text:
# Radiation-driven winds of hot luminous stars

## 1 Introduction

In recent years there has been substantial progress in the modelling of expanding atmospheres of hot stars. It is now possible to produce synthetic UV spectra of O stars that resemble the real, observed ones nearly perfectly. The state-of-the-art wind models deal with radiatively driven, homogeneous, stationary, extended, outflowing, spherically symmetric atmospheres. A complete model atmosphere calculation involves solving the hydrodynamics and the NLTE problem (rate equations for all important elements, radiative transfer, and energy equation). The solution of the total interdependent system of equations has thereby to be based on a non-restrictive treatment. This permits the calculation of the predicted or synthetic spectrum, which is then compared to the observed UV spectrum (cf. Pauldrach et al., Pauldrach-et-al-2001 (2001)). The process is repeated adopting different stellar parameters until a satisfactory fit is obtained. In this kind of work it is not necessary to adopt an arbitrary velocity law for the wind; the solution is hydrodynamically consistent and gives us the velocity law as well as the mass-loss rate (cf. Pauldrach Pauldrach-2003 (2003), Pauldrach and Hoffmann Pauldrach-Hoffmann-2003 (2003)).

A very important consequence of these recent developments is that the fits to the UV spectral features provide information about all the basic stellar parameters: effective temperature ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$), radius ($`R`$) – or equivalently, luminosity ($`L`$) –, mass of the star ($`M`$), terminal wind velocity ($`v_{\mathrm{}}`$), and mass loss rate ($`\dot{M}`$). Therefore we have a purely spectroscopic method to obtain separately $`L`$ and $`M`$.

Using this new generation of realistic stellar model atmospheres, Pauldrach et al. (Pauldrach-et-al-2001 (2001)), Pauldrach (Pauldrach-2003 (2003)), and Pauldrach and Hoffmann (Pauldrach-Hoffmann-2003 (2003)) present analyses of the massive O supergiants HD 30614 ($`\alpha `$ Cam) and HD 66811 ($`\zeta `$ Pup) which provide excellent matches to the observable UV-spectra, thus determining the basic stellar parameter sets of these objects. Further examples of this kind of work are given by Hoffmann and Pauldrach (Hoffmann-Pauldrach-2001 (2001)), who confirm in their analysis of a subsample of galactic massive O stars the parameters derived by Puls et al. (Puls-et-al-1996 (1996)) from an optical investigation.

Since this method produces reasonable results when applied to massive Population I stars, we now want to apply it to another kind of hot stars: the central stars of planetary nebulae (CSPNs in what follows). This permits, for the first time, to test the predictions from post-AGB evolutionary calculations. (The idea is described together with a first application by Pauldrach et al. Pauldrach-et-al-1988 (1988); preliminary results of the present investigation have be published by Pauldrach et al. 2001a .) The earlier work on CSPNs, based on plane-parallel non-LTE model atmospheres (e.g., Méndez et al. 1988a , 1988b ) could not provide a completely independent test, in the following sense: since the plane-parallel model fits to H and He photospheric absorption lines can only produce information about surface temperature, He abundance and surface gravity ($`\mathrm{log}g`$), we cannot derive stellar masses or luminosities, but only $`L/M`$ ratios. This is exactly the same problem we face when dealing with low-gravity early-type “supergiant” stars at high Galactic latitudes: are they luminous and massive, or are they evolving away from the AGB? We need some independent evidence to settle the issue – for example, the distance to the star. Unfortunately, we lack reliable distances to almost all CSPNs.

What could be done was to plot the positions of CSPNs in the $`\mathrm{log}g`$$`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ diagram, and compare them with plots of post-AGB tracks, translated from the $`\mathrm{log}L`$$`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ diagram. After doing this translation it is possible to read the stellar mass in the $`\mathrm{log}g`$$`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ diagram. From this, we can derive $`L`$ and, if we know the visual dereddened apparent magnitude, a so-called “spectroscopic distance”. All this work, however, is based on assuming that the evolutionary models give us the correct relation between stellar mass and luminosity. It is not a real test of the evolutionary models, but only a consistency check.

The new models allow us to overcome this limitation and produce for the first time information on $`L`$ and $`M`$ which is completely independent from the theory of stellar structure and evolution. In this paper we present the initial outcome of the project. We have made a careful selection of CSPNs for which we have adequate spectrograms covering both the visible and UV spectrum. In Sections 2 and 3 we describe the available spectrograms. In Section 4 we present the necessary information about the new wind models and we outline the fitting procedure. Section 5 introduces the relation between wind momentum loss rate and stellar luminosity, predicted by the theory of radiatively driven winds, and briefly describes earlier efforts to verify if the CSPNs follow this relation. Then in Sections 6 and 7 we present the UV spectral fits using the new wind models, explaining what discrepancies there are with respect to the earlier modelling and producing a table with the stellar parameters determined. Section 8 gives the interpretation of the CSPN winds and a discussion of the results concerning stellar luminosities and masses. In Section 9 we estimate the spectroscopic distances and compare them with other distance determinations, with inconclusive results. Section 10 deals with other estimates of pre-white dwarf masses. In Section 11 we summarize the conclusions.

## 2 The UV spectrograms

The sample of CSPNs we have analyzed is defined by the availability of adequate high-resolution UV spectra, covering the spectral region between 1000 and 2000 Å.

With the exception of that of He 2-108, all UV spectra of our sample were obtained from the INES Archive Data Server on the Web at http://ines.laeff.esa.es/, providing access to IUE Final Archive data. Apart from rectification “by eye” (aided by our experience with UV spectra from massive O stars), no further processing was done on the spectra.

The spectrum of He 2-108 is an HST/FOS spectrum (Proposal ID 5339, PI RHM) rectified by Haser (Haser-1995 (1995)). Here, interstellar Lyman-$`\alpha `$ absorption has been taken into account in the rectification process, leading to an empty band around 1216 Å with noisy edges.

## 3 The optical spectrograms

Most of the optical spectrograms were obtained by one of us (RHM) during two observing runs at the European Southern Observatory (ESO), Cerro La Silla, on 21–24 March and 13–17 June 1994 (the first one by remote control from ESO Garching), using the 3.5 m New Technology Telescope (NTT) and EMMI spectrograph in dichroic mode. In this mode of operation a dichroic beam-splitter was inserted, allowing to obtain blue and red spectrograms simultaneously.

A long slit of 1 arc sec width was used in the focal plane. The slit was oriented either N-S or E-W.

The dispersing element in the blue arm was grating number 3, with 1200 lines/mm, and the camera was $`f/4`$, giving a pixel size of 0.37 arc sec and a dispersion of 0.42 Å/pixel. The detector was a Tektronix CCD, $`1124\times 1024`$ pixels, with pixel size of 24 $`\mu `$m. In order to decrease the readout time only the central 200 pixels along the slit were read. Therefore the resulting spectrograms covered 74 arc secs along the slit, and 450 Å in wavelength, with central wavelengths of 4500 Å and 4535 Å in March and June 1994, respectively.

The dispersing element in the red arm was grating number 6, with 1200 lines/mm, and the camera was $`f/5.2`$, giving a pixel size of 0.27 arc sec and a dispersion of 0.31 Å/pixel. The detector was a Tektronix CCD, $`2086\times 2048`$ pixels, with pixel size of 24 $`\mu `$m. In order to decrease the readout time only the central 400 pixels along the slit were read. Therefore the resulting spectrograms covered 108 arc secs along the slit, and 650 Å in wavelength, with central wavelengths of 6560 Å and 6505 Å in March and June 1994, respectively.

The exposure times were short in the red arm, to avoid saturation of the strongest nebular emission lines.

The usual calibration frames (bias, dome flats, He-Ar comparison spectrum for wavelength calibration) were obtained for the observations in both arms. The CCD reductions were made using standard tasks provided in IRAF111IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomical Observatories, operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under contract to the National Science Foundation of the U.S.A.. After bias-level subtraction and flatfielding, whenever possible the spectrograms were registered and combined, to eliminate cosmic ray events and improve the signal-to-noise ratio. The image combination was made with the IRAF task imcombine, using the average option and ccdclip rejection (pixel rejection based on CCD noise parameters).

## 4 The modelling procedure

The UV spectrum between 1000 and 2000 Å carries a lot of information: P-Cygni-type profiles of resonance lines of several ions of C, N, O, Si, S, P, as well as hundreds of strongly wind-contaminated lines of Fe iv, Fe v, Fe vi, Cr v, Ni iv, Ar v, Ar vi. But the information about the stellar parameters can be extracted only after careful analysis. A very important recent improvement of our method concerns the development of a substantially consistent treatment of the blocking and blanketing influence of all metal lines in the entire sub- and supersonically expanding atmosphere. All the results we will present are based on this new generation of models.

The analysis method is based on modelling a homogeneous, stationary, extended, outflowing, spherically symmetric radiation-driven atmosphere. A detailed description is given by Pauldrach et al. (Pauldrach-et-al-2001 (2001)), Pauldrach (Pauldrach-2003 (2003)), and Pauldrach and Hoffmann (Pauldrach-Hoffmann-2003 (2003)).

The procedure is as follows. A preliminary inspection of the visual and/or UV spectrum of the star to be analyzed gives an estimate of $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. From the UV spectrum, the terminal wind velocity $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ can be measured directly. Now initial values for the stellar radius $`R`$ (defined at a Rosseland optical depth of $`2/3`$) and for the stellar mass $`M`$ are assumed.

With the current values of $`R`$, $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, $`M`$, and assuming a set of abundances, we can solve the model atmosphere and calculate the velocity field, the mass loss rate $`\dot{M}`$, and the synthetic spectrum. If the calculated terminal wind velocity $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ of the model differs from the observed one, we modify $`M`$ until agreement is reached (since $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ scales with $`(M/R)^{1/2}`$ according to the theory of radiation-driven winds). Now the predicted spectrum is compared to the observed one. If the fit is not satisfactory, we need to modify $`\dot{M}`$ via a change of $`R`$ (since $`\mathrm{log}\dot{M}\mathrm{log}L`$, according to radiation-driven wind theory). The change in $`R`$ forces us to change the mass, too, in order to keep $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ consistent with the observed value. The new model is calculated and the process is repeated until we obtain a good fit to all features in the observed spectrum. (Additionally, $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ might need to be corrected slightly during this iteration, if the initial guess was not satisfactory.)

With this procedure our current models produce satisfactory results for massive Population I stars. What happens if we apply the same procedure to CSPNs?

## 5 The wind properties of hot stars

As a first point of our investigation we examine the dynamical parameters $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\dot{M}`$ of radiation-driven CSPN winds.

The significance of this parameters is obvious, since it is the consistent hydrodynamics which provides the link between the stellar parameters ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, $`M`$, $`R`$) and the appearance of the UV spectra, because the latter are determined by the interplay of the NLTE model and the hydrodynamics. The link is the line force which controls the hydrodynamics, and which is controlled by the occupation numbers, and the radiative transfer of the NLTE model. The hydrodynamics in turn affects the NLTE model and thus the spectra via the density and velocity structure.

### 5.1 The relation between wind-momentum loss rate and luminosity

A tool for illustrating the behavior of the dynamical parameters is offered by the so called wind-momentum–luminosity relation.

The significance of this relation is based on the fact that, due to the driving mechanism of hot stars, the mechanical momentum of the wind flow ($`v_{\mathrm{}}\dot{M}`$) is mostly a function of photon momentum ($`L/c`$) and is therefore related to the luminosity. Thus, the radiatively driven wind theory predicts, for fixed abundances, a simple relation between the quantity $`\dot{M}v_{\mathrm{}}`$, which has the dimensions of a momentum loss rate, and the stellar luminosity:

$$\dot{M}v_{\mathrm{}}R^{1/2}L^{1/\alpha }$$

where $`\alpha `$, related to the power law exponent of the line strength distribution function, is $`2/3`$ (slightly dependent on temperature and metallicity; see, for example, Puls et al. Puls-et-al-1996 (1996)). As the expression $`v_{\mathrm{}}\dot{M}R^{1/2}`$ is an almost directly observable quantity (see below), it is practical to plot the log of $`\dot{M}v_{\mathrm{}}R^{1/2}`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{log}L`$. In this kind of plot the theory predicts, in first approximation, a linear relation, which is indeed followed by all kinds of massive hot stars, as shown in Figure 1.

An initial attempt to verify if CSPNs follow the wind-momentum–luminosity relation was partly successful (see Figure 3 in Kudritzki et al. Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997) and also our Figure 1). In that paper, terminal wind velocities $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ were taken from observed UV spectra and $`Q`$-values (a quantity relating mass loss rate and stellar radius, $`Q\dot{M}(Rv_{\mathrm{}})^{3/2}`$) were derived from observed H$`\alpha `$ profiles222We refer to this as “optical analysis”, since although $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ was taken from UV spectra, this is a quantity that can be derived easily and does not require much analysis. The real analysis determining $`Q`$ and $`\mathrm{log}g`$ using model atmospheres was performed using optical spectra.  using the optical spectra described in section 3. Stellar masses were derived from $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`\mathrm{log}g`$, using post-AGB tracks plotted in the $`\mathrm{log}g`$$`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ diagram. The stellar radii (and thus, mass loss rates) and luminosities were then obtained from the masses and the post-AGB mass–luminosity relation. The CSPNs were found to be at the expected position along the wind-momentum–luminosity relation, indicating a qualitatively successful prediction by the theory of radiatively driven winds. However, the situation was not satisfactory because there appeared to be a large dispersion in wind strengths at a given luminosity (strong-winded and weak-winded CSPNs) and some of the CSPN masses and luminosities were very high ($`M>0.8M_{}`$), in contradiction with theoretical post-AGB evolutionary speeds.

Thus, at that point we had a qualitatively positive result, namely that in principle the CSPN winds appear to obey the same physics as the massive O star winds; but we also had some unsolved problems.

This situation has been recently discussed by Tinkler and Lamers (Tinkler-Lamers-2002 (2002)), who try to improve the central star parameters by imposing consistency between the evolutionary age of the central star and the dynamical age of its PN. As result of scaling the distances and stellar parameters according to their method they obtain a scatter diagram with no clear dependence of wind momentum on luminosity. So in this way we find a conflict between the predictions of post-AGB evolution theory and the theory of radiatively driven stellar winds! Are the post-AGB evolutionary tracks not complete? Or is the behavior of the photon-momentum transfer different in the atmospheres of O-type CSPNs and massive O-stars?

We now want to rediscuss this situation using our improved model atmospheres.

As a preparatory step we have used our models to calculate the terminal velocities and mass loss rates for a grid of stars following the current theoretical post-AGB evolutionary tracks with surface temperatures from 30000 to 90000 K (see, for instance, Blöcker Bloecker-1995 (1995)); the resulting wind momenta are also plotted in Figure 1 (labelled “m–L grid”). The numerical models do nicely follow, as expected, the theoretical wind momentum–luminosity relation, showing less spread than the “observed” values derived by Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)). The positions of the Kudritzki et al. values in the diagram, compared to those of our models, again indicate rather large masses between $`0.6`$ and $`0.95M_{}`$, with a clear absence of CSPNs with masses below $`0.6M_{}`$.

As explained before, to find so many very massive CSPNs is rather unexpected from the standpoint of current evolutionary theory, in view of their very high predicted evolutionary speeds.

### 5.2 The relations of the individual dynamical parameters $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\dot{M}`$

To try to better understand the discrepancy found from the investigation of the wind momenta, we must compare the relations of the individual dynamical quantities involved ($`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\dot{M}`$), since these relations are not just a function of the stellar luminosity, as is the case for the “wind-momentum–luminosity relation”, they are also sensitively dependent on the stellar mass.

By doing so we find indeed that something must be seriously wrong. Figure 2 (upper panel) shows our predicted terminal velocities and the observed values. Figure 2 (lower panel) shows our predicted mass loss rates and those derived by Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)) for their sample. Here a fundamental discrepancy immediately becomes obvious: whereas the positions of the observations in the diagram showing the terminal velocities cluster at rather small CSPN masses (between $`0.5`$ and $`0.6M_{}`$), their mass loss rates point to a majority of masses above $`0.7M_{}`$.

A detailed look at the positions of individual CSPNs in the plots reveals even more alarming discrepancies. Take, for example, He 2-131. Its terminal velocity would indicate a mass of about $`0.6M_{}`$ (circle 1A in Figure 2 upper panel). But this mass is completely irreconcilable with its mass loss rate: it is found not at the position labelled 1A in Figure 2 (lower panel), but at 1B, with $`\dot{M}`$ a factor of hundred higher, suggesting a mass of above $`0.94M_{}`$! The reverse is true for NGC 2392. Its terminal velocity points to a mass of about $`0.9M_{}`$ (circle 2A in Figure 2 upper panel), but its observed mass loss rate is much too small for this mass (circle 2B in Figure 2 lower panel), indicating a mass of approximately $`0.6M_{}`$.

If instead of the terminal velocities we take the mass loss rate determinations of Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)) as basis for the discussion, then our calculations place these two stars at the positions labelled 1B and 2B in Figure 2 (upper panel), with terminal velocities differing by factors of 2 to 3. But this is clearly ruled out by the observations; $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ is a directly measurable quantity!

Therefore, no matter how we look at these plots, we conclude that the analysis of Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)) revealed mass loss rates which cannot be reconciled with the currently accepted post-AGB evolutionary tracks which the radiatively driven wind models shown have been based on.

So far we have used from the UV spectra of the CSPNs only one bit of information: the observed terminal velocity $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$. Now we will try to clarify the situation by fitting the full UV spectra with the new atmospheric models. In this way the wind theory will provide us with stellar parameters derived independently of the post-AGB evolution theory, and in case we are successful by fitting the spectra consistently with the dynamical parameters we might have the chance to decide whether the reason for this discrepancy lies with the evolutionary tracks on the one hand or the analysis by Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)) on the other.

## 6 Consistent UV analysis of the CSPNs He 2-131 and NGC 2392

We will start with a detailed description of the two puzzling cases we have been squarely faced with above.

Figure 3 (top left) shows the synthetic UV spectrum of the model corresponding to position 1A in Figure 2. It is clearly incompatible with the observed spectrum333Note that here and in the following, the observed spectra are contaminated by interstellar Lyman-$`\alpha `$ absorption. We have not attempted to include this in our models, since the affected region has no bearing on our conclusions. Neither are other interstellar lines included in the modelling procedure. of He 2-131 (middle), since its mass loss rate and due to that its luminosity is obviously too small, as evidenced by the presence of mostly purely photospheric lines, hardly affected by the unincisive thin wind. The theory of radiation-driven winds offers a solution: this CSPN must have a much larger luminosity, because $`L`$ is the major factor determining the mass loss rate. We have calculated a series of models with increasing luminosity – and therefore increasing mass loss rate – (at the same time adjusting the mass to keep the terminal velocity at its observed value) to verify if one of these models could reproduce the numerous strongly wind-contaminated iron lines observed especially between $`1500`$ and $`1700`$ Å. Indeed, a more luminous model, able to sustain the high mass loss rate of model 1B in Figure 2, produces a convincing fit – see Figure 3, bottom left. The parameters of this model are given in Table 1.

The situation is reversed with NGC 2392. The synthetic spectrum of model 2A in Figure 2 is incompatible with the observed UV spectrum (Figure 3, right top and middle, respectively), since it produces many strongly wind-contaminated lines, which are not observed; the star produces almost exclusively photospheric lines! Again the problem can be attributed to the luminosity, which is too high in this case. Decreasing the luminosity and thus the mass loss rate yields a model which is quite well in agreement with the observed spectrum (Figure 3, bottom right). The stellar parameters of this model are also given in Table 1.

In summary, the new model atmospheres produce a good fit to all the observable features in the UV spectrum. We remark at this point that our error in the stellar mass is very small ($`0.1M_{}`$) due to the sensitive dependence on the predicted $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ and the small error received from determining this value from the observed spectrum ($`10\%`$). Furthermore, we note that our predicted values of $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ are in agreement within 10% with the observed values in the case of massive O stars (cf. Hoffmann and Pauldrach Hoffmann-Pauldrach-2001 (2001)). Thus, a possible internal error leaves no margin for a larger uncertainty in the deduced masses.

What can we conclude from the derived stellar parameters? Let us consider first the weak-winded CSPN, NGC 2392. We determine a $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ of 40000 K from the ionization equilibrium of Fe ions in the stellar UV spectrum, similar to the value obtained from the ionization equilibrium of He i and He ii (absorption lines in the optical stellar spectrum).444We do not want to hide the fact that this central star has an anomalously high He ii Zanstra temperature of about 70000 K and an even higher energy-balance temperature (Méndez et al. Mendez-et-al-1992 (1992)), but we have carefully verified that both the visual and especially the UV stellar features are decidedly incompatible with such high temperatures. This discrepancy is at present unresolved. Apparently an additional source of He-ionizing photons is needed in this case. For the moment we ignore this, and perform the analysis using the information about $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ derived from the stellar spectrum. The very low terminal wind velocity of $`400\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, together with the low luminosity (needed to adjust the predicted mass loss rate so that the predicted and observed spectra are in good agreement) lead us to adopt a small radius. Using this radius ($`1.5R_{}`$) and $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ we get a stellar mass of only $`0.41M_{}`$, a value much smaller than obtained if we assume the classical post-AGB mass–luminosity relation – a high mass of $`0.9M_{}`$ was the result found by Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)).

Note that the radius $`1.5R_{}`$ and mass $`0.41M_{}`$ of this CSPN correspond to $`\mathrm{log}g=3.7`$, in good agreement with the $`\mathrm{log}g`$ derived earlier from the NLTE plane-parallel analysis of the optical stellar spectrum.

In the case of the central star of He 2-131 the terminal velocity of $`500\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (and $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=33000\mathrm{K}`$) would appear to suggest, according to the classical post-AGB mass–luminosity relation (cf. Figure 2 upper panel), a stellar mass of about $`0.6M_{}`$. However, the wind features observed in the UV spectrum forced us to increase the stellar $`R`$ and thus $`L`$, which in turn increased $`\dot{M}`$ until a good fit was obtained. From the corresponding large radius – $`5.5R_{}`$ – and $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ we derive a stellar mass of $`1.39M_{}`$, a value very close to the Chandrasekhar mass limit for white dwarfs! Thus, in this case the resulting mass is even more extreme than the value of $`0.9M_{}`$ obtained by Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)).

## 7 Consistent UV analysis of 7 additional CSPNs

In a similar fashion as for the two objects described in detail in the previous section, we have computed hydrodynamical models that reproduce the observed UV spectra of the 7 other CSPNs of our sample. The spectra are plotted in Figure 4, the resulting parameters are listed in Table 1.

We would like to remark on two points in this context. The first is that the observed spectrum of IC 4637 (not shown) is very noisy. Our parameters given for this particular star are therefore not of the same quality as those of the other objects, and should thus be seen more as a hydrodynamic consistency check to the values derived by Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)), than as resulting from a detailed spectral fit.

The second is that the UV spectra of IC 418 and He 2-108 are very similar, and we therefore derive similar parameters for these two stars, as the same model obviously fits both spectra equally well.

Concerning the elemental composition, we have adopted the Helium abundances from Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)). For the other elements, we have assumed a solar abundance pattern, justified by the good fit to the observed UV spectra. A minor discrepancy is seen in NGC 2392, which the optical spectrum would indicate to be N-rich and C-deficient, a result also reflected in the UV spectrum (for example, both the observed C iii and C iv lines are weaker than those of the model). However, the influence of this on the hydrodynamics is small, since C and N are not major contributors to the line force (Pauldrach Pauldrach-1987 (1987)) and the sum of C, N, and O would remain constant if these abundances were the result of the CNO-process.

## 8 Interpretation of CSPN winds

Table 1 shows the result of applying the method and UV analysis to the nine CSPNs of our sample.

First of all, these results are, in a broad sense, encouraging. We have not found any object with decidedly impossible masses and luminosities (for example, we could have derived masses and luminosities typical of massive Pop. I stars: certainly that would have been quite embarrassing, but it did not happen). However, a closer look shows that we are in a very unexpected situation.

Figure 5 shows the relation between stellar mass and luminosity obtained from our model atmosphere analyses, in comparison with the mass–luminosity relation of the evolutionary tracks, represented by the values from Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)). From the viewpoint of current stellar evolutionary calculations this plot is somewhat unsettling: there is a very large spread in masses, between 0.4 and 1.4 $`M_{}`$, and the derived masses and luminosities do not agree with the classical post-AGB mass–luminosity relation. Most CSPNs are underluminous for their mass (or too massive for their luminosities).

In Figure 6 we show again the wind-momentum–luminosity relation for both massive hot stars and CSPNs, but this time based on the parameters derived in our analysis. Our new parameters give wind momenta of the right order of magnitude and within the expected luminosity range (there may be still too many CSPNs at $`\mathrm{log}L/L_{}>4`$, but not so many as in Kudritzki et al. Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)). The CSPNs are found along the extrapolation of the wind-momentum–luminosity relation defined by the massive hot stars, and the CSPNs show a smaller dispersion, i.e., a tighter correlation of wind-momentum with luminosity, than was the case in Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)). None of these facts is surprising, because our derived parameters are now based on the wind theory; of course the theory, consistently applied, will not produce any departure from its own predictions! However, the really significant fact is that we could produce a very convincing fit simultaneously to a multitude of diagnostic features in the CSPN UV spectra. There was no guarantee a priori that such a good overall fit was possible, and this is the main reason why we think that it is not easy to simply argue “the wind models must be wrong”. Instead, it is very likely that the theory and the models as an approach to it are correct in case the experiment in the form of a comparison of observed and synthetic UV-spectra was successful.

More importantly, the results obtained for NGC 2392 and NGC 3242 rule out the possibility that our method simply systematically overestimates the stellar masses: for these two stars we derive masses that lie below those deduced by Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)). In the extreme case of NGC 2392, any systematic overestimate of the mass would require this star to have a mass even below $`0.4M_{}`$. If there is any physical effect at work whose neglect results in a systematic error in the analysis, it would need to be such that it can lead to an over- as well as underestimate of the masses, despite reproducing nearly perfectly the observed UV spectra. Our current knowledge of stellar winds does not provide us with any mechanism able to do this.

If we drop the assumption made by Kudritzki et al. that the stars obey the theoretical post-AGB mass–luminosity relation, and instead scale their mass loss rates to our radii555Additionally allowing for their different effective temperatures by requiring that the observed visual flux ($`R^2T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$) stay constant. – keeping $`Q`$, the real observational quantity, fixed – then their wind momenta match ours to within about a factor of two. Furthermore, their sample with the radii thus scaled now also shows a much tighter correlation of the wind momentum to luminosity than before (see Figure 6). This indicates that two independent procedures to obtain the mass loss rates (one based on optical, the other based on UV wind-sensitive line profiles) have given consistent results. In other words, the problem cannot be attributed exclusively to the observational data used by Kudritzki et al. (Kudritzki-et-al-1997 (1997)) to estimate the mass loss rates.

If we believe both, the current evolutionary theory and the luminosities and masses we have determined from the atmospheric models, then most of our CSPNs have not followed a classical post-AGB evolution. We find many stars near the Chandrasekhar limit for white dwarfs. They do not obey the core-mass–luminosity relation (being underluminous for their mass) and this indicates that their internal structure must be different. The special case of NGC 2392 is also remarkable: with such a small mass it cannot be a post-AGB star, and we would be forced to consider alternative evolutionary histories, involving probably a binary system merged immediately after the first visit to the red giant branch. A few similar cases of low-mass CSPNs have been noted in the past: EGB 5 and PHL 932, see Méndez et al. (1988a , 1988b ). What makes NGC 2392 a more troublesome case is the additional fact that kinematically it is a rather young PN, while numerical simulations of binary merging lead to expect no visible nebulae around them, or at most very old ones, like EGB 5 and PHL 932.

If we reject such drastic departures from the classical post-AGB evolutionary picture, still assuming the evolutionary calculations to be correct, then we would need to conclude that our models, while adequate for massive O supergiants, are a failure for stars of similar surface temperature and gravity in another evolutionary status, and produce good fits to the CSPN UV spectra only by a surprising and misleading coincidence. Considering the successes of radiatively-driven wind theory, however, we regard this conclusion as highly improbable. We must therefore contemplate the possibility that our current knowledge of stellar evolution might be incomplete.

## 9 Spectroscopic distances and white dwarf masses

Facing this surprising situation, we ask if there is any way of further verifying the CSPN masses and luminosities we determined. One possible way is to calculate the spectroscopic distances and verify if they agree with the rest of the available evidence. Another way, since we expect CSPNs to become white dwarfs, is to look into what is currently known about the white dwarf mass distribution and into the recent results on asteroseismology of pre-white dwarfs.

Having all the basic stellar parameters it is easy to calculate the spectroscopic distances, following, for example, the method described in Méndez et al. (Mendez-et-al-1992 (1992)), which uses the stellar mass, $`\mathrm{log}g`$, monochromatic model atmosphere flux at visual wavelength, and dereddened apparent visual magnitude.

Table 2 shows these quantities and the resulting distances. They are not too different from the earlier spectroscopic distances by Méndez et al. (1988b , Mendez-et-al-1992 (1992)), except for the effect of the different stellar masses we are using now. NGC 2392 gets a smaller distance and He 2-131 a larger one because the new mass is smaller and larger, respectively, than before.

Now we want to discuss systematically how these spectroscopic distances compare with individual PN distances derived from other methods. We disregard all the statistical distances published by many authors because they are too uncertain for a case-by-case discussion. We consider in turn trigonometric parallaxes, distances derived from visual companions to the central stars, cluster distances, extinction distances, and expansion distances.

### 9.1 Trigonometric parallaxes

There is no overlap with the sample we are analyzing here. However, it is possible to compare trigonometric versus other spectroscopic parallaxes. Some ground-based trigonometric parallaxes are listed by Harris et al. (Harris-et-al-1997 (1997)). We consider only those objects with reliable parallaxes larger than 2 milli-arc-seconds, i.e., with distances below 500 pc: NGC 6853, NGC 7293, S 216. Their distances compare very well with the spectroscopic distances of Napiwotzki (Napiwotzki-1999 (1999)).

The Hipparcos parallaxes again do not overlap with our sample, but again it is possible to compare with other spectroscopic parallaxes. Here there is some disagreement, especially in the case of PHL 932 and (marginally) A 36. The parallax for NGC 1360 is too uncertain, but Pottasch and Acker (Pottasch-Acker-1998 (1998)) show convincingly that the Hipparcos distances of PHL 932 and A 36 require higher surface gravities than indicated by the spectroscopic analysis if we assume a central star mass of 0.6 $`M_{}`$. One way to reduce the discrepancy is to reduce the mass of the central star; so in fact we could argue that Hipparcos has confirmed the conclusion that the central star of PHL 932 must have a very low mass, below 0.3 $`M_{}`$, and cannot be a post-AGB star (Méndez et al. 1988a ). Napiwotzki (Napiwotzki-1999 (1999)) has repeated the spectroscopic analysis of PHL 932, using different models and spectrograms, and obtains atmospheric parameters marginally consistent with those of Méndez et al. (1988a ). His surface gravity is somewhat higher, but not as high as required by the Hipparcos parallax, unless we reduce the central star mass to the rather implausible value of 0.1 $`M_{}`$. Therefore in the case of PHL 932 some degree of contradiction remains. Would somebody please remeasure this parallax? Nowadays it can probably be done from the ground with adequate CCD techniques.

### 9.2 Distances derived from visual companions to the CSPNs

Again no overlap; but Ciardullo et al. (Ciardullo-et-al-1999 (1999)) assign a distance of 2.4 kpc to NGC 1535, in good agreement with the spectroscopic distance of 2.0 kpc in Méndez et al. (Mendez-et-al-1992 (1992)).

### 9.3 Cluster distances

Again no overlap. The only object we can mention here is the central star of the PN in the globular cluster M 15, where the spectroscopic distance is in excellent agreement with the cluster distance, see McCarthy et al. (McCarthy-et-al-1997 (1997)).

### 9.4 Extinction distances

Here finally we find some objects in common with our sample. Martin (Martin-1994 (1994)) concludes that the extinction distance of He 2-131 (about 700 pc), although substantially smaller, does not necessarily invalidate our distance, in view of the high Galactic latitude of this PN. The same point was made earlier by Maciel (Maciel-1985 (1985)): given its high latitude, this object at a distance of 700 pc would be some 180 pc below the Galactic plane, which is not very different from the halfthickness of the Galactic absorbing layer. As a consequence, the extinction distance should be taken as a lower limit to the true distance. The same can be argued about Tc 1, with an extinction distance of 600 pc, although Martin considers this case more of a contradiction with the spectroscopic distance. For another of our objects (He 2-108) again there is no conflict.

Martin’s best case of a contradiction is IC 2448, with an extinction distance of 840 pc and a spectroscopic distance of about 3 kpc. Unfortunately IC 2448 is not in the sample we are studying here; we do not know if a revised spectral analysis would reduce its spectroscopic distance somewhat. In any case, we think that one isolated discrepant case does not have too much weight, given the existence of many other cases showing agreement, because the isolated discrepancy can always be attributed to accidental fine structure in the interstellar dust distribution.

### 9.5 Expansion distances

Again no overlap with our sample, but since we mentioned IC 2448 in the previous subsection, we should add that there is a recent expansion distance estimate for this PN by Palen et al. (Palen-et-al-2002 (2002)). Their result is 1.4 kpc, apparently in better agreement with the extinction distance. Here we would like to sound a word of caution: a point which was made already some time ago by Steffen et al. (Steffen-et-al-1997 (1997)) and again by Schönberner (Schoenberner-2001 (2001)). The outer rim of a PN is defined by a shock front, the temporal displacement of which is not given by a material velocity and is not easily derivable from the Doppler splitting of the strongest PN emission lines. Hydrodynamic modelling indicates that frequently the Doppler splitting is smaller than the linear velocity of expansion in the plane of the sky. The assumption that both are equal can easily lead to systematically too small expansion distances, perhaps by a factor as large as 2. For that reason we think that some more work is needed on the interpretation of the angular expansion of PNs.

### 9.6 Summary on distances

The amount of information is too small to extract any solid conclusion. The independent evidence would seem to provide support to several spectroscopic distances, but there are a few discrepant cases that need to be resolved.

Since we are primarily interested in testing the validity of the theory of post-AGB evolution, a few more comments are relevant. An interesting consequence of the extinction distances is that they produce several central stars with extremely low luminosities, which cannot be post-AGB stars (see Martin Martin-1994 (1994)). Therefore we may still have a severe problem with the classical interpretation of several other CSPNs as post-AGB stars; similar to what we found for NGC 2392.

In this situation we need more and better independent distance determinations, good enough to convince everybody. For the moment, we find no compelling reason to reject the spectroscopic distances, although we understand that some of them are taken with skepticism. But we would expect the spectroscopic distances, if based on an inadequate physical theory, to fail all together in a very systematic way; not just a few of them wrong and all the others OK. And so we still expect that the few conflicting cases may be resolved in favor of the spectroscopic distances when more evidence is added.

### 9.7 The constraints from the PN luminosity function

There is another verification we can undertake, based on the behavior of extragalactic PNs. They show a very characteristic luminosity function (PNLF), with a well-defined limiting brightness, which has been successfully used for extragalactic distance determinations (see, e.g., Jacoby and Ciardullo Jacoby-Ciardullo-1993 (1993), Jacoby Jacoby-1997 (1997)). We can try to verify if our spectroscopic distances produce any overluminous PN; that would be a nice argument supporting a smaller spectroscopic distance in that case.

Now one complication is that for extragalactic work the PNLF is built using the normally very bright nebular emission \[O iii\] $`\lambda `$5007. Very low-excitation PNs do not contribute to the bright end of the $`\lambda `$5007 PNLF. But it turns out that some of our central stars belong to low-excitation PNs, implying that the flux in $`\lambda `$5007 does not provide any useful limit. For that reason we have decided to do the test using a recombination line, namely H$`\beta `$. The problem is now that we do not have too much observational information about the limiting H$`\beta `$ flux in other galaxies: the only well-observed case is the LMC. But we can try to supplement the observational LMC limit by a limit obtained from numerical simulations of the PNLF: see Méndez and Soffner (Mendez-Soffner-1997 (1997)). Their Figure 6 shows the observed H$`\beta `$ LMC PNLF, compared with a simulated PNLF. Allowing for a somewhat larger sample size in our Galaxy (see the effect of increasing the sample size in Figure 10 of Méndez and Soffner), we can estimate that the brightest PNs in our Galaxy should have an absolute H$`\beta `$ magnitude of about $`2.3`$ (the relation between observed H$`\beta `$ flux and H$`\beta `$ apparent magnitude is traditionally defined as $`m_\beta =2.5\mathrm{log}F_\beta 13.74`$).

The resulting absolute H$`\beta `$ magnitudes we derive using our spectroscopic distances are listed in Table 2. There is only one case at the limit: He 2-131, with $`M_\beta =2.4`$. All the other distances produce weaker absolute H$`\beta `$ magnitudes. Again we find no strong reason to reject our spectroscopic distances, although He 2-131 is admittedly at the very limit of acceptability.

## 10 Masses of white dwarfs and pre-white dwarfs

Probably the most severe conflict we have is the large number of very massive CSPNs, in view of the known mass distribution of white dwarfs, with a well-defined maximum at about 0.6 $`M_{}`$. Although this could be used to argue against the credibility of our analysis, we would like to point to the existence of some recent results involving very massive pre-white dwarfs and white dwarfs. Most interesting is a report by Kawaler (Kawaler-2001 (2001)) who finds a wide range of pulsation periods among H-deficient CSPNs, which he tentatively interprets as due to a correspondingly large range of masses, from 0.52 to 1.2 $`M_{}`$. This looks surprisingly similar to our result, based on a completely different observational technique applied to a completely different sample of central stars (our stars have H-rich atmospheres).

Another study worth mentioning is by Napiwotzki et al. (Napiwotzki-et-al-1999 (1999)). They have determined masses for a sample of 46 hot DA white dwarfs selected from the Extreme UV Explorer (EUVE) and ROSAT Wide Field Camera bright source lists. They find a peak mass of 0.59 $`M_{}`$, in agreement with many other studies, but find a non-negligible fraction of white dwarfs with masses in excess of 1 $`M_{}`$.

Yet another study by Silvestri et al. (Silvestri-et-al-2001 (2001)), dealing with a sample of 41 white dwarfs in wide binary systems, finds a bimodal mass distribution with a second mass peak at 1.1 $`M_{}`$. They interpret this second peak, suspiciously close to twice the mass of the first peak, as the result of binary mergers.

Therefore, our mass distribution, with its probable dependence on very strong selection effects, is perhaps not as irreconcilable with the rest of the evidence as we could have thought initially.

The conflict with the post-AGB evolutionary speeds is not too important if we decide to accept a drastic departure from the relation between luminosity and mass. In this case new stellar structure and evolutionary calculations would be needed.

## 11 Conclusions and perspectives

We have applied our new model atmospheres, involving a much improved treatment of blocking and blanketing by all metal lines in the entire sub- and supersonically expanding atmosphere, to the analysis of a sample of 8 PN central stars. We have shown how the new models can produce an essentially perfect fit to a multitude of spectral features in the UV spectra of the CSPNs. The fits lead us to determine a set of stellar parameters including separate determinations of luminosity and mass, allowing for the first time a full test of the post-AGB evolutionary calculations. Surprisingly, we find drastic departures from the theoretical post-AGB mass–luminosity relation.

The luminosities we derive for the stars of our sample lie in the expected range, but we find a much larger spread in the masses, from 0.4 to 1.4 $`M_{}`$. The resulting relation between CSPN mass and luminosity deviates severely from that given by the theory of post-AGB evolution.

For five out of the nine CSPNs of our sample we obtain masses near, but not above, the critical Chandrasekhar mass limit for white dwarfs. Despite our sample most probably being influenced by selection effects, this result nevertheless invites speculation about the role of a group of CSPNs as precursors to the white dwarfs believed to end up as Type Ia supernovae.

We cannot at the moment offer a clear-cut explanation to the discrepancy between radiation-driven wind theory confirmed by UV-spectroscopy on the one hand and the theory of post-AGB stellar evolution on the other (in particular the fact that from the former we derive masses both larger and smaller than those predicted by the latter); however, we point out a number of other independent observational investigations (see section 9) that have also found a similarly large spread (up to 1.2 $`M_{}`$) in the CSPN/white-dwarf masses which cannot be explained by the classical post-AGB evolutionary theory. Nevertheless, if we believe both, the current evolutionary theory and the luminosities and masses we have determined from the atmospheric models, then most of the CSPNs of our sample have not followed a classical post-AGB evolution.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by the Sonderforschungsbereich 375 of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and by the DLR under grant 50 OR 9909 2.


format: text

text:
# 1 Allowed values of |𝑉_{𝑡𝑏}| (shaded area) as a function of the mass of the new quark.

hep-ph/0307176

July 2003

Indirect signals of quark singlets at colliders

J. A. Aguilar–Saavedra

Departamento de Física and CFIF,
Instituto Superior Técnico, P-1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal

## Abstract

In this talk we review some of the most relevant effects that the mixing with a $`Q=2/3`$ quark singlet might give at high energy colliders and $`K`$ and $`B`$ factories.

With the new colliders under construction or planned, the Standard Model (SM) sill be tested with an unprecedented precision in the forthcoming years. The precise measurement of the properties of the SM particles may shown indirect evidence of new physics, complementing the direct signals given by the observation of new particles. Our aim here is to describe some of the indirect effects that could be observed as a consequence of the mixing with quark singlets. These new “exotic” quarks have both their left- and right-handed components transforming as singlets under $`\mathrm{SU}(2)_L`$. Apart from their theoretical motivations , there is a clear phenomenological reason for the study of models with quark singlets. These models are the simplest ones in which the unitarity of the $`3\times 3`$ Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix is broken, and large deviations in top quark couplings with respect to the SM predictions are possible. In other SM extensions, like two Higgs doublet models or supersymmetry, the $`3\times 3`$ CKM matrix is unitary and hence the top charged couplings have the same values predicted by the SM.

For illustration we consider a SM extension with an extra $`Q=2/3`$ quark singlet. The most important effects of the mixing are caused by the modification of the SM weak interaction Lagrangian due to the mixing with the singlet. In this model, the weak interaction terms read

$`_W`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}}\overline{u}_L\gamma ^\mu Vd_LW_\mu ^++\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.,`$
$`_Z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2c_W}}\left(\overline{u}_L\gamma ^\mu X^uu_L\overline{d}_L\gamma ^\mu d_L2s_W^2J_{\mathrm{EM}}^\mu \right)Z_\mu ,`$ (1)
with $`V`$ the CKM matrix, in this case of dimension $`4\times 3`$, and $`X^u=VV^{}`$ a $`4\times 4`$ hermitian matrix, not necessarily diagonal. This modification of the charged and neutral current terms leads to new contributions to precision observables, like the ratios $`R_b`$, $`R_c`$, the forward-backward asymmetries measured at LEP and SLD and the oblique parameters. Moreover, there are important effects on meson physics, for instance in $`K`$, $`D`$ and $`B`$ oscillations, in the decays $`bs\gamma `$, $`bsl^+l^{}`$ and in the rare $`K`$ decays $`K^+\pi ^+\nu \overline{\nu }`$, $`K_L\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$. The agreement of this model with experiment implies that the charged current couplings of the new mass eigenstate $`V_{Td}`$, $`V_{Ts}`$ and the nondiagonal terms in $`X^u`$ must be relatively small, of order $`O(10^1)`$ at most. However, it is possible to have a sizeable mixing with the third generation, with observable effects at present and future colliders .

One remarkable effect of the mixing is the decrease of $`V_{tb}`$ from the SM prediction $`V_{tb}=0.999`$. The lower limit on $`V_{tb}`$ depends on the mass of the new quark $`m_T`$, and can be as small as $`V_{tb}0.6`$, as can be observed in Fig. 1. Such deviations could be easily noticed in the measurement of $`V_{tb}`$ in single top production at LHC . On the other hand, the $`Z`$ diagonal coupling $`X_{tt}^u=|V_{td}|^2+|V_{ts}|^2+|V_{tb}|^2|V_{tb}|^2`$ is closely related to $`V_{tb}`$, and its measurement in top pair production at TESLA might be more precise.

Other striking effect is the appearance of tree-level flavour-changing neutral couplings of order $`O(10^2)`$ between $`Q=2/3`$ quarks , which could lead to flavour-changing top decays and single top production at LHC  and TESLA  at observable rates (see Fig. 2).

The mixing with a singlet may also yield new effects in low energy observables. For instance, the branching ratio of the theoretically clean decay $`K_L\pi ^0\nu \overline{\nu }`$ can reach $`4.4\times 10^{10}`$, more than one order of magnitude above the SM prediction and readily observable in planned experiments . Other interesting quantity is the mass difference in the $`B_s`$ system, which can range between 13.1 and 37.7 ps-1 (the SM expectation is 17.6 ps-1). Another excellent place to look for new physics is through CP asymmetries in $`B`$ decays. A good example is the time dependent CP asymmetry in the decay $`B_sD_s^+D_s^{}`$. This asymmetry is almost free of penguin pollution and it is predicted to be close to zero in the SM, but can have any value between $`0.3`$ and $`0.4`$ in this model.

In summary, the existence of a new quark singlet can have interesting consequences at large colliders and at $`K`$ and $`B`$ factories. Despite the strong constraints given by present experimental data, there is still large room for new effects, which might show up in addition to the direct observation of a new quark.


text:
# Incompressible Maps of Surfaces and Dehn Filling

## 1 Introduction and Statements

The best understood 3-manifolds are Haken 3-manifolds; these are manifolds that are irreducible and contain incompressible surfaces. One approach to 3-manifolds is to try to generalize the notion of an incompressible surface. Essential laminations and mapped-in $`\pi _1`$-injective surfaces have both been used with some success as substitutes for incompressible surfaces, yielding theorems which apply to classes of manifolds larger than the class of Haken manifolds.

In dealing with maps of surfaces $`f:SM`$ which induce injections on $`\pi _1`$, a proof of the Simple Loop Conjecture would be helpful. Suppose $`M`$ is a compact, orientable closed 3-manifold, $`S`$ is a closed orientable surface of genus $`g1`$, and $`f:SM`$ is a map with the property that the induced map $`\pi _1(S)\pi _1(M)`$ has non-trivial kernel. Then the conjecture is that there is an essential simple closed curve $`\gamma `$ in $`S`$, with $`f|_\gamma `$ null-homotopic in $`M`$. (Note: The same conjecture with $`M`$ replaced by a surface was proved by David Gabai in .)

If the conjecture is true, a map $`f:SM`$ which is not essential, in the sense that it does not induce an injection on $`\pi _1`$, can be replaced by a map of a surface of lower genus by performing surgery on $`S`$ and on the map $`f`$. In dealing with embedded incompressible surfaces, this kind of surgery is an important tool.

For completeness, we give a precise definition of injective and $``$-injective maps of surfaces. We always assume $`M`$ is an orientable, compact 3-manifold. If $`S`$ is a compact surface, possibly with boundary, we will say that a map $`f:(S,S)(M,M)`$ is $`\pi _1`$-injective if the induced map $`\pi _1(S)\pi _1(M)`$ is injective. We will say the map $`f:(S,S)(M,M)`$ is $``$-$`\pi _1`$-injective if the induced map on $`\pi _1(S,S,p)\pi _1(M,M,f(p))`$ is injective for every choice of base point $`p`$ in $`S`$.

One can define a class of maps of surfaces which would be $`\pi _1`$-injective if the Simple Loop Conjecture were true. Given an orientable surface $`S`$ which is not a sphere or disc, we shall say that a map $`f:(S,S)(M,M)`$ is incompressible if no essential simple loop in $`S`$ is mapped to a homotopically trivial curve in $`M`$. When $`M`$ has boundary, we say that the map $`f:(S,S)(M,M)`$ is $``$-incompressible if no essential simple arc in $`S`$ is mapped to an arc in $`M`$ which is homotopic in $`M`$, rel boundary, to an arc in $`M`$. If $`f`$ is a sphere (or a disc) a map $`f:(S,S)(M,M)`$ is essential if it is not null-homotopic (not homotopic to a disc in $`M`$). We will say a map $`f:(S,S)(M,M)`$ is essential if either it is an essential map of a disc or sphere, or it is an incompressible, $``$-incompressible map of a surface which is not a disc or sphere. We emphasize that all results in this paper about essential maps of surfaces use the definition of “essential” in terms of incompressible maps, i.e. a definition which bypasses the issue of the Simple Loop Conjecture.

It is possible to prove some results about incompressible maps of surfaces, results analogous to results about embedded incompressible surfaces. In fact, in , I stated Proposition 1.1, below. Ian Agol pointed out a gap in the proof. The purpose of this paper is to generalize the result while filling the gap, a missed case which appears as Case 5 in the proof of the main theorem of this paper, Theorem 1.5.

###### Proposition 1.1.

(See .) Suppose $`M`$ is a compact, orientable 3-manifold with $`k`$ torus boundary components, and suppose $`\overline{M}=M(r_1,\mathrm{},r_k)`$ is the manifold obtained by performing Dehn filling of slope $`r_i`$ on the i-th boundary torus. Suppose $`S`$ is a closed orientable surface, not a sphere. Given an incompressible (e.g. $`\pi _1`$-injective) map $`f:S\overline{M}`$, there is an incompressible, $``$-incompressible map $`\widehat{f}:(\widehat{S},\widehat{S})(M,M)`$, where $`\widehat{S}`$ is a surface obtained from $`S`$ by removing interiors of some collection of disjointly embedded discs and where components of $`\widehat{S}`$ mapped to the $`i`$-th boundary component are embedded curves of slope $`r_i`$.

Agol asked me about the following related result, which he believed to be true. He proved a somewhat weaker version, Lemma 3.2 in .

###### Proposition 1.2.

Suppose $`M`$ is an orientable 3-manifold with $`M`$ a single torus, let $`M(r)`$ be the manifold obtained from $`M`$ by performing a slope $`r`$ Dehn filling on $`M`$, and let $`K`$ be the core curve of the Dehn filling solid torus $`R`$. Suppose $`f:SM(r)`$ is a map of a disc to $`M(r)`$ with $`f|_S`$ mapped to $`K`$ with degree $`1`$. Choosing a map which intersects $`K`$ minimally yields an incompressible, $``$-incompressible map $`\widehat{f}:(\widehat{S},\widehat{S})(M,M)`$ of a punctured disc $`\widehat{S}`$, where $`\widehat{S}=f^1(M)`$. One boundary component of $`\widehat{S}`$ is mapped to a curve in $`M`$ homotopic in $`R`$ to $`f|_S`$, and all other curves of $`\widehat{S}`$ are embedded as curves of slope $`r`$.

Exactly what we mean by a map “which intersects $`K`$ minimally” will be explained below. For Agol, the motivation for proving the above result was to be able to conclude that if a Dehn filling on $`M`$ yields a finite fundamental group 3-manifold, then there exists an incompressible, $``$-incompressible map of a disc-with-holes into the manifold $`M`$.

One can prove a more general theorem which has all of the above as corollaries. To state the more general theorem, we first make some more definitions. Let $`K=K_j`$ be a link in a manifold $`\overline{M}`$, where each $`K_j`$ is a knot, and let $`R_j`$ be a solid torus regular neighborhood of $`K_j`$. Suppose $`S`$ is a surface and suppose $`S`$ is the disjoint union of $`_iS`$ (interior boundary) and $`_eS`$ (exterior boundary).

###### Definitions 1.3.

A map $`f:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},K,\overline{M})`$ is relatively incompressible at $`K`$, if

i) for no simple essential arc $`\alpha `$ in $`S`$ with both ends on $`_iS`$ is $`f|_\alpha `$ homotopic in $`\overline{M}`$ into $`K`$.

ii) for every component $`\alpha `$ of $`_iS`$ $`f|_\alpha `$ is not null-homotopic in $`K`$, i.e. has $`\text{degree}1`$.

The map $`f:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},K,\overline{M})`$ is incompressible if (as before) no essential simple loop in $`S`$ is mapped to a homotopically trivial curve in $`\overline{M}`$. When $`\overline{M}`$ has boundary, we say that the map $`f:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},K,\overline{M})`$ is $``$-incompressible if no essential simple arc $`(\alpha ,\alpha )(S,_eS)`$ is mapped to an arc in $`\overline{M}`$ which is homotopic in $`\overline{M}`$ to an arc in $`\overline{M}`$. In all of the following, it is helpful to think of the special case where $`\overline{M}`$ is closed and $`_eS=\mathrm{}`$.

As we shall see, it is possible to homotope a relatively incompressible map $`f:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},K,\overline{M})`$ such that $`f^1(R_j)`$ is a collar of $`_iS`$, together with discs mapped homeomorphically to meridians of $`R_j`$’s. In this case we say $`f`$ is a good map with respect to $`K`$. For a good map, we also require that $`f|_{_eS}`$ be in general position, i.e. that there be no triple points on $`\overline{M}`$. Similarly, we require $`f`$ to intersect $`_jR_j`$ generically.

To see that a relatively incompressible map $`f:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},K,\overline{M})`$ can be replaced by a homotopic good map, we proceed as follows. Choose a curve $`\gamma `$ of $`_iS`$ and suppose it is mapped to $`K_j`$. Choose any curve $`\delta `$ embedded in $`R_j`$ homotopic in $`R_j`$ to the map $`f|_\gamma `$ and intersecting meridian discs efficiently. We can then construct a map of an annulus $`A`$ into $`R_j`$ by coning to the center $`\delta E`$ in each meridian disc $`E`$ of a 1-parameter family of meridian discs which foliate $`R_j`$. Then we homotope $`f`$ so that on a collar of $`\gamma `$ it agrees with the map of $`A`$ just constructed. We do this for every component of $`_iS`$. Finally, making $`f`$ transverse to $`_jK_j`$ on $`SN(_iS)`$, we may assume that remaining non-annular components of $`f^1(_jR_j)`$ are discs mapped to meridians of $`R_j`$’s. This yields a good map after a further homotopy to achieve general position in $`\overline{M}`$ and in $`_jR_j`$.

We will use $`M`$ to denote $`\overline{M}\text{int}(_jR_j)`$, $`\widehat{S}=f^1(M)`$, and $`\widehat{f}=f|_{\widehat{S}}`$.

It will be convenient to extend our definition of essentiality.

###### Definition 1.4.

A map

$$f:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},K,\overline{M})$$

of an orientable surface (possibly a disc or sphere) is essential if one of the following holds:

1) It is not a map of a disc or sphere and is incompressible, $``$-incompressible, and relatively incompressible at $`K_j`$.

2) It is an essential map of a sphere or an essential map of a disc $`(S,_eS)(\overline{M},\overline{M})`$.

3) It is a relatively incompressible map of a disc $`f:(S,_iS)(\overline{M},_jK_j)`$, i.e., a map of a disc $`S`$ of non-zero degree on $`S`$.

We assign a complexity to a good map $`f:(S,_iS,_eS)`$ $`(\overline{M},_jK_j,\overline{M})`$ The complexity is $`c(f)=m(f)+i(f)+e(f)`$, where $`m(f)`$ is the number of discs in $`f^1(_jR_j)`$, $`i(f)`$ is the number of double points of $`f`$ on $`_jR_j`$, and $`e(f)`$ is the number of double points on $`\overline{M}=_eM`$.

###### Theorem 1.5.

Suppose $`M`$ is an orientable 3-manifold with $`k`$ distinguished torus boundary components $`T_j`$, and suppose $`M(r_1,\mathrm{},r_k)=\overline{M}`$ is the manifold obtained by performing Dehn filling of slope $`r_j`$ on the $`j`$-th boundary torus $`T_j`$. Let $`K_j`$ denote the core curve of the $`j`$-th Dehn filling solid torus, $`R_j`$. Suppose $`S`$ is an orientable, connected surface and suppose $`f:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},_jK_j,\overline{M})`$, is essential. Then if $`c(f)`$ is minimal over all essential good maps $`g:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},_jK_j,\overline{M})`$ with $`g`$ homotopic to $`f`$ on $`_iS`$, then the restriction $`\widehat{f}`$ of $`f`$ to $`\widehat{S}=f^1(M)`$ is essential in $`M`$. For every component of $`_iS`$ mapped to $`K_j`$ there is a curve of $`\widehat{S}`$ isotopic to it in $`S`$ which is mapped by $`\widehat{f}`$ to $`R_j`$. Every other boundary curve of $`\widehat{S}`$ in $`f^1(R_j)`$ is embedded by $`\widehat{f}`$ as a meridian in $`R_j`$.

Note that, in general, the theorem yields an essential map $`\widehat{f}`$ of a surface $`\widehat{S}`$ whose boundary can be subdivided into three parts. The exterior boundary of $`S`$ remains unchanged in $`\widehat{S}`$, yielding $`_e\widehat{S}`$. The interior boundary of $`\widehat{S}`$, $`_i\widehat{S}`$, consists of those closed curves of $`\widehat{S}`$ on the boundary of annular collars in $`S\widehat{S}`$ of $`S`$ mapped by $`f`$ to $`_jR_j`$. The components of $`_i\widehat{S}`$ are isotopic in $`S`$ to components of $`_iS`$. Finally, $`_m\widehat{S}=f^1(R_j)_i\widehat{S}`$. In many applications, we can take $`_eS=\mathrm{}`$. In case $`\widehat{f}`$ is an embedding on a component of $`_i\widehat{S}`$, we can assign a boundary slope to that boundary component. The terminology is standard: A slope is the isotopy class of an embedded closed curve in a torus. In Proposition 1.2 above we obtain two boundary curves, one embedded and yielding a boundary slope. In Corollaries 1.6 and 1.7 below, we obtain exactly two boundary slopes, one of which is the slope of the Dehn filling. This indicates that incompressible, $``$-incompressible maps of connected surfaces with multiple boundary slopes, as described in , occur quite naturally.

###### Corollary 1.6.

Suppose $`M`$ is an orientable 3-manifold (for example the exterior of a knot in $`S^3`$) with $`M`$ a single torus. Let $`M(r)`$ be the manifold obtained from $`M`$ by performing a slope $`r`$ Dehn filling on $`M`$, and let $`K`$ be the core curve of the Dehn filling solid torus. If $`K`$ is null-homologous in $`M(r)`$, then $`K`$ bounds a mapped-in surface $`f:SM(r)`$ (so $`f|_S`$ is an embedding to $`K`$). If $`S`$ has genus $`g`$, then there is an essential map $`\widehat{f}:\widehat{S}M`$, of a surface $`\widehat{S}`$ of genus $`g`$ , with $`\widehat{f}`$ mapping one component, $`_i\widehat{S}`$, of $`\widehat{S}`$ to an integer slope embedded simple closed curve in $`M`$ and embedding the remainder, $`_m\widehat{S}`$, of $`\widehat{S}`$ as slope $`r`$ closed curves in $`M`$.

In particular, if $`M(r)`$ is a homology sphere, there is a map $`\widehat{f}`$ of a surface $`\widehat{S}`$ as above.

###### Corollary 1.7.

Let $`KS^3`$ be a knot in the 3-sphere and let $`X`$ be the knot exterior. There is an essential map $`\widehat{f}:(P,P)(X,X)`$ of a planar surface, with $`\widehat{f}`$ restricted to one component of $`P`$, $`_iP`$ say, mapping to an integer slope embedded simple closed curve in $`X`$ and with all other components of $`P`$ mapping to embedded meridian curves in $`X`$.

More general than Corollary 1.6, we have the following.

###### Corollary 1.8.

Suppose $`M`$ is an orientable 3-manifold with $`k`$ torus boundary components, and suppose $`\overline{M}=M(r_1,\mathrm{},r_k)`$ is the manifold obtained by performing Dehn filling of slope $`r_j`$ on the j-th boundary torus $`T_j`$, for each $`j`$. Let $`K_j\overline{M}`$ denote the core curve of the $`j`$-th Dehn filling solid torus. Giving an orientation to each $`K_j`$, suppose $`_in_{j_i}[K_{j_i}]=0`$ in $`H_1(\overline{M})`$ for some integers $`n_{j_i}`$, and no proper subset of the $`[K_{j_i}]`$’s is dependent in $`H_1(\overline{M})`$. Then the 1-cycle $`_in_{j_i}[K_{j_i}]`$ bounds a connected mapped-in surface $`f:S\overline{M}`$. If the genus of $`S`$ is $`g`$, then there is an essential map $`\widehat{f}:\widehat{S}M`$ of a connected surface $`\widehat{S}`$ of genus $`g`$ with the following property. The boundary of $`\widehat{S}`$ can be decomposed as $`\widehat{S}=_i\widehat{S}_m\widehat{S}`$, so that for every $`T_{j_i}`$ there is at least one component of $`_i\widehat{S}`$ mapped to $`T_{j_i}`$, and so that every component of $`_m\widehat{S}`$ is embedded in some $`T_j`$ as a slope $`r_j`$ curve.

The above corollary is related to Lemmas 2.4 and 2.5 of  which deal with planar surfaces only.

I thank Ian Agol, with whom I exchanged ideas related to this paper. The main result presented here grew out of Proposition 1.2, which was formulated by Agol.

## 2 Proof of Main Theorem

###### Proof.

(Theorem 1.5.) Recall that $`R_j`$ denotes the $`j`$-th filling solid torus attached to the 2-torus $`T_jM`$.

We assume now that $`f`$ is chosen so that the complexity $`c(f)`$ is minimal over all good maps $`g:(S,_iS,_eS)(\overline{M},_jK_j,\overline{M})`$ with $`g`$ homotopic to $`f`$ on $`_iS`$. Henceforth we let $`\widehat{f}`$ denote $`f`$ restricted to $`\widehat{S}=f^1(M)`$. We shall deal with the case that $`\widehat{f}:\widehat{S}M`$ is a map of a disc or sphere at the end of the proof, showing that the map is essential. In all remaining cases, our task is to prove incompressibility and $``$-incompressibility of the map $`\widehat{f}`$.

If $`\widehat{f}`$ is compressible, then using the incompressibility of $`f`$, we can replace $`f`$ by a map whose image includes fewer meridian discs in $`R_j`$’s as follows. A simple closed curve $`\alpha \widehat{S}`$ with $`\widehat{f}|_\alpha `$ null-homotopic in $`M`$, but with $`\alpha `$ not null-homotopic in $`\widehat{S}`$, must be null-homotopic in $`S`$ by the incompressibility of $`f`$. Replacing $`f`$ restricted to the disc $`D`$ in $`S`$ bounded by $`\alpha `$ by the null-homotopy in $`M`$, we obtain $`f`$ intersecting $`R_j`$ in fewer discs, so the summand $`m(f)`$ of $`c(f)`$ is reduced, a contradiction. The same argument applies if $`S`$ is a disc or a sphere.

Showing that $`\widehat{f}`$ is $``$-incompressible is considerably more difficult. Suppose $`\beta `$ is a simple essential arc in $`\widehat{S}`$ joining points in $`\widehat{S}`$ and homotopic to an arc in $`M`$. The homotopy is represented by a map $`h:(H,a)(M,M)`$, where $`H`$ is a half-disc, i.e. a disc with $`H`$ divided into two complementary arcs $`a`$ and $`b`$ intersecting only at their endpoints. The map $`h|_b`$ factors through an embedding $`k:b\widehat{S}`$ whose image is $`\beta \widehat{S}`$, so $`\widehat{f}k=h|_b`$. We may suppose the arc $`h|_a`$ is not homotopic in $`M`$ to an arc in the image of $`\widehat{S}`$, or more precisely, that $`h|_a`$ is not homotopic to $`\widehat{f}`$ restricted to an arc in $`\widehat{S}`$, otherwise extending this homotopy to $`h`$ changes $`h:HM`$ into a potential compressing disc for $`\widehat{f}`$. The fact that $`\widehat{f}`$ is incompressible then shows that $`h`$ is not a $``$-compression, since the image $`\beta `$ of $`h|_b`$ is then inessential in $`\widehat{S}`$.

Keeping in mind that we do not need to consider the uninteresting $``$\- compressions described above, there are 6 cases. We shall describe the cases by homotoping $`\widehat{f}|_\beta `$ in $`M`$ to an arc near $`M`$, extending the homotopy to all of $`S`$ rel $`\overline{M}{}_{}{}^{}M`$ to get a homotopy of $`f`$, and homotoping $`f`$ further to push $`\beta `$ into an $`R_j`$. Case 1 and 2, shown in Figures 1 and 2a, occur when the arc $`\beta `$ joins boundary components of $`\widehat{S}`$ which are capped by meridian discs in $`S`$. Each figure depicts a portion of the image of $`f`$ in an $`R_j`$, or in a regular neighborhood of an $`R_j`$. Case 3, shown in Figure 3, occurs when $`\beta \widehat{S}`$ joins a collar of $`_iS`$ to itself, or joins a pair of annular collars. Case 4, shown in Figure 4a, occurs when $`\beta `$ joins an annular collar to a meridian disc. Case 5, shown in Figure 5, occurs when $`\beta `$ joins a meridian disc to itself. Case 6 is the less interesting case in which $`\beta `$ joins $`_e\widehat{S}`$ to itself and $`\beta `$ is homotopic in $`M`$ to an arc in $`_eM=\overline{M}`$. Note that all of the figures show a regular neighborhood in $`\widehat{S}`$ of $`\beta `$ together with the collars or meridian discs they join; we do not show all of $`f(S)(R_j)`$.

Our list of cases is exhaustive: Since both ends of $`\beta `$ must be mapped to the same component of $`M`$, either both ends lie $`_eM`$, or both ends lie in a torus component $`R_j`$ of $`_iM=M_eM`$. If both ends lie on $`_eM`$, we have Case 6. Otherwise each end lies either on the boundary of a meridian disc or on the boundary of a collar in some $`R_j`$. Cases 1 and 2 deal with arcs $`\beta `$ joining a meridian disc to a different meridian disc. Case 5 deals with arcs $`\beta `$ joining a meridian disc to itself. Case 3 deals with an arc $`\beta `$ joining two different collars, or a collar to itself. Case 4 deals with an arc $`\beta `$ joining a meridian disc to a collar. One might think that it is necessary to consider cases like those shown in Figures 1,3, or 4 where connecting bands have different numbers of half-twists, but homotopy of $`f`$ allows the elimination of pairs of half-twists (of the same sense). In Figure 4a, introduction of a half-twist in the connecting band yields a band which can be homotoped to an untwisted band on the opposite side of the arc of intersection.

We will obtain a contradiction in each case.

Case 1. The arc $`\beta `$ joins two meridian discs of $`S`$ with opposite orientations, Figure 1. In this case, $`f`$ can be homotoped to reduce the number of disc intersections of $`f(S)`$ with $`_iR_i`$, a contradiction.

Case 2. The arc $`\beta `$ joins two meridian discs $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ of $`f(S)R_j`$, for some $`j`$, with consistent orientations, Figure 2a. In this case, the map $`f`$ can be homotoped such that the image of a neighborhood of $`E_1E_2\beta `$ is as shown in Figure 2b. The homotopy can be done in such a way that $`f(S)`$ is otherwise unchanged in a neighborhood of $`_iR_i`$. So we have replaced two discs of $`f^1(_iR_i)`$ by one disc mapped with an order 2 branch point, which we label $`P`$. We can move the branch point slightly away from $`R_j`$, if we wish, so that we can still regard $`f`$ as having the same complexity $`c(f)`$.

In order to obtain a contradiction, we must do some global modifications of the map $`f`$.

Applying H. Whitney’s Theorem 2 of  as described in Lemma 1 of , we can homotope $`f`$ such that the image is locally modelled as shown in Figure 6. At each point of the image, it is locally modelled as an embedding, as a transverse intersection along an arc, as an order 2 branch point, which is the cone on a figure eight, or as a triple point. We may assume that the surface $`S`$ is transversely oriented; in the figures we draw intersections so that the angle from the “+-side” of one sheet of $`S`$ to the +-side of the other sheet of $`S`$ is obtuse. Throughout this paper a branch point will be a branch point of order 2.

The idea is to eliminate branch points using homotopies starting at a branch point. Given an arc of self-intersection with at least one end a branch point, there is an obvious homotopy which moves the branch point along the arc of intersection while shortening the arc, see Figure 7. The effect is similar to the effect of a zipper, but four rather than two sheets of cloth come together along the zipper or arc of intersection. The usual zipper cuts a surface or rejoins it; our zipper cuts two surfaces and rejoins them locally in the opposite way. The branch point corresponds to the zipper head. The zipping operation was used by H. Whitney to prove Theorem 6 of  and is also used in Bing’s monograph, . In the proof of the Simple Loop Conjecture for maps from surfaces to surfaces, see , and in  the zipping operation was referred to as “the calculus of double curves.”

We begin by performing zipping operations with the goal of eliminating the branch point $`P`$. We choose any other branch point and begin zipping. It is possible that $`P`$ is the only branch point, but we shall deal with that eventuality later. If a triple point is encountered, we continue to zip through the triple point as shown in Figure 8. Clearly the curves of self-intersection of $`S`$ at the triple point are altered when the branch point passes through the triple point; there is a surgery operation on the double curves. Notice that in our figures we use a standard model for a triple point, as shown in Figure 6d. This explains our way of drawing Figure 8. After passing through a triple point, the zipper may return to what was the triple point once more, or the zipping path could return to the same point a second time as well.

There are just four possible obstructions which make it impossible to continue zipping: namely, the zipping arc may end at a point on some $`K_j`$, where a meridian of $`f(S)R_j`$ meets the image of $`_iS`$, as shown in Figure 9; it may end at another branch point as shown in Figure 10; it may end at $`\overline{M}`$, where $`f(S)`$ has a self-intersection as shown in Figure 11; or it may end where two points of $`_iS`$ are mapped to the same point of a $`K_j`$ at the end of an arc of intersection, as shown in Figure 12.

In the first case, when the zipping ends at a $`K_j`$ traversing an arc of intersection between a meridian disc and a collar in an $`R_j`$, Figure 9 shows that one obtains a new map of the same surface intersecting $`R_j`$ in fewer meridian discs. The new map, since it is homotopic to the old one and is good, satisfies the hypotheses of the theorem, which contradicts our assumption that $`f`$ has minimal complexity, since the summand $`m(f)`$ of the complexity $`c(f)`$ is reduced.

In the second case, when the zipping ends at another branch point, we cut on the arc of intersection and paste to obtain a surface which is embedded in a neighborhood of the arc, see Figure 10. The final surgery respects orientation. In terms of the topology of the surface $`S`$, this final cancellation of branch points locally has the effect of replacing an annulus of the source surface by two discs; thus it performs a surgery. But in our situation, the core of the annulus is a simple closed curve embedded in $`S`$ hence it must bound a disc in $`S`$ by the incompressibility of the map $`f`$. It follows that the final cancellation splits off a sphere, which we discard if $`S`$ is not a disc or sphere. This does not increase the number of disc components of $`f^1(R_j)`$, and it may reduce it. We obtain a new map $`f`$ defined on a homeomorphic surface $`S`$ with fewer branch points. The new map satisfies the hypotheses of the theorem. We shall see that this is the only case which does not immediately contradict the minimality of the complexity $`c(f)`$. In effect, we are using a complexity $`(c(f),b(f))`$ with lexicographical order, where $`b(f)`$ is the number of branch points, and in this case $`b(f)`$ is reduced.

If the zipping ends at $`P`$, then we have clearly removed the branch point, and we have reduced the number $`m(f)`$ of disc components of $`f^1(R_j)`$ by at least one, as compared with the number of intersections before the introduction of the branch point $`P`$. Again, the new map satisfies the hypotheses of the theorem, and we have a contradiction to the minimality of the complexity $`c(f)`$. If $`f`$ is a map of a disc or sphere, the surgery resulting from the cancellation of singularities yields maps of two spheres, or of a disc and a sphere. In each case, one of the new maps must be essential on a homeomorphic surface (disc or sphere), and it either has smaller complexity $`c(f)`$ or the same $`c(f)`$ and smaller $`b(f)`$, with strictly smaller $`c(f)`$ if the cancellation involves the branch point $`P`$.

In the third case, the zipping ends at $`\overline{M}`$, see Figure 11. Zipping to the end of the arc of intersection has the effect of surgering $`S`$ on a simple properly embedded arc. The $``$-incompressibility of $`f`$ shows that the surgery cuts a disc from $`S`$, so we obtain a new map on a homeomorphic surface by restricting to the remainder of the surface. The new map satisfies the hypotheses of the theorem. This is clear except in the case where $`S`$ is a disc, in which case the surgery yields two maps of discs, at least one of which is essential. In all cases we have reduced the summand $`e(f)`$ of the complexity $`c(f)`$, a contradiction.

In the fourth case, the zipping ends at a $`K_j`$, see Figure 12, after traversing an arc of intersection between two collars in an $`R_j`$. Zipping to the end of the arc of intersection has the effect of surgering $`S`$ on a simple properly embedded arc. The relative incompressibility of $`f`$ shows that the surgery cuts a half-disc from $`S`$, so we obtain a new map on a homeomorphic surface, satisfying the hypotheses of the theorem, by restricting to the remainder of the surface. We have reduced the summand $`i(f)`$ of the complexity $`c(f)`$, a contradiction. As before, if $`S`$ is a disc, one of the discs resulting from the surgery will be essential.

We continue zipping operations starting at branch points other than $`P`$. These operations must all end with cancellations of pairs of branch points. The fact that each zipping operation reduces the number $`b(f)`$ of branch points ensures that the process must stop when image of $`f`$ has no branch points or just the branch point at $`P`$.

If after a sequence of zipping operations, $`P`$ is the only remaining branch point, then we perform a zipping starting at $`P`$. First this has the effect of replacing the disc component of $`f^1(R_j)`$ containing $`f^1(P)`$ by two discs again, returning the configuration near $`P`$ to what it was before the introduction of the branch point $`P`$. The zipping now must end at a $`K_j`$ as shown in Figures 9 and 12, or it must end at $`\overline{M}`$ as shown in Figure 11. In each case, one obtains a surface satisfying the hypotheses of the theorem with reduced complexity as before, contradicting our assumption that $`c(f)`$ is minimal.

Case 3. The arc $`\beta `$ joins two annular collars adjacent to components of $`_iS`$ or joins an annular collar to itself. Extending $`\beta `$ yields an arc $`\beta ^{}`$ in $`S`$ joining components of $`_iS`$, which is homotopic into $`K_j`$. Relative incompressibility implies that $`\beta ^{}`$ is not essential in $`S`$; it cuts a half-disc $`H`$ from $`S`$. This yields a punctured half-disc in $`\widehat{S}`$ and shows that $`\beta `$ joins an annular collar to itself. If there is at least one puncture in $`H`$, then replacing $`f`$ on the half-disc by the homotopy from $`\beta ^{}`$ to $`K_j`$ shows that $`f`$ does not intersect $`K_j`$ minimally, showing that $`c(f)`$ was not minimal. Thus $`H`$ is embedded in $`\widehat{S}`$, and $`\beta `$ is not essential in $`\widehat{S}`$, contrary to assumption.

Case 4. The arc $`\beta `$ joins an annular collar adjacent to a component of $`_iS`$ to a meridian disc. In this case, a neighborhood in $`\widehat{S}`$ of $`\beta `$ together with the meridian disc and the annular collar are as shown in Figure 4a. The map $`f`$ can then be homotoped to eliminate a meridian disc as shown in Figure 4b,c. First, a homotopy introduces a pair of branch points, then one of the branch points is zipped to $`K`$. This again violates our assumption that $`f`$ has minimal complexity $`c(f)`$.

Case 5. We have a disc $`E`$ of $`f(S)R_j`$ joined to itself by an arc $`\beta `$ embedded in $`\widehat{S}`$, and $`f(\beta )`$ can be homotoped to an arc $`\beta ^{}`$ in $`R_j`$ as shown in Figure 5. The arc $`\beta ^{}`$ may wrap around $`R_j`$ longitudinally any number of times. We need not consider the possibility that $`\beta ^{}`$ is homotopic to an arc in $`E\widehat{S}`$, since, as we have observed, in this case the $``$-compression yields a compressing disc. The arc $`\beta ^{}`$ should be made simple at the expense of introducing additional intersections with $`E\widehat{S}`$. This can be done by pushing self-intersections of $`\beta ^{}`$ off the ends of $`\beta ^{}`$. Letting $`N(R_j)`$ be a regular neighborhood of $`R_j`$, in effect a slightly larger $`R_j`$, we will homotope $`f`$ so that $`f(S)N(R_j)`$ contains a neighborhood of $`f(N(\beta ))`$, with the image in a kind of general position. After the homotopy, $`\beta `$ is the same as $`\beta ^{}`$, but pushed out of $`R_j`$ slightly. Here $`N(\beta )`$ is a neighborhood of $`\beta `$ in $`\widehat{S}`$ which we shall refer to as the “band” connecting $`E`$ to itself. The image $`f(S)N(R_j)`$ will consist of the union of some meridian discs $`E_i`$, the images of annular collars of components of $`_iS`$ mapped to $`N(R_j)`$ , together with $`E`$ and the band connecting $`E`$ to itself. We are assuming that for every disc $`E_i`$ of $`f(S)R_j`$ there is a corresponding disc in $`N(R_j)`$, and, abusing notation, we denote this larger disc by the same symbol. The disc $`E`$ with a band connecting $`E`$ to itself is the image of an annulus $`A`$ in $`S`$. We homotope $`f`$ such that $`f`$ is a proper map of $`(A,A)`$ to $`(N(R_j),N(R_j))`$, and such that the image has exactly one branch point, which we denote $`P`$, as shown in Figure 13b. The branch point arises because the band joining $`E`$ to itself must have a half-twist. Figure 13 shows how to make $`f(A)`$ standard. In the figure, the image of the annulus $`A`$ intersects the meridian discs $`E_i`$ only in embedded arcs, and it has one similar embedded arc of self-intersection for every intersection of the interior of $`\beta `$ with $`E`$. In addition, there is one arc of self-intersection of $`f(A)`$ with one end at $`P`$ and the other end at a self-intersection of $`f(A)N(R_j)`$. Finally, there are simple arcs of intersection where $`A`$ intersects annular collars. These arcs are essential in $`A`$, but inessential in the collars. (The figure shows just one of these arcs, but there may be many.) The band may not wrap around $`R_j`$ “monotonically in the longitudinal direction” as shown in the figures, because we homotoped $`\beta ^{}`$ to be embedded. If $`f(\beta ^{})`$ intersects $`E`$ $`n`$ times, then the band joining $`E`$ to itself intersects $`E`$ in $`n2`$ arcs. We use $`n=n(\beta ^{})=n(\beta )`$ as a complexity for a $``$-compression of the type we are considering in this case.

Once again, we homotope $`f`$, relative $`N(R_j)`$, such that the image is locally isomorphic to one of the models of Figure 6 in the remainder of $`\overline{M}`$. As before, we begin zipping at a branch point other than $`P`$, if possible.

In the course of zipping, it may happen that, in $`N(R_j)`$, some arc of intersection disjoint from $`K_j`$ (other than the arc including $`P`$) is eliminated by the zipping. The zipping effects an orientation respecting cut-and-paste on the arc. If this happens, we immediately stop zipping. The eliminated arc of intersection was an arc of intersection between the band joining $`E`$ to itself and some $`E_i`$, an arc of intersection between the band and $`E`$ itself, or an arc of intersection of the band with an annular collar. Suppose first that the arc is not an arc where the band intersects $`E`$ itself. We verify that there is then a new boundary compression as in Case 1, 2, or 4, and we obtain a contradiction in every case by returning to the analysis in each of those cases. If the arc of intersection is an arc where the band joining $`E`$ to itself intersects $`E`$, then the zipping cuts the band on the arc and rejoins it so that we get a shorter band joining $`E`$ to itself. The core of this sub-band is an arc $`\gamma `$ properly embedded in the new $`\widehat{S}=f^1(M)`$. In other words, if the arc of intersection corresponds to an intersection point $`q`$ in the interior of $`\beta ^{}`$ with $`E`$, then $`q`$ cuts $`\beta ^{}`$ into two arcs, including an arc $`\gamma ^{}`$ joining $`E`$ to itself, which homotops to $`\gamma `$ in $`N(R_j)`$. If $`\gamma ^{}R_j`$ is not isotopic in $`R_j`$ to an arc in $`E`$, then clearly we get a new boundary compression along the the arc $`\gamma `$. The complexity $`n(\gamma ^{})<n(\beta ^{})`$, so we replace $`\beta ^{}`$ ($`\beta `$) by $`\gamma ^{}`$ ($`\gamma `$). If $`\gamma ^{}R_j`$ is isotopic in $`R_j`$ to an arc $`\delta ^{}`$ in $`E`$, then the arc $`\gamma `$ in $`\widehat{S}`$ is homotopic to an arc $`\delta `$ in the larger meridian disc $`E`$ in $`N(R_j)`$. Thus $`\gamma \delta `$ is a simple closed curve in $`\widehat{S}`$ which is null-homotopic in $`M`$, and by the incompressibility of $`\widehat{f}`$, the curve bounds a disc in $`\widehat{S}`$. It then follows that the original $`\beta ^{}`$ could be replaced by the closure in $`\beta ^{}`$ of $`\beta ^{}\gamma ^{}`$, which has smaller complexity and corresponds to a boundary compression joining $`E`$ to itself.

Thus, we reduce to the case that the zipping encounters no arc of intersection in an $`R_j`$. Therefore we are able to continue zipping until the zipping branch point collides with another branch point, ends at a $`K_i`$ where a collar meets $`K_i`$, or ends at $`\overline{M}`$. The collision with another branch point gives a surgery, and as usual, the surgery must cut a sphere from $`S`$. We obtain a new map of the same surface with fewer branch points, so the lexicographical complexity $`(c(f),b(f))`$ is reduced. In the special case where $`S`$ is a sphere or a disc, we replace $`f`$ by the essential map on a sphere or disc component obtained from surgery. If a zipping ends at a $`K_j`$ as in Figures 9 or 12, we obtain a contradiction to the minimal complexity of $`f`$ as before, and similarly if the zipping ends at $`\overline{M}`$ as in Figure 11.

If at some point in the process, $`P`$ is the only remaining branch point, so that it is impossible to start zipping at another branch point, then we begin zipping at $`P`$ and the zipping must end at a $`K_i`$ as in Figures 9 or 12, or at $`\overline{M}`$ as in Figure 11. In all cases the complexity $`c(f)`$ is reduced, a contradiction.

Suppose now that we perform a sequence of zipping operations which cancel branch points in pairs. Ultimately, since the number of branch points is reduced after each cancellation of branch points, a zipping must then end at $`P`$ without first effecting any cut-and-paste’s on arcs of $`f(A)(_iE_i)`$. The intersection of $`f(S)`$ with $`R_j`$ (Figure 13b) is unchanged by the zipping except on the arc ending at $`P`$. The final surgery eliminating $`P`$ then does not separate $`S`$. This is a contradiction, since incompressibility guarantees that the surgery corresponding to the cancellation of $`P`$ and another branch point cuts a sphere from $`S`$.

Case 6. There remains the case in which a simple arc $`\beta `$ joins $`_eS`$ to itself and $`\beta `$ is homotopic in $`M`$ to an arc in $`\overline{M}`$. Then by the $``$-incompressibility of $`f`$, $`\beta `$ cuts a half-disc $`H`$ from $`S`$. Then $`f(H)`$ must intersect $`K_j`$, otherwise $`\beta `$ is not essential in $`\widehat{S}`$, so replacing $`f|_H`$ by a map representing the homotopy of the arc $`\beta `$ to $`_eM`$ reduces the complexity.

We must still consider the possibility that $`\widehat{f}:\widehat{S}M`$ is a map of a disc or sphere. We must show that $`\widehat{f}`$ is essential. First suppose $`\widehat{S}`$ is a 2-sphere, then $`\widehat{S}=S`$ and $`S`$ is essential in $`\overline{M}`$, so it is certainly essential in $`M`$. Suppose that $`\widehat{S}`$ is a disc with $`\widehat{S}_eM=\overline{M}`$. Then again $`\widehat{S}=S`$. Since $`S`$ is essential in $`\overline{M}`$, $`\widehat{S}`$ is essential in $`M`$. Next suppose $`\widehat{S}`$ is a disc with $`\widehat{S}=_i\widehat{S}`$. Then the essentiality of the map $`f:(S,_iS)(\overline{M},_jK_j)`$ implies the essentiality of $`\widehat{f}`$. Finally, suppose $`\widehat{S}`$ is a disc with $`\widehat{S}=_m\widehat{S}`$. Then $`S`$ is a sphere with $`f:S\overline{M}`$ intersecting $`_jK_j`$ at a single point. Thus $`\widehat{f}(\widehat{S})`$ is a meridian in some $`R_j`$, and $`\widehat{f}`$ is essential. ∎

## 3 Proofs of Other Results.

###### Proof.

(Proposition 1.1). Proposition 1.1 is a special case of Theorem 1.5, when $`\overline{M}=\mathrm{}`$ and $`f:SM`$ is a map of a closed surface, so $`_eS=_iS=\mathrm{}`$. ∎

###### Proof.

(Proposition 1.2) Proposition 1.2 is also a special case of Theorem 1.5. Here $`M`$ has a single torus boundary component, $`\overline{M}=M(r)`$, $`M(r)=\mathrm{}`$, and $`S`$ is a disc with $`S=_iS`$. Since $`f:(S,S)(M,K)`$ is a map of a disc, where $`K`$ is the core curve of the Dehn filling solid torus, relative incompressibility is automatic. ∎

The following is a slight variation of a result stating that any class in $`H_2(M)`$ can be represented by an embedded oriented surface.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Let $`Q`$ be a 3-manifold, with $`K_1,\mathrm{},K_n`$ the components of an embedded (tame) link, $`K=_jK_j`$. Giving an orientation to each $`K_j`$, if $`_in_j[K_j]=0`$ in $`H_1(Q)`$ for some integers $`n_j`$, then there is a map of an oriented surface $`f:(S,S)(Q,K)`$ with $`f_{}([S])=_jn_j[K_j]`$ in $`H_1(K_j)`$. The map can be made an embedding on the interior of $`S`$.

###### Proof.

The proof is similar to the proof of the result alluded to above, for representing classes in homology by embedded surfaces. In our situation we will not be able to obtain an embedded surface, only a mapped-in surface. We choose a triangulation of $`Q`$ such that $`K`$ is a union of edges in the triangulation. The fact that $`_jn_j[K_j]=0`$ in $`H_1(Q)`$ gives a relative 2-cycle $`z`$ representing a class in $`H_2(Q,K)`$, in simplicial homology. Suppose $`z=_i\sigma _i`$, a finite sum, with $`z=_jn_j[K_j]`$. We assume that the orientation of edges of $`z`$ in $`K_j`$ coincides with the orientation of $`K_j`$. We begin by pairing as many as possible cancelling pairs of sides of 2-simplices in $`z`$ lying in $`K`$, joining the pairs of 2-simplices on the interiors of the sides. Our goal is not to obtain an embedded surface, so the pairing can be done arbitrarily, subject to the condition that 2-simplices are joined with consistent orientations. For every other edge $`e`$ of the triangulation, i.e., for every edge $`e`$ not contained in a $`K_j`$, we can pair all occurrences of $`e`$ in boundaries of 2-simplices, and join 2-simplices on the interiors of paired sides, again joining 2-simplices so they have consistent orientations. Thus we obtain a map $`g:(P,P)(Q,K)`$ of an oriented pseudo-surface $`P`$ with $`g(P)=_jn_j[K_j]`$, and with singularities mapped to the $`0`$-skeleton of the triangulation. Finally, making $`g`$ transverse to 2-spheres linking the 0-simplices, the pre-image in $`P`$ is a collection of simple closed curves and arcs with boundary in $`P`$. Cutting on these simple closed curves and arcs detaches neighborhoods of singular points in $`P`$ to give a surface $`\widehat{P}`$. Capping arcs and closed curves in $`\widehat{P}`$ mapped to linking spheres yields an oriented surface $`S`$ which can be mapped via $`f:(S,S)(Q,K)`$ to represent the same relative cycle as $`g:(P,P)(Q,K)`$.

To obtain a map which is an embedding on $`\text{int}(S)`$, one either chooses pairings more carefully away from $`K`$, or one performs orientation-respecting cut-and-paste on curves of self-intersection away from $`K`$. ∎

Just as we can represent a class in $`H_2(M)`$ ($`H_2(M,M)`$) by an embedded incompressible (and $``$-incompressible) oriented surface, so also we can represent a class in $`H_2(Q,K)`$ by an incompressible and relatively incompressible map of an oriented surface, as we show in the following lemma.

###### Lemma 3.2.

Let $`Q`$ be a 3-manifold, with $`K_1,\mathrm{},K_n`$ the components of an embedded (tame) link, $`K=_jK_j`$. Giving an orientation to each $`K_j`$, if $`_jn_j[K_j]=0`$ in $`H_1(Q)`$ for some integers $`n_j`$, then there is a map of an oriented surface $`f:(S,S)(Q,K)`$ with $`f_{}([S])=_jn_j[K_j]`$, and with $`f`$ restricted to each component of $`S`$ essential.

###### Proof.

By Lemma 3.1, we can represent a class in $`H_2(Q,K)`$ whose boundary is $`_jn_j[K_j]`$ by a map of an oriented surface $`f:(S,S)(Q,K)`$ with $`f_{}([S])=_jn_j[K_j]`$. If $`S`$ has any closed components or null homologous components, we discard these. Let us consider the restriction of $`f`$ to a component $`F`$ of $`S`$ on which $`f`$ is not essential. If the map is compressible, we can surger $`F`$ to replace it with a surface $`F^{}`$ with $`|\chi (F^{})|<|\chi (F)|`$, or if $`F`$ is an an annulus, we obtain a pair of discs $`F^{}`$. At the same time we modify $`f`$ to obtain $`f^{}:(F^{},F^{})(Q,K)`$ homologous to $`f`$. If $`f`$ is relatively compressible, we can surger $`F`$ on a half-disc to obtain $`F^{}`$ with $`|\chi (F^{})|<|\chi (F)|`$ or if $`F`$ is an annulus, we obtain a disc $`F^{}`$. At the same time we modify $`f`$ to obtain $`f^{}:(F^{},F^{})(Q,K)`$ homologous to $`f`$. If $`F^{}`$ has positive Euler characteristic, $`f^{}`$ is either inessential, hence null-homologous, or it is essential. We discard the null-homologous components of $`F^{}`$. We also discard closed components. Finally we replace $`F`$ by $`F^{}`$ to obtain a new $`S`$. If $`x(S)`$ denotes the sum of $`|\chi (G)|`$ over components $`G`$ of $`S`$ having negative Euler characteristic, then $`x(S)`$ was reduced by our modification of $`F`$, or the number of inessential components was decreased. Repeating this process on any non-essential component of $`S`$, we must eventually obtain a map which is essential on each component of $`S`$. ∎

###### Proof.

(Corollary 1.6.) We have the core curve $`K`$ of the Dehn filling solid torus null-homologous in $`M(r)`$. Hence, by Lemma 3.1, we can represent a generator in $`H_2(M(r),K)`$ whose boundary is $`[K]`$ by a map $`f:(S,S)(M(r),K)`$ of a surface $`S`$. Actually, the proof of Lemma 3.1 shows that we can assume $`S`$ is mapped homeomorphically to $`K`$. By Lemma 3.2, we can choose an essential map $`f`$ of a connected surface with $`f`$ restricted to $`S`$ a homeomorphism to $`K`$. The proof of Lemma 3.2 shows that the property of $`f`$ that it is a homeomorphism to $`K`$ on $`S`$ holds for the new $`f`$.

Applying Theorem 1.5 gives a map $`\widehat{f}:\widehat{S}M`$ as required, and $`\widehat{S}`$ has the same genus as $`S`$ by construction. ∎

###### Proof.

(Corollary 1.7) Corollary 1.7 is similar to Corollary 1.6, but in this case we already know that there is a map $`f:SS^3`$ with $`f`$ a homeomorphism to $`K`$ and with $`S`$ a disc. Applying Theorem 1.5 immediately yields the map $`\widehat{f}`$ of a punctured disc, as described. ∎

Corollary 1.8 is a fairly obvious generalization of Corollary 1.6.