text:
# Compactified Newtonian Potential and a Possible Explanation for Dark Matter

## Abstract

Exact Newtonian potential with an extra space dimension compactified on a circle is derived and studied. It is found that a point mass located at one side of the circle can generate almost the same strength of gravitational force at the other side. Combined with the brane-world scenarios, it means that although one can not see a particle which is confined to another brane, one can feel its gravity explicitly as if it were located on our brane. This leads to the conclusion that matter on all branes may contribute equally to the curvature of our brane. Therefore, dark matter is probably nothing unusual but a ‘shadow’ cast on our brane by hidden ordinary matter of other branes. It is shown that the physical effect of this ‘shadow’ could be modeled by a perfect fluid with an effective mass density and a non-zero pressure. This fluid could serve as a dark matter candidate with an equation of state $`p_{eff}=\omega \rho _{eff}`$ where $`\omega `$ is a positive $`r`$-dependent function and $`\omega 0,1/3`$, implying that it is neither cold nor hot. So, if the higher-dimensional universe contains several branes, the total amount of hidden matter would be able to provide the required amount for dark matter. Meanwhile, dark matter halos of galaxies might be just halos of the effective mass distribution yielded by hidden ordinary stars, and these stars are confined on other branes but captured by our galaxies. Some more properties and implications are also discussed.

The idea of extra compact spatial dimensions was firstly used in Kaluza-Klein theory Kaluza  to unify gravity with electromagnetism and then developed in superstrings, supergravity, and M-theories to unify all the four fundamental forces in nature. It was firstly pointed out by Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos and Dvali (ADD) that the well known Newtonian inverse square law could be violated if there exist extra space dimensions. They showed that if the $`N`$ extra dimensions are curled up with radius $`R`$, the Newtonian force between two point masses would undergo a transition from the familiar form $`1/r^2`$ at large distances ($`rR`$) to a form $`1/r^{2+N}`$ at small distances ($`rR`$) ADD98 ADD99 . Thus the $`(4+N)`$ dimensional gravity and other interactions could be united at the electroweak scale and the hierarchy problem could be resolved. This has attracted much attention in recent years from both theoretical and experimental physicists. Nowadays, a dozen groups over the world have set up to look for departure from the inverse square law at small distances Experi . Therefore, it is of great interest to know how the force varies along the $`r`$-direction from $`1/r^2`$ to $`1/r^{2+N}`$ in more details.

It was shown Flor99 Kehag00  that as the separation $`r`$ decreases, a Yukawa term appears as a first correction to the Newtonian $`1/r`$ potential,

$$V_{3+N}(r)\frac{G_4M}{r}\left(1+\alpha e^{r/\lambda }\right),$$
(1)
where $`\alpha =2N`$ for the compactification with $`N`$-torus, and $`\alpha =N+1`$ for an $`N`$-sphere. However, this approximate expression can not be used at small separation with $`r\lambda `$ at which the deviation might be very large. So a global exact solution for the Newtonian potential is of particular importance in both the experimental calculation and theoretical analysis. In what follows, we study the simplest case with $`N=1`$. Here we should mention that for $`N=1`$ the Yukawa parameters in (1) are $`\alpha =2`$ and $`\lambda =R`$. Using the $`\alpha \lambda `$ plot of Ref. Experi , we find that experimental constraint on the $`N=1`$ case is $`R<0.4mm`$. Therefore, $`N=1`$ is not experimentally excluded at all; it is just excluded by the ADD unification for the purpose to resolve the hierarchy problem.

The ($`3+1`$) dimensional Newtonian potential $`V_{3+1}`$ satisfies the ($`3+1`$) dimensional Poisson equation

$$_{3+1}^2V_{3+1}=2\pi ^2G_{4+1}\sigma $$
(2)
where $`G_{4+1}`$ is the Newtonian constant in ($`4+1`$) dimensional gravity. Consider a point mass $`M`$ located at the origin ($`r=y=0`$) and suppose the extra dimension $`y`$ is compactified to a circle with radius $`R`$ and circumference $`L=2\pi R`$. To mimic a compact dimension, we follow ADD ADD98 ADD99  to use a non-compact dimension with “mirror” masses placed periodically along the $`y`$-axis. Thus we obtain

$$V_{3+1}=\frac{G_{4+1}M}{2}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{r^2+\left(nLy\right)^2},$$
(3)
which satisfies the periodic identification $`yL\pm y`$. Then we can show that

$$\frac{1}{r^2+\left(nLy\right)^2}=\frac{1}{2iLr}\left(\frac{1}{n+z}\frac{1}{n+z^{}}\right),z=\frac{yir}{L}.$$
(4)
Using this relation in (3), we bring the Newtonian potential $`V_{3+1}`$ to a meromorphic function. Then, with use of the identity

$$\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{z+n}=\pi \mathrm{cot}\pi z$$
(5)
in (3), we finally obtain

$$V_{3+1}=\frac{G_{4+1}M}{4Rr}\left(\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}\mathrm{cos}\frac{y}{R}}\right).$$
(6)
This is the global exact Newtonian potential for $`N=1`$ which was firstly derived by Floratos and Leontaris with use of the method of Fourier transform Flor99 . Here we derived it directly from the ADD model (3). The periodicity for $`y`$ along the circle can be seen clearly from (6). One can check it by directly substituting (6) into the ($`3+1`$) dimensional Laplace equation

$$\left(\frac{^2}{r^2}+\frac{2}{r}\frac{}{r}+\frac{^2}{y^2}\right)V_{3+1}=0,$$
(7)
which is found to be satisfied by (6) as expected. Thus we can define the Newtonian force along the $`r`$-direction as

$$F_{3+1}\frac{}{r}V_{3+1}=\frac{G_{4+1}M}{4Rr^2}\left[\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}\mathrm{cos}\frac{y}{R}}\frac{r}{R}\frac{1\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}\mathrm{cos}\frac{y}{R}}{\left(\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}\mathrm{cos}\frac{y}{R}\right)^2}\right].$$
(8)
Equations (6) and (8) are exact global expressions valid everywhere except at the origin ($`r=y=0`$) at which the point mass $`M`$ is located. At large distances $`rL`$, these two equations lead to

$$V_{3+1}=\frac{G_{4+1}M}{4Rr}\left(1+2e^{\frac{r}{R}}\mathrm{cos}\frac{y}{R}+\mathrm{}\right),\text{for }rR,$$
(9)
and

$$F_{3+1}\frac{G_{4+1}M}{4Rr^2}\left[1+2\left(1+\frac{r}{R}\right)e^{\frac{r}{R}}\mathrm{cos}\frac{y}{R}+\mathrm{}\right],\text{for }rR.$$
(10)
At small distances $`r,\left|y\right|R`$, we let $`r/Ry/R\epsilon `$ with $`\epsilon `$ being a small parameter, then the two equations (6) and (8) give

$$V_{3+1}=\frac{G_{4+1}M}{2\left(r^2+y^2\right)}\left[1+\frac{r^2+y^2}{12R^2}+O(\epsilon ^4)\right],\text{for }r,\left|y\right|R,$$
(11)
and

$$F_{3+1}=\frac{G_{4+1}Mr}{\left(r^2+y^2\right)^2}\left[1+O(\epsilon ^4)\right],\text{for }r,\left|y\right|R.$$
(12)
Thus the 4-dimensional Newtonian constant $`G_4`$ is found to be

$$G_4=\frac{G_{4+1}}{4R}$$
(13)
as is given by ADD ADD98 ADD99 .

In the brane-world scenarios Witten ADD98 ADD99 , our universe is a 3-brane embedded in a higher dimensional space. While gravity can freely propagate in all dimensions, the standard matter particles and forces are confined to the 3-brane only. For $`N=1`$, it is natural to have two 3-branes located at $`y=0`$ and $`y=\pi R`$, respectively. Suppose we live in the visible $`y=0`$ brane. Then the Newtonian potential and force for a visible point mass $`M`$ located at $`r=y=0`$ are, respectively,

$`V_{vis}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_4M}{r}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}1}}\right),`$
$`V_{vis}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_4M}{r}}\left(1+2e^{\frac{r}{R}}+\mathrm{}\right),\text{for }rR.`$ (14)
and

$`F_{vis}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}V_{vis}={\displaystyle \frac{G_4M}{r^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}+\frac{r}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}1}}\right),`$
$`F_{vis}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_4M}{r^2}}\left[1+2\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r}{R}}\right)e^{\frac{r}{R}}+\mathrm{}\right],\text{for }rR,`$
$`F_{vis}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_{4+1}M}{r^3}},\text{for }r0.`$ (15)
Another case that a point mass $`M`$ is confined to the hidden side of the circle ($`r=0,`$ $`y=\pi R`$) might be more interesting. For this case we should replace $`y/R`$ with $`\left(\pi +y/R\right)`$ in the general solution (6), then the Newtonian potential and force for a hidden point mass $`M`$ located at $`r=0`$, $`y=\pi R`$ are

$`V_{hid}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_4M}{r}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}+1}}\right),`$
$`V_{hid}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_4M}{r}}\left(12e^{\frac{r}{R}}+\mathrm{}\right),\text{for }rR.`$ (16)
and

$`F_{hid}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}V_{hid}={\displaystyle \frac{G_4M}{r^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}\frac{r}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}+1}}\right),`$
$`F_{hid}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_4M}{r^2}}\left[12\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r}{R}}\right)e^{\frac{r}{R}}+\mathrm{}\right],\text{for }rR,`$
$`F_{hid}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_{4+1}M}{12R^3}}r0,\text{for }r0.`$ (17)
Thus we see that $`V_{hid}`$ and $`F_{hid}`$ are regular everywhere including at $`r=0`$. So one can not see the particle itself because it is hidden in another side of the extra dimension. However, one can “feel” its gravitational force, and this force is, to the leading term at large separation, of the same strength as if that particle $`M`$ is located at our side. Comparing (14), (16) with (1), we also find that a difference between these two cases appears in the first correction Yukawa term: If the source particle is at our side, the Yukawa parameter is $`\alpha =2`$; if it is at the hidden side, it is $`\alpha =2`$.

Equations (14) and (16) enable us to use the superposition theorem to write down the Newtonian potential for discrete particles,

$$V(r)=G_4\left[\underset{i}{}\frac{M_{vis}^i}{\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|}\left(\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|}{R}1}\right)+\underset{i}{}\frac{M_{hid}^i}{\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|}\left(\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|}{R}+1}\right)\right],$$
(18)
where $`M_{vis}`$ and $`M_{hid}`$ are masses of particles located at the visible and hidden brane, respectively. At large distances, i.e., $`\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|R`$ for all these particles, equation (18) approaches to

$$V(r)G_4\left(\underset{i}{}\frac{M_{vis}^i}{\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|}+\underset{i}{}\frac{M_{hid}^i}{\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|}\right),\text{for }\left|𝐫𝐫_i\right|R.\text{ }$$
(19)
Similar results can be written down if matter is continuously distributed over the branes. Thus, from (19), we conclude that, at large distances, particles at the hidden side of the extra dimension contribute to the Newtonian potential with the same strength as if they were at the visible side.

This is an important result which implies that all particles, no matter they are located at our brane or not, will equally contribute to the curvature of our brane. ADD and other authors have already discussed this case in more detail and for a variety of brane models ADD99 Manyfold00 . Here, in this paper, we provide with an exactly solvable model to exhibit it explicitly as given above.

Let us discuss it from a purely three-dimensional point of view. In (16), although the source particle $`M`$ is hidden at another side, it generates, in our 3D surface, a Newtonian potential from which we can define an effective mass density $`\rho _{eff}`$ via

$$\rho _{eff}\frac{1}{4\pi G_4}_3^2V_{hid}=\frac{M}{4\pi R^2}\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}}{r\left(\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}+1\right)^2}.$$
(20)
This density is regular everywhere including at $`r=0`$, at which it reaches to an finite maximum $`M(16\pi R^3)^1`$. Using (20) we can calculate the total amount of effective mass inside a shell of radius $`r`$, which is

$$\mu (r)4\pi _0^r\rho _{eff}r^2𝑑r=M\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}\frac{r}{R}}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}+1}.$$
(21)
We find $`\mu (r)M`$ as $`r/R\mathrm{}`$. So the total amount of the effective mass distributed over our brane equals exactly to the same mass of the hidden particle; it does not depend on the size $`R`$ of the extra dimension at all, though the density $`\rho _{eff}`$ does depend on $`R`$.

Thus we arrive at a conclusion that hidden particles contribute to our brane with the same amount of effective mass. This conclusion is drawn from the special case with only one extra dimension, however, it is reasonable to expect it to hold for more extra compact dimensions as discussed by ADD in Ref. . So, as a whole, all matter hidden on other branes may yield an effective mass density distributed over our brane. This kind of mass density is “dark” because one can not “see” it. But its gravity contributes to the curvature of our brane and can be measured without any problem. Thus the effective mass distribution provides us with a natural candidate for dark matter. Be aware that the amount of dark matter required by observations is about six times of the visible ordinary matter Spergel03 . Meanwhile, the string-membrane theories require up to seven extra dimensions. So if there are several branes and each brane has the same order of amount of ordinary matter as ours, then the required amount of dark matter could be found. If we accept this explanation, then dark matter probably is nothing unusual but a ‘shadow’ cast on our brane by hidden ordinary matter of other branes.

Now let us go further to study the effective mass distribution $`\rho _{eff}`$ in Eq. (20). If we explain $`\rho _{eff}`$ as a dark matter candidate, then this kind of dark matter has a significant property: As a whole, it yields an attractive force to other particles as seen from (17), — this can explain the dark halos of galaxies as well as the mass density for the universe. However, $`\rho _{eff}`$ is spread over our brane implying that different parts of itself can not collapse. This is distinctive from other dark matter candidates but does not contradict with current observations. To explain it, a natural way is to introduce an effective pressure $`p_{eff}`$. So we obtain a perfect fluid model for which we can write the hydrostatic equilibrium equation as

$$\frac{dp_{eff}}{dr}=\frac{G_4\mu (r)\rho _{eff}}{r^2}.$$
(22)
Substituting (21) and (20) in this equation, we obtain

$$p_{eff}=\frac{G_4M^2}{4\pi R^2}_r^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}\left(\mathrm{sinh}\frac{r}{R}\frac{r}{R}\right)}{r^3\left(\mathrm{cosh}\frac{r}{R}+1\right)^3}𝑑r$$
(23)
where we have chosen $`p_{eff}`$ such that $`p_{eff}0`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$. This corresponds to an equation of state $`p_{eff}=\omega \rho _{eff}`$ with $`\omega `$ being a function of the coordinate $`r`$, i.e., $`\omega =\omega (r)`$. We can show that $`\omega `$ is positive but not equal to zero or $`1/3`$. So this kind of dark matter is neither cold ($`\omega =0`$) nor hot ($`\omega =1/3`$).

In 5D relativity, the Newtonian potential and Newtonian force derived in this paper should be recovered as the corresponding Newtonian limit. For the exterior field of a point mass, the field equations should be the vacuum ones, $`R_{ab}=0`$ ($`a,b=0,1,2,3;5`$). It is known from the induced matter theory Wesson  Overduin  that five-dimensional Ricci-flat equations $`R_{ab}=0`$ contain the four-dimensional Einstein equations, which in terms of the 4D Einstein tensor and an induced energy-momentum tensor are

$${}_{}{}^{(4)}G_{\alpha \beta }^{}=\kappa T_{\alpha \beta }^{eff}.$$
(24)
It is also known that this induced energy-momentum tensor $`T_{\alpha \beta }^{eff}`$ could be modeled by a perfect fluid with an effective mass density and an effective pressure for the 5D spherically symmetric static solutions LiuJMP92 , the 5D cosmological solutions PoncedeLeon88  LiuMash95  LiuWessonAPJ  and some other kinds of solutions Wesson  Overduin . This is guaranteed by Campbell’s theorem which states that any solution of the Einstein equations in $`N`$-dimensions can be locally embedded in a Ricci-flat manifold of ($`N+1`$)-dimensions Campbell . Thus we conclude that the 4D effective energy-momentum tensor $`T_{\alpha \beta }^{eff}`$ appeared in (24) is actually the counterpart of the effective $`\rho _{eff}`$ and $`p_{eff}`$ of (20) and (23) of the Newtonian model. We also conclude that the induced matter theory could occupy a central position in the description of dark matter in brane world scenarios.

From equations (19) and (18) we see clearly that a hidden particle located at another brane can generate almost the same strength of force on our brane. So, generally speaking, a visible star of our brane could be captured by a hidden star of another brane and thus forms a special kind of binary. A visible galaxy of our brane can capture hidden stars from other branes, and this would provide us with a possible interpretation for the dark halos of galaxies. A hidden galaxy of another brane can also capture visible matter from our brane. Recently, it was reported NewSci  that Simon, Robishaw and Blitz observed a cloud of hydrogen gas rotating fast around a devoid region and they called this region as a dark galaxy. If it is true, this dark galaxy could be just the ‘shadow’ of a galaxy which is hidden on another brane. We should emphasize that all these speculations are based on the possible existence of extra compact space dimensions which is required by Kaluza-Klein and by string-membrane theories. We hope that future observations may show whether these speculations are correct or not and whether there exist extra dimensions. From our 4D point of view, the net effect of matter hidden on all other branes could be described by an effective mass distribution or an effective energy-momentum tensor which could serve as a candidate for dark matter. This candidate may provide us with the same mathematical results as provided by other dark matter candidates, with an exception that the physical nature of this dark matter could be just the higher dimensional gravitational field or gravitons.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank James Overduin for comments. This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation (10273004) and National Basic Research Program (2003CB716300) of P. R. China.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The BOOMERanG 1998 experiment provided crucial information on the acoustic peaks of the power spectrum of CMB and hence on the conditions at the last scattering epoch and cosmological parameters , . The Boomerang maps were compared with WMAP data .

The 150 GHz Boomerang maps were also analyzed to trace the geometrical shapes, namely, the ellipticity of the anisotropies . That analysis was motivated by similar analysis of the COBE-DMR data, where a signature of elongation of anisotropies had been detected . The latter analysis itself was motivated by the effect of geodesic mixing , which can result in elongation of CMB anisotropies independent on the temperature threshold. More generally, however, such analysis implies the estimation of Lyapunov exponents of any dynamical process which might lead to such distortion whatever its physical nature can be, as often used for example in the analysis of hydrodynamical experiments.

The study of the Boomerang maps shows the existence of a temperature interval where the elongation was independent on the threshold. The mean elongation yielded 2.2-2.3 for hot and cold areas (spots). The orientation of the elongations did not show any preferred direction. In the present paper we report the results of the largest anisotropy areas, namely containing more than 60 and 100 pixels. The importance of such analysis is related to the fact that the biases of the estimator and of the noise (which were studied by simulated maps and which could not be ignored for smaller, several pixel areas) are negligible for larger areas.

The low quadrupole detected by WMAP  led to a hot debate on the cosmological model: the curvature and/or topology of the Universe among the disputed reasons (e.g. ). It is remarkable that the ellipticity analysis even though carried out in a relatively small region of the sky (about 1 per cent) nevertheless might have the ability to detect such a large scale effect. Indeed, if the elongation is due to geodesic mixing than it has to refer to the hyperbolicity of the Universe and hence the non zero negative curvature. About the topology nothing can be claimed, since the given curvature can correspond to various both open and closed topologies.

## 2 Ellipticity in CMB maps and geodesic mixing

We briefly mention the idea of geodesic mixing as an effect which might produce the observed elongations. Photon beams while moving in hyperbolic spaces have exponentially deviating trajectories are described by the equation of geodesics deviation

$$\frac{d^2𝐧}{d\lambda ^2}+k𝐧=0,$$
(1)
where $`n`$ is the deviation vector. The solution of this equation is

$$𝐧(\lambda )=𝐧(\mathrm{𝟎})cosh\chi \lambda +\dot{𝐧}(0)sinh\chi \lambda $$
(2)
when $`k=1`$. On the other hand, it is proved that the geodesic flows in hyperbolic spaces (locally if the space is not compact) behave as Anosov systems,  i.e. dynamical systems with strong statistical properties, which can be described by proper reparameterisation of the affine parameter $`\lambda `$ for null geodesics . Then for geodesic flows of spaces of Robertson-Walker metric $`\chi `$ is the Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy and is given by the diameter of the Universe

$$\chi =1/a,$$
(3)
with the decay of time correlation function of the geodesic flow

$$|b(t)||b(0)|e^{c\chi \lambda },c>0.$$
(4)
In the context of freely propagating CMB photon beams this implies several observational effects such as the isotropization of the photon beams, i.e. damping of the degree of anisotropy by time, as well as to the distortion in the maps .111Geodesics or chaotic mixing is not however an alternative to inflation as mentioned e.g. in  but can act as an alternative tool to trace the geometry. The geodesic mixing is a statistical effect independent on the conditions on the last scattering surface, and is distinguished by threshold independence and random obliquities of the elongated areas. The measured Lyapunov exponents and Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy can describe also other processes occuring here. More informative descriptor for more accurate maps is the Kolmogorov complexity .

## 3 BOOMERanG’s Data

BOOMERanG is a millimetric telescope with bolometric detectors on a balloon borne platform , , , . It was flown in 1998/99 and produced wide (4$`\%`$ of the sky), high resolution ($`10^{}`$) maps of the microwave sky (90 to 410 GHz) . In the maps the structure is resolved with high signal to noise ratio, and hundreds of degree-scale hot and cold areas are evident. The rms temperature fluctuation of these areas is $`80\mu K`$. The detected fluctuations are spectrally consistent with the derivative of a 2.735 K blackbody. Masi et al.  have shown that contamination from local foregrounds is negligible in the maps at 90, 150 and 240 GHz, and that the 410 GHz channel is a good monitor for dust emission.

In our study we used two maps from independent detectors at 150 GHz. These maps have been obtained from the time ordered data using an iterative procedure , which properly takes into account the system noise and produces a maximum likelihood map. The largest structures (scales larger than 10o) are removed in this procedure, to avoid the effects of instrument drifts and 1/f noise. The two input maps, A and B, included 33111 pixels, each of 7 arcmin in linear size, in a high Galactic latitude region covering about 1 % of the sky, with coordinates $`RA>70^{}`$, $`55^{}<dec<35^{}`$ and $`b<20^o`$ . The first map (A) has been obtained from the data of the B150A detector, while the second map (B) was obtained by averaging the maps from detectors B150A1 and B150A2. In this way we obtained two maps with similar noise per pixel. The signal (CMB) to noise ratio per pixel is of the order of 1 for our 7’ pixels. The sum (A+B) is shown in Fig 1. There are three AGN with significant flux in the maps. All the areas including these AGNs have been excluded from the analysis.

## 4 Analysis

The algorithms of the study of excursion sets (areas) in the maps, i.e. pixel sets with temperature equal and higher than a given temperature threshold (lower, for negative thresholds) in the BOOMERanG maps are described in details in . The sensitivity of the procedures has been checked not only varying various input parameters but also via simulated maps. This enables to evaluate the biases of the ellipticity estimator (up to 0.4) and the bias due to the noise (up to 0.3). It was clear however that for larger areas these biases are much smaller, less than 0.1. Therefore the study of large areas (i.e. several degree-scale) containing over 60 or 100 pixels has a particular interest. The results are shown in Fig.2 where the existence of threshold independent ellipticity is evident. The obliquities of the areas again do not show a preferred direction (Fig.3).

Tables 1ab contain the data for the hot and cold anisotropy areas of more than 100 pixels at thresholds $`\pm 100\mu K`$.

## 5 Conclusions

The analysis of degree scale areas in the Boomerang CMB sky map reveals threshold independent ellipticity of around 2.6-2.7 in the meaningful interval of the temperature thresholds. Ellipticity for large scale areas had been found also in COBE-DMR maps . Similar analysis of the WMAP data is underway. The angular distribution of the areas is random. So, the effect exists not only for scales smaller than the horizon at the last scattering surface but also on larger scales. Thus it cannot be due to the physical effects at the last scattering surface: it has to arise after. Both effects, the geodesics mixing and the low multipoles are related to the diameter of the Universe: the first one via boundary conditions, the second one via hyperbolic geometry. Thus, if the detected ellipticity is due to geodesic mixing than this would indicate the non precisely zero curvature which might be the reason also of the low multipole behavior observed by WMAP.

The boundary conditions and the geometry of the Universe if taken into account for the modes of the vacuum fluctuations contributing into the cosmological constant predict a value being in remarkable agreement with the supernovae observations .


text:
# The locus of centers of ellipses inscribed in quadrilaterals

(8/11/03)

Introduction

Let $`R`$ be a four–sided convex polygon in the $`xy`$ plane. A problem often referred to in the literature as Newton’s problem, was to determine the locus of centers of ellipses inscribed in $`R`$. By inscribed we mean that the ellipse lies inside $`R`$ and is tangent to each side of $`R`$. Chakerian() gives a partial solution of Newton’s problem using orthogonal projection, which is the solution actually given by Newton, which we state as

###### Theorem 1

Let $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$ be the midpoints of the diagonals of $`R`$. Then if $`E`$ is an ellipse inscribed in $`R,`$ the center of $`E`$ must lie on $`Z`$, the open line segment connecting $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$.

However, Theorem 1 does not really give the precise locus of centers of ellipses inscribed in $`R`$. It is stated in (, pp. 217–219) that the locus of centers of ellipses inscribed in $`R`$ actually equals $`Z`$, but Newton only proved that the center of $`E`$ must lie on $`Z`$, as is noted in (). Indeed, it is not even clear that an ellipse exists which is inscribed in $`R,`$ let alone whether every point of $`Z`$ is the center of such an ellipse. The main result of this note is that it is indeed the case that every point of $`Z`$ is the center of an ellipse inscribed in $`R`$. This result was actually proved by the author in (, Theorem 11), but the approach given here is decidedly different and much shorter and more succinct. In addition, we are also able to prove that there is a unique ellipse of maximal area inscribed in $`R`$. While it is perhaps possible to prove these results using orthogonal projection, we use, instead, a theorem of Marden(, Theorem 1) relating the foci of an ellipse tangent to the lines thru the sides of a triangle and the zeros of a partial fraction expansion. We state the part we shall use here.

###### Theorem 2

(Marden): Let $`F(z)={\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{zz_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{t_2}{zz_2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{t_3}{zz_3}}`$, $`t_1+t_2+t_3=1,`$ and let $`Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$ denote the zeros of $`F(z)`$. Let $`L_1,L_2,L_3`$ be the line segments connecting $`z_2,z_3`$, $`z_1,z_3`$, and $`z_1,z_2,`$ respectively. If $`t_1t_2t_3>0,`$ then $`Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$ are the foci of an ellipse, $`E`$, which is tangent to $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_3`$ in the points $`\zeta _1,\zeta _2,\zeta _3`$, where $`\zeta _1={\displaystyle \frac{t_2z_3+t_3z_2}{t_2+t_3}}`$, $`\zeta _2={\displaystyle \frac{t_1z_3+t_3z_1}{t_1+t_3}}`$, $`\zeta _3={\displaystyle \frac{t_1z_2+t_2z_1}{t_1+t_2}}`$, respectively.

Main Result

###### Theorem 3

Let $`R`$ be a four–sided convex polygon in the $`xy`$ plane and let $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$ be the midpoints of the diagonals of $`R`$. Let $`Z`$ be the open line segment connecting $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$. If $`(h,k)Z`$ then there is a unique ellipse with center $`(h,k)`$ inscribed in $`R`$.

We shall now prove Theorem 3 for the case when no two sides of $`R`$ are parallel. Such a quadrilateral is sometimes called a trapezium. Our methods extend easily to the case when exactly two sides of $`R`$ are parallel, that is, when $`R`$ is a trapezoid. Of course, if $`R`$ is a parallelogram, then the midpoints of the diagonals coincide, and the line segment $`Z`$ is just a point. Since ellipses, tangent lines to ellipses, and four–sided convex polygons are preserved under affine transformations, we may assume that the vertices of $`R`$ are $`(0,0),(1,0),`$ $`(0,1)`$, and $`(s,t)`$ for some real numbers $`s`$ and $`t`$. Let $`I`$ denote the open interval between $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}`$ and $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}s`$. Then $`M_1=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}),M_2=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}s,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t)`$, and the equation of the line thru $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$ is

$$y=L(x)=\frac{1}{2}\frac{st+2x(t1)}{s1},xI$$

Since $`R`$ is convex, four–sided and no two sides of $`R`$ are parallel, it follows easily that

$$\text{ }s>0,t>0,s+t>1,\text{ and }s1t$$

We shall need the following lemmas.

###### Lemma 4

If $`hI`$ and $`s+t>1`$, then $`s+2h(t1)>0`$

Proof. If $`t>1`$, then $`s,h,`$ and $`t1`$ are all positive. If $`t1`$ and $`s1`$, then $`I=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}s)s+2h(t1)s2h>0`$. Finally, if $`t1`$ and $`s1`$, then $`I=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}s,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})s+2h(t1)>s+t1>0`$.

We leave the proof of the next lemma to the reader.

###### Lemma 5

Let $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ be ellipses with the same foci. Suppose also that $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ pass through a common point, $`z_0`$. Then $`E_1=E_2`$.

Proof of Theorem 3: Let $`L_1`$: $`y=0,L_2`$: $`x=0,L_3`$: $`y={\displaystyle \frac{t}{s1}}(x1)`$, and $`L_4`$: $`y=1+{\displaystyle \frac{t1}{s}}x`$ denote the lines which make up the boundary of $`R`$. $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_3`$ form a triangle, $`T_1`$, whose vertices are the complex points $`z_1=0`$, $`z_2=1`$, and $`z_3={\displaystyle \frac{t}{s1}}i`$. $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_4`$ form a triangle, $`T_2`$, whose vertices are the complex points $`w_1=0`$, $`w_2=i`$, and $`w_3={\displaystyle \frac{s}{t1}}`$. First, we want to find ellipses $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ tangent to $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_3,`$ and to $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_4`$, respectively. We shall use Theorem 2, so that $`E_1`$ has foci $`Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$, which are the zeros of $`F(z)={\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{z}}+{\displaystyle \frac{t_2}{z1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{t_3}{z+\frac{t}{s1}i}},`$ and $`E_2`$ has foci $`W_1`$ and $`W_2`$, which are the zeros of $`G(z)={\displaystyle \frac{s_1}{z}}+{\displaystyle \frac{s_2}{zi}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1s_1s_2}{z+\frac{s}{t1}}}`$. To guarantee that $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ are ellipses, we require, by Theorem 2, that $`s_1s_2s_3>0`$ and $`t_1t_2t_3>0`$, where $`s_3=1s_1s_2`$ and $`t_3=1t_1t_2`$. For example, let $`s=3`$, $`t=2`$, $`t_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}`$, $`t_2={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}`$, $`s_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}`$, and $`s_2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}`$. Then $`t_1t_2t_3={\displaystyle \frac{3}{32}}>0`$ and $`s_1s_2s_3={\displaystyle \frac{1}{36}}>0`$. The foci of $`E_1`$ are approximately $`Z_1=.1957.0496i`$ and $`Z_2=\mathrm{.304\hspace{0.17em}3}\mathrm{1.\hspace{0.17em}2004}i`$. Note that $`E_1`$ is not inscribed in $`T_1`$since not all of the $`t_j`$’s are positive(see Figure 1). The foci of $`E_2`$ are approximately $`W_1=.0159+\mathrm{.401\hspace{0.17em}9}i`$ and $`W_2=\mathrm{2.\hspace{0.17em}484\hspace{0.17em}1}+.0981i`$. Note that $`E_2`$ is inscribed in $`T_2`$ since all of the $`s_j`$’s are positive(see Figure 2). Assume now that $`(h,k)Z`$, or equivalently, that $`k=L(h),hI`$. We want $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ each to have center $`(h,k)`$. The center, $`C_1`$, of $`E_1`$ is $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(Z_1+Z_2\right)`$. A simple computation shows that $`C_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(s1)}}\left(it(t_1+t_2)+(s1)(t_21)\right)`$, which, upon taking real and imaginary parts yields $`C_1=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t_2,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t{\displaystyle \frac{t_1+t_2}{s1}})`$. Similarly, the center of $`E_2`$ is $`C_2=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}s{\displaystyle \frac{s_1+s_2}{t1}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(s_21\right))`$. We actually do not require these explicit formulas for $`C_1`$ and $`C_2.`$However, solving $`(h,k)=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t_2,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t{\displaystyle \frac{t_1+t_2}{s1}})`$ for $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ shows that the center of $`E_1`$ is $`(h,k)`$ if and only if

$$t_1=2h12k\frac{s1}{t}\text{}t_2=12h$$
(1)
Similarly, solving $`(h,k)=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}s{\displaystyle \frac{s_1+s_2}{t1}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(s_21\right))`$ for $`s_1`$ and $`s_2`$ shows that the center of $`E_2`$ is $`(h,k)`$ if and only if

$$s_1=2k12h\frac{t1}{s}\text{}s_2=12k$$
(2)
So given $`(h,k)Z`$, let $`s_1,s_2,t_1,t_2`$ be defined by (1) and (2). Substituting $`k=L(h)`$ into (1) and (2) yields $`t_1t_2t_3=\left(s+2h(t1)\right){\displaystyle \frac{\left(s2h\right)^2\left(2h1\right)^2}{t^3}}>0`$ since $`hI`$ and by Lemma 4. Similarly, $`s_1s_2s_3=\left(s+2h(t1)\right)\left(2h1\right)\left(s2h\right){\displaystyle \frac{\left(t1\right)^2}{s^2\left(s1\right)^2}}>0`$, again since $`hI`$ and by Lemma 4. Thus, corresponding to each $`(h,k)Z`$, we have found ellipses $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$, with $`E_1`$ tangent to $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_3`$, and $`E_2`$ tangent to $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_4`$. However, we require one ellipse, with center $`(h,k)`$, which is tangent to all four lines $`L_1,L_2,L_3`$, and $`L_4`$. Well, the foci of $`E_1`$ are the zeroes of the numerator of $`F(z),`$ which is the polynomial

$$p(z)=\left(s1\right)z^2+\left(it(t_1+t_2)+(s1)(t_21)\right)zit_1t$$

$$=\left(s1\right)(zZ_1)(zZ_2)$$

Similarly, the foci of $`E_2`$ are the zeros of the numerator of $`G(z)`$, which is the polynomial

$$q(z)=\left(t1\right)z^2+\left(s(s_1+s_2)+i\left(s_21\right)\left(t1\right)\right)zis_1s$$

$$=\left(t1\right)(zW_1)(zW_2)$$

Using $`k=L(h),`$ (1), and (2), $`{\displaystyle \frac{p(z)}{s1}}={\displaystyle \frac{q(z)}{t1}}=z^22(h+iL(h))z+i{\displaystyle \frac{s2h}{s1}}`$. Since $`{\displaystyle \frac{p(z)}{s1}}`$ and $`{\displaystyle \frac{q(z)}{t1}}`$ have the same coefficients, $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ have the same foci. Also, by Theorem 2, $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ are both tangent to $`L_2`$ at the point $`(0,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{s2h}{\left(s1\right)h}})`$. By Lemma 5, $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ are identical. Hence $`E=E_1=E_2`$ is an ellipse, with center $`(h,k)`$, which is tangent to all four lines $`L_1,L_2,L_3`$, and $`L_4`$. Of course $`E`$ is inscribed in $`R`$ since $`(h,k)ZR`$. To prove uniqueness, if $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ are distinct concentric ellipses, then, as noted in (), their four common tangents would have to form a parallelogram. If $`R`$ is not a parallelogram, then this is a contradiction. We leave the proof when exactly two sides of $`R`$ are parallel to the reader.

Maximal Area

We now want to minimize and/or maximize the area of an ellipse inscribed in a four–sided convex polygon, $`R`$. First we require a generalization of a result which appears in () on the area of an ellipse inscribed in a triangle. Chakerian’s result assumes that the point $`P`$ lies inside $`ABC`$, the triangle with vertices $`A,B,`$ and $`C`$, while our result assumes that $`P`$ lies outside $`ABC`$. In that case, area$`\left(ABC\right)=`$ area$`\left(CPA\right)+`$ area$`\left(APB\right)`$area$`\left(BPC\right)`$. The details of the proof are similar.

###### Lemma 6

Given a triangle $`ABC`$ and a point $`P\left(ABC\right)`$, let $`\alpha =`$ area$`(BPC),\beta =`$ area$`(CPA),`$ and $`\gamma =`$ area$`(APB)`$. Let $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_3`$ be the three lines thru the sides of $`ABC`$, and let $`E`$ be an ellipse with center $`P`$ which is tangent to $`L_1,L_2,`$ and $`L_3`$. If $`\sigma ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\alpha +\beta +\gamma \right)`$, then area$`(E)={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{\text{area}(ABC)}}\sqrt{\sigma \left(\sigma \alpha \right)\left(\sigma \beta \right)\left(\sigma \gamma \right)}`$

Now let $`A_E=`$ area of an ellipse $`E`$ inscribed in $`R`$. We want to maximize and/or minimize $`A_E`$ as a function of $`h`$, where $`(h,L(h))`$ denotes the center of $`E`$. We discuss the case when no two sides of $`R`$ are parallel. Let $`A=(0,0),B=(1,0),C=(0,{\displaystyle \frac{t}{s1}})`$ , which are the vertices of the triangle we earlier called $`T_1`$. Then area$`(ABC)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\left|s1\right|}}`$, and since $`E`$ is inscribed in $`ABC`$, we can apply Lemma 6, with $`P=(h,k)`$. Substituting $`k=L(h)`$ yields $`\sigma (\sigma \alpha )(\sigma \beta )(\sigma \gamma )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{256}}t^2\left(1+2h\right)\left(s+2ht2h\right){\displaystyle \frac{s2h}{\left(s1\right)^4}}`$. By Lemma 6, $`A_E={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2\left|s1\right|}}\sqrt{\left(2h1\right)\left(s+2h(t1)\right)\left(s2h\right)}`$. Thus we want to optimize $`A(h)=\left(s2h\right)\left(2h1\right)(s+2h(t1)),hI`$. Now $`A(1/2)=A(s/2)=0,`$ and $`A(h)0`$ for $`hI`$ by Lemma 4. Hence $`A^{}(h_0)=0`$ for some $`h_0I`$ with $`A(h_0)`$ a local maximum, and $`A(h)`$ dooes not attain its global minimum on $`I`$. Also, $`A(h_0)`$ must be the only local maximum of $`A(h)`$ on $`I`$, else $`A^{}(h)`$ would have three zeros in $`I`$. Thus $`A(h_0)`$ is the global maximum of $`A(h)`$ on $`I`$. Since ratios of areas of ellipses are preserved under affine transformations, we have proven

###### Theorem 7

Let $`R`$ be any given four–sided convex polygon in the $`xy`$ plane.Then there is a unique ellipse of maximal area inscribed in $`R`$. There is no ellipse of minimal area inscribed in $`R`$.

Example: Take $`s=4`$, $`t=2`$, so that $`R`$ has vertices $`(0,0),(1,0),`$ $`(0,1)`$, and $`(4,2)`$. Then the maximal area ellipse has center $`({\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}},{\displaystyle \frac{7}{9}})`$.

Hyperbolas

Using our earlier notation, let $`X`$ be the open line segment which is the part of $`L`$ lying inside $`R`$, where $`L`$ is the line thru the midpoints of the diagonals. If $`(h,k)XZM_1M_2`$, it is natural to think that there should be a hyperbola, $`H`$, with center $`(h,k)`$, which is tangent to each line making up the boundary of $`R`$. This is actually correct, but only if one considers an asymptote of $`H`$ to be tangent to $`H`$(at infinity, of course). 111This was also proven in (), but the statement there is not quite correct since this author omitted the case where the”tangent line” is an asymptote.This is not hard to prove using the methods of this paper. An asymptote of $`H`$ can arise when employing Theorem 2 since it is possible for one of $`t_i+t_j,ji,`$ to be $`0`$.


text:
# The Future of X-ray Spectroscopy of Galactic Black Hole Binaries

## 1 Looking Backward

Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. – George Santayana

There are a number of reviews describing theoretical models and observations of galactic black hole candidate (GBHC) binaries (e.g., Done, 2001; Reynolds and Nowak, 2003). It is interesting to look back, however, and note that many of the components incorporated into models today had their origins some time ago, with many important insights made using very sparse data. Some ideas have come into and out of consideration several times over the past thirty years. See Reynolds and Nowak (2003), for example, for a brief description of the history of the fluorescent Fe line in GBHC, which has gone from being interpreted as broad to narrow, and back and forth again, several times (Barr et al., 1985; Fabian et al., 1989; Kitamoto et al., 1990; Done et al., 1992, etc.). I myself have been on both sides of this issue Wilms et al. (1999); Nowak et al. (2002), although I am certainly not alone in this regard Done et al. (1992); Done and Życki (1999).

The seminal theoretical work that helped usher in the “modern era” of the study of accretion flows was that of Shakura & Sunyaev (Shakura and Sunyaev, 1973, see Fig. 1). Theories, aided by observations, quickly added complexity to this basic picture. The concept of a two-phase flow (i.e., disk and ‘corona’) was introduced, and was even suggested to represent ‘advection domination’ Shapiro et al. (1976); Ichimaru (1977). Disks were hypothesized to be warped Petterson (1977), to produce magnetic flares in their inner regions Galeev et al. (1979), or to be surrounded by a hot corona that produced the characteristic spectrum of ‘hard state’ observations Sunyaev and Trümper (1979). Very brief, fast-photometry optical observations Motch et al. (1983) revived the concept of disk flares, and tied them to optical synchrotron emission Fabian et al. (1982). Magneto-hydrodynamic turbulence was suggested as the viscous dissipation mechanism Balbus and Hawley (1991), and later even suggested to be acting within the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO) Agol and Kamionkowski (2001).

A major observational advance was made when radio jets were discovered in X-ray binaries Mirabel and Rodriguez (1994). It is interesting to note, however, that ‘radio jet ejection events’ previously had been hypothesized, probably correctly so, based solely upon ‘dipping events’ in X-ray observations of GX 339$``$4 Miyamoto and Kitamoto (1991). Meanwhile, the study of warped disks had been revived Pringle (1996), and advection dominated flows had undergone several revivals Rees et al. (1982); Narayan and Yi (1995) and further had winds, and several new acronyms, appended to them Blandford and Begelman (1999). In at least one instance Corbel et al. (2002), an X-ray binary jet clear manifested itself in the X-ray due to its interaction with the interstellar medium. It also has been suggested, however, that steady jets in the hard state can significantly contribute to the observed 2-200 keV X-ray spectrum Markoff et al. (2001).

This past 30 years of research has led to a picture much as presented in Fig. 2. My own reading of our field is that most of us would agree that *all* the components shown in Fig. 2 are relevant. The major questions, then, relate not to the existence of these components, but rather to their relative contributions to the observed spectra (and variability) from source to source, and, within a given source, as a function of the source luminosity, ‘state’, and history. Ultimately, our goal is to tie these phenomena to basic system parameters (black hole mass, spin, accretion rate onto the hole, secondary mass, binary separation, etc.), and use them to study General Relativity in the strong field regime (e.g., Wilms et al., 2001) and plasma physics under extreme conditions.

## 2 The ‘Golden Age’

As discussed in the abstract above, we are perhaps living in the “Golden Age” of X-ray spectroscopy, with four currently operating instruments that are in many ways complementary to one another. Using various combinations, one can obtain spectra in the 0.1–600 keV regime, (continuous) timing ranging from $`\mu `$sec to 100’s of ksec (and 10’s of Msec, if one includes the RXTE-ASM), and spectral resolutions as large as $`E/\mathrm{\Delta }E1000`$. Coordinated multiple X-ray satellite observations are now routinely performed. For example, RXTE provides the broad band spectrum while, Chandra allows the Fe line region to be decomposed into broad and narrow components (e.g., Miller et al., 2002).

In Fig. 3, I show joint RXTE-INTEGRAL observations of Cyg X-1 Pottschmidt et al. (2003), which provides an extremely broad-band spectrum. These particular spectra are very well fit by a low temperature, disk blackbody, Compton upscattered in an $`100`$ keV corona with optical depth $`\tau _{\mathrm{es}}1`$. The spectra are further reflected off of a cold, mildly ionized slab, with reflection fraction $`\mathrm{\Omega }/2\pi 0.2`$. There are plans to follow-up this particular observation in the Fall of 2004 with a multi-observatory campaign (PI: J. Wilms) that will consist of ground based radio and optical, along with simultaneous XMM-Newton, RXTE, and INTEGRAL observations. This will achieve the broadest band spectrum of any GBHC to date.

This highlights a very important point about X-ray spectroscopy as currently practiced: it no longer solely deals with X-ray spectra. Gamma-ray spectra are crucial for constraining high energy cutoffs, which yield coronal temperatures and are likely important for distinguishing between X-ray emission from jets and coronae. Radio spectra constrain models of the jets. IR and optical spectra constrain jet and outer-disk models. All these components are coupled observationally, and hence must be coupled theoretically. One of RXTE’s greatest contributions to the study of X-ray spectra of GBHC has been to reveal the coupling of radio and X-ray emission. For example, the low/hard state of GX 339$``$4 reveals that the X-ray flux, $`F_\mathrm{X}`$, is related to the radio flux, $`F_\mathrm{r}`$, by $`F_\mathrm{X}F_\mathrm{r}^{1.4}`$ Corbel et al. (2003). It further has been suggested that this trend may be universal in the hard state of GBHC Gallo et al. (2003).

Whether one agrees or disagrees with the X-ray jet model of hard state GBHC (e.g. Markoff et al., 2001), it is worthwhile noting that prior to the launch of RXTE, few would have ever even attempted to apply a model (at least to GBHC, as opposed to AGN) that attempts to describe the spectrum over 9 orders of magnitude in photon energy. The data simply did not exist. The extremely flexible scheduling of RXTE has allowed such multi-wavelength observations to be obtained far more readily. Furthermore, such observations have been carried out over multiple flux levels and spectral states111This points out another unique advantage of RXTE. To date, there have been eight Chandra observations of Cyg X-1, but over 200 RXTE observations. If a single observation allows one to study ‘weather’, RXTE has allowed us to study GBHC ‘climates’., allowing the discovery of spectral correlations as described above Corbel et al. (2003); Gallo et al. (2003).

Along with broad-band flux and spectral correlations, current RXTE observations have been highlighting correlations of these properties with variability features. In the hard state, flux appears correlated with spectral hardness, which in turn appears correlated with peak frequencies of characteristic broad features in power spectra (PSD) of X-ray variability (e.g. di Matteo and Psaltis, 1999; Gilfanov et al., 1999; Nowak et al., 2002) and with the time lags between hard and soft X-ray variability Pottschmidt et al. (2000); Nowak et al. (2002); Pottschmidt et al. (2003). These properties may further be correlated with ‘finer’ spectral features, such as reflection fraction Zdziarski et al. (1999); Gilfanov et al. (1999); Nowak et al. (2002). Again, these strong observational couplings indicate that there must be fundamental theoretical underpinnings. X-ray spectroscopy is (or at least, should be) inseparable from X-ray variability studies.

## 3 Looking Forward

Greetings, my friends. We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. And remember, my friends, future events such as these will affect you, in the future. – Criswell, ‘Plan 9 From Outer Space’

### 3.1 The Glass is (Mostly) Full

Where do we go from here, and are we well-prepared to get there? In the short-term, over the next two years, I believe that the answer is an emphatic yes. We will not see any of our capabilities diminish (barring any unforeseen events that affect currently operating satellites), and we will see some very important new capabilities emerge. One of these capabilities that I personally am most excited about is the advent of new IR and optical observations of GBHC. Although the discovery of microquasars is nearly a decade old, dedicated radio/X-ray spectral campaigns are less than seven years old. The correlation of these properties with X-ray timing properties is even more recent. Extending such studies to the IR and optical regimes is likely to be very important.

I foresee this progressing in two ways, both of which are underway now. First, there are dedicated, frequent optical observations of GBHC with small telescopes, such as recent optical observations of XTE J1550$``$564 Jain et al. (2001). Such observations can be correlated with the daily monitoring by the RXTE-ASM, which will likely shed further light on the nature of GBHC state transitions. IR/optical studies can also provide needed information about the transitions from the radio (jet?) to the X-ray (corona?) part of the spectrum. Specifically, we only have limited observational knowledge of the IR turnover between these two spectral regimes (although see Corbel and Fender, 2002).

Second, the twenty year old suggestion that inner-disk flares create optical synchrotron emission Fabian et al. (1982) was based upon only 100 seconds worth of data, where it was unclear whether the optical led or trailed, or was correlated or anti-correlated Motch et al. (1983)! Observations with large modern telescopes with fast photometry systems, such as the VLT, have dramatically improved this situation. Very exciting examples are the recent optical/X-ray observations of XTE J1118$`+`$480, where possibly correlated optical and X-ray quasi-periodic oscillations (QPO) are observed, and where it was further suggested that the optical variability traces a synchrotron component of the spectrum Hynes et al. (2003). Compared to correlated radio/X-ray spectral-temporal studies, these optical/X-ray studies are only in their infancy. Again, however, they do rely on the future availability of a flexible, easily scheduled X-ray observatory.

Spectral-temporal X-ray studies will undoubtedly continue in the near term, especially with RXTE. But what about the post-RXTE era? Chandra and the imminent Astro E II have somewhat reduced effective areas compared to RXTE, as well as potential problems with photon pile-up (e.g., Davis, 2001) for sources as bright as many GBHC. XMM-Newton, although having good effective area, CCD resolution, and reasonably fast timing capability, has suffered from telemetry constraints for bright sources222This has often required the use of the ‘burst mode’ for bright GBHC, wherein only $`3\%`$ of the photons are telemetered to ground.. A potential work-around for this situation may offer the possibility of dramatically improving the utility of XMM-Newton for GBHC spectral-temporal studies (Wilms et al., in prep.). In a suggested new mode, the lower energy threshold will be raised to $`2`$ keV, thereby reducing telemetry and allowing the use of ‘timing mode’. If successful, this will allow RXTE-like timing with CCD spectral resolution (see Fig. 4 for a spectral simulation of Cyg X-1; courtesy J. Wilms). However, XMM-Newton still has fairly severe scheduling constraints, and such a new mode will not be effective for GBHC much brighter than Cyg X-1 (which numerous X-ray novae in outburst are).

Regardless of the success of this proposed modified mode, in the near term XMM-Newton and Chandra both will further our understanding of the X-ray spectra, and variability, of quiescent GBHC. (This is provided that these objects are studied with sufficiently long integration times; short observations are often limited to simple spectra, e.g. constrained power laws, and flux measurements.) One interesting recent GBHC observation is of the quiescent state of XTE J1650$``$500 Tomsick et al. (2003). The observed spectrum was hard, as is typical for ‘low/hard state’ GBHC. Furthermore, the X-ray variability revealed a break in the power spectrum at very low frequency, consistent with previously observed trends for the characteristic PSD frequencies of hard state GBHC to decrease with decreasing flux. This is the first claim that this trend continues into such extremely faint states.

This is one area where the farther future offers substantially greater promise. Current studies are limited by photon statistics of such faint sources. (For a given signal-to-noise, the required integration times for PSD studies scale as received count rate squared; see van der Klis (1995).) An important attribute of Constellation-X (as well as XEUS, although here I do not show simulations of this latter mission) is that with its proposed very large effective area, we simultaneously will obtain detailed X-ray spectral and variability data from extremely faint sources. As an example, in Fig. 5 I present a simulation of a 50 ksec observation of a quiescent GBHC, such as XTE J1650$``$500. Instead of simple power-law spectrum, I have included a disk blackbody and relativistic line, which are clearly revealed in the residual spectra when only fitting a power law333This simulation and figure are modeled after a similar presentation by Jon Miller at the Constellation-X Workshop held at Columbia University, May 2003.

In addition to revealing structure in the spectrum, Constellation-X observations potentially could measure structure in the PSD of the X-ray variability. Fig. 6 shows a simulated PSD that may be associated with the spectrum of Fig. 5. (The variability parameters are modeled after the observations presented in Tomsick et al. (2003).) Thus, by correlating such spectral features as the presence of a soft disk component or broad line with characteristic variability features, we may determine whether these properties truly are associated, for example, with a varying ‘transition radius’ between an outer thin disk and an inner corona (see the reviews of Done, 2001; Reynolds and Nowak, 2003, and references therein).

### 3.2 The Glass is (a Little) Empty

As sketched out above, I am very optimistic about current progress in the field, and about some of the new directions that the field seems to be taking. But is there anything missing from our spectroscopic capabilities in the future? And is there room for a replacement for RXTE? My own opinion is that the answer to both questions is ‘yes’. Two of my major concerns for the future have been alluded to above. The first is that we have become quite attached to the flexibility, ease of scheduling, and the — still, in comparison to other X-ray satellites — rapid maneuverability of RXTE, yet we have no designated replacement.

The Swift X-ray/gamma-ray satellite will of course be flexible, rapidly maneuverable, and have broad energy coverage with good timing capabilities. Understandably, however, the majority of its program will be devoted to its gamma-ray burst program, and we cannot reasonably expect it to supplant the current radio/optical/X-ray multi-wavelength spectral programs conducted by RXTE. To a limited extent, Swift also will act as a replacement for the RXTE-ASM. Again, however, this replacement will be incomplete. The eventual loss of the ASM will impact future XMM-Newton and Chandra observations in several ways.

Not only will we no longer have a soft X-ray trigger for scheduling pointed spectral observations of rare events, but we will also no longer have a long term lightcurve to act as context for pointed observations by other instruments. As alluded to above, the number of XMM-Newton or Chandra observations of any given GBHC is usually quite limited in comparison to available RXTE observations. Currently, these more limited observations can be compared to spectral properties revealed by the ASM, which in turn often can be compared to more detailed pointed RXTE observations of the same source at an earlier time with similar ASM spectral characteristics. (Currently, many radio/optical/X-ray studies are conducted as monitoring programs utilizing the ASM, e.g., Jain et al. (2001); Corbel and Fender (2002).) We very well may lose this ability well before the end of the mission lifetime of either XMM-Newton or Chandra.

The second concern that I have for future X-ray spectral studies is that we may be forgoing opportunities to delve deeper into studies of spectral-temporal correlations. Further progress is partly contingent upon having the ability to study rapid variability with a large effective area instrument. Specifically, the ability to study X-ray variability *phase information* and *coherence* is severely limited by photon statistics, even more so than are PSD studies van der Klis (1995); Vaughan and Nowak (1997).

One currently utilized method of studying spectral-temporal correlations is the so-called ‘Fourier resolved spectroscopy’ Gilfanov et al. (1999); Revnivtsev et al. (2001) (although this technique has been previously applied to Ginga observations of GBHC). Essentially, it involves weighting a spectrum by a PSD amplitude. One of my major objections to such techniques is that they ignore phase information. For example, a pivoting power law appears as a broken spectrum, with the break at the pivot. Or another way of phrasing it, we are taking knowledge from an incoherent sum (the PSD), and applying that to something which is likely comprised of (quasi-)coherently added components (the spectrum). Techniques that go from the spectrum to an incoherently summed PSD seem to me more promising.

Such thoughts, as with many of the theories discussed in the introduction, are of course not new, and have been contemplated for prior X-ray observations of GBHC. For example, using Ginga data, Miyamoto and collaborators hypothesized that GBHC variability was comprised of ‘disk’ and ‘coronal’ components incoherently summed Miyamoto et al. (1994). By first fitting the spectral component and then using the normalizations of the disk and coronal portions of the spectrum, they found that a fair representation of the associated PSD could be obtained. An incoherent sum for the variability, however, is just the first approximation. Each component likely has its own phase (or, equivalently, lag between hard and soft variability) that can add/interfere in the regions of strong overlap of the PSD components.

A potential example of such effects is shown in Fig. 7. These PSD, phase lags, and coherence (i.e., normalized amplitude of the cross-correlation; Vaughan and Nowak (1997)) are composed from a set of (very similar) observations of GX 339$``$4 Nowak (2000). The PSD is well modeled as a sum of broad features. It is possible that *each* of these broad features has its own intrinsic phase/time lag between hard and soft variability (a hypothesized decomposition is shown in Fig. 7), and that the net observed phase lag is the sum of these components. Furthermore, one would expect drops in the coherence (i.e., the degree of linear correlation between soft and hard variability) in regions where the independent PSD components overlap (see Fig. 7, and Nowak, 2000). (Again, these thoughts are not new, and have been considered by Miyamoto and collaborators for Ginga data of GBHC; Miyamoto et al. (1988).)

Again, I believe the most fruitful avenue of research to pursue is to start with a spectral decomposition and then work forward towards the timing attributes, specifically, PSD, phase, and coherence. A very good example of this approach is the work by Poutanen and Gierlinski (Poutanen and Gierliński, 2003, and these proceedings), who modeled the X-ray spectra and variability of the pulsar SAX J1808.4$``$3658. One of their key results was to show that the measured phase could be related to the individual spectral components. This particular source, however, had the advantage of being relatively bright and having a strong variability feature (i.e., the pulse). Thus there were good statistics for performing such a spectral-temporal decomposition. But what about GBHC where most variability features are broad?

This latter case is difficult because obtaining variability phase information requires extremely good statistics, and hence large effective areas. (Whereas there is an ‘optimal filter’ to remove many effects of Poisson noise from the PSD, there is no optimal filter to minimize noise effects on phase measurements; van der Klis (1995); Vaughan and Nowak (1997).) This seems to me a prime goal for ‘spectral-temporal’ studies that could be performed by a successor to RXTE. Also, given sufficient detector area *and* the ability to spectrally decompose rapid variability, we may yet consider performing spectral-temporal studies in the time domain (as opposed to the Fourier frequency domain). It is worthwhile noting that, although Constellation-X is partly being designed with the goal of ‘reverberation mapping’ of the broad Fe line in AGN Reynolds et al. (1999), a similar study in GBHC not only requires a faster time response, but also larger effective area. The obtained signal-to-noise in a spectrum integrated over a characteristic time scale (viscous, thermal, or dynamical) is actually greater for AGN compared to GBHC (see the discussion of Reynolds and Nowak, 2003, and references therein). Again, this suggests a successor mission to RXTE with its rapid timing capabilities, but substantially larger effective area.

## 4 Summary

Over the past 30 years, we certainly have come a long way in our understanding of the spectra (at all wavelength bands, not just X-ray) of Galactic black hole binaries. Although many of the components of our theories and models have been in existence for a large fraction of this history, it truly is the modern era, with four unique and complementary X-ray satellites, working in cooperation with other wavelength bands, wherein we are able to conduct careful tests of these concepts. Our capabilities will increase further (with the launch of Swift and Astro E II, and the continuing missions of current satellites) in the short-term future. The farther future promises more ambitious instruments, i.e., Constellation-X, XEUS, and MAXIM, which will greatly enhance our knowledge of X-ray spectra.

Still, if there is any cause for wistfulness, it will be the eventual loss of the RXTE pointed instruments, PCA and HEXTE, and the RXTE All Sky Monitor. The flexibility of RXTE has been crucial for multi-wavelength spectroscopy, and it has reinvigorated the study of spectral-temporal correlations. If there is a ‘hole’ to be filled in our, otherwise very exciting, future studies of X-ray spectra, it is a new flexible satellite with rapid timing capabilities and effective area larger than RXTE.

It is a pleasure to acknowledge stimulating conversations with Omer Blaes, Paolo Coppi, Sera Markoff, Jon Miller, and Christopher Reynolds. I would also like to thank my wife, Nirah Shomer, for suggesting the use of the 24 hour clock, and Jack Bauer for keep America safe. I beg the indulgence of my boss for me not discussing the future of ‘high resolution X-ray spectroscopy’, but that is the subject of a more thorough review by someone more knowledgeable than myself. This work has been supported by NASA grants NAS8-01129 and GO3-4050B.


text:
# Pseudogap in the microwave response of YBa2Cu3O7-x

## I Introduction

Last years a lot of interest has been attracted by investigations of the nature of pseudogap states of high-$`T_c`$ superconductors’ (HTSC) phase diagram. This area corresponds to lower concentration $`p`$ of holes per copper atom in the CuO2 plane and lower critical temperatures $`T_c`$ in comparison with the optimal value $`p0.16`$ and the maximum temperature $`T_{c,max}`$ of the superconducting transition. The $`p`$ and $`T_c`$ values in HTSC satisfy the following empirical relationship Tal1 : $`T_c=T_{c,max}[182.6(p0.16)^2]`$. Currently, the origin of the pseudogap remains unclear. Proposed theoretical scenarios may be divided into two categories. One is based on the idea that the pseudogap is due to precursor superconductivity, in which pairing takes place at the pseudogap transition temperature $`T^{}>T_c`$ but achieves coherence only at $`T_c`$. The other assumes that the pseudogap state is not related to superconductivity per se, but rather competes with it. This magnetic precursor scenario of the pseudogap assumes dynamical fluctuations of some kind, such as spin, charge or structural, or so-called staggered flux phase. These two scenarios treat anomalies of electronic properties in underdoped HTSC observed at temperatures both above $`T_c`$ and in its vicinity Timu ; Tal2 ; Sado ; Norm .

In the heavily underdoped HTSC, at $`TT_c`$ a competition of pseudogap and superconducting order parameters develops most effectively and results in the peculiarities of the superfluid density $`n_s(T,p)`$ as a function of $`T`$ and $`p`$. It is well known that in clean BCS $`d`$-wave superconductors (DSC) the dependence $`\mathrm{\Delta }n_s(T)n_s(T)n_0`$ is linear on temperature $`TT_c`$: $`\mathrm{\Delta }n_s(T)(T/\mathrm{\Delta }_0)`$, where $`n_0=n_s(0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0=\mathrm{\Delta }(0)`$ are the superfluid density and the superconducting gap amplitude at $`T=0`$. This dependence is confirmed by the measurements of the $`ab`$-plane penetration depth $`\lambda _{ab}(T)=\sqrt{m^{}/\mu _0e^2n_s(T)}`$: $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _{ab}(T)T`$ at $`T<T_c/3`$, where $`\mu _0`$, $`m^{}`$ and $`e`$ are the vacuum permeability, the effective mass and the electronic charge, respectively. The derivative $`|dn_s(T)/dT|`$ at $`T0`$ determines $`n_0/\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ ratio. If thermally excited fermionic quasiparticles are the only important excitations even at $`p<0.16`$, then the slope of $`n_s(T)`$ curves at $`TT_c`$ is proportional to $`n_0(p)/\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$ ratio: $`|dn_s(T)/dT|_{T0}n_0(p)/\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$. The measurements of $`\lambda _{ab}(0)`$ in underdoped HTSC showed that the superfluid density $`n_0(p)\lambda _{ab}^2(0)`$ increases approximately linearly with $`p>0.08`$ reaching its maximum value at $`p0.16`$ Lor ; Ber .

When decreasing $`p<0.16`$ and hence approaching the dielectric phase, the role of electron correlations and phase fluctuations becomes increasingly significant. The generalized Fermi-liquid models (GFL) allow for this through $`p`$-dependent Landau parameter $`L(p)`$ Lee ; Mil1 ; Mil2  which includes $`n_0(p)`$. The values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$ and $`L(p)`$ determine the doping dependence of the derivative $`|dn_s(T)/dT|_{T0}=L(p)/\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$. In Ref. Lee,  the ratio $`L(p)/\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$ does not depend on $`p`$; the model Mil1  predicts $`L(p)/\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)p^2`$. The measurements of YBa2Cu3O7-x single crystals Bonn  and oriented powders Pan  with the holes concentration $`p0.1`$ showed that the slope of $`n_s(T)`$ dependences at $`T0`$ is either slightly $`p`$-dependent Bonn , which agrees with Ref. Lee, , or diminishes with decreasing $`p0.16`$Pan  which contradicts the GFL models Lee ; Mil1 ; Mil2 .

In the precursor pairing model Kost ; Levi  of pseudogap, based on the formation of pair electron excitations with finite momentum at $`T^{}>T_c`$, the influence of pseudogap order parameter on the quasiparticles spectrum at $`T<T_c`$ leads to a rise of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$ and decrease of $`n_0(p)`$ with $`p`$ lowering. Hence, the decrease of the derivative $`|dn_s(T)/dT|_{T0}n_0(p)/\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$ is expected. The $`n_s(T,p)/n_0`$ dependences calculated in Ref. Levi,  show that their low temperature slopes decrease with underdoping. An alternative behavior of $`|dn_s(T)/dT|`$ follows from magnetic precursor $`d`$-density wave (DDW) scenario of pseudogap Chak . In this model a DDW order parameter $`W(p,T)`$ is directly introduced into the quasiparticle band structure. At low energies the excitation spectrum of DDW consists of conventional fermionic particles and holes like that of DSC with which it competes at $`p<0.2`$. The DSC gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$ steadily vanishes with $`p`$ decreasing, whereas the sum of zero-temperature squares $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0^2(p)+W_0^2(p)`$ remains constant Tew . In the issue, the DDW model predicts a growth of the slope of $`n_s(T,p)/n_0`$ curves at low $`T`$ and $`p<0.1`$. At the same time the opening of pseudogap influences weakly the $`c`$-axis penetration depth $`\lambda _c(T,p)`$ of high-frequency field for currents running perpendicular to CuO2 planes. In particular, strong decrease of the interlayer coupling integral $`t_{}(p)`$ with $`p`$ lowering Nyh  in YBa2Cu3O7-x dominates over effects of the DDW order on $`\lambda _c(0,p)`$ Kim .

The present paper aims at the experimental verification of the above mentioned theoretical speculations.

## II Experiment

To fulfill the task, we investigated the anisotropy and evolution of the temperature dependences of microwave conductivity components in YBa2Cu3O7-x crystal under varying oxygen doping in the range $`0.07x0.47`$. The crystal of a rectangular shape, with dimensions $`1.6\times 0.4\times 0.1`$ mm3, has been grown in a BaZrO3 crucible. The measurements were made at the frequency of $`\omega /2\pi =9.4`$ GHz and in the temperature range $`5T200`$ K. To change an oxygen content in the sample, we successively annealed the sample in the air at different $`T500^{}`$ C specified in Table 1.

According to susceptibility measurements at the frequency of 100 kHz, superconducting transition width amounted to 0.1 K in the optimally doped state ($`x=0.07`$); however, the width increased with the increase of $`x`$, having reached 4 K at $`x=0.47`$. The temperatures of the superconducting transition were $`T_c=92,80,70,57,41`$ K which correspond to the concentrations $`p=0.16,0.12,0.106,0.092,0.078`$, respectively (Table 1). Anisotropy was measured for each of the five crystal states. The whole cycle of the microwave measurements included the following: (i) we measured the temperature dependences of the quality factor and of the frequency shift of the superconducting niobium resonator with the sample inside in the two crystal orientations with respect to the microwave magnetic field, transversal ($`T`$) and longitudinal ($`L`$); (ii) measurements in the $`T`$ orientation gave the surface resistance $`R_{ab}(T)`$, reactance $`X_{ab}(T)`$ and conductivity $`\sigma _{ab}(T)=i\omega \mu _0/Z_{ab}^2(T)`$ of the crystal cuprate planes in its normal and superconducting states; (iii) measurements in the $`L`$ orientation gave $`\sigma _c(T)`$, $`X_c(T)`$, $`R_c(T)`$. See Ref. Nef1,  for the details of the measuring technique in the optimally doped YBa2Cu3O6.95 crystal.

The temperature dependences of surface impedance $`Z_{ab}=R_{ab}+iX_{ab}`$ components, $`R_{ab}(T)`$ and $`X_{ab}(T)`$, are shown in Fig. 1a. In the normal state for each of the five crystal states we have $`R_{ab}(T)=X_{ab}(T)`$ which implies the validity of the normal skin-effect condition. The value of residual losses $`R_{ab}(T0)`$ does not exceed 40 $`\mu \mathrm{\Omega }`$. In the case of optimum oxygen content $`R_{ab}(T)`$ dependence has a broad peak at $`TT_c/2`$ which vanishes with $`p`$ lowering. At $`T<T_c/3`$ all $`R_{ab}(T)`$ curves are linear on $`T`$. In Fig. 1b we demonstrate the temperature dependences of the $`c`$-axis impedance components $`R_c(T)`$ and $`X_c(T)`$. The real and imaginary parts of the surface impedance coincide at $`T>T_c`$, $`R_c(T)=X_c(T)`$. Therefore, the resistivities $`\rho _{ab}(T)`$ and $`\rho _c(T)`$ can be found from $`R_{ab}(T)`$ and $`R_c(T)`$ curves at $`T>T_c`$ in Fig. 1, applying the standard formulas of the normal skin effect: $`\rho _{ab}(T)=2R_{ab}^2(T)/\omega \mu _0`$, $`\rho _c(T)=2R_c^2(T)/\omega \mu _0`$. Fig. 2 shows the evolution of the dependences $`\rho _{ab}(T)`$ and $`\rho _c(T)`$ in YBa2Cu3O7-x crystal with the change of $`x`$ in the temperature range $`T_c<T200`$ K.

## III Results and discussion

Fig. 3 shows the low temperature sections of the measured $`\lambda _{ab}(T)=X_{ab}(T)/\omega \mu _0`$ curves. The linear extrapolation (dashed lines) of these dependences at $`T<T_c/3`$ gives the following $`\lambda _{ab}(0)`$ values: 152, 170, 178, 190, 198 nm for $`p=0.16,0.12,0.106,0.092,0.078`$, respectively (Table 1). The error in $`\lambda _{ab}(T)`$ is largely determined by the measurement accuracy of the additive constant $`X_0`$ which is equal to the difference between the measured reactance shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }X_{ab}(T)`$ and $`R_{ab}(T)`$ at $`T>T_c`$ Tru03 .

As follows from Fig. 4, halving of the concentration (namely, from $`p=0.16`$ to $`p=0.078`$) results in approximately two times smaller $`\lambda _{ab}^2(0)=n_0\mu _0e^2/m^{}`$ value. Similar behavior $`n_0(p)p`$ within the range $`0.08<p0.16`$ was observed by other groups Lor ; Ber . It is easily seen that this dependence contradicts Uemura’s relation $`n_0(p)T_c(p)`$ Uem . The naive linear extrapolation of the dashed line in Fig. 4 at $`p<0.08`$ leads to nonphysical result: $`n_0(p)`$ is finite at vanishing $`p`$. To the best of our knowledge there is no data of superfluid density measurements in HTSC at $`p<0.08`$. As for theoretical predictions, $`n_0`$ linearity on $`p`$ extends down to $`p=0`$ in the model Lee , while in the DDW scenario Tew ; Wan  it exists in the underdoped range of phase diagram (Fig. 5) where the DSC order parameter grows from zero to its maximal value, moreover, $`n_0(p)`$ is nonzero as $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$ vanishes (Fig. 1 from Ref. Wan ). The latter agrees with our data.

In Fig. 4 we also show the slopes $`|d\lambda _{ab}^2(T)/dT|_{T0}|dn_s(T)/dT|_{T0}`$ of $`\lambda _{ab}^2(T)`$ curves obtained from $`\lambda _{ab}(T)`$ dependences at $`T<T_c/3`$. The value of $`|d\lambda _{ab}^2(T)/dT|`$ changes slightly at $`0.1<p0.16`$ in accordance with Ref. Lee . However, it grows drastically at $`p0.1`$, namely, $`\lambda _{ab}^2(T)`$ slope increases 2.5 times with $`p`$ decrease from 0.12 to 0.08. $`|d\lambda _{ab}^2(T)/dT|p^2`$ dependence Mil1  is shown by solid line in Fig. 4 and roughly fits the data at $`p0.12`$. The dotted line drawn through $`|d\lambda _{ab}^2(T)/dT|`$ experimental points in Fig. 4 qualitatively agrees with the behavior of this quantity in the DDW model Tew ; Wan .

The temperature dependence of the superfluid density $`n_s(T)`$ at low $`T`$ in the heavily underdoped YBa2Cu3O7-x proves to be one more check-up of the DDW scenario of pseudogap. $`\lambda _{ab}^2(0)/\lambda _{ab}^2(T)=n_s(T)/n_0`$ dependences obtained from the data in Fig. 3 are shown in Fig. 6 for different $`p`$ values. The solid line represents the DSC result. The evident peculiarities in Fig. 6 are the concavity of $`n_s(T)/n_0`$ curves corresponding to the heavily underdoped states ($`p=0.078`$ and $`p=0.092`$) and their deviation from DSC and the curves for $`p=0.16,0.12,0.106`$. This behavior of the superfluid density $`n_s(T)/n_0`$ contradicts the conclusions of the precursor pairing model Levi , but agrees with the DDW scenario Tew . According to Tew , at temperatures much smaller than the relevant energy scales $`W_0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$, only the nodal regions close to the points ($`\pi /2,\pi /2`$) and symmetry-related points on the Fermi surface will contribute to the suppression of the superfluid density. In a wide range of temperatures $`n_s(T)`$ dependence will be linear for the optimally and moderately doped samples, in which $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ is larger than or comparable to $`W_0`$ (Fig. 5) and plays a leading role in the temperature dependence of the superfluid density. However, for the heavily underdoped samples the situation is quite different. As the DDW gap is much larger than the superconducting gap in these heavily underdoped samples, $`W_0`$ becomes dominant around the nodes. Though in the asymptotically low-temperature regime the suppression of the superfluid density is linear on temperature, there is an intermediate temperature range over which the suppression actually behaves as $`\sqrt{T}`$. It is worth emphasizing that the authors of Ref. Tew  state that these features are independent of the precise $`W_0(p)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$ functional forms. The only input that is needed is the existence of DDW order which diminishes with $`p`$ increase and complementary development of the DSC order. The DDW order eats away part of the superfluid density from an otherwise pure DSC system. Actually, in the intermediate temperature range $`0.1T_c<T0.5T_c`$ the experimental $`n_s(T)`$ curves in YBa2Cu3O6.60 and YBa2Cu3O6.53 with $`p<0.1`$ are not linear but similar to $`\sqrt{T}`$-dependences. This is confirmed by Fig. 7, where the measured curves $`\lambda _{ab}^2(T)n_s(T)`$ are compared with linear ($`T`$) in YBa2Cu3O6.67 ($`p=0.106`$) and $`\sqrt{T}`$-dependences $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _{ab}^2(T)=3\sqrt{T}`$ ($`\lambda _{ab}`$ and $`T`$ are expressed in $`\mu `$m and K) in YBa2Cu3O6.60 ($`p=0.092`$) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _{ab}^2(T)=3.5\sqrt{T}`$ in YBa2Cu3O6.53 ($`p=0.078`$). Dashed lines in Fig. 7 correspond to the linear at $`T<T_c/3`$ dependences of $`\lambda _{ab}(T)`$ presented in Fig. 3 and extended to higher temperatures.

It is also interesting to note that these deviations of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _{ab}^2(T)`$ in YBa2Cu3O6.60 and YBa2Cu3O6.53 are accompanied by inflection of the resistivity $`\rho _{ab}(T)`$ curves in the normal state of these samples. These inflections are seen at two lower $`\rho _{ab}(T)`$ curves in Fig. 2 around $`T100`$ K. One more feature of the curves in Fig. 2 is that only the optimally doped YBa2Cu3O6.93 shows that both dependences $`\rho _{ab}(T)`$ and $`\rho _c(T)`$ have a metallic behavior, and the ratio $`\rho _c/\rho _{ab}`$ approaches the anisotropy of effective masses of charge carriers $`m_c/m_{ab}=\lambda _c^2(0)/\lambda _{ab}^2(0)`$ in $`3D`$ London superconductor, which type YBa2Cu3O6.93 belongs to. The other states of YBa2Cu3O7-x have the resistivity $`\rho _c(T)`$ increase with the decrease of temperature, so that decrease of carriers concentration in YBa2Cu3O7-x crystal results in the crossover from Drude $`c`$-axis conductivity to the tunneling one Tru2 . The evolution of the temperature dependences of $`\rho _c(T)`$ with doping correlates with those of the $`c`$-axis penetration depth $`\lambda _c(T)`$. Solid symbols of Fig. 8 show the dependences $`\lambda _c^2(0)/\lambda _c^2(T)`$ at $`TT_c/2`$ for YBa2Cu3O7-x states with $`T_c=92`$ K, $`T_c=70`$ K and $`T_c=41`$ K. Table 1 contains the values of the penetration depth $`\lambda _c(0)`$ at $`T=0`$ and the exponents $`\alpha `$ in the measured $`\lambda _c(T)\lambda _c(0)=\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _c(T)T^\alpha `$ dependences at $`TT_c/3`$. The peculiarity of the optimally doped state YBa2Cu3O6.93 is good coincidence of $`\lambda _{ab}^2(0)/\lambda _{ab}^2(T)`$ (open circles in Fig. 8) and $`\lambda _c^2(0)/\lambda _c^2(T)`$ temperature dependences. With the decrease of $`p`$ the temperature dependence of $`\lambda _c^2(0)/\lambda _c^2(T)`$ becomes substantially weaker than that of $`\lambda _{ab}^2(0)/\lambda _{ab}^2(T)`$. Model Lev1  associates the reduction in the low-$`T`$ slope of $`\lambda _c^2(0)/\lambda _c^2(T)`$ curves and the appearance of semiconducting-like temperature dependence of $`\rho _c(T)`$ with a decrease of the interlayer coupling in the crystal. Dashed line in Fig. 8 represents numerical result Lev1  for this case. On the other hand, in the optimally doped YBa2Cu3O6.93 the interlayer coupling is strong and quasiparticle transport along the $`c`$-axis becomes identical to one in the anisotropic $`3D`$ superconductor Xiang . Solid line in Fig. 8 is $`\lambda _c^2(0)/\lambda _c^2(T)`$ dependence, calculated in Ref. Lev1  for this particular case. So, the low-$`T`$ dependences of $`\lambda _c(T)`$ are well described without taking pseudogap effects into consideration. Let us consider now their possible manifestations in the doping dependence of the $`c`$-axis penetration depth.

From the inset to Fig. 8 follows that reciprocal value of the zero-temperature penetration depth $`1/\lambda _c(0,p)`$ is roughly linear on $`p`$. Note that it vanishes at $`p0.07`$ which is near the value where $`T_c`$ does too (Fig. 5). There are several theoretical models Lev1 ; Hir  and experimental confirmations Bas  of the direct proportionality of $`\lambda _c^2(0)`$ to the $`c`$-axis conductivity $`\sigma _c(T_c)`$ in HTSC. In the simplest theory this correlation is caused by $`\lambda _c^2J_c`$ relation, where $`J_c`$ is the $`c`$-axis critical current in the $`d`$-wave superconductor with anisotropic interlayer scattering and weak interlayer coupling. The value of $`J_c(0)`$ is determined by both the superconducting gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ and the conductivity $`\sigma _c(T_c)`$. The symbols in the lower inset to Fig. 9 show our data fitted by the dashed line $`\mathrm{log}\lambda _c(0)[\mu m]=0.48\mathrm{log}\sigma _c(T_c)[\mathrm{\Omega }^1m^1]+2.08`$. The latter constant defines a proportionality factor $`U_0(p)`$ in $`\lambda _c^2(0,p)=U_0(p)\sigma _c(T_c,p)`$ relation. In the framework of DDW model the value of $`U_0(p)`$ is determined by the doping dependences of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0(p)`$, $`W_0(p)`$ and chemical potential $`\mu (p)`$. As it is shown in Ref. Kim  the opening of DDW gap can lead to increase as well as to decrease of $`U_0(p)`$. This depends on the position of Fermi surface with respect to DDW gap, but in any case $`U_0(p)`$ changes less than twice in the whole range of doping. The values of $`\lambda _c^2(0.16)/\lambda _c^2(p)`$ at $`T=0`$ and $`\sigma _c(p)/\sigma _c(0.16)`$ at $`T=T_c`$ are shown in Fig. 9. Their ratio $`U_0(p)/U_0(0.16)`$ is demonstrated in the upper unset to Fig. 9. This weak doping dependence indicates that the contribution of the interlayer coupling integral $`t_{}(p)\sigma _c(T_c,p)`$ into $`\lambda _c(0,p)`$ is dominant.

Thus, four main experimental observations of this paper, viz, (i) linear dependence of $`n_0(p)`$ in the range $`0.078p0.16`$, (ii) drastic increase of low-temperature $`n_s(T)`$ slope at $`p<0.1`$, (iii) the deviation of $`\mathrm{\Delta }n_s(T)`$ dependence from universal BCS behavior $`\mathrm{\Delta }n_s(T)(T)`$ at $`T<T_c/2`$ towards $`\mathrm{\Delta }n_s(T)(\sqrt{T})`$ with decreasing $`p<0.1`$, and (iv) very weak influence of pseudogap on the low-$`T`$ and doping dependences of the $`c`$-axis penetration depth evidence the DDW scenario of electronic processes in underdoped HTSC. Nevertheless, the measurements of $`\lambda _{ab}(T)`$ and $`\lambda _c(T)`$ at lower temperatures and in the high-quality samples with smaller carrier density are necessary for ultimate conclusion.

Helpful discussions with A.I. Larkin, E.G. Maksimov, and Sudip Chakravarty are gratefully acknowledged. This research was supported by RFBR grants Nos. 03-02-16812 and 02-02-08004.


text:
# Chapter 1 Calculation of Muon Fluxes at the Small Atmospheric Depths

## Chapter 1 Calculation of Muon Fluxes at the Small Atmospheric Depths

### Abstract

Precise knowledge of the hadronic interaction between primary cosmic rays and atmospheric nuclei is very important and fundamental to study atmospheric neutrinos and their oscillations. We studied hadronic interaction models using the data of primary and secondary cosmic rays observed by BESS experiments. By comparing the observed spectra with the ones calculated by several interaction models, we found DPMJET-III is most favored among them.

### 1. Introduction

The discovery of neutrino oscillations and its finite mass using the atmospheric neutrino is a mile stone in the history of particle physics. The next step would be the accurate determination of the oscillation parameters. However, the capability of neutrino experiments using the atmospheric neutrinos is limited by the accuracy of the predicted neutrino fluxes. The main uncertainty in the calculation of the atmospheric neutrino flux stems from the uncertainties of primary cosmic-ray flux and hadronic interactions. We note that the uncertainty of the cosmic-ray proton fluxes is remarkably reduced by the recent cosmic ray observations up to 100 GeV. For the hadronic interactions, however, there are scarcely any recent experiments available for our purpose.

In this paper, we study interaction models using the data of primary and secondary cosmic rays observed simultaneously by the BESS experiment at balloon altitudes. Muons at balloon altitudes are considered to carry direct informations of the hadronic interaction of primary cosmic rays with air nuclei. However, it is usually difficult to acquire sufficient statistics during balloon flights, due to small muon fluxes at balloon altitudes. The BESS-2001 flight is unique and interesting in this sense. During the flight, the balloon kept relatively lower altitudes, corresponding to the air depths of 4.5 - 28 $`\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$ for a long time, and registered a sufficient number of muons. This paper is a revise of the previous work  after the calibration of the atmospheric depth measurement.

### 2. BESS Experiments

The BESS ($`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{B}}`$alloon-borne $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{E}}`$xperiment with a $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{S}}`$uperconducting $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{S}}`$pectrometer) detector  is a high-resolution spectrometer with a large acceptance to perform precise measurement of absolute fluxes of various primary cosmic rays, as well as highly sensitive searches for rare cosmic-ray components. In the previous measurements, BESS obtained precise atmospheric muon spectra at sea level  and mountain altitudes  as well as precise primary proton and helium spectra .

The BESS-2001 balloon flight was carried out at Ft. Sumner, New Mexico, USA (3449N, 10422W) on 24th September 2001. Throughout the flight, the vertical geomagnetic cut-off rigidity was about 4.2 GV. Figure 1 shows a balloon flight profile during the experiment. The balloon reached at a normal floating altitude of 36 km at an atmospheric depth of 4.5 g/cm2, then gradually lost its altitude. During the descending period, cosmic-ray data were collected at atmospheric depths between 4.5 g/cm2 and 28 g/cm2.

The proton and helium fluxes in the energy range of 0.5–10 GeV/n and muon flux in 0.5 GeV/$`c`$–10 GeV/$`c`$ were obtained . The overall errors including both statistic and systematic errors are less than 8 %, 10% and 20 % for protons, helium nuclei and muons, respectively. The obtained proton and helium spectra are shown in Fig. 2. Figure 3 shows the observed muon flux together with the predicted ones  as a function of the residual atmospheric depth. For understanding the interactions and tuning the models in the calculation, these data are essentially important to be compared with calculations.

### 3. Comparison of the data with calculation.

We calculated the muon flux under the same environmental condition as that of the BESS-2001 balloon experiment, with several interaction models. The primary flux model used here is essentially the one reported in Gaisser et al.  with a modulation function so that it reproduce the proton cosmic ray flux observed at 4.68 $`\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$ at the energies above the rigidity cut-off of 4.2 GV. The proton flux at 4.68 $`\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$ calculated in this procedure is plotted in Fig. 2.

We plot the quantity (muon flux)/depth for observed data in Fig. 4. For the calculated flux, we depict the same quantity only for 4.68, 13.4 and 26.4 $`g/cm^2`$ in the same figure for DPMJET-III  and Fritiof 1.6  (used in HKKM95) interaction models. The curves for all atmospheric depths are very close. It is clearly seen from these figures that the agreement between the data and calculation is better for DPMJET-III. Quantitatively, the $`\chi ^2`$ is 1.12 for DPMJET-III and 1.75 for Fritiof 1.6. We have made the same analysis for FLUKA 97  and Fritiof 7.02 , and the $`\chi ^2`$ are 1.37 and 1.85 respectively. In Figs. 5, we plotted the ground level muon flux observed at Lynn lake, Mt. Norikura, and Tsukuba. Also plotted are the muon flux calculated by DPMJET-III. The muon fluxes at ground level are affected by the atmospheric density structure, and procedures other than the hadronic interactions. However, we can see that the agreements of data and calculations are reasonably good.

In the comparison of data with calculated fluxes of the several interaction models, no interaction model is strongly excluded by the $`\chi ^2`$ study. Among all the interaction models we studied here, however, DPMJET-III is the most favored.

### 4. Summary

The BESS-2001 flight provided a very unique opportunity to measure precise cosmic-ray fluxes at small atmospheric depths of 4.5 g/cm2 through 28 g/cm2. Using the primary and secondary cosmic-ray fluxes measured by the BESS-2001 experiment, we studied four interaction models used in the atmospheric neutrino calculations. As a result of $`\chi ^2`$ study, no interaction model was strongly excluded. However, DPMJET-III is the most favored in all the interaction models we studied here. It reproduced atmospheric muons observed at sea level (Tsukuba and Lynn Lake) and mountain altitude (Mt. Norikura).

We would like to thank ICRR, the University of Tokyo for the support. This study was supported by Grants-in-Aid, KAKENHI(12047206), from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology (MEXT).

1. Abe K. et al. Phys. Lett. B 564 (2003) 8.

2. Abe K. et al. Proc. 28th ICRC (Tsukuba) HE2.4 (2003) 1463.

3. Ajima Y. et al. Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 443 (2000) 71.

4. Asaoka Y. et al. Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 416 (1998) 236.

5. Battistoni, G. et al. astro-ph/0207035, unpublished.

6. Honda M. et al. Proc. 28th ICRC (Tsukuba) HE2.4 (2003) 1415.

7. Motoki M. et al. Astropart. Phys. 19 (2002) 113.

8. Nilsson-Almqvist B. et al. Comp. Phys. Comm. 43 (1987) 387.

9. Orito S. et al. in : Proc. ASTROMAG Workshop, KEK Report KEK87-19, eds. J. Nishimura, K. Nakamura, and A. Yamamoto (KEK, Ibaraki, 1987)p.111.

10. Pi H. et al. Comp. Phys. Comm. 71 (1992) 173A

11. Roeseler S. et al. SLAC-PUB-8740, hep-ph/0012252, unpublished.

12. Sanuki T. et al. 2000 Astrophys. J. 545 (2000) 1135.

13. Sanuki T. et al. Phys. Lett. B 541 (2002) 234.

14. Shikaze Y. et al. Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 455 (2000) 596.

15. Yamamoto A. et al. Adv. Space Res. 14 (1994) 75.


text:
# Magnetocaloric effect and magnetization in a Ni-Mn-Ga Heusler alloy in the vicinity of magnetostructural transition

## Abstract

The magnetic and thermodynamic properties of a Ni2.19Mn0.81Ga alloy with coupled magnetic and structural (martensitic) phase transitions were studied experimentally and theoretically. The magnetocaloric effect was measured by a direct method in magnetic fields $`026`$ kOe at temperatures close to the magnetostructural transition temperature. For theoretical description of the alloy properties near the magnetostructural transition a statistical model is suggested, that takes into account the coexistence of martensite and austenite domains in the vicinity of martensite transformation point.

Ferromagnetism; Magnetostructural phase transition; Magnetization; Magnetocaloric effect

In recent year Ni2MnGa-based ferromagnetic shape memory alloys have attracted considerable attention as a new class of actuator materials (see, for a recent review, Ref. ). Giant magnetocaloric effect (MCE) has also been observed in these alloys. Solid state materials with a large MCE are considered to be very perspective in creation of solid state refrigerators with high efficiency, manufacturability and ecological compatibility (Ref.  and references therein). In Ni-Mn-Ga alloys, the martensitic transition temperature is very sensitive to composition, which is very important for practical applications of these alloys. For instance, upon a partial substitution of Mn for Ni the martensitic transition temperature $`T_m`$ increases and Curie temperature $`T_C`$ decreases until they merge in one first-order magnetostructural phase transition (MSPT) . The values of MCE in the vicinity of such a transition are likely to be maximal. The aim of our work has been to study, experimentally and theoretically, magnetic and thermodynamic properties of Ni2.19Mn0.81Ga alloy with MSPT and to determine directly the magnitude of MCE.

Polycrystalline Ni2.19Mn0.81Ga alloy was prepared by a conventional arc-melting method in argon atmosphere. MCE was measured by a direct method in a calorimetric system at constant temperatures in the vicinity of MSPT. The sample for the measurement of MCE was fixed by glass wires of 10 mm in diameter glued to the sample. The change in the temperature of the sample, $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$, with the change in magnetic field, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$, was measured by a differential thermocouple. A cooper screen was placed near the sample in order to decrease radiational losses. The magnetic field up to 26 kOe was created by an electromagnet.

The temperature dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ at turning the magnetic field off is presented in Fig. 1. The experimental results obtained evidence that the $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ dependence has a peak at $`T340`$ K. This temperature corresponds to the temperature of MSPT .

A statistical model is suggested for the theoretical description of the alloy properties near MSPT. The model takes into account coexistence of three types of martensitic and one type of austenitic structural domains in the vicinity of MSPT point . Each structural domain is divided by $`180^{}`$ magnetic domains. It is postulated that the rate of transformation between structural domains is proportional to the net probability of transformation. This probability is expressed using the value of energetic barrier between the domains

$$P_{\alpha \beta }=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }Vb_{\alpha \beta }}{kT}\right)$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$ is the transformation volume, $`b_{\alpha \beta }`$ is the energetic barrier for transitions from $`\alpha `$ phase to $`\beta `$ phase ($`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are the numbers of structural domains). The magnitude of the potential barrier can be obtained as the energy at the point where Gibbs potentials of $`\alpha `$ phase and $`\beta `$ phase are equal for a fixed value of stress. Gibbs potential is $`G=FSE`$, where $`F`$ is free energy, $`S`$ and $`E`$ are stress and strain. The free energy of the sample consists of magnetic, magnetoelastic and elastic terms. The evolution of the system depends on the energetic impacts of each phase. The rate of transformation from one phase to another is determined by

$$\dot{\xi }^\alpha =\underset{\alpha }{\overset{\beta \alpha }{}}\omega (P_{\beta \alpha }\xi ^\beta P_{\alpha \beta }\xi ^\alpha ),$$
(2)
where $`\omega `$ is the frequency of attempt, $`\xi ^\alpha `$ is a volume fraction of $`\alpha `$ phase. From equation (2) we can find the volume fraction of each phase. Then the magnetization of the sample can be found as

$$M=\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{4}{}}\xi ^\alpha M^\alpha ,$$
(3)
where $`M^\alpha `$ is the magnetization of $`\alpha `$ phase. Using (3) we can obtain the temperature change corresponding to the change in magnetic field

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T=\left(\frac{T}{C_{P,H}}\right)\left(\frac{dM}{dT}\right)_H\mathrm{\Delta }H,$$
(4)
where $`C_{P,H}`$ is specific heat of the alloy.

Numerical calculation was made with the following parameters of the alloy $`C_{P,H}=25`$ J/kg K, $`\mathrm{\Delta }V=0.2\times 10^{25}`$ m3, $`T_m=T_C=340`$ K, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H=26`$ kOe. The results are presented in Fig. 1 by the solid line. It is seen that for the given parameters the results of calculation are in a good agreement with the experimental results.

From Fig. 2 we can determine the magnetic entropy change $`\mathrm{\Delta }S`$ at MSPT using Maxwell relation. This value is about 4.5 J/kg K at 15 kOe, which is comparable with that observed in the same magnetic field at the martensitic transition temperature in a Ni2.104Mn0.924Ga0.972 composition .

The work was partially supported by grants RFBR-BRFBR 02-02-81030 Bel2002a, RFBR 03-02-17443, 02-02-16636a and RF Ministry of Education No E02-3.4-35.