text:
# Carbon Doping in 𝑀𝑔𝐵₂ : Role of Boron and Carbon 𝑝_{𝑥(𝑦)} Bands

## 1 INTRODUCTION

The changes in the electronic properties of $`MgB_2`$ upon doping with various elements gets manifested in the changes in its superconducting behavior. An understanding of these changes in the superconducting behavior of $`MgB_2`$ upon doping can provide useful information about the nature of interaction responsible for superconductivity. Such information can then be used to prepare materials with desired superconducting properties. Since the discovery of superconductivity in $`MgB_2`$, a substantial amount of effort has been directed towards probing the various aspects of superconductivity using doping.

The effects of doping $`MgB_2`$ with various elements such as $`s`$-elements $`Be`$  and $`Li`$ , $`sp`$-elements $`Al`$  and $`Si`$ , and $`d`$-elements $`Fe,Co,Ni`$  and others  have been studied experimentally. Most of these substitutions take place in the $`Mg`$ plane of $`MgB_2`$, leaving the $`B`$ plane in tact. For some dopants at particular concentrations, it is also found that the dopants prefer to form a separate layer  rather than mix with the $`Mg`$ layer or the $`B`$ layer. For dilute amount of dopants the changes in the superconducting properties, in particular the superconducting transition temperature, $`T_c`$, depends on the alloying element . For larger concentrations, with only $`Mg_{1x}Al_xB_2`$  being studied extensively, the $`T_c`$ is found to decrease due to the gradual filling of the $`B`$ $`p_{x(y)}`$-holes.

The doping of $`MgB_2`$ with $`C`$  can be expected to be different from the ones described in the previous paragraph due to the following two reasons, (i) C prefers to go to the $`B`$ plane instead of the $`Mg`$ plane and (ii) C forms strong covalent-bonded layered structure similar to $`B`$ layer in $`MgB_2`$. These reasons imply that the lowering of $`T_c`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys with increasing $`x`$ is mainly due to the filling up of the $`p_{x(y)}`$ holes, and not due to disorder in the $`B`$ plane. However, the $`x`$ dependence of $`T_c`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys as obtained in some earlier experiments may not be accurate due to the difficulties in estimating its $`C`$ content . According to Ref. , the $`T_c`$ observed for $`x=0.1`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys was $`22K`$, which is lower than the result of Ref. .

Theoretical attempts at understanding the changes in the electronic structure and how these changes affect the superconducting properties of carbon-doped $`MgB_2`$ alloys have not gone beyond the rigid-band model approach  with its limited applicability. To be able to reliably describe the effects of $`C`$ doping in $`MgB_2`$, we have carried out ab initio studies of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys with $`0x0.3`$. We have used Korringa-Kohn-Rostoker coherent-potential approximation  in the atomic-sphere approximation (KKR-ASA CPA) method for taking into account the effects of disorder, Gaspari-Gyorffy formalism  for calculating the electron-phonon coupling constant $`\lambda `$, and Allen-Dynes equation  for calculating $`T_c`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys as a function of $`C`$ concentration. We have used the present approach to study several other $`MgB_2`$-based alloys . In the following, we present our results in terms of the changes in the total density of states (DOS), in particular the changes in the $`p`$ contributions of both $`B`$ and $`C`$ to the total DOS, as a function of concentration $`x`$ of $`C`$ atoms. Before we describe the results of our calculations we provide some of the computational details.

## 2 COMPUTATIONAL DETAILS

The charge self-consistent electronic structure of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys as a function of $`x`$ has been calculated using the KKR-ASA CPA method . We parametrized the exchange-correlation potential as suggested by Perdew-Wang  within the generalized gradient approximation . The Brillouin zone (BZ) integration was carried out using $`1215`$ $`k`$ points in the irreducible part of the BZ. For DOS calculations, we added a small imaginary component of $`1`$ $`mRy`$ to the energy and used $`4900`$ k-points in the irreducible part of the BZ. The lattice constants for $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys as a function of $`x`$ were taken from the experimental result of . The Wigner- Seitz radius for $`Mg`$ was larger than that of $`B`$ and $`C`$. The sphere overlap which is crucial in ASA, was less than $`10`$% and the maximum $`l`$ used was $`l_{max}`$ = $`2`$. The present calculations were carried out using the scalar-relativistic Schroedinger equation. The Green’s function is calculated in a complex plane with a $`20`$ point Gaussian quadrature.

The electron-phonon coupling constant $`\lambda `$ was calculated using Gaspari-Gyorffy  formalism with the charge self-consistent potentials of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ obtained with the KKR-ASA CPA method. Subsequently, the variation of $`T_c`$ as a function of $`C`$ concentration was calculated using Allen-Dynes equation . The parameters used in the calculation of $`T_c`$ using the Allen-Dynes equation, for the whole range of $`x`$, were $`\mu ^{}=0.09`$, $`\omega _{rms}=400cm^1`$, and $`\omega _{ln}=834K`$.

## 3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this section we describe our results for $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys in terms of the changes in the densities of states, the electron-phonon coupling constant $`\lambda `$ and the superconducting transition temperature $`T_c`$ as a function of $`x`$ with $`0x0.3`$. In our analysis we will emphasize those aspects of changes in the electronic structure which directly affect the superconducting properties of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys, in particular its $`T_c`$. Thus, we discuss the changes in the density of states as a function of $`x`$, in particular the $`p`$ contributions of both $`B`$ and C to the total DOS and how it affects the electron-phonon coupling constant and consequently the $`T_c`$ of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys.

### 3.1 Densities of States

In Fig. 1, we show the total DOS of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys for $`x`$ equal to $`0.01,`$ $`0.1,`$ $`0.2`$ and $`0.3`$, calculated using the KKR-ASA CPA method. A comparison of Figs. 1(a)-(d) shows that with increasing $`x`$ the Fermi energy, $`E_F,`$ moves outward and the DOS becomes smoother. The outward movement of $`E_F`$ is due to the increase in the number of valence electrons with the addition of $`C`$ while the increase in disorder in the $`B`$ plane of $`MgB_2`$ flattens the peaks in the DOS. In $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys the outward movement of $`E_F`$ decreases the total DOS at the Fermi energy, $`N(E_F)`$, in particular for $`x0.3`$, $`N(E_F)`$ is a minimum. Generally, a decrease in $`N(E_F)`$ leads to a lowering of $`T_c`$ , it is expected that with the increase in $`C`$ concentration the $`T_c`$ of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys should decrease.

It is known that in $`MgB_2`$ the holes in the $`p_{x(y)}`$ bands couple very strongly to the optical $`E_{2g}`$ phonon mode , and hence a change in the $`p_{x(y)}`$ bands directly affects the superconducting properties of $`MgB_2`$. Thus, to get a more detailed picture of how the changes in $`N(E_F)`$ affect the superconducting properties of $`MgB_2`$, we have to analyze the changes in the $`B`$ $`p_{x(y)}`$ contributions to $`N(E_F)`$. In addition, since $`C`$ is known to form strong covalent-bonded layered structures, it may be that in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys the $`C`$ $`p_{x(y)}`$ electrons/holes also couple to the optical phonons the way $`B`$ $`p_{x(y)}`$ electrons/holes do.

To see how the $`p`$ contributions to the total DOS change in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys as a function of $`x`$, we show in Fig. 2 the $`p_{x(y)}`$ DOS for both $`B`$ and $`C`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys for $`x`$ equal to $`0.01,`$ $`0.1,`$ $`0.2`$ and $`0.3`$. The $`p`$ DOS of $`MgB_2`$ calculated with the KKR-ASA CPA method is in good agreement with our full-potential result  and other calculations , indicating the reliability of the present approach. From Fig. 2 it is clear that near $`E_F`$ both $`B`$ and $`C`$ $`p_{x(y)}`$ densities of states are similar for the whole range of $`x`$ with $`C`$ DOS being somewhat smaller than the $`B`$ DOS. As the addition of $`C`$ increases the electron count, the outward movement of $`E_F`$ as $`x`$ increases fills up the $`p_{x(y)}`$bands of both $`B`$ and C, signalling a sharp change in the superconducting properties of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys in this range.

The changes in the $`p_z`$ contribution to the total DOS in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys as a function of $`x`$ is not very significant, as can be seen from Fig. 3 , where we have shown the $`p_z`$ DOS for both $`B`$ and $`C`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys for $`x`$ equal to $`0.01,`$ $`0.1,`$ $`0.2`$ and $`0.3`$. In the dilute limit, the $`p_z`$ DOS due to $`B`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloy is similar to the $`p_z`$ DOS due to $`B`$ in $`MgB_2`$ . In addition, these electrons play a minor role in deciding the superconducting properties of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys.

Since the changes in the superconducting properties of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ are dictated by the DOS at $`E_F`$, in particular the $`p_{x(y)}`$ contributions of both $`B`$ and C  to the total DOS, we show in Fig. 4 the variations of the total density of states $`N(E_F)`$ and the $`B`$ and C  $`p_{x(y)}`$ contributions to it. As can be seen from Fig. 4, there is a steep drop in the $`p_{x(y)}`$ DOS for both $`B`$ and $`C`$ between $`x=0.2`$ to $`x=0.3`$, indicating the filling up of the $`p_{x(y)}`$ bands. Given that the $`p_{x(y)}`$ bands are responsible for driving superconductivity in $`MgB_2`$, we expect the superconducting properties of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys to change significantly between $`x=0.2`$ to $`x=0.3`$. Here, we like to point out that the range of $`x`$ as indicated above, in which the superconducting properties of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ are expected to change significantly, must be viewed within the constraints inherent in the present approach.

### 3.2 The superconducting transition temperature

We have used the Gaspari-Gyorffy formalism to calculate the Hopfield parameter and then the electron-phonon coupling constant $`\lambda `$ of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys. Our calculations show that the $`C`$ atoms in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys couple to the phonons as strongly as the $`B`$ atoms. For example, at $`x=0.2`$ we find $`\lambda `$ (per atom) for $`B`$ and $`C`$ to be $`0.31`$ and $`0.24`$, respectively. It is interesting to note that as the $`C`$ $`p_{x(y)}`$ bands fill up somewhat later than the $`B`$ $`p_{x(y)}`$ bands, the calculated $`\lambda `$ of $`C`$ becomes greater than that of $`B`$ for $`x0.3`$.

To see how the changes in the electronic properties of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys affect the superconducting transition temperature, we show in Fig. 5 the calculated $`T_c`$ as a function of $`x`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys. The experimentally observed $`T_c`$ values as reported in Refs.  are also shown in Fig. 5. Note that for $`x=0.1`$, Refs.  and  find $`T_c`$ to be equal to $`34K`$ and $`22K`$, respectively. Our calculations show that the $`T_c`$ drops to $`0K`$ from $`20K`$ as $`x`$ changes from $`0.2`$ to 0.3, which is consistent with the filling up of the $`p_{x(y)}`$ bands as discussed above. The calculated trend in the variation of $`T_c`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys is in qualitative agreement with the experimental results as shown in Fig. 5.

Some of the differences between the calculated (more accurately than the present approach) and the observed $`T_c`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys may be due to an inaccurate determination of the $`C`$ content in these alloys, as pointed out in Ref. . In the present case, the calculation of $`T_c`$ incorporates two additional approximations, (i) use of a constant phonon frequency over the whole range of $`x`$ and (ii) use of Gaspari-Gyorffy formalism for estimating the electron-phonon matrix elements, which is known to underestimate the strength of the coupling. However, we expect the trend in the variation of $`T_c`$ in $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys, as shown in Fig. 5, to be reliable.

## 4 CONCLUSIONS

We have studied the changes in the electronic structure of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys as a function of $`x`$ with $`0x0.3`$ using the KKR-ASA CPA method. We find that the changes in the electronic structure of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys , especially near the Fermi energy $`E_F`$, come mainly from the outward movement of $`E_F`$ with increasing $`x`$ and the effects of disorder in the $`B`$ plane are small. In particular, our results show a sharp decline in $`B`$ and $`C`$ $`p_{x(y)}`$ states for $`0.2`$$`x`$$`0.3`$. Our calculated variation in $`T_c`$ of $`Mg(B_{1x}C_x)_2`$ alloys is in qualitative agreement with the experiments.


format: text

text:
# Tracing the Sgr Stream with 2MASS

## 1 Introduction

There is clear evidence that the Sagittarius dwarf Spheroidal galaxy (Sgr dSph; Ibata et al. 1994, 1997) has lost (and is currently loosing) a significant fraction of its stars under the strain of the Milky Way tidal field. The lost stars seem able to remain coherently aligned with the orbital path of the Sgr dSph as a long-lived ($`>`$ few Gyr; see Johnston et al. (1999); Ibata & Lewis (1998)) stellar relic, known as the Sgr Stream. Parts of the Sgr Stream have been detected by many different groups and with many different techniques, up to $`>100\mathrm{°}`$ away from the main body of the galaxy (Fahlman et al., 1996; Mateo, Olszewski & Morrison, 1998; Majewski et al., 1999; Helmi et al., 1999; Ibata et al., 2001a, 2002; Kundu et al., 2002; Martínez-Delgado et al., 2001; Vivas et al., 2001; Yanny et al., 2000; Ivezic et al., 2000). Direct identifications, based on the similarity of the CMD in the main body of the galaxy and in portions of the Stream $`160\mathrm{°}`$ away in galactic longitude have been provided by Newberg et al. (2002).

Ibata & Lewis (1998, hereafter IL98) and Ibata et al. (2001a) have simulated the evolution of the Sgr dSph over several orbital periods (P $`1`$ Gyr), computing the orbit of the galaxy as well as the phase-space distribution of the debris under different assumptions about the flattening of the CDM halo. The initial conditions of the simulations were based on the known position and radial velocity of Sgr dSph and on its proper motion as estimated by Ibata et al. (1997, 2001a). The orbit has a planar rosette structure, with the pole of the orbit located at \[$`\mathrm{}=90^{}`$, $`b=13^{}`$\] (i.e. a nearly polar orbit), and peri- and apo-Galactic distances of $`15\mathrm{kpc}`$ and $`60\mathrm{kpc}`$ respectively. The derived orbit has successfully been used to predict the observed position (Ibata et al. 2001a, b) and radial velocity (Yanny et al. 2003) of the Sgr Stream.

In a previous paper (Bellazzini, Ferraro & Ibata 2003, hereafter BFI03) we compared the IL98 orbit during the last orbital period with a subset of galactic globular clusters, namely those having $`10\mathrm{kpc}R_{GC}40\mathrm{kpc}`$ which we termed Outer Halo (OH) globulars, in the phase-space of Galactocentric cartesian coordinates and radial velocity ($`X,Y,Z,V_r`$: see BFI03 for further details). We found that the region of phase-space occupied by the Sgr Stream hosts a significant overdensity of OH clusters, thus some of them have to be physically associated with the Stream and were former members of the Sgr dSph. While the association of at least 4 OH clusters with the Stream is quite firmly established, the result is statistical in nature and we cannot confirm the actual membership of individual clusters with the adopted technique. Hence, we simply provided a list of candidate Stream members ranked according to their proximity to the Sgr orbit in the considered phase-space. Strong support for individual associations may be provided by a direct detection of Sgr Stream stars around a candidate cluster and located at the same distance from us, as provided, for instance, by Martínez-Delgado et al. (2002) in the case of our first-ranked candidate Pal 12 (see also Dinescu et al. 2000).

This kind of search requires the sampling of wide areas of sky, since the Stream is a *very* low surface brightness structure, and the use of suitable tracer stars that can be singled out from the strong contamination provided by ordinary Galactic field stars (see Ibata et al. 2001a; Yanny et al. 2000; Ivezic et al. 2000; Newberg et al. 2002; Vivas et al. 2001; Ibata et al. 2002 for the different tracers used to date). Here we use stars in the upper Red Giant Branch (RGB) from the near infrared Color-Magnitude Diagrams (CMD) of wide areas of sky provided by the 2-Micron All-Sky Survey (2MASS) to search for Stream stars around the top-ranked candidates listed in Tab. 1 of BFI03. Sgr Stream stars at the “right” distance are detected around Pal 12, thus confirming the result by Martínez-Delgado et al. (2002), and around NGC 4147, a completely new detection. The present study has to be considered as a preliminary “pilot” analysis. We will perform a deeper and more complete search once the final all-sky 2MASS catalogue is released.

The plan of the paper is the following: in §2 we present the data and the method; in §3 and in §4 we describe the results obtained for Pal 12 and NGC 4147, respectively; in §5 we deal briefly with the case of the other considered candidates; §6 gives a short summary and a discussion of the reported results.

## 2 Data and method

All the photometric data are from the Point Source Catalogue (PSC) of the Second Incremental Data Release of 2MASS111see Cutri, R.M., et al., 2000, Explanatory Supplement to the 2MASS Second Incremental Data Release, http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/2mass/releases/second/doc/expsup.html and consist of calibrated J,H,KS222From now on we drop the $`S`$ index from KS, for brevity. magnitudes and positions of sources classified as stellar and without any detected contamination from other nearby sources. Magnitudes and colors of all the retrieved sources have been corrected for interstellar extinction by interpolating in the IRAS-DIRBE reddening maps of Schlegel, Finkbeiner & Davis (1998) and adopting the extinction laws by Savage & Mathis (1979). The present sky coverage of 2MASS is quite patchy, hence there are regions of sky that cannot be scrutinized. We typically select areas of $`20\mathrm{°}\times 20\mathrm{°}`$ toward interesting directions, but in all cases large unobserved zones are included in the selected areas. Typically, the effective sampled area ranges from $`\frac{1}{4}`$ to $`\frac{2}{3}`$ of the selected area (see, for example, Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, below). Distances and other parameters for globular clusters are taken from the compilation by Harris (1996).

Fig. 1 displays the K,J-K CMD of a $`4\mathrm{°}\times 4\mathrm{°}`$ field centered on the point of maximum density of the main body of the Sgr dSph. A similar field has been used by Cole (2001) to study the metallicity of the galaxy and virtually the same field has been considered by Alard (2001) in his analysis of the metallicity gradient. As noted by these authors the brighter part of the RGB of the Sgr dSph stands out very clearly in this diagram, to the red of any feature due to galactic field stars in the region $`(JK)_0>0.8`$ and $`K_0\stackrel{<}{}12`$ (see Cole (2001) and Alard (2001) for discussion of the field features in the CMD). The lower part of the reported box encloses the more clearly visible part of the Sgr RGB. The upper (smaller) sector of the box encloses bright Asymptotic Giant Branch (AGB) stars of Sgr. We will use only RGB stars as tracers of the Sgr stellar population but we maintain also the upper sector of the box to check also if rarer AGB stars fall in our selection box. The reddest Sgr stars from 2MASS have been already used by Ibata et al. (2002) for a pole-count analysis that detected an overdensity of such stars in the plane of the sky in the directions predicted by the IL98 orbit.

The detection method is quite simple: since Sgr RGB stars stand out clearly against galactic field stars in the considered CMD, we will look if similar stars can be found also in wide fields surrounding OH globulars that are candidate stream members according to BFI03. The RGB feature, if present, has to be shifted in magnitude by the difference in true distance moduli between the Sgr dSph and the considered cluster ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0`$). Therefore, we will simply report the Selection Box (SB) shown in Fig. 1 in the CMDs of the selected area and of a suitable Control Field (CF) applying a shift by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0`$. Then we will check if there is a significant overdensity of stars in the SB of the selected area with respect to the CF. It is important to note that the SB has been constructed to include also the bluest stars in the Sgr RGB, in order to remain sensitive to the searched feature notwithstanding the effect of the metallicity/population radial gradient observed in Sgr (Alard, 2001).

Since we are looking for very low-surface-brightness structures, it is of the utmost importance to avoid any possible source of contamination. To this end, within the SB we will select only stars having $`(JK)_0>0.95`$, to avoid the inclusion of the reddest stars from the local M dwarf plume at $`(JK)_00.8`$, and we will reject stars with $`K_0>12`$, since in this range of magnitude a sparse cloud of red sources (possibly misclassified galaxies333The feature is more evident in less crowded fields with respect to that shown in Fig. 1; see Fig. 2 and Fig. 3.) provides additional contamination. For this reason, the adopted technique is nearly insensitive to the feature of interest for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0\stackrel{>}{}+0.5`$, i.e. the Sgr Stream RGB can be detected only up to a distance of $`32`$ Kpc from us. In some cases (e.g., NGC 4147) the considered clusters fall in an unobserved zone of the selected area, thus contamination of the SB by cluster stars cannot occur. In all other considered cases we checked the CMD of the stars in the immediate vicinity of the cluster (up to $`1\mathrm{°}`$ from its center) and we never found the case of a possible cluster star falling in the SB. This is due to the fact that the considered clusters are significantly more metal poor than the main population of Sgr (see Cole 2001; Monaco et al. 2002 and references therein), hence their RGBs are much bluer and fall within the Galactic field features of the CMD.

In this first attempt we considered the first six clusters of the ranked list of candidates of BFI03, these are, in order of increasing phase-space distance from the IL98 orbit: Pal 12, NGC 4147, Pal 5, NGC 5634, NGC 5053 and Ter 3. Searching the PSC catalogue we have found suitable selected areas for Pal 12 and NGC 4147. The present sky coverage of 2MASS around NGC 5634, Pal 5 and NGC 5053 is insufficient to obtain an effective sampled area useful for the present purpose. Finally, we recently realized (Marsakov, private communication) that the 2003 version of the Harris (1996) catalogue reports significantly revised estimates of the reddening and distance modulus of Ter 3 \[E(B-V)=0.72; $`(mM)_V=16.61`$\] with respect to the 1996 version that was used by BFI03 \[E(B-V)=0.32; $`(mM)_V=18.00`$\]. The new distance estimate places the cluster quite far from the Sgr orbit. As a consequence, Ter 3 was removed from the list of candidates and it is not considered in the present analysis. Thus, the test remains to be done for Pal 5, NGC 5634 and NGC 5053 (these cases are shortly discussed in §5, below), while in the following two sections we show the results we have obtained for the cases of Pal 12 and NGC 4147.

## 3 Pal 12

To search for Sgr Stream stars around this cluster, whose galactic coordinates are $`(l;b)=(30.512\mathrm{°};47.681\mathrm{°})`$, we selected the area comprised in the ranges $`20\mathrm{°}l40\mathrm{°}`$ and $`57\mathrm{°}b37\mathrm{°}`$. The effectively sampled field is 71% of the selected area. In the upper panels of Fig. 2 the CMDs of the Pal 12 field is compared to the CMD of a suitable nearby Control Field at similar galactic latitude ($`80\mathrm{°}l100\mathrm{°}`$ and $`55\mathrm{°}b35\mathrm{°}`$). The difference in true distance modulus between Pal 12 and the core of the Sgr galaxy is $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0=\mu _0(P12)\mu _0(M54)=0.76\pm 0.15`$. Hence the SB shown in Fig. 2 has been shifted by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0=0.76`$ in K to search for the RGB feature at the distance of Pal 12.

Even from a visual inspection it is clear that Sgr RGB stars are present in the field surrounding the cluster and are missing in the CF. To quantify the observed difference we count the stars falling into the SB (with the additional conditions $`(JK)_0>0.95`$ and $`K_012.0`$) in the two CMDs ($`N_b^{clus}`$ and $`N_b^{CF}`$, for the cluster field and for the CF, respectively). To take simultaneously into account the differences in sampled area and any possible difference due to galactic population gradients between the cluster fields and the CFs we normalize to the number of stars spanning the same magnitude range of the plotted SB and with colors $`0.55<(JK)_0<0.90`$ ($`N_{norm}^{clus}`$ and $`N_{norm}^{CF}`$). Note, however, that all the results are fully confirmed if we normalize by the ratio of the sampled areas instead. In particular, the normalization ratios by number and by area are virtually identical in all of the considered cases. Defined $`R=N_{norm}^{clus}/N_{norm}^{CF}`$, we compute the normalized difference:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }N_{}=N_b^{clus}R\times N_b^{CF},$$
(1)
and its standard deviation, assuming Poisson errors in star counts:

$$\sigma (\mathrm{\Delta }N_{})=\sqrt{N_b^{clus}+R^2\times N_b^{CF}}.$$
(2)
In the present case $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_{}=53.5\pm 10.9`$ is obtained, that is, a very significant difference ($`4.9\sigma `$). The searched RGB feature is indeed present around Pal 12, it is statistically significant and it is found at the right magnitude level.

To explore better the nature of the detected signal we repeat the counts shifting the SB in the range $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0=0.76\pm 1.0`$ at 0.04 mag steps. We plot the resulting $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_{}`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0`$ in the lower panel of Fig. 2. The normalized difference reaches a wide maximum in the range $`1.1\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _00.5`$ and the characteristic $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0`$ of Pal 12 (indicated by a filled triangle in the top of the panel) falls right in the middle of the detected plateau. The plot has to be considered just a consistency test since the constraining power on distance of a sparsely populated upper RGB sequence is obviously not strong. Moreover, the signal remains significant over a wide range of $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_{}`$ because, after all, the Sgr stars are present in the Pal 12 field and absent in the CF in this area of the CMD. Thus any position of the SB that includes some of the Sgr RGB stars provides a sensible difference with respect to the CF. The effects of this syndrome may be particularly strong in shifting the SB toward brighter magnitudes ($`K_0`$ $`\stackrel{<}{}`$10.5) since in this region the CF is virtually devoid of stars.

Notwithstanding the above caveats the detection of Sgr Stream stars around Pal 12 is clear and significant, confirming the findings by Martínez-Delgado et al. (2002). Given it’s position in the phase-space with respect to the orbit of the Sgr dSph (see BFI03) and its physical location within the Sgr Stream, we conclude that Pal 12 presently belongs to the Sgr Stream and that it was a former member of the globular cluster system of the Sgr dSph.

Even an educated guess of the surface brightness ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$) of the Sgr Stream at the considered locations would be of great interest for future modeling of the dynamical history of the dwarf galaxy. We obtain such an estimate by counting the number of stars in the SB having luminosities within 1 magnitude of the assumed RGB Tip ($`N_{Tip}^{clus}`$), dividing by the sampled area and rescaling by the central surface brightness of Sgr dSph to the ratio of surface density of RGB Tip stars in the considered area and in the center of Sgr. The underlying assumption is that the stellar population in the center of the Sgr dSph and in the Sgr Stream are similar. The adopted method is widely used (see, for example, Kleyna et al. 1998; Mateo et al. 1991) and its physical basis is anchored on the Evolutionary Flux Theorem (Renzini & Buzzoni 1986; Renzini & Fusi Pecci 1988; Renzini 1998). In the central $`0.5\times 0.5\mathrm{deg}^2`$ of Sgr dSph we find $`N_{Tip}^{clus}=50`$ stars within 1 mag from the RGB Tip and we assume that this corresponds to the central surface brightness of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V(0)25.4\pm 0.3\mathrm{mag}/\mathrm{arcsec}^2`$ reported by Mateo (1998). The possible contamination by field stars is tentatively removed with the same technique used above, i.e. considering $`N_{}^{Tip}=N_{Tip}^{clus}R\times N_{Tip}^{CF}`$ instead of $`N_{Tip}^{clus}`$ itself. Finally, we obtain for the average surface brightness in the Sgr Stream around Pal 12, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V=33.9\pm 0.5\mathrm{mag}/\mathrm{arcsec}^2`$. The uncertainty has been estimated by 1000 Montecarlo simulations in which $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V^{Sgr}(0)`$, $`N_{Tip}^{clus}`$ and $`N_{Tip}^{Sgr}`$ were simultaneously extracted from gaussian distributions having the observed values as mean and the reported $`1\sigma `$ uncertainty as $`\sigma `$.

## 4 NGC 4147

NGC 4147 $`[(l;b)=(252.850\mathrm{°};77.189\mathrm{°})]`$ lies in a region of the sky ($`220\mathrm{°}\stackrel{<}{}l\stackrel{<}{}320\mathrm{°}`$) where the orbit of the Sgr dSph runs approximately at constant galactic latitude ($`b75\mathrm{°}`$). We take advantage from this occurrence by taking a wide selected area comprised within $`230\mathrm{°}l290\mathrm{°}`$ and $`65\mathrm{°}b85\mathrm{°}`$. The effectively sampled field is 50% of the selected area. As Control Field we choose the region of the sky symmetric with respect to the galactic equator, i.e. $`230\mathrm{°}l290\mathrm{°}`$ and $`85\mathrm{°}b65\mathrm{°}`$. The resulting CMDs are shown in Fig. 3, which is arranged in the same way and with the same symbols as Fig. 2, above. The difference in true distance modulus between NGC 4147 and the core of the Sgr galaxy is $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0=\mu _0(N4147)\mu _0(M54)=0.70\pm 0.15`$ and the SB has been shifted accordingly in these panels with respect to Fig. 1.

Also in this case the Sgr RGB feature is quite evident and significant. The normalized difference is $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_{}=35.4\pm 8.7`$, a $`4.0\sigma `$ signal. The lower panel of Fig. 3 shows a less pronounced maximum with respect to the Pal 12 case, probably due to the higher degree of contamination of the considered CMDs in the region $`(JK)_0>0.95`$. The adopted $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0`$ for NGC 4147 falls at the “bright” edge of the plateau. However if we consider the normalized difference in terms of standard deviations ($`N_{}/\sigma `$), the maximum signal is detected at $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0=0.70\pm 0.04`$, i.e. at the distance of NGC 4147.

Hence, it has to be concluded that also this cluster is immersed in the Sgr Stream and that it is physically associated with this structure.

Using the technique illustrated above we obtained $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V=34.0\pm 0.6\mathrm{mag}/\mathrm{arcsec}^2`$ for the Sgr Stream surrounding NGC 4147. The comparison with the analogous estimate obtained in the region around Pal 12 suggests that the Stream maintains nearly constant surface brightness along its whole extension (see also Mateo, Olszewski & Morrison 1998).

## 5 Other cases

In this section we shortly comment on the other candidates by BFI03 considered by the present study. In all cases we cannot reach a firm conclusion, either because of a too small effectively sampled area or because of problems with interstellar extinction.

NGC 5634 and Pal 5 are relatively nearby in the sky and have similar $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _0`$, and thus may be studied simultaneously. Fig. 4 shows that the coverage of 2MASS in this region of sky is quite poor and unfavorably placed with respect to the considered clusters and to the Sgr orbit. Hence, the absence of a significant detection in the selected area shown in Fig. 4 cannot be considered as evidence that the clusters are not associated with the Sgr Stream. Hopefully, the question should be resolved when future releases of the 2MASS catalogue are available.

The same problem plagues the application of the test to NGC 5053. In this case only a barely significant detection is obtained but the effective sampling is clearly insufficient and unfavorable (see Fig. 5).

In Fig. 6 we report, for comparison, the distribution of the sampled fields in the selected area around NGC 4147.

## 6 Summary and Conclusions

We have examined the 2MASS $`K_0`$;$`(JK)_0`$ CMDs of wide areas of the sky around six Outer Halo globular clusters to search for stars belonging to the Sgr Stream and that are located approximately at the same distance as the considered clusters. The considered clusters were selected for their phase-space proximity to the orbit of the Sgr galaxy, according to BFI03. The dataset was found to be suitable for the application of the test to the cases of Pal 12 and NGC 4147. In both cases, an overdensity of tracer stars of similar heliocentric distance as the clusters, was detected at the $`>4.5\sigma `$ level of significance with respect to Control Fields. Hence we have shown that both clusters are physically immersed in the Sgr Stream and are very likely members of this structure as well as being former members of the Sgr dSph galaxy. While our result for Pal 12 confirms a previous (independent) detection by Martínez-Delgado et al. (2002), this is the first time that Sgr Stream stars are found around NGC 4147. A thorough analysis of the structure and the stellar populations of the Sgr Stream will be presented when the full-sky 2MASS catalogs become available.

###### Acknowledgements.

M.B. and F.R.F. acknowledge the financial support to this research by the italian Ministero dell’Universitá e della Ricerca Scientifica (MURST) through the grant p. 2001028879, assigned to the project Origin and Evolution of Stellar Populations in the Galactic Spheroid. We are grateful to V. Marsakov for calling our attention to the new distance modulus of Ter 3, and to the Referee (M. Mateo) for several useful comments. This research has made use of NASA’s Astrophysics Data System Abstract Service. M.B. dedicates this work to the memory of his father Giocondo.


text:
# 1 The experimental data and the average.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank S. Oh for discussion. The main part of this work was done when T.Y. belonged to International Center for Elementary Particle Physics(ICEPP) in Tokyo University as a COE research fellow.


text:
# Optical Flashes and Very Early Afterglows in Wind Environments

## 1 Introduction

Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) have been profoundly understood since the discovery of afterglows in 1997 (Wijers 1997; Piran 1999; van Paradijs, Kouveliotou & Wijers 2000; Mészáros 2002). The hydrodynamic evolution of a GRB remnant is well described by an ultra-relativistic forward shock that sweeps into an interstellar medium (ISM) and slows down to the non-relativistic phase while the resulting afterglow is due to synchrotron radiation of electrons accelerated by the shock.

However, the emission from a reverse shock propagating into the shell of the GRB ejecta, was also predicted (Mészáros $`\&`$ Rees 1997; Sari $`\&`$ Piran 1999a). Before the reverse shock crosses the shell, the shocked shell matter carries an amount of energy comparable to that of the forward shocked interstellar medium. The prompt optical flash of GRB $`990123`$ (Akerlof et al. 1999) motivates investigations of emission from the reverse shock (Mészáros $`\&`$ Rees 1999; Sari $`\&`$ Piran 1999b; Kobayashi $`\&`$ Sari 2000; Kobayashi 2000). The light curve of an optical flash in a uniform ISM has been well studied in both thin shell and thick shell cases (Kobayashi 2000) and it is found that the optical flash of GRB $`990123`$ is due to the radiation from a mildly relativistic reverse shock (Kobayashi $`\&`$ Sari 2000). Recently, the contribution of reverse shocks to early radio afterglows was also discussed by Soderberg $`\&`$ Ramirez-Ruiz (2002).

There is increasing evidence for the association between some GRBs and type Ib/c supernovae. The most direct evidence is the association of GRB $`980425`$ with SN $`1998`$bw (Galama et al. 1998). This association is strengthed by its radio emission after the burst (Li $`\&`$ Chevalier 1999). Up to date several GRB afterglows, e.g., GRBs $`970228`$ (Reichart 1999), $`970508`$ (Sokolov 2001), $`980326`$ (Bloom et al 1999), $`990712`$ (Sahu et al. 2000), $`991208`$ (Castro-Tirado et al. 2001), $`000911`$ (Lazzati et al. 2001), and $`011211`$ (Bloom et al. 2002), show a supernova component in their light curves peaking at $`t_{}=(1+z)t_{\mathrm{SN},\mathrm{peak}}`$, with $`t_{\mathrm{SN},\mathrm{peak}}`$ 15 days for SN Ic. One of the most popular central engines of GRBs now is believed to be the collapse of massive stars (Woosley 1993; Paczyński 1998). This collapsar/hypernova scenario naturally explains the broad and shifted iron-group emission lines in GRBs (McLaughlin, Wijers $`\&`$ Brown 2002). The iron line emission can be attributed in the envelope models either from the irradiated shallower layers on the funnel wall along the rotation axis by a continuing but decaying relativistic outflow (Rees $`\&`$ Mészáros 2000) or from the dissipation of the magnetized thermal bubble expanding into H envelope of the progenitor, which results from the interaction between the jet with continuing energy injection and the stellar envelope (Mészáros $`\&`$ Rees 2001). The place of the iron line emission in the envelope models is at H envelope radius $`r10^{13}`$ cm, where a small amount of iron, $`10^8`$ M and $`10^5`$ M, can meet the requirement. Other iron line emission models require a large line emission radius, $`r10^{16}`$ cm, and much larger iron mass $`0.06`$ M (Vietri et al. 2001; Böttcher $`\&`$ Fryer 2001). The measured emission lines in the X-ray afterglow of GRB 011211 favors the latter (Reeves et al. 2002). The pre-explosion wind structure can survive in envelope models but may be destroyed in the other models due to either the ejection of SN prior to GRB or the common envelope evolution in the binary system. Detailed calculations and more sensitive data on X-ray afterglow spectral features will distinguish between the various line emission models (Ballantyne $`\&`$ Ramirez-Ruiz 2001).

The light curve steepening of some well-observed GRB afterglows deviates from the predictions of the standard model (Sari, Piran $`\&`$ Narayan 1998). This deviation leads to discussions of the environment and geometry effects. Previous studies have discussed the afterglow from a spherical blast wave in a wind (Dai $`\&`$ Lu 1998; Chevalier $`\&`$ Li 1999, 2000) and from a jet in a wind (Livio $`\&`$ Waxman 2000; Dai $`\&`$ Gou 2001; Gou et al. 2001). The wind environments of GRBs $`970228`$, $`970508`$, $`991216`$ and $`000301c`$ are recognized in the spherical-wind model (Chevalier $`\&`$ Li 2000; Li $`\&`$ Chevalier 2001). In the jet model, ten broadband GRB afterglows (i.e., GRBs 970508, 980519, 990123, 990510, 991208, 991216, 000301c, 000418, 000926, and 010222) have been well fitted (Panaitescu 2001; Panaitescu $`\&`$ Kumar 2001, 2002). Among them, only GRBs $`980519`$, $`990123`$ and $`990510`$ are inconsistent with wind environments. However, we also noticed that Frail et al. (2000) gave a better fit for their first 63 days observations of the radio afterglow of GRB $`980519`$ in the spherical-wind model.

Information on the surrounding environment of a GRB can also be obtained by considering the evolution of the soft X-ray absorption property according to the surrounding density distribution (Lazzati $`\&`$ Perna 2002). The expected absorption of a wind environment will quickly drop to the undetectable level in no more than 1 second. It conflicts with the evidence of variable soft X-ray absorption in three GRBs detected by BeppoSAX. Nonetheless, the wind environments can not be excluded by this method due to the limited samples. It may give some evidence for another type of GRBs environments, such as dense clouds. Superbubbles which are proposed as the sites of GRBs have been expected to explain the obtained low densities $`n10^3`$ cm-3 (Scalo $`\&`$ Wheeler 2001). It requires a very weak stellar wind at least 6 orders weaker than that of the progenitor of SN $`1998`$bw to insure non-contamination of the supperbubble by the wind at a typical afterglow radius. The wind profile $`nr^2`$ may be terminated at some radius $`r10^{17}`$ cm, where the wind sweeps up a mass of ISM comparable to that of the wind and leads to a quasi-homogeneous dense shell with the mean density $``$ $`10^2`$ cm-3 \- $`10^3`$ cm-3 and the thickness $``$ $`10^{17}`$ cm (Ramirez-Ruiz et al. 2001). This termination of the wind profile will not affect our analysis of the dynamic evolution of very early afterglows, but has the potential reduction of the optical flash. In this paper we perform a more detailed calculation of the very early afterglows of GRBs in wind environments including the reverse shock effect. In §2 we give the hydrodynamics of forward and reverse shocks. In §3 early afterglow light curves at optical and radio bands are calculated. We discuss some observational implications of our results in §4. The synchrotron self-absorption of electrons with a broken power law energy distribution is discussed in the appendix.

## 2 Hydrodynamics of forward and reverse shocks

We consider a uniform and cold relativistic coasting shell with rest mass $`M_0`$, the energy $`E`$, the initial Lorentz factor $`\eta =E/M_0c^2`$, and the observed width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which sweeps up a wind with the particle number density $`n_1=Ar^k`$ ($`k=2`$), where $`A=\dot{M}/4\pi m_pv_w=3\times 10^{35}A_{}\mathrm{cm}^1`$ and $`A_{}=(\dot{M}/1\times 10^5M_{}yr^1)(v_w/10^3\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s})^1`$ (Chevalier $`\&`$ Li 1999, 2000). Two shocks develop: a forward shock propagating into the wind and a reverse shock propagating into the shell. There are four regions separated by the two shocks: (1) the unshocked wind, (2) the shocked wind, (3) the shocked shell material, (4) the unshocked shell material. From the shock jump conditions and equality of pressures and velocities along the contact discontinuity, the Lorentz factor $`\gamma `$, the pressure $`p`$, and the number density $`n`$ in both shocked regions can be determined by $`n_1`$, $`n_4`$, and $`\eta `$ (Blandford $`\&`$ McKee 1976, hereafter BM).

We define the Sedov radius, at which the swept-up wind’s rest-mass energy equals the initial energy $`E`$ of the shell, i.e., $`l=M_0\eta /(4\pi Am_p)`$. Assuming that the shell doesn’t enter the spreading stage, the width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a constant, and $`n_4=M_0/(4\pi m_pr^2\mathrm{\Delta }\eta )r^2`$. The property of the reverse shock is largely determined by a parameter defined as $`f=n_4/n_1`$ (Sari $`\&`$ Piran 1995), which can be further given by

$$f=\frac{l}{\mathrm{\Delta }\eta ^2}.$$
(1)
As shown by Sari $`\&`$ Piran (1995), if $`f\eta ^2`$, or the baryon loading $`M_04\pi m_pA\mathrm{\Delta }\eta ^3`$, the reverse shock will be a Newtonian reverse shock (NRS), and the reverse shock will be a relativistic reverse shock (RRS) if $`f\eta ^2`$ or $`M_04\pi m_pA\mathrm{\Delta }\eta ^3`$. For RRS, the Lorentz factor of the shocked shell relative to the unshocked shell is $`\overline{\gamma }_3=\eta ^{1/2}f^{1/4}/\sqrt{2}`$, and the Lorentz factors of shocked matter are $`\gamma _2=\gamma _3=\eta ^{1/2}f^{1/4}/\sqrt{2}`$. The time for the reverse shock to cross the shell in the fixed frame is

$$t_\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }\eta f^{1/2}}{c},$$
(2)
where $`\alpha =1/2`$ for RRS and $`\alpha =3/\sqrt{14}`$ for NRS (Sari $`\&`$ Piran 1995). The shock expands to the radius $`R_\mathrm{\Delta }ct_\mathrm{\Delta }=\alpha \sqrt{l\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ when the reverse shock is just over. In addition to $`R_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ there are two other characteristic radii involved here: the deceleration radius $`R_\eta =l\eta ^2`$, at which the swept-up mass is $`M_0/\eta `$, and the shell spreading radius $`R_s=\mathrm{\Delta }\eta ^2`$. They have different dependences on $`l`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\eta `$ for the wind and ISM cases (Sari $`\&`$ Piran 1995). A parameter $`\zeta =\eta ^2\sqrt{l/\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is introduced to compare these three radii. According to equation (1), we get

$$R_\eta =\zeta R_\mathrm{\Delta }/\alpha =\zeta ^2R_s,$$
(3)
with $`f=\zeta ^2\eta ^2`$. $`\zeta 1`$ describes RRS: $`f\eta ^2`$, and $`R_\eta R_\mathrm{\Delta }R_s`$, while $`\zeta 1`$ describes NRS: $`f\eta ^2`$, and $`R_sR_\mathrm{\Delta }R_\eta `$. For RRS, the previous assumption of $`\mathrm{\Delta }=`$const is always satisfied, and deceleration of the shell happens before the reverse shock crosses it. For NRS we must consider the spreading effect of the shell, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=r/\eta ^2`$ with $`n_4=Al/r^3`$. The comoving density ratio $`f=l/r`$ decreases with increasing $`r`$. The reverse shock becomes trans-relativistic at $`R_N=l/\eta ^2`$(=$`R_\eta `$) when $`f=\eta ^2`$. A similar correction on $`t_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`R_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ must be done since $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`f`$ vary with $`r`$. We are most interested in RRS because of both a large energy output and a constant width.

Before RRS crosses the shell, the distance that the shell travels when RRS crosses a length $`dx`$ in the unshocked shell frame can be given by (Kobayashi 2000),

$$dr=\alpha \eta \sqrt{f}dx.$$
(4)
The shocked electron number is proportional to $`x/\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In the observer’s frame we have $`r=2c\gamma _3^2t_{}`$, so the hydrodynamic variables are

$$n_3=\frac{8\sqrt{2}A}{\eta l^{1/4}\mathrm{\Delta }^{7/4}}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^2,e_3=\frac{8Am_pc^2}{l^{1/2}\mathrm{\Delta }^{3/2}}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^2,$$
(5)
$$\gamma _3=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\frac{l}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)^{1/4},N_e=N_0\frac{t_{}}{T},$$
(6)
where $`N_0=M_0/m_p`$ is the total electron number of the shell and $`T=\mathrm{\Delta }/(2c)`$ is the observer’s time at which the RRS crosses the shell, which is one half of the crossing time adopted by Kobayashi (2000).

After RRS crosses the shell, the temperature of the shocked shell is very high and it will expands adiabatically and enters the spreading stage. Since it locates not far away from the forward shocked wind, we take the BM self-similar adiabatic solution with impulsive energy injection for the evolution of the shocked shell (Kabayashi $`\&`$ Sari 2000). With $`p_3n_3^{4/3}`$, we get $`p_3r^{(4k26)/3}r^6,\gamma _3r^{(2k7)/2}r^{3/2},n_3r^{(2k13)/2}r^{9/2}`$ and $`rt_{}^{1/4}`$. The hydrodynamic variables are therefore given by

$$n_3=n_3(T)\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^{9/8},e_3=e_3(T)\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^{3/2},$$
(7)
$$\gamma _3=\gamma _3(T)\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^{3/8},N_e=N_0.$$
(8)
The hydrodynamic evolution of a relativistic forward shock in a wind has already been discussed in some details (Dai $`\&`$ Lu 1998; Chevalier $`\&`$ Li 2000; Panaitescu $`\&`$ Kumar 2000). Before RRS crosses the shell, the Lorentz factor of forward shock $`\gamma _{sh}=\sqrt{2}\gamma _2`$ is a constant and equals $`\sqrt{2}\gamma _3`$. The forward shock radius is $`r=2\gamma _{sh}^2ct_{}=4\gamma _2^2ct_{}`$. Note that there is a difference of a factor of 2 between the reverse shock radius and the forward shock radius, which arises from the fact that the forward shock moves with $`\gamma _{sh}`$ at any time although the photon emitter travels with $`\gamma _2`$ (Chevalier $`\&`$ Li 2000). So the time when the reverse shock is finished becomes $`T^{}=T/2`$. For $`t_{}T^{}`$

$$n_2=\frac{8\sqrt{2}A}{l^{3/4}\mathrm{\Delta }^{5/4}}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^2,e_2=\frac{8Am_pc^2}{l^{1/2}\mathrm{\Delta }^{3/2}}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^2,$$
(9)
with $`\gamma _2=\sqrt{2}(l/\mathrm{\Delta })^{1/4}/2`$. For $`t_{}>T^{}`$, the hydrodynamic variables evolve as

$$n_2=n_2(T^{})\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^{5/4},e_2=e_2(T^{})\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^{3/2},\gamma _2=\gamma _2(T^{})\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^{1/4}.$$
(10)
The above analytical hydrodynamic evolution for both the reverse shock and forward shock is valid only in the relativistic phase. However, a late-time afterglow may be produced by a non-relativistic forward shock (Huang, Dai $`\&`$ Lu 1998, 1999, 2000). Thus, our results are applied only for early or very early afterglows in wind environments, including the reverse shock emission.

## 3 Light curve of very early afterglow

### 3.1 Radiation from RRS

The shock accelerates electrons to a power-law energy distribution with an index $`p`$ and with a minimum Lorentz factor $`\gamma _m=\xi _e(\overline{\gamma }_31)[(p2)/(p1)]m_p/m_e`$, where $`\xi _e`$ is a fraction of the internal energy density carried by the electrons. The standard radiation mechanism for GRB afterglows is synchrotron radiation by relativistic electrons in the magnetic field whose energy density is another fraction ($`\xi _B`$) of the internal energy density. We also consider synchrotron self-absorbtion at the radio band. Thus, the spectrum as discussed by Sari, Piran $`\&`$ Narayan (1998) in the ISM case can be used to discuss an afterglow in the wind case. The spectrum is characterized by three break frequencies: the typical frequency $`\nu _m`$, the cooling frequency $`\nu _c`$, and the self-absorption frequency $`\nu _a`$. A detailed derivation of $`\nu _a`$ for fast-cooling and slow-cooling regimes is given in the appendix. Since $`B(\xi _Bn_1)^{1/2}\gamma _3`$ and $`\gamma _c1/(\gamma _3B^2t_{})`$, we have $`\nu _m\gamma _3\gamma _m^2B`$ and $`\nu _c\gamma _3\gamma _c^2B`$. The peak flux $`F_{\nu ,max}N_e\gamma _3B/D^2`$, where $`D`$ is the distance from the GRB site to the observer.

Before RRS crosses the shell ($`t_{}T`$),

$$\nu _m=8.65\times 10^{16}E_{52}^{1/2}\xi _{e,0}^2\xi _{B,2}^{1/2}\eta _{300}^2A_{}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/2}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^1\mathrm{Hz},$$
(11)
$$\nu _c=1.32\times 10^{12}E_{52}^{1/2}\xi _{B,2}^{3/2}A_{}^2\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/2}\frac{t_{}}{T}\mathrm{Hz},$$
(12)
$$F_{\nu ,max}^{rs}=1.42E_{52}\xi _{B,2}^{1/2}\eta _{300}^1A_{}^{1/2}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^1D_{28}^2\mathrm{Jy},$$
(13)
where $`E=10^{52}E_{52}`$ ergs, $`\eta =300\eta _{300}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=10^{13}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}`$ cm, $`\xi _B=10^2\xi _{B,2}`$, $`\xi _e=0.6\xi _{e,0}`$, $`A=3\times 10^{35}A_{}\mathrm{cm}^1`$ and $`D=10^{28}D_{28}`$ cm. The time for the reverse shock to cross the shell is $`T=167\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}`$ s. For $`\nu _c\nu _a\nu _m`$, we have

$$\nu _a=4.11\times 10^{13}E_{52}^{1/6}\eta _{300}^{1/3}A_{}^{1/6}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{5/6}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^{2/3}\mathrm{Hz},$$
(14)
which is consistent with eq. (18) of Dai $`\&`$ Lu (2001). For $`\nu _a\nu _c\nu _m`$, we have

$$\nu _a=6.47\times 10^{14}E_{52}^{1/10}\eta _{300}^{3/5}A_{}^{19/10}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{19/10}\xi _{B,2}^{6/5}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^2\mathrm{Hz}.$$
(15)
The cooling Lorentz factor ($`\gamma _ct_{}/T`$) is determined by the dynamical timescale. At very early times, $`\gamma _c`$ may be less than unity, which is impossible in physics. In fact the radiation power of such electrons with $`\gamma _c1`$ will be cyclotron power, instead of synchrotron power. According to Dai & Lu (2001), we neglect the radiation before $`t_{,\mathrm{crit}}`$ (same as $`t_0`$ in Dai $`\&`$ Lu 2001) when $`\gamma _c=1`$,

$$t_{,\mathrm{crit}}=11.3E_{52}^{1/4}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/4}\xi _{B,2}A_{}^{5/4}\mathrm{s}$$
(16)
which is the beginning for our calculation.

When RRS crosses the shell ($`t_{}>T`$), the shock-accelerated electrons will be in the slow cooling regime if $`\nu _c(T)>\nu _m(T)`$. However, there will be no radiation if $`\nu _c(T)<\nu _m(T)`$, because all the previously shocked electrons have cooled and no newly-shocked electrons are in the shell when $`t_{}>T`$. The break frequencies and peak flux for $`\nu _c(T)>\nu _m(T)`$ are

$$\nu _m=\nu _m(T)\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^{15/8},\nu _{cut}=\nu _c(T)\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^{15/8},F_{\nu ,max}=F_{\nu ,max}(T)\left(\frac{t_{}}{T}\right)^{9/8}.$$
(17)
We have also derived the self-absorption frequency: in the slow cooling phase, $`\nu _a(t_{}/T)^{3/5}`$ for $`\nu _a\nu _m\nu _{cut}`$, and $`\nu _a(t_{}/T)^{(15p+26)/8(p+4)}`$ for $`\nu _m\nu _a\nu _{cut}`$. The time for the reverse shocked shell to become non-relativistic, i.e., when $`\gamma _3=2`$, is

$$t_{,nr}=197.0E_{52}^{2/3}A_{}^{2/3}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{2/3}T.$$
(18)
### 3.2 Radiation from the forward shock

Before RRS crosses the shell, the forward shocked wind matter moves with the same Lorentz factor as the reverse shocked shell matter. Whilst most of the initial kinetic energy of the shell has been transferred to the forward shocked matter, as shown in eq. (3). The forward shock decelerates at a slower rate than the shocked shell does after the crossing time. We can consider the shocked shell as a tail of the forward shock based on the BM solution with its self-similar parameter $`\chi r^{4k}r^2`$, which describes inward motion of the shocked shell relative to the shock front as the shock radius increases.

Before RRS crosses the shell ($`t_{}T^{}`$), the radiation from the forward shock can be described by

$$\nu _m=1.70\times 10^{17}E_{52}^{1/2}\xi _{e,0}^2\xi _{B,2}^{1/2}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{3/2}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^1\mathrm{Hz},$$
(19)
$$\nu _c=5.28\times 10^{12}E_{52}^{1/2}\xi _{B,2}^{3/2}A_{}^2\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/2}\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\mathrm{Hz},$$
(20)
$$F_{\nu ,max}^{fs}=5.07E_{52}^{1/2}A_{}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/2}D_{28}^2\mathrm{Jy}.$$
(21)
For $`\nu _c\nu _a\nu _m`$, we have the self-absorption frequency

$$\nu _a=2.92\times 10^{13}A_{}^{1/3}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{2/3}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^{2/3}\mathrm{Hz},$$
(22)
and for $`\nu _a\nu _c\nu _m`$ we have

$$\nu _a=9.78\times 10^{13}E_{52}^{2/5}A_{}^{11/5}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{8/5}\xi _{B,2}^{6/5}\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^2\mathrm{Hz}.$$
(23)
The time for $`\gamma _c1`$ is

$$t_{,crit}^{}=2.81E_{52}^{1/4}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/4}\xi _{B,2}A_{}^{5/4}\mathrm{s},$$
(24)
which is the beginning of our calculation. Since the peak flux of the forward shock emission is comparable to that of the RRS emission, a very early afterglow may be dominated by both of the two regions. An optical flash may even be dominated by the RRS emission if $`E`$ is very large and $`A_{}`$ is small, which can be estimated by comparing eq. (13) with eq. (21).

The break frequencies and peak flux for $`t_{}>T^{}`$ are

$$\nu _m=\nu _m(T^{})\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^{3/2},\nu _c=\nu _c(T^{})\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^{1/2},F_{\nu ,max}=F_{\nu ,max}(T^{})\left(\frac{t_{}}{T^{}}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(25)
The self-absorption frequency is: (1) in the fast cooling phase, $`\nu _a(t_{}/T^{})^{2/3}`$ for $`\nu _c\nu _a\nu _m`$, and $`\nu _a(t_{}/T^{})^{8/5}`$ for $`\nu _a\nu _c\nu _m`$; (2) in the slow cooling phase, $`\nu _a(t_{}/T^{})^{3/5}`$ for $`\nu _a\nu _m\nu _c`$. The case of $`\nu _m\nu _a\nu _c`$ seems impossible before $`t_{,nr}^{}=2.763\times 10^3E_{52}A_{}^1\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^1T^{}`$.

### 3.3 Light curves of optical and radio afterglows

The above subsections give the spectral profiles and the decaying laws of the break frequencies. In this subsection, we will discuss the light curves at some observed frequencies such as $`\nu _{opt}=4\times 10^{14}`$ Hz and $`\nu _{rad}=8.46`$ GHz. We calculate the evolution of the flux densities at these two frequencies with fixed parameters of $`\xi _{e,0}=1.0`$, $`\xi _{B,2}=1.0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}=0.5`$ but with $`E_{52}`$ varying between 1.0 and $`10^2`$, and $`A_{}`$ varying between $`10^2`$ and 1, to investigate the effects of energy and wind intensity. The values of $`\xi _{e,0}`$ and $`\xi _{B,2}`$ are consistent with the afterglow of GRB $`970508`$ (Wijers $`\&`$ Galama 1999; Granot, Piran $`\&`$ Sari 1999) and the optical flash and afterglow of GRB $`990123`$ (Wang, Dai $`\&`$ Lu 2000), and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}=0.5`$ is consistent with $`T^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }/4c42`$ sec, which is the peak time of the optical flash of GRB $`990123`$. The light curves in six cases and at two frequencies are shown in Figures 1-6.

The emission from RRS is nearly comparable or dominant over that from the forward shock at optical frequency. This is naturally estimated from the ratio of the reversely shocked electron number of the shell to the forward shocked electron number,

$$\frac{N_{e,rs}}{N_{e,fs}}=3f^{1/2}=4.21E_{52}^{1/2}A_{}^{1/2}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/2}\eta _{300}^1,$$
(26)
before RRS crosses the shell, compared with eq.(58) of Chevalier $`\&`$ Li (2000). In detail, the maximum optical flux in RRS reaches at $`t_{}=T`$,

$`F_{\nu _{opt}}^{rs}(T)`$ $`=`$ $`F_{\nu ,max}^{rs}({\displaystyle \frac{\nu _{opt}}{\nu _c}})^{1/2}`$ (27)
$`=`$ $`8.16\times 10^2E_{52}^{5/4}\eta _{300}^1A_{}^{1/2}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{3/4}\xi _{B,2}^{1/4}D_{28}^2\mathrm{Jy},`$
when RRS is still in the fast cooling regime, as emphasized by Chevalier $`\&`$ Li (2000). The above equation is not suitable for the case of $`E_{52}=10,A_{}=10^2`$, where RRS enters the slow cooling regime before it crosses the shell, because we can use eqs.(11) and (12) to get the transition time $`t_{mc}^{rs}`$ by $`\nu _m=\nu _c`$,

$$\frac{t_{mc}^{rs}}{T}=2.56\times 10^2E_{52}^{1/2}\eta _{300}A_{}^{3/2}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/2}\xi _{e,0}\xi _{B,2}=0.11<1,$$
(28)
for $`E_{52}=10,A_{}=10^2`$. The optical flux contributed by the forward shock reaches its maximum at $`t_{}=T^{}`$,

$`F_{\nu _{opt}}^{fs}(T^{})`$ $`=`$ $`F_{\nu ,max}^{fs}({\displaystyle \frac{\nu _{opt}}{\nu _c}})^{1/2}`$ (29)
$`=`$ $`0.583E_{52}^{3/4}\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}^{1/4}\xi _{B,2}^{3/4}D_{28}^2\mathrm{Jy},`$
except in the two cases of $`E_{52}=10,A_{}=0.1`$ and $`E_{52}=10,A_{}=10^2`$. For these two cases, the optical flux by the forward shock reaches the maximum before RRS has crossed the shell and decays to

$`F_{\nu _{opt}}^{fs}(T^{})`$ $`=`$ $`F_{\nu ,max}^{fs}({\displaystyle \frac{\nu _{opt}}{\nu _c}})^{1/3}`$ (30)
$`=`$ $`1.583E_{53}^{1/3}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{13}}{0.5}})^{2/3}({\displaystyle \frac{A_{}}{0.1}})^{5/3}\xi _{B,2}^{1/2}D_{28}^2\mathrm{Jy}.`$
For more energetic fireball and weaker stellar wind, the emission from RRS becomes more stronger than that from the forward shock. The weakest RRS case is for $`E=10^{52}`$ ergs, $`A_{}=1.0`$, where the forward shock dominates RRS at $`\nu _{opt}`$ by about one order of magnitude (Fig. 2.). The peak flux $`F_{\nu _{opt},peak}`$ increases with both $`E`$ and $`A_{}`$ and varies from $`1`$ Jy to $`10^2`$ Jy. An optical flash occurs in all cases, although its properties such as the brightening and decaying timescales and the light curve index may be different from each other. The time scale of emission with flux above 1 Jy ranges from 10 to $`10^4`$ seconds. None of the six cases discussed here is consistent with the rapid brightening ($`F_{\nu _{opt}}t_{}^{3.4}`$) and fast decaying ($`t_{}^{2.1}`$) of the optical flash of GRB $`990123`$. This further confirms the result of Chevalier $`\&`$ Li (2000) that the optical flash of GRB $`990123`$ originates from a homogeneous ISM.

The radio afterglow is mainly attributed to radiation from the forward shock and we can neglect the contribution of the emission from RRS. The light curve indices of the forward shock are $`2`$, $`2/3`$, $`0`$, $`(3p1)/4`$ from low- to high-frequencies in Figs. 1, 4 and 6, as shown in Chevalier $`\&`$ Li (2000). We also get an index $`\beta =3`$, which does not equal to $`7/4`$ of Chevalier $`\&`$ Li (2000) at very early times. Indices of 2, 1, and 0 in Fig. 2. and Fig. 5. are consistent with the results of Chevalier $`\&`$ Li (2000). The peak flux at radio band varies by two orders of magnitude, from $`10^3`$ to $`10^5`$ $`\mu `$Jy. There is a long lasting platform in the radio flux before the forward shock enters the non-relativistic phase ( also see Fig. 3 of Panaitescu $`\&`$ Kumar 2000). It might be used to distinguish the wind environment from the uniform ISM environment of GRBs and give further hints on the central engine.

## 4 Summary

We have analyzed very early afterglows in wind environments by considering the radiation from both a relativistic reverse shock and a relativistic forward shock. The resulting optical flash in the wind case is mainly attributed to RRS because of reduction of the flux from the forward shock by synchrotron self-absorption. Fo more energetic fireball and weaker stellar wind, the optical emission from RRS becomes more stronger than that from the forward shock. The resulting radio flare is largely produced by the forward shock emission.

Theoretically, the peak flux of the optical flash ranges from 1 Jy to $`10^2`$ Jy, and the peak time since the GRB trigger is tens of seconds, which is determined by the shell width. In our cases we choose the width according to the typical time scales of long gamma-ray bursts, i.e., $``$ a few tens of seconds. Such a large optical flux at very early times is due to the dense wind at small radius. If optical observations could be done in a few seconds after the GRB trigger, then one can discriminate the wind environment from the uniform ISM environment. It is a challenge for current observational instruments. While strong optical flashes have been predicted theoretically in this research as well as by many other authors, in realistic observations optical flash has been observed only from GRB $`990123`$ till now. The missing of a significant number of strong optical flashes has been interpreted as due to dust obscuration (Soderberg $`\&`$ Ramirez-Ruiz 2002). We propose that further contribution to the reduction of the optical flash may come from the dense shell around the stellar wind with the column density about $`10^{20}10^{21}`$ cm-2 (Ramirez-Ruiz et al. 2001). Another characteristic of wind environment which might be easier for observations is a long lasting platform in radio flux, which arises from the interaction of the forward shock with the wind matter.

However, dust extinction could not darken a 4th magnitude ($``$ 100 Jy) optical flash significantly to be immune to the optical survey. The non-detections of optical flashes brighter than $``$ 9th magnitude would eventually constrain the isotropic energies of GRBs to be no more than a few $`10^{52}`$ ergs and result in relatively weak circum-burst wind intensities with $`A_{}<1.0`$, according to eqs. (13), (21) and (27). We expect future observations on early afterglows to diagnose the environments of GRBs efficiently.

## Acknowledgments

We wish to thank the referee for valuable suggestions. XFW would like to thank D. M. Wei, X. Y. Wang, Z. Li, Y. Z. Fan, and J. B. Feng for their fruitful discussions. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 19973003, 10233010, 10003001), the National 973 project (NKBRSF G19990754), the Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctorial Dissertation of P. R. China (Project No: 200125) and the Special Funds for Major State Basic Research Projects.

## Appendix A Synchrotron self-absorption by electrons with a broken power-law distribution

### A.1 Synchrotron self-absorption coefficient by electrons with one single power-law distribution

All the quantities below are in the comoving reference frame. The power law distribution of the shock-accelerated electrons can be written as $`N(\gamma _e)d\gamma _e=N_{\gamma _e}\gamma _e^pd\gamma _e`$, where $`N_{\gamma _e}`$ is the normalized coefficient and $`\gamma _1\gamma _e\gamma _2`$. The power radiated from an electron with $`\gamma _e`$ is (Rybicki $`\&`$ Lightman 1979)

$$P(\nu ,\gamma _e)=\frac{2\pi \sqrt{3}q_e^2\nu _L\mathrm{sin}\theta }{c}\frac{\nu }{\nu _c}_{\nu /\nu _c}^{\mathrm{}}K_{5/3}(t)𝑑t,$$
(31)
where $`\nu _L=q_eB/2\pi m_ec`$ is the Lamor frequency and $`\nu _c=(3\gamma _e^2\nu _L\mathrm{sin}\theta )/2`$ is the typical frequency emitted by this electron. We rewrite the self-absorption coefficient of eq. (6.52) of Rybicki $`\&`$ Lightman (1979), and get

$$k_\nu =\frac{1}{8\pi m_e\nu ^2}_{\gamma _1}^{\gamma _2}P(\nu ,\gamma _e)\gamma _e^2\frac{d}{d\gamma _e}\left(\frac{N(\gamma _e)}{\gamma _e^2}\right)𝑑\gamma _e.$$
(32)
Before integrating the above equation, we define $`\nu _1=(3\gamma _1^2\nu _L\mathrm{sin}\theta )/2`$ and $`\nu _2=(3\gamma _2^2\nu _L\mathrm{sin}\theta )/2`$. For $`\nu \nu _1`$, we have

$$k_\nu =\frac{\pi ^{1/3}}{2^{2/3}3^{1/3}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{3})}\frac{p+2}{p+\frac{2}{3}}\frac{q_e^{8/3}}{(m_ec)^{5/3}}N_{\gamma _e}B^{2/3}(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{2/3}\gamma _1^{(p+2/3)}\nu ^{5/3}.$$
(33)
For simplicity, we take an isotropic distribution of $`\theta `$ with $`<(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{2/3}>=\frac{\sqrt{\pi }\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{3})}{5\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{5}{6})}`$ and obtain

$$k_\nu =114.65\times \frac{p+2}{p+\frac{2}{3}}N_{\gamma _e}B^{2/3}\gamma _1^{(p+2/3)}\nu ^{5/3}.$$
(34)
For $`\nu _1\nu \nu _2`$, we obtain

$$k_\nu =g(p)\frac{q_e^3}{2\pi m_e}\left(\frac{3q_e}{2\pi m_e^3c^5}\right)^{p/2}(m_ec^2)^{p1}N_{\gamma _e}B^{(p+2)/2}(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{(p+2)/2}\nu ^{(p+4)/2},$$
(35)
where $`g(p)=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{16}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3p+2}{12})\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3p+10}{12})(p+\frac{10}{3})`$. This case is the same as the well known eq. (6.53) of Rybicki $`\&`$ Lightman (1979). For $`\nu _2\nu `$, we get

$$k_\nu =\frac{\sqrt{3}\pi ^{3/2}}{9\sqrt{2}}\frac{(p+2)}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }N_{\gamma _e}\gamma _2^{(p+4)}\frac{q_e}{B}\left(\frac{\nu }{\nu _2}\right)^{(p+4)/2}e^{\nu /\nu _2},$$
(36)
and if we take the isotropic distribution $`<\mathrm{sin}\theta >=1/4`$,

$$k_\nu =\frac{2\sqrt{6}\pi ^{3/2}}{9}(p+2)N_{\gamma _e}\gamma _2^{(p+4)}\frac{q_e}{B}\left(\frac{\nu }{\nu _2}\right)^{(p+4)/2}e^{\nu /\nu _2},$$
(37)
which is always neglected in astrophysics but it may be applied for GRBs in which the self-absorption $`\nu _a>\nu _2`$ is possible and it may explain the spectrum of GRBs combining inverse Compton scattering.

For unification and convenience for comparison in the next section we rewrite eqs. (A3), (A5) and (A7),

$$k_\nu =c_1\frac{q_e}{B}N_{\gamma _e}\gamma _1^{(p+4)}\left(\frac{\nu }{\nu _1}\right)^{5/3},\nu \nu _1$$
(38)
$$k_\nu =c_2\frac{q_e}{B}N_{\gamma _e}\gamma _1^{(p+4)}\left(\frac{\nu }{\nu _1}\right)^{(p+4)/2},\nu _1\nu \nu _2$$
(39)
$$k_\nu =c_3\frac{q_e}{B}N_{\gamma _e}\gamma _2^{(p+4)}\left(\frac{\nu }{\nu _2}\right)^{(p+4)/2}e^{\nu /\nu _2},\nu _2\nu ,$$
(40)
where $`c_1=\frac{32\pi ^2}{92^{\frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{3})}\frac{p+2}{p+\frac{2}{3}}`$, $`c_2=\frac{32\pi }{9}2^{\frac{p}{2}}g(p)`$ and $`c_3=\frac{2\sqrt{6}\pi ^{\frac{3}{2}}}{9}(p+2)`$ which are of the same order. For illustration, $`c_1=14.78`$, $`c_2=17.80`$ and $`c_3=13.64`$ for $`p=2.5`$; $`c_1=15.60`$, $`c_2=15.64`$ and $`c_3=12.12`$ for $`p=2.0`$. So the above expression of $`k_\nu `$ still is valid even when $`\nu `$ approaches $`\nu _1`$ or $`\nu _2`$. For simulations, the discontinuity of $`k_\nu `$ can be removed if we constrain $`c_1=c_2=c_3/e`$.

### A.2 Self-absorption frequency and the spectrums of fast and slow cooling cases

Now we consider the absorption by electrons with a broken power-law distribution. The break Lorentz factors $`\gamma _1<\gamma _2<\gamma _3`$ with power law indices $`p_1`$ of $`(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)`$ (hereafter we refer to this region as region A) and $`p_2`$ of $`(\gamma _2,\gamma _3)`$ (region B). For slow cooling $`p_1=p`$ and $`p_2=(p+1)`$ with $`\gamma _1=\gamma _m`$, $`\gamma _2=\gamma _c`$, and $`\gamma _3=\gamma _M`$. For fast cooling $`p_1=2`$ and $`p_2=(p+1)`$ with $`\gamma _1=\gamma _c`$, $`\gamma _2=\gamma _m`$, and $`\gamma _3=\gamma _M`$. Both regions A and B contribute to $`k_\nu `$. According to eqs. (A8), (A9) and (A10), we find that $`k_\nu `$ is mainly determined by a nearer region with respect to its frequency $`\nu `$, i.e., $`k_\nu =k_\nu (A)`$ for $`\nu \nu _1`$ and $`\nu _1<\nu <\nu _2`$, while $`k_\nu =k_\nu (B)`$ for $`\nu _2<\nu \nu _3`$ and $`\nu _3<\nu `$.

The self-absorption frequency $`\nu _a`$ is determined by $`k_{\nu _a}L1`$, where $`L`$ is the length of the radiation region in the comoving frame. The spectrum below $`\nu _a`$ will be corrected since the optical depth is larger than unity and $`I_\nu j_\nu /k_\nu `$. From the above analysis, we obtain the complete spectrum in all cases.

In the fast cooling phase, (1) for $`\nu _a<\nu _c<\nu _m`$ the spectral indices of four segments are $`(2,\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{2},\frac{p}{2})`$; (2) for $`\nu _c<\nu _a<\nu _m`$ the spectral indices are $`(2,\frac{5}{2},\frac{1}{2},\frac{p}{2})`$; (3) for $`\nu _c<\nu _m<\nu _a(<\nu _M)`$ the spectral indices are $`(2,\frac{5}{2},\frac{5}{2},\frac{p}{2})`$. Case (3) is previously rarely discussed in astrophysics and maybe contributes to GRBs but not to their afterglows. There is still case (4) $`\nu _M<\nu _a`$. We do not discuss it since the flux of $`\nu >\nu _M`$ is negligible.

In the slow cooling phase, (1) for $`\nu _a<\nu _m<\nu _c(<\nu _M)`$ the spectral indices are $`(2,\frac{1}{3},\frac{p1}{2},\frac{p}{2})`$; (2) for $`\nu _m<\nu _a<\nu _c(<\nu _M)`$ the spectral indices are $`(2,\frac{5}{2},\frac{p1}{2},\frac{p}{2})`$; (3) for $`\nu _m<\nu _c<\nu _a(<\nu _M)`$ the spectral indices are $`(2,\frac{5}{2},\frac{5}{2},\frac{p}{2})`$. For case (1), from eq. (A4) we can find $`\nu _a`$ in the observer’s frame is consistent with eq. (22) of Wijers $`\&`$ Galama (1999), or we use eq. (A8) to get the same $`\nu _a`$ as eq. (52) ($`\nu <\nu _p`$) of Panaitescu $`\&`$ Kumar (2000), if we take $`N_{\gamma _e}(p1)n_e\gamma _m^{p1}`$ and $`n_e`$ is the electron density in the comoving frame.