text:
# Scalar Field Dark Matter, Cross Section and Planck-Scale Physics

## 1 Introduction

Recent cosmological observations suggest a flat Universe in a current accelerated expansion but full with 95% of unknown matter. 25% of the matter in the Universe, widely known as dark matter, is responsible of the formation of the large scale structure we observe in the sky: galaxies, clusters of galaxies, voids, walls, etc. This model of dark matter has been very successfultriangle .

However, at galactic scale, numerical simulations show some discrepancies between dark-matter predictions and observationsstein . Dark matter simulations show cuspy halos of galaxies with an excess of small scale structure, while observations suggest a constant halo core densityavila  and a small number of subgalactic objectsavila2 . In order to solve these discrepancies, there are some proposals of scalar fields as dark matter in the literature nowadayspeebles ; jeremy ; hu ; bento ; tkachev . All of them have assumed a polynomial scalar potential up to fourth order. At the cosmological scale, the main results are cold dark matter-like behavior, growing linear perturbations, the existence of a Jeans scale and suppression of the mass power at small scales, but they depend upon initial conditions. At the galactic scale, where the self-interaction becomes important, the scattering cross section is proportional to the quartic coupling square $`g^2`$, which is a free parameter of the models. Even if there is a model-independent result in which a particle with a value for the scattering cross section given by (10) has, straightforwardly, a mean-free path of order of 1 Mpc (see eq. (4) inbento ), the free parameters of the potential are very related, as we can see in eq. (6) of ref.bento . Depending of the coupling $`g`$ the mass of the scalar field could be of order of MeV, inclusive. But nobody has determined the value of this coupling.

In this paper, we continue investigating the hypothesis of a scalar field as dark matter in the Universe with a $`\mathrm{cosh}`$ scalar potentialluis ; luis2 ; sahni

$$V(\mathrm{\Phi })=V_0\left[\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \sqrt{\kappa _o}\mathrm{\Phi })1\right]$$
(1)
with $`\kappa _0^{1/2}=(8\pi G)^{1/2}=M_{Pl}/\sqrt{8\pi }=2.4\times 10^{18}GeV`$ being the inverse square of the reduced Planck mass. Using results given in renormalization theory, we calculate the $`22`$ cross section at the lowest order for the potential (1). It is found that the result corresponds to an effective $`\varphi ^4`$-theory in which the effective coupling $`g`$ is exponentially enhanced by the scale of renormalization $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, which remains as a free parameter of the model. This result is compared with the value given for the cross section in self-interacting dark matter models. We found that if the scale of renormalization of potential (1) is of order of the Planck Mass, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=𝒪(M_{Pl})`$, the predicted scattering cross section by mass of the scalar particles $`\sigma _{22}/m_\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can fit the value predicted in numerical simulations of self-interacting dark matter in order to avoid high-density dark matter halos.

## 2 Scalar field dark matter with a cosh potential

This model neither depends on initial conditions nor has problems with nucleosynthesis (provided that $`\lambda >5`$) and scales as radiation at early times, because of its exponential behavior. It scales as cold dark matter once the scalar field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ oscillates around the minimum of the potential. Its fluctuations are also the same than those of standard cold dark matter but it predict a cut-off in the Mass Power Spectrum, now due to its quadratic behavior. This results are enclosed in the following relationsluis ; luis2

$`V_0`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1.7}{9}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_{0CDM}}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{0\gamma }}}\right)^3\left(\lambda ^24\right)^3\rho _{0CDM},`$
$`m_\mathrm{\Phi }^2`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _0V_0\lambda ^2,`$ (2)
$`k_J`$ $``$ $`1.3\lambda \sqrt{\lambda ^24}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_{0CDM}}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_{0\gamma }}}}H_0.`$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{0CDM}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{0\gamma }`$ are the current contributions of dark matter and radiation to the critical energy density $`\rho _{crit}=3H_0^2/\kappa _0`$ with $`H_0`$ the current Hubble parameter and then $`\rho _{0CDM}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{oCDM}\rho _{crit}`$. $`m_\mathrm{\Phi }^2`$ is the mass of the scalar field and $`k_J`$ is the Jeans wave number at which the Mass Power Spectrum has a cut-off, a very important difference with respect to the standard cold dark matter model.

We recall that the model, at this level, has only one free parameter: $`\lambda `$. Nevertheless, if we expect a cut-off in the Mass Power Spectrum about the wave number $`k4.5hMpc^1`$liddle , we can use the last of eqs. (2) to determine $`\lambda `$. It turns out that $`\lambda 20.28`$, then, we also obtain that $`V_0\left(3.0\times 10^{27}M_{Pl}36.5eV\right)^4`$ and the corresponding ultra-light mass of the scalar field is $`m_\mathrm{\Phi }9.1\times 10^{52}M_{Pl}1.1\times 10^{23}eV`$luis2 . In other words, the expected cut-off of the Mass Power Spectrum in the Universe fixes the last free parameter of the model. Up to this point, all parameters in potential (1) are completely determined, we recover the success of standard cold dark matter model at large scales and we have in addition a cut-off in the Mass Power Spectrum, alleviating problems of the standard model at subgalactic level.

Some differences with respect to other scalar field models appear because of the non-polynomial behavior of (1) in certain regimes. For instance, at cosmological scale, the exponential-like behavior provokes no problem with initial conditions either for $`\rho _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ or the fluctuations (no fine-tuning). Also, the Jeans scale is related to the time at which the scalar field changes its behavior as radiation-like to cold dark matter-likeluis2 , not to the time of radiation-matter equality as in polynomial potentialshu .

Moreover, because of the presence of a scalar field potential (1), there must be an important self-interaction among the scalar particles. For example, even if scalar particles are lighter than neutrinos, the former can cluster due to the presence of the scalar potential. That means that this scalar field dark matter model belongs to the so called group of self-interacting dark matter models which are characterized by a $`22`$ scattering cross sectionstein ; stein2 .

## 3 Renormalization and $`22`$ scattering cross section

The scalar potential (1) can be written as a series of even powers in $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, $`V=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}V_0\lambda ^{2n}\kappa _0^n\mathrm{\Phi }^{2n}`$. Working on 4 dimensions, it is commonly believed that only $`\mathrm{\Phi }^4`$ and lower order theories are renormalizable. But, following the important workhalpern , if we consider that there is only one intrinsic scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the theory, we conclude that there is a momentum cut-off and that we can have an effective $`\mathrm{\Phi }^4`$ theory which depends upon all couplings in the theory. In addition, it was recently demonstratedbran  that scalar exponential-like potentials of the form (we have used the notation of potential (1) and for example, parameter $`\mu `$ in eqs. 7-8 in ref.bran  is $`\mu ^1=\lambda \sqrt{\kappa _0}`$))

$$U_\mathrm{\Lambda }(\mathrm{\Phi })=M^4\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\lambda ^2\kappa _0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{32\pi ^2}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\pm \lambda \sqrt{\kappa _0}\mathrm{\Phi }\right)$$
(3)
are non-perturbative solutions of the exact renormalization group equation in the Local Potential Approximation (LPA) (we have taken a massless gaussian fixed point potential, i.e. parameter $`m^2=0`$ in eq. (5) of bran ). Here $`M`$ and $`\lambda `$ are free parameters of the potential and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the scale of renormalization. Being our potential a $`\mathrm{cosh}`$-like potential (non-polynomial), it is then a solution to the renormalization group equations in the (LPA), too. Comparing eqs. (1, 3), we can identify $`V_0=M^4\tau `$ with

$$\tau =\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\lambda ^2\kappa _0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{32\pi ^2}\right)$$
(4)
and we see that an additional free parameter appears, the scale of renormalization $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. From this, we can assume that potential (1) is renormalizable with only one intrinsic scale: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Even though the parameters in the scalar potential (1) were fixed by cosmological observations, the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ remains free.

We now proceed to calculate the $`21`$ scattering cross section for the scalar particles. Following the procedure shown inhalpern2  for a potential with even powers of the dimensionless scalar field $`\varphi `$, $`U(\varphi )=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}u_{2n}\varphi ^{2n}`$, the scattering amplitudes are given by

$$A_{2n}=\underset{m=n}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}u_{2m}\left(\frac{I}{2}\right)^{mn}\frac{(2m)!}{(mn)!},$$
(5)
where, in our case, the dimensionless $`u_{2m}`$ are

$$u_{2m}=\left(\frac{M}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right)^4\frac{\tau \lambda ^{2m}\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\kappa _0\right)^m}{(2m)!},$$
(6)
and the internal contraction $`I`$ reads

$$I_0^1\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{1}{k^2+2u_2}=\frac{1}{16\pi ^2}\left(1+2u_2\mathrm{ln}\frac{2u_2}{1+2u_2}\right).$$
(7)
Summing the series (5) we find

$$A_{2n}=\left(\frac{M}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right)^4\lambda ^{2n}\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\kappa _0\right)^n\tau \mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{I\lambda ^2\kappa _0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{2}\right).$$
(8)
Since the only scale that appears naturally in gravitation is the Planck mass in $`\kappa _0`$, we can expect that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }𝒪(M_{Pl})`$ and then $`2u_2=(m_\mathrm{\Phi }^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)1`$. In consequence, $`I1/(16\pi ^2)`$. Then, the cross section for $`22`$ scattering in the center-of-mass frame is

$$\sigma _{22}=\frac{g^2}{16\pi E^2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\lambda ^2\kappa _0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{16\pi ^2}\right),$$
(9)
where $`E`$ is the total energy. At this point, we can notice the non-perturbative nature of potential (1). Had we taken perturbatively the scalar potential (1) with a coupling $`g=4!u_42\times 10^{97}`$, the self-interaction would have appeared as extremely weak. But, surprisingly, we can observe from eqs. (4, 8) that the contribution of higher-order couplings points to an effective coupling $`g_{eff}=g\tau ^1`$.

## 4 Planck-scale physics and galactic consequences

An interesting dark matter model is that of a self-interacting dark matterstein ; stein2 . This proposal considers that dark matter particles have an interaction characterized by a scattering cross section by mass of the particles given by stein ; avila

$$\frac{\sigma _{22}}{m}=10^{25}10^{23}cm^2GeV^1.$$
(10)
This self-interaction provides shallow cores of galaxies and a minimum scale of structure formation, that it must also be noticed as a cut-off in the Mass Power Spectrumavila2 ; liddle . The cosh-potential (1) directly provides this cut-off, but the self-interaction among scalar particles would be important for other aspects of galaxy evolution.

We can guess the value of the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ by considering the expected result (10). Near the threshold $`E4m^2`$ and taking the values of $`\lambda `$, $`m_\mathrm{\Phi }`$, we find that

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(1.93\pm 0.01)M_{Pl}2.3\times 10^{19}GeV.$$
(11)
The range of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is very narrow because of the exponential behavior. Observe that the scale of renormalization is of order of the Planck Mass. Recalling that $`V_0\tau ^1=M^4`$, we also find that $`M=(6.7\pm 1.9)\times 10^2`$ TeV. All parameters are completely fixed now.

An intriguing point is the appearance of two different energy scales, one in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and another one in $`M`$ in (3), and it could be not only a coincidence that the former is of $`𝒪(M_{Pl})`$ and the latter is of $`𝒪(100TeV)`$. It should be noted that it is the combination of these scales which determines the observable value of parameters $`V_0`$ and $`m_\mathrm{\Phi }`$, at the cosmological scale, and the value of $`\sigma `$ at the galactic one. This could be the first case in which the relevant scales are hidden into the effective theory at low-energies, as it was claimed that the solution (3) is a solution of the renormalization group equations “irrespectively of the high energy theory”bran . It is also worth mentioning that the potential (1) has been widely studied in non perturbative field theory in $`1+1`$ dimensions where it is known as the sinh-Gordon model (see saleur  and references therein).

We would like to mention that our first motivation was to investigate the hypothesis of scalar dark matter in galaxies, from a pure general relativistic point of viewsiddh . The main result have been that an exponential-like potential appears naturally if one wants to fit rotation curves in galaxies, in both axiallysiddh  and spherically symmetric casessiddh2 . Since it is known that the formation of galaxies from dark matter involves non-lineal phenomena that can only be analyzed using numerical simulations, the cases treated insiddh ; siddh2  can be considered as good approximations to the exact solution with the potential (1).

But, even if the evolution of a galaxy could be described by self-interacting dark matter modelsstein2 , the scalar nature of dark matter can provide us with a more interesting picture: Bose condensationjeremy ; tkachev . For instance, the relaxation time for the condensate would be smaller than the age of the Universe iftkachev

$$g_{eff}>6\times 10^{15}\left(m_\mathrm{\Phi }/eV\right)^{7/2}.$$
(12)
We find that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>1.72M_{Pl}`$. Again, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ should be of order of the Planck mass. From this, it is clear that, at galactic scales, the scalar field dark matter model with the scalar potential (1) must be studied both in general relativity and quantum mechanics. This is beyond the purpose of this paper and is left for future work.

Summarizing, a scalar field endowed with the scalar potential (1) is a reliable model as dark matter in the Universe, not only at cosmological level, but also at galactic level because of its self-interaction. Even if we are dealing with a non-perturbative case, the scalar potential is renormalizable at a energy scale of order of the Planck mass. Also, all relevant scales are hidden into the parameters of the effective theory, but they might be very important when performing quantum calculations.

We would like to thank F. Siddhartha Guzmán and Darío Núñez for many helpful discussions. L.A.U. thanks Rodrigo Pelayo and Juan Carlos Arteaga Velázquez and T.M. thanks Gabriel López Castro for very helpful comments. This work was partly supported by CONACyT, México 119259 (L.A.U.).


format: text

text:
# Kinematics from spectroscopy with a wide slit: detecting black holes in galaxy centres

## 1 Introduction

Long-slit spectroscopy has been for decades a fundamental tool of astronomy, and although integral-field spectrographs are now beginning to be important for ground-based observations of galactic dynamics (e.g., SAURON, Copin et al. 2000), the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) has never been more reliant on long-slit spectroscopy.

Observations with long-slit spectrographs often use a slit that is wider than the FWHM of the instrumental point-spread-function (PSF). This practice is conventionally considered to enhance the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of the data at the price of what may be an insignificant loss in velocity resolution. Here we show that when the target has steep velocity gradients, the use of a wide slit can have more subtle effects, because the position and velocity information becomes entangled along the dispersion direction. If these effects are not recognized in the data, a misleading impression of the structure of the target can be inferred. When the effects of a wide slit are recognized, however, they can increase the diagnostic power of the spectrum over that of a narrow-slit spectrum of equal S/N.

Since our study has been motivated by a programme of spectroscopy of galactic nuclei using the STIS instrument on HST (Marconi et al. 2000; Axon et al. 2000), we focus on the specific case of STIS spectra of gas swirling around a black hole in a galactic nucleus. However, the principles we elucidate have a wider applicability: whenever an object with steep velocity gradients is studied with a slit that is wider than the FWHM of the PSF. Large velocity gradients occur in shocks and contact discontinuities, as well as in accretion discs around black holes.

In Section 2 we analyze the appearance of galactic-disc spectra that are taken with a slit that is much wider than the PSF and has been laid along the disc’s line of nodes. In Section 3 we use this analysis to develop a new estimator for the mass of the nuclear BH. In Section 4 we generalize the analysis of Sections 2 and 3 to a slit that is inclined to the line of nodes. We find that, paradoxically, the detectability of a BH with a given spectrograph depends on the sense of rotation of its accretion disc. We also investigate the case of a slit that does not pass through the nucleus. In Section 5 we consider the case in which the FWHM of the PSF is comparable to the slit width. In Section 6 we reanalyse STIS observations of M84 taken by Bower et al (1998), and show that the results of Section 4 enable us to understand these data with a much simpler model of the galaxy than that developed by Bower et al., and yield a mass for the black hole in M84 that is smaller than that of Bower et al. by a factor $`4`$.

## 2 A slit wider than the PSF

For clarity we consider long-slit spectra of a disc in circular motion in a specific but realistic axisymmetric galactic potential. We assume that the latter is generated by a nuclear BH and an extended mass distribution, in which the density varies radially as $`R^{1.8}`$ – this behaviour is consistent with what is inferred for the centre of the Milky Way (Binney et al., 1991; Genzel et al., 1997) and is characteristic of the luminosity profiles of a large class of elliptical galaxies (Gebhardt et al., 1996). With the density scaling as $`R^{1.8}`$, the circular speed generated by the extended mass distribution scales as $`R^{0.1}`$, and falls towards the centre. Consequently, there is some radius $`R_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ at which the circular speed of the embedded BH, which scales as $`R^{0.5}`$, begins to dominate. The conventional approach to the determination of the mass of the BH involves fitting a Keplerian circular-speed curve to the observed rotation curve well inside $`R_{\mathrm{BH}}`$. We shall see that with a wide slit mass inside $`R_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ can be derived from data taken at $`RR_{\mathrm{BH}}`$. The ability to work near $`R_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ rather than well inside it is important because $`R_{BH}`$ is typically very small — usually smaller than atmospheric seeing.

Fig. 1 shows the circular speeds out to $`200\mathrm{pc}`$ in our model: the dotted curve shows the circular speed generated by the $`10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$ BH, the dashed line shows that generated by the stars, and the full curve shows the net circular speed.

### 2.1 A slit parallel to the line of nodes

Fig. 2 is a composite position-velocity plot for 21 parallel cuts through our model galaxy. The disc has been inclined at $`60\mathrm{°}`$ to the line of sight, and the cuts run parallel to the line of nodes. The inset at top left shows the locations of some representative cuts: the outermost cuts are dotted and the one through the nucleus is dashed. Velocities along the cuts differ markedly near the centre since only the cut through the nucleus fully samples the central divergence of the BH’s circular-speed curve. Velocities along many outer cuts show no rise, but smoothly decline to zero at the slit centre.

### 2.2 Velocity offsets

When our disc is observed in some emission line through a long-slit spectrograph, the pattern of intensity resembles Fig. 2 but with some significant differences, which we now deduce by considering how the spectrograph works.

Fig. 3 shows the relevant geometry. The telescope creates an image of the disc in the slit, and we show two rays of wavelength $`\lambda `$ through each of two points on this image: one at the centre of the slit, which lies on the optical axis, and one off-centre. After passage through the collimator, rays through the centre of the slit run parallel to the optical axis until they hit the grating, whose normal makes angle $`\varphi `$ with the axis. The interference pattern produced by the grating peaks at angle $`\theta _0`$ to the grating’s normal, where $`\theta _0`$ satisfies the diffraction equation

$$\mathrm{sin}\theta _0\mathrm{sin}\varphi =m\lambda /\mathrm{\Delta },$$
(1)
with $`m`$ being the spectral order, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the row separation.

The rays going through a point on the image that is offset by $`\delta `$ from the centre of the slit are inclined at angle $`\psi `$ to the optical axis after passing the collimator, where

$$\psi =\delta \frac{f_{\mathrm{telescope}}}{f_{\mathrm{collimator}}}.$$
(2)
Hence, their angle of incidence on the grating is $`\varphi \psi `$, and the diffraction pattern to which they contribute peaks at the angle $`\theta _1`$ that satisfies

$$\mathrm{sin}\theta _1\mathrm{sin}(\varphi \psi )=m\lambda /\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
(3)
The angle $`\theta `$ of the peak in the diffraction pattern always decreases with the displacement $`\delta `$ of the source from the slit centre.

The spectrograph’s camera gathers all light that enters in a given direction onto a single point on the detector. Since the on- and off-centre rays enter at different angles, they are gathered to different points on the detector despite their common wavelength. In so far as we associate a velocity with each position along the dispersion direction, we have to recognize that the velocity scale for a point distance $`\delta `$ from the centre of the slit is offset from the scale for the centre of the slit by an amount proportional to $`\delta `$. This offset depends on wavelength $`\lambda `$, and is listed for individual spectrographs as a ‘plate scale’ (see Table 5 in Woodgate et al. 1998 for STIS). This feature of a spectrograph is commonly known as a slit effect (see e.g. Bacon et al. 1995).

For the spectral order $`m=1`$, the angle $`\theta `$ at which constructive interference peaks increases with wavelength $`\lambda `$, or decreases with emitter’s velocity. As noted above, it also decreases as one moves up the slit in Fig. 2. Out of convenience, we convert decrements in $`\theta `$ to increments in the dispersion coordinate on the detector, so that higher velocity of the emitter reveals itself as larger value of the dispersion coordinate. With this conversion, also the velocity offset is positive for points above the centre of the slit, and negative below. Fig. 4 shows the resulting pattern of light on the detector for the top half of the slit: each line from Fig. 2 is shifted by a constant amount, different for each line. As in Fig. 2, the dashed curve comes from the cut through the nucleus, and the dotted curve marks the edge of the slit, which is $`2\delta `$ wide. On the left side of Fig. 4 the dotted curve is shifted up away from the dashed one, so the light is diffused over the detector in an unhelpful way. On the right side of Fig. 4, by contrast, the shift moves the dotted curve past the dashed curve at large distances along the slit, while at small distances, the shift leaves the dotted curve below the dashed curve. On this side, the instrumental velocity offset competes with the real rise in velocity due to the nuclear BH. Close to the nucleus, the BH-related velocity rise dominates, hence the dashed line that goes through the nucleus stays on top. Further from the nucleus, the real velocity gradient across the slit is small, and the instrumental velocity offset, largest for the edge of the slit, takes over: hence there the dotted line is on top. Somewhere in between, there is a point along the slit at which the BH-related velocity rise is balanced by the velocity offset, and the dashed and dotted lines intersect. Since the curves generated by intermediate cuts are similarly shifted, the dashed curve crosses all the other curves, and happens to do so in a narrow range of distances along the slit. All light entering that part of the slit gets focused virtually at one position in the dispersion direction. We refer to this region of inversion of the order of the curves as the ‘caustic’.

In the lower half of the slit, the velocity offset is negative, so the light distribution on the detector from this half of the slit is the same as that shown in Fig. 4 rotated by $`180\mathrm{°}`$. Fig. 5 shows the light distribution from the two halves of the slit combined. The top panel is similar to Fig. 4 except that a grid of pixels has been overlaid – the grid is appropriate for the G750M grating on STIS with the model at a distance $`20\mathrm{Mpc}`$, so that $`1`$arcsec corresponds to $`100\mathrm{pc}`$. The bottom panel shows the light distribution in those pixels under the assumption that the surface brightness within the disc scales as $`R^1`$.

Inside the two caustics, the light distribution shows two maxima in the dispersion direction: the one furthest from the systemic velocity is created by light coming from the slit centre, and contains information about the BH. The other one, made by light from slit edges, goes through zero velocity at the nucleus. Thus we predict full two-dimensional position-velocity diagrams for rotating discs to be rich in structure; the information contained in this structure is lost if one merely fits a Gaussian emission line profile at each radius (which is the traditional approach).

## 3 A new BH mass estimator

Observationally, the caustic described in the last section will be conspicuous because light from right across the slit is concentrated in it. We experimented with various stellar mass distributions other than the one resulting in velocity $`R^{0.1}`$ presented here, and the position of the caustic along the slit does not depend sensitively on the stellar density profile. Any reasonable mass distribution produces caustics at locations similar to the case of no stellar mass at all. Hence, we can infer the mass of the BH from the location of the caustics.

The velocity field in the disc due to the BH is

$$v=AR^{1/2},$$
(4)
where $`A`$ is related to the BH mass $`M_{}`$ by $`A=\sqrt{GM_{}}`$. Let $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ be Cartesian coordinates on the sky, with $`\beta `$ constant along the line of nodes, and let $`d`$ be the distance to the system. Then the line-of-sight velocity along a cut offset from the nucleus by distance $`\beta `$ and parallel to the line of nodes is

$$v_{\alpha \beta }=\frac{A\alpha \mathrm{sin}i}{d^{1/2}\left(\alpha ^2+(\frac{\beta }{\mathrm{cos}i})^2\right)^{3/4}}.$$
(5)
Taking the ratio of velocity $`v_{\alpha 0}`$ at the slit centre ($`\beta =0`$) to that, $`v_{\alpha \delta }`$, at the slit top edge ($`\beta =\delta `$) for a given position $`\alpha `$ along the slit returns the value of inclination angle $`i`$

$$\mathrm{cos}i=\frac{\delta }{\alpha \sqrt{(v_{\alpha 0}/v_{\alpha \delta })^{4/3}1}}.$$
(6)
It is easiest to estimate the ratio $`v_{\alpha 0}/v_{\alpha \delta }`$ at the caustic: through a spectrograph of dispersion $`D`$ (in $`\text{pixel}/\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) and slit half-width $`\delta `$, the light from the slit centre is detected at a position $`Dv_{\alpha 0}`$ in the dispersion direction, and the light from the slit top edge is detected at $`Dv_{\alpha \delta }+B\delta `$, where $`B`$ is the detector plate scale in the dispersion direction (in pixel/arcsec). Thus although always $`v_{\alpha \delta }<v_{\alpha 0}`$, the instrumental velocity offset $`B\delta `$, positive for the top half of the slit, moves the light from the slit edge up towards the light from the slit centre that is emitted at higher intrinsic velocity. If the caustic occurs distance $`\alpha `$ along the slit from the nucleus, one has

$$yDv_{\alpha 0}=Dv_{\alpha \delta }+B\delta ,$$
(7)
where $`y`$ is the position of the caustic in the dispersion direction. Therefore $`v_{\alpha \delta }/v_{\alpha 0}=1\frac{B\delta }{y}`$ and (6) expressed in observable quantities takes the form

$$\mathrm{cos}i=\frac{\delta }{\alpha }\left(\left(1\frac{B\delta }{y}\right)^{4/3}1\right)^{1/2}.$$
(8)
The mass of the BH can now be calculated by inserting this value of $`i`$ in (5) for $`\beta =0`$. We find

$$M_{}=\frac{\alpha d}{G}\left(\frac{y}{D\mathrm{sin}i}\right)^2.$$
(9)
We have checked the usefulness of these formulae by using them to analyse the realistic spectrum shown in the bottom panel of Fig. 5. The caustic occurs at the fourth pixel along the slit from the nucleus, and is located at the seventh pixel in the dispersion direction. These numbers yield $`i=50\mathrm{°}`$ and $`M_{}=2.6\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$ compared to the input values $`i=60\mathrm{°}`$ and $`M_{}=10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$. The errors here are dominated by the neglect in the above derivation of the stellar mass distribution which is unknown. They can be reduced by recalling that the position of the caustic along the slit, $`\alpha `$, is fairly independent of the stellar density profile, but its position in the dispersion direction, $`y`$, is sensitive to the stellar density profile because it measures the mass interior to $`\alpha `$. The calculations above should have used the position of the caustic $`y_{}`$ when the BH acts alone. From equation (7) we have that $`y/y_{}=v_0(\alpha )/v_{}(\alpha )`$, where $`v_{}(\alpha )`$ is the velocity due to the BH alone. Let $`v_{}(\alpha )`$ be the velocity due to the stars, then

$$y=y_{}\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{v_{}}{v_{}}\right)^2}.$$
(10)
Setting $`v_{}/v_{}=1`$ (see Figs. 1 and 4), we get $`i=66\mathrm{°}`$ and $`M_{}=0.86\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$ in good agreement with the input values.

The key advantage of this technique for determining $`M_{}`$ is that it exploits a feature that occurs at the outer edge of the BH’s sphere of influence, and therefore gives higher sensitivity to BH detection than the traditional method, in which one fits the Keplerian rise of the rotation curve at the smallest accessible radii. Moreover, our approach yields the mass of the black hole and the disc inclination independently, whereas the traditional approach only yields $`M_{}\mathrm{sin}^2i`$. One should keep in mind though that our method yields the mass within the radius of the caustic, and to get the BH mass one must assume the contribution to the potential from extended mass. This method cannot determine whether the measured mass comes from the BH, but on the other hand the very existence of the caustic comes from the steep velocity rise towards the nucleus, which itself is characteristic of a massive BH. Thus the main advantage of our technique is in detecting BHs in galaxies for which we cannot achieve the resolution required to follow the Keplerian rise in velocities inwards.

## 4 Inclined slits

Since nuclear discs frequently lie in a plane that differs markedly from that of galaxy’s main disc, one usually does not know the line of nodes before nuclear spectra are taken. Hence, we now consider a slit that passes through the nucleus at an arbitrary position angle (PA) with respect to the line of nodes.

The top panel of Fig. 6 is the analogue of Fig. 2 for the case of non-zero PA: it is a position-velocity plot for several cuts that are inclined at $`\text{PA}=40\mathrm{°}`$ to the line of nodes. The dashed curve is for the cut that passes through the nucleus, and the other cuts all pass above the nucleus. Notice that this plot, unlike Fig. 2, is not symmetric on inversion through its centre; the plot one obtains by carrying out this inversion is the position-velocity plot for cuts that pass below the nucleus.

The middle panel of Fig. 6 is the analogue of the top panel of Fig. 5 for non-zero PA. It shows the effect of adding the velocity offsets associated with finite slit width to the velocities shown in the top panel, together with the corresponding velocities for the cuts below the nucleus.

The bottom panel is the analogue of the middle panel for a disc that rotates in the opposite sense: thus before adding the velocity offsets we changed the sign of the velocities given by the top panel. Clearly the bottom and middle panels differ by much more than a reflection. In particular, one has prominent caustics on the spatial axis while the other does not. Given that these two panels describe observations with the same spectrograph of systems that differ only in their sense of rotation, the striking differences between these panels may be surprising. They reflect the fact that a spectrograph is symmetric only under inversion of both the spatial and temporal axes, and not symmetric under time reversal only. The latter asymmetry is evident because a spectrograph displays frequency shifts as spatial displacements. For the same reason, changing the sense of rotation of the disc is equivalent to switching the sign of the observed spectral order (see eq. 1).

When the slit lies along the line of nodes, cuts that pass $`\pm \delta `$ above and below the slit map to the same point in the position-velocity plot at a given distance down the slit (see Fig. 2). Consequently, it is immaterial whether contributions coming from above the nucleus are moved up and the others down, or vice-versa. When the slit does not run along the line of nodes, cuts above and below the nucleus map to different points in the position-velocity plot, and it matters which is moved up and which down.

Although the appearance of the spectrum changes with the slit position angle, the principal features persist. In the middle and bottom panels of Fig. 6, one can see the caustics, and two intensity maxima inside the caustics. Notice that, whereas in Fig. 5 the outer envelope of the light distribution near the nucleus is formed by light coming through the slit centre, in Fig. 6 it comes from the sides of the slit – the dashed line associated with the slit centre has a much narrower peak. Consequently, fitting profiles from an infinitely thin slit to the light distributions in the lower panels of Fig. 6 would result in a considerable overestimation of the BH mass when the traditional method is being used. We give an example of this phenomenon in Section 6.

Our method relies on the existence of caustics to diagnose the presence of a BH. Since Fig. 6 shows that for non-zero PA the appearance of caustics can depend on the sense of disc rotation, it follows that the detectability of a BH with a given spectrograph setup depends on the sense of rotation of its accretion disc. As the slit position angle increases, the caustic becomes more difficult to detect as it moves in to the nucleus and often to higher velocities.

With unknown PA, our method returns only two out of three parameters: PA, $`i`$, $`M_{}`$. However, equations (6) to (9) are readily generalized to the case of non-zero position angle. Equation (5) gives the line-of-sight velocity at a point $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ in the disc, with $`\beta =0`$ marking the line of nodes through the nucleus. For a cut inclined at a given PA, the coordinate $`\alpha ^{}`$ down the slit, and the offset $`\beta ^{}`$ of the cut are related to $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ by a simple rotation matrix

$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^{}\mathrm{cos}\text{PA}\beta ^{}\mathrm{sin}\text{PA}`$ (11)
$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`\beta ^{}\mathrm{sin}\text{PA}+\beta ^{}\mathrm{cos}\text{PA}.`$ (12)
Substituting these values of $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ into equation (5) gives the velocity $`v_0`$ in the nuclear cut ($`\beta ^{}=0`$), and $`v_{\pm \delta }`$ in the cut marking the edge of the slit ($`\beta ^{}=\pm \delta `$). As in (6), the inclination angle can be recovered from the ratio $`v_0/v_{\pm \delta }`$:

$$\mathrm{cos}^2i=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{4/3}(\mathrm{sin}\text{PA}\pm \frac{\delta }{\alpha }\mathrm{cos}\text{PA})^2\mathrm{sin}^2\text{PA}}{\mathrm{cos}^2\text{PA}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{4/3}(\mathrm{cos}\text{PA}\frac{\delta }{\alpha }\mathrm{sin}\text{PA})^2},$$
(13)
where

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{v_{\pm \delta }}{v_0}\left(1\frac{\delta }{\alpha }\mathrm{tan}\text{PA}\right)^1,$$
(14)
and the prime has been dropped from $`\alpha `$ for simplicity. In equations (13) and (14), the upper sign refers to the top edge of the slit, and the lower sign to the bottom edge – this dichotomy reflects the loss of the symmetry that takes place as the PA is displaced from zero. From equation (7) we again get $`v_{\pm \delta }/v_0=1\frac{B\delta }{y}`$. Substituting this ratio into equation (14) we obtain an expression for the inclination in terms of observed quantities. The mass of the black hole can then be obtained from equations (5) and (11) with $`\beta ^{}=0`$:

$$M_{}=M_{}(\text{PA}=0)\frac{\left(1\mathrm{cos}^2\text{PA}\mathrm{sin}^2i\right)^{3/2}}{\mathrm{cos}^3i\mathrm{cos}^2\text{PA}},$$
(15)
where $`M_{}(\text{PA}=0)`$ is given by equation (9). Note that the correction factor in the equation above quickly diverges for $`i90\mathrm{°}`$ and PA $`90\mathrm{°}`$, but otherwise it remains a mild function of $`i`$ and PA. In Section 6, we use published data and these formulae to obtain a new estimate of the mass of the BH in M84.

### 4.1 Offset Slits

It is a common strategy to use offset slits to recover the PA of the nuclear disc, and to disentangle values of $`M_{}`$ and $`i`$ from the value of the product $`M_{}\mathrm{sin}^2i`$ that emerges from the conventional treatment of a slit through the nucleus. We have shown how this disentanglement can already be done directly from data for a wide slit through the nucleus, and it is a priori evident that a proper treatment of wide slits greatly reduces the value of offset slits: a wide slit through the centre already contains a narrow off-set slit. Constraints on the disc PA can be inferred from offset slits, and there are a couple of features of offset slits that merit mention.

First, the pattern of light on the detector is the same for slits that pass equal distances above and below the nucleus. Fig. 7 is the analogue of Fig. 6 for an offset slit – the PA is still $`40\mathrm{°}`$ but now the centre of the slit misses the nucleus by $`0.2`$arcsec. Again we see that the light distribution in the detector differs qualitatively depending on the sense of rotation of the disc. The bottom boundary of the light distribution in the two lower panels of Fig. 7 is set by light from the edge of the slit that passes closest to the nucleus. The nuclear BH causes a mere widening of the light pattern close to the galactic centre in the middle panel, while in the lower panel a caustic is evident. This panel corresponds to the same sense of rotation as the bottom panel in Fig. 6, in which there is no comparable concentration of light. Hence, when the disc rotates in the least favourable sense for black hole detection with a slit through the nucleus, this is the favoured sense of rotation for detection from an offset slit.

Finally, fitting the thin-slit model to the off-center data again results in an overestimate of the BH mass: The disc’s intensity will be highest along the edge of the slit that passes closest to the nucleus. In the two lower panels of Fig. 7 this edge forms the lower dotted line. Since the curvature of this line is larger than the curvature of the dashed central line, the BH mass will be overestimated if the curvature of the light profile serves as the BH-mass estimator.

## 5 Convolution with the PSF

The discussion above has been confined to the distribution of the principal maxima in the diffraction pattern that is produced on the spectrograph’s detector by light of a given frequency coming from a given point in the object being measured. In reality light from a point on the target is distributed over the slit by the PSF of the primary telescope optics, and light from any point on the slit produces an entire diffraction pattern on the detector. To what extent would our conclusions be modified if we took into account the complete diffraction pattern?

We cannot answer this question rigorously for lack of sufficient data on STIS. To see what data are required, recall that light at a given frequency from a given point on the object is concentrated by the primary telescope optics into an interference pattern in the plane of the slit. Ideally, this pattern would comprise an Airy disc and rings, but it is in reality complex. The slit truncates this pattern. After passage through the spectrograph, light from every surviving point in the pattern interferes both with itself and light from other surviving points in the pattern, so in principle one needs to know the phase of the radiation within the slit and not just the intensity pattern.

Here we neglect the effects of the coherence of radiation at different points in the slit, and add contributions from truncated Airy discs in intensity – this is strictly correct only in the case of a seeing-dominated PSF. For each point in the source we approximate the Airy pattern in the slit plane with the circular model PSF. We chose the PSF obtained by Roeland van der Marel (2000, private communication) from tests on STIS that involved shifting a star across a 0.1 arcsec-wide slit. This PSF is approximated by four Gaussians

$$\mathrm{PSF}(r)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}\frac{\gamma _i}{2\pi \sigma _i^2}\mathrm{exp}(r^2/2\sigma _i^2),$$
(16)
with parameters listed in Table 1. It has a FWHM of 0.057 arcsec. Its pattern is truncated by the slit edges. The light from each surviving point on a given Airy disc is propagated to the detector according to equation (3), i.e. it is placed at the maximum of the diffraction pattern. This approach recovers the flux on the detector and the velocity offset measured in the abovementioned set of tests, and therefore gives a faithful approximation of the light pattern on the detector. In the next section, we confront our models, already convolved with the PSF, with the STIS data.

## 6 Confronting observations

To date, the most unambiguous gas kinematical detection of a nuclear BH with STIS is that for M84 by Bower et al. (1998). The left panel of Fig. 8 shows the relevant spectrum, which was taken with a slit $`0.2`$arcsec wide. At several positions just to the right of the nucleus, the emission clearly peaks at two velocities. Consequently, when Bower et al. fitted Gaussians in velocity to the data, they found two Gaussians to be required at many spatial locations. Bower et al. interpreted this finding in terms of two gas components. Fig. 5 shows that when the non-negligible width of the slit is taken into account, two peaks arise naturally from the simplest model of the accretion disc, in which there is a unique velocity at a given radius.

In the left panel of Fig. 8 we interpret the point – $`0.45`$arcsec (nine pixels) from the nucleus – at which the track of maximum light splits into two, as the position of the caustic. We estimate the corresponding velocity to be $`125\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. Adopting the Bower et al. value of the relative position angle of the slit with respect to the line of nodes ($`\text{PA}=21\mathrm{°}`$), and roughly accounting for the stellar mass contribution, we derive $`i=74\mathrm{°}`$ and $`M_{}=4\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$ from equations (13) and (15). Our estimate of $`i`$ agrees roughly with that of Bower et al. ($`i=80\mathrm{°}`$), but our value for $`M_{}`$ is almost 4 times smaller than that of Bower et al. We believe the Bower et al. value is too large because it is based on fitting a thin slit model to the outer envelope in light distribution, which is dominated by light from the edge of the slit. In Section 4 we showed how this procedure can lead to a significant overestimation of $`M_{}`$.

The observed spectrum is distinctly left-right asymmetric, which makes it different from a generic model in Fig. 5. Any failure to get the centre of the slit to pass through the nucleus will inevitably introduce such asymmetry. We therefore simulated a STIS spectrum for $`M_{}=4\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$, $`i=74\mathrm{°}`$ and relative $`\text{PA}=21\mathrm{°}`$, and the centre of the slit displaced from the nucleus by $`0.03`$arcsec, less than a quarter of its width. The middle panel of Fig. 8 shows the light distribution on the detector after convolution with the PSF; in the right panel, this light has been binned into pixels. The simulated spectrum clearly reproduces the main features of the observed spectrum next to it: on the left-hand side of this spectrum, the BH-related rise in velocities is clear, with not much emission in the second light maximum at low velocities. On the other hand, most of the light on the right of the nucleus is gathered into the low-velocity maximum, with the emission from the BH-related velocity rise enhanced only close to the galactic centre. All emission recorded in the nuclear slit spectrum observed by Bower et al. can be explained as coming from a thin disc in circular motion around the central BH. Note that although the distribution of intensities changes when the slit is displaced, the relative position of caustics remains unchanged.

It is also worth noting that the convolution with PSF does not introduce any significant change in the light pattern on the detector already outlined in Fig. 5. It is so because the slit width considered here (0.2 arcsec) is substantially larger than the FWHM of the instrumental PSF. Thus in observations with a sufficiently wide slit, the convolution with the PSF can be treated as a small correction to the slit effects described in this paper.

Since our analysis of spectra taken with a wide slit is motivated by a program of STIS observations, we have confronted our simulated spectra with the STIS observations of Bower et al. (1998). However, the effects of a wide slit already may be evident in older spectra of M87 that were taken with the Faint Object Camera on HST (Macchetto et al. 1997). Two bright spots located symmetrically on each side of the nucleus and separated by a drop in the emission in the innermost $`0.1`$arcsec may indicate the presence of caustics, but we cannot make a strong case here because of limited quality of the data.

## 7 Conclusions

We have analysed the consequences of using a long-slit that is significantly wider than the PSF of the primary telescope optics. When the object under study contains large velocity gradients, such that the object’s velocity can change appreciably across the slit, the pattern of light that will be measured on the detector differs qualitatively from what one would observe with an ideal narrow slit. There is more information in a spectrum taken with a wide slit that in a spectrum of equal S/N that is taken with a narrow slit. This happy state of affairs in natural intuitively, since a wide slit contains many narrow slits within it.

Competition between real velocity differences within the object, and offsets in velocity that arise because light from different points across the slit enter the spectrograph at different angles, frequently cause the intensity of light on the detector to have more than one peak at a given spatial location, even for a trivial velocity field in the object. Such multiple peaks in spectra of galactic nuclear discs have already been observed from the ground (e.g. Rubin, Kenney & Young 1997), and are evident in STIS spectra (Bower et al. 1998). In this last observation, they were interpreted as evidence for multiple components along a single line of sight. Bertola et al. (1998) showed that this does not need to be the case, and serious physical problems are likely to be encountered when a three-dimensional model is sought that displays such components. Here we confirm this finding, and in addition conclude that, when correctly interpreted, the multiple peaks have considerable diagnostic power: they enable us to detect nuclear black holes by exploiting data for a given galaxy at larger distances from the nucleus than in the traditional approach to BH mass-estimation. Our BH-detection method is therefore reliable down to lower black-hole masses ($`M_{}`$) for which detection of Keplerian rise of velocity inwards is beyond the resolution limit. Moreover, our estimator recovers $`M_{}`$ and the inclination $`i`$ of the disc independently from a single long-slit spectrum, whereas from the same spectrum the traditional approach determines only the value of the product $`M_{}\mathrm{sin}^2i`$ and requires an additional spectrum from an off-set slit to extract $`M_{}`$ and $`i`$ separately from the product. Nevertheless we ought to point out that our method serves only as a rough indicator of a central mass concentration, and tells us nothing about the mass distribution inside the caustic. The traditional method that follows the Keplerian rise in velocities will secure the BH detection once data with sufficient resolution become available.

When the slit is inclined at some angle to the line of nodes, the distribution of light on the spectrograph’s detector differs qualitatively depending on the sense in which the disc rotates. Consequently, with a given spectrograph setup, the detectability of a black hole depends on the sense in which the disc surrounding it rotates.

We applied our mass estimator to a published spectrum of M84 (Bower et al. 1998), and find that in this galaxy $`M_{}`$ is 4 times smaller than previously estimated. We argue that interpretation of data taken with a wide slit in terms of an infinitely thin slit will cause $`M_{}`$ to be systematically overestimated. Currently we are estimating the masses of nuclear BHs in a sample of $`50`$ nearby galaxies for which we have STIS spectra (Marconi et al. 2000, Axon et al. 2000).

## Acknowledgment

We would like to thank Gary Bower for providing us with the data shown in Fig. 8 and Roeland van der Marel for providing us with unpublished test data for STIS, and for useful comments.


text:
# References

SMT00/01

Seiberg-Witten theory for the asymptotic free rank three tensors of $`SU(N)`$

Henric Rhedin111 henric.rhedin@celsius.se

Celsius Consultants AB

Chalmers Teknikpark

S-412 88 Göteborg

Sweden

Abstract

> We here give a first indication that there exists a Seiberg-Witten curve for $`SU(N)`$ Seiberg-Witten theory with matter transforming in the totally antisymmetric rank three tensor representation. We present a derivation of the leading order hyperelliptic approximation of a curve for this case. Since we are only interested in the asymptotic free theory we are restricted to $`N=6,7,8`$. The derivation is carried out by reversed engineering starting from the known form of the prepotential at tree level. We also predict the form of the one instanton correction to the prepotential.

A lot of effort has been spent over the years in Seiberg-Witten theory and all asymptotic free cases has been accounted for except $`SU(N)`$ with matter transforming in the totally antisymmetric rank three tensor representation. Curves have been derived by generalisations  of Seiberg and Wittens original work , by first principles from M-theory  and most recently by reversed engineering . Furthermore, results that can be subject to tests of those curves have been made available for all cases .

Here we start a program to determine the Seiberg-Witten curve for $`SU(N)`$ with matter transforming in the totally antisymmetric rank three tensor representation. Up to this point no information has been presented for this case and fewer clues are available than for e.g. the case of two antisymmetric two tensors  that was derived by similar methods.

One of the essential ingredients that characterise the Seiberg-Witten theory is a particular residue function denoted $`S(x)`$ below. For the case studied here there is no obvious candidate for this function in contrast to e.g. the rank two tensor representations for $`SU(N)`$. For the rank two tensor representations there were also involutions symmetries which from a M-theory perspective implemented themselves using known objects such as orientifolds. This involution constrained the form of the curve. For the case at hand the realisation of such a symmetry at M-theory level is not known and hence the form of the curve seems less constrained.

Never the less one may use the known form of the prepotential at tree level and simple arguments like dimension analysis to find a candidate for a curve for the $`SU(N)`$ Seiberg-Witten theory with matter transforming in the totally antisymmetric rank three tensor representation. This curve should be regarded as the lowest order approximation of a full curve and as a first step toward the true answer.

The weights of the totally antisymmetric three tensor representation of SU($`N`$) may be parameterised by

$`e_i+e_j+e_ki<j<k=1,\mathrm{},N.`$ (1)
where $`e_i`$ are the weights of the defining representation. The Dynkin index of the three tensor is given by

$`I_{Dynkin}={\displaystyle \frac{(N2)(N3)}{2}}`$ (2)
and hence asymptotic freedom, which requires $`2NI_{Dynkin}0`$, restrict us to $`N=6,7`$ and 8. We may also add up to 5 and 3 defining representations for $`SU(6)`$ and $`SU(7)`$ respectively, while $`SU(8)`$ does not allow for any more matter.

Take the hyperelliptic curve

$`y^2+2A(x)y+L^2B(x)=0,L^2=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{2N(N2)(N3)/2},`$ (3)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the dynamical scale of the theory. It is sometimes convenient to use the alternative form

$`y^2=(A(x))^2L^2B(x)`$ (4)
and we will interchangeably use the notation hyper elliptic approximation for either of those two forms.

The purpose of this paper is to find out whether or not there exists functions $`A(x)`$ and $`B(x)`$ such that this curve reproduces the tree level prepotential using the Seiberg-Witten method. The tree level part of the prepotential is proportional to

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e_ie_j)^2ln\left({\displaystyle \frac{(e_ie_j)^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}\right){\displaystyle \underset{i<j<k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e_i+e_j+e_k)^2ln\left({\displaystyle \frac{(e_i+e_j+e_k)^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}\right).`$ (5)
and starting from a hyperelliptic curve there is a well known prescription  how to check this result. Here the objective is to revese this process.

We expect to be able to find appropriate functions for the curve by reverse engineering following the method developed in . Reversed engineering makes use of symmetries, functional forms, and dimensional restrictions to find a candidate for a curve. The restriction available apart from the form of the tree level prepotential (5) is the R-parity of the 1-instanton correction or equivalently the curve. Although the form of the 1-instanton contribution to the prepotential is not known it will follow from the form of $`A(x)`$ and $`B(x)`$ and since the R-parity of the 1-instanton term is known this puts restrictions on $`A(x)`$ and $`B(x)`$.

When integrating out the matter one should find pure Yang-Mills and hence we expect the usual $`_{i=1}^N(xe_i)`$ to be a part of $`A(x)`$. The form of the weights indicates that $`B(x)`$ should contain a factor of $`(x+e_i+e_j)`$. Here there is no obvious choice for the range of indices. Options available are $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},N`$, $`ij=1,\mathrm{}N`$ or $`i<j=1,\mathrm{}N`$ and although there is no obvious candidate the minimal choice seems the most attractive one for computational reasons. Hence we begin with this choice and we will subsequently comment on the other possible choices. By inspection it is clear that any of the choices of $`B(x)`$ given above will give too many weights and those have to be corrected for in some way.

Before we continue we must carry out the calculations to find what kind of logarithmic terms follow from the choices

$`A(x)={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(xe_i)B(x)={\displaystyle \underset{i<j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(x+e_i+e_j).`$ (6)
where we for a moment forget R-parity restrictions. Following Seiberg-Witten  we would like to calculate the periods $`a_i`$ and dual periods $`a_i^D`$ since the latter are related to the prepotential $`F`$ via

$`a_i^D={\displaystyle \frac{F}{a_i}}.`$ (7)
The periods and dual periods follow from the usual expression in terms of integrals over the cycles $`A_k`$ and dual cycles $`B_k`$ as

$`a_i={\displaystyle _{A_k}}\lambda 𝑑xa_i^D={\displaystyle _{B_k}}\lambda 𝑑x\lambda ={\displaystyle \frac{dy}{y}}.`$ (8)
The cycles follow from the shape of the curve and the full set of cycles is not known without knowing the exact form of the curve. However, we can find a subset of cycles and find their corresponding periods’ contribution to the tree level prepotential. Additional cycles required to meet the constraints on R-parity and correct number of weights will give us additional contributions.

In order to carry out the integrals we need the branchcut structure of the curve. In its current form the curve have $`N`$ branchcuts and the branchpoints follow from the constraint that those are the common points of the two sheets $`y_+`$ and $`y_{}`$ where

$`y_\pm =\sqrt{A^2(x)L^2B(x)}.`$ (9)
For convenience we introduce the residue function

$`S(x)={\displaystyle \frac{B(x)}{A^2(x)}}S_k(x)=(xe_k)^2S(x).`$ (10)
In terms of this function the $`2N`$ branchpoints take the form

$`x_k^\pm =e_k\pm L\sqrt{S_k(e_k)}+\mathrm{}`$ (11)
and we chose to let the corresponding $`N`$ branchcuts to run between $`x_k^+`$ and $`x_k^{}`$. We also chose the cycles $`A_k`$ to surround $`x_k^+`$ and $`x_k^{}`$ on one sheet and the dual cycles $`B_k`$ to run from $`x_k^+`$ to $`x_k^{}`$ on one sheet and back on the other sheet. Note that there may be corrections at this order but since we will only be interested in tree level prepotential we only use the zeroth order term $`x_k^\pm =e_k`$ although we depend on the existence of a branch cut.

Standard integration gives the first orders of the periods as

$`a_k=e_k+{\displaystyle \frac{L^2}{4}}_kS_k+\mathrm{}`$ (12)
which may also have corrections at this order. We are, however, only keeping the lowest order. The interesting terms of the dual periods turns out to be

$`2{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e_ke_i)ln(e_ke_i){\displaystyle \underset{i<j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e_k+e_i+e_j)ln(e_k+e_i+e_j)`$ (13)
which should be compared to the derivative of the prepotential which is proportional to

$`2{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e_ke_i)ln(e_ke_i){\displaystyle \underset{i<j=1,i,jk}{\overset{N}{}}}(e_k+e_i+e_j)ln(e_k+e_i+e_j).`$ (14)
The difference is given by terms of the form $`(2e_k+e_i)ln(2e_k+e_i)`$ $`i=1,\mathrm{}N,ik`$ which must be corrected by a counterterm of opposite sign. It seems obvious to change the residue function into

$`S(x)={\displaystyle \frac{_{i<j=1}^N(x+e_i+e_j)}{_{i=1}^N(2x+e_i)_{i=1}^N(xe_i)^2}}`$ (15)
but this does not work for two reasons. It does not correspond to a hyperelliptic type of curve since the denominator is not a perfect square. Furthermore, as we will show below, there is no way to simultaneously get the correct R-parity and weight count using this form. Changing $`(2x+e_i)`$ into $`(2x+e_i)^2`$ gives a perfect square and may give correct R-parity but does not provide a correct weight count. There is a second possibility that satisfies the hyperelliptic curve demand namely

$`S(x)={\displaystyle \frac{_{i<j=1}^N(x+e_i+e_j)}{_{i=1}^N(x+e_i/2)^2_{i=1}^N(xe_i)^2}}.`$ (16)
Both these forms contribute additional terms to the logarithmic parts of the prepotential by

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(2e_k+e_i)ln(2e_k+e_i)`$ (17)
but they have distinct R-parity contributions. Furthermore, there is an over count in (17) by $`3e_klne_k`$ which is corrected for by multiplication by $`x^3`$. We hence suggest the form of the residue function

$`S(x)={\displaystyle \frac{x^3_{i<j=1}^N(x+e_i+e_j)}{_{i=1}^N(xe_i)^2_{i=1}^N(x+e_i/2)^2}}.`$ (18)
The R-parity of $`L^2S_k(x)`$ should be 2 since we anticipate this form to contribute to the 1-instanton correction of the prepotential. Using the R-parity of $`L^2`$ which is $`2N(N2)(N3)/2`$ we find the form above (18) to have the correct R-parity. Note that the first suggestion (15) would give R-parity of $`L^2S_k(x)`$ to be $`2+N3`$. We could have introduced an additional $`x^{3N}`$ to ensure the correct R-parity but this would ruin the weight count.

We now have a new form of curve with functions

$`A(x)={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(x+e_i/2){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(xe_i),B(x)=x^3{\displaystyle \underset{i<j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(x+e_i+e_j).`$ (19)
This suggestion has, however, a serious flaw. As can be seen from the branchpoints discussion above this set of functions (19) forces us to consider more branchcuts centred on $`x=e_i/2`$. This also means more cycles which will yield additional contributions to the prepotential. A closer study of the curve for the antisymmetric two tensor representation indicates a way out. If we multiply $`A(x)`$ by another factor of $`_{i=1}^N(x+e_i/2)`$ and $`B(x)`$ by $`_{i=1}^N(x+e_i/2)^2`$ then the ramification points where the two sheets coincide will not require branchcuts and hence there are no additional cycles. Furthermore, this does not change R-parity of the residue function $`S(x)`$.

The final form of the hyperelliptic approximation is thus

$`y^2+2A(x)y+L^2B(x)=0`$ $`\mathrm{where}`$ (20)
$`A(x)={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(x+e_i/2)^2{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(xe_i)`$ $`B(x)=x^3{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(x+e_i/2)^2{\displaystyle \underset{i<j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(x+e_i+e_j).`$
This curve gives the correct 1-loop prepotential for $`SU(N)`$ with matter in the totally antisymmetric three tensor representation. It is also clear that by introducing a mass $`m`$ for the matter representation in the usual way by taking $`xx+m`$ and $`e_ie_i+m`$ one may as usual integrate out $`m`$ yielding the correct pure Yang-Mills result.

Defining matter may be incorporated by multiplication of additional factors

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}(x+M_i)`$ (21)
to $`B(x)`$. Here $`N_f5`$ for $`N=6`$ and $`N_f3`$ for $`N=7`$ while $`N=8`$ does not allow for any defining matter.

We mentioned above the possibility to have another $`B(x)`$ with a wider range of indices e.g. $`ij=1,\mathrm{}N`$ or $`i,j=1,\mathrm{}N`$ instead of $`i<j=1,\mathrm{}N`$ as above. We have not been able to find a form of $`S(x)`$ that would yield the correct number of weights and at the same time respect R-parity restrictions for any other choice of range of indices.

We now proceed by predicting the one instanton contribution to the prepotential. Following the same line of reasoning as in  we give that the following form of the one instanton contribution

$`F_{1inst}={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(S_k(e_k)2\overline{S}_k(e_k/23m/2))`$ (22)
where

$`S(x)={\displaystyle \frac{(x+m)^3_{i<j=1}^N(x+e_i+e_j+3m)_{j=1}^{N_f}(x+M_j)}{_{i=1}^N(x+e_i/2+3m/2)^2_{i=1}^N(xe_i)^2}}`$ $`\mathrm{and}`$ (23)
$`S_k(x)(xe_k)^2S(x),\overline{S}_k(x)(x+e_k/2+3m/2)^2S(x).`$
This result has the following properties. It yields the correct pure Yang-Mills and defining flavour results in the double scaling limit $`m\mathrm{}`$ and $`L^2m^{3+n(n1)/22N}L_{new}^2`$ where $`L_{new}^2`$ is the new scale of the theory. Furtermore, it does not have any poles as $`e_k=e_l/23m/2`$ for some $`l\{1,\mathrm{}N\}`$, which is the fact for a sum over $`S_k(e_k)`$ only. The precence of the sum over $`\overline{S}_k(e_k)`$ guarantees that there are only poles in the appropriate places.

It is clear that this curve is not the full curve. It is expected to have subleading (contributions with $`L^2`$ or higher order) terms in $`A(x)`$ as was the case for the antisymmetric rank two tensor. Also, the curve itself is expected to have a higher degree. We hope to be able to present more details on those issues in the near future.


text:
# On the Kinetic Roughening in Polymer Film Growth by Vapor Deposition

\[

\]

In an interesting recent Letter , Zhao el al. report on an experimental investigation of kinetically rough polymeric (p-xylene) thin film growth using atomic force microscopy. The main experimental finding  is a measurement of the effective critical exponents $`\beta `$ (growth exponent), $`\alpha `$ (roughness exponent), $`z`$ (dynamical exponent), and $`\lambda `$ (slope exponent) characterizing kinetically rough surface growth in p-xylene. These exponents are obtained  from a statistical study of the height-height correlation function of the evolving growth front as a function of growth time (or, equivalently, the average film thickness). The standard dynamic scaling ansatz for kinetic surface roughening asserts that the root mean square surface width $`W(t)`$, the surface correlation length $`\xi (t)`$, and the average mound slope  $`M(t)`$ scale as $`W(t)t^\beta `$; $`\xi (t)t^{1/z}`$; $`M(t)t^\lambda `$ in the pre-stationary growth regime characterized by $`tL^z`$ (or equivalently $`\xi L`$) with the dynamical exponent $`z`$ given by $`z=\alpha /\beta `$. (An equivalent description follows from the height correlation function used in Ref. .) In Ref.  the measured exponent values are reported as $`\beta =0.25\pm 0.03`$; $`\alpha =0.72\pm 0.05`$; $`1/z=0.31\pm 0.02`$; $`\lambda =0.10.3`$. Although the exponents $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, and $`z`$ reported in Ref.  are completely consistent with the theoretical predictions  of Lai and Das Sarma (LD) for the conserved nonlinear MBE growth universality class, as was noted in Ref. , the authors of Ref.  claim that their observations indicate a novel universality class hitherto unknown in the literature. The basis for this claim is the measured non-zero value of the slope exponent $`\lambda `$ ($`0.10.3`$), whereas the LD theory , according to Ref. , “predicts stationary growth with a constant local slope” leading to $`\lambda =0`$.

In this Comment we point out that all the experimentally measured exponents ($`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`z`$, $`\lambda `$) in Ref.  are completely consistent with those of the discrete Das Sarma-Tamborenea (DT) limited mobility growth model  introduced as a minimal model for ideal molecular beam epitaxy. In particular, we show in Fig. 1 the measured DT exponents in 2+1 dimensions using standard stochastic DT simulations . It is clear that the DT exponents ($`\alpha 0.6`$; $`\beta 0.2`$; $`1/z0.3`$; $`\lambda 0.12`$) agree very well with those reported in Ref. . Our typical simulated DT growth morphology also agrees remarkably well with the experimental morphology in Ref. . Details on the 2+1 dimensional DT model simulations can be found in the literature . The important point we emphasize

in this Comment is that DT model produces  a mounded growth morphology with a finite local slope exponent ($`\lambda 0`$) during a very long-lived pre-asymptotic regime (even in the absence of any diffusion bias or Ehrlich-Schwoebel barrier) with its critical exponents ($`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`z`$) remaining consistent with LD universality precisely as observed in Ref. .

We conclude by stating that the fact that the experimental growth reported in Ref.  belongs to the DT universality class is not surprising because the DT model is a minimal diffusion-driven vapor deposition growth model. It is known  that the DT model asymptotically belong to the LD continuum universality class although there are very interesting non-asymptotic corrections such as the non-zero slope exponent  observed in Ref. . It will be very interesting to experimentally observe some of these non-asymptotic corrections  such as anomalous scaling and multifractality in the experimental system of Ref. .

This work is supported by the Maryland NSF-MRSEC.


text:
# Screening in Hot SU(2) Gauge Theory and Propagators in 3d Adjoint Higgs model

## Abstract

We investigate the large distance behavior of the electric and magnetic propagators of hot SU(2) gauge theory in different gauges using lattice simulations of the full 4d theory and the effective, dimensionally reduced 3d theory. A comparison of the 3d and 4d data for the propagators suggests that dimensional reduction works surprisingly well down to temperatures $`T2T_c`$. A detailed study of the volume dependence of magnetic propagators is performed. The electric propagators show exponential decay at large distances in all gauges considered and a possible gauge dependence of the electric screening mass turns out to be statistically insignificant.

The poles of the finite temperature gluon propagator can be related to screening of chromoelectric and chromomagnetic fields . The static chromoelectric (Debye) screening mass was calculated in leading order of perturbation theory long ago and was found to be gauge independent to this order . The existence of a static chromomagnetic screening mass generated non-perturbatively was postulated by Linde to render the perturbative expansion of different thermodynamic quantities finite . Beyond the leading order also the Debye screening mass is non-perturbative , i.e depends explicitly on the magnetic mass. Static electric and magnetic propagators and the corresponding screening masses were studied in SU(2) gauge theory in Landau gauge . In Ref.  it was shown that static propagators could be studied in the effective dimensionally reduced version of finite temperature SU(2) gauge theory, the 3d adjoint Higgs model. Here we will discuss the determination of the screening masses from propagators calculated in different gauges and their gauge dependence. Results calculated within full 4d SU(2) gauge theory as well as the effective 3d theory will be presented.

In four dimensions (4d) all our calculations are performed with the standard Wilson action for SU(2) lattice gauge theory. We will use the notation $`\beta _4=4/g_4^2`$ for the lattice gauge coupling. In three dimensions the standard dimensional reduction process leads us to consider the 3d adjoint Higgs model

$`S=\beta _3{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}U_P`$
$`\beta _3{\displaystyle \underset{𝐱,\widehat{\mu }}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}A_0(𝐱)U_\mu (𝐱)A_0(𝐱+\widehat{\mu })U_\mu ^{}(𝐱)+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\beta _3{\displaystyle \underset{𝐱}{}}\left[\left(6+h\right)\mathrm{Tr}A_0^2(𝐱)+x\left(\mathrm{Tr}A_0^2(𝐱)\right)^2\right],`$ (1)
where $`\beta _3`$ now is related to the dimensionfull $`3d`$ gauge coupling and the lattice spacing $`a`$, i.e. $`\beta _3=4/g_3^2a`$, and the adjoint Higgs field is parameterized by hermitian matrices $`A_0=_a\sigma ^aA_0^a`$ ($`\sigma ^a`$ are the usual Pauli matrices). Furthermore, $`x`$ parameterizes the quartic self coupling of the Higgs field and $`h`$ denotes the bare Higgs mass squared. We also note that the indices $`\mu ,\nu `$ run from 0 to 3 in four dimensions and from $`1`$ to $`3`$ in three dimensions.

As we want to analyze properties of the gluon propagator, which is a gauge dependent quantity, we have to fix a gauge on each configuration on which we want to calculate this observable. In the past most studies of the gluon propagator have been performed in Landau gauge. Here we will consider a class of $`\lambda `$-gauges introduced in Ref. . In the continuum these gauges correspond to the gauge condition

$$\lambda _0A_0+_iA_i=0.$$
(2)
Here the index $`i`$ runs from 1 to 3. The case $`\lambda =1`$ corresponds to the usual Landau gauge. In addition to the $`\lambda `$-gauges we also consider the Maximally Abelian gauge (MAG) . In this case one has to fix a residual gauge degree of freedom which we do by imposing an additional U(1)-Landau gauge condition . In the 4d SU(2) gauge theory we also consider the static time averaged Landau gauge (STALG) introduced in Ref.. In continuum it is defined by

$$_0A_0(x_0,𝐱)=0,\underset{x_0}{}\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}_iA_i=0.$$
(3)
While the notion of Landau and Maximally Abelian gauges carries over easily to the 3d case we have to specify our notion of $`\lambda `$-gauges in $`3d`$. We have considered two versions of $`\lambda `$-gauge,

$$_1A_1+_2A_2+\lambda _3_3A_3=0,$$
(4)
$$\lambda _1_1A_1+_2A_2+_3A_3=0,$$
(5)
which we will refer to as $`\lambda _1`$-gauge and $`\lambda _3`$-gauge correspondingly. Furthermore, we consider in 3d the Coulomb gauge, which fixes the gauge in a plane transverse to the $`z`$-direction, $`_1A_1+_2A_2=0`$. The residual gauge freedom is fixed by demanding that $`_{x,y}U_3(𝐱)=u_{30}`$ should be constant.

All our 4d simulations have been performed at temperature $`T=2T_c`$. The values for the 4d coupling $`\beta _4`$ corresponding to this temperature were taken from Ref. , $`\beta _4=2.52`$ for $`N_t=4`$ and $`\beta _4=2.74`$ for $`N_t=8`$. The 3d adjoint Higgs model simulations were done for three sets of parameters, $`\beta _3=11`$, $`x=0.099`$, $`h=0.395`$ corresponding to $`T=2T_c`$, and $`\beta _3=16`$, $`x=0.03`$, $`h=0.2085`$ as well as $`\beta _3=24`$, $`x=0.03`$, $`h=0.1510`$ which correspond to $`T9200T_c`$. For the 3d gauge coupling $`g_3^3`$ we always use the 1-loop relation $`g_3^2=g^2(T)T`$ with $`g(T)`$ being the 4d 1-loop running coupling constant in $`\overline{MS}`$-scheme with $`\overline{\mu }=18.86T`$ . The detailed procedure for fixing the parameters of the 3d effective theory is described in Ref. .

We note that for static fields the gauge condition for 4d $`\lambda `$ -gauges, $`\lambda _0A_0+_iA_i=0`$ is equivalent to 3d Landau gauge. The same is true for STALG. One would expect that if dimensional reduction works, propagators calculated in different $`\lambda `$ -gauges and STALG agree with each other, and of course, with the propagators calculated in the 3d effective theory in Landau gauge. A comparison of the corresponding data in 4d SU(2) gauge theory and the 3d effective theory shows that this is indeed the case. Furthermore, we have compared the electric and magnetic propagators calculated in 4d SU(2) gauge theory and 3d effective theory in MAG. Good agreement between 3d and 4d data was found also here.

Previous lattice calculations of the magnetic propagator in hot SU(2) gauge theory in 4d  and in the 3d adjoint Higgs model  gave evidence for its exponential decay in coordinate space and thus suggested the existence of a magnetic mass. In was also found that the magnetic propagators calculated in the 3d adjoint Higgs model are quite insensitive to the scalar couplings and are quite close to the corresponding propagators of 3d pure gauge theory. In Ref.  the Landau gauge gluon propagator of 3d gauge theory was studied in momentum space and was found to be infrared suppressed for large volumes. Such a behavior clearly rules out the existence of a simple pole mass. To clarify the picture of magnetic screening a detailed study of finite size effects is necessary. In what follows we will mainly concentrate on a discussion of the magnetic propagators in the limit of the 3d pure gauge theory. Where appropriate, comparison with the results from 4d SU(2) gauge theory will be made. In Figure 1a we show the magnetic propagators in coordinate space on different volumes at $`T=2T_c`$. Calculations were done in 4d SU(2) gauge theory at $`\beta _4=2.52,2.74`$ and in 3d pure gauge theory at $`\beta _3=8`$. On small volumes the propagator indeed shows exponential decay but it continues to drop faster as the volume increases. For volumes $`VT^3>330`$ we have clear evidence that the propagators become negative at $`zT>2`$. A similar strong volume dependence was observed in other $`\lambda `$-gauges and also in Coulomb gauge.

Because of the strong volume dependence of the magnetic propagators in $`\lambda `$-gauges simulations on large lattices are necessary to get control over finite size effects. We have analyzed the magnetic propagators in Landau gauge in the 3d pure gauge theory for $`\beta _3=5`$ and on lattices of size $`L^3`$ with $`L=32,40,48,56,64,72`$ and $`96`$. In what follows all dimensionfull quantities will be scaled by appropriate powers of the 3d gauge coupling $`g_3`$. Using the relation of $`g_3`$ to the renormalized 4d gauge coupling (see above) it is straightforward to express dimensionfull quantities in units of $`T`$. The magnetic propagators at $`\beta _3=5`$ and for different volumes are shown in Figure 1b and Figure 1c. As one can see from the figure the volume dependence of the coordinate space propagator is small on these large lattices. The propagator becomes negative for $`zg_3^2>4`$.

The strong volume dependence translates into infrared sensivity of the momentum space propagators. For $`p/g_3^2<0.3`$ the momentum space propagator is sensitive to the volume, while for large momenta ($`p/g_3^2>0.3`$) it is essentially independent of the lattice size. Moreover, we note that for small momenta the finite volume effects lead to a decrease of $`\stackrel{~}{D}(p)`$ with increasing volume while the volume dependence is already negligible for $`p/g_3^20.3`$. Thus the magnetic propagators in Landau gauge are infrared suppressed. The propagators in other $`\lambda `$-gauges show similar behavior. Let us note that the infrared suppression of the Landau gauge propagator was observed also $`T=0`$ 4d SU(N) gauge theory .

In contrast to the complicated structure found in Landau gauge the propagator calculated in MAG does show a simple exponential decay at large distances and does not show any significant volume dependence. We find for the magnetic screening mass in MAG $`m_M=0.50(5)g_3^2`$.

Contrary to the magnetic propagators the electric propagators show little volume dependence and decay exponentially in all gauges considered. We have investigated in detail the gauge dependence of the electric propagators in the 3d effective theory at temperature $`T9200T_c`$. The results are summarized in Figure 2. As one can see from this figure any possible gauge dependence of the local electric masses in the region where they reach a plateau is statistically insignificant.

Acknowledgments: The work has been supported by the TMR network ERBFMRX-CT-970122 and by the DFG under grant Ka 1198/4-1. The numerical calculations have partly been performed at the HLRS in Stuttgart and the $`(PC)^2`$ in Paderborn.