text:
# Resolving Sirius-like binaries with the Hubble Space TelescopeBased on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by AURA, under NASA contract NAS 5-26555.

## 1 Introduction

White dwarfs (WDs) represent the evolutionary end point for most stars, since it is believed that all stars with initial masses below $``$$`8M_{}`$ become WDs. An understanding of the evolution of WDs is important in several contexts. For example, the loss of the stellar envelope in the form of a planetary nebula, during the transition from red giant to hot WD, recycles stellar material back into the interstellar medium. Imprinted on the WD luminosity function is the history of star formation in our Galaxy, and the cut-off at $``$3500 K, below which no WDs are known, places a limit of 8–10 Gyr on the age of the disk (e.g. Oswalt et al. 1996; Leggett, Ruiz, & Bergeron 1998).

Theoretical studies have led to the formulation of the mass-radius relation and Chandrasekhar mass limit for zero-temperature WDs (e.g. Chandrasekhar 1931, 1935; Hamada & Salpeter 1961), and later to inclusion of the effects of the actual WD temperature due to the presence of a non-degenerate envelope (Wood 1992) and of variations in the core composition (Wood 1995). Direct tests of the theory are still rare, however, due to the difficulty of obtaining accurate measurements of the radii and masses of known WDs. $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`\mathrm{log}g`$ can be measured from the Balmer-line profiles in optical spectra, using theoretical model atmospheres (Holberg et al. 1985; Kidder 1991). Bergeron, Saffer, & Liebert (1992) used this technique to determine the mass distribution of the population of single H-rich DA WDs, by combining the observational results with the theoretical mass-radius relation of Wood (1992).

A combination of Balmer-line measurements and parallax data can provide an independent means of obtaining WD masses and radii and, therefore, a new route for examining the evolutionary models. Until recently, most parallax measurements of WDs have not been of sufficient accuracy to provide meaningful constraints, but the improvement in ground-based observations (Monet et al. 1992) and the availability of space-based parallaxes from Hipparcos (ESA 1997) has improved the situation. Recent results suggest that the masses and radii are generally consistent with expectations (Vauclair et al. 1997; Barstow et al. 1997; Provencal et al. 1998; Holberg et al. 1998). However, most of this work is restricted to the narrow range of masses near $`0.6M_{}`$, encompassed in the population of isolated WDs. Furthermore, even with the new parallaxes, the overall uncertainties remain too large to provide a really thorough examination of the differences between theoretical models which make differing assumptions about the core and envelope compositions.

Observations of WDs in binaries potentially represent a more direct test of the evolutionary models, since a dynamical WD mass can be determined purely from the orbital elements of the system. In practice, however, very few such systems have been available to be studied in sufficient detail to make such comparisons; only Sirius, Procyon (Girard et al. 2000), and a handful of other binary systems have provided useful directly measured WD masses to date.

This situation is likely to improve dramatically in the next few years, because the ROSAT Wide Field Camera (WFC) and EUVE sky surveys have revealed a number of new sources in which strong EUV emission is detected from a previously unknown hot, but optically faint, companion of a visually bright star. Several similar systems have also been discovered serendipitously in the TD-1 survey data (Landsman et al. 1996) and in IUE observations of individual stars (e.g. Böhm-Vitense 1980, 1993).

This interesting, but rather disparate, group of objects has been the subject of a series of studies (e.g. Barstow et al. 1994; Vennes et al. 1995; Genova et al. 1995; Burleigh, Barstow, & Fleming 1997; Burleigh, Barstow, & Holberg 1998; Vennes, Christian, & Thorstensen 1998). Some of them should be new members of the class of wide binaries represented by Sirius, comprising a normal dwarf or subgiant and a WD companion, and they present an opportunity to extend the sample of well-studied binary systems. Others may belong to much closer binaries, which have passed through a common-envelope interaction; however, with the exception of HR 8210 (a spectroscopic binary with an orbital period of 21.7 days), radial-velocity measurements have not revealed any of the objects to have a sufficiently short binary period (e.g. Vennes et al. 1998).

None of these systems have been resolved using ground-based imaging, down to typical resolution limits of $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}5}`$ to $`1^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}0}`$, but a major complication is the overwhelming brightness of the primary in the visible band. Since the difference in visual brightness between primary and WD can be 5 mag or more, a WD could easily be hidden in the wings of the image of the primary. This makes the effective resolution several times worse than what can be achieved with smaller magnitude differences.

The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) and its Wide Field Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) provide the answer to these problems. WFPC2 allows imaging in the ultraviolet, where the brightnesses of both components become comparable. Moreover, WFPC2 delivers diffraction-limited images at UV wavelengths of $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}08}`$ FWHM, making it possible to resolve binary components with separations down to about this amount.

In this paper we report the initial results of an HST “snapshot” survey for resolved Sirius-like binary systems. Out of 17 targets observed to date, we have resolved 8 of them. In the following sections we discuss our analysis of the WFPC2 images, the nominal orbital periods for the resolved systems, and the limits on the orbital periods for those binaries that we were unable to resolve. In addition, we discuss the results for each individual object in the context of their known properties from earlier observations.

## 2 Target properties

Table 1 lists the physical parameters of the 17 systems that we have observed to date with WFPC2. The data are drawn from the references cited above, as well as the SIMBAD database, and include the spectral types and $`V`$ magnitudes of the optical primary stars, the distances to the systems (mostly derived from the Hipparcos parallaxes, or in six cases estimated from the spectral types and magnitudes), and the effective temperatures and approximate $`V`$ magnitudes of the WD components. The parameters for the WDs have been derived mainly from their Lyman $`\alpha `$ profiles by ourselves and other authors (see references in Table 1). However, such measurements suffer from known ambiguities. Consequently, where possible, these parameters have been further constrained by soft X-ray/EUV photometry and spectroscopy, together with knowledge of the primary distance. The primary stars have spectral types ranging from A1 to K2, and with a few exceptions they are dwarfs or subgiants.

## 3 WFPC2 Observations

All observations of the binary systems were conducted between 1999 July 17 and 2000 June 10, as part of our Cycle 8 “snapshot” programme (GO-8181 - the programme remains active at the time of writing, but it is now unlikely that any additional targets may be observed). In each case we placed the target on the Planetary Camera CCD chip of the WFPC2 camera on board HST. A single UV filter was chosen, for each system, to give approximately equal fluxes from the two components, based on knowledge of the primary spectral type and temperature of the WD. This optimised the ability to separate the stars in the image, if resolvable. Each complete observation consisted of a pair of equal exposures (to facilitate removal of cosmic-ray hits from the images). The exposure times were calculated where possible to achieve the maximum possible signal-to-noise, just short of saturation of the CCD by the brighter component in that particular band, but were limited to a maximum of 500 s. In most cases the exposures did prove to be near optimal, but a few objects had a few saturated pixels at the centre of the brighter component’s image. In two cases (HR 1358 and 56 Per) there was a guide-star acquisition failure, but the target was nevertheless located within the PC field of view and the observation was successful although obtained only under gyro control.

Table 2 summarises the observing programme, with the final column indicating whether or not the binary was resolved. The filter names indicate their nominal effective wavelengths in nm.

## 4 Analysis of the WFPC2 images

All images were processed through the standard WFPC2 pipeline provided by STScI. We inspected each image carefully, and in eight cases the binary was either clearly resolved into two (or more) stars, or (for $`\zeta `$ Cyg) had an elongated, partially resolved image. For the remaining nine systems we measured the FWHM, ellipticity, and position angle of the elliptical fit to the image (using IRAF’s111 IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories, which are operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation. imexamine routine). This procedure revealed no evidence of resolution of the images, although it did show significant variations in the FWHM and ellipticity from object to object, attributed to telescope “breathing” (i.e., small changes in focus due to the varying thermal environment as the spacecraft orbits the Earth).

### 4.1 Resolved systems

For the resolved binaries, we measured the component locations and relative magnitudes, again using the IRAF imexamine routine. In order to convert the positions of the stellar components into the true separation and position angle, we need to correct for the wavelength-dependent geometric distortions known to exist in the PC camera.

Wavelength-dependent formulae that correct for the geometric distortion have been calculated by Trauger et al. (1995) based on a detailed analysis of the camera optics, and are adopted here. These formulae convert measured $`(x,y)`$ pixel coordinates at a given wavelength into geometrically corrected coordinates at a wavelength of 5550 Å. In implementing this correction, we take the effective wavelength of each filter to be given by the filter name, and we have not attempted to correct for the small effect of the different amounts of flux transmitted by the filter red-leaks for the blue and red components of the binaries. We then convert $`(x_{\mathrm{corr}},y_{\mathrm{corr}})`$ to seconds of arc, using an adopted plate scale of $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}04557}\pm 0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}00002}\mathrm{pixel}^1`$ in the F555W filter (Trauger et al. 1995).

There have been relatively few detailed empirical measurements done to date to confirm the Trauger et al. predicted formulae for the WFPC2 UV filters. We therefore downloaded a set of UV images of the star cluster NGC 2100 and the elliptical galaxy NGC 205 from the STScI archive, measured the separations of several pairs of stars in images taken in each of the UV filters, and corrected the separations for the wavelength-dependent geometry as described above. The results showed very small, but significant, residual filter-dependent differences in the measured stellar separations. We assumed these differences to be correctable by small scale factors, as given in Table 3 (the sense of the corrections being that the measured separations should be multiplied by these scale factors to yield the true separations).

The final step is to use the STSDAS routine north to determine the orientation of the PC $`y`$ axis relative to celestial north, in order to calculate the position angle of the binary. The spacecraft roll angle, as calculated by north, is accurate to about $`\pm 0^{}\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}04}`$ (S. Casertano and E. Nelan, private communications).

In the case of 14 Aur, the B component fell in the WF2 chip. The reduction of its position was done with a program kindly provided by S. Casertano, which takes into account the relative positions and orientations of the four WFPC2 chips, as well as the wavelength-dependent geometry of the four fields. The measurement is, however, less accurate than for measurements made within a single chip, due to small time-dependent drifts in the relative positions of the CCD chips.

The largest source of uncertainty in the astrometry arises from the centroiding of the slightly undersampled stellar images. Tests based on series of dithered images of the resolved binaries Procyon and G 107-70, obtained by H.E.B. and collaborators in a separate WFPC2 program, show that the 1$`\sigma `$ internal scatter in the separations as measured with imexamine at a single telescope pointing is about $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}003}`$. The other sources of uncertainty (e.g., in the geometrical corrections and F555W plate scale) are believed to be of order $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}001}`$ or less over separations of up to several arcseconds. The errors are, of course, larger when some of the pixels at the center of the stellar image are saturated, as was the case for the A component of 14 Aur and the Aa component of 56 Per. The position of 14 Aur B relative to the A component, however, is probably an order of magnitude less accurate, since it had to be measured across two separate chips as noted above.

Finally, the $`\zeta `$ Cyg system was only marginally resolved, and we were unable to measure the components with imexamine. Instead, we analyzed its image as follows. First, as a reference image we chose our observation of HD 15638, which had been taken in the same F218W filter under similar predicted telescope focus conditions (the detailed HST focus history, predicted from a model based on the instantaneous thermal status of the telescope, is documented at the STScI web site). Using IRAF’s imshift routine, we shifted the reference image by various fractional pixel amounts, and then added the shifted image to the reference image to simulate a partially resolved binary. We then did a least-squares fit to the image ellipticities (as output by imexamine) vs. the known separations of the simulated binaries. Finally, using the measured ellipticity of the $`\zeta `$ Cyg image, we could read off its separation, $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}036}`$. Although the formal internal error of the least-squares fit is only of order $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}0015}`$, the systematic error in the separation introduced by the undersampling of the PC pixels, and by our assumption that both components of the binary are of equal brightness, is probably at least of order 10%. More sophisticated modelling of the image might improve this result further, but is beyond the scope of the present paper.

The results are summarised in Table 4. Except for 14 Aur, discussed below, the position angle is that of the fainter component in the UV filter used, relative to the brighter component in that filter. It should also be noted that the magnitude differences are measured in the UV filters used for the observations, and are much larger at visual wavelengths. Except as discussed below, we generally do not know which of the resolved components is the WD and which is the cooler optical star. We also note that, with the limited photometric information available, we cannot completely exclude the possibility that the resolved object in each system is not actually a WD, but a normal star of similar spectral type to the target. In this case the WD would reside in a still unresolved binary, with one of the imaged stars as its primary. The absence of any reported radial velocity variations for these resolved systems (e.g. Vennes et al. 1998; except for 14 Aur C, see section 5.1.5), would tend to rule this out but there remains a region of the parameter space (i.e. small orbital inclination and/or orbital periods of a few years) where a WD would remain hidden from both radial velocity and WFPC2 observations. Observations in additional WFPC2 filters will be necessary to definitively identify the WD components.

In order to facilitate such future observations, we present images of five of our resolved binaries in Figs. 1a-1e, in which each frame is a $`5^{\prime \prime }\times 5^{\prime \prime }`$ square. The more complicated multiple systems 56 Per and 14 Aur are illustrated in Figs. 6 and 7 respectively. We do not attempt to illustrate the marginally resolved binary $`\zeta `$ Cyg.

From Kepler’s third law we can calculate the period $`P`$ (in years) of a binary system, using the usual equation

$$P=[(a/\pi )^3/(M_{\mathrm{pri}}+M_{\mathrm{WD}})]^{1/2},$$

where $`a`$ is the semi-major axis of the orbit and $`\pi `$ is the parallax, both in seconds of arc, and $`M_{\mathrm{pri}}`$ and $`M_{\mathrm{WD}}`$ are the masses of the primary and WD, respectively, in solar masses.

We have estimated approximate primary masses from their spectral types, taking account of the fact that in at least two cases (HR 1358 and 14 Aur C) the primary is itself a binary system (see below). For the WD components, we simply assume a mass of $`0.6M_{}`$ (even though some of them - see below - may be somewhat more massive. We then calculate nominal orbital periods, $`P_{\mathrm{nom}}`$, taking $`a`$ to be the measured separation listed above, and tabulate them in Table 5. In almost all cases, the true orbital periods will of course be longer than $`P_{\mathrm{nom}}`$, since the projected orbital separations are lower limits to the true current binary separation and the system is most likely not presently at maximum projected elongation; however, for some unusual system geometries the true period could be less than $`P_{\mathrm{nom}}`$. The table shows that some of the orbital periods may be short enough for detection of the motion on timescales of a few years or less.

### 4.2 Unresolved systems

As discussed above, the remaining nine systems were unresolved. We can assume that the projected separation of the components is less than about the FWHM of the images, which is generally $``$$`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}08}`$. Then, similarly to the above calculations for the resolved binaries, we can calculate nominal upper limits to the orbital periods (the true periods could, under special circumstances, be longer than the nominal ones, e.g. if the system happens to be near conjunction at the present time). These nominal upper-limit periods are tabulated in Table 6. The main conclusion is that most of the systems could still be wide enough for the WD components to have evolved essentially as single stars. On the other hand, the fact that the systems are unresolved makes it statistically highly probable that the binaries do form a physically associated system, rather than a chance alignment. Consequently — as is likely to be the case for the resolved systems as well — most or all of them can be used as tracers of the initial-final mass relation, as well as in studies of the WD mass-radius relation.

## 5 Discussion

We now discuss each of the observed systems briefly, starting with the resolved systems, and then turning to the unresolved ones.

### 5.1 The resolved binaries

#### 5.1.1 HD 2133

Burleigh, Barstow, & Fleming (1997) reported the detection of HD 2133 in the ROSAT WFC all-sky survey and their subsequent identification of the WD companion through IUE observations. The $`V=9.6`$ F7 V primary is included in the Hipparcos catalogue, at a distance of 140 pc. Adopting this distance, Burleigh et al. (1997) estimate the $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`\mathrm{log}g`$ of the WD to be $``$26,800 K and 7.75, respectively. Interestingly, the X-ray and EUV data require the WD to have a pure H atmosphere and negligible interstellar column density, lower than might be expected in that direction. To our knowledge, no radial-velocity observations have been made of the system, but with a nominal orbital period of nearly 600 yr, it will not be possible to detect radial velocity variations in the foreseeable future.

#### 5.1.2 MS 0354.6$``$3650

The WD was initially detected in the Einstein Medium Sensitivity survey (hence the MS designation) but misidentified with a cluster of galaxies (Stocke et al. 1991). It was subsequently detected by EUVE and associated with a $`V=12.45`$ G2 V star; an IUE spectrum obtained by Christian et al. (1996) confirmed the presence of a hot WD with $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}52,000`$ K. With a large physical separation and a nominal orbital period $``$6,000 years, we would not expect the G2 V primary to display any evidence for radial velocity variations. If better constraints can be placed on the WD’s physical parameters through far-UV observations of the H Lyman series with FUSE, then it should be possible to show whether the two stars really are associated or, less likely, merely a chance alignment.

#### 5.1.3 HR 1358

The WD companion to HR 1358 (HD 27483) was originally discovered by Böhm-Vitense (1993) through an IUE observation of the system. Burleigh, Barstow & Holberg (1998) reanalysed the IUE spectrum in association with the ROSAT PSPC and WFC data. The active primary of this system is a binary in its own right, consisting of a pair of F6 V stars, with an orbital period of 3.05 days. For the Hipparcos distance, the WD UV spectrum is best matched by a $`\mathrm{log}g=8.5`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=22000`$ K model, with an estimated mass of $`0.98M_{}`$. As a member of the Hyades cluster, HR 1358 has a known age and it is possible to compare the age of the proposed $`6.7M_{}`$ progenitor with that of the cluster. Burleigh et al. (1998) point out the the sum of the progenitor lifetime and WD age is significantly less than the cluster age (0.7 Gyr), implying that the reported WD mass is an overestimate. Now that the WD has been resolved with HST, it may be possible to obtain a Balmer line spectrum of it and apply the standard analysis technique employed for isolated DAs to resolve this problem.

#### 5.1.4 56 Per

The first indication of a WD companion to 56 Per was through a flux excess in the 1565 Å band of the TD-1 ultraviolet sky survey (Landsman, Simon, & Bergeron 1996); the WD was subsequently confirmed by these authors with an IUE spectrum. At $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=14,00016,000`$ K, the WD is actually too cool to be detected at EUV or soft X-ray wavelengths. Landsman et al. (1996) also obtained a surface gravity of $`\mathrm{log}g=8.46\pm 0.2`$, giving an implied WD mass of $`0.9M_{}`$, well above the canonical $``$$`0.6M_{}`$ typical of single DAs.

56 Per ($`V=5.8`$, F4 V) has a visual companion with $`V=8.7`$, known since the 19th century, at a separation of about $`4^{\prime \prime }`$. An extensive archive of measurements of the 56 Per AB visual binary is available at the U.S. Naval Observatory’s Washington Double Star Catalog and was kindly provided to us by Dr. Brian Mason. These data show slow orbital motion, with the B component having moved through an arc of about $`30^{}`$ since the mid-1800’s. (This amount of motion is roughly consistent with a nominal orbital period for the AB pair, calculated as above, of about 1500 yr.) The B component, however, is unlikely to be the WD, since Landsman et al. point out that 56 Per B is both too bright visually to be the WD, and too distant from 56 Per A as well, since their IUE observation indicated that the WD is within $``$$`1^{\prime \prime }`$ of the A component.

Remarkably, Fig. 2 reveals that the system actually has four resolved components, which can be seen in the 1700Å image. The brightest component is seen to have a companion at a separation of only $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}39}`$, and we identify this pair as the F4 V primary and the WD companion. They are denoted as “Aa” and “Ab” in Fig. 2 (and in Table 4) on the assumption that Aa is the F star, although we caution that it is possible that the star labelled Aa could actually be the WD, and Ab the visually bright primary. The B component is also resolved into a close pair, which we denote Ba-Bb, having a separation of $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}6}`$. The nominal orbital period of the Ba-Bb pair is about 100 yr.

The close F4-WD pair, with a nominal period near 50 yr, is rather similar to the prototype Sirius system. It is a prime candidate for continued HST observations, which—if a successor high-resolution UV imaging space experiment is available to continue the monitoring once HST has been decommissioned—would ultimately yield an astrometric determination of the orbit and the component masses.

#### 5.1.5 14 Aur C

The first of the Sirius-like binaries to be discovered from the ROSAT WFC EUV survey (Hodgkin et al. 1993), 14 Aur forms an interesting multiple system. The primary star 14 Aur A (also cataloged as KW Aur) is a $`\delta `$ Scuti variable and a single-lined spectroscopic binary ($`P=3.79`$ days; Fitch & Wisniewski 1979) with a spectral type of A9 IV (Morgan & Abt 1972) or A9 V (Abt & Cardona 1984). 14 Aur B is an 11th-mag star located some $`10^{\prime \prime }`$ north of A. The available measurements of the AB pair from the Washington Double Star Catalog, along with our new HST measurement, reveal linear relative motion, confirming that B is merely an optical companion. The Washington Catalog, however, along with our new measurement, show that 14 Aur C shares a common proper motion with A, and is thus a physical companion.

The C component, which has been classified variously as F3 V (Halbedel 1985), F4 V (Abt & Cardona 1984), and F2 V (Vennes et al. 1998), is also a single-lined spectroscopic binary; its velocity variability was discovered by Webbink et al. (1992), and the orbital period was found to be 2.99 days by Tokovinin (1997) and, independently, by Vennes et al. (1998). Tokovinin and Vennes et al. also found very similar $`\gamma `$ velocities for A and C, strengthening the conclusion that they form a physical (at least quadruple) system.

Hodgkin et al. (1993) were able to associate the detected WD with the vicinity of the C component, raising the possibility that it is in fact the 2.99-day radial-velocity companion; if so, 14 Aur C would be of interest as a post-common-envelope system. However, Holberg et al. (1999), using IUE spectra, found no evidence for radial-velocity variations of the WD based on measurements of metallic lines visible in the WD photosphere; thus the WD cannot be the 2.99-day companion.

The HST image, shown in Fig. 3, immediately clarifies the situation. It shows 14 Aur C to be resolved into two components separated by $`2^{\prime \prime }`$. Our astrometric measurements (cf. Table 4), combined with the historical visual measurements, demonstrate conclusively that the component labelled “Ca” in Fig. 7 is the F-type star, with a still-hidden companion, detected from radial velocity measurements made at visual wavelengths (Webbink et al. 1992),. Hence the new object, denoted “Cb,” must be the WD (which is actually slightly brighter in the UV frame than Ca). There is thus a total of at least five components in the 14 Aur system. If we assume that Cb is a physical companion of Ca (which is as yet unproven, aside from the statistical improbability of a chance alignment), its orbital period about the unresolved Ca binary is of order 1300 yr (Table 5).

#### 5.1.6 RE J1925$``$566

This system, with a separation of about $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}2}`$, has a nominal orbital period near 100 yr, short enough that additional HST imaging could reveal the motion within the next few years. While Barstow et al. (1994) report the detection of Ca II H and K emission, there is no evidence from the ROSAT PSPC data that the G7 V primary is an X-ray source in its own right (Vennes et al. 1998). The analysis of Barstow et al. did suggest an unusual excess in the WFC S1 flux. However, the EUVE spectrum presented by Vennes et al. indicates a higher temperature (48,000–51,000 K) for the WD than obtained earlier from the IUE Lyman $`\alpha `$ line profile ($``$37,000 K), which explains the anomaly. Vennes et al. report that they have initiated a radial velocity study of the system. Now that we have resolved the WD, we would not expect any variations to be detectable unless the G star is itself a close binary, as might be suggested by the Ca II emission.

#### 5.1.7 $`\zeta `$ Cygni

$`\zeta `$ Cygni (HR 8115, HD 202109) is a prototype of the “mild” barium stars. The history of the recognition of its spectroscopic peculiarities is recounted in full detail by Griffin & Keenan (1992), who adopt a classification of G8+ IIIa Ba0.5 (abbreviated as G8 IIIp in our table 1). Barium stars are thought to be members of binary systems having WD companions (e.g. Böhm-Vitense 2000; Bond & Sion 2000; and references therein). The abundance anomalies of the present-day primaries probably originate in processed material transferred from the WD progenitor when it was on the asymptotic giant branch. The WD companion to $`\zeta `$ Cygni was first identified in an IUE far-UV spectrum by Böhm-Vitense (1980) and confirmed by Dominy & Lambert (1983), who estimated its surface temperature to be $``$12,000 K. Griffin & Keenan (1992) showed that $`\zeta `$ Cygni displays radial velocity variations with a period of $`6489\pm 31`$ days (i.e., $``$18 years); we have now marginally resolved the WD companion, and the binary separation ($``$$`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}036}`$) is not inconsistent with this orbital period.

This system is a prime candidate for further imaging to observe the orbital motion over the next few years, leading to a new dynamically determined mass for the WD. According to the spectroscopic ephemeris of Griffin & Keenan (1992), our HST observation of $`\zeta `$ Cyg was taken at spectroscopic phase 0.69. At this phase, the radial velocity is almost exactly at the center-of-mass velocity, i.e., the stars should be near their smallest projected angular separation. Our small measured separation agrees with this expectation. The angular semimajor axis should be of order $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}19}`$, so at other orbital phases the binary should be easily resolved by HST.

#### 5.1.8 HD 223816

The WD component of this system is one of the hottest in the sample of EUV-detected binaries, the IUE data indicating $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ to be around 69,000 K. The EUV and soft X-ray photometry indicates that the WD atmosphere is heavily contaminated with heavy elements; this is confirmed by an EUVE spectrum (Vennes et al. 1998), which shows the WD to be similar to G 191-B2B and RE J0457$``$285. Vennes et al. detect no radial velocity variations, consistent with the wide separation of the system observed here. The presence of photospheric heavy elements is thus likely to be due to radiative levitation effects rather than the presence of the wide companion.

### 5.2 The unresolved binaries

#### 5.2.1 BD $`+08^{}102`$

The level of activity and high rotational velocity observed in the primary star (e.g. Barstow et al. 1994) suggest this is a close binary. It has been proposed as the prototype of a new class of fast rotators, spun up by accretion from the red-giant wind of the WD progenitor (Jeffries and Stevens 1996). No radial velocity variations were detected in several days of observations (Kellett et al. 1995), suggesting that the period must be fairly long. Our nominal upper limit from the lack of resolution is about 10 yr.

#### 5.2.2 HD 15638

Both Landsman et al. (1993) and Vennes et al. (1998) classify the primary as an F6 dwarf, but the Hipparcos distance is only compatible with a subgiant classification. This is consistent with the F3 IV classification in the Michigan Spectral Survey (Houk & Cowley 1975). Vennes et al. report high-resolution spectra at Ca II H and K that show no evidence of activity. Favata et al. (1995) give a rotational velocity $`v_{\mathrm{rot}}\mathrm{sin}i=62\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. In a short series of four measurements, Vennes et al. (1998) found no radial-velocity variations, with a standard deviation of $`0.7\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, indicating that this is not a short-period system. Our failure to resolve the system with HST only constrains the orbital period to be less than about 50 yr.

#### 5.2.3 HD 18131

The Hipparcos distance is consistent with the K0 IV-III classification of Vennes et al. (1998). The primary is also an X-ray source, indicative of a short rotation period. However, Vennes et al.’s radial-velocity measurements indicate variations of a few $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ on a one-year time scale. The implied period is well below the nominal 19 year limit of our observations, so it is not surprising that the system is not resolved. Hence, it is most likely that this is also an example of a primary spun up by interaction with the wind of the WD progenitor.

#### 5.2.4 63 Eri

This is a known single-lined spectroscopic binary with an orbital period of 903 days (Beavers & Eitter 1988), about 2.5 years. We assume that the WD is the star in the 903-day orbit, since the period would have had to be $``$7 years for the system to have been resolved by our programme.

#### 5.2.5 HR 3643

HR 3643 is one of the two systems (the other being 56 Per) with WD companions identified from the TD-1 survey by Landsman et al. (1996). No evidence for radial-velocity variations have been found for the primary, which has in fact been adopted as a radial-velocity standard (e.g. Layden 1994). Hence, it cannot be a short period system. The $``$21 year upper limit on the binary period imposed by the WFPC2 observations is consistent with this.

#### 5.2.6 HD 90052

The WD companion to HD 90052 (BD$`+27^{}1888`$) was discovered by Burleigh et al. (1997). Vennes et al. (1998) comment that the WD and the F0 V primary form an unlikely pair: with a temperature between 34,000 K–40,000 K and a surface gravity log $`g=7.38.5`$, the WD should lie closer ($`<`$171 pc) than the main sequence star (229–275 pc, unless it is dramatically underluminous), although Vennes et al. (1998) also point out that a chance alignment at this high Galactic latitude is unlikely. The HST observation shows that the two stars are aligned within $`0^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{.\hspace{0.17em}08}`$, and therefore very likely form a physical pair with an orbital period $`<62`$ years. A far-UV spectrum of the white dwarf, covering the H Lyman series, is urgently required to better constrain its physical parameters ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, log $`g`$) and resolve the discrepancy between the distance estimates to the WD and the F0 V star. This can and should be carried out by FUSE.

#### 5.2.7 $`\beta `$ Crt

Although Campbell & Moore (1928) reported velocity variations in this object, prompting Fleming et al. (1991) to speculate that the orbital period could be $`<20.1`$ days, both Smalley et al. (1997) and Vennes et al. (1998) showed that $`\beta `$ Crt is not a close system. In fact, $`\beta `$ Crt did show small variations from the systemic velocity during the 15 months that it was studied by Vennes et al. (1998), indicating that the period may be of order a few years. Duemmler et al. (1997) also report that the mean radial velocity measured across 8 consecutive nights in 1997 was significantly different from the value reported by Smalley et al. (1997) from measurements made in 1994/95, again suggesting that the binary period is of order a few years. This conclusion is strengthened by proper motion measurements from Hipparcos which indicate possible micro-variability in the star’s motion across the sky, and suggest the binary period is $``$10 years, consistent with HST’s failure to resolve the WD.

#### 5.2.8 RE J1309+081

RE J1309$`+`$081 is one of the few remaining ROSAT Wide Field Camera Bright Source Catalogue (Pounds et al. 1993) sources without an obvious optical counterpart. The EUV detection is almost certainly real, since it is coincident with a similar source in the EUVE Bright Source Catalog (EUVE J1309$`+`$08.2, Bowyer et al. 1994), but the only object in the field is an inactive 11th-magnitude late F dwarf (GSC 0884.00380, F8/9 V, Burleigh et al. 2000). Therefore, we suspected that this star might be hiding a fainter hot WD companion, and added it to our HST target list accordingly, but the target was unresolved. We emphasise that RE J1309+081 has yet to be confirmed as a Sirius-like binary, and the temperature given in Table 1 for the hypothetical white dwarf ($`>`$22,000K) merely represents the lower limit for DA white dwarfs to be detectable in the EUV.

#### 5.2.9 HR 8210

HR 8210 was identified as a single-lined spectroscopic binary system by Harper (1927), and Vennes et al. (1998) have provided an improved orbital period of $`21.72173\pm 0.00005`$ days by combining their new data with Harper’s. Assuming that the WD is the short-period companion, it is not surprising that we did not resolve the system.

## 6 Conclusion

Using HST’s WFPC2 camera at UV wavelengths, we are carrying out a systematic “snapshot” imaging survey of binary systems, each comprising a non-degenerate primary with a WD secondary. The majority of these systems were discovered through the EUV or UV emission from the WD, which is swamped by the overwhelming brightness of the primary star at visible wavelengths. All of our targets are unresolved in ground-based observations.

Of 17 systems observed to date, WFPC2 has resolved eight of them. These are new analogs of the well-known Sirius system. Several of them, notably 56 Per, $`\zeta `$ Cyg, and perhaps RE J1925+566 may have orbital periods short enough for the visual orbits to be determined in the foreseeable future, providing a significant augmentation to the small number of WDs with dynamically determined masses. Two of the targets were found to be interesting quadruple (56 Per) or quintuple (14 Aur) multiple systems, providing a sample of “mini-clusters” which should provide new constraints on WD evolution. All of the resolved systems provide new targets for determinations of gravitational redshifts.

## 7 Acknowledgements

The work of M.A.B. and M.R.B. was supported by PPARC, UK. H.E.B. and J.B.H. acknowledge support from STScI Grant GO-8181. J.B.H. also wishes to acknowledge support for this work from NASA grant NAG5-3472. We are grateful to Ray Lucas and the support staff at STScI for their assistance in implementing this programme. We thank John Biretta and Stefano Casertano (both STScI) for discussions of WFPC2 astrometry, and Brian Mason for providing data from the Washington Double Star Catalog maintained at the U.S. Naval Observatory. This research has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France.


format: text

text:
# Pion Imaging at the AGS

## I Introduction

Measurements of two-particle correlations offer a powerful tool for studies of spatial and temporal behaviour of the heavy-ion collisions. The complex nature of the heavy-ion reactions requires utilization of different probes and different analysis techniques in order to obtaine reliable and complete picture of the system created in the collision.
We will discuss application of imaging technique of Brown-Danielewicz which allows one to reconstruct the entire source function, phase space density and entropy from any like-pair correlations in a model independent way. We will present recent results of the two-pion imaging analysis performed by the E895 Collaboration and discuss natural connection between imaging and traditional HBT.

### A E895 Experiment and Analysis Details

Detailed description of the experiment E895 can be found elsewhere . The Au beams of kinetic energy 1.85, 3.9, 5.9 and 7.9$`A`$ GeV from the AGS accelerator at Brookhaven were incident on a fixed Au target. The analyzed $`\pi ^{}`$ samples come from the main E895 subsystem — the EOS Time Projection Chamber (TPC) , located in a dipole magnetic field of 0.75 or 1.0 Tesla. Results of the E895 $`\pi ^{}`$ HBT analysis were reported earlier , and in this paper, we focus on an application of imaging to the same datasets.

### B Source Imaging

In order to obtain the two-pion correlation function $`C_2`$ experimentally, the standard event-mixing technique was used . Negative pions were detected and reconstructed over a substantial fraction of $`4\pi `$ solid angle in the center-of-mass frame, and simultaneous measurement of particle momentum and specific ionization in the TPC gas helped to separate $`\pi ^{}`$ from other negatively charge particles, such as electrons, K- and antiprotons. Contamination from these species is estimated to be under 5%, and is even less at the lower beam energies and higher transverse momenta. Momentum resolution in the region of correlation measurements is better than 3%. Event centrality selection was based on the multiplicity of reconstructed charged particles. In the present analysis, events were selected with a multiplicity corresponding to the upper 11% of the inelastic cross section for Au + Au collisions. Only pions with $`p_T`$ between 100 MeV/$`c`$ and 300 MeV/$`c`$ and within $`\pm 0.35`$ units from midrapidity were used. Another requirement was for each used $`\pi ^{}`$ track to point back to the primary event vertex with a distance of closest approach (DCA) less than 2.5 cm. This cut removes most pions originating from weak decays of long-lived particles, e.g. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and K0. Monte Carlo simulations based on the RQMD model  indicate that decay daughters are present at a level that varies from 5% at 4$`A`$ GeV to 10% at 8$`A`$ GeV, and they lie preferentially at $`p_T<100`$ MeV/$`c`$. Finally, in order to overcome effects of track merging, a cut on spatial separation of two tracks was imposed. For pairs from both “true” and “background” distributions, the separation between two tracks was required to be greater than 4.5 cm over a distance of 18 cm in the beam direction. This cut also suppresses effects of track splitting . Correlation functions were corrected for pion Coulomb interaction .

Imaging  was used to extract quantitative information from the measured correlation functions. It has been shown  that imaging allows robust reconstruction of the source function for systems with non-zero lifetime, even in the presence of strong space-momentum correlations. The main features of the method are outlined below; see Refs  for more details. The two-particle correlation function may be expressed as follows:

$$C_𝐏(𝐐)1=𝑑𝐫K(𝐐,𝐫)S_𝐏(𝐫),$$
(1)
where $`K=|\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐐^{()}(𝐫)|^21`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐐^{()}`$ is the relative wavefunction of the pair. The source function, $`S_𝐏(𝐫)`$, is the distribution of relative separations of emission points for the two particles in their center-of-mass frame. The total momentum of the pair is denoted by $`𝐏`$, the relative momentum by $`𝐐=𝐩_\mathrm{𝟏}𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}`$, and the relative separation by $`𝐫`$. Since the correlation data is already Coulomb corrected, we may approximate the relative wavefunction of the pions with a noninteracting spin-0 boson wavefunction:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐐^{()}(𝐫)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(e^{i𝐐/2𝐫}+e^{i𝐐/2𝐫}\right).$$
(2)
The goal of imaging is the determination of the relative source function ($`S_𝐏(𝐫)`$ in Eq. (1)), given $`C_𝐏(𝐐)`$. The problem of imaging then becomes the problem of inverting $`K(𝐪,𝐫)`$ . For pions, one might think that because Eq. 1 is a Fourier cosine transform it may be inverted analytically  to give the source function directly in terms of the correlation function:

$$S_𝐩(𝐫)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^3}d^3Q\mathrm{cos}(𝐐𝐫)\left(C_𝐩(𝐐)1\right).$$
(3)
While this might work for vanishing experimental uncertainty, for realistic situations, this is a poor way to perform the inversion. When Fourier transforming, it is impossible to distinguish between statistical noise and real structure in the data . Instead, we proceed as in  and expand the source in a Basis Spline basis: $`S(𝐫)=_jS_jB_j(𝐫)`$. With this, Eq. (1) becomes a matrix equation $`C_i=_jK_{ij}S_j`$ with a new kernel:

$$K_{ij}=𝑑𝐫K(𝐐_i,𝐫)B_j(𝐫).$$
(4)
Imaging reduces to finding the set of source coefficients, $`S_j`$, that minimize the $`\chi ^2`$. Here, $`\chi ^2=_i(C_i_jK_{ij}S_j)^2/\mathrm{\Delta }^2C_i`$.
This set of source coefficients is $`S_j=_i[(K^T(\mathrm{\Delta }^2C)^1K)^1K^TB]_{ji}(C_i1)`$ where $`K^T`$ is the transpose of the kernel matrix. The uncertainty of the source is the square-root of the diagonal elements of the covariance matrix of the source, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2S=(K^T(\mathrm{\Delta }^2C)^1K)^1`$. It has been shown  that for the case of noninteracting spin-zero bosons with Gaussian correlations, there is a natural connection between the imaged sources and “standard” HBT parameters. Indeed, the source is a Gaussian with the “standard” HBT parameters as radii:

$$S(𝐫)=\frac{\lambda }{(2\sqrt{\pi })^3\sqrt{det[R^2]}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{4}r_ir_j[R^2]_{ij}^1\right),$$
(5)
where $`\lambda `$ is a fit parameter traditionally called the chaoticity or coherence factor in HBT analyses. Here, $`[R^2]`$ is the real symmetric matrix of radius parameters

$$[R^2]=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}R_o^2& R_{os}^2& R_o\mathrm{}^2\\ R_{os}^2& R_s^2& R_s\mathrm{}^2\\ R_o\mathrm{}^2& R_s\mathrm{}^2& R_{\mathrm{}}^2\end{array}\right).$$
(6)
Eq. (5) is the most general Gaussian one may use, but usually one assumes a particular symmetry of the single particle source so that there is only one non-vanishing non-diagonal element $`R_{ol}^2`$. The asymptotic value of the relative source function at zero separation $`S(𝐫0)`$ is related to the inverse effective volume of particle emission, and has units of fm-3:

$$S(𝐫0)=\frac{\lambda }{(2\sqrt{\pi })^3\sqrt{det[R^2]}}.$$
(7)
As it was shown in  $`S(𝐫0)`$ is an important parameter needed to extract the space-averaged phase-space density. Figure 1 shows measured angle-averaged two-pion correlation functions for central Au + Au collisions at 2, 4, 6 and 8$`A`$ GeV. Figure 2 shows relative source functions $`S(r)`$ obtained by applying the imaging technique to the measured two-pion correlation functions. Note that the plotted points are for representation of the continuous source function and hence are not statistically independent of each other as the source functions are expanded in Basis Splines . Since the source covariance matrix is not diagonal, the coefficients of the Basis spline expansion are also not independent which is taken into account during $`\chi ^2`$ calculations.

With this technique, we may reconstruct the distribution of relative pion separations with useful accuracy out to $`r20`$ fm. The images obtained at each of the four E895 beam energies are rather similar in shape, and upon fitting with a Gaussian function, values of $`\chi ^2`$ per degree of freedom between 0.9 and 1.2 are obtained. Results of fits to the source function and correlation functions are shown in Table I. One can see that source radii extracted via both techniques are similar, further confirming the validity of a Gaussian source hypothesis. Figure 3 compares values related to effective volumes of pion emission inferred from the standard Bertsch-Pratt pion HBT parametrization (open circles) with the effective volumes derived from the image source functions shown in Fig. 2 (solid circles). Essentially, this figure plots the inverse of the left- and right-hand sides of Eq. 7. Results of the multidimensional Bertsch-Pratt fit to the pion correlation data have already been published in Ref.  and are reproduced in Table II. It can be seen from Fig. 3 that the agreement between imaging and the HBT parametrization is fairly good. Values of source functions at zero separations estimated via either technique are approximately constant within errors across the 2 to 8$`A`$ GeV beam energy range.
In summary, we present measurements of one-dimensional correlation functions for negative pions emitted at mid-rapidity from central Au + Au collisions at 2, 4, 6 and 8$`A`$ GeV. These correlation functions are analyzed using the imaging technique of Brown and Danielewicz. It is found that relative source functions $`S(r)`$ have rather similar shapes and zero-separation intercepts $`S(r0)`$. Distributions of relative separation have been measured out to 20 fm, and the extracted source functions are approximately Gaussian. We have performed the first experimental check of the predicted connection between imaging and traditional meson interferometry techniques and found that the two methods are in good agreement. This agreement paves the way for applications of the imaging method to the interpretation of pair correlations among strongly interacting particle such as protons, antiprotons, etc. Values of source functions at zero separation which are related to the pion effective volumes of emission are almost constant across the range of bombarding energies under study.

## Acknowledgments

Parts of this paper are based on work done in collaboration with D. Brown and G.F. Bertsch . This research is supported by US DOE, NSF and other funding, as detailed in Ref. .


text:
# Electromagnetic Structure of Few-Nucleon Systems: a Critical Review

## 1 Introduction

In the present talk I will review the simple, traditional picture of the nucleus as a system of point-like nucleons interacting among themselves via effective many-body potentials, and with external electro-weak probes via effective many-body currents. I will also discuss the extent to which this picture, the so called “nuclear standard model”, is successful in predicting a number of nuclear properties for systems with mass number $`A8`$, including energy spectra of low-lying states, electromagnetic form factors, and low-energy capture reactions.

## 2 Interactions and Energy Spectra

The Hamiltonian in the nuclear standard model is taken to consist of a non-relativistic kinetic energy operator, and two- and three-nucleon potentials. The two-nucleon potential consists of a long range part due to pion exchange, and a short-range part parameterized either in terms of heavy meson exchanges as, for example, in the Bonn potential , or via suitable operators and strength functions, as in the Argonne $`v_{18}`$ (AV18) potential . The short-range terms in these potentials are then constrained to fit $`pp`$ and $`np`$ scattering data up to energies of $``$ 350 MeV in the laboratory, and the deuteron binding energy. The modern models mentioned above include isospin-symmetry-breaking components, and provide fits to the Nijmegen data-base  characterized by $`\chi ^2`$ per datum close to one. They should therefore be viewed as phase-equivalent.

A major difference among these modern potential models, however, is in the treatment of non-localities, particularly those associated with off-the-energy-shell prescriptions of the one-pion-exchange (OPE) term. The AV18 as well as the Nijmegen models incorporate the on-shell form of the OPE term, which leads to a local tensor component. The Bonn potential, on the other hand, includes the off-shell extension predicted by pseudo-scalar coupling of pions to nucleons, and hence has a strongly non-local tensor component. More than two decades ago, Friar and collaborators  showed that different OPE off-shell extensions can be related to each other via a unitary transformation, and that differences in predictions for observables sensitive to OPE, such as the triton binding energy or the deuteron tensor polarization at moderate momentum transfers ($``$ 5 fm-1), can be, to a large extent, removed by performing consistent calculations, namely calculations using three-nucleon interactions and charge operators that obey the unitary equivalence of the OPE interaction. An example of this type of calculations is illustrated in Fig. 1, where the deuteron tensor polarizations corresponding to the Bonn potential and to the AV18 deuteron wave function and charge operator, unitarily transformed to match the off-shell extension of the Bonn OPE, are compared. The remaining differences at the larger values of momentum transfer are presumably originating from additional short-range non-localities present in the Bonn model. It should be stressed that consistent calculations of the type alluded to above have been carried out up until now only for the deuteron. It would be interesting to verify these expectations also for the case of other observables, such as the triton binding energy, for example.

It is now well established that two-nucleon potentials alone underbind nuclei : for example, the AV18 and Bonn models give , in numerically exact calculations, binding energies of 24.28 MeV and 26.26 MeV respectively, which should be compared to the experimental value of 28.3 MeV. Moreover, it has been shown in Ref.  that, for example, 6Li and 7Li are unstable against breakup into $`\alpha `$$`d`$ and $`\alpha `$$`t`$ clusters, respectively, and that energy differences are not, in general, well predicted, when only two-nucleon potentials are retained in the Hamiltonian.

Important components of the three-nucleon potential are due to the internal structure of the nucleon. Since all degrees of freedom other than the nucleon have been integrated out, the presence of virtual $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonances, for example, induces three-nucleon potentials. Current three-nucleon potential models are reviewed by Carlson  in these proceedings. These newly developed models include the “long-range”term, resulting from the intermediate excitation of a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with pion exchanges involving the other two nucleons, known as the Fujita-Miyazawa term , as well as multipion exchange terms involving excitation of one or two $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$’s, so-called pion-ring diagrams, and the terms arising from S-wave pion rescattering, required by chiral symmetry. There are four strength parameters which are then determined by fitting the energies of $`20`$ low-lying states of systems with $`A8`$ nuclei in exact Green’s function Monte Carlo calculations. The resulting energy spectra for these systems are in good agreement with the experimental ones . In particular, the underbinding of neutron-rich nuclei, such as 6He and 8Li, which had proven to be a problem with earlier models of three-nucleon potentials, is resolved to a large extent.

## 3 Electromagnetic Current and Form Factors

The nuclear current operator consists of one- and many-body terms that operate on the nucleon degrees of freedom. The one-body operator has the standard expression in terms of single-nucleon convection and magnetization currents. The two-body current operator has “model-independent”and “model-dependent”components (for a review, see Ref. ). The model-independent terms are obtained from the two-nucleon potential, and by construction satisfy current conservation with it. The leading operator is the isovector “$`\pi `$-like”current obtained from the isospin-dependent spin-spin and tensor interactions. The latter also generate an isovector “$`\rho `$-like ”current, while additional model-independent isoscalar and isovector currents arise from the central and momentum-dependent interactions. These currents are short-ranged and numerically far less important than the $`\pi `$-like current. Finally, models for three-body currents have been derived in Ref. , by gauging the two-pion exchange three-nucleon interaction associated with S-wave pion-nucleon scattering. The resulting contributions have been found to be very small in studies of the magnetic structure of the trinucleons .

The model-dependent currents are purely transverse and therefore cannot be directly linked to the underlying two-nucleon interaction. Among them, those associated with the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-isobar are the most important ones at moderate values of momentum-transfer ($`q5`$ fm-1). These currents are treated within the transition-correlation-operator scheme , a scaled-down approach to a full $`N`$+$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ coupled-channel treatment. In this scheme, the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ degrees of freedom are explicitly included in the nuclear wave functions by means of transition correlation operators that convert $`NN`$ pairs into $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }`$ pairs, acting on a purely nucleonic wave function. Both $`\gamma N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }`$ $`M_1`$ couplings are considered with their values obtained from data .

The calculated isoscalar and isovector magnetic form factors of the trinucleons are shown in Fig. 2. The isovector form factor is undepredicted by theory in the first diffraction region. In this region, the $`\pi `$-like and $`\rho `$-like currents, constructed from the spin-spin and tensor components of the $`v_{18}`$ interaction in the results shown in Fig. 2, is the dominant contribution, and therefore the underprediction mentioned above indicates that these currents are too weak at moderate values of momentum transfers. On the other hand, the isovector magnetic moment is in excellent agreement with the experimental value.

The isoscalar form factor appears to be slightly overpredicted by theory over the whole momentum transfer range. In particular, the calculated isoscalar magnetic moment is roughly 4 % too large with respect to the experimental value. This again points to deficiencies in the model for two-body currents.

While the model-independent two-body currents are linked to the form of nucleon-nucleon interaction via the continuity equation, the most important two-body charge operators are model dependent and may be viewed as relativistic corrections. They fall into two classes. The first class includes those effective operators that represent non-nucleonic degrees of freedom, such as nucleon-antinucleon pairs or nucleon-resonances, and which arise when these degrees of freedom are eliminated from the state vector. To the second class belong those dynamical exchange charge effects that would appear even in a description explicitly including non-nucleonic excitations in the state vector, such as the $`\rho \pi \gamma `$ transition coupling. The proper forms of the former operators depend on the method of eliminating the non-nucleonic degrees of freedom . There are nevertheless rather clear indications for the relevance of two-body charge operators from the failure of calculations based on the one-body operator in predicting the charge form factors of the three- and four-nucleon systems, and deuteron tensor polarization observable.

The largest two-body charge contribution, at moderate values of the momentum transfer, is that due to the $`\pi `$-meson exchange operator. It is derived by considering the low-energy limit of the relativistic Born diagrams associated with the virtual $`\pi `$-meson photoproduction amplitude. In this limit, such an amplitude leads to two terms (at the lowest order). The first term consists of three factors: a single-nucleon charge operator, a non-relativistic propagator, and a OPE interaction. It is already included in the one-body (impulse approximation) calculation of the form factors, since the wave functions used in these calculations are obtained from solutions of a Schrödinger equation including the OPE interaction. The second term, however, represents the truly two-body charge operator. It is a local operator with both isoscalar and isovector components. There are additional contributions due to the energy dependence of the pion propagator and direct coupling of the photon to the exchanged pion . These operators, however, give rise to non-local isovector contributions which are expected to provide only small corrections to the leading local terms. For example these operators would only contribute to the isovector combination of the 3He and 3H charge form factors, which is anyway a factor of three smaller than the isoscalar. Thus they have been neglected in most of the studies I am familiar with.

The calculated 3He and 3H charge form factors are compared to data in Fig. 3. There is excellent agreement between theory and experiment. The important role of the two-body contributions above 3 fm-1 is also evident. The remarkable success of the present picture based on non-relativistic wave functions and a charge operator including the leading relativistic corrections should be stressed. It suggests, in particular, that the present model for the two-body charge operator is better than one a priori should expect. These operators fall into the class of relativistic corrections. Thus, evaluating their matrix elements with non-relativistic wave functions represents only the first approximation to a systematic reduction. A consistent treatment of these relativistic effects would require, for example, inclusion of the boost corrections on the nuclear wave functions. Yet, the excellent agreement between the calculated and measured charge form factors suggests that these corrections may be neglegible in the $`q`$-range explored so far.

## 4 Capture Reactions

### 4.1 The $`pd`$ and $`nd`$ Radiative Captures

There are now available many high-quality data, including differential cross sections, vector and tensor analyzing powers, and photon polarization coefficients, on the $`pd`$ radiative capture at c.m. energies ranging from 0 to 2 MeV . These data indicate that the reaction proceeds predominantly through S- and P-wave capture.

The predicted angular distributions  of the differential cross section $`\sigma (\theta )`$, vector and tensor analyzing powers $`A_y(\theta )`$ and $`T_{20}(\theta )`$, and photon linear polarization coefficient $`P_\gamma (\theta )`$ are compared with the TUNL data below 50 keV from Refs.  in Fig 4. Note that the AV18/UIX Hamiltonian model is used in the calculations reported here. The agreement between the full theory, including many-body current contributions, and experiment is generally good. However, a closer inspection of the figure reveals the presence of significative discrepancies between theory and experiment in the small angle behavior of $`\sigma (\theta )`$ and $`T_{20}(\theta )`$, as well as in the $`S`$-factor below 40 keV . The S-wave capture proceeds mostly through the $`M_1`$ transitions connecting the doublet and quartet $`pd`$ states to 3He–the associated reduced matrix elements (RMEs) are denoted by $`m_2`$ and $`m_4`$, respectively. The situation for P-wave capture is more complex, although at energies below 50 keV it is dominated by the $`E_1`$ transitions from the doublet and quartet $`pd`$ states having channel spin $`S`$=1/2, whose RMEs I denote as $`p_2`$ and $`p_4`$. The $`E_1`$ transitions involving the channel spin $`S=3/2`$ states, while smaller, do play an important role in $`T_{20}(\theta )`$.

The TUNL  and Wisconsin  groups have determined the leading $`M_1`$ and $`E_1`$ RMEs via fits to the measured observables. The results of this fitting procedure are compared with the calculated RMEs in Table 1. The phase of each RME is simply related to the elastic $`pd`$ phase shift , which at these low energies is essentially the Coulomb phase shift. As can be seen from Table 1, the most significant differences between theoretical and experimental RMEs are found for $`|p_4|`$. The theoretical overprediction of $`p_4`$ is the cause of the discrepancies mentioned above in the low-energy ($`50`$ keV) $`S`$-factor and small angle $`\sigma (\theta )`$.

It is interesting to analyze the ratio $`r_{E1}|p_4/p_2|^2`$. Theory gives $`r_{E1}1`$, while from the fit it results that $`r_{E1}0.74\pm 0.04`$. It is important to stress that the calculation of these RMEs is not influenced by uncertainties in the two-body currents, since their values are entirely given by the long-wavelength form of the $`E_1`$ operator (Siegert’s theorem), which has no spin-dependence (for a thorough discussion of the validity of the long-wavelength approximation in $`E_1`$ transitions, particularly suppressed ones, see Ref. ). It is therefore of interest to examine more closely the origin of the above discrepancy. If the interactions between the $`p`$ and $`d`$ clusters are switched off, the relation $`r_{E1}1`$ then simply follows from angular momentum algebra. Deviations of this ratio from one are therefore to be ascribed to differences induced by the interactions in the $`S`$=1/2 doublet and quartet wave functions. The interactions in these channels do not change the ratio above significantly. It should be emphasized that the studies carried out up until now ignore, in the continuum states, the effects arising from electromagnetic interactions beyond the static Coulomb interaction between protons. It is not clear whether the inclusion of these long-range interactions, in particular their spin-orbit component, could explain the splitting between the $`p_2`$ and $`p_4`$ RMEs observed at very low energy. This discrepancy seems to disappear at 2 MeV .

Finally, the doublet $`m_2`$ RME is underpredicted by theory at the 5 % level. On the other hand, the cross section for $`n`$$`d`$ capture at thermal neutron energy is calculated to be 229 $`\mu `$b with one-body currents and 578 $`\mu `$b with one- and many-body currents, using the AV18/UIX Hamiltonian model . This last result is 15 % larger than the experimental value (508$`\pm `$15) $`\mu `$. Of course, $`M_1`$ transitions (which induce the $`nd`$ capture), particularly doublet ones, are significantly influenced by many-body current contributions. This is an unsettling state of affairs: on the one hand, theory underpredicts the doublet $`M_1`$ “experimental”RME for $`pd`$ capture (see Table 1), while overpredicting, on the other hand, the $`nd`$ capture cross section, which is dominated by the doublet $`M_1`$ transition.

### 4.2 The $`\alpha d`$ Radiative Capture

Radiative capture of deuterons on $`\alpha `$ particles is the only process by which 6Li is produced in standard primordial nucleosynthesis models . There are no direct $`\alpha `$$`d`$ capture data in the energy region relevant for big bang nucleosynthesis (BBN), and it is therefore crucial to have a reliable theoretical estimate for the $`d(\alpha ,\gamma )^6\mathrm{Li}`$ cross section.

In fact, the theoretical description of the $`\alpha d`$ capture is particularly challenging: the S- and P-wave captures are strongly inhibited by quasi-orthogonality between the initial and final states and by an isospin selection rule, respectively. As a result, the dominant process in all experiments performed to date has been electric quadrupole ($`E_2`$) capture from D-wave scattering states. The small remaining $`E_1`$ contribution from P-wave initial states has been observed at about 2 MeV, but its magnitude has not been successfully explained by theoretical treatments; it is generally expected to contribute half of the cross section at 100 keV. The S-wave capture induced by $`M_1`$ has been neglected in most calculations because of the quasi-orthogonality mentioned above, which makes the associated matrix element identically zero in two-body treatments of the process. The energy dependences of the various capture mechanisms ($`E_2`$, $`E_1`$, $`M_1`$) are such that even $`E_1`$ and $`M_1`$ captures with small amplitudes may become important at low ($`<200`$ keV) energies. Low-energy behavior is particularly important for standard BBN: the primordial 6Li yield is only sensitive to the capture cross section between 20 and 200 keV, with the strongest sensitivity at 60 keV .

Recently, a calculation of the $`\alpha d`$ capture has been carried out  using variational Monte Carlo wave functions to describe the initial $`\alpha `$$`d`$ S-, P-, and D-wave scattering states and final 6Li bound-state, and including $`M_1`$, $`E_1`$, and $`E_2`$ transitions. The resulting $`S`$-factor is compared with available data in Fig. 5. While this calculation is not in the same league as the three-body capture calculations discussed in the previous section or the $`p^3`$He weak capture calculation presented by Marcucci in these proceedings , it is, nevertheless, the first attempt to a microscopic description of a six-body capture process. At present, the $`\alpha `$$`d`$ relative wave function is obtained from a phenomenological potential, fitted to $`\alpha `$$`d`$ elastic scattering data, and the 6Li variational wave function gives an energy that is higher than that corresponding to separated $`\alpha `$ and $`d`$ clusters. These aspects of the calculation are clearly unsatisfactory. For example, the orthogonality between the $`\alpha `$$`d`$ S-wave scattering state and 6Li bound state needs to be enforced artificially. Some of these limitations can be easily overcome, for example one could use a Green’s function Monte Carlo wave function for 6Li, which does reproduce the experimental binding energy. Others, however, are more challenging, one clearly belonging to this class is the calculation of the $`\alpha `$$`d`$ scattering state from the six-body realistic Hamiltonian. This is perhaps the central problem in calculations of capture processes involving systems with $`A>4`$.

## 5 Acknowledgments

I wish to thank J. Carlson, J.L. Forest, A. Kievsky, L.E. Marcucci, K.M. Nollett, V.R. Pandharipande, S.C. Pieper, D.O. Riska, S. Rosati, M. Viviani, and R.B. Wiringa for their many important contributions to the work reported here. This work was supported by DOE contract DE-AC05-84ER40150 under which the Southeastern Universities Research Association (SURA) operates the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility.


text:
# A Polarization Flare in 3C 273: A Clue to Jet Physics

## 1. The Data

Our data consist of polarization position angle (E-field), percentage polarization, and total flux at $`UBVRIJHK`$ for 3C 273 for each night of UT 10, 12-18 February 1988. The data for a representative night (12 Feb.) are shown in Figure 1, where the solid lines represent the best-fitting model for that night (see §2). The data were taken at UKIRT with the Mark II Hatfield Polarimeter (Hough, Peacock, & Bailey 1991), which makes simultaneous optical and near-infrared observations, important for this variable blazar. The data have been corrected for interstellar polarization and Galactic extinction. A brief discussion of these data was presented by Wills (1991).

At the time of our observations 3C 273 was in an outburst state (Courvoisier et al. 1988). This outburst has since been associated with the ejection of VLBI component C9 ($`t_0=1988.1\pm 0.1`$, Bååth et al. 1991). At this time the polarization was higher than usual.

In our data both the percentage polarization and the position angle are very frequency-dependent, and this dependence changes from night to night. The frequency dependence of $`\theta `$, particularly a 90 flip on 14 Feb., is suggestive of the presence of two perpendicular polarized components of similar amplitude but different spectral shape.

## 2. Modelling

We have modelled our data with two power laws in polarized flux density that vary from night to night in amplitude, spectral index, and position angle. The addition of two such components for 12 Feb. is illustrated in Figure 2. In all cases we find that the two components are approximately perpendicular, with the E-vector of the steeper component transverse to the projected jet direction. The model reproduces the data well. Slight changes in the model parameters (for example, $`<`$3 in position angle, $`<`$0.05 in spectral index, and $`<`$0.05 mJy in amplitude) produce noticeably worse fits to the data. The two-component models are thus well-constrained by the data. We find that the components are correlated in amplitude and position angle, and probably spectral index (significance levels of $`>`$99.75%, $`>`$99%, and $`>`$93% respectively) with a time lag of much less than one day. The changes of the amplitudes and position angles of the components with time are illustrated in Figure 3.

## 3. Discussion

We explain the polarization of 3C 273 in outburst with two synchrotron components. Since these components are nearly perpendicular they tend to cancel each other out, resulting in low polarized flux. This blazar-like polarization is further diluted by a strong, unpolarized non-blazar continuum, resulting in the low observed percentage polarization for this object.

The outburst emission of blazars is often explained in terms of a shocked jet model like that of Marscher & Gear (1985). Such models normally involve a quiescent component and a shock component. We instead require two components associated with the shock. These components must be nearly co-spatial to account for the very short time lag between their polarizations. The simplest model would involve an underlying magnetic field that is parallel to the jet, but which is compressed so as to be perpendicular in the region of the shock. One of our components, which has polarization parallel to the jet and a flatter spectrum, would originate from the region of the perpendicular B-field, as expected from the Marscher & Gear model. The other component, with perpendicular polarization, would be due to high energy electrons that have leaked from the shocked region and are accelerated where the B-field is parallel to the jet. We see these two components superimposed.

## References

Bååth, L. B. et al. 1991, A&A, 241, L1.

Courvoisier, T. J.-L. et al. 1988, Nature, 335, 330.

Hough, J. H., Peacock, T. and Bailey, J. A. 1991, MNRAS, 248, 74.

Marscher, A. P. and Gear, W. K. 1985, ApJ, 298, 114.

Wills, B.J. 1991 in Variability of Active Galactic Nuclei, ed. H.R. Miller and P.J. Wiita (New York: Cambridge University Press), 87.


text:
# Pulsar spectra of radio emission

## 1 Introduction

One of the main observables of pulsar emission is its flux density $`S_\nu `$, measured at a given central frequency $`\nu `$ of the receiver bandwidth. Flux measurements are crucial for deriving, the so called, pulsar luminosity function and therefore the birth rate of the Galactic population of neutron stars. The first spectrum of a pulsar taken at 5 frequencies was published by Robinson et al. (robinson (1968)). The flux density variations and spectra for frequencies between 0.15 and 1.6 GHz were later reported for a number of pulsars by McLean (mclean (1973)). Spectra of 27 pulsars were published by Sieber (sieber73 (1973)) who used pulse energy values obtained with the 100-m and 25-m telescopes of the Max-Planck-Institute for Radioastronomy (MPIfR) as well as other values published in the literature. He was the first to show a turn-over behaviour at low frequencies around 100 MHz and a break in spectrum at high frequencies (about 1 GHz). Sieber et al. (sieber75 (1975)) published pulse shapes and their energies for 35 pulsars at 2.7 and 4.9 GHz, and for 7 pulsars at 10.7 GHz. Izvekova et al. (izvekova (1981)) and Slee et al. (slee (1986)) presented an analysis of flux measurements for pulsars at meter wavelengths ($``$ 80 MHz). A compilation of spectra of 45 pulsars over a wide frequency range was published for the first time by Malofeev et al. (malofeev94 (1994)). Seiradakis et al. (seiradakis (1995)) published a collection of high frequency data on pulsar profiles and flux densities for 183 pulsars at 1.4 GHz, 46 pulsars at 4.85 GHz and 24 pulsars at 10.5 GHz. The catalogue of pulsar flux density measurements for 281 pulsars at frequencies ranging from 0.4 GHz to 1.6 GHz was published by Lorimer et al. (lorimer (1995)). The first spectra for four millisecond pulsars were published by Foster et al. (foster (1991)). Kramer et al. (kramer98 (1998)) presented the results of flux density measurements for 23 millisecond pulsars at frequencies 1.4 and 1.7 GHz and an analysis of their spectra. Van Ommen et al. (ommen (1997)) presented polarimetric data together with flux density measurements for a large number of southern pulsars at frequencies of 800 MHz and 950 MHz. Most recently, Toscano et al. (toscano (1998)) have presented flux density measurements for southern millisecond and slow pulsars at frequencies between 0.4 GHz and 1.6 GHz, and Kramer et al. (kramer99 (1999)) studied the emission properties of millisecond pulsars up 4.85 GHz. A first large sample of flux densities of weak pulsars at 4.85 GHz was published by Kijak et al. (kijak (1998)).

It has been long believed that flux density spectra for most of the pulsars have been well described by a simple power law $`S\nu ^\alpha `$ with spectral index of $`1.6`$ (Sieber sieber73 (1973) and Lorimer et al. lorimer (1995)). However, a considerable fraction of pulsars demonstrated spectra that required modelling by two power laws (Sieber sieber73 (1973) and Malofeev et al. malofeev94 (1994)). These were commonly called the broken-type spectra. In this paper we show that the two power law spectra are rare exception and that majority of pulsars can be modelled by a single power law. Our analysis shows that only 10% of pulsars requires two power law spectra.

Recently, pulsar flux density measurements have been extended to the mm-wavelengths region, which provided information about this newly explored spectral region. These measurements suggested that spectrum flattens out or even turns up at very high frequencies (Kramer et al. kramer96 (1996)). In this paper we present a new and most complete compilation of spectra for 281 pulsars in the frequency range from 39 MHz to 43 GHz. The flux density measurements for frequencies from 300 MHz to 1.4 GHz were done at Jodrell Bank (Lorimer et al. lorimer (1995)). For frequencies equal or above 1.4 GHz we have utilized flux measurements made by different authors at the Effelsberg Radiotelescope of the Max-Planck Institute for Radioastronomy (Sieber et al. sieber75 (1975), Bartel et al. bartel (1978), Sieber & Wielebinski sieber87 (1987), Wielebinski et al. wielebinski (1993), Seiradakis et al. seiradakis (1995), Kramer et al. kramer96 (1996), Hoensbroech et al. hoensbroech (1997), Kramer et al. kramer97 (1997), Kijak et al. kijak (1998)). We have also reduced a significant amount of the unpublished data available at the archives of the MPIfR. Most of these data is available throughout the European Pulsar Network Database (Lorimer et al. lorimer98 (1998)). We have also included the data published by Izvekova et al. (izvekova (1981)) and Malofeev et al. (malofeev2000 (2000)) containing observations made at low radio frequencies from 39 MHz to 102.5 MHz. Our own observations at 4.85 GHz made in Effelsberg in 1998 are also included.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

As a basis for our database we have taken the flux density measurements published by Lorimer et al. (lorimer (1995)). These observations were made between July 1988 and October 1992 using the 76-m Lovell radio telescope at Jodrell Bank, at frequencies 408, 606, 925, 1408 and 1606 MHz. Lorimer et al. (lorimer (1995)) excluded from their sample those pulsars which were too weak to obtain reliable flux density measurements as well as the millisecond pulsars. We have extended this database by observations made at higher frequencies by different authors mentioned earlier or those unpublished but made available at MPIfR archives in Bonn. All observations at frequency range from 1.4 GHz to 43 GHz were made with the 100-m radio telescope of the MPIfR at Effelsberg and are available in European Pulsar Network Database (Lorimer et al. lorimer98 (1998)). Some values at 1.4 and 1.6 GHz were also published by Lorimer et al. (lorimer (1995)). We performed additional observations at 4.85 GHz of 43 very weak pulsars in August 1998. We managed to detect 30 objects and those undetected are listed in Table 1. The detection limit of $`\mathrm{S}0.05\mathrm{mJy}`$ for the survey published by Kijak et al. (kijak (1998)) is clearly visible from this table. The observations published by Izvekova et al. (izvekova (1981)) and Malofeev et al. (malofeev2000 (2000)) were performed at the Pushchino Radio Astronomical Observatory of the Lebedev Physical Institute.

### 2.1 Calibration procedure

In order to calibrate the flux density of a pulsar using a system in the Effelsberg Radio-observatory, a noise diode installed in every receiver is switched synchronously with the pulse period. The energy output for the noise diode is then compared with energy received from the pulsar, since the first samples of an observed pulse profile contain the calibration signal while the remaining samples contain the pulse. The energy of the noise diode itself can be calibrated by comparing its output to the flux density of a known continuum sources. This pointing procedure is generally performed on well known reliable flux calibrators, e.g. 3C123, 3C48, etc. From these pointing observations a factor $`f_c`$ translating the height of the calibration signal into flux units, is derived. The energy of a pulse is given as the integral beneath its waveform which in arbitrary units yields

$$E=\underset{i\mathrm{pulse}}{}A_i\mathrm{\Delta }t_{\mathrm{samp}}=\mathrm{\Delta }t_{\mathrm{samp}}\underset{i\mathrm{pulse}}{}A_i$$
(1)
where $`A_i`$ is the pulse amplitude measured in the phase bin $`i`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_{\mathrm{samp}}`$ is the sampling time. Scaling the whole profile now in units of the height of the calibration signal measured in the same profile, $`A_{\mathrm{cal}}`$, we obtain

$$E=\mathrm{\Delta }t_{\mathrm{samp}}\underset{i\mathrm{pulse}}{}\frac{A_i}{A_{\mathrm{cal}}}.$$
(2)
Using the conversion factor $`f_c`$, the mean pulse energy is translated into proper units, i.e. $`\mathrm{J}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{Hz}`$, according to the following formula

$$E=f_c\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }t_{\mathrm{samp}}}{A_{cal}}\underset{i\mathrm{pulse}}{}A_i.$$
(3)
The mean flux represents the pulse energy averaged over a pulse period,

$$S_{\mathrm{mean}}=\frac{E}{P}$$
(4)
Finally, assuming that $`f_c`$ converts the units of the calibration signal strength into mJy, and the sampling time $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_{\mathrm{samp}}`$ is given in $`\mu `$s, the mean flux is obtained as (Kramer kramerPhD (1995))

$$S_{\mathrm{mean}}=10^3\frac{f_c}{P}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }t_{\mathrm{samp}}}{A_{cal}}\underset{i\mathrm{pulse}}{}A_i.$$
(5)
### 2.2 Error analysis

Pulsars are generally known to be stable radio sources although the measured flux density varies due to diffractive and refractive scintillation effects (e.g., Stinebring & Condon sc90 (1990)). Interstellar scintillations are caused by irregularities in the electron density of the interstellar medium. The observed flux variations are frequency and distance dependent and also depend on the observing set-up, i.e. on the relative width of observing and scintillation bandwidth (e.g., Malofeev et al. malofeev96a (1996), Malofeev malofeev96 (1996)). Unless the receiver bandwidth is significantly larger than the scintillation bandwidth, which increases with frequency, strong variations in the observed flux densities are to be expected. Usually, however, the amplitude of scintillation decreases towards higher frequencies, so that those data are less influenced by the scintillation effects. Nevertheless, the question of intrinsic variations on very short and very long time scales remains still open (cf. Stinebring & Condon sc90 (1990)). Assessing the situation is hampered by the fact that many authors do not estimate the always present influence of interstellar scintillations or do not quote error estimates at all. Given the difference in the observing set-ups for given observatories, a careful analysis is difficult. We try to circumvent this unpleasant situation by estimating errors for the pulsar flux densities in our sample from published values, wherever available, and standard deviations of the average of single measurements. If only one measurement was available, an error estimate could not be computed although it may happen that form of the spectrum changes when new measurements are added.

### 2.3 Search technique for break frequency

Since a robust theory of pulsar radio emission does not exist, the true shape of pulsar spectra is still not known. A fair first attempt is to model them by simple power laws. Previous studies (e.g. Sieber sieber73 (1973), Malofeev et al. malofeev94 (1994)) showed however that some pulsar spectra cannot apparently be described by this simple approach. Usually, such a conclusion is reached after a visual inspection of the data, i.e. after a power law fit has been done. However, if pulsar spectra are indeed more complicated, the usual next step to fit a composite (or ’broken’) power law is just another approximation, where the undersampling of the spectrum in the observed range of frequencies would place any fitted ’break’ naturally in the range of a few GHz, i.e. the range where they are indeed usually observed as it was clearly pointed out by Thorsett (thorsett (1991)). Nevertheless, even if two power laws are just another approximation to a ’true’ spectrum, any need to fit a break in order to describe the data adequately would represent a valuable hint on the true nature of pulsar spectra. It is therefore very important to search for such breaks in the spectra, while keeping just discussed limitations in mind. We believe, however, that one has to be more quantitative when describing the need for fitting a two power laws rather than a simple power law. This is even more important in the light of the latest results on millisecond pulsar spectra (Kramer et al. kramer99 (1999), Kuzmin & Losovski kl00 (2000)), where no significant break (not even a low frequency turn-over) has been found. Hence, we adopted in this work the following approach: Firstly, we fitted a simple power law to the flux density data, assuming that this describes the data sufficiently. We calculated a $`\chi ^2`$ and the probability $`Q`$ that a random $`\chi ^2`$ exceeds this value for a given number of degrees of freedom. These computed probabilities give a quantitative measure for the goodness-of-fit of the model. If $`Q`$ is very small then the apparent discrepancies are unlikely to be chance fluctuations. Much more probably either the model is wrong, or the measurement errors are larger than stated, or measurement errors might not be normally distributed. Generally, one may accept models with $`Q`$ 0.001 (Press et al. recipees (1996)). Secondly, we assumed that a two power law had to be fitted to the data, using the following rules:

$$S(\nu )=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill c_1\nu ^{\alpha _1}:& \nu \nu _b\hfill \\ \hfill c_2\nu ^{\alpha _2}:& \nu >\nu _b.\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
Since the break frequency, $`\nu _b`$, is a priori unknown, we treated it as a free parameter and tried to minimize a corresponding $`\chi ^2`$ simultaneously over the whole parameter space of $`c_1,c_2,\alpha _1,\alpha _2`$ and $`\nu _b`$. Due to the nature of the additional boundary condition ($`\nu \nu _b`$ or $`\nu >\nu _b`$), we applied a Simplex algorithm as described by Nelder & Mead (nelder (1965)). For the resulting, minimized $`\chi ^2`$ we then calculated again the probability that a random $`\chi ^2`$ is larger than the found value. A comparison of the $`\chi ^2`$-statistics for both cases was then used to judge whether a break was truly significant or not. The fitting procedure was performed on data in the frequency range from 400 MHz to 23 GHz. We have not taken into account data corresponding to single measurements, as well as those at frequencies lower than 400 MHz, as they could represent a low frequency turn-over which usually occurs at $``$ 100 MHz. There is a gap in data coverage between 100 and 300 MHz, but this should not affect our analysis and conclusions.

## 3 Results and discussion

In this paper we obtained a large database of flux density measurements over a wide range of frequencies, from 39 MHz to 43 GHz. Although measurements were made in three different observatories, the data seem consistent. In particular, the values obtained by Lorimer et al. (lorimer (1995)) and those from the Effelsberg radio-telescope at the same frequency are comparable (e.g., PSR B0740$``$28)111All figures with spectra of 281 are available at: http://astro.ca.wsp.zgora.pl/olaf/paper1. We have calculated the spectral index for pulsars using the method described in Sect. 2.3. The results of this analysis are listed in Table 2.

We found only 15 pulsars out of 167 whose spectral fit evidently required the two-power-law model (Table 3). In Fig. 1a we present distribution of spectral indices $`\alpha `$ for pulsars with a simple power-law spectrum and in Fig. 1b and c for pulsars with a broken-type spectrum (see caption for explanation of $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$). In Fig. 2b and c we also show two examples of two-power-law spectrum pulsars with the smallest and largest slope difference, respectively.

As detailed above, in order to reduce the effects of diffractive and refractive interstellar scintillations as well as possible intrinsic phenomena, we need a large number of measurements at a given frequency to obtain reliable pulsar spectra. We believe that our large sample of flux density measurements is capable of doing this over a wide frequency range, allowing an analysis of the spectral behaviour of pulsar radio emission. Our analysis shows that, in principle, pulsar spectra are described by a simple power law with the mean spectral index $`<\alpha >=1.8\pm 0.2`$ (see Fig. 2a). We examined the data for any possible correlations between spectral index and rotation period $`P`$, spin-down rate $`\dot{P}`$, characteristic age $`\tau `$, polarization as well as profile type. In general no significant correlations were found but we have distinguished some interesting groups of objects which are discussed below:

(i) Very steep spectrum sources
This group of pulsars consists of objects with very steep spectra. Examples of such pulsars are the PSRs B0942$``$13, B0943+10 and B1859+031 with spectral indices of $``$3.0, $``$3.7 and $``$2.8, respectively (see Table 2). Lorimer et al. (lorimer (1995)) suggested that older pulsars ($`\tau 10^8`$ yr) have steeper spectra, which is obviously not the case for B0943+10 and B1859+03 as these pulsars have characteristic ages of $`4.9\times 10^6`$ yr and $`1.4\times 10^6`$ yr, respectively. There is, of course, yet another exception, the Crab pulsar (PSR B0531+21), i.e. the youngest known radio pulsar with one of the steepest spectrum in our sample. These results provide evidence that there is no correlation between steepness of spectra and the characteristic pulsar age.

(ii) Flat spectrum sources
It was previously believed that pulsars have a steep spectra but the analysis of a large sample shows that there are pulsars with flat spectra over a wide frequency range. In this group there are pulsars which have almost flat spectra with $`\alpha 1.0`$. Examples of such pulsars are B0144+59, B1750$``$24 and B2022+501 with spectral indices of $`1.0\pm 0.04`$, $`1.0\pm 0.07`$ and $`0.8\pm 0.05`$, respectively. Although Lorimer et al. (lorimer (1995)) suggested that younger pulsars have flat spectra, they also found that PSR B1952+29 possessed a flat spectrum and yet had a characteristic age of $`3.4\times 10^9`$ yr. This pulsar indeed has a flat spectrum in the frequency range from 400 MHz to 1.4 GHz but considering the whole frequency range from 400 MHz to 10.7 GHz its spectrum becomes a two-power-law one. A similar behaviour was observed for PSR B0540+231. It is possible that the pulsars with flat spectrum mentioned by Lorimer et al. (lorimer (1995)) may have a break in their spectrum at higher frequencies.

(iii) Sources with low-frequency turn-over
Spectra of many pulsars show a low-frequency turn-over at $``$ 100 MHz (Sieber sieber73 (1973), Izvekova et al. izvekova (1981)). We have not fitted the turn-over points because of the gap in flux density measurements at frequencies between 100 MHz and 300 MHz and difficulties in determining the maximum frequency $`\nu _{\mathrm{max}}`$. We have found 2 pulsars in our sample which have a turn-over at unusually high frequency ($``$ 1 GHz): B1838$``$04 and B1823$``$13 (see Fig. 3). These are young pulsars and all belong to the 1800$``$21-class of pulsars, which was introduced by Hoensbroech et al. (hoensbroech98 (1998)) to describe their unusual polarization properties. The PSR B1800$``$211 has a two power law spectrum, which may be also interpreted as a “broad form of turn-over”.

(iv) Sources with high-frequency turn-up or flattening
There is a group of pulsars which have a possible turn-up or flattening in spectra at very high frequencies. Therefore we have not fitted the points above 23 GHz. In this group there are pulsars such as: B0329+54, B0355+54, B1929+10 and B2021+511 which were studied in detail by Kramer et al. (kramer96 (1996)). There are also pulsars which may show a spectrum flattening already at $``$ 5 GHz. For example, the spectra of PSR B0144+59 and B2255+581. Recently, the idea of a spectral change at very high frequencies received a strong support from observations of the Crab pulsar. Moffet & Hankins (moffet (1999)) observed a clear flattening of its spectrum at realtively low frequency around 10 GHz, as compared with about 20 GHz (Kramer et al. kramer96 (1996)) .

(v) Sources with two power law spectra
We also recognized broken-type spectra (Sieber sieber73 (1973) and Malofeev et al. malofeev94 (1994)), although there are only 15 definite two-power-law cases in our sample, showing so called break frequency between 0.9 and 2.7 GHz (see Table 3) which divides the whole spectrum into two parts with considerably different slopes. This is a significantly smaller fraction (only about 10%) than the reported 35% by Malofeev (malofeev96 (1996)). The distribution of spectral indices for broken-type pulsars is shown in Fig. 1b and c. The reduced fraction of two-power-law spectra pulsars can be only partly explained by selection effects possibly present in the Malofeev sample. In fact, many pulsars which were previously thought to demonstrate two-power-law spectra (Malofeev et al. malofeev94 (1994), Kramer et al. kramer96 (1996), Xilouris et al. xilouris (1996)) can be modelled by a simple power-law spectra in our sample. We believe that this can be largely explained by severe flux density variations (see Sect. 2.2) and the fact that the number of measurements included into a fit so far may have been too small (e.g. PSR B0628+281).

We note that Gil et al. (gil94 (1994)) and Malofeev (malofeev96 (1996)) suggested that PSR B1822$``$09 has a complex flux density spectrum. Our data do not confirm such a behaviour although some deviations from a simple power law seem to be present. Moreover, there are indeed some other pulsars which exhibit a rather unusual spectral behaviour (e.g. B0823+26, B0621$``$04, B0656+141). These objects may actually have a complex spectrum but we certainly need more and better data before we should consider them as a separate class of sources. Generally, pulsar spectra can be classified in two groups: Out of 167 pulsars which have been studied over a wide frequency range (from 400 MHz up to at least 5 GHz), the spectra of most pulsars can be modelled by a simple power law. About 10% of all pulsars require two power laws to fit the data. Table 4 and references therein clearly indicate that the spectra of slowly and fast rotating pulsars (i.e. millisecond pulsars) are indeed identical on the average. We note again, that the analysis of the main physical parameters of pulsars with unusual or two-power-law spectra has not shown any correlation, consistent with the results of Xilouris et al. (xilouris (1996)) and Malofeev (malofeev96 (1996)).

## 4 Summary and Conclusions

The main conclusion of this paper is that the single power law spectrum is a rule and the two power law spectrum is a rare exception to this rule. One could therefore think that the nature of this exception is that the spectrum just becomes steeper starting from some, relatively high frequency. However, inspection of Fig. 1 indicates that this might not be a case. The distribution of $`\alpha _1`$ seems different from that of $`\alpha `$, meaning that in pulsars with two power law spectra the average spectral index $`<\alpha _1>`$ is typically much larger than the average $`<\alpha >`$ (Fig. 1b) and of course, the high frequency index $`<\alpha _2>`$ is much smaller than $`<\alpha >`$ (Fig. 1c). Thus, it seems that the two power law spectra are qualitatively different from the typical single power law spectra. In this paper we obtained spectral index for a large sample of pulsars in a wide frequency range (form 400 MHz to 23 GHz) . The average spectral index of pulsars $`<\alpha >`$ with simple power-law spectrum in our sample is $`1.8\pm 0.2`$ which agrees with results obtained by other authors (see Table 4). The distribution of spectral indices is symmetric and almost Gaussian. The average indices for the broken-type spectra are $`<\alpha _1>=0.9\pm 0.5`$ and $`<\alpha _2>=2.2\pm 0.9`$, respectively, with a break frequency of $`<\nu _b>1.5`$ GHz on the average. We have not found any correlations between spectral index and rotation period $`P`$, spin-down rate $`\dot{P}`$, characteristic age $`\tau `$, polarization and profile type for pulsars with both simple power law spectra and two-power-law spectra. We have found 2 young, nearly fully polarized pulsars which indicate turn-over at unusually high frequency ($``$ 1 GHz). We have also found 15 pulsars which definitely require two-power-law spectra. The comparison of pulsar spectra analysis for slow and millisecond pulsars indicates that both groups have the same emission mechanism (Table 4).

Postscript files of spectra are available at http://astro.ca.wsp.zgora.pl/olaf/paper1 and our spectra are also presented in EPN Database at http://www.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank Christoph Lange for his help with our observations in August 1998. OM thanks the director of the MPIfR Prof. Dr. R. Wielebinski for invitation and support. OM and JK gratefully acknowledge several discussions with J. Gil in the course of this work. The authors also thank V.M. Malofeev for unpublished data at 102 MHz and his helpful comments. This work was supported in part by the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research Grant 2 P03D 008 19