text:
# Hysteretic Depinning and Dynamical Melting for Magnetically Interacting Vortices in Disordered Layered Superconductors

\[

## Abstract

We examine the depinning transitions and the temperature versus driving force phase diagram for magnetically interacting pancake vortices in layered superconductors. For strong disorder the initial depinning is plastic followed by a sharp hysteretic transition to a 3D ordered state for increasing driving force. Our results are in good agreement with theoretical predictions for driven anisotropic charge density wave systems. We also show that a temperature induced peak effect in the critical current occurs due to the onset of plasticity between the layers.

\]

A vortex lattice subject to quenched disorder offers an ideal system for studying glassy dynamics governed by the competition between the ordering forces (the vortex-vortex repulsion) and disorder . One of the key issues of glassy dynamics is the nature of the depinning transition separating a pinned state of the lattice at small external drives from the sliding regime that occurs when the external force exceeds a threshold depinning value. The early numerical simulations revealed that in the system with strong disorder plastic depinning occurs with the vortices tearing past one another and flowing in complex patterns . The onset of plasticity at depinning was later confirmed in experiment  as well as subsequent numerical studies  and was demonstrated to play a crucial role in the pre-melting peak effect where the critical current exhibits a striking increase as a function of temperature or field  prior to vortex lattice melting and related phenomena. As the applied driving force is further increased, the effect of the quenched disorder is reduced and the vortex lattice can show a remarkable reordering transition at a driving force $`F_r`$ . At this transition a considerable portion of the vortex lattice order is restored and the motion is highly coherent. The reordering force $`F_r`$ is expected to diverge as the temperature $`T`$ approaches the vortex lattice melting temperature $`T_m`$ . Transport measurements provide strong evidence for this scenario . Additional studies on the depinning and reordering transition and the nature of the coherently moving phases have been conducted theoretically , numerically , and experimentally , showing both non-hysteretic continuous depinning transitions and abrupt hysteretic V(I) curves. The appearance of the hysteretic portion of the V(I) curves depends on how the vortex lattice was prepared: the initial current ramp shows a large hysteretic critical current but subsequent ramps produce only continuous non-hysteretic V(I) characteristics .

The underlying mechanisms of depinning and its interplay with the reordering transition remain an open question. The issues to be clarified include a determination of the conditions under which the depinning transition shows hysteretic or switching responses, as well as an understanding of the nature of these phenomena. The mechanism by which a three-dimensional lattice depins or reorders is also an open question, as well as the issue of whether the onset of plasticity coincides with a sudden jump in the critical current (the peak effect).

Some of these issues were addressed in  in a context of a driven three-dimensional anisotropic charge density wave system (CDW) with disorder. It was shown that if disorder is sufficiently strong, the dependence of the lattice velocity on the applied drive becomes two-valued or bistable: at the same applied force (close to the depinning force of the topologically disordered phase) the lattice can either remain at rest or slide depending on the history. This means that the depinning transition shows switching behavior and hysteresis. The details of depinning are determined by particulars of the system involved. For a layered anisotropic CDW considered in  the depinning occurs in two stages. The initial plastic depinning, where the decoupled 2D CDWs slide independently in each layer, is followed by a sharp transition or crossover at higher drives to a faster coherently moving 3D solid CDW phase. Reversing the process reveals hysteresis: pinning (immobilizing) of a coherent 3D CDW occurs at smaller drives. It was also shown that for weak disorder there is only a single non-hysteretic depinning transition directly to the 3D coherently moving state.

The results of  are very general, and the particular model used there can be straightforwardly generalized to other periodic media in quenched disorder. A detailed study of the character of the many-valued $`vF`$ dependence near depinning was recently carried out in  within the framework of a mean-field model for a visco-elastically driven vortex configuration, where a dynamic bistability and, accordingly, a hysteretic plastic depinning was found to occur for sufficiently strong disorder. Note that the layered CDW model of  can be conveniently applied directly to highly anisotropic superconductors where the magnetic interactions between pancake vortices dominate . In this system both a 2D regime, in which vortices in each layer move independently from the other layers, and a 3D regime, where vortices in different layers form coherently moving lines, should exist .

In this work we investigate the dynamics of magnetically interacting vortices in a three-dimensional layered superconductor to numerically test the predictions of Ref. . Our model is relevant to anisotropic layered superconductors such as BSCCO as well as artificially layered superconductors in which the magnetic interactions dominate. Recent numerical simulations with this model have found that for increasing applied driving force, a transition from a decoupled plastically flowing state to a coupled 3D coherently moving lattice occurs . A sharp static 2D to 3D disorder induced transition also appears as a function of field and disorder . In this model, the dynamic phase diagram as a function of driving force and temperature, as well as hysteretic and switching behavior in the current-voltage characteristics, have not been studied until now. We find that for strong disorder, the initial depinning is 2D with the vortices flowing plastically and independently in any one layer. For increased drives we see a sharp transition to a coherently moving 3D vortex lattice which manifests itself in an abrupt increase in the vortex velocities. We observe strong hysteresis when the driving current is cycled. We have also investigated the driving versus temperature phase diagram.

We consider a three-dimensional layered superconductor in which the vortices are modeled as repulsive point particles confined to a layer with an equal number of vortices per layer. The overdamped equation of motion for vortex $`i`$ is given by

$$𝐟_i=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N_v}{}}_i𝐔(\rho _{i,j},z_{i,j})+𝐟_i^{vp}+𝐟_d+𝐟^T=\eta 𝐯_i,$$

where $`N_v`$ is the number of vortices, $`\rho _{i,j}`$ and $`z_{i,j}`$ are the distance between pancakes $`i`$ and $`j`$ in cylindrical coordinates, and $`\eta =1`$. The system has periodic boundaries in-plane and open boundaries in the $`z`$ direction . The magnetic energy between pancakes is

$`𝐔(\rho _{i,j},0)=2dϵ_0\left((1{\displaystyle \frac{d}{2\lambda }})\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{R}{\rho }}+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{2\lambda }}E_1\right)`$ (1)
$`𝐔(\rho _{i,j},z)=s_m{\displaystyle \frac{d^2ϵ_0}{\lambda }}\left(\mathrm{exp}(z/\lambda )\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{R}{\rho }}E_2\right)`$ (2)
where $`ϵ_0=\mathrm{\Phi }_0^2/(4\pi \lambda )^2`$, $`\lambda `$ is the London penetration depth, $`R=22.6\lambda `$, the maximum radial distance, $`E_1=_\rho ^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\rho ^{}\mathrm{exp}(\rho ^{}/\lambda )/\rho ^{}`$, $`E_2=_\rho ^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\rho ^{}\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{z^2+\rho ^2}/\lambda )/\rho ^{}`$, $`d=0.005\lambda `$ is the interlayer spacing, and we set $`s_m=2.0`$. The uncorrelated pins are modeled by parabolic traps that are randomly distributed in each layer. The vortex-pin interaction is given by $`𝐟_i^{vp}=_{k=1}^{N_{p,L}}(f_p/\xi _p)(𝐫_i𝐫_k^{(p)})\mathrm{\Theta }((\xi _p|𝐫_i𝐫_k^{(p)}|)/\lambda )`$, where the pin radius $`\xi _p=0.2\lambda `$, the pinning force $`f_p=0.02f_0^{}`$, and $`f_0^{}=ϵ_0/\lambda `$. We have simulated a $`16\lambda \times 16\lambda `$ system with a vortex density of $`n_v=0.35/\lambda ^2`$ and a pin density of $`n_p=1.0/\lambda ^2`$ in each of $`L=8`$ layers. This corresponds to $`N_v=80`$ vortices and $`N_p=256`$ pins per layer, with a total of 640 pancake vortices. For our finite temperature simulations the temperature is modeled as a Langevan kick $`𝐟^T`$ where $`<𝐟(t)^T>=0`$ and $`<𝐟(t)_i^T𝐟(t)^T>=2\eta k_BT\delta _{ij}`$.

In Fig. 1(a) we show the average vortex velocities in the direction of drive, $`V_x=<v_x>`$, as the applied driving force $`f_d`$ is increased and then decreased, and in Fig. 1(b) we show the corresponding c-axis correlation function, $`C_z=1(|(𝐫_{i,L}𝐫_{i,L+1})|/(a_0/2))\mathrm{\Theta }(a_0/2|(𝐫_{i,L}𝐫_{i,L+1})|)`$, where $`a_0`$ is the vortex lattice constant. At $`f_d=0`$ the vortices are pinned and uncorrelated in the $`z`$-direction as is indicated by the fact that $`C_z`$ has a low value. The initial depinning, at $`f_{dp}=0.01f_0^{}`$, is 2D with the vortices remaining uncorrelated in the $`z`$-direction. Near $`f_d=0.013`$ the vortex velocities sharply increase, coinciding with a sharp transition to a coupled moving 3D state as seen in the jump up in $`C_z`$ . At higher drives the vortex velocity linearly increases with increasing $`f_d`$. Upon reducing $`f_d`$ from this linear regime the system remains in the 3D state for driving forces well below $`f_d=0.013`$. At $`f_d=0.007`$ there is a sudden transition to a 2D pinned state as seen in the drop in $`V_x`$ and $`C_z`$. If the applied driving force is again increased the velocities and $`C_z`$ will follow the same hysteresis loop. In Fig. 1(c,d) we show $`V_x`$ and $`C_z`$ for the same system as in Fig. 1(a,b) but with a lower disorder strength of $`f_p=0.01f_0^{}`$. Here the depinning transition is non-hysteretic with a single depinning threshold to the 3D coherently moving state as seen by the fact that $`C_z=1.0`$ at all times. For a given coupling strength value $`s_m`$, there is a critical pinning force above which there is a static 3D-2D transition . Hysteretic $`V(I)`$ curves can only be observed above, but close to, this transition. The width of the hysteresis in the $`V(I)`$ curves is largest for disorder strengths just above the static 2D-3D transition and gradually narrows for increasing disorder strength.

The behavior we observe is in excellent agreement with the theoretical predictions of . We note that unlike the anisotropic charge-density wave system, where only inter-plane plasticity or slipping can occur, in the vortex system in-plane plasticity is possible within each layer. The 2D-3D transition in the case of the vortices occurs by simultaneous recoupling of the vortices between layers and the reordering of the vortices in plane. To illustrate this, in Fig. 2(a) we show a top view of the vortices in

the moving 2D regime, indicating that the vortices are uncorrelated from layer to layer and are disordered in plane. In contrast, Fig. 2(b) shows that in the moving 3D regime, the vortices are aligned between layers and possess a triangular ordering.

In Fig. 3 we show the driving force versus temperature phase diagram for a system with $`f_p=0.01f_0^{}`$. The temperature is plotted in units of $`T_m=0.00045`$, the temperature at which the clean system undergoes melting in the form of a single sharp transition from a 3D lattice to a 2D pancake gas. As shown in Fig. 3, at $`T/T_m<0.005`$ for low drives there is a 3D pinned phase where the vortices remain aligned. At these temperatures, for $`f_d/f_0=0.001`$ there is a non-hysteretic depinning transition directly to the coherently moving 3D state.

We find a static transition to the 2D state at $`T/T_m=0.005`$, which we label $`T_{dc}`$. For $`T>T_{dc}`$ the depinning transition is 2D, and as the driving force is further increased a dynamically induced reordering of the vortices occurs. As $`T`$ is further increased above $`T_{dc}`$ the size of the 2D pinned phase is reduced, while the drive at which the 2D plastic flow to 3D coherent flow transition occurs diverges as $`T`$ approaches $`T_m`$, in agreement with the dynamical freezing model of Koshelev and Vinokur .

The thermally induced decoupling seen in Fig. 3 also coincides with a sharp increase in the critical current or a “peak effect.” There has been considerable work on dimensional transitions in the context of the peak effect in layered superconductors. The static 3D-2D transition and critical current increase in layered superconductors have been previously studied as a function of interlayer coupling and magnetic field . Koshelev and Kes

have proposed theoretically that magnetically coupled vortices can show a first order transition from a 3D to a 2D system under certain conditions . The sharpness in the 3D-2D transition we observe in our simulation suggests that it is first order in nature .

The 3D-2D transition can be seen as a temperature induced peak effect in which the combination of temperature and quenched disorder bring about a decoupling transition where the individual pancakes can adjust to the optimal pinning configurations. The phase diagram in Fig. 3 is very similar to the one proposed by Bhattacharya and Higgins  in which there is an elastic depinning regime for a certain temperature range, above which the peak effect and the onset of plasticity simultaneously appear. In our model the peak effect is caused not by the onset of plasticity in the $`ab`$ plane but by the onset of plasticity in the $`c`$-axis  with the plasticity only occurring for $`T>T_{dc}`$. We find that the temperature $`T_{dc}`$ moves further below $`T_m`$ as the disorder in the sample is increased. Thus for large enough disorder the 2D phase extends all the way to $`T=0`$, and the dynamic phase diagram becomes the same as the one proposed in in Ref. .

In Fig. 4 we show the $`V_x`$ versus $`f_d`$ curves, which correspond to experimental V(I) curves, for increasing $`T`$. For $`T<T_{dc}`$ there is a sharp elastic depinning transition at which all the vortices start moving at once in the 3D state. For $`T>T_{dc}`$ the depinning response is more continuous since the 2D depinning occurs inhomogeneously, with certain regions moving while other regions remain pinned. As $`T`$ is further increased in the 2D regime the depinning transition falls at driving forces lower than that at which the 3D depinning transition occurred. Although for these higher temperatures the 2D pancakes depin at a lower applied drive than the 3D state, the overall velocity above depinning is still less than that of a coherently moving 3D system at the same drive so that a crossing of the IV curves occurs.

To summarize, we have numerically investigated the dynamics of magnetically coupled vortices in layered superconductors interacting with quenched disorder. For sufficiently strong disorder the depinning is 2D. Here the vortices flow plastically in each layer and are uncorrelated from layer to layer. For higher drives there is a sharp hysteretic transition to a coherently moving ordered 3D vortex lattice. For weak disorder there is a non-hysteretic depinning transition from a pinned 3D to a moving 3D state. The two stage 2D-3D hysteretic depinning transition is in good agreement with the theoretical predictions of Ref. . We have also mapped out the dynamic phase diagram as a function of driving force and temperature. At low temperatures we observe non-hysteretic 3D pinned to 3D moving transitions. For increased temperature there is a static 3D-2D transition which coincides with a peak in the critical current as well as the onset of plasticity in the $`c`$-axis. The drive at which a dynamically induced 2D-3D dynamic transition diverges as $`T_m`$ is approached. Our dynamic phase diagram is very similar to that proposed in Ref.

CJO and CR thank B. Janko for his kind hospitality at Argonne National Laboratory. This work was supported by CLC and CULAR (LANL/UC), by NSF-DMR-9985978, and by Argonne National Laboratory through U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science under contract No. W-31-109-ENG-38.


format: text

text:
# Probing the End of the Dark Ages

## 1. Introduction

At epochs corresponding to $`z1000`$ the intergalactic medium is expected to recombine and remain neutral until sources of radiation and heat develop that are capable of reionizing it. The detection of transmitted flux shortward of the Ly$`\alpha `$wavelength in the spectra of sources at $`z6`$ implies that the hydrogen component of this IGM was ionized at even higher redshifts. It appears then that substantial sources of ultraviolet photons and mechanical energy were already present when the Universe was less than 6% of its current age, perhaps quasars and/or young star-forming galaxies: an episode of pregalactic star formation may provide a possible explanation for the widespread existence of heavy elements (like carbon, oxygen, and silicon) in the IGM, while the integrated radiation emitted from quasars is likely responsible for the reionization of intergalactic helium at later times.

Popular cosmological models predict that some time beyond a redshift of 15 the gas within halos with virial temperatures $`T_v>10^4`$K \[or, equivalently, with masses $`M>10^9(1+z)^{3/2}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ comparable to present-day dwarf ellipticals\] cooled rapidly due to the excitation of hydrogen Ly$`\alpha `$by the Maxwellian tail of the electron distribution, and fragmented. Massive stars formed with some initial mass function (IMF), synthesized heavy elements, and exploded as Type II supernovae (SNe) after a few $`\times 10^7`$yr, enriching and heating the surrounding medium. Whilst collisional excitation of molecular hydrogen may have allowed the gas in even smaller systems \[virial temperatures of only a few hundred K, corresponding to masses around $`10^7(1+z)^{3/2}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$\] to cool and form stars at earlier times (Abel, Ciardi, and Ferrara, this volume), H2 molecules are efficiently photo-dissociated by stellar UV radiation, and such negative ‘feedback’ is likely to have suppressed molecular cooling and further star formation inside very small halos. One should note that while numerical N-body$`+`$hydrodynamical simulations have convincingly shown that the IGM is expected to fragment into structures at early times in CDM cosmogonies (e.g. Cen et al. 1994; Zhang et al. 1995), the same simulations are much less able to predict the efficiency with which the first gravitationally collapsed objects lit up the Universe at the end of the ‘dark age’.

## 2. ‘Minihalos’, Metal Enrichment, and Reionization

The reionization scenario that has been the subject of the most theoretical study is one in which intergalactic hydrogen is photoionized by the UV radiation emitted either by quasars or by stars with masses $`>10\mathrm{M}_{}`$, rather than ionized by collisions with electrons heated up by, e.g., supernova-driven winds from early pregalactic objects. In the former case a high degree of ionization requires about $`13.6\times (1+t/\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}})`$eV per hydrogen atom, where $`\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}}`$ is the volume-averaged hydrogen recombination timescale, the ratio $`t/\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}}`$ being much greater than unity already at $`z10`$ (Haiman and Gnedin, this volume). Collisional ionization to a neutral fraction of only few parts in $`10^5`$ requires a comparable energy input, i.e. an IGM temperature close to $`10^5`$K or about $`25`$eV per atom.

Massive stars will deposit both radiative and mechanical energy into the interstellar medium of subgalactic fragments. A complex network of ‘feedback’ mechanisms is likely at work in these systems, as the gas in shallow potential is more easily blown away thereby quenching further star formation, and the blastwaves produced by supernova explosions reheat the surrounding intergalactic gas and enrich it with newly formed heavy elements and dust. It is therefore unclear at this stage whether an early input of mechanical energy will actually play a major role in determining the thermal and ionization state of the IGM on large scales (Tegmark et al. 1993). What can be easily shown is that, during the evolution of a a ‘typical’ stellar population, more energy is lost in ultraviolet radiation than in mechanical form. This is because in nuclear burning from zero to solar metallicity ($`Z_{}=0.02`$), the energy radiated per baryon is $`0.02\times 0.007\times m_\mathrm{H}c^2`$; about one third of it goes into H-ionizing photons. The same massive stars that dominate the UV light also explode as SNe, returning most of the metals to the interstellar medium and injecting about $`10^{51}`$ergs per event in kinetic energy. For a Salpeter IMF, one has about one SN every $`150\mathrm{M}_{}`$ of baryons that forms stars. The mass fraction in mechanical energy is then approximately $`4\times 10^6`$, ten times lower than the fraction released in photons above 1 ryd.

The relative importance of photoionization versus shock ionization will depend, however, on the efficiency with which radiation and mechanical energy actually escape into the IGM. Consider, in particular, the case of an early generation of halos with circular speed $`v_c=25\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, corresponding in top-hat spherical collapse to a virial temperature $`T_v=0.5\mu m_pv_c^2/k10^{4.3}`$K and halo mass $`M=0.1v_c^3/GH10^8[(1+z)/10]^{3/2}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$. In these systems rapid cooling by atomic hydrogen can take place and a significant fraction, $`f\mathrm{\Omega }_B`$, of their total mass may be converted into stars over a dynamical timescale (here $`\mathrm{\Omega }_B`$ is the baryon density parameter). In a flat cosmology with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$, $`h=0.5`$, and rms mass fluctuation normalized at present to $`\sigma _8=0.63`$ on spheres of $`8h^1`$Mpc, halos with $`M=10^8h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ would be collapsing at $`z=9`$ from 2 $`\sigma `$ fluctuations. At this epoch more massive halos with $`M=10^{10}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$, while able to cool rapidly, would be collapsing from 3 $`\sigma `$ peaks and be too rare to produce significant amounts of heavy elements and UV radiation (in a gaussian theory the 3 $`\sigma `$ peaks contain only 5% as much mass as the 2 $`\sigma `$ peaks at a given epoch), unless they were able somehow to form stars more efficiently than lower-mass objects. Halos from 1 $`\sigma `$ fluctuations would be more numerous and contain most of the mass, but with virial temperatures of only a few hundred degrees they would most likely be unable to cool via H2 before reionization actually occurs at $`z=z_{\mathrm{rei}}`$.

For $`f=0.1`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2=0.019`$, and $`h=0.5`$, the explosive output of $`10,000`$ SNe would inject a total energy $`E_010^{55}`$ergs. Correlated multi-SN explosions will create large holes in the ISM of these pregalactic halos, perhaps enlarging by far pre-existing ones due to winds from their progenitors stars. The energy from SNe will impart enough momentum to the interstellar medium that large portions of it will become unbound and leave the parent halo, taking the metal-enriched stellar debris along (MacLow & Ferrara 1999). A large fraction – perhaps as much as 90% – of the energy injected in these SN-driven bubbles could be lost to radiation in the halo before the bubbles expand out into the surrounding IGM (Madau et al. 2000). Eventually the hot gas will escape its host, shock the IGM, and form a cosmological blast wave. If the explosion occurs at cosmic time $`t=4\times 10^8`$yr (corresponding in the adopted cosmology to $`z=9`$), at time $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=0.2t`$ after the event we can use the standard Sedov-Taylor self-similar (adiabatic) solution to give a rough estimate of the proper radius of the shock,

$$R_s\left[\frac{12\pi G(0.1E_0)}{\mathrm{\Omega }_B}\right]^{1/5}t^{2/5}\mathrm{\Delta }t^{2/5}10\mathrm{kpc}.$$
$`(1)`$
At this instant the shock velocity relative to the Hubble flow is

$$v_s2R_s/5\mathrm{\Delta }t50\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1,$$
$`(2)`$
lower than the escape velocity from the halo. The gas temperature just behind the shock front is $`T_s=3\mu m_pv_s^2/16k10^5`$K, more than enough to efficiently ionize all the incoming hydrogen. At these redshifts, it is the onset of Compton cooling off cosmic microwave background photons that ends the adiabatic stage of blast wave propagation. According to the Press-Schechter formalism, the comoving abundance of collapsed halos with mass $`M=10^8h^1M_{}`$ at $`z=9`$ is $`dn/d\mathrm{ln}M30h^3`$Mpc-3, corresponding to a mean proper distance between neighboring halos of $`20h^1`$kpc, and to a total mass density parameter of order $`0.01`$. With the assumed star formation efficiency only a small fraction, about one percent, of the stars seen today would form at these early epochs. Still, our simplistic analysis (see Madau et al. 2000 for a more detailed treatment) conveys the interesting idea that the blast waves from such a population of pregalactic objects may actually fill a significant fraction of the Hubble volume, and drive the intergalalactic medium at early epochs to a higher adiabat, $`T10^5`$K, than expected from photoionization, so as to inhibit the formation of further protogalaxies by raising the Jeans mass. This effect could perhaps be responsible for providing a global negative feedback to self-regulate the early stellar birthrate, effectively causing a pause in the cosmic history of star formation. After this epoch of pregalactic outflows, the IGM would be polluted to a mean metallicity $`Z=\mathrm{\Omega }_Z/\mathrm{\Omega }_b0.001Z_{}`$ (Madau et al. 2000). A lower density of sources – which would therefore have to originate from higher amplitude peaks – would suffice if the typical efficiency of star formation were larger than assumed here.

## 3. Cosmological $`\mathrm{𝐈𝐈}`$regions

In this section we will focus our attention to the photoionization of the IGM, i.e. we will assume that UV photons from an early generation of stars and/or quasars are the main source of energy for the reionization and reheating of the Universe, and that star formation and quasar activity occurs in collapsed galaxy halos. The process then begins as individual sources start to generate expanding $`\mathrm{II}`$regions in the surrounding IGM; throughout an $`\mathrm{II}`$region, H is ionized and He is either singly or doubly ionized. As more and more sources of ultraviolet radiation switch on, the ionized volume grows in size while the neutral phase shrinks. Reionization is completed when the $`\mathrm{II}`$regions overlap, and every point in the intergalactic space gets exposed for the first time to a nearly uniform Lyman-continuum (Lyc) background.

In the presence of a population of ionizing sources, the transition from a neutral IGM to one that is almost fully ionized can be statistically described by the evolution with redshift of the volume filling factor (or porosity) $`Q`$ of $`\mathrm{II}`$, He $`\mathrm{II}`$, and He $`\mathrm{III}`$regions. The radiation emitted by spatially clustered stellar-like and quasar-like sources – the number densities and luminosities of which may change rapidly as a function of redshift – coupled with absorption processes in a medium that becomes more and more clumpy owing to the non-linear collapse of structures (Figure 1), all determine the complex topology of neutral and ionized zones in the Universe (Gnedin, this volume; Ciardi et al. 2000; Abel et al. 1999). When $`Q1`$ and the radiation sources are randomly distributed, the ionized regions are spatially isolated, every UV photon is absorbed somewhere in the IGM, and the UV radiation field is highly inhomogeneous. As $`Q`$ grows, the crossing of ionization fronts becomes more and more common, until percolation occurs at $`Q=1`$.

Since the mean free path of Lyc radiation is always much smaller than the horizon (this is also true after ‘overlapping’ because of the residual $`\mathrm{I}`$still present in the Ly$`\alpha `$forest clouds and the Lyman-limit systems), the filling factor of cosmological $`\mathrm{II}`$regions is equal at any given time $`t`$ to the total number of ionizing photons emitted per hydrogen atom by all radiation sources present at earlier epochs, $`_0^t\dot{n}_{\mathrm{ion}}𝑑t^{}/\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}`$, minus the total number of radiative recombinations per atom, $`_0^tQ𝑑t^{}/\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}}`$. This statement reflects the simple fact that every ultraviolet photon that is emitted is either absorbed by a newly ionized hydrogen atom or by a recombining one. Differentiating one gets

$$\frac{dQ}{dt}=\frac{\dot{n}_{\mathrm{ion}}}{\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}}\frac{Q}{\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}}}.$$
$`(3)`$
It is this differential equation – and its equivalent for expanding helium zones – that statistically describes the transition from a neutral Universe to a fully ionized one (Madau et al. 1999). Initially, when the filling factor is $`1`$, recombinations can be neglected and the ionized volume increases at a rate fixed solely by the ratio $`\dot{n}_{\mathrm{ion}}/\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}`$. As time goes on and more and more Lyc photons are emitted, radiative recombinations become important and slow down the growth of the ionized volume, until $`Q`$ reaches unity, the recombination term saturates, and reionization is finally completed (except for the high density regions far from any source which are only gradually eaten away, Miralda-Escudé, Haehnelt, & Rees 2000). In the limit of a fast recombining IGM ($`\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}}t`$), one can neglect the derivative on the left-hand side of equation (3) and derive

$$Q<\frac{\dot{n}_{\mathrm{ion}}}{\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}}\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}},$$
$`(4)`$
i.e. the volume filling factor of ionized bubbles must be less (or equal) to the number of Lyc photons emitted per hydrogen atom in one recombination time. In other words, because of radiative recombinations, only a fraction $`\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}}/t1`$ of the photons emitted above 1 ryd is actually used to ionize new IGM material. The Universe is completely reionized when

$$\dot{n}_{\mathrm{ion}}\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}}>\overline{n}_\mathrm{H},$$
$`(5)`$
i.e. when the emission rate of ultraviolet photons exceeds the mean rate of recombinations.

## 4. A clumpy Universe

The simplest way to treat reionization in a inhomogeneous medium is in terms of a clumping factor that increases the effective gas recombination rate. In this case the volume-averaged recombination time is

$$\overline{t}_{\mathrm{rec}}=[(1+2\chi )\overline{n}_p\alpha _BC]^1=0.06\mathrm{Gyr}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2}{0.019}\right)^1\left(\frac{1+z}{10}\right)^3\frac{\overline{n}_\mathrm{H}}{\overline{n}_p}C_{10}^1,$$
$`(6)`$
where $`\alpha _B`$ is the recombination coefficient to the excited states of hydrogen (at an assumed gas temperature of $`10^4`$K), $`\chi `$ the helium to hydrogen abundance ratio, and the factor $`Cn_p^2/\overline{n}_p^2>1`$ takes into account the degree of clumpiness of photoionized regions (hereafter $`C_{10}C/10`$). If ionized gas with density $`n_p`$ filled uniformly a fraction $`1/C`$ of the available volume, the rest being empty space, the mean square density would be $`n_p^2=n_p^2/C=\overline{n}_p^2C`$. More in general, if $`f_m`$ is the fraction of baryonic mass in photoionized gas at an overdensity $`\delta `$ relative to the mean, and the remaining (underdense) medium is distributed uniformly, then the fractional volume occupied by the denser component is

$$f_v=f_m/\delta ,$$
$`(7)`$
the density of the diffuse component is

$$\overline{n}_p\frac{1f_m}{1f_v},$$
$`(8)`$
and the recombination rate is larger than that of a homogeneous Universe by the factor

$$C=f_m\delta +\frac{(1f_m)^2}{1f_v}.$$
$`(9)`$
It is difficult to estimate the clumping factor accurately. According to hydrodynamics simulations of structure formation in the IGM (within the framework of CDM-dominated cosmologies), Ly$`\alpha `$forest clouds with moderate overdensities, $`5<\delta <10`$, occupy a fraction of the available volume which is too small for them to dominate the clumping at high redshifts (e.g. Theuns et al. 1998). In hierarchical clustering models, it is the virialized gas with $`\delta 200`$ in the earliest non-linear objects with $`T_JT_v10^4`$K (here $`T_J`$ is the virial temperature corresponding to the cosmological Jean mass) which will boost the recombination rate by large factors as soon as the collapsed mass fraction exceeds $`0.5`$% (Haiman, this volume). The importance of photoevaporating minihalos as sinks of ionizing photons during cosmological reionization has been recently discussed by Haiman et al. (2000). Note that such minihalos are not yet resolved in large-scale three-dimensional cosmological simulations. Halos or halo cores which are dense and thick enough to be self-shielded from UV radiation will stay neutral and will not contribute to the recombination rate. This is also true of gas in more massive halos, which will be virialized to higher temperatures and ionized by collisions with thermal electrons.

## 5. The Earliest Luminous Sources and the Damping Wing of the Gunn-Peterson Trough

Prior to complete reionization, sources of ultraviolet radiation will be seen behind a large column of intervening gas that is still neutral. In this case, because of scattering off the line-of-sight due to the diffuse neutral IGM, the spectrum of a source at $`z_{\mathrm{em}}>z_{\mathrm{rei}}`$ should show the red damping wing of the Gunn-Peterson absorption trough at wavelengths longer than the local Ly$`\alpha `$resonance, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{obs}}>\lambda _\alpha (1+z_{\mathrm{em}})`$, where $`\lambda _\alpha =c/\nu _\alpha =1216`$A. At $`z>6`$, this characteristic feature extends for more than $`1500\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ to the red of the resonance, and may significantly suppress the Ly$`\alpha `$emission line in the spectra of the first generation of objects in the Universe. Measuring the shape of the absorption profile of the damping wing could provide a determination of the density of the neutral IGM near the source (Miralda-Escudé 1998).

Cen & Haiman (2000) and Madau & Rees (2000) have recently focused on the width of the red damping wing – related to the expected strength of the Ly$`\alpha `$emission line – in the spectra of very distant QSOs as a flag of the observation of the IGM before reionization. They have assessed, in particular, the impact of the photoionized, Mpc-size regions which will surround individual luminous sources of Lyc radiation on the transmission of photons redward of the Ly$`\alpha `$resonance, and shown that the damping wing of the Gunn-Peterson trough may nearly completely disappear because of the lack of neutral hydrogen in the vicinity of a bright QSO. If the quasar lifetime is shorter than the expansion and gas recombination timescales, the volume ionized will be proportional to the total number of photons produced above 13.6 eV: the effect of this local photoionization is to greatly reduce the scattering opacity between the redshift of the quasar and the boundary of its $`\mathrm{II}`$region. The transmission on the red side of the Ly$`\alpha `$resonance is always greater than 50% for sources radiating a total of $`>10^{69.5}`$ ionizing photons into the IGM (Figure 2). The detection of a strong Ly$`\alpha `$emission line in the spectra of bright QSOs shining for $`>10^7`$yr cannot then be used, by itself, as a constraint on the reionization epoch. The first signs of an object radiating prior to the transition from a neutral to an ionized Universe may be best searched for in the spectra of luminous sources with a small escape fraction of Lyman-continuum photons into the IGM, or sources with a short duty cycle.

### Acknowledgments.

I would like to thank my collaborators, T. Abel, A. Ferrara, F. Haardt, Z. Haiman, and M. Rees, for many useful discussions on the topics discussed here.


text:
# October 2000 The sign of the day-night asymmetry for solar neutrinos

\[

## Abstract

A qualitative understanding of the day-night asymmetry for solar neutrinos is provided. The greater night flux in $`\nu _e`$ is seen to be a consequence of the fact that the matter effect in the sun and that in the earth have the same sign. It is shown in the adiabatic approximation for the sun that for all values of the mixing angle $`\theta _V`$ between $`0`$ and $`\pi /2`$, the night flux of neutrinos is greater than the day flux. Only for small values of $`\theta _V`$ where the adiabatic approximation badly fails does the sign of the day-night asymmetry reverse.

\]

It was pointed out a long time ago  that as a result of the matter effect in the earth it is possible that the flux of neutrinos at night is different from that in the day. Calculations made for a variety of situations  almost always gave a greater flux at night than during the day. This note is designed to explain the sign of the day-night asymmetry.

Most calculations until recently concerned values of the vacuum mixing angle $`\theta _V<45^{}`$ such that the $`\nu _e`$ flux at earth was less than half of the expected flux so that most of the arriving neutrinos were $`\nu _x`$ (that is, $`\nu _\mu `$ or $`\nu _\tau `$). It was then often said that the earth effect was to change $`\nu _x`$ to $`\nu _e`$ and $`\nu _e`$ to $`\nu _x`$ so that there were more $`\nu _e`$ at night because there were more $`\nu _x`$ to start with ***One of us (L.W.) admits to having said this once.. This explanation is fundamentally wrong.

That this is wrong is obvious from noting in recent calculations  a positive asymmetry persists when $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _V=1`$, corresponding to maximal mixing. This point has been discussed in detail recently . Furthermore, even if $`\theta _V>45^{}`$ there is still a positive asymmetry as can be seen, for example, from Figs. 1 and 2 in Ref. .

We start by assuming the adiabatic approximation for the neutrinos traversing the sun and that $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2/2E`$ is much less than the matter effect near the center of the sun where the neutrinos originate. In this case the neutrinos emerge from the sun in the upper vacuum mass eigenstate

$$\nu _2=\mathrm{sin}\theta _V\nu _e+\mathrm{cos}\theta _V\nu _x.$$
(1)
There are no oscillations between the sun and the earth so that the $`\nu _e`$ flux arriving at the earth is $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _VF_0`$, where $`F_0`$ is the expected flux without oscillations in the sun. When the neutrinos go through the earth, the state $`\nu _2`$ is mixed with

$$\nu _1=\mathrm{cos}\theta _V\nu _e\mathrm{sin}\theta _V\nu _x.$$
(2)
Thus, the neutrinos that emerge at night are in a coherent mixture ($`a\nu _2+b\nu _1`$). The night flux then depends on the relative sign and phase of $`a`$ and $`b`$.

For neutrinos going through the mantle of the earth a good approximation is a constant density $`N_e`$, where $`N_e`$ is the electron density. In the $`\nu _1\text{-}\nu _2`$ representation the propagation in the earth is given by

$`i{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu _1\\ \nu _2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu _1\\ \nu _2\end{array}\right),`$ (7)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}B& A\\ A& B\end{array}\right),`$ (10)
where

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}G_FN_e\mathrm{sin}2\theta _V,`$ (11)
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}G_FN_e\mathrm{cos}2\theta _V\mathrm{\Delta }_0,`$ (12)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m^2}{2p}},`$ (13)
with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2m_2^2m_1^2`$ and $`p`$ being the momentum of the neutrino that is approximately equal to its energy $`E`$. The state that emerges then is

$`\nu _2(t)`$ $`=`$ $`i\mathrm{sin}2\theta _M\mathrm{sin}\lambda t|\nu _1`$ (15)
$`+\left(\mathrm{cos}\lambda ti\mathrm{cos}2\theta _M\mathrm{sin}\lambda t\right)|\nu _2,`$
where

$`\mathrm{tan}2\theta _M={\displaystyle \frac{A}{B}},`$ (16)
$`\lambda ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{A^2+B^2}.`$ (17)
The $`\nu _e`$ emerging probability is

$`P_{2e}`$ $`=`$ $`|\nu _e|\nu _2(t)|^2`$ (18)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V+\mathrm{sin}2\theta _M\mathrm{sin}(2\theta _M+2\theta _V)\mathrm{sin}^2\lambda t.`$ (19)
From Eq. (16) it is seen that when $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0\sqrt{2}G_FN_e`$, $`\mathrm{tan}2\theta _M`$ has a small positive value given by $`A/\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$; as $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ decreases till it is much smaller than $`\sqrt{2}G_FN_e`$, the value of $`2\theta _M`$ approaches $`\pi 2\theta _V`$, corresponding to $`\mathrm{tan}2\theta _M=\mathrm{tan}2\theta _V`$. For this whole range of $`\theta _M`$ it follows from Eq. (18) that the emerging $`\nu _e`$ probability is always greater than $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V`$ for all values of $`\theta _V`$ between zero and $`\pi /2`$. For the maximum of the oscillation in Eq. (18), i.e., $`\mathrm{sin}^2\lambda t=1`$, there exists a value of $`\theta _M`$ such that the emerging night flux equals $`F_0`$, the no-oscillation flux; this corresponds to

$$\mathrm{tan}2\theta _M=\mathrm{cot}\theta _V,$$
(20)
which occurs for all $`\theta _V`$ if

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_0=\sqrt{2}G_FN_e\mathrm{\Delta }_o^{max}.$$
(21)
The results may be understood from Fig. 1. The state $`\nu _2`$ is represented by the vector 2 while the heavy eigenvector in matter is $`M`$ These are analogous to Pauli spin vectors for this 2-component system.. In matter the vector 2 precesses about the vector $`M`$ arriving at $`2^{}`$ at the midpoint of the precession. Eq. (20) corresponds to

$$2\theta _M=\frac{\pi }{2}\theta _V$$
(22)
and one can see directly that $`2^{}`$ then coincides with the vector $`\nu _e`$.

The sign of the day-night effect now clearly is seen to depend on the fact that the vector $`M`$ is displaced from 2 in the direction of $`\nu _e`$, which follows from the fact that $`A/\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ is positive. The reason for this is that the matter effect in the sun which makes $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ positive has the same sign as that in the earth. It may be noted that this means that if $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ were originating instead of $`\nu _e`$ the asymmetry would have the same sign.

The approximation that the state emerging from the sun is $`\nu _2`$ may fail for two reasons:

1. $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ is large enough that the matter effect does not dominate even near the center of the sun where the neutrinos originate.
2. The adiabatic approximation fails.

We will neglect the first of these since if $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ is so large the earth effect will be very small. If the adiabatic approximation fails then the state that arrives at the earth will be a mixture of $`\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _2`$. Except for values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ well below $`10^8\mathrm{eV}^2`$ this mixture will be incoherent  with a probability $`1P_c`$ for $`\nu _2`$ and $`P_c`$ for $`\nu _1`$. Here $`P_c`$ is the “jumping probability” given approximately by

$$P_c=\frac{e^{\gamma \mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V}e^\gamma }{1e^\gamma },$$
(23)
where

$`\gamma `$ $`=`$ $`2\pi r_0\mathrm{\Delta }_0,`$ (24)
$`r_0`$ $`=`$ $`R_{\mathrm{sun}}/10.54=6.60\times 10^4\mathrm{km}.`$ (25)
The electron neutrino flux at earth is then

$$D=(1P_c)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V+P_c\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _V,$$
(26)
and the night flux is given by

$$N=(1P_c)P_{2e}+P_c(1P_{2e})$$
(27)
So one has

$$ND=\left(12P_c\right)\left(P_{2e}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V\right).$$
(28)
Clearly $`N`$ is greater than $`D`$ if $`P_C<1/2`$, since $`P_{2e}>\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V`$ from Eq. (18). Thus the $`N<D`$ situation occurs only for $`P_C>1/2`$.

In Fig. 2 we show night and day fluxes $`N`$ and $`D`$, respectively, for the maximum asymmetry case corresponding to Eq. (21). The observed night flux in any experiment depends upon the location, the time of year, and the time of night. Detailed results for different experiments are given in Refs. . Here to get the qualitative behaviour, we consider the mantle with $`N_e=2.5\mathrm{N}_\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and average over the traveling distance $`ct`$ of the neutrinos through the earth between $`0`$ and $`1.5R_E`$, where $`R_E`$ is the radius of the earth. From the figure, one can see that the night flux is greater than the day flux except for very small values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V`$.

As long as the matter oscillation wave length $`\mathrm{}_m`$ is less than $`R_E`$, the $`\mathrm{sin}^2\lambda t`$ term averages to about $`1/2`$; since the maximum of the oscillation yields the flux $`F_0`$, the difference $`ND=\frac{1}{2}(1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V)`$, which holds for large values of $`\theta _V`$. When $`\mathrm{}_mR_E`$ there is sensitivity to the oscillations depending upon the particular way the night is defined. This is illustrated for our particular assumption by the oscillation for values between $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V=0.05`$ and $`0.5`$. When $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V`$ is small, $`\frac{1}{2}(1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V)\frac{1}{2}`$ and so the oscillations are roughly about a value of $`N=\frac{1}{2}`$. For neutrinos going through the core there is a more complicated oscillation possibility . For smaller values of $`\theta _V`$ the value of $`\mathrm{}_m`$ gets much larger than $`R_E`$ so that $`ND`$ decreases rapidly between $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V=0.01`$ and $`0.05`$. Finally, the adiabatic approximation fails for $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V<0.01`$ where the jumping probability $`P_c`$ significantly rises, and $`D`$ becomes greater than $`N`$ for $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V0.001`$. The day-night asymmetry defined as

$$A_{DN}=\frac{ND}{N+D}$$
(29)
reaches a minimum value of $`0.007`$ for $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _V=0.001`$.

In Fig. 3 we show the day-night asymmetry $`A_{DN}`$ for three values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$, corresponding to a range of 9 in energy for fixed $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$, or a range of 9 in $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ for a fixed energy.

For values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2/2E`$ larger than $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0^{max}`$ (dashed curve) the vector $`2^{}`$ is above $`\nu _e`$ as in Fig. 1; as a result, at the peak of the oscillation its $`\nu _e`$ component is less than maximal. Furthermore, $`\theta _M`$ is approximately proportional to $`\theta _V`$ so that as $`\theta _V`$ gets smaller and the day flux decreases, so does $`ND`$. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2/2E`$ smaller than $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0^{max}`$ (dash-dotted curve), the vector $`2^{}`$ is below $`\nu _e`$ As $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2/2E`$ approaches zero, obviously the vector $`M`$ approaches the vector $`\nu _e`$.. The main difference between the dashed and the dash-dotted curves is that the failure of the adiabatic approximation occurs for larger values of $`\theta _V`$ for the case of smaller $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$.

Conclusion: In this paper, we have tried to provide a qualitative understanding of the day-night asymmetry for solar neutrinos, in particular, its sign. We have explored the general behaviour as a function of $`\theta _V`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2/E`$ without consideration of fitting present solar neutrino data. The greater flux at night is seen to be a consequence of the fact that the matter effect in the sun has the same sign as that in the earth. The sign of the asymmetry is reversed only for very small values of $`\theta _V`$ where the adiabatic approximation fails badly (jumping probability greater than $`0.5`$); the magnitude of the asymmetry with the opposite sign is extremely small.

This work is supported by the Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-91ER40682.


text:
# Neutrino-Driven Jets and Rapid-Process Nucleosynthesis

## 1 INTRODUCTION

It is one of the most important astrophysical problems that the sites where the rapid-process (r-process) nucleosyntesis occurs are not still known exactly. There are, at least, three reasons that make the study on r-process nucleosynthesis important. One of them is a very pure scientific interest. The mass numbers of the products of r-process nucleosynthesis are very high ($`A`$ = 80–250), which means that the most massive nuclei in the universe are synthesized through the r-process. You can guess easily that the situation in which the r-process nuclei are synthesized is a very peculiar one in the universe. We want to know where, when, and how the r-process nuclei are formed. Second reason is that some r-process nuclei can be used as chronometers. For example, the half-lives of $`{}_{}{}^{232}\mathrm{Th}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{238}\mathrm{U}`$ are 1.405$`\times 10^{10}`$ yr and 4.468$`\times 10^9`$ yr, respectively. So if we can predict the mass-spectrum of the products of r-process nucleosynthesis precisely, we can estimate the ages of metal-poor objects which contain the r-process nuclei by observing its abundance ratio. Third reason is that some r-process nuclei can be used as tools of the study on the chemical evolution in our Galaxy (e.g., Ishimaru and Wanajo (1999)), which has a potential to reveal the history of the evolution of our Galaxy itself. Due to the reasons mentioned above, the study on the r-process nucleosynthesis is very important.

The conditions in which the r-process nucleosynthesis occurs successfully are (e.g., Hoffman et al. (1997)): (i) neutron-rich ($`n_n10^{20}\mathrm{cm}^3`$), (ii) high entropy per baryon, (iii) small dynamical timescale, and (iv) small $`Y_e`$. This is because r-process nuclei are synthesized throuth the non-equilibrium process of the rapid neutron capture on the seed nuclei (iron-group elements). In other words, a highly dense, explosive, and neutron–rich site with high entropy will be a candidate for the location where the r-process nucleosynthesis occurs.

The most probable candidates for the sites are collapse-driven supernovae (e.g., Woosley et al. (1994)) and/or neutron star mergers (e.g., Freiburghaus et al. (1999)). This is because these candidates are thought to have a potential to meet the requirements mentioned above. However, we think that the collapse-driven supernovae are thought to be more probable sites than the neutron star mergers, because metal poor stars already contain the r-process nuclei (e.g., Freiburghaus et al. (1999)). In fact, Mcwilliam et al. (1995) reported that the abundance of Eu can be estimated in 11 stars out of 33 metal-poor stars. These observations prove that r-process nuclei are produced from the early stage of the star formation in our Galaxy. Taking the event rate of collapse-driven supernovae ($`10^2\mathrm{yr}^1\mathrm{Gal}^1`$; van den Bergh and Tammann (1991)) and neutron star merger ($`10^5\mathrm{yr}^1\mathrm{Gal}^1`$; van den Heuvel and Lorimer (1996); Behte and Brown (1998)) into consideration, collapse-driven supernovae are favored since they can supply the r-process nuclei from the early stage of the star formation in our Galaxy. Also, Cowan et al (1999) reported that the abundance ratio of r-process nuclei in metal poor stars are very similar to that in the solar system. This proves that r-process nuclei are synthesized through the similar conditions. This will be translated that, at least, most of the r-process nuclei are from one candidate. So we assume in this paper that most of the r-process nuclei are synthesized in the collapse-driven supernovae.

There are many excellent and precise analytic and/or numerical calculations on the r-process nucleosynthesis in the collapse-driven supernovae. However, it would be able to be said that there is no report that the r-process nuclei can be reproduced completely. For example, Takahashi et al. (1994) performed numerical simulations assuming Newtonian gravity and reported that entropy per baryon in the hot bubble is about 5 times smaller than the required value. Qian and Woosley (1996; hereafter QW96) also reported analytic treatments of the neutrino-driven winds from the surface of the proto-neutron star. At the same time, their analytical treatments are tested and confirmed by numerical methods. However, the derived entropy by their wind solutions are shown to fall short, by a factor of 2–3, of the value required to produce a strong r-process (Hoffman et al. (1997)). Otsuki et al. (2000) have surveyed the effects of general relativity parametrically. They reported that r-process can occur in the strong neutrino-driven winds ($`L_\nu 10^{52}`$ erg $`\mathrm{s}^1`$) as long as a massive ($``$2.0 $`M_{}`$) and compact ($``$ 10 km) proto-neutron star is formed. It is very interesting because such a solution can not be found in the frame work of Newtonian gravity (Qian and Woosley (1996)). Such a solution is confirmed by the excellent numerical calculations (Sumiyoshi et al. (1999)). However, the equation of state (EOS) of the nuclear matter has to be too soft to achieve such conditions. In fact, the r-process nuclei can not be produced in the numerical simulations with an normal EOS (Sumiyoshi et al. (1999)).

There is only one report that r-process nucleosynthesis occurred successfully. That is the work done by Woosley et al (1994; here after WWMHM94). In their numerical simulation, the entropy per baryon becomes higher and higher as the time goes on. Finally, at very late phase of neutrino-driven wind ($`10`$ s after the core-collapse), successful r-process occurs. However, there are some questions on their results. One is that the reason why the entropy per baryon becomes high at the late phase is unclear. In fact, when we adopt the analytic formulation of QW96, it is concluded that such a high entropy should not be obtained. It is true that general relativistic effects are included in WWMHM94, but such a high entropy could not be obtained in the work done by Otsuki et al (2000). So the discrepancy between WWMHM94 and QW96 can not be explained by the general relativistic effects alone. Also, WWMHM94 has a problem that the nuclei whose mass numbers are $``$ 90 are much produced in the early stage of the neutrino-driven winds. So if we try to reproduce the mass-spectrum of the solar system abundances, we have to abandon the matter which is made at the early stage of the neutrino-driven winds. Even worse, the successful mass-spectrum at the late phase of neutrino-driven winds is destroyed when the reactions of neutral-current neutrino spallations of nucleons from $`{}_{}{}^{4}\mathrm{He}`$ are taken into consideration (Meyer (1995)). In their paper, it is reported that (30–50)$`\%`$ increase in the entropy is needed in order to restore the $`A`$ = 195 peak, which is extremely large modifications to the model. So, although the work done by WWMHM94 is the very remarkable and interesting one, it would not be concluded that the problem of r-process nucleosynthesis has been solved completely.

Due to the reason mentioned above, it will be natural to think that there may be an (some) effect(s) that will help the r-process nucleosynthesis. There are some papers that mention the effects of jet (Symbalisty (1984); Shimizu, Yamada, & Sato (1994); Nagataki (2000)) that is generated around the polar region of the highly rotating (the period $`T`$1ms) and/or magnetized ($`10^{15}`$ G) proto-neutron star (LeBlanc & Wilson (1970); Symbalisty (1984); Shimizu, Yamada, & Sato (1994); Yamada & Sato (1994); Fryer & Heger (1999)). Since the physical conditions in the jet are different from those in a spherical explosion, the products of the nucleosynthesis are expected to be different. In fact, it is reported that the products of the explosive nucleosynthesis in a jet-like explosion in Si– and O– rich layer are much different from those in a spherical explosion (Nagataki et al. (1997); Nagataki (2000)). So it is natural to think that the products of explosive nucleosynthesis in the Fe core (that is, in the hot bubble) will be also changed due to the effects of the jet. This is the reason why we should examine whether the effects of the jet can help the synthesis of r-process nuclei or not.

Since there is no numerical simulation on the r-process nucleosynthesis in the jet during the neutrino-driven wind phase, our final goal is to perform such realistic numerical simulations. However, such a numerical simulation will be a heavy task. We also think that the results of such numerical simulations will not be understood completely without analytical studies. So, before performing such numerical simulations, we examine the physical conditions of the jet using a simple model. In this paper, we study a steady, subsonic, and rigidly rotating flow of the jet that is driven by neutrinos. We study the effects of the jet on the physical conditions such as the entropy per baryon and the dynamical timescale. Finally, we discuss whether the effects of the jet can help the synthesis of r-process nuclei.

In section 2, we explain the formulation for the jet in the hot bubble. In section 3, we show the results. Summary and discussions are presented in section 4.

## 2 FORMULATION OF JET

### 2.1 Basic Equations

In Gaussian units, the Euler’s equation acted on by electromagnetic forces can be written as (Shapiro and Teukolsky (1883))

$`v{\displaystyle \frac{dv}{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}P\mathrm{\Phi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi \rho }}B^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi \rho }}(\stackrel{}{B})\stackrel{}{B}.`$ (1)
Here

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}+\stackrel{}{v}`$ (2)
is the Lagrangian time derivative following a fluid element.

In this paper, we study a steady jet which has $`\varphi `$-symmetry around the polar region of the proto-neutron star. So we use the cylindrical coordinate ($`r`$, $`\varphi `$, $`z`$) for convenience. The origin $`z`$=0 is set at the center of the proto-neutron star. In the cylindrical coordinate, the Euler equation can be written as

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}v_r\frac{v_r}{r}+v_z\frac{v_r}{z}\frac{v_\varphi ^2}{r}\\ v_r\frac{v_\varphi }{r}+v_z\frac{v_\varphi }{z}+\frac{v_rv_\varphi }{r}\\ v_r\frac{v_z}{r}+v_z\frac{v_z}{z}\end{array}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{P}{r}\\ 0\\ \frac{P}{z}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ \frac{GM}{z^2}\end{array}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi \rho }}\left(\begin{array}{c}\left(\frac{B_r}{z}\frac{B_z}{r}\right)B_z\frac{B_\varphi }{r}\frac{}{r}(rB_\varphi )\\ \frac{B_r}{r}\frac{}{r}(rB_\varphi )+B_z\frac{B_\varphi }{z}\\ B_r\left(\frac{B_r}{z}\frac{B_z}{r}\right)B_\varphi \frac{B_\varphi }{z}\end{array}\right).`$ (15)
Conservation of mass requires that

$`\dot{M}={\displaystyle _0^D}2\pi r\rho v_z𝑑r,`$ (16)
where $`\dot{M}`$ and $`D`$ are the constant mass outflow rate in the ejecta and the radius of the jet, respectively.

The equation for the evolution of material energy, $`ϵ`$, is

$`\rho \dot{q}`$ $`=`$ $`(\rho ϵ\stackrel{}{v})+P\stackrel{}{v}`$ (17)
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}(r\rho ϵv_r)+{\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}(\rho ϵv_z)\right)+P\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}(rv_r)+{\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}v_z\right)`$ (18)
where $`\dot{q}`$ is the net specific heating rate due to neutrino interactions (Qian and Woosley (1996)). In this study, we consider three neutrino heating and/or cooling processes (neutrino absorption on free nucleons, neutrino scattering processes on the electrons and positrons, and electron capture on free nucleons) as

$`\dot{q}=\dot{q}_{\nu N}+\dot{q}_{\nu e}\dot{q}_{eN},`$ (19)
where

$`\dot{q}_{\nu N}=1.55\times 10^5N_\mathrm{A}\left[(1Y_e)L_{\nu _e,51}ϵ_{\nu _e,\mathrm{MeV}}^2+Y_eL_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}^2\right]{\displaystyle \frac{1x}{R_6^2}}\left[\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{g}^1\right],`$ (20)
$`\dot{q}_{\nu e}=3.48\times 10^6N_\mathrm{A}{\displaystyle \frac{T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^4}{\rho _8}}\left(L_{\nu _e,51}ϵ_{\nu _e,\mathrm{MeV}}+L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}+{\displaystyle \frac{6}{7}}L_{\nu _\nu ,51}ϵ_{\nu _\nu ,\mathrm{MeV}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1x}{R_6^2}}\left[\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{g}^1\right],`$ (21)
and

$`\dot{q}_{eN}=3.63\times 10^6N_\mathrm{A}T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^6\left[\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{g}^1\right].`$ (22)
Here $`R_6`$ is the neutrino sphere radius in units of $`10^6`$ cm, $`x=(1R^2/z^2)^{1/2}`$, $`N_\mathrm{A}`$ is Avogadro’s number, $`L_{\nu ,51}`$ is the individual neutrino luminosity in $`10^{51}`$ erg $`\mathrm{s}^1`$, $`ϵ_{\nu ,\mathrm{MeV}}`$ is an appropriate neutrino energy $`ϵ_\nu `$ in MeV (Qian and Woosley (1996)). In this study, we set $`\dot{q}`$=0 at $`T`$0.5 MeV, because free nucleons are bound into $`\alpha `$-particles and heavier nuclei and electron-positron pairs annihilate into photons.

The pressure $`P`$ and internal energy $`ϵ`$ are determined approximately by the relativistic electrons and positrons and photon radiation as long as $`T0.5`$ MeV. So the pressure and internal energy can be written as

$`P={\displaystyle \frac{11\pi ^2}{180}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^4T^4}{\mathrm{}^3c^3}}\left[\mathrm{dyn}\mathrm{cm}^2\right]`$ (23)
and

$`ϵ={\displaystyle \frac{11\pi ^2}{60}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^4T^4}{\mathrm{}^3c^3\rho }}\left[\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{g}^1\right],`$ (24)
where $`k`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ are Boltzmann and Planck constants, respectively. These are the basic equations in this paper. Precisely, we should consider the effects of annihilations of electron-positron pairs on the dynamics at $`T0.5`$ MeV. However, its effects seems to be little (Sumiyoshi et al. (1999)).

### 2.2 Model for the Jet

In this study, we try to construct a simple steady state for a jet so that we can understand the effects of magnetic fields clearly. So we assume in this study that the form of the magnetic fields is

$`\stackrel{}{B}=(0,0,B_\varphi (r,z)).`$ (25)
Next, we seek a solution for the jet rotating rigidly. That is, we seek a solution $`\stackrel{}{v}`$ = (0,$`\mathrm{\Omega }r`$,$`v_z(r,z)`$) at $`zR`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the angular velocity of the proto-neutron star. From Eq. (15), $`\stackrel{}{B}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{v}`$ must meet the following relation:

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Omega }^2r\\ v_z\frac{v_z}{z}\end{array}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{P}{r}\\ \frac{P}{z}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \frac{GM}{z^2}\end{array}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi \rho }}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{B_\varphi }{r}\frac{}{r}(rB_\varphi )\\ B_\varphi \frac{B_\varphi }{z}\end{array}\right).`$ (34)
In this case, there is a useful approximate solution. That is,

$`B_\varphi =(2\pi \rho )^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Omega }r,`$ (35)
where $`\rho `$ and $`P`$ are assumed to be a function of $`z`$ alone. It is noted that this approximate solution is valid as long as $`\mathrm{\Omega }D`$ is small enough. In fact, the derivatives of $`\rho `$ and $`T`$ by $`z`$ can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho }{dz}}={\displaystyle \frac{\frac{P\dot{q}}{v_zϵ}+\frac{\rho GM}{z^2}}{\frac{P}{ϵ\rho }\left(ϵ+\frac{P}{\rho }\right)v_z^2+\frac{(\mathrm{\Omega }r)^2}{4}}}`$ (36)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dT}{dz}}={\displaystyle \frac{\frac{\dot{q}}{v_z}+\left(\frac{ϵ}{\rho }+\frac{P}{\rho ^2}\right)\frac{d\rho }{dz}}{\frac{4ϵ}{T}}}.`$ (37)
It is clearly understood from Eq. (36) that the solution holds valid as long as $`\mathrm{\Omega }D`$ is small enough. In this case, Eq. (16) can be rewritten as

$`\dot{M}=\pi D^2\rho v_z.`$ (38)
From Eqs. (34) and (35), we can see that the magnetic fields accelerate the matter as long as the density gradient is negative. We are also able to see clearly from Eq. (35) that small $`\mathrm{\Omega }D`$ corresponds to weak magnetic field. So we call such solutions weak field solutions in this paper. On the other hand, we also want to see what can happen as the magnetic fields are getting stronger and stronger. So, although the truth is that these solutions are inapplicable to the case of strong magnetic fields, we extend these solutions to the case in which $`\mathrm{\Omega }D`$ is relatively large. By so doing, we will be able to find at least what happens in the case of strong magnetic fields qualitatively. We call such solutions strong field solutions in this paper. In section 3, we show the results for the weak and strong field solutions, respectively.

### 2.3 Boundary Conditions

In this study, the surface of the proto-neutron star is considered as the inner boundary. The inner boundary conditions are composed of density, luminosities of neutrinos, mass and radius of the proto-neutron star, velocity of the outflow, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }D`$. Initial temperature and final electron fraction are determined by these parameters as (Qian and Woosley (1996))

$`T_i=1.19\times 10^{10}\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{L_{\nu _e}}{L_{\overline{\nu }_e}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_{\nu _e,\mathrm{MeV}}}{ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}}}\right)^2\right]^{\frac{1}{6}}L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}^{\frac{1}{6}}R_6^{\frac{1}{3}}ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}^{\frac{1}{3}}\left[\mathrm{K}\right]`$ (39)
and

$`Y_{e,f}=\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{L_{\overline{\nu }_e}}{L_{\nu _e}}}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}2\mathrm{\Delta }+1.2\mathrm{\Delta }^2/ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}}{ϵ_{\nu _e,\mathrm{MeV}}+2\mathrm{\Delta }+1.2\mathrm{\Delta }^2/ϵ_{\nu _e,\mathrm{MeV}}}}\right)^1,`$ (40)
where $`L_{\nu ,51}`$ is the individual neutrino luminosity in $`10^{51}`$ $`\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{s}^1`$, $`R_6`$ is the neutron star radius in $`10^6`$ cm, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ = 1.293 MeV is the neutron-proton mass difference, and $`ϵ_{\nu ,\mathrm{MeV}}`$ is a neutrino energy in MeV. We assume that the neutron star radius is equal to the neutrino sphere radius.

In this study, the luminosities of neutrinos are assumed to be common (Qian and Woosley (1996); Otsuki et al. (2000)). The energy of neutrinos are assumed to be 12, 22, and 34 MeV for $`\nu _e`$, $`\overline{\nu }_e`$, and other neutrinos, respectively (Woosley et al. (1994); Qian and Woosley (1996); Otsuki et al. (2000)). Surface density is assumed to be $`10^{10}`$ $`\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3`$ (Otsuki et al. (2000)). Initial velocity of the outflow is chosen so that $`\dot{M}`$ becomes less than $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{crit}}`$, where $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{crit}}`$ is the critical value for supersonic solution. We have to emphasize that the flow is assumed to be subsonic and contain no critical point. Previous works also adopted this assumption (Qian and Woosley (1996); Otsuki et al. (2000)). In case we try to survey the flow that contains a transition point like a shock front, we can not use Eqs. (18), (34), (36), and (37). This is because these differential equations diverge and break down. In order to treat such a flow that contains a discontinuity, we have to use the Rankine-Hugoniot relation instead of these equations. We will examine such flows in the forthcoming paper. $`D`$ is assumed to be $`10^5`$ cm, which is about one tenth of the proto-neutron star radius. We note that an appropriate environment can exist around the jet, that is, there is a solution that meets Eq. (34) for $`rD`$ in which $`B_\varphi `$ and $`v_\varphi `$ becomes zero at $`r\mathrm{}`$. So the rigid rotating flow at $`rD`$ is not an unrealistic solution at all. In this study, we consider only the region $`rD`$ in which the matter rotates rigidly for simplicity. Other parameters are changed parametrically. The parameters employed as well as the model names are given in Table 1. We take $`z`$ = $`10^9`$ cm for the radius of the outer boundary (Otsuki et al. (2000)). Since the radius of the Fe core is about $`10^8`$ cm, we think the radius of the outer boundary is large enough to investigate the r-process nucleosynthesis that occurs in the hot bubble.

## 3 RESULTS

### 3.1 Weak Field Solutions

Output parameters are shown in Table 2. Entropy per baryon ($`S`$), dynamical timescale ($`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn}}`$), analytically estimated dynamical timescale ($`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn}.\mathrm{ana}}`$), electron fraction ($`Y_e`$), and temperature ($`T`$) at the outer boundary ($`z`$ = $`10^9`$ cm) are shown in the table. Entropy per baryon in radiation dominated gas can be written as

$`S/k={\displaystyle \frac{11\pi ^2}{45}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^3}{\mathrm{}^3c^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{T^3}{\rho /m_N}}`$ (41)
as long as $`T`$ 0.5 MeV. $`m_N`$ is the nucleon rest mass. Even if the annihilation of the electron-positron pairs occurs, the entropy per baryon is conserved. The definition of the dynamical timescale is the time for the temperature to decrease from 0.5 MeV to 0.2 MeV. This is because r-process nucleosynthesis occurs in this temperature range (Woosley et al. (1994); Takahashi et al. (1994); Qian and Woosley (1996)). The reason why the dynamical timescales are not written in some models is that temperature does not decrease to 0.2 MeV within $`z`$ = $`10^9`$ cm. The definition of the analytically estimated dynamical timescale is described later (see Eq. (51)).

There is a tendency that $`S`$ and $`T_b`$ in the models studied here are higher than those in the models of QW96. For example, we show in Figure 1 the outflow velocity, temperature, and density as a function of $`z`$ for Model 10CW and Model 10C in QW96. The inner boundary conditions in Model 10C in QW96 is same as those in Model 10CW (see table 1 in Qian and Woosley (1996)). From this figure and Eq. (41), we can see the tendency mentioned above clearly. We consider the reason for this tendency below. In order to find a clue to it, we show the absolute values (in cgs units) of the components in Eqs. (36) and (37) for Model 10CW in Figure 2. From this figure, we can see what determines the gradients of temperature and density. For comparison, we also show those for Model 10C in QW96 in Figure 3. Lines (a)-(g) correspond to $`4ϵ/T`$, $`(P/ϵ\rho )(ϵ+P/\rho )`$, $`v_z^2`$, $`\rho GM/z^2`$, $`P\dot{q}/v_zϵ`$, $`(ϵ/\rho +P/\rho ^2)\frac{d\rho }{dz}`$, and $`\dot{q}/v_z`$ as a function of $`z`$, respectively. As can be seen from Figures 2 and 3, $`d\rho /dz`$ can be approximated by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho }{dz}}{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{\rho GM}{z^2}}{\frac{P}{ϵ\rho }\left(ϵ+\frac{P}{\rho }\right)}}.`$ (42)
Also, $`dT/dz`$ can be approximated by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dT}{dz}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\frac{ϵ}{\rho }+\frac{P}{\rho ^2}\right)\frac{d\rho }{dz}}{\frac{4ϵ}{T}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_N}{S}}{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{z^2}}.`$ (43)
From Eq. (43) we can see that the temperature gradient $`dT/dz`$ is steeper when the entropy per baryon is smaller. So we can expect that the entropy per baryon is larger in Model 10CW than Model 10C in QW96. It is verified in Figure 4. So, the problem why $`T_b`$ becomes high is translated to the problem why the entropy per baryon becomes high in Model 10CW. The answer is shown in Figure 2. The velocity at small radii in Model 10CW is smaller than that in Model 10C in QW96. The entropy per baryon is getting larger with time as long as the heating process is effective. The heating process is effective only at small radii, which is proved in Figure 4. So, if the velocity at small radii is small, there is a long time for the outflow matter to get heat from neutrinos. As a result, higher entropy per baryon can be achieved and $`T_b`$ becomes higher. This is the case with the jet models studied in this paper. As for the reason why the initial velocity has to be smaller in Model 10CW than Model 10C in QW96 is relatively difficult. At least, we can say that $`dv_z/dz`$ can be written from Eq. (38) as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dv_z}{dz}}={\displaystyle \frac{v_z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho }{dz}}\mathrm{in}\mathrm{Model}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}\mathrm{CW}.`$ (44)
On the other hand, it can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dv_z}{dz}}={\displaystyle \frac{v_z}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho }{dz}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_z}{r}}\mathrm{in}\mathrm{Model}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{in}\mathrm{QW96},`$ (45)
because $`4\pi z^2\rho v_z`$ is constant in Model 10C in QW96. Taking these equations and Eq. (36), which also holds in the models in QW96 (Qian and Woosley (1996)), into consideration, the velocity gradient is steeper in Model 10CW as long as $`v_z(z)`$, $`\rho (z)`$, and $`T(z)`$ are same in both models. So we can guess that initial $`v_z`$ has to be smaller in Model 10CW so as not to achieve the adiabatic sound speed, $`v_s`$ = $`(4P/3\rho )^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. This will be the reason why the initial velocity in Model 10CW has to be smaller.

Next, we consider the dynamical timescale. As mentioned above, the dynamical timescale becomes infinity when $`T_b`$ is above 0.2 MeV. Since $`T_b`$ in the jet models tends to be higher, we can not determine the dynamical timescale in many jet models. This is a bad tendency to produce r-process nuclei. From Table 2, the dynamical timescale can be determined as long as $`L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}`$ is small. We will discuss later whether r-process can occur or not in such models. Before we continue to further discussion, we explain the way to derive the analytically estimated dynamical timescale $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$.

Like Model 10C in QW96, from Eqs. (18) and (34) we can derive the following equation as long as $`\mathrm{\Omega }D`$ is small:

$`\dot{q}=v_z{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dz}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{v_z^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{TS}{m_N}}{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{z}}\right).`$ (46)
So, when the heating/cooling process becomes non-effective, there is a conserved quantum

$`ϵ_{\mathrm{flow},\mathrm{f}}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{v_z^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{TS}{m_N}}{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{z}}\right).`$ (47)
In the subcritical case, $`v_zv_s`$ everywhere, we can approximate Eq. (47) as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{TS}{m_N}}{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{T_bS}{m_N}}.`$ (48)
When $`T_b`$0.5MeV, we can take

$`{\displaystyle \frac{TS}{m_N}}{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{r}}\mathrm{at}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0.5}\mathrm{MeV}.`$ (49)
See Qian and Woosley (1996) for details. In this case, $`Tr^1`$ near $`T`$ 0.5 MeV because $`S`$ is also a conserved quantum as long as the heating/cooling process does not work. From Eq. (41), $`\rho r^3`$. From Eq. (38), $`v_zr^3`$. So, $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ can be approximated as

$`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ $`={\displaystyle _{T=0.5\mathrm{MeV}}^{T=0.2\mathrm{MeV}}}𝑑t={\displaystyle _{T=0.5\mathrm{MeV}}^{T=0.2\mathrm{MeV}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{dz}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{dT}}𝑑T`$ (51)
$`=\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{vT^2}}\right)_{T=0.5\mathrm{MeV}}{\displaystyle _{T=0.2\mathrm{MeV}}^{T=0.5\mathrm{MeV}}}T𝑑T0.42\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{v}}\right)_{T=0.5\mathrm{MeV}}\left[s\right].`$
For further discussion, we try to express the dynamical timescale by input parameters (see Qian and Woosley (1996) for details). From simple calculations, we can derive the entropy per baryon and the mass outflow rate in Model 10CW as

$`S/k235L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}^{\frac{1}{6}}ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}^{\frac{1}{3}}R_6^{\frac{2}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{1.4M_{}}}\right)`$ (52)
and

$`\dot{M}{\displaystyle \frac{D^2}{4R^2}}\times 1.14\times 10^{10}L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}^{\frac{5}{3}}ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}^{\frac{10}{3}}R_6^{\frac{5}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1.4M_{}}{M}}\right)^2\left[M_{}s^1\right],`$ (53)
respectively. At last, we can derive the expression for $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ from Eqs. (38), (41), (49), (51), (52), and (53) that

$`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}10.5L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}^{\frac{4}{3}}ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}^{\frac{8}{3}}R_6^{\frac{5}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{1.4M_{}}}\right)\left[s\right].`$ (54)
This value for each model is written in Table 2. We can find that $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ agrees with $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn}}`$ within a factor of 2-3 in all models in which the dynamical timescale can be defined, although $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ tends to be smaller. This precision of $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ is about the same that in the analysis in QW96 (see Qian and Woosley (1996) for details).

We compare $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ derived here with that in QW96 in order to see the effects of jet. It is written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}}{\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{QW}}}}=0.15{\displaystyle \frac{R_6^{\frac{2}{3}}}{L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}^{\frac{1}{3}}ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}^{\frac{2}{3}}}}.`$ (55)
For example, when $`L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}`$ = 0.1, $`R_6`$ = 1, and $`ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}`$ = 22, $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn}}/\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{QW}}`$ = 0.04. Even if we take the uncertainty (a factor of 2-3) of $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ into consideration, it seems that short dynamical timescale can be realized in jet models. So, as long as $`T_b`$ can be small (that is, $`L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}`$ is small enough), we think that short dynamical timescale can be realized in jet models.

Now we discuss whether r-process nucleosynthesis can occur in jet models or not. We can use the Hoffman’s criterion (Hoffman et al. (1997)) for the judgment. The Hoffman’s criterion can be written as

$`S2\times 10^3Y_e\left({\displaystyle \frac{\tau _{\mathrm{dyn}}}{s}}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}`$ (56)
for $`Y_e`$0.38. This is the criterion for production of r-process nuclei with mass number $`A`$200 (Hoffman et al. (1997)). Substituting Eqs. (52) and (54) into Eq. (56), We can translate the criterion into

$`R_6{\displaystyle \frac{0.74}{C^{\frac{3}{11}}}}L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}^{\frac{5}{22}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{1.4M_{}}}\right)^{\frac{6}{11}},`$ (57)
where $`ϵ_{\overline{\nu }_e,\mathrm{MeV}}`$ is assumed to be 22. $`C`$ is the factor 2-3 which represents the tendency that $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn},\mathrm{ana}}`$ tends to be smaller than $`\tau _{\mathrm{dyn}}`$. In case of $`M`$=1.4$`M_{}`$ and $`C`$=2, we can see from Eq. (57) that $`R_6`$ can be larger than 1 as long as $`L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}`$ is larger than 8.6. This means that there seems to be possible to produce r-process nuclei without unrealistically soft EOS as long as $`L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}`$ is larger than 8.6. However, we found from Table 2 that $`T_b`$ can not be lower than 0.2 MeV when the neutrino luminosity is so high. So we have to conclude that r-process can not occur in these models.

However, we can find that the requirement to produce r-process nuclei is relaxed in these jet models. In fact, for the models of QW96, the criterion like Eq. (57) can be written as

$`R_{6,\mathrm{QW}}0.19L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}^{\frac{1}{6}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{1.4M_{}}}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}.`$ (58)
So, $`R_{6,\mathrm{QW}}`$ can be larger than 1 when $`L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}`$ is larger than 2.3$`\times 10^4`$, which can not be realized in numerical simulations of supernovae (Woosley et al. (1994)). We can compare the required radius in jet models ($`C=2`$) with that in models of QW96 as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{R_6}{R_{6,\mathrm{QW}}}}=3.2L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}^{\frac{2}{33}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{1.4M_{}}}\right)^{\frac{4}{33}}.`$ (59)
For example, in case of $`M`$ = 1.4$`M_{}`$ and $`L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}`$ = 0.1, $`R_6/R_{6,\mathrm{QW}}`$ = 2.8. This suggests that the EOS of the nuclear matter has not necessary to be too soft as Otsuki et al (2000) requires, when the jet models are adopted. So, we can conclude that the requirement to achieve r-process nucleosynthesis is relaxed for the jet models, although r-process nucleosynthesis is not still able to occur in the jet models. When we include the effects of a jet and general relativity at the same time, an successful solution may be obtained. We will discuss this topic in the forthcoming paper.

Finally, we consider the mass outflow rate. Taking the event rate of collapse-driven supernovae ($`10^2\mathrm{yr}^1\mathrm{Gal}^1`$; van den Bergh and Tammann (1991)), one needs $`10^6`$ to $`10^4`$ $`M_{}`$ of ejected r-process material per collapse-driven supernova event to explain the observed solar-abundance ratio (K$`\ddot{\mathrm{a}}`$ppeler et al. (1989); Woosley et al. (1994)). We give a rough estimate whether each model can produce r-process matter enough to explain the solar-system abundance. Taking the gravitational binding energy of a neutron star is $`3\times 10^{53}`$ erg into consideration, the duration time, $`t`$, can be roughly estimated as

$`t{\displaystyle \frac{300}{6\times L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}}}\left[\mathrm{s}\right]`$ (60)
where the factor 6 represents the number of flavor of neutrinos. So required $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{req}}`$ to explain the solar abundance ratio is

$`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{req}}\left(10^410^6\right)M_{}\times {\displaystyle \frac{L_{\overline{\nu }_e,51}}{50}}\left[M_{}s^1\right].`$ (61)
So $`\dot{M}`$ in Table 1 has to meet the relation

$`2\times \dot{M}\dot{M}_{\mathrm{req}}`$ (62)
where the factor 2 represents that the matter is ejected from both (north and south) sides of the polar region. We can find from Eq. (61), (62), and Table 1 that low-luminosity models like 10GW-10LW and 30FW-30HW can not meet the relation mentioned above, although the high-luminosity models like 10AW-10FW and 30AW-30EW may be able to meet the relation.

At last we can derive the conclusion. In the framework of the steady neutrino-driven jet with weak magnetic fields, high-luminosity models can not work because $`T_b`$ becomes high and dynamical timescale becomes too long. Also, low-luminosity models do not present a required condition to produce the r-process nuclei in the framework of Newtonian gravity. Although a successful solution may be obtained when we include the effects of jet and general relativity at the same time, the amount of mass outflow seems to be too little to explain the solar-system abundance ratio in such low-luminosity models. As a conclusion, we have to say that it is difficult to cause a successful r-process nucleosynthesis in the weak field solutions.

### 3.2 Strong Field Solutions

In this subsection, we examine the models in which $`\mathrm{\Omega }D`$0. As stated in subsection 2.2, the truth is that the solutions studied in this paper are inapplicable to the case of strong magnetic fields. However, we want to see what can happen as the magnetic fields are getting stronger and stronger. At the same time, we should investigate the range of application of weak field solutions.

In this study, we consider three models (Model 10GS1-3) for strong field solutions. These are listed in Table 1. The strength of the magnetic fields corresponds to 2.5$`\times 10^{13}`$ G, 2.5$`\times 10^{14}`$ G, and 2.5$`\times 10^{15}`$ G, respectively (see Eq. (35)).

The results are shown in Table 2. We can find that the values of output parameters change drastically in Model 10GS3. This result suggests that the weak field solutions can be applied at least in the range of order $`B10^{14}`$ G. This means that the weak field solutions will be valid for the typical proto-neutron stars. In case we consider the nucleosynthesis in a magnetar (Woods et al. (1999)), we will have to investigate using strong field solutions.

In order to understand what happens in Model 10GS3, we show the outflow velocity, temperature, density, and entropy per baryon as a function of $`z`$ of Model 10GS3 in Figure 5. We also show the absolute values (in cgs units) of the components of Eqs. (36) and (37) for Model 10GS3 in Figure 6. Lines (a)-(h) correspond to $`4ϵ/T`$, $`(P/ϵ\rho )(ϵ+P/\rho )`$, $`v_z^2`$, $`\rho GM/z^2`$, $`P\dot{q}/v_zϵ`$, $`(ϵ/\rho +P/\rho ^2)\frac{d\rho }{dz}`$, $`\dot{q}/v_z`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2D^2`$/4 as a function of $`z`$, respectively. As can be seen from Figures 6, $`d\rho /dz`$ at $`r=D`$ can be approximated by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho }{dz}}|_{r=D}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho GM/z^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }^2D^2/4}}.`$ (63)
Also, $`dT/dz`$ can be approximated by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dT}{dz}}{\displaystyle \frac{T\left(\frac{ϵ}{\rho }+\frac{P}{\rho ^2}\right)\frac{d\rho }{dz}}{4ϵ}}`$ $`\mathrm{for}z8\times 10^1\mathrm{and}z2\times 10^3`$ (64)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{T\dot{q}}{4ϵv_z}}`$ $`\mathrm{for}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}8}\times 10^1z2\times 10^3.`$ (65)
We note that the denominator of Eq. (63) is $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2D^2`$/4, which is constant through out. Since the denominator is large, the value of the density gradient becomes small. So the density gradient in 10GS3 becomes nearly zero at smaller $`z`$ (compare Figures 1 and 5). As a result, temperature does not decrease due to the adiabatic expansion. When the temperature is kept to be high, cooling process works better (see Eqs. (20), (21), and (22)). So, at $`z8\times 10^6`$ cm, the cooling process overcomes the heating process. As a result, entropy per baryon is getting lower in the range $`8\times 10^6z2\times 10^8`$ cm. This is the reason why the entropy per baryon becomes small in Model 10GS3. We also note that the temperature gradient becomes too small at $`z2\times 10^8`$ cm. This is because the numerator of Eq. (44) becomes in proportion to $`d\rho /dz`$, which is very small as seen above. So we can find that the entropy per baryon is small and the dynamical timescale is long in the strong field solution 10GS3. This tendency is a bad one for the production of r-process nuclei. The truth is, of course, that the solutions studied in this paper are inapplicable to the case of strong magnetic fields (see Eq. (36)). However, similar tendency discussed here may be also found in the exact solutions. If so, the strong field solutions are unsuitable for the r-process nucleosynthesis.

Finally we add a comment on the effects of the magnetic fields. You may have thought that the dynamical timescale in the strong field solutions will become shorter than that in the weak field solutions, because the magnetic fields accelerate the matter as long as the density gradient is negative (see Eqs. (34) and (35)). However, in the framework of the steady flow, the density gradient becomes nearly zero and acceleration does not occur. So, the situation may be different and acceleration occurs in the case of an unsteady flow. We will investigate the features of such an unsteady flow by numerical tests in the near future.

## 4 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

We have studied whether the jet in a collapse-driven supernova can be a key process for the r-process nucleosynthesis. We have studied the effects of a jet using a simple model, because the results of a realistic numerical simulation concerning with such a theme will not be understood completely without analytical study. Although our final goal is to perform such realistic numerical simulations, this work is a necessary process to understand the effects of a jet on the r-process nucleosynthesis.

We have studied two cases, that is, the cases in which the magnetic fields are weak/strong. In both cases, we assumed that the flow is steady and subsonic.

As for the weak field solutions, we have concluded that high-luminosity models can not work because $`T_b`$ becomes high and dynamical timescale becomes too long. Also, low-luminosity models do not present a required condition to produce the r-process nuclei in the framework of Newtonian gravity. Although a successful solution may be obtained when we include the effects of jet and general relativity at the same time, the total mass of the outflow seems to be too little to explain the solar-system abundance ratio in such low-luminosity models. On the other hand, we found that the entropy per baryon is small and the dynamical timescale is long in the strong field solution. We can tell that this tendency is a bad one for the production of r-process nuclei. The truth is that the solutions studied in this paper are inapplicable to the case of strong magnetic fields. However, similar tendency may be also found in the exact solutions. If so, we will be able to conclude that strong field solutions are unsuitable for r-process nucleosynthesis. As a conclusion, we have to say that it seems to be difficult to cause a successful r-process nucleosynthesis in the jet models in this study.

We have to emphasize that there are some assumptions in this study. So, we can not say that we have proved that a successful r-process nucleosynthesis does not occur in a neutrino-driven jet in a collapse-driven supernova. For example, we assumed that the flow is subsonic and there is no critical point, which is the common assumption in the previous studies on the r-process nucleosynthesis (Qian and Woosley (1996); Otsuki et al. (2000)). However, we think that we do not need to restrict the solutions in such a way, that is, there may be a transition point at which Eqs. (18), (34), (36), and (37) break down. In most cases, the transition point will be a shock front. It means that the flow will gain entropy at the transition point, which will be a good sense to produce the r-process nuclei. The problem whether the flow contains transition points or not depends sensitively on the initial velocity on the surface of the proto-neutron star. So our final goal is to determine physically the velocity at the surface of the proto-neutron star. It means that the $`\dot{M}`$ should be not given as an input parameter. It should be an output parameter. We have to investigate the mechanism for determining the outflow velocity at the surface of the proto-neutron star for further discussions. We also assumed that the flow is steady. As seen in subsection 3.2, the density gradient becomes nearly zero and acceleration due to the strong magnetic fields does not occur in the framework of the steady flow. So, the situation may be different and acceleration occurs in the case of the unsteady flow. We should investigate the features of the unsteady jet flow. It will be investigated by numerical tests assuming a simple environment. We will perform such numerical tests in the near future. At the same time, we will try to perform realistic numerical simulations for the jet induced explosion in a collapse-driven supernova and seek a final answer whether the jet in a collapse-driven supernova is a key process for the r-process nucleosynthesis or not.

This research has been supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for the Center-of-Excellence (COE) Research (07CE2002) and for the Scientific Research Fund (199908802) of the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture in Japan and by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Postdoctoral Fellowships for Research Abroad.