text:
# Untitled Document

Globular Clusters as Candidates for Gravitational Lenses

to Explain Quasar––Galaxy Associations

Yu. L. Bukhmastova

Astronomical Institute, St. Petersburg State University, Russia,

bukh@astro.spbu.ru

Keywords: quasar—galaxy associations, gravitational lensing, globular clusters, hidden halomass. INTRODUCTION What the nature of the association between some quasars and nearby galaxies is has remained an open question for more than three decades. The essence of this problem is that some quasars are observed in the immediate vicinity of galaxies, with the redshifts of the galaxies being much lower than those of the quasars close to them. A number of publications are devoted to this problem. Among these, we note the monographs on gravitational lensing by Bliokh and Minakov (1989) and Schneider et al. (1992) and the review article by Zakharov (1997).

Arp was among the first to gave rapt attention to close quasar–galaxy pairs. In his paper (Arp 1987), he provided examples of four galaxies at $`z0.01`$ that have two or three quasars at a distance of $`2^{}`$ from the galactic center. These quasars have $`z1`$ and are brighter than $`m_v20.`$ Since the density of quasars with $`m_v`$ brighter than 20 is 20 objects per square degree, it seems unlikely to detect two or three quasars around any point. According to the estimates by Schneider et al. (1992), the probabilities of detecting two and three such quasars at an angular distance of $`2^{}`$ are 0.07 and 0.005, respectively. Two major strategies of searching for quasar—galaxy pairs are being discussed in the literature (Schneider et al. (1992)).

The first strategy of searching for such pairs is to consider quasars around galaxies and to investigate the possible excess of the density of quasars around galaxies above the mean quasar density.

The overlap between the Second Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies containing 4364 objects and the catalog of quasars (Hewitt and Burbidge 1980) containing 1356 objects showed a statistical significance of the correlation between the sky projections of quasars at different redshifts and bright galaxies at $`z<0.05`$ (Chu et al. 1984). However, the result was questioned, because the catalog included mostly radio–active quasars. Moreover, analysis of the catalogs of quasars and galaxies (Nieto and Seldner 1982) revealed no statistical significance for associations. Nieto (1977, 1978, 1979) and Nieto and Seldner (1982) found no significant excess of the density of all types of quasars around nearby galaxies but revealed an excess of the density among optically variable quasars.

The second strategy of searching for pairs is to consider galaxies around quasars to determine whether there is an excess of the density of galaxies around quasars above the mean galaxy density. Rozyczka (1972) pointed out that there is such an excess of galaxies around nearby quasars and that low-redshift quasars are located in groups of galaxies at the same redshift. Tyson (1986) found an excess of the density of galaxies around low- and high-redshift quasars.

Burbidge et al. (1990) conducted a computeraided search for close quasar—galaxy pairs with an angular separation of less than $`10^{}.`$ As a result of thissearch, a catalog of 577 quasars and 500 galaxies was published. The observed number of associations is several times larger than the expected number of chance coincidences. For example, the probability of detecting a randomly thrown object at an angular distance of $`2^{}`$ from a galaxy brighter than $`15^m`$ is estimated to be $`10^3.`$ Thus, the expected number of chance pairs for 5000 observed quasars is 5, while the catalog contains 38 such pairs. Such a simple estimate indicates that the physical association between quasars and galaxies in pairs is real. This association is also supported by the angular separation–galaxy redshift diagram constructed for 392 pairs. According to this observational relation, the mean linear galaxy—quasar separation in projection onto the sky, $`100`$ kpc, remains constant. These data led Burbidge et al. (1990) to conclude that quasars tend to be located in the halos of normal galaxies much more often than is expected for chance projections and that this physical association requires an explanation.

Based on the LEDA catalog of galaxies (Paturel 1997) containing some 100 000 objects and on the catalog of quasars and active galactic nuclei (AGNs) (Veron-Cetty and Veron 1998), we previously (Bukhmastova 2001) searched for close quasar—galaxy pairs. The search for pairs was conducted in such a way that the linear separation between the galaxy and the quasar projection onto the galactic plane did not exceed 150 kpc. The following criteria were used:

(1) The spatial coordinates $`\alpha ,\delta `$ and $`z`$ are available for quasars and galaxies and the magnitudes $`m_Q`$ are known for quasars;

(2) The quasar must be farther than the galaxy (i.e., $`z_Q>z_G`$);

(3) The quasars must be projected onto the halos of galaxies up to 150 kpc in size;

(4) The galaxy must have $`z_G>410^4.`$

77 483 galaxies and 11 358 quasars satised criterion (1). 1054 galaxies and 3164 quasars were in pairs, which amounted to 8382 quasar—galaxy pairs. Below, such pairs selected by using criteria (2)–(4) are called quasar—galaxy associations.

A statistical analysis of such associations based on computer simulations and on theoretical calculations indicates that their observed number is much larger than the number of chance projections (1200 pairs), suggesting a physical association between the galaxy and quasar images.

When analyzing the catalog of close quasar—galaxy pairs (Burbidge et al. 1990), Baryshev and Ezova (1997) found the number of quasar—galaxy associations to depend on $`a=z_G/z_Q,`$ where $`z_G`$ and $`z_Q`$ are the redshifts of the galaxy and the quasar from each pair. According to this dependence, galaxies in pairs tend to be located either close to the observer (so that $`a<0.1`$) or close to the quasar ($`a>0.9`$) and avoid the central position in the observer—quasar segment.

Based on new data for 8382 pairs, we previously (Bukhmastova 2001) analyzed the dependence of the number of pairs on $`a=z_G/z_Q.`$ This dependence confermed the previous result that there is an excess of pairs with $`a<0.1`$ and $`a>0.9.`$ There are at least two hypotheses that can explain the appearance of close quasar–galaxy pairs. One of these is that quasars in associations are in the halos of nearby galaxies; thus, their redshifts are not distance indicators for these objects. Arp (1966, 1987, 1990) adhered to this hypothesis. The second hypothesis is that quasars in associations are only projected onto the halos of nearby galaxies; their redshifts remain cosmological in origin and the enhanced visible luminosity of such quasars is the result of gravitational lensing by objects in the galactic halos. Here, we hypothesize that at least some of such pairs result from gravitational lensing. If this is the case, then the quasars in associations are the images of distant sources. The following question naturally arises: what astrophysical object for each pair acts as the source and what object is the gravitational lens? Canizares (1981) was the first to attempt to explain the appearance of quasar—galaxy associations as due to gravitational lensing by galactic halo stars (microlensing). Thus, the individual halo stars falling on the line of sight acted as the lenses. Faint quasars were chosen as the sources; because of the low surface density of faint quasars, it was subsequently shown that the hypothesis of gravitational lensing could not explain the observed effect. It is important to note that microlensing makes it possible to weakly amplify the source images.

If the gravitational lenses are not stars but globular clusters (GCs), dwarf galaxies, or clustered hidden mass objects with masses $`10^510^9M_{}`$ (’’mesolenses’’), then it becomes possible to strongly amplify the sources (Baryshen and Ezova 1997). The King model is applicable to such objects. This model well fits the density profile in GCs, dwarf galaxies, and, possibly, other self-gravitating hidden mass objects. These objects are assumed to be located in the halos of galaxies in associations.

The existence and abundance of such hidden mass objects in galactic halos were discussed by Paolis et al. (1998). Dalal and Kochanek (2001) noted that the hidden mass in galactic halos could be clustered. The authors investigated seven radio sources with four-component images, in which they detected gravitational lensing. Six lensed sources exhibited an anomalous flux that could be explained by the presence of a substructure. Analysis showed that the masses of the objects of the gravitational lens substructure lay within the range characteristic of GCs, $`10^610^9M_{}.`$

The nature of the gravitational lenses responsible for the appearance of quasar–galaxy associations and for the assumed enhancement of the quasar flux can differ widely. The gravitational lenses can be made up of dark baryonic matter. In his review article, Carr (1994) discussed in detail the various components of the dark baryonic matter. Snowballs produced through the condensation of cold hydrogen, brown dwarfs, Jupiter–like objects composed of hydrogen, dim red stars (Њ dwarfs), clouds of molecular hydrogen, neutron stars, black holes produced by the collapse of baryonic matter, and supermassive black holes can be these components.

The possibility that the gravitational lenses could be formed out of nonbaryonic cold dark matter (CDM) is not ruled out. The need for this mass component in the Universe follows from the prediction of critical total matter density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{tot}=1`$ in the influationary model and from the prediction of baryonic matter density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{bar}=0.05h_{65}^2`$ in the standard model of primordial nucleosynthesis. Thus, $`95\%`$ of the mass in the Universe can be in the mysterious nonbaryonic form. The Einstein cosmological constant or dark energy is currently believed to account for $`70\%`$ of the dark matter (Peebles and Ratra 2002). The remaining $`25\%`$ is accounted for by nonbaryonic CDM, for which the thermal energy and pressure can be disregarded compared to the energy of the rest mass. Dark energy represents a uniform background, while CDM is clustered to form structures of all scales (for a detailed review of the present views of dark energy, see Sahni and Starobinsky (2000)).

In the standard cosmological model, CDM is a dominant dynamical factor that governs the formation of galactic halos and the large-scale structure. High-resolution numerical calculations show that the hierarchy of CDM structures extends from the scales of galaxy superclusters down to the halos of individual galaxies composed of fundamental CDM clusters with masses in the range $`10^610^8M_{}`$ (Klypin et al.1999; Morr et al. 1999, 2001). Thus, if the clusters with such masses are assumed to account for $`0.2\%,`$ then, as follows from an estimate of the lensing probability, on the order of several tens of thousands of quasars could be amplified by gravitational lensing (Baryshev and Ezova 1997).

To explain the large number of quasar–galaxy associations, we accept the Barnothy–Tyson hypothesis (Barnothy 1965) that quasars, at least partially, are the gravitationally amplified images of AGNs. Thus, in our model, compact massive objects located in the central regions of active galaxies, such as Seyfert galaxies and radio galaxies of all types, rather than faint quasars act as the sources. The number of these objects is large enough to provide the observed properties of the associations for ampli.cation factors of 3-5 magnitudes. Kormendy (2000a, 2000b), Kormendy and Ho (2000), Ho and Kormendy (2000), and Bartusiak (1998) gave evidence that one might expect the presence of compact massive objects in the central regions of almost all galaxies. This large number of potential sources, naturally, exceeds the probability of occurrence of the lensing effect. Stuart et al. (2002) assumed black holes with masses $`>310^9M_{}`$ to be located in the central parts of quasars. The authors showed that a third of the distant quasars at $`z6`$ could be amplified by gravitational lenses on the line of sight, with the observed flux being enhanced by several tens of times or more. This study is a logical continuation of the studies of the properties for quasar–galaxy associations initiated by Baryshev and Bukhmastova (1997, 2001). We argue that GCs are suitable candidates for gravitational lenses when we deal with quasar–galaxy associations. We discuss GC parameters, in particular, the distribution of GCs in central surface density. We give the possible locations of GC lenses relative to the centers of the galaxies in associations and analyze the types of galaxies in pairs. We summarize our main conclusions and discuss possible observational tests.

DATA ON GLOBULAR CLUSTERS The idea to consider GCs as possible candidates for gravitational lenses was first put forward by Barnothy (1974) using the associations of the quasar 3C 455 with the galaxy NGC 7413 and an M15-type GC as an example. GCs as mesolens candidates were also considered by Yushchenko et al. (1998), Ugolnikov (2001), and Kurt and Ugolnikov (2000). Here, to obtain specific quantitative results, we use the parameters of 135 GCs in the Milky Way; thus, the previously used sample of 56 GCs analyzed by Baryshev and Ezova (1997) was expanded. For each of the GCs, we determined the core radius in pc and the central surface density by using the King model. These parameters are used for rough estimates. The list of Milky Way GCs in Table 1 contains the following parameters:

| ID | $`c`$ | $`r_c^{^{}}`$ | $`R`$ | $`\mathrm{lg}M/M_{}`$ | $`R_c`$ | $`\sigma _0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| NGC 4147 | 1.80 | 0.10 | 18.8 | 4.39 | 0.56 | 0.9 |
| NGC 6325 | 2.50 | 0.03 | 9.4 | 4.44 | 0.08 | 30.1 |
| NGC 6402 | 1.60 | 0.83 | 8.7 | 5.89 | 2.16 | 2.5 |
| TER 9 | 2.50 | 0.03 | 7.8 | 3.32 | 0.07 | 3.3 |
| NGC 6864 | 1.88 | 0.10 | 18.4 | 5.43 | 0.55 | 10.4 |
| PAL 12 | 1.94 | 0.20 | 18.7 | 3.82 | 1.12 | 5e-2 |
| AM 1 | 1.23 | 0.12 | 119.1 | 3.69 | 4.28 | 7e-3 |
| NGC 3202 | 1.31 | 1.45 | 5.1 | 5.05 | 2.21 | 0.5 |
| NGC 5897 | 0.79 | 1.96 | 12.7 | 4.83 | 7.46 | 0.1 |
| NGC 6139 | 1.80 | 0.14 | 10.5 | 5.28 | 0.44 | 12.3 |
| NGC 6205 | 1.49 | 0.88 | 7.0 | 5.59 | 1.85 | 1.9 |
| NGC 6304 | 1.80 | 0.21 | 6.0 | 4.92 | 0.38 | 7.3 |
| NGC 6535 | 1.30 | 0.42 | 6.8 | 3.81 | 0.86 | 0.2 |
| NGC 6656 | 1.31 | 1.42 | 3.2 | 5.53 | 1.36 | 4.0 |
| PAL 13 | 0.66 | 0.48 | 26.3 | 3.14 | 3.79 | 0.2 |
| NGC 5986 | 1.22 | 0.63 | 10.3 | 5.48 | 1.95 | 2.0 |
| NGC 6723 | 1.05 | 0.94 | 8.6 | 5.15 | 2.43 | 0.9 |
| NGC 6316 | 1.55 | 0.17 | 11.5 | 5.49 | 0.59 | 14.5 |
| NGC 6712 | 0.90 | 0.94 | 6.7 | 4.98 | 1.89 | 1.6 |
| NGC 5139 | 1.24 | 2.58 | 5.1 | 6.38 | 3.95 | 3.8 |
| NGC 5634 | 1.60 | 0.21 | 25.3 | 5.18 | 1.59 | 0.9 |
| PAL 14 | 0.72 | 1.1 | 72.2 | 3.83 | 23.83 | 3e-3 |
| NGC 6426 | 1.70 | 0.26 | 19.9 | 4.50 | 1.55 | 0.2 |
| NGC 6558 | 2.50 | 0.03 | 6.4 | 4.50 | 0.06 | 74.6 |
| NGC 6569 | 1.27 | 0.37 | 8.5 | 5.19 | 0.94 | 4.1 |
| NGC 6624 | 2.50 | 0.06 | 7.9 | 5.04 | 0.14 | 42.5 |
| NGC 1851 | 2.24 | 0.08 | 12.2 | 5.42 | 0.29 | 27.9 |
| AM 4 | 0.50 | 0.42 | 29.2 | 2.41 | 3.68 | 2e-3 |
| PAL 15 | 0.60 | 1.21 | 43.6 | 4.10 | 15.83 | 1e-2 |
| NGC 6779 | 1.37 | 0.37 | 9.9 | 4.98 | 1.09 | 1.6 |
| NGC 6229 | 1.61 | 0.13 | 29.3 | 5.35 | 1.14 | 2.6 |
| NGC 6218 | 1.38 | 0.66 | 4.7 | 5.07 | 0.93 | 2.7 |
| PAL 1 | 1.50 | 0.32 | 9.7 | 2.80 | 0.93 | 1e-2 |
| NGC 6934 | 1.53 | 0.25 | 15.2 | 5.06 | 1.14 | 1.5 |
| NGC 4833 | 1.25 | 1.00 | 5.9 | 5.20 | 1.77 | 1.2 |
| NGC 6626 | 1.67 | 0.24 | 5.7 | 5.36 | 0.41 | 19.3 |
| NGC 6637 | 1.39 | 0.34 | 8.2 | 5.30 | 0.84 | 5.6 |
| NGC 6093 | 1.95 | 0.15 | 8.7 | 5.24 | 0.39 | 12.6 |
| NGC 6528 | 2.29 | 0.09 | 7.4 | 4.67 | 0.20 | 10.4 |
| NGC 6539 | 1.60 | 0.57 | 7.9 | 4.48 | 1.35 | 0.3 |
| NGC 6517 | 1.82 | 0.06 | 10.5 | 4.88 | 0.19 | 26.3 |
| NGC 6638 | 1.40 | 0.26 | 8.2 | 4.50 | 0.64 | 1.5 |
| NGC 5824 | 2.45 | 0.05 | 31.3 | 6.00 | 0.47 | 36.5 |
| NGC 6715 | 1.84 | 0.11 | 26.2 | 5.99 | 0.86 | 15.9 |
| NGC 6171 | 1.51 | 0.54 | 6.3 | 4.80 | 1.02 | 1.0 |

| ID | $`c`$ | $`r_c^{^{}}`$ | $`R`$ | $`\mathrm{lg}M/M_{}`$ | $`R_c`$ | $`\sigma _0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| NGC 6496 | 0.70 | 1.05 | 11.6 | 4.29 | 3.65 | 0.4 |
| NGC 6760 | 1.59 | 0.33 | 7.3 | 4.75 | 0.72 | 1.6 |
| NGC 5286 | 1.46 | 0.29 | 10.7 | 5.48 | 0.93 | 6.2 |
| NGC 6342 | 2.50 | 0.05 | 9.1 | 4.81 | 0.14 | 27.1 |
| NGC 6441 | 1.85 | 0.11 | 9.7 | 5.88 | 0.32 | 89.4 |
| NGC 6287 | 1.60 | 0.26 | 8.4 | 4.65 | 0.66 | 1.6 |
| NGC 6584 | 1.20 | 0.59 | 13.0 | 5.09 | 2.30 | 0.6 |
| NGC 1904 | 1.72 | 0.16 | 12.6 | 5.19 | 0.60 | 5.7 |
| TON 2 | 1.30 | 0.54 | 7.9 | 4.08 | 1.28 | 0.2 |
| NGC 1261 | 1.27 | 0.39 | 16.0 | 5.17 | 1.87 | 0.9 |
| NGC 6453 | 2.50 | 0.07 | 10.9 | 4.98 | 0.23 | 14.3 |
| NGC 5694 | 1.84 | 0.06 | 33.9 | 5.57 | 0.61 | 12.2 |
| NGC 6541 | 2.00 | 0.30 | 7.4 | 5.52 | 0.67 | 8.0 |
| NGC 6981 | 1.23 | 0.54 | 16.8 | 4.80 | 2.72 | 0.2 |
| NGC 6101 | 0.80 | 1.15 | 15.1 | 4.83 | 5.21 | 0.2 |
| NGC 6266 | 1.70 | 0.18 | 6.7 | 5.59 | 0.36 | 41.0 |
| HP 1 | 2.50 | 0.03 | 7.2 | 4.79 | 0.06 | 114.9 |
| TER 5 | 1.74 | 0.18 | 8.0 | 4.94 | 0.43 | 6.2 |
| NGC 5024 | 1.78 | 0.37 | 18.4 | 5.68 | 2.04 | 1.5 |
| NGC 6333 | 1.15 | 0.58 | 8.3 | 5.23 | 1.44 | 2.4 |
| NGC 104 | 2.04 | 0.37 | 4.3 | 6.03 | 0.48 | 49.0 |
| NGC 6355 | 2.50 | 0.05 | 7.1 | 4.79 | 0.11 | 42.6 |
| ERI | 1.10 | 0.25 | 80.8 | 3.89 | 6.06 | 7e-3 |
| NGC 6553 | 1.17 | 0.55 | 4.7 | 5.42 | 0.78 | 12.2 |
| NGC 2808 | 1.77 | 0.26 | 9.3 | 5.96 | 0.73 | 22.4 |
| NGC 6256 | 2.50 | 0.02 | 9.3 | 4.52 | 0.06 | 83.3 |
| NGC 6366 | 0.92 | 1.83 | 3.6 | 4.47 | 1.98 | 0.4 |
| NGC 6388 | 1.70 | 0.12 | 11.5 | 6.16 | 0.41 | 116.4 |
| NGC 6652 | 1.80 | 0.07 | 9.4 | 4.98 | 0.20 | 30.9 |
| TER 6 | 2.50 | 0.05 | 7.5 | 4.53 | 0.11 | 20.9 |
| NGC 6642 | 1.99 | 0.10 | 7.6 | 4.16 | 0.23 | 3.0 |
| PAL 10 | 0.83 | 0.77 | 7.7 | 4.45 | 1.78 | 0.7 |
| NGC 6235 | 1.33 | 0.36 | 9.7 | 4.42 | 1.05 | 0.5 |
| NGC 6356 | 1.54 | 0.23 | 14.6 | 5.69 | 1.01 | 7.9 |
| NGC 6752 | 2.50 | 0.17 | 3.9 | 5.16 | 0.20 | 28.6 |
| TER 7 | 1.08 | 0.61 | 23.0 | 4.37 | 4.21 | 4e-2 |
| ARP 2 | 0.90 | 1.59 | 27.6 | 4.06 | 13.17 | 4e-3 |
| NGC 6401 | 1.69 | 0.25 | 7.5 | 4.94 | 0.56 | 3.8 |
| PAL 11 | 0.69 | 2.00 | 12.6 | 4.82 | 7.56 | 0.4 |
| NGC 2298 | 1.28 | 0.34 | 10.6 | 4.56 | 1.08 | 0.7 |
| NGC 5466 | 1.43 | 1.96 | 16.6 | 4.85 | 9.76 | 1e-2 |
| NGC 6522 | 2.50 | 0.05 | 7.0 | 4.97 | 0.11 | 66.3 |
| NGC 6544 | 1.63 | 0.05 | 2.5 | 4.53 | 0.04 | 356.5 |
| NGC 7006 | 1.42 | 0.24 | 40.7 | 5.13 | 2.93 | 0.3 |
| TER 8 | 0.60 | 1.00 | 25.4 | 4.56 | 7.62 | 0.2 |

| ID | $`c`$ | $`r_c^{^{}}`$ | $`R`$ | $`\mathrm{lg}M/M_{}`$ | $`R_c`$ | $`\sigma _0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| NGC 6749 | 0.83 | 0.77 | 7.7 | 4.45 | 1.78 | 0.7 |
| PAL 3 | 1.00 | 0.48 | 89.4 | 4.36 | 12.87 | 6e-3 |
| NGC 5946 | 2.50 | 0.08 | 12.3 | 4.88 | 0.30 | 6.8 |
| USK 3 | 2.10 | 0.15 | 7.5 | 5.11 | 0.34 | 11.3 |
| PAL 4 | 0.78 | 0.55 | 99.6 | 4.21 | 16.43 | 7e-3 |
| NGC 6717 | 2.07 | 0.08 | 7.1 | 4.34 | 0.17 | 7.7 |
| NGC 7492 | 1.00 | 0.83 | 25.2 | 3.90 | 6.27 | 8e-3 |
| NGC 6838 | 1.15 | 0.63 | 3.8 | 4.29 | 0.72 | 1.1 |
| NGC 6293 | 2.50 | 0.05 | 8.8 | 5.01 | 0.13 | 45.9 |
| PAL 5 | 0.74 | 2.90 | 22.6 | 3.92 | 19.66 | 4e-3 |
| NGC 362 | 1.94 | 0.17 | 8.3 | 5.45 | 0.42 | 17.7 |
| E 3 | 0.75 | 1.87 | 4.2 | 3.55 | 2.36 | 0.1 |
| NGC 5904 | 1.87 | 0.40 | 7.3 | 5.66 | 0.88 | 7.1 |
| PAL 2 | 1.45 | 0.24 | 26.9 | 4.95 | 1.94 | 0.4 |
| PAL 6 | 1.10 | 0.66 | 6.7 | 4.81 | 1.33 | 1.2 |
| NGC 5272 | 1.85 | 0.50 | 10.0 | 5.81 | 1.50 | 3.5 |
| NGC 5927 | 1.60 | 0.42 | 7.4 | 5.32 | 0.93 | 3.7 |
| NGC 6284 | 2.50 | 0.07 | 14.3 | 4.88 | 0.30 | 6.6 |
| NGC 4590 | 1.64 | 0.69 | 10.1 | 4.95 | 2.09 | 0.3 |
| NGC 6273 | 1.53 | 0.43 | 8.5 | 6.03 | 1.10 | 14.7 |
| TER 1 | 2.50 | 0.04 | 6.5 | 3.51 | 0.08 | 4.2 |
| NGC 2419 | 1.40 | 0.35 | 82.3 | 6.01 | 8.64 | 0.3 |
| NGC 6681 | 2.50 | 0.03 | 8.7 | 4.85 | 0.08 | 90.4 |
| TER 2 | 2.50 | 0.03 | 9.5 | 3.88 | 0.09 | 8.1 |
| NGC 5053 | 0.82 | 2.25 | 16.2 | 4.41 | 10.94 | 2e-2 |
| NGC 6362 | 1.10 | 1.32 | 7.5 | 4.91 | 2.97 | 0.3 |
| LIL 1 | 2.30 | 0.06 | 10.5 | 5.27 | 0.19 | 45.8 |
| NGC 7099 | 2.50 | 0.06 | 7.9 | 4.91 | 0.14 | 31.5 |
| NGC 4372 | 1.30 | 1.75 | 4.9 | 5.11 | 2.57 | 0.4 |
| NGC 6121 | 1.59 | 0.83 | 2.2 | 4.83 | 0.55 | 3.5 |
| PAL 8 | 1.53 | 0.40 | 12.4 | 4.90 | 1.49 | 0.6 |
| RUP 106 | 0.70 | 1.00 | 20.6 | 4.83 | 6.18 | 0.5 |
| TER 3 | 0.70 | 1.18 | 26.4 | 4.47 | 9.35 | 0.1 |
| NGC 6352 | 1.10 | 0.83 | 5.6 | 4.57 | 1.39 | 0.6 |
| NGC 288 | 0.96 | 1.42 | 8.1 | 4.64 | 3.45 | 0.2 |
| NGC 6341 | 1.81 | 0.23 | 8.1 | 5.34 | 0.56 | 8.8 |
| NGC 6440 | 1.70 | 0.13 | 8.0 | 5.63 | 0.31 | 60.5 |
| NGC 7078 | 2.50 | 0.07 | 10.2 | 5.85 | 0.21 | 120.8 |
| NGC 7089 | 1.80 | 0.34 | 11.4 | 5.78 | 1.16 | 5.6 |
| NGC 6809 | 0.76 | 2.83 | 5.3 | 5.03 | 4.50 | 0.7 |
| IC 4499 | 1.11 | 0.96 | 18.4 | 5.12 | 5.30 | 0.1 |
| NGC 6254 | 1.40 | 0.86 | 4.3 | 5.06 | 1.11 | 1.8 |
| NGC 6397 | 2.50 | 0.05 | 2.2 | 4.63 | 0.03 | 306.8 |
| IC 1276 | 1.29 | 1.08 | 9.3 | 5.09 | 3.01 | 0.3 |
| NGC 6144 | 1.55 | 0.94 | 10.1 | 4.76 | 2.85 | 0.1 |

Column 1– the cluster number; column 2– the concentration parameter $`c=\mathrm{lg}(r_t/r_c),`$ where $`r_t`$ is the outer cluster radius and $`r_c`$ is the core radius; column 3– the core radius $`r_c`$ in arcminutes; column 4– the distance to the Sun $`R`$ in kpc; column 5– the cluster mass in solar masses $`m=\mathrm{lg}(M/M_{});`$ column 6– the core radius $`R_c`$ in pc; and column 7– the central surface density $`\sigma _0`$ in g/cm $`^2.`$

We took the data on $`(ID),(c),(r_c^{^{}}),`$ and $`(R)`$ from Harris (1996) and on ($`\mathrm{lg}(M/M_{})`$) from Mandushev et al. (1991). We calculated $`(R_c)`$ from $`(r_c)`$ and $`(R)`$ and $`(\sigma _0)`$ from formulas of the King model. The mass of an object in the King model is dened as

$$M=\pi r_c^2\sigma _0\mathrm{\Lambda }_0$$
$`(1)`$
where

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_0=2\mathrm{ln}(r_t/r_c)3$$
$`(2)`$
For $`r_t/r_c100,`$ the surface density can be calculated with a high accuracy from the formula

$$\sigma _0=\frac{10^5M/M_{}}{r_c^2\text{[pc]}}$$
$`(3)`$
The Surface-Density Function The results of Table 1 reveal that $`72\%`$ of the Milky Way GCs have central surface densities up to 10 g/cm $`^2.`$ Figure 1 shows an empirical GC surfacedensity distribution (histogram 1). The sharp decrease at low $`\sigma _0`$ and the long tail at high $`\sigma _0`$ suggests that the distribution of this quantitymay be lognormal (histogram 2 in Fig. 1). The distribution of $`\sigma _0`$ is then

$$f_{\sigma _0}(x)=\frac{1}{x\sigma \sqrt{2}\pi }e^{{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{ln}x\mu )^2}{2\sigma ^2}}}$$
$`(4)`$
where $`\mu ,\sigma `$ are the distribution parameters and $`x=\sigma _0.`$ The values of $`\mu =0.58,\sigma =2.68`$ were determined by the maximum–likelihood method.

To test the hypothesis of a lognormal distribution of the central surface density, we used the $`\chi ^2`$ test. According to this test, the GC data are consistent with the hypothesis of a lognormal $`\sigma _0`$ distribution with $`95\%`$ confidence (at an $`\alpha =5\%`$ significance level.) Figure 2 shows the cumulative distribution function of the GC surface density. Curve 1 represents the lognormal distribution with the above parameters and curve 2 represents the experimental dependence for 135 objects. For comparison, this figure also shows curve 3 for the exponential distribution function $`\beta e^{\beta x},`$ where $`x=\sigma _0,`$ with $`\beta =0.056.`$ Our analysis leads us to conclude that the lognormal distribution well describes the experimental data on the central surface density of Milky Way GCs. Our signicantly expanded \[compared to the sample of Baryshev and Ezova (1997)\] sample of GCs conrmed that the distribution function of the GC central surface density is lognormal and allowed the parameters of this distribution to be rened. How to physically interpret this law remains an open question, i.e., whether it is the result of selection eects or it is inherent in the physical formation and evolution of GCs.

The Critical Central Surface Density of a Lens The central surface density of the putative lenses considered in the previous section is involved in many gravitational lensing formulas.

The main manifestations of gravitational focusing include the possible amplication of the image of a distance source. A signicant amplication factor is possible only if the observer is not between the lens focus and the lens. Since the quasar brightness is assumed to be signicantly amplied, by $`35`$ magnitudes, when interpreting quasar—galaxy associations, the position of the lens focus relative to the observer becomes important. In turn, the focus position is determined by the central surface density of the gravitational lens. Thus, we can determine the minimum lens density that corresponds to the case where the observer is at the lens focus (and, hence, a large image amplication is achieved).

$$\sigma _{0cr}(a,z_S)=\frac{0.077}{a(1a)z_S}$$
$`(5)`$
Assume that the quasars are located at the distance corresponding to the redshift $`z_S=2.`$ A plot of this dependence for $`z_S=2`$ is shown in Fig.3. We see from the gure that, if the lenses in quasar—galaxy pairs tend to be located at distances $`a<0.1`$ and $`a>0.9`$ \[as follows from Bukhmastova (2001) and Baryshev and Ezova (1997)\], then this corresponds to a lens surface density $`\sigma _0>0.42`$ g/cm $`^2.`$ An upper limit can be determined if we set $`a=10^4`$ and $`z_S=2.`$ In that case, $`\sigma _0<385`$ g/cm $`^2,`$ in close agreement with the central surface density for GCs (Table 1). Thus, the fact that the required central surface densities of putative gravitational lenses lie within the range of their values for GCs is one of the arguments that GCs are good candidates for gravitational lenses. The number of quasar–galaxy pairs found previously (Bukhmastova 2001) is 8382. These pairs include 3164 quasars. Assume that each quasar in associations is lensed and that GCs in the halos of galaxies in associations act as the lenses. Given the distances to the galaxy and the quasar, we can then calculate the critical central densities of the putative GC lenses for each pair that correspond to the condition that the observer be near the focus (and, hence, a large amplification factor is achieved). If our assumption is valid, then at least 3164 calculated critical densities must be characteristic of the GC central surface densities shown in Fig.1. Below, we present the calculated critical central surface densities of the putative lenses for 8382 quasar—galaxy pairs. The pairs can be found at http://www.astro.spbu.ru/staff/Baryshev/gl\_dm/htm. The top line gives the critical density in g/cm <sup>2</sup> calculated from formula (5); the botton line gives the number of lenses with this density:    0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100 \>100    708 688 556 375 272 226 295 212 470 396 4184   It turns out that 8332 pairs give central surface densities up to 80 g/cm $`^2,`$ which closely match the central surface densities for GCs. This is yet another argument for the theory of the gravitational lensing of AGNs by GCs in galactic halos.

Dwarf galaxies, like GCs, also belong to the objects with a King mass distribution. They are difficult to detect because of their low luminosities. The data on dwarf galaxies (Ferguson and Binggeli 1994; Gallagher and Wyse 1994) are too scarce to reach a final conclusion about their central surface density. Dwarf galaxies contain a large amount of hidden mass, which leads to disagreements regarding the determination of the core radius. The parameters of dwarf galaxies from Yakovlev et al. (1983) give an idea of their basic parameters:

|  | $`\mathrm{lg}M/M_{}`$ | $`r_c`$ | $`\mathrm{lg}r_t/r_c`$ | $`\sigma _0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  |  | \[kpc\] |  | \[g cm<sup>2</sup>\] |
| dwarf galaxies | 5.0–9.5 | 0.2–1 | 0–0.7 | $`10^4`$–0.2 |

If dwarf galaxies with characteristic surface densities $`10^40.2`$ g/cm <sup>2</sup> acted as the lenses, then an excess of pairs with $`a0.5`$ would be observed in the best case; i.e., galaxies would prefer the central position on the observer–quasar segment, which is in conict with the observational data from the catalog of quasar–galaxy associations. According to these data, $`a<0.1`$ or $`a>0.9.`$ Thus, for dwarf galaxies to be considered as good candidates for gravitational lenses, they must contain a large amount of hidden mass. The latter must be strongly concentrated toward the center in order to increase the central surface density to $`180`$ g/cm $`^2.`$

If clustered transparent hidden mass objects act as the lenses, then we can specify the boundaries of their central surface densities: $`\sigma _0>0.28(z_Q3),\sigma _0>1.68(z_Q0.5).`$ The higher is the central surface density of a lens, the closer it is to the observer or the quasar. If the halo objects of our Galaxy (or the halo objects of the galaxy in which a quasar may be located) are assumed to be the lenses, then the central surface densities of these lenses must be $`10^510^8`$ g/cm $`^2,`$ which correspond to the parameters of actually existing objects– asteroids and minor planets. At present, such objects are dicult to invoke as the gravitational lenses to explain quasar—galaxy associations, because the model of a pointlike lens should most likely be used for them. For the lensing probability in this model to be high enough, the halo mass must be too large. The Caustics and Cross Sections of Gravitational Lenses If we use the models of a pointlike gravitational lens applicable to stars or of an isothermal sphere applicable to galaxies to explain the enhanced brightness of the quasars from associations, then an accurate alignment of the observer, the lens, and the source on one straight line (on the axial caustic) is required to achieve large amplication factors.

An important feature of the gravitational lenses with a King mass distribution is that in this case, no accurate alignment of the observer, the lens, and the source on one straight line is required to achieve large amplication factors. This is because large amplication factors are achieved near the caustics. In addition to the axial caustic, GC lenses have the conical caustic. Its presence and the wide range of possible GC central surface densities ensure great freedom of the observer’s position relative to the lens and the source and, hence, increase the probability of strong lensing \[see Baryshev and Ezova (1997) for more details\].

The probability that a distant object will be amplied by a foreground lens depends on the lens cross section. The larger is this cross section, the higher is the probability. For lenses with a King mass distribution, there is the total cross section that consists of the cross sections of the two (axial and conical)caustic regions. Therefore, the following two regions of maximum cross section exist for lenses with a King mass distribution: region I where all caustics meet (near–focus region) and region II on the line of sight halfway between the observer and the lens. This is schematically shown in Fig. 4. To take into account region II requires an accurate alignment of the observer, the lens, and the source on one straight line. In addition, as was mentioned above, a much lower central surface density than the GC surface density is required for the lenses located halfway between the observer and the source. To take into account region I, we need not impose stringent requirements on the observer’s position relative to the source–lens straight line. Besides, the GC central surface densities exactly correspond to the case where the observer falls within region I, which explains the preferential positions of the galaxies in associations close to the observer and the quasar.

Thus, the presence of a conical caustic in GC lenses gives them yet another advantage over other possible objects. AROUND WHAT TYPES OF GALAXIES

SHOULD GC LENSES BE SEARCHED FOR? The new catalog of quasar—galaxy associations contains 8382 pairs, which comprise 3164 quasars and 1054 galaxies. If galactic halo GCs are considered as the lenses located in the halos of these galaxies, then the following question naturally arises: what types of galaxies are encountered more often in pairs? or what galaxies contain GCs around them and at what distances from the galactic center should GCs be searched for?

The original LEDA catalog of galaxies (Paturel 1997), which was used to compose pairs, contains data on the types of 40475 galaxies. Types -5, 5, and 10 correspond to elliptical, spiral, and irregular galaxies, respectively. Table 2 contains data on the number of galaxies of each type:

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| -5 | 2500 | 0.061 | 37 | 0.048 | 0.79 |
| -4 | 1474 | 0.036 | 15 | 0.019 | 0.54 |
| -3 | 2872 | 0.070 | 34 | 0.044 | 0.63 |
| -2 | 3295 | 0.081 | 48 | 0.063 | 0.77 |
| -1 | 1554 | 0.038 | 24 | 0.031 | 0.82 |
| 0 | 2053 | 0.050 | 30 | 0.039 | 0.78 |
| 1 | 1968 | 0.048 | 25 | 0.033 | 0.67 |
| 2 | 2327 | 0.057 | 32 | 0.042 | 0.73 |
| 3 | 3967 | 0.098 | 58 | 0.076 | 0.78 |
| 4 | 5232 | 0.129 | 57 | 0.075 | 0.58 |
| 5 | 5995 | 0.148 | 51 | 0.067 | 0.45 |
| 6 | 2730 | 0.067 | 55 | 0.072 | 1.07 |
| 7 | 1053 | 0.026 | 38 | 0.050 | 1.92 |
| 8 | 1171 | 0.028 | 50 | 0.066 | 2.88 |
| 9 | 918 | 0.022 | 67 | 0.088 | 3.90 |
| 10 | 1366 | 0.033 | 136 | 0.179 | 5.32 |

column 1– the type of galaxy; column 2– the number of galaxies of a given type in the original LEDA catalog of galaxies;column 3– the fraction of the galaxies of a given type from the total number of galaxies; column 4–the number of galaxies of a given type in quasar–galaxy pairs; column 5– the fraction of the galaxies in pairs from the total number of galaxies in pairs for which data on their types are available (there are 757 such galaxies); column 6 reflects the relative contribution of the galaxies of each type in pairs. We see from the sixth column of this table that the relative number of GC lenses in the galaxies of types -5—5 is approximately the same. Starting from type 6, the relative number of putative lenses increases; in the irregular galaxies of type 10, the number of GCs is expected to be approximately a factor of 7 larger than that in the spiral and elliptical galaxies of each type.

Table 3 presents irregular galaxies of types 9 and 10 in quasar–galaxy associations:

column 1– the galaxy name; column 2– the galaxy type; column 3– the galaxy redshift; column 4– the assumed distances (in kpc) from the galactic center at which the clustered object (CO) lenses are located; column 5– the number of quasars projected onto the galaxy; and column 6– the number of compact star clusters detected in these galaxies to date

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PGC0009168 | 9 | 0.0019 | 134 | 1 |  |
| PGC0048280 | 10 | 9.0E-4 | 42-149 | 49 |  |
| PGC0043869 | 10 | 0.0013 | 58-149 | 27 |  |
| PGC0037722 | 10 | 0.0038 | 17 | 1 |  |
| PGC0028623 | 10 | 0.0047 | 133 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039619 | 9 | 7.0E-4 | 11 | 48 |  |
| PGC0071596 | 9 | 0.0014 | 10 | 1 |  |
| PGC0022151 | 10 | 0.0167 | 133 | 1 |  |
| PGC0020852 | 10 | 0.0015 | 127 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039615 | 10 | 9.0E-4 | 23-147 | 9 |  |
| PGC0063000 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 84-137 | 2 |  |
| PGC0009759 | 10 | 0.0019 | 94 | 1 |  |
| PGC0045755 | 10 | 0.0028 | 88-149 | 2 |  |
| PGC0030187 | 9 | 0.0022 | 104-133 | 3 |  |
| PGC0042832 | 10 | 0.0015 | 52 | 1 |  |
| PGC0003085 | 9 | 6.0E-4 | 63-142 | 7 | 2 |
| PGC0039018 | 9 | 4.0E-4 | 12-149 | 84 |  |
| PGC0003710 | 9 | 0.0046 | 114 | 1 |  |
| PGC0010682 | 10 | 0.0036 | 91 | 1 |  |
| PGC0023769 | 10 | 0.0013 | 96-131 | 3 |  |
| PGC0041608 | 10 | 6.0E-4 | 6-147 | 88 |  |
| PGC0011153 | 9 | 0.0059 | 53 | 1 |  |
| PGC0050073 | 10 | 0.0017 | 142 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039225 | 10 | 0.0009 | 102-144 | 4 | 29 |
| PGC0016282 | pec(-3) | 0.0021 | 12-35 | 2 | 16 |
| PGC0046039 | 10 | 0.0006 | 40-140 | 18 | 3 |

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PGC0006430 | 10 | 0.0013 | 112-136 | 3 |  |
| PGC0004143 | 10 | 0.0062 | 75-148 | 5 |  |
| PGC0057170 | 10 | 0.0407 | 46 | 1 |  |
| PGC0044681 | 10 | 0.0028 | 39 | 1 |  |
| PGC0038148 | 10 | 7.0E-4 | 8-141 | 11 |  |
| PGC0014664 | 10 | 0.0029 | 90 | 1 |  |
| PGC0049497 | 10 | 0.0032 | 98-125 | 2 |  |
| PGC0042393 | 9 | 0.0041 | 77-119 | 2 |  |
| PGC0005208 | 10 | 0.0072 | 86-105 | 4 |  |
| PGC0054648 | 10 | 0.0022 | 78 | 1 |  |
| PGC0020445 | 10 | 0.0011 | 119 | 1 |  |
| PGC0021073 | 10 | 0.0012 | 50-129 | 2 |  |
| PGC0043450 | 10 | 0.0017 | 76-144 | 4 |  |
| PGC0010670 | 9 | 0.0037 | 20-94 | 3 |  |
| PGC0012762 | 9 | 0.0048 | 46 | 1 |  |
| PGC0045939 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 24-142 | 20 |  |
| PGC0027935 | 10 | 0.0018 | 85-85 | 1 |  |
| PGC0002992 | 10 | 0.0022 | 131 | 1 |  |
| PGC0014458 | 9 | 0.0063 | 41 | 1 |  |
| PGC0013985 | 10 | 0.0029 | 120-148 | 2 |  |
| PGC0001014 | 9 | 4.0E-4 | 7-149 | 100 |  |
| PGC0029034 | 9 | 0.0052 | 93.6 | 1 |  |
| PGC0017373 | 10 | 0.0062 | 106 | 1 |  |
| PGC0051281 | 10 | 0.0024 | 105-137 | 2 |  |
| PGC0029194 | 10 | 0.0012 | 75-145 | 2 |  |
| PGC0031427 | 10 | 0.0099 | 39 | 1 |  |
| PGC0016344 | 9 | 0.0056 | 134 | 1 |  |
| PGC0011139 | 9 | 0.0019 | 84 | 1 |  |
| PGC0038881 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 71-144 | 11 |  |
| PGC0029427 | 10 | 0.0021 | 61-148 | 6 |  |
| PGC0033479 | 10 | 0.0113 | 146 | 1 |  |
| PGC0036398 | 9 | 0.0044 | 61 | 1 |  |
| PGC0006574 | 9 | 0.0011 | 95 | 1 |  |
| PGC0042219 | 9 | 0.0025 | 45-142 | 10 |  |
| PGC0052142 | 10 | 7.0E-4 | 86-141 | 2 |  |
| PGC0041746 | 9 | 9.0E-4 | 10-144 | 39 |  |
| PGC0026663 | 10 | 0.0061 | 40-44 | 2 |  |
| PGC0045927 | 10 | 0.0032 | 62 | 1 |  |
| PGC0041743 | 9 | 0.0035 | 116-129 | 2 |  |
| PGC0024213 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 53-137 | 2 |  |
| PGC0004913 | 9 | 0.0021 | 110 | 1 |  |
| PGC0051472 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 51-149 | 29 |  |
| PGC0038481 | 10 | 0.0029 | 50-141 | 3 |  |
| PGC0067908 | 10 | 4.0E-4 | 89-121 | 6 |  |
| PGC0027091 | 10 | 0.0019 | 10 | 1 |  |

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PGC0010854 | 9 | 0.0050 | 130-144 | 2 |  |
| PGC0023340 | 9 | 0.0017 | 99 | 1 |  |
| PGC0009685 | 10 | 0.0047 | 137 | 1 |  |
| PGC0007399 | 10 | 0.0023 | 139 | 1 |  |
| PGC0003844 | 10 | 8.0E-4 | 6-149 | 47 |  |
| PGC0031414 | 10 | 0.0032 | 144 | 1 |  |
| PGC0008851 | 9 | 0.0054 | 110 | 1 |  |
| PGC0068498 | 10 | 0.0061 | 112 | 1 |  |
| PGC0072228 | 9 | 9.0E-4 | 57-129 | 5 |  |
| PGC0010650 | 10 | 0.0089 | 109-120 | 4 |  |
| PGC0032041 | 9 | 0.0027 | 18 | 1 |  |
| PGC0002816 | 10 | 0.0057 | 59-65 | 2 |  |
| PGC0005896 | 9 | 0.0013 | 20-149 | 79 |  |
| PGC0001357 | 10 | 0.0118 | 55 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039142 | 10 | 9.0E-4 | 17-149 | 37 |  |
| PGC0037050 | 10 | 8.0E-4 | 33-130 | 9 |  |
| PGC0043822 | 10 | 0.0142 | 83 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039734 | 9 | 0.0016 | 19 | 1 |  |
| PGC0033264 | 10 | 0.0023 | 17-120 | 3 |  |
| PGC0002578 | 10 | 0.0012 | 26-138 | 3 |  |
| PGC0017157 | 9 | 0.0043 | 126 | 1 |  |
| PGC0042160 | 10 | 0.0036 | 43-139 | 2 |  |
| PGC0006751 | 10 | 0.0057 | 81 | 1 |  |
| PGC0045314 | 9 | 0.0011 | 44-149 | 10 |  |
| PGC0047368 | 9 | 7.0E-4 | 73-149 | 11 |  |
| PGC0049452 | 10 | 8.0E-4 | 38-137 | 2 |  |
| PGC0009702 | 10 | 0.0019 | 147 | 1 |  |
| PGC0023324 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 84-149 | 3 | 3 |
| PGC0021199 | 10 | 0.0018 | 142 | 1 |  |
| PGC0032226 | 9 | 0.0019 | 86 | 1 |  |
| PGC0045506 | 10 | 7.0E-4 | 31-144 | 14 |  |
| PGC0047951 | 9 | 0.0048 | 95 | 1 |  |
| PGC0032221 | 10 | 0.0026 | 40 | 1 |  |
| PGC0037037 | 10 | 0.0030 | 24-140 | 3 |  |
| PGC0045306 | 10 | 0.0039 | 12-147 | 8 |  |
| PGC0059410 | 10 | 0.0015 | 96 | 1 |  |
| PGC0000703 | 10 | 0.0030 | 127 | 1 |  |
| PGC0071538 | 10 | 6.0E-4 | 38-148 | 2 |  |
| PGC0042348 | 10 | 0.0069 | 110 | 1 |  |
| PGC0049448 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 17-142 | 25 |  |
| PGC0021585 | 10 | 0.0012 | 45-123 | 3 |  |
| PGC0041512 | 10 | 0.0021 | 108-144 | 6 |  |
| PGC0057678 | 9 | 0.0024 | 61-126 | 2 |  |
| PGC0040844 | 10 | 0.0011 | 25-148 | 25 |  |
| PGC0014377 | 10 | 0.0063 | 92 | 1 |  |

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PGC0015996 | 10 | 0.0045 | 122 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039317 | 10 | 0.0039 | 47-136 | 6 |  |
| PGC0032376 | 9 | 0.0045 | 44-111 | 4 |  |
| PGC0067048 | 10 | 0.0083 | 35-143 | 4 |  |
| PGC0039316 | 10 | 6.0E-4 | 18-137 | 16 |  |
| PGC0070306 | 9 | 0.0046 | 50 | 1 |  |
| PGC0046127 | 10 | 9.0E-4 | 11-146 | 18 |  |
| PGC0003974 | 9 | 5.0E-4 | 73-141 | 3 |  |
| PGC0029549 | 10 | 0.0046 | 56-127 | 2 |  |
| PGC0044982 | 10 | 0.0025 | 118-132 | 2 |  |
| PGC0050961 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 56-143 | 14 |  |
| PGC0035684 | 10 | 8.0E-4 | 54-131 | 2 |  |
| PGC0041505 | 9 | 9.0E-4 | 18-145 | 35 |  |
| PGC0041667 | 10 | 0.0109 | 17 | 1 |  |
| PGC0014407 | 10 | 0.0047 | 58 | 1 |  |
| PGC0005661 | 10 | 0.0022 | 17 | 1 |  |
| PGC0025754 | 9 | 0.0164 | 122 | 1 |  |
| PGC0037217 | 9 | 0.0033 | 109 | 1 |  |
| PGC0038998 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 58-145 | 16 |  |
| PGC0012706 | 10 | 0.0046 | 97 | 1 |  |
| PGC0035878 | 10 | 8.0E-4 | 36-142 | 8 |  |
| PGC0040791 | 10 | 7.0E-4 | 21-148 | 6 |  |
| PGC0031693 | 10 | 0.0024 | 146 | 1 |  |
| PGC0071878 | 9 | 0.0092 | 34-115 | 2 |  |
| PGC0040596 | 9 | 0.0011 | 1-112 | 4 |  |
| PGC0037967 | 9 | 0.0055 | 127-141 | 2 |  |
| PGC0055965 | 10 | 0.0070 | 93 | 1 |  |
| PGC0021600 | 10 | 9.0E-4 | 37 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039260 | 9 | 0.0029 | 70-134 | 5 |  |
| PGC0010213 | 9 | 0.0046 | 100 | 1 |  |
| PGC0046666 | 10 | 0.0082 | 128-134 | 2 |  |
| PGC0042910 | 9 | 0.0039 | 131 | 1 |  |
| PGC0041258 | 10 | 0.0016 | 54-116 | 10 |  |
| PGC0038190 | 10 | 0.0049 | 114 | 1 |  |
| PGC0013521 | 9 | 0.0050 | 102-147 | 3 |  |
| PGC0044170 | 10 | 0.0019 | 93 | 1 |  |
| PGC0069271 | 9 | 0.0047 | 109 | 1 |  |
| PGC0029128 | 9 | 0.0013 | 98-141 | 3 |  |
| PGC0069505 | 10 | 0.0059 | 12-130 | 5 |  |
| PGC0071466 | 9 | 0.0023 | 114 | 1 |  |
| PGC0042275 | 10 | 0.0010 | 54-128 | 4 |  |
| PGC0037553 | 10 | 0.0036 | 24-107 | 2 |  |
| PGC0040973 | 10 | 7.0E-4 | 68-145 | 7 |  |
| PGC0042901 | 10 | 0.0020 | 64-149 | 9 |  |
| PGC0033010 | 10 | 0.0023 | 136 | 1 |  |

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PGC0032343 | 10 | 0.0025 | 118-146 | 2 |  |
| PGC0038811 | 9 | 0.0033 | 44-106 | 3 |  |
| PGC0004416 | 10 | 0.0039 | 77 | 1 |  |
| PGC0072525 | 10 | 0.0022 | 98-134 | 2 |  |
| PGC0042863 | 9 | 0.0021 | 101-133 | 2 |  |
| PGC0000035 | 10 | 0.0011 | 27-64 | 2 |  |
| PGC0035856 | 10 | 8.0E-4 | 52-149 | 4 |  |
| PGC0033408 | 9 | 0.0023 | 71-138 | 3 |  |
| PGC0031477 | 10 | 0.0020 | 142 | 1 |  |
| PGC0042503 | 9 | 0.0021 | 43-120 | 6 |  |
| PGC0045388 | 9 | 0.0159 | 10-133 | 2 |  |
| PGC0004211 | 10 | 0.0049 | 68-138 | 4 |  |
| PGC0017652 | 10 | 0.0037 | 102 | 1 |  |
| PGC0041636 | 10 | 0.0011 | 53-124 | 5 |  |
| PGC0000621 | 10 | 7.0E-4 | 38-140 | 6 |  |
| PGC0035451 | 9 | 0.0049 | 113-127 | 2 |  |
| PGC0037542 | 9 | 0.0032 | 83 | 1 |  |
| PGC0033957 | 9 | 0.0050 | 141 | 1 |  |
| PGC0041239 | 10 | 0.0013 | 48-133 | 14 |  |
| PGC0040409 | 10 | 0.0029 | 75 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039431 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 7-148 | 96 |  |
| PGC0030997 | 9 | 6.0E-4 | 91-143 | 4 |  |
| PGC0043129 | 10 | 0.0011 | 106-142 | 5 |  |
| PGC0048332 | 10 | 7.0E-4 | 40-131 | 6 |  |
| PGC0042656 | 10 | 0.0012 | 69-121 | 3 |  |
| PGC0041036 | 10 | 0.0019 | 50-132 | 4 |  |
| PGC0040563 | 10 | 0.0050 | 47 | 1 |  |
| PGC0039395 | 10 | 0.0043 | 53-132 | 3 |  |
| PGC0043124 | 10 | 0.0017 | 128-142 | 2 |  |
| PGC0040367 | 9 | 0.0016 | 97 | 1 |  |
| PGC0004202 | 10 | 0.0021 | 91 | 1 |  |
| PGC0040200 | 9 | 0.0013 | 110-135 | 2 |  |
| PGC0040005 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 23-148 | 103 |  |
| PGC0056959 | 10 | 0.0027 | 87 | 1 |  |
| PGC0027605 | 10 | 5.0E-4 | 48-141 | 18 |  |
| PGC0049158 | 10 | 6.0E-4 | 12-145 | 17 |  |
| PGC0026142 | 10 | 0.0020 | 84 | 1 |  |
| PGC0003290 | 9 | 0.0052 | 93-147 | 8 |  |
| PGC0003095 | 9 | 0.0054 | 87-128 | 2 |  |
| PGC0011202 | 9 | 0.0051 | 103 | 1 |  |
| PGC0029653 | 10 | 0.0011 | 32-106 | 3 | 1 |
| PGC0026895 | 10 | 0.0121 | 105 | 1 |  |
| PGC0037727 | 10 | 0.0037 | 61-136 | 3 |  |
| PGC0041020 | 9 | 9.0E-4 | 11-128 | 5 |  |
| PGC0044536 | 9 | 0.0028 | 60-140 | 7 |  |

The data of this tablemake it possible to check specific galaxies for the presence of clustered objects in their halos and, in particular, in the immediate vicinity of the quasars.

The absolute magnitudes of the galaxies of types 9 and 10 in pairs lie within the range from -11 to -21, with $`80\%`$ of them having absolute magnitudes from -15 to -19. The distances from the centers of the irregular galaxies at which one might expect GCs are $`50100`$ kpc. To all appearances, these are young globular clusters. The currently available observational data confirm our conclusion that the halos of irregular galaxies contain clustered objects with the masses typical of the GCs. Based on the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) data, Hunter et al. (2001) investigated the irregular galaxy NGC 1569. In this galaxy, they found 47 clusters whose core radii lie within the range typical of the GCs. The absolute magnitude of the galaxy is $`M_V=18.`$ The parameters of two clusters in this galaxy are known: the core radii are 2.3 and 3.1 pc and the masses are $`310^5M_{}.`$ These authors provided data on seven more irregular galaxies in which compact star clusters were detected. Sixty compact star clusters were identified in the irregular galaxy NGC 4449, 49 of which are presumed to be GCs. NGC4214 (PGC 039225) is an irregular galaxy with active star formation. Twenty nine compact star clusters were identified around this galaxy; Hunter et al. (2001) believe these clusters to be young. Similarly, three clusters were found around the galaxy DDO 50 (PGC 023324), 16 clusters were found around NGC 1705 (PGC 016282), three clusters were found around DDO 168 (PGC 046039), four clusters were found around DDO165 (PGC 045372), and one compact cluster was found in DDO 75 (PGC 029653) and in WLM. All these compact objects have radii $`r<15`$ pc and $`M_V`$ brighter than $`10^m.`$ Most of the star clusters are young with sizes and masses comparable to those of GCs. Thus, the number of GCs in irregular galaxies can be much larger than is generally thought to be. The irregular galaxies NGC 4214, DDO 50, NGC 1705, DDO 168, and DDO 75 with compact star clusters detected in their halos investigated by Hunter et al. (2001) are members of the quasar—galaxy associations found previously (Bukhmastova 2001); several quasars are projected onto each of them.

Table 4 lists the spiral and elliptical galaxies in whose halos GCs and quasars have been detected to date: column 1— the galaxy name; column 2—the galaxy type; column 3— the number of quasars projected onto the galaxy; and column 4— the number of GCs detected in the halo. The data on the presence of GCs were taken from astro-ph/0206140 for the first galaxy and from astro-ph/0112209 for the second, third, and fourth galaxies; for the remaining galaxies, we took the data from Harris (1996). Thus, the data of Tables 3 and 4 support the hypothesis that the associations of distant quasars with nearby galaxies can be provided by compact star clusters (GCs), which act as gravitational lenses. Therefore, a more thorough analysis of the properties of these associations may give an independent scenario for the formation and evolution of globular clusters or may shed light on the nature of the clustered hidden mass in galactic halos.

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PGC041297 (NGC4478) | E2 | 3 | presence |
| PGC044324 (NGC4840) | SABO | 1 | $`10^310^4`$ |
| PGC043008 (NGC4673) | E1-2 | 1 | $`10^310^4`$ |
| PGC044553 | E | 1 | $`10^310^4`$ |
| PGC013344 (NGC1387) | SO | 2 | $`385\pm 80`$ |
| PGC013418 (NGC1399) | E1pec | 1 | $`5340\pm 1780`$ |
| PGC013433 (NGC1404) | E1 | 1 | $`950\pm 140`$ |
| PGC024930 (NGC2683) | Sb | 4 | $`310\pm 100`$ |
| PGC032226 (NGC3377) | E5 | 1 | $`210\pm 50`$ |
| PGC032256 (NGC3379) | E1 | 6 | $`260\pm 140`$ |
| PGC036487 (NGC3842) | E3 | 2 | $`14000\pm 2500`$ |
| PGC039764 (NGC4278) | E1 | 2 | $`1050\pm 120`$ |
| PGC039246 (NGC4216) | Sb | 129 | $`620\pm 310`$ |
| PGC041327 (NGC4486) | EO | 1 | $`13000\pm 500`$ |
| PGC041968 (NGC4552) | EO | 34 | $`2400`$ |
| PGC042051 (NGC4564) | E6 | 3 | $`1000\pm 300`$ |
| PGC042628 (NGC4621) | E5 | 7 | $`1900\pm 400`$ |
| PGC000218 (NGC7814) | Sab | 1 | $`500\pm 160`$ |

MAIN CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONAL TESTS As a result of our analysis of the properties of quasar—galaxy associations and according to the assumptions about their possible nature made in the introduction, we favor GCs as good candidates for gravitational lenses located in the halos of galaxies in associations. Apart from the aforesaid, the following arguments support this assumption:

(1) GCs are actually existing observed objects. Their number in the halos of some galaxies can reach several thousand (Harris 1996). This provides a good possibility to use them as good candidates for gravitational lenses, because the more potential candidates for gravitational lenses are in the halo, the larger is the total cross section of the lenses and, hence, the higher is the probability of lensing distant sources.

(2) The possible manifestations of gravitational lensing include source image splitting. For GCs described by the King model, one, two, or three images of a distant source can appear. The characteristic linear separation between the possible images is defined via the Chwolson— Einstein ring radius $`\xi =\sqrt{2r_g{\displaystyle \frac{R_{OL}R_{LS}}{R_{OS}}}},`$ where $`R_{OL},R_{LS}`$ and $`R_{OS}`$ are the distances from the observer to the lens, from the lens to the source, and from the observer to the source, respectively; and $`r_g`$ is the gravitational radius of the lens. If the GC mass is assumed to be $`10^6M_{},`$ then for $`z_{OL}=10^30.1`$ (the redshifts of the galaxies in associations), $`\xi `$ varies between $`10^2`$ and $`0.4`$ pc. The quasar sizes are very small ($`10^3`$ pc). Since the possible amplification factor for a source is equal to the ratio of the area of its image to the source area, GCs make an amplification by $`3^m10^m`$ possible. This favorably distinguishes them from stars, which are often invoked as the lenses to explain quasar—galaxy associations. Stars described by the model of a pointlike lens (microlensing) give only a weak amplification of the source and cannot explain the enhanced quasar luminosity in this way.

(3) The GC central surface densities closely correspond to the condition that the observer be near the lens focus. This gives large amplification factors $`3^m5^m`$ and, hence, allows us to explain the enhanced quasar luminosity and their leftward displacement in the Hubble diagram $`z=f(m)`$ for galaxies and quasars (see Bukhmastova 2001).

(4) The preferential GC distances from the galactic centers are less than 50 kpc. This is in agreement with the fact that most of the nearby quasars from associations with $`z_G/z_Q>0.9`$ are also projected onto galactic halos with radii up to 50 kpc (Bukhmastova 2001).

(5) Since the critical central surface densities of the putative lenses calculated for quasar—galaxy associations match the GC central surface densities, we can assume that the association between distant quasars and nearby galaxies is provided by halo GCs.

(6) The expected light variability because of the motion of a GC as a whole has a time scale of more than a thousand years, because the time scale estimate is given by the expression

$$t_{var}\frac{R_{OL}\mathrm{\Theta }_{ChE}}{v}10^3\left(\frac{M}{10^6M_{}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{D^{}}{10\text{Mpc}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{v}{10^3\text{km s}^1}\right)^1\text{yr}$$

where $`D^{}={\displaystyle \frac{R_{LS}R_{OL}}{R_{OS}}}`$– is the reduced distance to the lenses and $`v`$ is the lens velocity. However, light variability on time scales of less than one year is possible because of microlensing by individual GC stars.

(7) Since GCs belong to the galactic halos, absorption lines can emerge in the spectra of quasars with $`z_{abs}`$ corresponding to this galaxy. In this case, an excess of systems with $`z_{abs}/z_{em}>0.9`$ or $`z_{abs}/z_{em}<0.1`$ must be observed. This theoretical assumption follows from the dependence (Baryshev and Ezova 1997) of the differential lensing probability on $`a=z_L/z_S,`$ where $`z_L`$ and $`z_S`$ are the redshifts of the lens and the source, respectively. Note that if the distribution of galaxies on the line of sight is fractal, then this can also cause the number of systems with $`a>0.9`$ and $`a<0.1`$ to increase. Thus, gravitational lensing by objects with a King mass distribution and the fractal distribution of galaxies with their surrounding lenses can mutually enhance this effect. More specifically, in this case, galaxies in pairs with quasars will avoid the central position on the observer— quasar line of sight, as confirmed by analysis of the catalogs of associations (Burbidge et al. 1990; Bukhmastova 2001).

(8) Based on the observed widths of the 21–cm absorption lines in the spectra of some quasars and assuming the clouds responsible for their appearance to be gravitationally bound, Komberg (1986) estimated the optical luminosities and sizes of these clouds. The luminosities, sizes, and masses were found to be typical of the GCs. These author also estimated the HI mass to be only a few solar masses. Even in old GCs one might expect such an amount of neutral hydrogen. It thus follows that the 21–cm lines can be detected in nearby GCs. The coincidence of the 21–cm absorption lines and the systems with absorption lines of metal ions may also stem from the fact that GCs, which can be gravitational lenses (thus, can be responsible for the enhanced luminosities of some quasars), fall on the line of sight.

(9) An increased number of GCs, a factor of 6–7 larger than that for spiral and elliptical galaxies of each type (Table 2), must presumably be observed in irregular galaxies of types 9 and 10. These GCs are presumed to be located at distances of $`100`$ kpc from the galactic centers and to have central surface densities $`\sigma _01÷200`$ g cm $`^2.`$ This follows from our analysis of the types of galaxies in pairs and from our calculations of the critical surface density of the putative lenses for each quasar—galaxy pair (formula 5) as well as from the available HST observational data (Hunter et al. 2001).

(10) The Chandra observations revealed X-ray sources in six Galactic GCs. Thus, GCs can be detected in galactic halos by X-ray sources (Revnivtsev et al. 2002).

(11) Quasars in associations with $`a>0.9,`$ i.e., close to galaxies in redshift, are observable in the radio frequency range. This allows the possible splitting of the core structure in these quasars to be detected at a millisecond level. These quasars can be found at http://www.astro.spbu.ru/sta./baryshev/gl\_dm.htm.

It follows from our analysis of the data on 135 Milky Way GCs given in Table 1 that the GC distribution in central surface density is lognormal. I hope that all of the arguments listed above will help to explain the appearance of quasar—galaxy associations and to re.ne the nature of the candidates for gravitational lenses. Apart from GCs, the latter can include dwarf galaxies and clustered hidden mass objects.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to Yu.V. Baryshev for a helpful discussion and D.S. Bukhmastov for technical help in preparing the publication. Translated by V.Astakhov

REFERENCES

1. Arp// Astrophys.J., 1966, v.148, p.321.
2. Arp// Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies, Interstelar Media, Berkelley, Ca., 1987.
3. Arp// Astron. and Astrophys., 1990, v.229, p.93.
4. J.M. Barnothy// Astron.J., 1965, v.70, p.666.
5. J.M. Barnothy// Bul.A.A.S., 1974, v.6, p.212.
6. M. Bartusiak// Astronomy, 1998, June, p.42.
7. Yu. V. Baryshev, Yu. L. Ezova, (Yu. L. Bukhmastova,) //Astron. Zh.,1997,v.74,p. 497 (Astron. Rep., 1997, v.41, p. 436); astro-ph/020648.
8. P.V. Bliokh and A.A. Minakov// Gravitational Lenses, (Naukova Dumka, Kiev, 1989).
9. Yu.L. Bukhmastova// Astron. Zh., 2001, v.78, p.675 (Astron. Rep.,2001, v.45); astro-ph/0206456.
10. G. Burbidge, A.Hewitt, J.V.Narlikar, P.Das Gupta// Astrophys. J.Suppl.Ser., 1990, v.74, p.675.
11. C.R. Canizares// Nature, 1981, v.291, p.620.
12. B. Carr// ARA A, 1994, v.32, p.531.
13. Y. Chu, X. Zhu, G. Burbidge, A. Hewitt // Astr.Ap., 1984, v.138, p.408.
14. N. Dalal, C.S. Kochanek// (2002); (astro-ph/0111456).
15. F.De. Paolis, G. Ingrosso, Ph. Jetzer, M. Roncadelli// Astrophys.J., 1998, v.500, p.59.
16. H.C. Ferguson, B. Binggeli// Astron. and Astrophys. Rev., 1994, v.6, p.67.
17. J.S. Gallagher, R.F.G. Wyse// Publication of the Astron. Society of the Pacific., 1994, v.106, p.1225.
18. W.E. Harris// A.J., 1996, v.112, p.1487 ;

(http://www.physics. mcmaster.ca/Globular.html)
19. A. Hewitt, G. Burbidge// Ap.J.Suppl., 1980, v.43, p.57.
20. L. C. Ho and J. Kormendy//(2000); astro-ph/000367.
21. D.A. Hunter, O.H. Billet and B.G. Elmegreen,// (2001); (astro-ph/0112260).
22. A. Klypin et al.// Astrophys. J., 1999, v.516, p.516.
23. B. V. Komberg// Astrofizika , 1986, v.24, p.321.
24. J. Kormendy// (2000); (astro-ph/ 0007400).
25. J. Kormendy// (2000); (astro-ph/ 0007401).
26. J. Kormendy, L.C. Ho//(2000); (astro-ph/ 0003268).
27. V. G. Kurt and O. S. Ugol’nikov// Kosm. Issled., 2000, v.38, p.227.
28. G. Mandushev, N. Spassova, A. Staneva// Astron. and Astrophys., 1991, v.252, p.94.
29. B. Moore et al.// Astrophys. J., 1999, v.524, p.L19.
30. B. Moore et al.// (2001); (astro-ph/0106271).
31. J.-L. Nieto// Nature, 1977, v.270, p.411.
32. J.-L. Nieto// Astr.Ap., 1978, v.70, p.219.
33. J.-L. Nieto// Astron. Astrophys., 1979, v.74, p.152.
34. J.-L. Nieto, M. Seldner//Astr. Ap., 1982, v.112, p.321.
35. G. Paturel// Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser., 1997, v.124, p.109.
36. P.J.E.Peebles, B. Ratra// The Cosmological Constant and Dark Energy. (2002); (astro-ph/0207347).
37. M.G. Revnivtsev, S. P. Trudolyubov, and K. N. Borozdin// Pis’ma Astron. Zh., 2002, v.28, p. 276. (Astron. Lett. 2002, v.28, p.237)
38. M. Rozyczka// Acta Astr., 1972, v.22, p.93.
39. V. Sahni and A. A. Starobinsky// Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 2000, v.9, p.373 ;astro-ph/9904398.
40. P. Schneider, J. Ehlers,E.E. Falco// ’’Gravitational Lenses’’, Berlin-Heidelberg- New York, Spriger-Verlag (1992).
41. J. Stuart, B. Wyithe and A. Loeb// (2002); (astro-ph/0203116).
42. J.A. Tyson// Astron.J., 1986, v.92, p.691.
43. O.S. Ugol’nikov// Preprint of Lebedev Physical Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow , 2001, no. 17.
44. M.P. Veron-Cetty, P. Veron// Quasars and Active Galactic Nuclei, ESO Scientific Report 18 (1998).
45. D.G. Yakovlev, L.G. Mitrofanov, S.A. Levshakov and D.A. Varshalovich// Astrophis. and Space Science., 1983, v.91, p.133.
46. A.V. Yushcenko, Yu. Baryshev, A.A. Raikov// Astron. Astrophys. Trans., 1998, v.17, p.9.
47. A. F. Zaharov// Gravitational Lenses and Microlenses (Yanus-K, Moscow, 1997).


format: text

text:
# Spin symmetry in the anti-nucleon spectrum

## Abstract

We discuss spin and pseudo-spin symmetry in the spectrum of single nucleons and single anti-nucleons in a nucleus. As an example we use relativistic mean field theory to investigate single anti-nucleon spectra. We find a very well developed spin symmetry in single anti-neutron and single anti-proton spectra. The dominant components of the wave functions of the spin doublet are almost identical. This spin symmetry in anti-particle spectra and the pseudo-spin symmetry in particle spectra have the same origin. However it turns out that the spin symmetry in anti-nucleon spectra is much better developed than the pseudo-spin symmetry in normal nuclear single particle spectra.

Symmetries in single particle spectra of atomic nuclei have been discussed extensively in the literature, as the violation of spin-symmetry by the spin-orbit term and approximate pseudo-spin symmetry in nuclear single particle spectra: atomic nuclei are characterized by a very large spin-orbit splitting, i.e. pairs of single particle states with opposite spin ($`j=l\pm \frac{1}{2}`$) have very different energies. This fact allowed the understanding of magic numbers in nuclei and forms the basis of nuclear shell structure. More than thirty years ago AHS.69 ; HA.69  pseudo-spin quantum numbers have been introduced by $`\stackrel{~}{l}=l\pm 1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{j}=j`$ for $`j=l\pm \frac{1}{2}`$ and it has been observed that the splitting between pseudo-spin doublets in nuclear single particle spectra is by an order of magnitude smaller than the normal spin-orbit splitting.

After the observation that relativistic mean field models yield spectra with nearly degenerate pseudo spin-orbit partners BBD.95 , Ginocchio showed clearly that the origin of pseudo-spin symmetry in nuclei is given by a relativistic symmetry in the Dirac Hamiltonian (Gin.97 ; Gin.99  and references given therein). He found that pseudo-spin symmetry becomes exact in the limiting case, where the strong scalar and vector potentials have the same size but opposite sign. However, this condition is never fulfilled exactly in real nuclei, because in this limit the average nuclear potential vanishes and nuclei are no longer bound. It has been found that the quality of pseudo-spin symmetry is related to the competition between the centrifugal barrier and the pseudo-spin orbital potential MSY.98 .

In relativistic investigations a Dirac Hamiltonian is used. In its spectrum one finds single particle levels with positive energies as well as those with negative energies. The latter are interpreted as anti-particles under charge conjugation. This has lead to much efforts to explore configurations with anti-particles and their interaction with nuclei. The possibility of producing a new kind of nuclear system by putting one or more anti-baryons inside ordinary nuclei has recently gained renewed interest BMS.02 . For future studies of anti-particles in nuclei it is therefore of great importance to investigate the symmetries of such configurations.

In a relativistic description nuclei are characterized by two strong potentials, an attactive scalar field $`S(𝒓)`$ and a repulsive vectror field $`V(𝒓)`$ in the Dirac equation which for nucleons (labelled by a subscript “N”) reads,

$$\left[𝜶𝒑+V_\text{N}(𝒓)+\beta (MS_\text{N}(𝒓))\right]\psi _\text{N}(𝒓)=ϵ_\text{N}\psi _\text{N}(𝒓),$$
(1)
where $`V_\text{N}(𝒓)=V(𝒓)`$ and $`S_\text{N}(𝒓)=S(𝒓)`$. For a spherical system, the Dirac spinor $`\psi _\text{N}`$ has the form

$$\psi _\text{N}(𝒓,s)=\frac{1}{r}\left(\begin{array}{c}iG_{n\kappa }(r)Y_{jm}^l(\theta ,\varphi ,s)\\ F_{\stackrel{~}{n}\kappa }(r)Y_{jm}^{\stackrel{~}{l}}(\theta ,\varphi ,s)\end{array}\right),j=l\pm \frac{1}{2},$$
(2)
where $`Y_{jm}^l(\theta ,\varphi )`$ are the spin spherical harmonics. $`G_{n\kappa }(r)/r`$ and $`F_{\stackrel{~}{n}\kappa }(r)/r`$ form the radial wave functions for the upper and lower components with $`n`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{n}`$ radial nodes. $`\kappa =1+𝝈𝐥=(1)^{j+l+1/2}(j+1/2)`$ characterizes the spin orbit operator and the quantum numbers $`l`$ and $`j`$. $`\stackrel{~}{l}=l\text{sign}(\kappa )`$ is the orbital angular momentum of the lower component. It is therefore well accepted, that the pseudo-spin quantum number of a particle state with positive energy are nothing but the quantum numbers of the lower component Gin.97 ; Gin.99 .

Charge conjugation leaves the scalar potential $`S_\text{N}(𝒓)`$ invariant while it changes the sign of the vector potential $`V_\text{N}(𝒓)`$. That is, for anti-nucleons (labelled by “A”), $`V_\text{A}(𝒓)=V_\text{N}(𝒓)=V(𝒓)`$ and $`S_\text{A}(𝒓)=S_\text{N}(𝒓)=S(𝒓)`$. Charge conjugation of Eq. (2) gives the Dirac spinor for an anti-nucleon,

$$\psi _\text{A}(𝒓,s)=\frac{1}{r}\left(\begin{array}{c}F_{\stackrel{~}{n}\stackrel{~}{\kappa }}(r)Y_{jm}^{\stackrel{~}{l}}(\theta ,\varphi ,s)\\ iG_{n\stackrel{~}{\kappa }}(r)Y_{jm}^l(\theta ,\varphi ,s)\end{array}\right),j=l\pm \frac{1}{2},$$
(3)
with $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }=\kappa `$.

We are only interested in positive energy states of the Dirac equations. Therefore normal quantum numbers follow the upper component which is dominant. A particle state is labeled by $`\{nl\kappa m\}`$, while its pseudo-quantum numbers are $`\{\stackrel{~}{n}\stackrel{~}{l}\stackrel{~}{\kappa }m\}`$. Following Ref. LG.01 , $`\stackrel{~}{n}=n+1`$ for $`\kappa >0`$; $`\stackrel{~}{n}=n`$ for $`\kappa <0`$. An anti-particle state is labeled by $`\{\stackrel{~}{n}\stackrel{~}{l}\stackrel{~}{\kappa }m\}`$ and its pseudo-quantum numbers are $`\{nl\kappa m\}`$. In analogy to Ref. LG.01 , we deduce the relation

$$n=\stackrel{~}{n}+1,\text{for}\stackrel{~}{\kappa }>0;n=\stackrel{~}{n},\text{for}\stackrel{~}{\kappa }<0.$$
(4)
With $`\kappa (1\kappa )=\stackrel{~}{l}(\stackrel{~}{l}+1)`$ and $`\kappa (1+\kappa )=l(l+1)`$ in mind, one derives Schrödinger-like equations for the upper and the lower components

$$\left[\frac{1}{2M_+}\left(\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac{1}{2M_+}\frac{dV_+}{dr}\frac{d}{dr}\frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}\right)\frac{1}{4M_+^2}\frac{\kappa }{r}\frac{dV_+}{dr}+MV_{}\right]G(r)=\{\begin{array}{c}+ϵ_\text{N}G(r),\hfill \\ ϵ_\text{A}G(r),\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
$$\left[\frac{1}{2M_{}}\left(\frac{d^2}{dr^2}\frac{1}{2M_{}}\frac{dV_{}}{dr}\frac{d}{dr}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{l}(\stackrel{~}{l}+1)}{r^2}\right)+\frac{1}{4M_{}^2}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }}{r}\frac{dV_{}}{dr}+MV_+\right]F(r)=\{\begin{array}{c}ϵ_\text{N}F(r),\hfill \\ +ϵ_\text{A}F(r),\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
where $`V_\pm (r)=V(r)\pm S(r)`$ and $`M_\pm =M_\pm (ϵ)=M\pm ϵV_\pm `$ with $`ϵ`$ = $`+ϵ_\text{N}`$ or $`ϵ_\text{A}`$. Both equations are fully equivalent to the exact Dirac equation with the full spectrum of particle and anti-particle states. But they carry different quantum numbers. For particle states the first equation carries spin-quantum numbers and the second carries pseudo-spin quantum numbers, for anti-particle states the opposite is true. In the following discussions we will use either the first or the second equations according to the type of quantum numbers (spin or pseudo-spin) we are interested in.

We give the relation between spin or pseudo-spin symmetry and the external fields in Table 1. If $`dV_+/dr`$ = 0, we have exact spin symmetry in the particle spectrum and exact pseudo-spin symmetry in the anti-particle spectrum because states with the same $`l`$ (but different $`\kappa `$) are degenerate in Eq. (5). $`l`$ is the orbital angular momentum of particle states and pseudo orbital angular momentum of anti-particle states. When $`dV_+/dr0`$, the symmetries are broken. But if $`dV_+/dr`$ is so small that the spin-orbit term (the term $`\kappa `$) in Eq. (5) is much smaller than the centrifugal term, there will be approximate symmetries. For nuclei far from stability where the nuclear potential is expected to be more diffuse, the spin-orbit splitting in single nucleon spectra will be also smaller as compared to stable nuclei. This quenching of the spin-orbit splitting could be one of the reasons for the change of magic numbers in exotic nuclei.

Similarly, when $`dV_{}/dr`$ = 0 in Eq. (6), there is an exact pseudo-spin symmetry in the particle spectra Gin.99 . On the other hand, if we focus on anti-particle states, we have in this case exact spin symmetry because now $`\stackrel{~}{l}`$ is the orbital angular momentum. If $`dV_{}/dr0`$ but small, we have approximate pseudo-spin symmetry in particle spectra and approximate spin symmetry in anti-particle spectra. This implies that the spin symmetry in the anti-particle spectrum has the same origin as the pseudo-spin symmetry in particle spectrum as realized in Ref. Gin.99 . However, there is an essential difference in the degree to which the symmetry is broken in both cases: the factor $`1/M_{}^2=1/(Mϵ+V_{})^2`$ is much smaller for anti nucleon states than that for nucleon states. The bound anti-particle energies $`ϵ_\text{A}`$ are in the region between $`MV_+(0)ϵ_\text{A}M`$. For realistic nuclei roughly we therefore have $`0.3`$ GeV $`ϵ_\text{A}1`$ GeV. On the other hand the bound particle states are in the region of $`M|V_{}(0)|ϵ_\text{N}M`$, i.e. for realistic nuclei close to 1 GeV. We therefore have $`|M_{}(ϵ_\text{A})|>2|MS(0)|`$ and $`|M_{}(ϵ_\text{N})|<|V_{}(0)|`$. Thus the factor in front of the $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }`$-term is for anti-particle states by more than a factor $`(2|MS(0)|/|V_{}(0)|)^2400`$ smaller than for particle states. Spin-symmetry for anti-particle states is therefore much less broken than pseudo-spin symmetry for particle states.

Since the spin-orbit term in Eq. (6) is so small for anti-nucleon states, we expect in addition that the radial wave functions of the spin-doublets are nearly identical, i.e. the dominant components of spin partners for anti-particle solutions are much more similar than the small components of pseudo-spin partners for particles.

Although the present discussion is meant for single particle spectra in atomic nuclei, the idea is very general. It has been first discovered that the equality of the vector and scalar potentials results in spin symmetry in Ref ST.71 ; BR.75  where the authors suggested applications to meson spectra. However, this symmetry was only recently found to be valid for mesons with one heavy quark PGG.01 . In the present letter, we illustrate for the first time in realistic nuclei nearly exact spin symmetry in the single particle spectra for anti-nucleons. We use for that purpose non-linear relativistic mean field (RMF) theory Rin.96  with modern parameter set NL3. Relativistic Hartree calculations are carried out in coordinate space for the doubly magic nuclei 16O and 208Pb.

For 16O, pseudo-spin symmetry cannot be studied successfully because there are only very few bound nucleon states. However, as seen in Fig. 1, there are many more anti-particle states. We find excellent spin symmetry for them. Since there are too many levels in anti-particle spectra of 208Pb (around 400 for either anti-neutrons or anti-protons), we will not give a similar figure in this case.

In Fig. 2 we present the spin-orbit splitting in anti-neutron spectra of 16O and 208Pb. For 16O, the spin-orbit splittings are around 0.2-0.5 MeV for $`p`$ states ($`l=1`$). With increasing particle number $`A`$ the spin symmetry in the anti-particle spectra becomes even more exact. For 208Pb, the spin-orbit splittings are $``$ 0.1 MeV for $`p`$ states and less than 0.2 MeV even for $`h`$ states ($`l=5`$) as seen in the lower panel of Fig. 2. We show in Table 2 the pseudo-spin orbit splitting of the neutron spectrum of 208Pb to compare them with the spin-orbit splitting in anti-nucleon spectra. In most cases, the pseudo-spin orbit splittings for particles are larger than 0.4 MeV and for deeply bound states, it can reach even values around 4 MeV.

In general, the spin-orbit splitting decreases with the state approaching the continuum limit. But for very deeply bound anti-neutron $`p`$, $`d`$, $`f`$ and $`g`$ states in 208Pb, the spin orbit splitting is smaller. This might be due to the competition between the centrifugal barrier and the spin-orbit potential in Eq. (6). In order to investigate this in more detail, we calculated the expectation value of the spin-orbit potential,

$$SOP=𝑑rF(r)^2\frac{1}{4M_{}^2(ϵ)}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }}{r}\frac{dV_{}}{dr}.$$
(7)
Since the lower amplitudes of the two spin doublets are nearly equal to each other (cf. Figs. 4 and 5), we expect the difference, $`\mathrm{\Delta }SOP`$, gives the main part of $`\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ`$ of a pair of spin doublets. In Fig. 3 we present $`\mathrm{\Delta }SOP`$ as a function of the average energy for spin doublets in 208Pb. The variational trend of $`\mathrm{\Delta }SOP`$ is roughly in agreement with that of $`\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ`$. Particularly, for deeply bound states, $`\mathrm{\Delta }SOP\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ`$.

Wave functions of pseudo-spin doublets in single nucleon spectra have been studied extensively in the literature Gin.99 . The lower amplitudes of pseudo-spin doublet are found to be close to each other. Since the spin symmetry in the anti-nucleon spectrum is much more exact than the pseudo-spin symmetry in the single nucleon spectrum, we expect that the upper amplitudes of the spin doublets coincide with each other even much more.

In Figs. 4 and 5, we show radial wave functions $`F(r)`$ and $`G(r)`$ for several anti-nucleon spin doublets in 16O and 208Pb. The dominant components $`F(r)`$ are nearly exactly identical for the two spin partners. On the other hand the small components $`G(r)`$ of the two spin-partners show dramatic deviations from each other. The relation between the node numbers of the upper and lower amplitudes given in Eq. (4) is seen in Figs. 4 and 5.

In summary, we discussed the relation between the (pseudo)-spin symmetry in single (anti)-particle states and the external fields where the (anti)-particle moves. We present the single anti-nucleon spectra in atomic nuclei as examples and find an almost exact spin symmetry. The origin of the spin symmetry in anti-nucleon spectra and the pseudo-spin symmetry in nucleon spectra have the same origin but the former is much more conserved in real nuclei. We performed RMF calculations for some doubly magic nuclei. Even in a very light nucleus, 16O, the spin symmetry in the anti nucleon spectrum is very good. The spin splitting increases with the orbital quantum number and decreases with the anti-nucleon state approaching the continuum. An investigation of wave functions shows that the dominant components of the Dirac spinor of the anti-nucleon spin doublets are almost identical.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was partly supported by the Major State Basic Research Development Program Under Contract Number G2000077407 and the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 10025522, 10047001 and 10221003 and by the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung under the project 06 TM 193.


text:
# Generalized Schwinger boson mean field theory for two-dimensional SU(4) symmetric spin-orbital antiferromagnet

## Abstract

A generalized Schwinger boson representation is proposed to describe the two-dimensional SU(4) symmetric spin-orbital quantum antiferromagnet. A uniform mean field solution gives rise to an antiferromagnetic long range ordered state with a small staggered magnetization $`m_s=0.07566`$, and the recent quantum Monte Carlo simulations on rather large lattice sizes have provided strong evidence to support these mean field results.

There have been much interests in the properties of Mott insulators with orbital degeneracy. In order to describe low-energy physics of an insulating phase with one-electron per site with double orbital degeneracy in the limit of the large Hubbard repulsion, an SU(4) symmetric model was proposed santoro

$$H=\underset{<i,j>}{}[𝐒_i𝐒_j+𝐓_i𝐓_j4(𝐒_i𝐒_j)(𝐓_i𝐓_j)],$$

where $`𝐒_i`$ and $`𝐓_i`$ denote the spin-1/2 and orbital-1/2 operators at a lattice site $`i`$, respectively. The physical condition to derive the above effective model is that among the possible two-particle states obtained upon virtual hopping, the inter-orbital singlet is the lowest energy state due to the dynamic Jahn-Teller effect.

Recently, by generalizing the SU(2) Schwinger boson representation aa1988 , we proposed an SU(4) spin-boson representation to denote both the spin-1/2 and orbital-1/2 operators simultaneously, and the model is simplified to a quadratic form of a nearest neighboring SU(4) symmetric valence bond (VB) pairing operator zhang-shen . By a direct Hartree-Fock decomposition and replacing the local constraint by its bulk average, a uniform SU(4) mean field (MF) theory gives rise to a spin-orbital liquid state with a finite gap in 1D, consistent with the exact matrix product solution martins  and the numerical simulations santoro . On a 2D square lattice, the spin, orbital, and spin-orbital tensor form antiferromagnetic (AF) long range ordering state.

It is noted that total spin, orbital, and staggered spin-orbital operators $`_jS_j^\alpha `$, $`_jT_j^\alpha `$, $`_j2S_j^\alpha T_j^\beta e^{i𝐐𝐑_j}`$ with $`𝐐`$ the AF reciprocal vector, generate an SU(4) Lie algebra and commutes with the Hamiltonian. In order to characterize both spin and orbital degrees of freedom simultaneously, an SU(4) generalized Schwinger boson representation is introduced as the generators $`F_\beta ^\alpha (i)=b_{i,\alpha }^{}b_{i,\beta }`$ with the expressions

$`S_i^+=b_{i,1}^{}b_{i,2}+b_{i,3}^{}b_{i,4},S_i^{}=b_{i,2}^{}b_{i,1}+b_{i,4}^{}b_{i,3},`$
$`S_i^z=(b_{i,1}^{}b_{i,1}b_{i,2}^{}b_{i,2}+b_{i,3}^{}b_{i,3}b_{i,4}^{}b_{i,4})/2;`$
$`T_i^+=b_{i,1}^{}b_{i,3}+b_{i,2}^{}b_{i,4},T_i^{}=b_{i,3}^{}b_{i,1}+b_{i,4}^{}b_{i,2},`$
$`T_i^z=(b_{i,1}^{}b_{i,1}+b_{i,2}^{}b_{i,2}b_{i,3}^{}b_{i,3}b_{i,4}^{}b_{i,4})/2,`$ (1)
with a local constraint $`_\mu b_{i,\mu }^{}b_{i,\mu }=1`$. The model Hamiltonian is then rewritten as

$$H=\underset{<i,j>}{}B_{i,j}^{}B_{i,j}$$
(2)
where $`B_{i,j}=\left[b_{j,4}b_{i,1}+b_{j,1}b_{i,4}b_{j,3}b_{i,2}b_{j,2}b_{i,3}\right]`$, an SU(4) symmetric singlet pairing operator.

When a VB order parameter is assumed $`\mathrm{\Delta }=B_{i,j}`$ and the local constraint is imposed by a Lagrangian multiplier $`\lambda `$, in terms of a Nambu spinor $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(𝐤)=(b_{𝐤,1}^{},b_{𝐤,2}^{},b_{𝐤,3}^{},b_{𝐤,4}^{};b_{𝐤,1},b_{𝐤,2},b_{𝐤,3},b_{𝐤,4})`$, the MF Hamiltonian matrix is obtained as $`H_{mf}(𝐤)=\lambda +2Z\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma _𝐤\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$, where $`𝛀_1=\sigma _x\sigma _y\sigma _y`$, and $`\gamma _𝐤=\frac{1}{Z}_\delta e^{i𝐤\delta }`$. From the Lagrangian, the bosonic Matsubara Green function is given by

$$𝐆(𝐤,i\omega _n)=\frac{i\omega _n\mathrm{\Omega }_2\lambda +2Z\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma _𝐤\mathrm{\Omega }_1}{\omega _n^2+\left[\lambda ^2(2Z\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma _𝐤)^2\right]},$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2=`$ $`\sigma _z\sigma _0\sigma _0`$ and the quasiparticle excitation dispersion $`\omega _𝐤=\sqrt{\lambda ^2(2Z\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma _𝐤)^2}`$. From the free energy, the saddle point equations are derived

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\lambda }{\omega _𝐤}}\left[2n_B(\omega _𝐤)+1\right]=3,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(2Z\gamma _𝐤)^2}{\omega _𝐤}}\left[2n_B(\omega _𝐤)+1\right]=Z.`$ (4)
The dynamic correlation functions of the spin, orbital, and spin-orbital tensor operators can be calculated by using $`S_i^\alpha =\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(𝐫_i)\mathrm{\Omega }_S^\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }(𝐫_i)`$, $`T_i^\alpha =\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(𝐫_i)\mathrm{\Omega }_T^\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }(𝐫_i)`$, $`L_i^{\alpha \beta }=\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(𝐫_i)\mathrm{\Omega }_L^{\alpha \beta }\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐫_i)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S^x=\sigma _0\sigma _0\sigma _x`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S^y=\sigma _z\sigma _0\sigma _y`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S^z=\sigma _0\sigma _0\sigma _z`$; $`\mathrm{\Omega }_T^x=\sigma _0\sigma _x\sigma _0`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_T^y=\sigma _z\sigma _y\sigma _0`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_T^z=\sigma _0\sigma _z\sigma _0`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_L^{\alpha \beta }=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S^\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }_T^\beta `$. All fifteen correlation functions associated with $`S_i^\alpha `$, $`T_i^\alpha `$, and $`L_i^{\alpha \beta }=2S_i^\alpha T_i^\beta `$ are found to satisfy

$$\chi _S^\alpha (𝐪,i\omega _n)=\chi _T^\alpha (𝐪,i\omega _n)=\chi _L^{\alpha ,\beta }(𝐪+𝐐,i\omega _n),$$
(5)
independent of the indices $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$, implying the the bosonic MF state is SU(4) symmetric!

On a 2D square lattice and at $`T=0`$, the conversion from the summations over momenta to the integrals will be invalid as $`\lambda 8\mathrm{\Delta }`$. By separating the divergent terms at $`𝐤^{}=\mathrm{𝟎}`$, $`𝐐`$ from the summations, the superfluid density $`\rho =4n_B(\omega _𝐤^{})/\sqrt{1(8\mathrm{\Delta }/\lambda )^2}`$ is defined and obtain $`\rho 0.107`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }1.3159`$, and $`\lambda 10.5271`$. The dynamic correlation function is evaluated, leading to the imaginary part of the dynamic susceptibility for $`\omega >0`$,

$`\mathrm{I}m\chi _S(𝐪,\omega ){\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2𝐤}{(2\pi )^2}\left[1\frac{\lambda ^2(8\mathrm{\Delta })^2\gamma _𝐤\gamma _{𝐤+𝐪}}{ϵ_𝐤ϵ_{𝐤+𝐪}}\right]}`$
$`\text{ }\times \left[n_B(ϵ_{𝐤+𝐪})+n_B(ϵ_𝐤)+1\right]\delta \left(\omega ϵ_𝐤ϵ_{𝐤+𝐪}\right).`$
As $`𝐪𝐐`$ with $`\lambda 8\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\mathrm{I}m\chi _S(𝐐,\omega )`$ is divergent. From the fluctuation dissipation theorem, the dynamic structure factor is obtained $`S(𝐐,\omega )N\left(\rho /\sqrt{2}\right)^22\pi \delta (\omega )`$, yielding to a long-range AF ordered state with the staggered magnetizations $`m_S0.07566`$.

These results *disagree* with the prediction of a spin liquid state with a finite gap by the quantum Monte Carlo calculations on a $`12\times 12`$ square lattice santoro , and is believed due to their small system sizes zhang-shen . Interestingly, the latest quantum Monte Carlo simulations on much larger lattice sizes harada  have showed that the convergence of staggered magnetization to a finite value can be seen for systems larger than $`32\times 32`$ lattices, and the estimated staggered magnetization is $`m_S0.0703`$, which is nearly the same value as ours.

The author would like to thank S. Q. Shen for his useful discussion.


text:
# Widespread acetaldehyde near the Galactic Centre

## 1 Introduction

The giant molecular cloud complex Sgr B2 is one of the most interesting regions in the Galaxy. Located close to the Galactic Centre, the complex is undergoing extensive star formation and hosts a myriad of large molecules, many of which have not been detected elsewhere in the Galaxy. Most of the complex organic molecules found here are confined to a compact (size $`0.1`$ pc) region called the Large Molecular Heimat (LMH) (e.g. Miao et al. (1995); Mehringer et al. (1997); Snyder et al. (2002)). This is in keeping with models of the formation of complex molecules, according to which these molecules are either directly formed on the surfaces of dust grains or are formed from seed molecules which are themselves formed on grain surfaces (e.g. Charnley et al. (1992, 1995)). When these dust grains are heated (typically by radiation from hot stars that form in molecular cloud cores), the grain mantles evaporate, releasing the molecules in gaseous form. Further, in time dependent astro-chemical models, these molecules are rapidly destroyed either by photodissociation or by collisions with other molecules. As a result, complex organic molecules are generally found only in hot molecular cloud cores.

Recently, however, there have been indications that some large organic molecules are more wide-spread in the Sgr B2 cloud than was hitherto believed. A comparison of the measured flux density from single dish and interferometric observations of the millimetre wavelength emission from glycolaldehyde suggests that the molecule is distributed over a region at least $`1`$ pc in size (Hollis et al. (2001)). However, no direct images of its spatial distribution are available. Similarly, emission studies of ethanol towards selected regions around Sgr B2 indicate that it too is likely to be wide-spread in this region, but again, no direct images are available for this molecule (Martín-Pintado et al. (2001)).

We present here wide field Giant Meterwave Radio Telescope (GMRT) images of the 1065 MHz $`1_{11}`$ 110 K transition of acetaldehyde (Kleiner et al. (1996)) towards Sgr B2; this transition was originally detected towards Sgr B2 by Gottleib (1973), using a single dish telescope. Acetaldehyde is one of the molecules whose interstellar production mechanism is presently quite unclear, placing strong constraints on models of interstellar chemistry. It has been found so far in both cold dust clouds as well as in hot cores (Ikeda et al. (2001); Matthews et al. (1985)). Towards the Galactic Centre, it has been detected at mm wavelengths in Sgr B2(N) (Ikeda et al. (2001)), along with its isomers vinyl alcohol and ethylene oxide (Dickens et al. (1997); Turner et al. (2001)). Interferometric observations of the 1065 MHz transition were not possible until very recently, as there were no telescopes equipped with receivers at this frequency. The newly comissioned GMRT does operate at this frequency, however, and, unlike millimetre-wave interferometers, provides both a (relatively) large field of view as well as high spatial resolution. Our images show direct evidence for the presence of acetaldehyde over a large region in Sgr B2.

## 2 Observations and Data Analysis

The GMRT (Swarup et al. (1991)) observations were carried out on 12 May 2001, during the commissioning phase of the telescope. The array has a hybrid configuration with 14 of its 30 antennas located in a central compact array with size $``$ 1 km ($``$ 3.5 k$`\lambda `$ at 1065 MHz) and the remaining antennas distributed in a roughly “Y” shaped configuration, giving a maximum baseline length of $``$ 25 km ($``$ 90 k$`\lambda `$ at 1065 MHz). The baselines between antennas in the central array are similar in length to those of the “D” array of the VLA while the baselines between the arm antennas are comparable to those of the VLA “B” array. An observing bandwidth of 1 MHz ($`280`$ km/s) was used for the CH3CHO observations, centered at 1065.075 MHz, the line rest frequency (Gottlieb (1973); Kleiner et al. (1996)). The band was divided into 128 spectral channels, giving a channel spacing of $`2.2`$ km s-1. The standard calibrators 3C286 and 3C48 were observed at the start and end of the run respectively in order to set the absolute flux density scale and also to determine the bandpass shape, while the compact source 1751$``$253 was used for phase calibration. The total on-source time was $`4.2`$ hours. In a later, short observing run, the system temperature was measured towards the calibrators as well as the source by firing noise diodes.

The data were converted from the raw telescope format into FITS and then analyzed in AIPS. After editing the obviously bad data, the flux density scale and instrumental phase were calibrated using standard AIPS procedures. Care was also taken to account for the fact that the system temperature in the direction of Sgr B2 is higher than that towards the flux or phase calibrators (due to the wide-spread continuum emission from the environs of Sgr B2 and its proximity to the Galactic Centre). After the initial calibration, a continuum image was made using the line-free channels and used to self-calibrate the U-V visibilities. This was carried out in an iterative manner until the quality of the image was found to not improve on further self-calibration. The continuum emission was then subtracted from the multi-channel U-V data set and the continuum-subtracted data mapped in all channels; any residual continuum was then subtracted in the image plane by fitting a linear baseline to line-free regions.

The hybrid configuration of the GMRT array implies that a single GMRT observation yields information on both small and large angular scales. Image cubes were therefore made at various (U,V) ranges and analysed separately. The low resolution images (such as Fig. 1) were deconvolved using the standard CLEAN deconvolution algorithm to produce the final spectral cube. However, at the highest resolutions (such as that of Fig. 3), the signal to noise ratio (SNR) is too low and the emission too diffuse for the CLEAN algorithm to work reliably; this image has hence not been deconvolved. Despite this, the low SNR of this image implies that the inability to deconvolve it does not greatly degrade its dynamic range or fidelity; the morphology of the emission should hence be accurately traced, apart from an uncertainty in the scaling factor (this essentially arises because the main effect of deconvolving weak emission at about the noise level corresponds to multiplying by a scale factor; Jörsäter & van Moorsel (1995); Rupen (1999)).

## 3 Results and Discussion

CH3CHO emission was detected from Sgr B2 over the LSR velocity range $`4585`$ km s-1. Fig. 1 shows the integrated emission from this entire velocity range (contours) overlaid on the continuum emission at 1065 MHz (grey scale). We detect emission from the regions Sgr B2 north (N), main (M) and south (S), as well as from a location $`4^{}`$ to the south of Sgr B2 (N) (which is labelled AA in Fig. 1 after Mehringer et al. 1993). The spectra of these regions (Fig. 2) show a systematic velocity gradient in the north-south direction, with Sgr B2 (N) showing emission up to an LSR velocity of $`85`$ km s-1 and Sgr B2 (AA) having emission centered at $`50`$ km s-1. A similar gradient is seen in several molecular species associated with Sgr B2, e.g. HC3N and CH3CN (de Vicente et al. (1997)) and H2CO (Rogstad et al. (1974), Martín-Pintado et al. (1990), Mehringer et al. (1995)). We do not detect any CH3CHO emission towards Sgr B1, although it lies within our field of view and our observing frequency band is sufficiently wide to include any emission associated with it.

The other noteworthy feature of Fig. 1 is that the line emission is confined to regions with continuum emission. This implies that either the CH3CHO emission is mased or that the gas which produces the CH3CHO emission is closely associated with that producing the radio continuum. However, the velocities of the CH3CHO emission match those of the formaldehyde (H2CO) absorption in the different regions (Martín-Pintado et al. (1990); Mehringer et al. (1995)), showing that the CH3CHO emitting clouds lie in front of the HII regions which are the source of the radio continuum. In the absence of masing, this would require fine-tuning of physical conditions to ensure the excitation of gas only in clouds in front of the continuum sources (the parent gas cloud, as traced by the CH3CN and HC3N emission, is more extended than the region showing CH3CHO emission; de Vicente et al. (1997)). The observed line to continuum ratio in all four regions is $`0.035`$, consistent with the CH3CHO emission being weakly mased (the continuum flux densities of the regions over which the spectra in Fig. 2 were extracted are listed in the figure caption). Note, however, that the continuum emission in Sgr B2 is considerably more extended than the line emission (and hence more resolved out in our interferometric observations); the measured line to continuum ratios in our maps are thus upper limits on the true line to continuum ratios. Our conclusion that the observed emission is mased is consistent with that of Fourikis et al. (1974), who found that the relative intensities of the $`1_{10}1_{11}`$ and $`2_{11}2_{12}`$ lines could only be explained if the former line is weakly mased.

Fig. 3 is a high resolution ($`6.6^{\prime \prime }\times 3.8^{\prime \prime }`$) image of the velocity integrated CH3CHO emission. Sgr B2 (AA) is not detected at this high resolution. The emission correlates very well with the high resolution images of 4.8 GHz formaldehyde absorption (Whiteoak & Gardener (1983)), the 6.7 GHz methanol absorption (Houghton & Whiteoak (1995)) and the quasi-thermal 44 GHz methanol emission (Mehringer & Menten (1997)). It also overlaps with the star forming ridge recently detected via emission from vibrationally excited HC3N in Sgr B2 (de Vicente et al. (2000)).

Fig. 1 shows clearly that, unlike most other large organic molecules, CH3CHO is wide-spread in Sgr B2. The angular extent of the emission is, in fact, reasonably close to that assumed by Fourikis et al. (1974) in their computation of the excitation temperature and column density of CH3CHO. If we assume that the $`2_{11}2_{12}`$ transition of CH3CHO observed by Fourikis et al. (1974) is thermalized and has an excitation temperature of $`100`$ K, we can use their eqn. (3) to obtain a CH3CHO column density of $`10^{14}`$ cm-2 in the $`2_{12}`$ level. On the other hand, the column density in the 111 level of H2CO is $`10^{14}\times T_{\mathrm{ex}}`$ cm-2 (Martín-Pintado et al. (1990)). For reasonable values of the H2CO $`1_{10}1_{11}`$ excitation temperature (i.e. few K), and under the further assumption that the abundance ratio obtained from these two levels is representative of the actual abundance ratio of the molecules, the ratio of the molecular column densities is N(H2CO)/N(CH3CHO) $`1`$. This is considerably smaller than the ratio of $`10^4`$ expected from pure gas phase models for the production of these molecules (Lee et al. (1996)) and suggests that grain chemistry is probably important for the production of CH3CHO.

The enhanced wide-spread abundance of CH3CHO is probably related to the presence of numerous shocks in Sgr B2, for which there are several independent lines of evidence. (1) Sato et al. (2000) postulate a large-scale shock resulting from a cloud-cloud collision. Evidence for such a collision comes from large-scale CO maps as well as the presence of various molecular line masers (e.g. CH3OH, H2CO; Houghton & Whiteoak (1995); Whiteoak & Gardener (1983)) and distorted magnetic fields (Dowell et al. (1998)), all of which are aligned approximately north-south, broadly coincident with the CH3CHO emission of Fig. 1. Further, the eastern edge of the northern section and the western edge of the southern section of the CH3CHO emission seen in Fig. 1 lie along the boundary of this postulated cloud-cloud collission. (2) Mehringer & Menten (1997) argue that the quasi-thermal 44 GHz methanol emission (which is spatially correlated with the CH3CHO emission) probably arises from shocked gas at the boundaries of expanding ionized shells around the young stars in the molecular cloud. (3) Martín-Pintado et al. (1999) have found a large number of hot expanding shells produced by massive evolved stars in the region between Sgr B2 (M) and Sgr B2 (AA), from which we detect bright CH3CHO emission. Again, the expansion of these hot shells into the parent molecular cloud is likely to result in the formation of shocks. Thus, shocks do appear to be present at a number of locations in Sgr B2. These shocks can cause the disruption of the grain mantles on which organic molecules have been formed and thus result in the release of these molecules into the gas phase. This could account for the observed wide-spread emission from CH3CHO.

In time-dependent astro-chemical models, the abundance of complex molecules released from grain mantles rapidly decreases with time, due to their destruction via UV photons or collisions (e.g. Charnley et al. (1992, 1995)). The non-detection of acetaldehyde towards Sgr B1 (which is believed to be considerably older than Sgr B2; Mehringer et al. (1992)) is thus consistent with models in which this molecule is produced by the (possibly shock-induced) disruption of grain mantles. We note, however, that the mechanism for inverting the populations of the CH3CHO $`1_{11}`$ and $`1_{10}`$ levels is currently unknown; it is thus also possible that CH3CHO is present in Sgr B1, but that physical conditions here are not appropriate to excite the 1065 MHz transition. New interferometers, such as the GMRT, which can yield wide field images of molecular emission, now make it possible to obtain a clearer view of the large-scale distribution of complex organic molecules in the Galaxy.

###### Acknowledgements.

These observations would not have been possible without the many years of dedicated effort put in by the GMRT staff in order to build the telescope. The GMRT is operated by the National Centre for Radio Astrophysics of the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research. We thank the referee, J. Martín-Pintado, for his comments and suggestions which have improved this paper.