minimum, it is extremely important to reach the best trade-off between the improvement of the angular resolution, necessary to measure the high order acoustic peaks of CMB anisotropy, and the minimization of the straylight contamination due to the Galactic emission (GSC, Galaxy Straylight Contamination), one of the most critical systematic effects, most relevant at large and intermediate angular scales (i.e. at multipoles $`\mathrm{}`$ less than $`100`$).

In this work we focus, as a working case, on the 100 GHz channels of Planck Low Frequency Instrument, although the methods and the basic results described here can be applied also to other Planck frequency channels and to different CMB anisotropy experiments. We shall also compare our results with simulated data at 30 GHz.

We will use here the detailed analysis on optical computations and the main optical results concerning the full antenna pattern response given in Sandri et al. 2003 (hereafter Paper I). We present extensive simulations of the GSC due to Galactic foreground components relevant at 100 GHz and, at this purpose, we have made use of a wide set of simulated optical configurations in order to find the best compromise between resolution and GSC therefore defining the maximum range of multipoles accessible to the considered frequency channel and the level of straylight signal affecting the data.

In Sect. 2 we briefly describe the basic recipes to simulate Planck observations (see also Appendix A), the adopted optical input, and maps of Galactic components. The results of the simulated straylight contamination are described in Sect. 3, while the comparison between the results obtained for different antenna patterns and foreground components is presented in Sect. 4 (and in Appendix B for the comparison with a straylight simulation at 30 GHz). Finally, we discuss the results and draw our main conclusions in Sect. 5.

## 2 Simulations

The selected orbit for Planck is a Lissajous orbit around the Lagrangian point L2 of the Sun-Earth system (see e.g. Mandolesi et al. 1998). The spacecraft spins at 1 r.p.m. and the field of view of the two instruments (LFI/HFI) is about $`10^{}\times 10^{}`$ centered at the telescope optical axis (the so-called telescope line of sight, LOS) at a given angle $`\alpha `$ from the spin-axis direction, given by a unit vector, $`s`$, chosen to be pointed in the opposite direction with respect to the Sun. In this work we consider values of $`\alpha 85^{}`$, as adopted for the baseline scanning strategy. The spin axis will be kept parallel to the Sun–spacecraft direction and repointed by $`2.5^{}`$ every $`1`$ hour (baseline scanning strategy). Hence Planck will trace large circles in the sky. A precession of the spin-axis with a period, $`P`$, of $`6`$ months at a given angle $`\beta 10^{}`$ about an axis, $`f`$, parallel to the Sun–spacecraft direction (and outward the Sun) and shifted of $`2.5^{}`$ every $`1`$ hour, may be included in the scanning strategy, possibly with a modulation of the speed of the precession in order to optimize data transmission (Bernard et al. 2002). Although the scanning strategy could be changed, the GSC pattern, peak-to-peak, and angular power spectrum are very weakly dependent on the details of these proposed scanning strategies (Burigana et al. 2000).

The code we have implemented for simulating Planck observations for a wide set of scanning strategies is described in detail in Burigana et al. (1997, 1998) and in Maino et al. (1999). In this study we exploit the baseline scanning strategy and simply assume Planck located in L2. We do not consider the Planck Lissajous orbit around L2 because its effects are negligible in this context.

We compute the convolutions between the antenna pattern response and the sky signal as described in Burigana et al. (2001) by working at $`1^{}`$ or $`7^{}`$ resolution when considering the far or the intermediate sidelobes and by considering spin-axis shifts of $`2^{}`$ every two days and 180 samplings per scan circle. In fact, the effects of pattern features we want to study here occur at $``$ degree or larger scales and, also, the wide set of optical simulations for the full antenna pattern is available at $``$ degree resolution (see Paper I for details on computation time of optical simulations).

With respect to the reference frames described in Burigana et al. (2001), following the recent developments in optimizing the polarization properties of LFI main beams (see Paper I), the conversion between the standard Cartesian telescope frame $`x,y,z`$ and the beam frame $`x_{bf},y_{bf},z_{bf}`$ requires a further angle $`\psi _B`$ other than the standard polar coordinates $`\theta _B`$ and $`\varphi _B`$ defining the colatitude and the longitude of the main beam centre direction in the telescope frame. Appendix A provides the transformation rules between the telescope frame and the beam frame, as well as the definition of the reference frames adopted in this work.

The orientation of these frames as the satellite moves is implemented in the code. For each integration time, we determine the orientations in the sky of the telescope frame and of the beam frame, thus performing a direct convolution between the full pattern response and the sky signal for the desired number of maps, simultaneously.

### 2.1 Optical inputs

A detailed discussion of the optical simulation method and results is presented in Paper I (see Tables 2 and 3 of Paper I for the main properties of the adopted antenna patterns). We briefly summarize here the most relevant aspect in this context.

Several full beam patterns have been simulated for different designs of two Planck LFI feedhorns at 100 GHz differently located on the focal plane unit: three models (9A, 9B, 9C) for LFI9 and four models (4A, 4B, 4C, 4D) for LFI4. Different values of ET will reflect in significant differences in the level of the GSC in the TOD, while different feed designs with the same ET will produce small, but not negligible, differences.

The details of the antenna pattern response, computed as described in Paper I as functions of the two standard polar coordinates $`\theta _{bf}`$, $`\varphi _{bf}`$ in the beam frame, depend also on the optical contributions considered in the analysis. For some representative cases, we will compare the results of our simulations of GSC by adopting optical computations taking into account the first and second or the first, second and third order optical interactions (see Paper I).

In the beam frame we identify two different angular regions relevant for the straylight analysis: the intermediate pattern and the far sidelobes, respectively defined as the region between $`1.2^{}`$ and $`5^{}`$ from the beam centre direction and at angles large than $`5^{}`$ from the beam centre direction. The definition of these “reference” angles is, of course, somewhat arbitrary. They roughly separate angular regions where significant pattern variations occur on sub-degree scales from those where they occur on scales of few degrees or larger. The values adopted here allow a direct comparison with a previous analysis (Burigana et al. 2001).

### 2.2 Maps of Galactic components

In the cosmological window (70–300 GHz) the CMB is clearly the dominant component; on the other hand the Galactic emission is still relevant at low and middle Galactic latitudes. The templates adopted here are similar to those described in Maino et al. (2002) and Paladini et al. (2003).

At 100 GHz the most relevant Galactic component is the thermal dust emission. We adopted here a template obtained by extrapolating the maps by Schlegel et al. (1998) which combines IRAS and DIRBE data, assuming a grey-body spectrum (expressed in antenna temperature),

$$T_{A,dust}(\nu )\frac{\stackrel{~}{\nu }^{\beta +1}}{e^{\stackrel{~}{\nu }}1},\stackrel{~}{\nu }=\frac{h\nu }{kT_{dust}}$$
(1)
with uniform temperature $`T_{dust}=18`$K and emissivity $`\beta =2`$.

In order to simulate the free-free contribution we assume, somewhat arbitrarily, that it is perfectly correlated with the dust itself, i.e. that it has the same spatial distribution. Its antenna temperature scales with frequency as $`T_{A,ff}\nu ^{\beta _{ff}}`$, with $`\beta _{ff}=2.1`$. The relative amplitude of dust and free-free emission is assumed to be a factor of 3 at 100 GHz (De Zotti et al. 1999). Thus, we produce a single map of “thermal” emission from dust plus diffuse free-free emission (see Fig. 1) with a spectrum described by:

$$T_{A,thermal}(\nu )=\left[\frac{1}{3}\left(\frac{\nu }{100\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}\right)^{\beta _{ff}}+\frac{T_{A,dust}(\nu )}{T_{A,dust}(100\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z})}\right]\times T_{A,dust}(100\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}).$$
(2)
The synchrotron emission template is the 408 MHz map of Haslam et al. (1982), available at a resolution of $`0.85^{}`$, extrapolated to the considered frequencies (see Fig. 2) assuming a uniform spectral index $`\beta _{\mathrm{syn}}=2.9`$ in antenna temperature. No attempt is made here to add small scale fluctuations, since the effects of pattern features on which this work is focused occur at $``$ degree or larger scales; for the same reason, the fact the original template includes a convolution with a beam with the given resolution is not a concern.

Localized free-free emission dominates the signal on wide areas in the Galactic plane at least over the frequency range from 30 to 100 GHz. The Synthetic Catalog at 2.7 GHz produced by Paladini et al. (2003) provides a rich information on compact Galactic HII regions that has been used in this work to generate a map of free-free emission from these sources (see Fig. 3). A spectral index $`\alpha =0.1`$ in flux ($`2.1`$ in antenna temperature), as in the case of thermal bremsstrahlung emission in a thin plasma, has been adopted here to extrapolate the signal from 2.7 GHz to the considered Planck frequency channels. With respect to the simulated map reported by Paladini et al. (2003), we have implemented here a code which simulates the contribution of each source in the Synthetic Catalog to each map pixel without applying at this step the convolution with the beam, since the convolution with the intermediate and far antenna pattern has been subsequently applied as described in the first part of this section.

All maps have been projected into the HEALPix scheme 222http://www.eso.org/science/healpix/ (Hierarchical Equal Area and IsoLatitude Pixelization of the Sphere) by Gòrski et al. (1999).

While this work was nearly completed, the 1 year data products 333http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov from the WMAP satellite have become available. In a few representative cases, we have repeated the straylight analysis by adopting the WMAP frequency maps at 33 and 94 GHz, including in the straylight evaluation also the minor contributions to straylight signal from CMB and extragalactic source fluctuations 444Note that these WMAP maps do not include the monopole, while our Galactic component maps include the corresponding monopoles. The comparison between the average straylight signals will be therefore only indicative. Clearly, anisotropy experiments are not sensitive to the monopole, directly subtracted in the data.. Note that WMAP maps are, of course, convolved with the corresponding beam patterns and include the effect of main beam distortions and straylight contamination as well as the instrumental noise and the effect of other sistematics not subtracted in the data analysis; on the other hand, these effects are significantly smaller than the signal (Hinshaw et al. 2003a) and, since this analysis is mainly contributed by signal variations on degree or larger angular scales, they can be neglected.

## 3 Simulation results

The main output of our simulation code are the time ordered data (TOD) of the signals entering the intermediate and far pattern.

In the TOD of each scan circle, two prominent maxima typically appear. These are related, for the intermediate pattern, to the two crossings of the Galactic plane of the telescope field of view and to the crossings of the Galactic plane of the main spillover in the case of the far pattern. As already recognized by Burigana et al. (2001), these maxima are only slighlty shifted with respect to the maxima of the signal entering the main beam in the case of the intermediate pattern and shifted of about $`90^{}`$ in the case of the far pattern, as direct consequence of the pattern shape.

The typical signal level is determined by the sky signal and the fraction, $`f_\%=100_{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Omega }}}J𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }/_{4\pi }J𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }`$, of integrated antenna response in the considered antenna pattern region, $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$, reported in Table 3 of Paper I. The ratio between the fraction of the integrated antenna response in the far pattern and the one in the intermediate pattern provides only a rough upper limit to the ratio of straylight peak-to-peak signal in these two pattern regions. In fact, while an extended very bright Galactic region could quite easily fill the (relatively small) solid angle subtended by the intermediate pattern, the whole (quite large) solid angle subtented by the main spillover and by the other relevant far pattern features can not be easily filled by signals coming all simultaneously from very bright Galactic regions. Similarly, the fractional difference between the integrated antenna response in the far pattern computed by including or not the third order optical interaction provides an upper limit (less than about 10%) to the fractional underestimation of the GSC when the third order optical interaction is neglected. More accurate estimates require numerical simulations.

In Figs. 4 and 5 we report the TOD corresponding to the straylight signal respectively from the far and intermediate pattern for the three Galactic components described in Sect. 2.2 in the case of the beam LFI9 9B computed by including the first, second and third order optical interactions.

The TOD corresponding to the difference between the straylight signal obtained by including or neglecting the third order optical interaction are reported in Figs. 6 and 7. Clearly, the difference is within $`5`$ % of the straylight signal, i.e. smaller than the above upper limit derived on the basis of simple optical considerations by about a factor two. Therefore, considering only the first and second order optical interactions does not introduce relevant loss of information in the optimization analysis of the optical design 555On the contrary, as obvious, the best possible knowledge of the antenna pattern, including all possible effects, from those due dust and molecular contamination on mirror surfaces to those related to the mirror roughness and temperature behaviour, should to be taken into account in the final data analysis..

By comparing Figs. 1, 2, and 3 with Figs. 4 and 5, note how the different angular distribution of the three considered Galactic components reflects in the pattern of the straylight signal TOD, more or less “diffuse” according to the considered component.

Similar results are found for all the considered beam patterns, but with a peak-to-peak and rms straylight signal significantly dependent on the adopted pattern shape. Instead of reporting the full simulation results, a concise comparison between the results obtained for the whole set of optical configurations is reported in the next section.

## 4 Comparison between different antenna patterns and foreground components

The statistical moments of the straylight signal TOD and its peak-to-peak value are reported in Tables 1–7 for our whole set of optical configurations at 100 GHz \[in the tables, the data referring to the global straylight effect from intermediate pattern plus far sidelobes (I + F) are derived including also the contribution from the third order optical interactions, when available\]. Table 8 summarizes the basic information contained in the above tables as functions of the edge taper.

As evident from the tables, the contamination from the far sidelobes is much more relevant than that from the intermediate pattern when the rms of the TOD is considered; by looking at the peak-to-peak of the straylight signal, the contamination from the far sidelobes is larger by a factor of few units or comparable to that from the intermediate pattern. The larger impact of the far sidelobes with respect to the intermediate pattern is particularly remarkable for the case of the diffuse Galactic components, while it is less evident in the case the map of free-free emission from Galactic HII regions. We find in fact a quite general behaviour: more diffuse the component and more relevant the straylight contamination from far sidelobes with respect to the intermediate pattern.

On the contrary, the skewness and kurtosis indices are larger for the straylight contamination from the intermediate pattern because they are more sensitive to localized features. As expected, these indices are larger for the free-free emission from Galactic HII regions than for the more diffuse components.

For a couple of representative cases, LFI9 9B and LFI4 4A, we evaluated the straylight signal on the basis of the WMAP map at 94 GHz for the intermediate pattern and far sidelobes, respectively (see Tables 2 and 4). For the signal in the intermediate pattern, we find a straylight contamination larger by a factor $`1.6`$ in terms of rms (but essentially unchanged in terms of peak-to-peak). It is interesting to note that in the case of the WMAP map, since the 94 GHz channel has a low level of Galactic foreground contamination, the contribution to straylight from CMB fluctuations clearly appears (see Fig. 8) far from the Galactic plane, where the straylight signal is negligible in the case of the simulation carried out by using the three Galactic templates (on the contrary, this effect is not evident at 30 GHz, see Fig. B.1 in Appendix B). If we set to zero the values of the TOD samples with signal smaller than $`0.15\mu `$K (the maximum value of straylight far from the Galactic plane in the right panel of Fig. 8) we obtain a rms straylight of $`0.024\mu `$K, quite close to the rms straylight value of $`0.028\mu `$K obtained in the case of the sum of the three adopted Galactic templates (see Table 2). This means that main contribution to the factor $`1.6`$ of discrepancy in the rms of the straylight signal found by adopting the three Galactic templates or the WMAP map at 94 GHz is mainly produced by the CMB anisotropy.

In the case of the straylight in the far sidelobes we find a straylight contamination larger only by a factor $`1.3`$ in the case of the WMAP map than in the case of the sum of the three adopted Galactic templates, in terms of both rms and peak-to-peak. The above CMB anisotropy effect is not evident. On the contrary, the regions at low straylight signal in the case of the simulation based on the WMAP map show a pattern that, although with different signal values, is quite similar to that found in the same regions by using the Galactic templates. This indicates that the main difference found in this case is due to the adopted model of Galactic templates, in agreement with the idea that CMB anisotropies (and also extragalactic bright sources and fluctuations, minimum at about 100–200 GHz) contained in the WMAP map, can produce only minor contaminations, compared to the Galactic signal, because of their smaller power at large angular scales which implies that positive and negative fluctuations partially compensate inside the relatively large antenna pattern solid angles relevant for this kind of straylight contamination.

By exploiting our set of optical configurations and taking into account the correction factor found on the basis of the WMAP map, we find a linear approximation describing quite well the dependence of the rms and the peak-to-peak values of the GSC at 100 GHz on the (per cent) fractional contribution, $`f_\%`$, to the integrated antenna pattern response from the considered pattern region (see also Fig. 9):

$$\text{peak-to-peak}5.3\mu \mathrm{K}\times f_\%175\mu \mathrm{K}\times \mathrm{LET}$$
(3)
$$\mathrm{rms}0.62\mu \mathrm{K}\times f_\%21\mu \mathrm{K}\times \mathrm{LET},$$
(4)
for the far sidelobes, and

$$\text{peak-to-peak}28\mu \mathrm{K}\times f_\%98\mu \mathrm{K}\times \mathrm{LET}$$
(5)
$$\mathrm{rms}0.86\mu \mathrm{K}\times f_\%3\mu \mathrm{K}\times \mathrm{LET},$$
(6)
for the intermediate pattern 666In these fits we adopt, for uniformity, the numbers found by considering the first and second order optical interactions, available for the all cases., where eqs. (1)–(5) of Paper I are taken into account in the last equalities of these equations (the LET is here referred to a taper at an angle of $`24^{}`$ from the feed axis). The numerical coefficients in eq. (6) can be multiplied by $`1.6`$ to include also the straylight contribution in the intermediate pattern from CMB fluctuations.

Clearly, in the cosmological window the GSC contamination is less than that in the lowest and highest Planck frequency channels and so its impact on CMB power spectrum recovery (see Burigana et al. 2001 for an analysis of GSC impact on the power spectrum recovery and Fourier decomposition of scan circle data at the lowest Planck frequency channel). On the other hand, the ultimate goal of Planck, and in general of future CMB anisotropy experiments after WMAP, is not only the power spectrum recovery but also a detailed imaging of the last scattering surface and a detailed study of the whole statistical information, cosmological and astrophysical, contained in the frequency maps. For this reason, the Planck requirement on the maximum acceptable level of systematic effect contamination is of few $`\mu `$K, in order to avoid spurious signals at a level comparable with the Planck sensitivity.

Among the set of analyzed optical configurations we can identify a subsample which reaches a good trade-off between the angular resolution (see Table 2 of Paper I) and the suppression of the straylight contamination.

In the case of LFI9 the configuration 9B shows a global peak-to-peak (rms) GSC less than about $`2\mu `$K ($`0.2\mu `$K) simultaneoulsy reaching an angular resolution (FWHM) of $`10.02^{}`$. The configuration 9A shows a lower GSC, but with a worse angular resolution ($`10.56^{}`$), while the configuration 9C allows to reach a resolution of $`9.54^{}`$ but introducing a relatively large GSC, being its peak-to-peak (rms) signal of about $`7\mu `$K ($`0.7\mu `$K). The worse resolution for LFI4 with respect to LFI9 is due to the different location of the corresponding feed in the focal surface (see Mandolesi et al. 2000b). On the other hand, our analysis identifies a well defined optimal optical configuration (4C) that allows to reach the best angular resolution ($`12.08^{}`$) with the minimum GSC, i.e. a peak-to-peak (rms) signal less than about $`1.5\mu `$K ($`0.15\mu `$K).

In Appendix B we report also the results obtained for a simulation at 30 GHz. We find some qualitative differences between the GSC at these two frequencies, related to their optical behaviours and to the different role of the Galactic foregrounds.

An accurate computation of the GSC on Planck polarization data could be in principle carried out by using the formalism described in Challinor et al. (2000). On the other hand, since no microwave polarization surveys are currently available, a detailed computation based on current simulated templates (see e.g. Giardino et al. 2002) may provide only indicative results. A first order analysis aimed to obtain a robust upper limit on the rms GSC in the Planck LFI polarization data can be obtained with a simple argument. The signals, $`I_{ij}`$ ($`i=1,2`$), in the four radiometers associated to a couple of LFI feeds symmetrically located on the focal plane can be expressed as:

$$2I_{11}=T+\delta T_{11}^s+(Q+\delta Q_{11}^s)\mathrm{cos}(2\varphi _{11})+(U+\delta U_{11}^s)\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _{11})$$

$$2I_{12}=T+\delta T_{12}^s(Q+\delta Q_{12}^s)\mathrm{cos}(2\varphi _{11})(U+\delta U_{12}^s)\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _{11})$$

$$2I_{21}=T+\delta T_{21}^s+(Q+\delta Q_{21}^s)\mathrm{cos}(2\varphi _{21})+(U+\delta U_{21}^s)\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _{21})$$

$$2I_{22}=T+\delta T_{22}^s(Q+\delta Q_{22}^s)\mathrm{cos}(2\varphi _{21})(U+\delta U_{22}^s)\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _{21}).$$

Here $`\varphi _{21}=\varphi _{11}+\pi /4`$, $`\varphi _{11}`$ is the angle between the axis $`x_{bf}`$ of the beam frame corresponding to the first feed and the direction of the parallel in the considered pointing direction, $`T`$, $`Q`$ and $`U`$ are the unpolarized signal and the Stokes parameters in the main beam, and the terms $`\delta T_{ij}^s,\delta Q_{ij}^s,\delta Q_{ij}^s`$ account for the spurious contributions due to the Galactic straylight. For each pointing direction, they are different for the four radiometers because of the different level and orientation of the corresponding antenna patterns. The measure of the Stokes parameters $`Q`$ and $`U`$ is obtained by combining the signals in the four radiometers: $`Q=(I_{11}I_{12})\mathrm{cos}(2\varphi _{11})(I_{21}I_{22})\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _{11})`$, $`U=(I_{21}I_{22})\mathrm{cos}(2\varphi _{11})+(I_{11}I_{22})\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _{11})`$. The Galactic synchrotron emission is partially polarized ($`30`$ %), while the Galactic free-free and thermal dust emission, most relevant at $`\nu \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}50}`$ GHz, are only weakly polarized (a few %). Therefore, at least in the cosmological window, a Galactic straylight contamination relevant for the polarization measure mainly derives from the differences between the temperature straylight signals, $`\delta T_{ij}^s`$, in each pairs of radiometers associated to the same feed. Assuming a typical value $`1/2`$ for $`\mathrm{cos}(2\varphi _{11})`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _{11})`$, we find a rms GSC on $`Q`$ and $`U`$ similar to that found above for $`T`$ \[see eqs. (4) and (6)\], to be considered as a pessimistic upper limit, corresponding to a difference of a factor $`2`$ in the temperature straylight signals in each pair of radiometers.

We then conclude that, at least in terms of rms and in the cosmological window, keeping at very low level the GSC in the temperature data directly assures an adequate suppression of the GSC in the polarization data.

## 5 Conclusions

Satellite CMB anisotropy missions, such as WMAP and Planck, and also the new generation of balloon-borne and ground experiments, make use of complex multi-frequency instruments at the focal surface of a meter class telescope to allow the joint study of CMB and foreground anisotropies, necessary for a high quality component separation. In the so-called “cosmological window”, between $`70`$ GHz and $`300`$ GHz, where foreground contamination is minimum, it is extremely important to reach the best angular resolution (necessary to measure the high order acoustic peaks of CMB anisotropy) achievable keeping at the same time the straylight contamination at acceptable levels (peak-to-peak of few $`\mu `$K).

By focusing, as a working case, on the 100 GHz channels of Planck LFI, we have presented here extensive simulations of the straylight contamination starting from a wide set of simulated optical configurations, described in Paper I, in order to find the best compromise between resolution and GSC.

By adopting some templates of Galactic foreground extrapolated from radio and IR surveys we found that it is possible to improve the angular resolution of about $`57`$ % and to reach for example $`10^{}12^{}`$ of FWHM at 100 GHz by keeping the overall straylight contamination below the level of few $`\mu `$K in terms of peak-to-peak and about 10 times smaller in terms of rms, as necessary to avoid systematic errors comparable with the Planck sensitivity.

We compared the level of straylight introduced by the different Galactic components for different beam regions and provided simple approximate relations giving the rms and peak-to-peak levels of the GSC for the intermediate pattern and the far sidelobes as functions of the corresponding contributions to the integrated antenna pattern response, related to the edge taper.

For the considered optical designs, the most important straylight contamination derives from the far sidelobes, where the Galactic signal overwhelms the other straylight contributions (nevertheless, in the intermediate pattern, the straylight contamination from CMB fluctuations is found to be not negligible compared to the GSC).

We demonstrated that including the third order optical interactions changes only of few % the results of straylight analyses. As discussed in Paper I, this is extremely important for optical design optimization studies, probing that accurate enough optical simulations can be carried out by saving about 75% of the computational time without a relevant loss of accuracy.

Keeping at very low level the GSC in the temperature data directly assures a reliable suppression of the GSC in the polarization data, at least in terms of rms. The CMB polarization angular power spectrum ($`ET`$, $`E`$, and $`B`$ modes) recovery will be then not significantly affected by straylight.

The results at 100 GHz have been compared with those at 30 GHz, where the GSC is more critical, showing a peak-to-peak value at a level of $`57\mu `$K. In comparison with previous analyses (see e.g. Burigana et al. 2001), this represents a relevant improvement in straylight rejection related to the optimization of the overall Planck optical scheme (Dubruel et al. 2000). Clearly, assuming different Galactic templates implies differences in the computed straylight signals. On the other hand, even for the quite different input maps adopted in these tests, differences larger than $`12\mu `$K are limited to quite localized regions, close to the Galactic plane, where the CMB anisotropy is dominated by the very high Galactic signal in the main beam. This suggests that, even far from the “cosmological window”, a subtraction of the GSC well down to $`1\mu `$K level could be obtained by evaluating with few iterations the straylight contamination signal for the maps directly derived from Planck observations, provided that the antenna pattern response could be quite accurately modelled.

###### Acknowledgements.

Some of the results in this paper have been derived using the HEALPix (Gòrski et al. 1999).

## Appendix A Transformation rules between telescope frame and beam frame

Let $`s`$ be the unit vector, choosen outward the Sun direction, of the spin axis direction and $`\widehat{k}`$ that of the direction, $`z`$, of the telescope line of sight (LOS), pointing at an angle $`\alpha 85^{}`$ from the direction of $`s`$.

On the plane tangent to the celestial sphere in the direction of the LOS we choose two coordinates $`x`$ and $`y`$, respectively defined by the unit vector $`\widehat{i}`$ and $`\widehat{j}`$ according to the convention that the unit vector $`\widehat{i}`$ points always toward $`s`$ and that $`x,y,z`$ is a standard Cartesian frame, referred here as telescope frame.

Let $`\widehat{i}_{bf},\widehat{j}_{bf},\widehat{k}_{bf}`$ be the unit vectors corresponding to the Cartesian axes $`x_{bf},y_{bf},z_{bf}`$ of the beam frame; $`\widehat{k}_{bf}`$ defines the direction of the beam centre axis in the telescope frame. The beam frame is defined with respect to the telescope frame by three angles: $`\theta _B`$$`\varphi _B`$$`\psi _B`$ ($`\theta _B`$ and $`\varphi _B`$, two standard polar coordinates defining the direction of the beam centre axis, range respectively from $`0^{}`$, for an on-axis beam, to some degrees, for LFI off-axis beams, and from $`0^{}`$ to $`360^{}`$).

Let $`\widehat{i^{}}_{bf},\widehat{j^{}}_{bf},\widehat{k^{}}_{bf^{}}`$ ($`\widehat{k^{}}_{bf}=\widehat{k}_{bf}`$) be the unit vectors corresponding to the Cartesian axes $`x^{},y^{},z^{}`$ of an intermediate frame, defined by the two angles $`\theta _B`$ and $`\varphi _B`$, obtained by the telescope frame $`x,y,z`$ when the unit vector of the axis $`z`$ is rotated by an angle $`\theta _B`$ on the plane defined by the unit vector of the axis $`z`$ and the unit vector $`\widehat{k}_{bf}`$ up to reach $`\widehat{k}_{bf}`$:

$$\widehat{k^{}}_{bf}=\widehat{k}_{bf}=\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _B)\mathrm{sin}(\theta _B)\widehat{i}+\mathrm{sin}(\varphi _B)\mathrm{sin}(\theta _B)\widehat{j}+\mathrm{cos}(\theta _B)\widehat{k}$$
(7)
$$\widehat{i^{}}_{bf}=[\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _B)^2\mathrm{cos}(\theta _B)+\mathrm{sin}(\varphi _B)^2]\widehat{i}+[\mathrm{sin}(\varphi _B)\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _B)(\mathrm{cos}(\theta _B)1)]\widehat{j}\mathrm{sin}(\theta _B)\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _B)\widehat{k}$$
(8)
$$\widehat{j^{}}_{bf}=[\mathrm{sin}(\varphi _B)\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _B)(\mathrm{cos}(\theta _B)1)]\widehat{i}+[\mathrm{cos}(\theta _B)\mathrm{sin}(\varphi _B)^2+\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _B)^2]\widehat{j}\mathrm{sin}(\theta _B)\mathrm{sin}(\varphi _B)\widehat{k}.$$
(9)
The beam frame is obtained from the intermediate frame through a further (anti-clockwise) rotation of an angle $`\psi _B`$ (ranging from $`0^{}`$ to $`360^{}`$ 777We note that, in other conventions, angles $`\varphi _B^{}`$ and $`\psi _B^{}`$ ranging from $`180^{}`$ to $`180^{}`$ are given, instead of $`\varphi _B`$ and $`\psi _B`$. The angles $`\varphi _B`$ and $`\psi _B`$ here defined are equal to $`\varphi _B^{}`$ and $`\psi _B^{}`$ when they are positive and are given respectively by $`360^{}+\varphi _B^{}`$ and $`360^{}+\psi _B^{}`$ for negative $`\varphi _B^{}`$ and $`\psi _B^{}`$.) around $`\widehat{k}_{bf}`$ and is therefore explicitely given by:

$`\widehat{i}_{bf}`$ $`=`$ $`[\mathrm{cos}(\psi _B)\widehat{i^{}}_{bf,x}+\mathrm{sin}(\psi _B)\widehat{j^{}}_{bf,x}]\widehat{i}+[\mathrm{cos}(\psi _B)\widehat{i^{}}_{bf,y}+\mathrm{sin}(\psi _B)\widehat{j^{}}_{bf,y}]\widehat{j}`$ (10)
$`+[\mathrm{cos}(\psi _B)\widehat{i^{}}_{bf,z}+\mathrm{sin}(\psi _B)\widehat{j^{}}_{bf,z}]\widehat{z}`$
$`\widehat{j}_{bf}`$ $`=`$ $`[\mathrm{sin}(\psi _B)\widehat{i^{}}_{bf,x}+\mathrm{cos}(\psi _B)\widehat{j^{}}_{bf,x}]\widehat{i}+[\mathrm{sin}(\psi _B)\widehat{i^{}}_{bf,y}+\mathrm{cos}(\psi _B)\widehat{j^{}}_{bf,y}]\widehat{j}`$ (11)
$`+[\mathrm{sin}(\psi _B)\widehat{i^{}}_{bf,z}+\mathrm{cos}(\psi _B)\widehat{j^{}}_{bf,z}]\widehat{z},`$
where the bottom index $`x`$ $`(y,z)`$ indicates the component of intermediate frame unit vector along the axis $`x`$ $`(y,z)`$ of the telescope frame, as defined by eqs. (A1–A3).

## Appendix B Simulations at 30 GHz

The feed horn at 30 GHz considered in these simulations is specified by its Spherical Wave Expansion (SWE) provided by Alcatel Space Industries, since the sub reflector is in the near field of the corrugated horn and near field effects cannot be neglected. The feed horn directivity is about 22 dBi, the ET is 30 dB at $`22^{}`$, and the main beam has a FWHM resolution of $`33.73^{}`$. The beam position and orientation is identified by ($`\theta _B`$$`\varphi _B`$$`\psi _B`$) = ($`4.3466^{}`$$`153.6074^{}`$$`337.5^{}`$).

We carry out the simulation of Planck observation as described in Sect. 2 by assuming both the Galactic templates presented in Sect. 2.2 and the WMAP map at 33 GHz. The results are summarized in Table 7 while Fig. B.1 reports the TOD corresponding to the overall straylight signal (from the far sidelobes plus intermediate pattern) for the sum of the three Galactic components described in Sect. 2.2 and for the WMAP map. In spite of the differences in the foreground templates (the dominant signal deriving from Galactic diffuse free-free emission by using the templates of Sect. 2.2 and, according to Bennett et al. 2003b, from Galactic diffuse synchrotron emission by using the WMAP map) the peak-to-peak values is at a level of $`57\mu `$K for the contributions from both the far sidelobes and the intermediate pattern (rms $`1\mu `$K, mainly due to the signal in the far sidelobes). Right panel of Fig. B.1 reports shows the difference between the TOD obtained by using these two different templates: only for $`0.01`$ % (0.09, 0.3, 10 %) of the samples of the TOD the difference is larger than $`4\mu `$K (3, 2, $`1\mu `$K). The figure shows also that differences larger than $`12\mu `$K are localized quite close to the Galactic plane, where the CMB anisotropy is dominated by the very high Galactic signal in the main beam. This implies that a subtraction of the GSC well down to $`1\mu `$K level does not require a particularly accurate description of the microwave sky emission nor particularly sophisticated computations, even at frequencies where the GSC is relevant, but it is mainly related to a good knowledge of the antenna pattern response.

Clearly, the unsubtracted GSC is relevant at frequencies far from the “cosmological window”. On the other hand, this results represent a significant optical improvement compared to the analyses of GSC at 30 GHz by Burigana et al. (2001), based on the optical simulations by De Maagt et al. (1998), predicting a similar level of GSC from the far sidelobes but a contamination from the intermediate pattern significantly worst (peak-to-peak of about $`15\mu `$K). This reduction of GSC from the intermediate pattern is due to the corresponding contribution to the integrated response from the antenna pattern at few degrees from the beam centre direction, significantly reduced in the actual optimized optical design 888 In fact, the (per cent) fractional contribution, $`f_\%`$, is now $`0.045`$ (0.39) for the intermediate pattern (far sidelobes), while it were about 0.6 (1) for the intermediate pattern (far sidelobes) in the case of the previous analysis..


format: text

text:
# ADDENDUM: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE PROMINENCE OF SPIRAL GALAXY BULGES [AJ, 121, 820 (2001)]

## 1


text:
# Indices of vector fields or 1-forms and characteristic numbers

## Introduction

An isolated singular point (zero) $`p`$ of a vector field $`X`$ on a (real or complex analytic) manifold $`M`$ has an index: the degree of the map $`X/X`$ from a small sphere around the point $`p`$ to the unit sphere. If the manifold $`M`$ is closed (compact without boundary) and the vector field $`X`$ has only isolated singular points, the sum of their indices is equal to the Euler characteristic $`\chi (M)`$ of the manifold $`M`$. If $`M`$ is a complex analytic manifold of dimension $`n`$, then its Euler characteristic $`\chi (M)`$ is the characteristic number $`c_n(TM),[M]`$, where $`TM`$ is the tangent bundle of the manifold $`M`$ and $`c_n`$ is the corresponding Chern class.

If the vector field $`X`$ is complex analytic, the index of its (isolated) singular point $`p`$ can be computed as the dimension of a certain algebra. Namely, if, in local coordinates centred at the point $`p`$, $`X=_{i=1}^nX_i(/x_i)`$, then $`\text{ind}_pX=dim𝒪_{^n,0}/(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)`$, where $`𝒪_{^n,0}`$ is the ring of germs of holomorphic functions of $`n`$ variables, $`(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)`$ is the ideal generated by the components of the field $`X`$. The Eisenbud-Levine-Khimshiashvili formula \[EL, Kh\] expresses the index of an algebraically isolated singular point of a (smooth) vector field on a real smooth manifold as the signature of a certain quadratic form defined on the real analogue of the algebra mentioned above. Similar statements hold for 1-forms on manifolds with the only difference that the sum of indices of singular points of a 1-form on a complex analytic manifold $`M`$ of dimension $`n`$ is equal to the characteristic number $`c_n(T^{}M),[M]=(1)^n\chi (M)`$.

In the framework of the described properties there is almost no difference between vector fields and 1-forms (except the fact that non-zero analytic vector fields and 1-forms exist, generally speaking, on different complex manifolds). The difference becomes crucial if one considers complex-analytic vector fields or 1-forms on singular varieties \[EG1, EG2\]. The main difference is related with the fact that a complex analytic 1-form can be restricted to a submanifold or to a subvariety (staying complex analytic, at least, at the non-singular points of the subvariety), while there is no invariant notion of a restriction of a vector field to a submanifold.

Here we start to discuss generalizations of these notions and statements for other characteristic numbers (different from $`c_n,[M]`$). For smooth varieties, it is not very essential whether we discuss vector fields, or 1-forms, or simply sections of a vector bundle. For singular varieties (namely for isolated complete intersection singularities: ICIS) the properties of 1-forms and vector fields with respect to the discussed problems are quite different. Here we restrict ourselves almost exclusively to the complex analytic case.

## 1 An index for collections of sections of a vector bundle

We consider a general setting. Let $`\pi :EM`$ be a complex analytic vector bundle of rank $`m`$ over a complex analytic manifold $`M`$ of dimension $`n`$. It is known that the Poincaré dual to the characteristic class $`c_k(E)`$ ($`k=1,\mathrm{},m`$) is represented by the $`2(nk)`$-dimensional cycle which consists of points of the manifold $`M`$ where $`mk+1`$ sections of the vector bundle $`E`$ are linearly dependent (cf., e.g., \[GH, p. 413\]).

For natural numbers $`p`$ and $`q`$ with $`pq`$, let $`(p,q)`$ be the space of $`p\times q`$ matrices with complex entries and let $`D_{p,q}`$ be the subspace of $`(p,q)`$ consisting of matrices of rank less than $`q`$. The subset $`D_{p,q}`$ is an irreducible subvariety of $`(p,q)`$ of codimension $`pq+1`$ (see below). The complement $`W_{p,q}=(p,q)D_{p,q}`$ is the Stiefel manifold of $`q`$-frames (collections of $`q`$ linearly independent vectors) in $`^p`$. It is known that $`W_{p,q}`$ is $`(2p2q)`$-connected and $`H_{2p2q+1}(W_{p,q})`$ (see, e.g., \[H\]). The latter fact also proves that $`D_{p,q}`$ is irreducible. Since $`W_{p,q}`$ is the complement of an irreducible complex analytic subvariety of codimension $`pq+1`$ in $`(p,q)`$, there is a natural choice of a generator of the homology group $`H_{2p2q+1}(W_{p,q})`$. Namely, the (”positive”) generator is the boundary of a small ball in a smooth complex analytic slice transversal to $`W_{p,q}`$ at a non-singular point.

Let $`𝐤=(k_1,\mathrm{},k_s)`$ be a sequence of positive integers with $`_{i=1}^sk_i=k`$. Consider the space $`_{m,𝐤}=_{i=1}^s(m,mk_i+1)`$ and the subvariety $`D_{m,𝐤}=_{i=1}^sD_{m,mk_i+1}`$ in it. The variety $`D_{m,𝐤}`$ consists of sets $`\{A_i\}`$ of $`m\times (mk_i+1)`$ matrices such that $`\text{rk}A_i<mk_i+1`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$. Since $`D_{m,𝐤}`$ is irreducible of codimension $`k`$, its complement $`W_{m,𝐤}=_{m,𝐤}D_{m,𝐤}`$ is $`(2k2)`$-connected, $`H_{2k1}(W_{m,𝐤})`$, and there is a natural choice of a generator of the latter group. This choice defines a degree (an integer) of a map from an oriented manifold of dimension $`2k1`$ to the manifold $`W_{m,𝐤}`$.

Let $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$; $`j=1,\mathrm{},mk_i+1`$; $`_{i=1}^sk_i=n`$) be a collection of sections of the vector bundle $`\pi :EM`$ such that there are only isolated points where, for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$, the sections $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},mk_i+1`$, are linearly dependent. Let us choose a trivialization of the vector bundle $`\pi :EM`$ in a neighbourhood of a point $`p`$, let $`(\omega _1^{(i)}(x),\mathrm{},\omega _{mk_i+1}^{(i)}(x))`$ be the $`m\times (mk_i+1)`$-matrix the columns of which consist of the components of the sections $`\omega _j^{(i)}(x)`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},mk_i+1`$, $`xM`$, with respect to this trivialization. Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }_p`$ be the mapping from a neighbourhood of the point $`p`$ to $`_{m,𝐤}`$ which sends a point $`x`$ to the collection of matrices $`\{(\omega _1^{(i)}(x),\mathrm{},\omega _{mk_i+1}^{(i)}(x))\}`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$. Its restriction $`\psi _p`$ to a small sphere $`S_{p,\epsilon }^{2n1}`$ around the point $`p`$ maps this sphere to the subset $`W_{m,𝐤}`$.

Definition The degree of the mapping $`\psi _p:S_{p,\epsilon }^{2n1}W_{m,𝐤}`$ is called the index of the collection of sections $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ at the point $`p`$ and is denoted by $`\text{ind}_p\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$.

In other words, the index $`\text{ind}_p\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ is equal to the intersection number of the germ of the image of the (complex analytic) map $`\mathrm{\Psi }_p`$ with the variety $`D_{m,𝐤}`$.

The point $`p`$ is non-singular for the collection $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ if at least for some $`i`$ the values $`\omega _j^{(i)}(p)`$ of the sections $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$ at the point $`p`$ are linearly independent. The index $`\text{ind}_p\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ of a non-singular point is equal to zero. The description of the Poincaré dual cycles to the Chern classes $`c_{k_i}(E)`$ of the vector bundle $`E`$ yields the following statement.

###### Theorem 1

Let $`_{i=1}^sk_i=n`$ and suppose that the collection $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$; $`j=1,\mathrm{},mk_i+1`$) of sections of the vector bundle $`\pi :EM`$ over a closed complex manifold $`M`$ has only isolated singular points. Then the sum of the indices of these points is equal to the characteristic number $`_{i=1}^sc_{k_i}(E),[M]`$ of the vector bundle $`E`$.

## 2 An algebraic formula for the index

Suppose that, in local coordinates centred at the point $`p`$, the components of the section $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$ are complex analytic functions on $`M`$ (e.g., this happens if the fibre bundle $`\pi :EM`$ is complex analytic and the sections $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$ are complex analytic in a neighbourhood of the point $`p=0`$). Let $`I_{\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}}`$ be the ideal in the ring $`𝒪_{^n,0}`$ of germs of analytic functions of $`n`$ variables generated by the $`(mk_i+1)\times (mk_i+1)`$-minors of the matrices $`(\omega _1^{(i)},\mathrm{},\omega _{mk_i+1}^{(i)})`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$.

###### Theorem 2

$$\mathrm{ind}_p\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}=dim_{}𝒪_{^n,0}/I_{\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}}.$$

Proof. The proof follows the same lines as the proof of \[EG2, Theorem 1\]. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_j^{(i)}`$ be suitable analytic perturbations of the sections $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$ and let $`\stackrel{~}{D}`$ be the corresponding degeneracy locus. The essential point in the proof is the fact that $`\stackrel{~}{D}`$ is Cohen-Macaulay which follows from \[BR, Corollary (2.7)\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 Indices on ICIS

Let $`f=(f_1,\mathrm{},f_{\mathrm{}}):(^n,0)(^{\mathrm{}},0)`$ be an analytic map which defines an $`(n\mathrm{})`$-dimensional isolated complete intersection singularity (ICIS) $`V=f^1(0)(^n,0)`$ ($`f_r:(^n,0)(,0)`$). Let $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ be a collection of 1-forms on a neighbourhood of the origin in $`(^n,0)`$ with $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},n\mathrm{}k_i+1`$, $`k_i=n\mathrm{}`$, the restriction of which to $`V`$ has no singular points on $`V`$ outside of the origin in a neighbourhood of it. (Here it is not necessary to demand that the 1-forms $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$ are complex analytic. It is sufficient to suppose that $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$ are continuous complex linear functions on the tangent bundle $`T^n`$.) Let $`U`$ be a neighbourhood of the origin in $`^n`$ where all the functions $`f_r`$ ($`r=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$) and the 1-forms $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$ are defined and such that the restriction of the collection $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ of 1-forms to $`(VU)\{0\}`$ has no singular points. Let $`S_\delta U`$ be a sufficiently small sphere around the origin which intersects $`V`$ transversally and denote by $`K=VS_\delta `$ the link of the ICIS $`(V,0)`$. Let $`\widehat{𝐤}=(k_1+\mathrm{},\mathrm{},k_s+\mathrm{})`$ and let $`\mathrm{\Psi }_V`$ be the mapping from $`VU`$ to $`_{n,\widehat{𝐤}}`$ which sends a point $`xVU`$ to the collection of $`n\times (nk_i+1)`$-matrices

$$\{(df_1(x),\mathrm{},df_{\mathrm{}}(x),\omega _1^{(i)}(x),\mathrm{},\omega _{n\mathrm{}k_i+1}^{(i)}(x))\},i=1,\mathrm{},s.$$

Its restriction $`\psi _V`$ to the link $`K`$ maps $`K`$ to the subset $`W_{n,\widehat{𝐤}}`$.

Definition The index $`\mathrm{ind}_{V,0}\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ of the collection of 1-forms $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ on the ICIS $`V`$ is the degree of the mapping $`\psi _V:KW_{n,\widehat{𝐤}}`$.

As above, the index $`\mathrm{ind}_{V,0}\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ is equal to the intersection number of the germ of the image of the complex analytic mapping $`\mathrm{\Psi }_V`$ with the variety $`D_{n,\widehat{𝐤}}`$.

For $`s=1`$, $`k_1=n\mathrm{}`$, this definition coincides with the one of the index of a 1-form from \[EG1\].

Let $`V^n`$ be a complete intersection with isolated singular points. Let $`L`$ be a complex line bundle on $`V`$ and let $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ be a collection of continuous 1-forms on $`V`$ with values in $`L`$. Here this means that the forms $`\omega _j^{(i)}`$ are continuous sections of the fibre bundle $`T^{}VL`$ outside of the singular points of $`V`$. Since, in a neighbourhood of each point $`p`$, the vector bundle $`L`$ is trivial, one can define the index $`\text{ind}_p\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ of the collection of 1-forms $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ at the point $`p`$ just in the same way as in the local setting above. Moreover, one can consider $`L`$ as a line bundle on a smoothing $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ of the complete intersection $`V`$ as well (e.g., using the pull back along a projection of $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ to $`V`$).

###### Theorem 3

One has

$$\underset{pV}{}\mathrm{ind}_p\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}c_{k_i}(T^{}\stackrel{~}{V}L),[\stackrel{~}{V}],$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is a smoothing of the complete intersection $`V`$.

Now, as above, let $`(V,0)(^n,0)`$ be the ICIS defined by the equations $`f_1=\mathrm{}=f_{\mathrm{}}=0`$ and let $`\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$; $`j=1,\mathrm{},n\mathrm{}k_i+1`$) be a collection of complex analytic 1-forms on a neighbourhood of the origin in $`^n`$ the restriction of which has no singular points on $`V`$ outside of the origin in a neighbourhood of it. Let $`I_{V,\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}}`$ be the ideal in the ring $`𝒪_{^n,0}`$ generated by the functions $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_{\mathrm{}}`$ and by the $`(nk_i+1)\times (nk_i+1)`$ minors of all the matrices

$$(df_1(x),\mathrm{},df_{\mathrm{}}(x),\omega _1^{(i)}(x),\mathrm{},\omega _{n\mathrm{}k_i+1}^{(i)}(x))$$

for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$.

###### Theorem 4

$$\mathrm{ind}_{V,0}\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}=dim_{}𝒪_{^n,0}/I_{V,\{\omega _j^{(i)}\}}.$$

See the ”proof” of Theorem 2.

Remark. Let $`\{X_j^{(i)}\}`$ be a collection of vector fields on a neighbourhood of the origin in $`(^n,0)`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$; $`j=1,\mathrm{},n\mathrm{}k_i+1`$; $`k_i=n\mathrm{}`$) which are tangent to the ICIS $`(V,0)=\{f_1=\mathrm{}=f_{\mathrm{}}=0\}(^n,0)`$ at non-singular points of $`V`$. One can define the index $`\mathrm{ind}_{V,0}\{X_j^{(i)}\}`$ as the degree of the mapping $`KW_{n,\widehat{𝐤}}`$ which sends a point $`xK`$ to the collection of $`n\times (nk_i+1)`$ matrices

$$\{(\text{grad}f_1(x),\mathrm{},\text{grad}f_{\mathrm{}}(x),X_1^{(i)}(x),\mathrm{},X_{n\mathrm{}k_i+1}^{(i)}(x))\},i=1,\mathrm{},s.$$

Here

$$\text{grad}f_r(x)=(\overline{\frac{f_r}{x_1}(x)},\mathrm{},\overline{\frac{f_r}{x_n}(x)}),$$

where $`\overline{z}`$ is the complex conjugate of the complex number $`z`$. For $`s=1`$, $`k_1=n\mathrm{}`$, this definition coincides with the definition of the index of a vector field on an ICIS from \[GSV, SS\]. For vector fields the analogue of Theorem 3 holds with the only difference that the sum of the indices is equal to the characteristic number $`_{i=1}^sc_{k_i}(T\stackrel{~}{V}L),[\stackrel{~}{V}]`$. However, a formula similar to that of Theorem 4 does not exist. A reason for that is that in this case the index is the intersection number with $`D_{n,\widehat{𝐤}}`$ of the image of the ICIS $`(V,0)`$ under a map which is not complex analytic. Moreover, in some cases this index can be negative.

Universität Hannover, Institut für Mathematik
Postfach 6009, D-30060 Hannover, Germany
E-mail: ebeling@math.uni-hannover.de

Moscow State University, Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics
Moscow, 119992, Russia
E-mail: sabir@mccme.ru


text:
# Lyman Break Galaxies and Reionization of the Universe

## 1 Introduction

The most dramatic global transition in the recent history of the universe is the reionization of the intergalactic medium. The recent identification of the predicted Gunn-Peterson trough in the absorption spectra of several QSO’s has placed this event at about a redshift of 6 (Djorgovski et al. 2002; Becker et al. 2001).

Ionizing radiation from newly formed stars has been suggested as the most likely source of this radiation. Bright, optically selected QSO’s appear to be too sparse during the relevant period (Fan et al. 2001). Low brightness AGN’s remain a possibility, but no other strong candidates have emerged.

It is natural to look for evidence for these ionizing stars in the accumulating observational data on high redshift ($`z4`$) galaxies (Madau et al. 1996; Madau, Pozzetti, & Dickinson 1998; Steidel et al. 1999; Ouchi et al. 2001; Ferguson, Dickinson, & Papovich 2002; Hu et al. 2002; Malhotra & Rhoads 2002; Lehnert & Bremer 2003; Kodaira et al. 2003; Iwata et al. 2003). Some studies on Lyman Break Galaxies (LBG) have questioned whether enough stars could have been formed to accomplish reionization at so early a time (Ferguson, Dickinson, & Papovich 2002; Dickinson et al. 2003).

In the popular Lambda-CDM cosmological model the seeds of galaxy formation lie in minute density fluctuations, which manifest themselves as temperature fluctuations in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). As the fluctuations continue to grow into dark matter halos, they trap gas within their potential wells. That part of the gas that is able to radiate its energy efficiently eventually condenses into dense molecular clouds, that give birth to stars.

Reionization has been studied within this paradigm both by semi-analytical methods (Giroux & Shapiro 1996; Ciardi & Ferrara 1997; Haiman & Loeb 1997, 1998; Madau et al. 1999; Valageas & Silk 1999; Chiu & Ostriker 2000; Miralda-Escude, Haehnelt & Rees 2000; Barkana & Loeb 2000; Oh et al. 2001; Wyithe & Loeb 2003) and by numerical simulations (Ostriker & Gnedin 1997; Gnedin & Ostriker 1998; Gnedin 2000; Nakamoto, Umemura, & Susa 2001; Razoumov et al. 2002). The former necessarily involve broad simplifying assumptions and, therefore, have limited predictive power. The latter, although more realistic and fully self-consistent, are limited by the dynamical range that can be accommodated by existing numerical techniques on modern supercomputers. The two approaches are complementary and will have to remain so until the next generation of cosmological numerical codes become available on faster computers.

For this paper we use a simulation that was reported in Gnedin (2000). The simulation includes dark matter, gas, star formation, chemistry and ionization balance in the primordial plasma, and an approximate implementation of 3D radiative transfer. All galaxies with total masses in excess of $`3\times 10^8\text{ M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ are resolved both spatially and by mass. The simulation was continued until $`z=4.0`$.

The overall picture for the evolution of the early universe that has emerged from this simulation is as follows:

Star formation first begins in earnest at about $`200\text{ Myr}`$ ($`z20`$). The overall star formation rate increases to a maximum at about $`1\text{ Gyr}`$ ($`z5.5`$) and decreases slightly thereafter.

Reionization of the intergalactic medium occurs over a prolonged period of time from about $`350\text{ Myr}`$ ($`z12`$) to about $`900\text{ Myr}`$ ($`z6`$), with expanding Hii regions in the low density IGM merging at $`z7`$. This latter moment of rapid transition is often identified as the ”moment of reionization”. This moment approximately corresponds to the mass (volume) averaged neutral fraction in the low density IGM falling below 1 (0.1) percent respectively.

As a result of reionization, the gas content of halos less massive than about $`3\times 10^9\text{ M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ solar masses is drastically reduced.

Since this simulation does not include AGN’s, it provides a detailed example of how stars alone might be sufficient to accomplish reionization. The addition of AGN’s to this scenario would presumably lead to even more ionizing photons, which could take up the slack in the event that the amount of star formation in the simulation were overestimated.

The simulation provides us with a detailed star formation history for each galaxy and thus allows us to make detailed photometric predictions. In this paper we present the star formation histories, luminosities, colors, mass to light ratios, and halo masses of the simulated galaxies.

Our simulation, while state of the art, is only barely sufficient for our purpose, because the computational box is so small. This inherent limitation of any simulation limits the number of bright objects that can be modeled, while the observations approach the galaxy hierarchy from the other end, detecting bright galaxies and missing the dim ones. In this sense we can think of observations and simulations as moving toward each other along the galaxy luminosity curve. Although there is not much overlap yet, the junction point has at last been reached, as we show below.

We argue that to the extent comparisons can be made, our predictions are consistent with observations of Lyman Break Galaxies. The varied star formation histories that we see provide the key to understanding why the observations appear to argue that LBG galaxies are too young to have reionized the universe.

## 2 Method

### 2.1 Simulation

The specific simulation we use in this paper is fully described in Gnedin (2000). The simulation was performed using the Softened Lagrangian Hydrodynamics (SLH) code, which includes dark matter, gas, star formation, chemistry and ionization balance in the primordial plasma, and 3D radiative transfer (in an approximate implementation). All these physical ingredients are required to properly model the process of cosmological reionization.

The simulation of a representative CDM+$`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ cosmological model111With the following cosmological parameters: $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$, $`h=0.7`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b=0.04`$, $`n=1`$, $`\sigma _8=0.91`$, where the amplitude and the slope of the primordial spectrum are fixed by the COBE and cluster-scale normalizations. was performed in a comoving box with the size of $`4h^1\text{ Mpc}`$ with the total mass resolution of $`4\times 10^6\text{ M}_{}`$ and the comoving spatial resolution of $`1h^1\text{ kpc}`$. This resolution is a reasonable compromise between the need to have the box large enough to accommodate several Hii regions and the need to have spatial resolution high enough to resolve sources of ionizing radiation. Convergence studies presented in Gnedin (2000) demonstrate that, while still limited, the resolution of this simulation is sufficient to model reionization at a semi-qualitative level (with precision of the order of 50% or so).

The simulation was stopped at $`z=4`$ because at this time the rms density fluctuation in the computational box is about 0.25, and at later times the box ceases to be a representative region of the universe even for the dark matter.

The simulation was designed in such a way as to approximately reproduce the measured star formation rate density at $`z=4`$ of about $`0.1\text{ M}_{}/\text{ yr}/\text{ Mpc}^3`$ (Steidel et al. 1999).

Our simulation assumes that all cosmological reionization occurs via radiation from stellar sources, with star formation parameterized by the phenomenological Schmidt law as discussed in Gnedin (2000a). An alternative and complementary scenario would be one in which the bulk of reionization is produced by Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN). In light of recent high-redshift quasar counts (e.g., Fan et al. 2001), a scenario in which the universe is reionized by bright optically selected QSOs seems unlikely in any event. There remains however the possibility that low brightness AGNs contributed significantly (if not dominantly) to the reionization of the universe.

For the purpose of this paper, however, this simulation is quite suitable for the following reason. Our main goal in this paper is to investigate whether galaxies are capable of reionizing the universe and still appear as young as they do at $`z4`$. Thus, by ignoring the AGN component, we consider the most extreme case, since we require galaxies to carry all the burden of reionizing the universe by themselves. One would then expect that if galaxies are capable of reionizing the universe and appear as young as they do at $`z4`$, then it will be even easier for the models to agree with observations if some ionization is done by AGNs.

We identify galaxies in the simulation with gravitationally bound objects, which are selected with the DENMAX algorithm of Bertschinger & Gelb (1991).

### 2.2 Population Synthesis

Population synthesis is carried out using the Starburst99 package (Leitherer et al. 1999). The version we use included the July 2002 update, which revised the UV spectra for O and B stars. These spectra, based on the recent work of Smith, Norris, & Crawther (2002), have decreased ionizing radiation during the early stages of star formation. These changes affect not only the amount of Lyman alpha continuum, but also the amount of Lyman alpha that can be produced if this UV is absorbed by local gas. We choose the instantaneous burst option. This is appropriate because we apply spectral synthesis to individual stellar particles formed in the simulation, which sample the stellar distribution function at discrete time steps.

We choose the lowest metallicity option (5% solar) available in Starburst99, since the simulated galaxies have comparable metallicities. Starburst99 maintains same metallicity for each subsequent generation of stars. This simplification should be sufficient for times less than about $`1\text{ Gyr}`$ (Leitherer et al. 1999).

Ultra-violet absorption by the IGM material along the line of sight (i.e. by the Lyman alpha forest) is taken into account using the method of Madau (1995).

Reddening corrections are made by the method of Calzetti (1997), including the recent calibration data of Leitherer et al. (2002) We find it sufficient to consider a range of reddening corresponding to a color excess of $`E(BV)=00.3`$. Higher amounts of reddening produce colors inconsistent with nearly all the observed galaxies. This range is in line with the estimate of Shapely et al. (2001) of an average color excess of $`E(BV)=0.15`$ for a sample of Lyman break galaxies at a redshift of about 3. This range is also generally consistent with the results of others for high redshift galaxies.

We also allow for the partial escape of ionizing photons from the modeled galaxies by reducing the flux above $`13.6\text{ eV}`$ by a factor $`f_{\mathrm{ESC}}`$, and converting 2/3 of the removed photons into Lyman-alpha emission following the recipe of Malhotra & Rhoads (2002). The escape fraction $`f_{\mathrm{ESC}}`$ becomes another parameter in our modeling. We consider three values for this parameter: 0.1, 0.5, and 1.0.

The $`AB`$ magnitude system is used throughout. We adopt the same cosmology as used in the simulation (flat concordance cosmology with $`H_0=70\text{ km/s}/\text{ Mpc}`$.

For comparison purposes the $`GI`$ colors for observed galaxies over a range of redshifts were corrected to a redshift of 4.0. This was done as follows. For each of a range of $`z`$ values, including 4.0, a series of 199 model galaxies of different ages was constructed at $`5\text{ Myr}`$ intervals, each having a single burst of star formation. For each observed galaxy the set of models at the nearest $`z`$ value was selected. The two bracketing models at this redshift plus the two corresponding models at redshift 4.0 were used to obtain a corrected color using a linear interpolation. This method was feasible because the relationship between $`GI`$ and age is, with few exceptions at these intervals, monotonic. A similar correction for $`I`$ was not possible.

Figure 1 shows an illustrative spectrum of a typical bright galaxy from our simulation. Sharp absorption edges due to intervening Lyman-$`\alpha `$ and Lyman-$`\beta `$ forests are clearly visible.

## 3 Results

Figure 2 shows a computed luminosity function for the simulated galaxies at $`z=4.0`$. As a measure of luminosity we use the $`I`$ band $`AB`$ magnitude, which corresponds to a rest frame wavelength of about 1600 A. Also shown for comparison is the observed luminosity function for Lyman Break Galaxies at $`z34`$ from a variety of authors (Madau et al. 1996; Steidel et al. 1999). Because of the difficulties in observing at these redshifts, Steidel et al. (1999) have not attempted to make a Schechter fit at $`z=4`$, but instead have observed that the data are well described by the Schechter function fitted to Lyman Break Galaxies at a redshift of about 3. This fit, however, does not match the slope of the luminosity function of simulated galaxies at faint magnitudes, but the combined luminosity function (simulated plus observed) can be fit by a single Schechter function with a shallower slope. The parameters of both fits are listed in Table 1.

Because of the small size of the simulation box, only a few of the observed points are expected to overlap the simulated ones, and these are all from the Hubble Deep Field North, which probed fainter magnitudes than did the ground based observations of Steidel et al. (1999). But it appears that both the simulation and the observations can be fitted with the same luminosity function, implying that the simulation produces galaxies similar to the real ones. The limitation of the small box size directly translates into the upper limit on galaxy luminosities (there should be at least a few galaxies of luminosity $`L`$ in the simulation box to determine $`\varphi (L)`$). As one can see, our simulation has just enough volume to reach the luminosities of HDF galaxies, and is a factor of 2 too small to have a single galaxy as large as those found by Steidel et al. (1999) in the simulation volume. Thus, we are not able to make comparisons on a galaxy-by-galaxy basis yet, but future simulation will be able to model volumes comparable to those covered by observations in only a few years.

Given a Schechter function fit, we can integrate the total luminosity function to estimate the fraction of starlight in observed and simulated galaxies. We find that the observed galaxies contain about 2/3 of the total luminosity density, while the simulated ones account for about 1/3. The contribution of observed galaxies to reionization is expected to be somewhat smaller however (Gnedin 2000b). This is because these galaxies tend to be clustered (Steidel et al. 1999; Adelberger et al. 1998), and most of the time several of them sit inside the same Hii region. When an Hii region grows to be larger than the mean free path of ionizing photons, these photons are wasted.

These arguments imply that the redshift of reionization in the simulation is an underestimate, but not by a large factor because the star formation rate in the simulation increases rapidly with time (Gnedin 2000a). If we assume that the simulation underestimates the volume filling fraction of the ionized gas at any given time by, say, 50%, then the redshift of reionization is underestimated in the simulation by about $`\mathrm{\Delta }z1.5`$. As we emphasized above, our simulation is clearly insufficient to give a quantitatively accurate model of reionization, so this level of precision is more than acceptable for our purposes.

A remarkable feature of Fig. 2 is flattening of the luminosity function in the dwarf galaxy range. This effect is the result of the inhibited accretion of gas onto low mass halos because of photoionization, sometimes improperly called “photoevaporation” (Thoul & Weinberg 1996; Quinn, Katz, & Efstathiou 1996; Weinberg, Hernquist, & Katz 1997; Navarro & Steinmetz 1997; Gnedin 2000b; Chiu, Gnedin, & Ostriker 2000; Sommerville 2002; Benson et al. 2002a,b), and has been reproduced by earlier simulations (Nagamine 2002).

Figure 3 shows Color-Magnitude Diagrams (CMD) for the simulated and observed galaxies. Because the simulation cannot predict the redenning correction, we plot each simulated galaxy as a dotted region (which appears almost like a single line), spanning a range in redenning corrections from $`E(BV)=0`$ to $`E(BV)=0.3`$, consistent with values found by Steidel et al. (1999), and a range of escape fractions from $`f_{\mathrm{ESC}}=0.1`$ to $`f_{\mathrm{ESC}}=1.0`$.

One can see that simulated galaxies have similar colors to the observed ones, which suggests that the simulation captures at least some of the physics, which is going on in these galaxies. Let us now imagine a “super-simulation”, with so large a box that it can be considered infinite. Because the colors of our brightest galaxies do not change much with magnitude, it is plausible to assume that simulated galaxies in the magnitude range $`23<I<25`$ would have similar colors to the observed ones. If we plausibly assume that the simulated luminosity function, when extended to higher luminosities, would match the observed one reasonably well, then the total luminosity density in such a “super-simulation” would be a factor of 3 higher than in our simulation, and, thus, the redshift of reionization would be even higher than $`z=7`$ \- the redshift of reionization in our simulation - by about $`\mathrm{\Delta }z1.5`$. Such a “super-simulation” would serve as a strong counter example to claims that LBGs at $`z4`$ are too young to reionize the universe by $`z6`$.

Why, then, is observational determination of ages so misleading? Figure 4 illustrates the diversity of star formation histories in simulated galaxies. While our brightest galaxies ($`I27`$, such as the one shown in panel a) are experiencing a peak of star formation at around $`z=4`$, one magnitude dimmer galaxies ($`I28`$) were more luminous in the past - indeed, at the time of reionization (at $`z7`$ in this simulation) - and by $`z4`$ their star formation rate has decreased by a factor of several. In fact, the galaxy shown in panel (c) has $`1.1\times 10^9\text{ M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ in stars, whereas the galaxy in panel (a), while being more than a magnitude brighter, has a stellar mass of only $`7\times 10^8\text{ M}_{\mathrm{}}`$. We, therefore, conclude that galaxies that reionized the universe at $`z7`$ appear at $`z4`$ within the magnitude range of $`28I30`$, while LBGs that are observed at $`z4`$ with $`23I25`$ are indeed very young, experiencing their first major episode of star formation (we refrain from using the word “burst”, because the star formation history of a galaxy shown in panel a, while strongly rising by $`z4`$, can still be hardly called a “burst”).

Figure 5 illustrates this point further. It shows total star formation rates for galaxies that appear within different magnitude bins at $`z=4`$. In agreement with individual examples from Fig. 4, the star formation rate at $`z=4`$ is dominated by our brightest galaxies, but these galaxies contribute only about 20% to the star formation at $`z7`$. At that redshift more than half of the total star formation rate is contributed by galaxies that appear within the $`28<I<30`$ magnitude bin at $`z4`$.

The large variation in possible star formation histories is further confirmed by Figure 6, which shows mean mass-weighted star formation ages for all simulated galaxies as a function of their magnitudes at $`z=4`$,

$$t_{SF}=\frac{1}{M_{}}_0^{t_f}t\mathrm{SFR}(t)𝑑t,$$

where $`M_{}`$ is the total stellar mass. Even for our brightest galaxies the variation is significant, reaching up to a factor of 3 for the dimmest ones. A remarkable feature of Fig. 6 is a large concentration of galaxies with $`40<I<45`$ and little star formation after $`1\text{ Gyr}`$. It is tempting to identify these galaxies with dwarf spheroidals: they are old and would have luminosities of the order of $`10^{56}L_{\mathrm{}}`$ at $`z=0`$. A small fraction of these galaxies still have active star formation at $`z4`$, which may explain the diverse star formation histories of dwarf spheroidals in the Local Group (Grebel 1998; Mateo 1998). We leave this as a possible speculation, as this is not the goal of this paper, however.

Observations at longer wavelengths and/or at fainter magnitudes would be more sensitive to older populations of stars. Unfortunately, these observations are very difficult to make at a redshift of 4, and they will most likely have to wait for JWST and 30-meter class ground telescopes. But those instruments are on the horizon, and one might hope to indeed observe the culprits of reionization within the 10-year time frame.

Whatever the global history of star formation we would at least expect that the total stellar content of the universe would be monotonic with time. Thus, we have compared the stellar content of the simulated galaxies with the global history of total stellar mass as presented in Dickinson et al. (2003). In Figure 7 we show the B band rest frame luminosity function and mass-to-light ratios of the simulated galaxies, calculated from the K band magnitudes. Vertical lines give the comparison with Dickinson et al. (2003) estimates. Our results are in comfortable agreement with these estimates for all galaxies brighter than dwarf spheroidal candidates.

Finally, Figure 8 shows cumulative mass and luminosity densities of simulated galaxies as compared with Dickinson et al. (2003) estimates. Again it appears that the simulated galaxies are in a reasonable agreement with the observational data. We would like to emphasize that we are quite comfortable with a factor of 2 agreement: one should remember that the simulation can only account for about 1/3 of the total light because of the small box size. In fact, in the imaginary “super-simulation”, discussed above, the total stellar mass would be up to a factor of 3 higher (depending on whether the mass-to-light ratio goes down for brighter galaxies) and would not agree with Dickinson et al. (2003). One could hypothesize about a source of this potential discrepancy, including anything from a non-standard IMF to incorrect stellar synthesis models, but for the purpose of this paper we are content with the level of agreement we obtain, given substantial limitations of our simulation.

It would also be interesting to compare the luminosities of Lyman Break Galaxies and their dark matter masses, because the relation of LBGs and their dark matter halos is still poorly understood (Somerville, Primack, & Faber 2001; Wechsler et al. 2001; Somerville 2002; Benson et al. 2002a,b). In Figure 9 we show this relation. As one can see, Lyman Break Galaxies represent a diverse population. For example, our brightest galaxies with absolute magnitudes between -18 and -17 cover about two magnitudes in the total mass: some of them are the most massive galaxies in the simulations, but some of them have significantly lower masses and are experiencing a starburst at $`z=4`$. There exists a general trend of less massive galaxies being dimmer, but the scatter around the mean relation is very large.

## 4 Discussion

So, how well does the simulation do? While the computational box of our simulation is clearly insufficient to have even a single galaxy as luminous as those of Steidel et al. (1999), simulated galaxies do appear as fainter cousins of the observed ones. They have similar colors, and simulated and observed galaxies together can be fitted by a single luminosity function.

They are also faring well in their abilities to reionize the universe. Star formation histories of simulated galaxies are diverse, and vary systematically with magnitude. The brightest galaxies at $`z=4`$ are indeed quite young, in accord with conclusions of Shapely et al. (2001) and Ferguson et al. (2002). But these brightest galaxies contribute only about 25% of ionizing photons at $`z>6`$. The bulk of work of reionizing the universe was done by dimmer galaxies, those that fall within the $`28<I<30`$ magnitude range at $`z4`$, but which are not necessarily less massive than the bright ones.

We expect that detailed simulations will become increasingly important in sorting out the various possibilities. The general picture that our simulation produces is at least consistent with observations of Lyman Break Galaxies, an encouraging message to theorists.

The recent results from the WMAP mission (Kogut et al. 2003) indicate that the optical depth to Thompson scattering is significantly larger than in our simulation. While this measurement cannot pin down the redshift of reionization, it suggests, if correct, that there was a considerable ionizing flux at early times. Our simulation provides no support for a stellar origin of this ionizing flux. Perhaps, very massive population III stars, which we have not considered, could be responsible.

Because, as we have discussed, the photoionization feedback likely plays a significant role in the evolution of faint Lyman Break Galaxies, one might wonder how the WMAP results affect the conclusions of this paper. As has been shown by several previous studies (Gnedin 2000b and references herein), the photoionization feedback results in the substantial loss of the gas mass of objects with circular velocities below about $`40\text{ km/s}`$. However, this characteristic circular velocity is essentially redshift independent. So even if the universe was fully ionized throughout its entire history, the effect of the photoionization feedback at $`z=4`$ would be essentially at the same level as in our simulations. Our conclusion about a reasonable agreement between the simulation and the data is, in fact, independent of the redshift of reionization as long as it is above about 6.

We are grateful to Chuck Steidel for providing us with his custom filter shapes and for enlightening comments during his visit to CU. This work was supported by NSF grant AST-0134373. This work was also partially supported by National Computational Science Alliance under grant AST-960015N and utilized the SGI/CRAY Origin 2000 array at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA).


text:
# Polaron Energy Spectrum in Quantum Dots

## 1 Introduction

Investigation of electron spectrum in quantum dots has been attracted much attention in the last decade as it has been technologically possible to produce well characterized quasi-zero-dimensional structures. The energy spectrum depens on the physical papameters of the quantum dot’s material, its shape and size. Also, the important factor influenses on the electron spectrum in polar semiconductor is interaction between electrons and longitudinal optical LO phonons. In low-dimesional structures the importance of polaron effects increases. So, the knowledge of the polaron energy spectrum is important for understanding the infrared properties of quantum dots. One of the interesting experimental facts is the absence of the LO phonon bottleneck effect of photoexcited electrons. There is a number of papers proposed various reasons why the expected bottleneck effect may be bypassed \[1-3\]. In particular, in the works  the energy relaxation of the excited electrons in quantum dots was discussed in connection with polaron effects. So, it is interesting to investigate polaron spectrum in quantum dots in the region where the distance between size-quantized leves equals to the LO-phonon energy.

In magneto-optical experiments in bulk crystals the electron-LO-phonon interaction leads to anticrossing of the energy levels. Larsen was the first to point out the level repulsion at $`\omega _c=\omega _{LO}`$, where $`\omega _c`$ is the cyclotron frequency and $`\omega _{LO}`$ is the frequency of LO- phonon .The anticrossing of energy levels was observed in absorption spectrum of quantum dots $`InAs/GaAs`$ in magnetic field in the work . Appearance of the anticrossing in the dependence of polaron levels on the quantum dot radius theoretically was derived on the base of two-levels system .

However, in order to obtain more correct expressions for the polaron energy shift it is necessary to take into account the influence of the all size-quantized levels. In present paper we consider an optical weak-coupling polaron at low temperature in a cylindrical quantum dot. An analytical expression for the polaron energy shift is obtained using a modified perturbation theory.

## 2 Polaron energy

In the present paper we consider a disc shape quantum dot, i.e. a cylindrical quantum dot with the radius essentially exceeding the height. The same situation usually is realized in experiments. Usually the diameter of the disc exceeds its heigt by the order. Besides, we use the oscillator model of the potential confining electron’s movement along the cylindrical axis $`z`$ with the frequency $`\omega _z`$ and in the plane of the disk with the frequency $`\omega `$. According to the cosidered shape of the disc it is assumed that $`\omega _z\omega `$. It is considered that the levels connected with confinement along $`z`$ are situated too over the ground state and their influence can be neglected. It is suggested that the coupling constant of a polar crystal in a quantum dot is too little (for $`GaAs`$ $`\alpha 0.07`$). In this connection we use the perturbation theory for polaron energy shift. The suggested model of the quantum dot is related to the following Schrödinger equation for electron noninteracting with phonons

$$\left(\frac{}{\rho ^2}+\frac{1}{\rho }\frac{}{\rho }+\frac{1}{\rho ^2}\frac{^2}{\phi ^2}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }+\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{z^2}+\left(\frac{2m_0E^{\left(0\right)}}{\mathrm{}^2}\frac{m_0^2\omega ^2\rho ^2}{\mathrm{}^2}\frac{m_0^2\omega _z^2z^2}{\mathrm{}^2}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(1)
where $`m_0`$ is electron’s effective mass in the quantum dot, $`\rho `$, $`\phi `$, $`z`$ are the cylindrical coordinates. The solution of the equation (1) is well known

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{nm}=\frac{aa_z^{\frac{1}{2}}a_{nm}}{\pi ^{\frac{3}{4}}}\left(a\rho \right)^mL_{\frac{n\left|m\right|}{2}}^{\left|m\right|}\left(a^2\rho ^2\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a^2\rho ^2}{2}\frac{a_z^2z^2}{2}+im\phi \right),$$
(2)
where $`L_n^\lambda \left(x\right)`$ are the associated Laguerre polynomials, $`a^2=\frac{m_0\omega }{\mathrm{}}`$; $`a_z^2=\frac{m_0\omega _z}{\mathrm{}}`$; $`a_{nm}^2=\frac{\left(\frac{n\left|m\right|}{2}\right)!}{\left(\frac{n+\left|m\right|}{2}\right)!}`$ ($`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$, $`m=0,\pm 2,\pm 4,\mathrm{},\pm n`$ if $`n`$ is even, $`m=\pm 1,\pm 3,\mathrm{},\pm n`$ if $`n`$ is odd and $`m=0`$ for $`n=0`$). The energy spectrum is:

$$E_n^{\left(0\right)}=\frac{\mathrm{}\omega _z}{2}+\mathrm{}\omega \left(n+1\right).$$
(3)
The electrons are assumed to be coupled to dispersionless LO-phonons of the bulk crystal. The potential yielded by one LO-phonon is

$$\phi _q=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{q}e^{iq_{}\rho \mathrm{cos}\phi +iq_zz},$$
(4)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=i\mathrm{}\omega _0\left(4\pi \alpha /\gamma _0V\right)`$, $`q`$ is the phonon wavevector, $`q_{}`$and $`q_z`$ are the components of the phonon wavevector laying in the plane of the disc and along $`z`$ axes correspondingly, $`q=\sqrt{q_{}^2+q_z^2}`$, $`\gamma _0^2=\frac{2m_0\omega _0}{\mathrm{}}`$, $`\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ is the energy of LO phonon at $`q=0`$, $`V`$ is the quantum dot’s volume.

The matrix element corresponding to the emission of the LO phonon is

$$M_{nmn^{}m^{}}=\mathrm{\Psi }_{nm}e\phi _q^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{n^{}m^{}}^{}𝑑V,$$
(5)
where $`e`$ is the electron charge. Using the expressions (2), (4) and (5) we obtain

$$M_{nmn^{}m^{}}=\frac{2\mathrm{\Lambda }a_{nm}a_{n^{}m^{}}\left(i\right)^{m^{}m}}{q}e^{\frac{q_z^2}{4a_z^2}}I_{nmn^{}m^{}}\left(\frac{q_{}}{2a}\right),$$
(6)
where

$$I_{nmn^{}m^{}}\left(y\right)=_0^{\mathrm{}}x^{\left|m\right|+\left|m^{}\right|+1}L_{\frac{n\left|m\right|}{2}}^{\left|m\right|}\left(x^2\right)L_{\frac{n^{}\left|m^{}\right|}{2}}^{\left|m^{}\right|}\left(x^2\right)e^{x^2}J_{m^{}m}\left(2xy\right),$$

$`J_{m^{}m}\left(2xy\right)`$ is the Bessel function.

It is assumed that the difference between conductivity bands of the material of quantum dot and surroundings is quite large and a sufficient number of the quantum levels can exist inside the quantum well. Therefore, while calculating the polaron energy, we shall take into account the electron’s transitions to the all levels. Far from the resonance $`\left(E_n^{(0)}E_n^{}^{(0)}\right)=\mathrm{}\omega _0`$, the polaron correction to the energy in the second order of the perturbation theory is defined as follows:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_n=\underset{m,n^{},m^{},\stackrel{}{q}}{}\frac{\left|M_{nmn^{}m^{}}\right|^2}{E_n^{\left(0\right)}E_n^{}^{\left(0\right)}\mathrm{}\omega _0}.$$
(7)
The expression (7) differs from the one, usually being used for calculation of a correction to the ground state, by the additional sum over degenerate states of the level $`E_n^{\left(0\right)}`$ (summation over $`m`$). We shall substitute (3) and (6) in (7) and replace the summation over $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ with integration. For simplicity we shall consider the limit $`\omega _z,a_z\mathrm{}`$ related to the case of zero height cylinder. According to this limit the integral over $`q_z`$ is equal to:

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{q_z^2}{2a_z^2}\right)}{q_{}^2+q_z^2}𝑑q_z_{q_z\mathrm{}}=\frac{\pi }{q_{}}.$$

As a result we shall obtain the following expression of the polaron energy shift normalized by $`\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0`$:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }E_n}{\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0}=8\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\underset{m,n^{},m^{}}{}\frac{a_{nm}^2a_{n^{}m^{}}^2J_{nmn^{}m^{}}}{\left(n^{}n\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }+1}$$
(8)
$$J_{nmn^{}m^{}}=_0^{\mathrm{}}\left|I_{nmn^{}m^{}}\right|^2𝑑y,$$

where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\omega /\omega _0`$. As the parameter $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is proportional to $`1/R`$, where $`R`$ is the quantum dot radius, the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{}`$ corresponds to the ultraquantum limit. On the other hand, the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }0`$ corresponds to the two-dimensional case of a plane. The polaron energy shift of the ground state $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_0/\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0`$ calculated as a function of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is plotted in Fig.1. The quantity of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_0/\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0`$ trends to the well known value $`\pi /2`$ for two-dimensional case in the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }0.`$ In the case of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{}`$ the quantity of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_0/\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0`$ diverges proportionally to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. It is known that the divergence is taken place also in the case of a quantum wire if the wire radius tends to zero . However, in one-dimensional case there is more weak logarithmic divergence. Now we shall calculate the polaron energy shift of the level $`E_1^{\left(0\right)}`$ for any value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ including the resonace region. As it is seen from the expression (9) for $`n=1`$, the term corresponding to $`n^{}=0,`$diverges in the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1`$. The formula (9) is not applicable near the resonance $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1`$. In order to calculate the energy shift of the level $`E_1^{\left(0\right)}`$ in this area we shall exclude from (9) the term corresponding to the transition from the state $`n=1`$ to $`n^{}=0`$ and shall take into account this contribution using the perturbation theory applicable in the case of degeneracy of two levels $`E_1^{\left(0\right)}`$ and $`E_0^{\left(0\right)}+\mathrm{}\omega _0`$. We shall consider the system consisted from an electron, which has the state $`n=0,m=0`$ of the level $`E_0^{\left(0\right)}`$ and two degenerate states $`n=1,m=\pm 1`$ of the level $`E_1^{\left(0\right)}`$, and a phonon which will have the occupation number $`n_q=0`$ if the electron is on the level $`E_0^{\left(0\right)}`$ and $`n_q=1`$ if the electron is on the level $`E_1^{\left(0\right)}`$. So, the united noninteracting electron-phonon system may exist on the level $`E_1^{\left(0\right)}`$ with two degenerate states $`|n=1,m=\pm 1,n_q=0`$ and on the level $`E_0^{\left(0\right)}+\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ with the state $`|n=0,m=0,n_q=1`$. Then including the Fröhlich coupling one can easy obtain the following expression for the energy of the two-level system:

$$E=\frac{E_1^{\left(0\right)}+E_0^{\left(0\right)}+\mathrm{}\omega _0}{2}\pm \sqrt{\frac{1}{4}\left(E_1^{\left(0\right)}E_0^{\left(0\right)}\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)^2+\left|V_{01}\right|^2},$$
(9)
where $`E_0^{\left(0\right)}=\mathrm{}\omega `$, $`E_1^{\left(0\right)}=2\mathrm{}\omega `$, $`\left|V_{01}\right|^2=\underset{\stackrel{}{q}}{}\left(\left|M_{0,01,1}\right|^2+\left|M_{0,01,1}\right|^2\right)`$.

From (9) we can define $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_1=EE_1^{\left(0\right)}`$ in the following form:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }E_1}{\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0}=\frac{1\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2\alpha }\pm \frac{1}{\alpha }\sqrt{\left(\frac{1\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2}\right)^2+\frac{\left|V_{01}\right|^2}{\left(\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)^2}},$$
(10)
where $`\frac{\left|V_{01}\right|^2}{\left(\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)^2}=16\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\alpha J_{1,10,0}`$.

The sign plus corresponds to the region $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1`$, the sign minus to the region $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1`$. The contribution into the energy shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)=EE_0^{\left(0\right)}\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ corresponding to the same transition is defined by the formula (11), but with the sign plus in the region $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1`$ and with the sign minus in the region $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1`$.

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\left(E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)}{\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0}=\frac{1\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2\alpha }\pm \frac{1}{\alpha }\sqrt{\left(\frac{1\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2}\right)^2+\frac{\left|V_{01}\right|^2}{\left(\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)^2}}$$
(11)
The value of the integral $`J_{1,10,0.}`$is $`0.039`$.

The total shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_1/\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)/\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0`$ is calculated excluding from (9) the term related to the transition $`n=1,m=\pm 1n=0,m=0`$ and adding the contribution defined by (11) and (12) respectively. The shifts $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_1/\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)/\alpha \mathrm{}\omega _0`$ as the functions of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are plotted in fig.2 and fig.3 respectively for $`\alpha 0.07`$. It is seen from fig.2 and fig.3 that $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_1|_{\mathrm{\Gamma }10}=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)|_{\mathrm{\Gamma }1\pm 0}`$. The picture of the levels $`E_1/\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ and $`\left(E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)/\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ is represented in fig.4, where $`E_1^{\left(0\right)}/\mathrm{}\omega _0=2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\left(E_0^{\left(0\right)}+\mathrm{}\omega _0\right)/\mathrm{}\omega _0=\mathrm{\Gamma }+1`$ are represented by the dashed lines. In the resonance area of the energy levels the corresponding wave function are represented as a superposition of the states $`|n=1,m=\pm 1,n_q=0`$ and $`|n=0,m=0,n_q=1`$.

## 3 Conclusion

Using the perturbation theory the polaron energy shift was obtained. The polaron shift of ground state tends to the well known value $`\pi /2`$ for two-dimensional system in the case of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }0.`$In the limit of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{}`$ the polaron shift diverges more sharp than in the case of quantum wire. when its radius tends to zero.

Using the modified perturbation theory the anticrossing of the polaron levels $`E_1`$and $`E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ was obtained near the resonance region.

The picture like the one plotted in fig.4 was obtained in experimental dependence of polaron spectrum on the magnetic field directed along axes $`z`$ of the cylindrical quantum dots . In the presence of magnetic field the derived formulas are the same with substitution of $`\omega `$ by $`\left(\omega ^2+\omega _c^2/4\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. The role of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ will play the magnitude $`\left(\omega ^2+\omega _c^2/4\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}/\omega _0`$.

Note that the splitting of the levels $`E_1`$ and $`E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ in light absorption experiment will be observed also in the absence of magnetic field if $`\omega `$ $`\omega _0`$. Besides the allowed transition $`E_0`$ $`E_1`$, the transition $`E_0`$ $`E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ may also take place because the wave functions of these levels are mixed in the anticrossing region. Far from the resonance the level $`E_0+\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ has not the particular physical meaning, however, the states corresponding to this level in the resonance region may be realized in experiments on light absorption.

## References