format: text

text:
# Deuterated Ammonia in Galactic Protostellar Cores

## 1 Introduction

Deuterium in molecules is enhanced above the cosmological $`[\mathrm{D}]/[\mathrm{H}]`$ value of $`1.6_{0.19}^{+0.14}\times 10^5`$ (Linsky et al., 1995) by several orders of magnitude in the cold environs of the interstellar medium (ISM). Two theoretical pathways can account for the abundance of these deuterated molecules. Deuterium binds more strongly in molecules than do less massive hydrogen atoms, especially at low temperatures, in gas–phase reactions between parent species and e.g. $`\mathrm{H}_3^+`$ and $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{D}^+`$ (Dalgarno & Lepp, 1984; Watson, 1974) and other similar molecular ions in dense ($`n>10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$) gas. The qualitative understanding that reactions specifically with $`\mathrm{H}_3^+`$ and $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{D}^+`$ have been enhanced by recent detections (Geballe & Oka, 1996; Stark, et al., 1999). Their abundances are consistent with requirements of gas–phase ion–molecule chemistry predictions of most species, including deuterium isotopes. Reactions on grains will also contribute to deuterium enhancements. Deuteration has a smaller activation energy than does hydrogenation on grain surfaces. Additionally the more massive deuterium will desorb less quickly from grain surfaces than hydrogen, increasing the interaction time for potential grain–induced deuteration (Tielens, 1983). Such predictions are considered important for the high fractionation ($`10^2`$) observed for $`\mathrm{HDCO}/\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ (Loren & Wootten, 1985), $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ (Walmsley et al., 1987), and $`\mathrm{CH}_3\mathrm{OD}/\mathrm{CH}_3\mathrm{OH}`$ (Mauersberger et al., 1988) towards the hot core Orion-KL. In such regions, high temperatures quench the ion–molecule deuterium fractionation reactions by rapid destruction of $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{D}^+`$ and faster reactions (lower energy barriers) for more abundant species. High observed deuterium fractions towards these sources provide a chemical “fingerprint” of the physical conditions in the pre–protostellar gas. Comparisons of deuterated molecules to their more abundant isotopes may, then, provide meaningful insight into the evolution of the ISM.

Deuterated ammonia, $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$, is a useful probe of protostellar sources because (1) it can be easily compared to $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$, a well–used tracer of temperature and dense gas condesations in the ISM; (2) it possesses easily observable millimeter transitions; (3) it has hyperfine components that can be easily resolved and used to estimate column density; and (4) its abundance can be compared with chemical models which predict variations with temperature, density and evolutionary state. $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ was first observed by Turner et al. (1978) in Sgr B2 and Rodriguez–Kuiper et al. (1978) in Orion KL. These observations of hot core regions yielded ammonia deuterium fractionation levels, $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$, of order a few times $`10^3`$, significantly higher than the local ISM $`[\mathrm{D}]/[\mathrm{H}]`$ value of $`1.6\times 10^5`$. Walmsley et al. (1987) suggested that longer time-scales for deuterium interaction on grain surfaces (versus that of lighter hydrogen atoms) can generate larger deuterated molecular abundances. The high temperatures in these cores sublimate or photo-evaporate grain mantles, providing the high observed $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ levels. Olberg et al. (1985) investigated this phenomenon in the colder, less evolved sources L183 and towards the $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ column density peak in TMC1, TMC1 $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$, where low temperatures minimize any surface contributions and gas–phase chemistry dominates molecule formation. They found $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$(L183)=0.05, but only an upper limit towards TMC1 $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$. Tiné et al. (2000) revisit the difference in ammonia fractionation for L183 and TMC1. They find $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ detections towards both sources, with L183 ($`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_30.1`$) having 5 times the ammonia fractionation level of TMC1 ($`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3=0.02`$). Their gas–phase network based on the reaction rates of Millar et al. (1991) sufficiently explains the abundances and fractionation of ammonia. Saito et al. (2000) invoke grain processes to differentiate star–filled and star–less ammonia cores with and without $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ detections, respectively. They made this conclusion despite the fact that Saito et al. (2000) measured the strong fractionation towards L183, with a value similar to ours and Tine et al. L183 is a well known starless core which lacks any source of radiation to sublimate grains. Some of the discrepancy in the interpretation of the origin of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ may result from the source samples. The listed studies have concentrated on either too few sources or sources over a small range in physical conditions.

We present in this paper an experiment to address the deuterium enhancements of ammonia, $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$, towards dark cores and Class 0 sources. The former are often termed “pre–protosteller” since most do not possess strong continuum detectable by instruments such as IRAS. In such environs, ion–molecule chemistry fractionates neutrals and ions such as ammonia and $`\mathrm{HCO}^+`$ (Wootten, 1987) and dominates surface deuteratated components desorbed back into the ISM. Most of the grain ice mantles remain frozen since the ambient temperatures are significantly less than 90 K, the sublimation temperature of the major ice constituent, $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{O}`$. Class 0 sources are cold dense cores with spectral energy distributions (SEDs) peaked in the sub-millimeter ($`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{D}2050`$ K) and highly collimated outflows (André, Ward-Thompson, & Barsony, 1993). Blake et al. (1995) showed that Class 0 sources such as IRAS4 contain a large number of hydrogenated species and long–chain molecules that can only be produced by grain catalyzation. Thus, Class 0 sources represent an ideal location for separating gas–phase effects from grain chemistry. The $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ ratio of these sources will reflect what, if any, additional deuteration has occured on the grains.

Our observations of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ also reveal that four (and possibly six) sources possess asymmetric line profiles. One does not expect to see such complex line profiles from relatively low abundance (and, therefore, low optical depth) species such as $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$. Line–of–sight self–absorption or kinematic effects (e.g. multiple cores within the telescope beam) can account for such a line profile. In this work, we assert that gas–phase chemistry adequately accounts for observed deuterium enhancements in ammonia. We present a radiative transfer analysis using (multi-layer) microturbulent models in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3, and discuss how ion–molecule reactions can, in fact, effectively explain the observations, including self–absorbed profiles in section $`\mathrm{\S }`$5. We discuss our main conclusions in section $`\mathrm{\S }`$6.

## 2 Observations

#### 2.0.1 The $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ molecule

$`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ is a slightly asymmetric top molecule whose rotational levels are split by inversion doubling, as in its more well studied symmetric isotopomer, $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$, but the asymmetry mixes the rotation and inversion. The primary dipole moment, $`\stackrel{}{\mu _c}=1.4652`$ D, induces rotation–inversion transitions which are in turn split by the 14N nuclear quadrupole moment into five hyperfine components (Bester et al., 1983). The inversion–split $`1_{01}`$ and $`1_{11}`$ levels, corresponding to the $`\mu _c`$ dipole moment, produce a symmetric and anti–symmetric transition, one at 85.926263 GHz (ortho–$`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$; $`v=01`$) and the other at 110.153599 GHz (para–$`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$; $`v=10`$) (see Table 1). The relative nuclear statistical weights taken from Bester et al. (1983) favor the para–$`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ transition by a factor of 3. As in ammonia, one can compute the optical depths and column densities using ratios of the hyperfine transitions (Mangum, Wootten, & Mundy, 1992; Ho & Townes, 1983). A weaker dipole moment, $`\stackrel{}{\mu _a}=0.1848`$ D, produces pure rotational transitions within a given inversion level. It is responsible for the ground state transitions, $`J=1_{01}0_{00}`$ levels at 332.82251 GHz ($`v=0`$) and 332.78189 GHz ($`v=1`$).

### 2.1 NRAO 12–meter Observations

We observed the 85.93GHz $`J_{K_1K_1}=1_{11}^a1_{01}^s`$ and 110.15 GHz $`J_{K_1K_1}=1_{11}^s1_{01}^a`$ rotation–inversion transitions of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ using the NRAO 12 meter111The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is operated by Associated Universities, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation. telescope at Kitt Peak, Arizona (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The data are from several epochs, mostly dating from 1987 September, but a fair portion from 1997 September, using both the filter banks and the hybrid digital spectrometer. The recent data set was observed with a two–channel SIS junction receiver tuned to receive signals in a single side–band. Each channel measured orthogonal linear polarizations. We utilized two banks of filters, 100 kHz and 250 kHz, each consisting of 256 channels, resulting in 0.27 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$and 0.68 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$per channel resolution. We used the hybrid spectrometer in the two–IF mode with 12.5 MHz bandwidth and 512 channels per IF, resulting in a spectral resolution of 24.4 kHz or 0.131$`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$; both linear polarizations were averaged. All data were obtained in frequency switched mode, at a switching interval of 2.5 MHz. The excellent quality of the high resolution data from the hybrid spectrometer motivated us to use it exclusively for our analysis presented here. Filter bank data were generally used to diagnose any systematic problems.

Sky dip measurements indicated zenith opacities of 0.01 to 0.4 when few clouds were apparent. The system temperatures varied between 180 and 300 K for all observations reported here. Calibration was achieved by the synchronous detection of an ambient temperature absorber and the sky. The observed line intensities were corrected for forward scattering and spillover efficiency $`\eta _{fss}=0.68`$ to place the data on a T$`{}_{}{}^{}{}_{R}{}^{}`$ scale. Column density calculations require an additional main beam brightness correction of $`\eta _m^{}=0.95`$. The beamsize of the 12m at 86 GHz is 90″, and 70″ at 110 GHz. Regular pointing checks performed with planets indicated a positional accuracy better than 5″.

### 2.2 CSO Observations of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$

We also report on the detection of the fundamental transition of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$, $`J=1_{01}0_{00}`$, at 332.782 GHz (Ortho) and 332.822 GHz (Para), towards the dense core L1689N with the Caltech Submillimeter Observatory (CSO). The data were observed in orthogonal linear polarizations. The 1024–channel 50MHz acousto–optical spectrometers were used. The data were position switched with 30′ east or west offsets. The beamwidth at 333 GHz is $`20\mathrm{}`$ and the main beam efficiency, determined from planet observations, is 67% at 345 GHz.

### 2.3 NRAO 140–foot Observations

Observations of the ammonia transitions were made during 1998 June at the 43m telescope of the NRAO in Green Bank, West Virginia (Figure 5). The $`(J,K)=(1,1)`$ (23.694506 GHz) and $`(J,K)=(2,2)`$ (23.722634 GHz) transitions were observed to sensitive limits in all of our sources. All of the data were observed in orthogonal linear polarizations. The 1024 channel Mark IV autocorrelator gave a spectral resolution of 0.25 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ per channel. The data were frequency switched at an interval of 2.5 MHz. The variation of gain with elevation was reduced by use of the lateral focusing stage. The beamwidth at 23.7 GHz is $`1\mathrm{}`$ and the beam efficiency is 30%. This beam width is similar to that of the 12–meter observations. Thus, differential beam dilution is not considered when comparing the $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ column densities, assuming that both isotopes emit from similar volumes of gas. Line intensities are measured in units of TR\*. The forward scattering and spillover efficiency, $`\eta _{\mathrm{fss}}`$, is 0.63 (Loren, Evans, and Knapp 1979).

## 3 Results

### 3.1 $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ and $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$

We determined column densities for both $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ and $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ using a microturbulent radiative transfer model. We utilize $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ as a measure of source physical conditions. This explictly assumes that $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ and ammonia overlap. In general, $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ is excited in more dense regions than $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$. Thus, temperature estimates from both species may not be cospatial in a given source. With this caveat in mind, we discuss below how physical conditions were determined.

#### 3.1.1 Estimates of Source Physical Conditions

Chemical models predict significant variations of molecular abundances with density, temperature, and evolutionary state of the cloud. We model the temperature and density structure of each source using $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ observations and formaldehyde observations from Wootten et al. (2001). For clarity we discuss some issues involved with $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ radiative transfer modeling below. $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$, an asymmetric rotor molecule, is an important probe of molecular cloud physical conditions because of:

* a large number of transitions closely spaced in frequency but well separated in energy, possessing a coupled sensitivity to kinetic temperature and volume density when measured through appropriately chosen line ratios.
* a large, uniform, and ubiquitous abundance in the ISM (Mangum, Wooten, Wadiak & Loren, 1990).
* multiple transitions through only a few receiving systems, minimizing calibration uncertainties.

One must compare the various transitions to determine if an isothermal, iso–density cloud model or one with more elaborate physical conditions is necessary to reproduce the observed $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ transitions.

Several steps are needed to determine basic physical parameters for the sources. The ratio of the $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ (2,2) and (1,1) measurements provides lower limits to the temperature of the cold, extended envelopes of each source. We use published data with similar resolution to supplement some of our (2,2) data with poor signal–to–noise (see column 7 of Table 3). Next, we use the formaldehyde data which provides sensitivity to the density and the presence of any warm gas. A comparison of many $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ line ratios using a Large Velocity Gradient model provides initial estimates for both density and temperature (Mangum & Wootten, 1993). Using these initial estimates, we then employ a more robust microturbulent radiative transfer model (one in which the size scale of velocity turbulence is small when compared to the photon mean–free path) to iteratively calculate the line intensities of the lower opacity para–formaldehyde species and obtain the best fit temperature and density model which reproduces the observed brightness temperatures. In some regions, multiple layers must contribute to the observed spectrum.

In general, low excitation transitions of $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ (e.g. $`J_{K_1K_1}=1_{01}1_{00}`$ are compared to estimate the temperature and density in the cold region. Alternatively, a relatively warmer region tends to produce emission from higher energy transitions (e.g. $`J_{K_1K_1}=5_{05}4_{04}`$). For example, towards IRAS4A, Wootten et al. (2001) find both low excitation ($`T_R^{}𝑑V[J_{K_1K_1}=1_{01}1_{00}]=4.21\pm 0.09`$ K $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) and high excitation ($`T_R^{}𝑑V[J_{K_1K_1}=5_{05}4_{04}]=3.63\pm 0.15`$ K $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) lines of $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$, indicating that a layer of high density, warm gas coexists with colder, low density gas.

We use these values for n and T as input parameters into a microturbulent model for $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$. The partition function is determined over all energy levels in order to eliminate errors due to high temperature approximations. With the size of the region set by our beam, we essentially have one free parameter, the column density, to predict the integrated intensities. We match the intensities and line profiles of all of the hyperfine components of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ along with estimates of the optical depth from the following equation:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{B}(\mathrm{m})}{\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{B}(\mathrm{s})}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1exp[\tau (m)]}{1exp[a\tau (m)]}}`$ (1)
to determine the best fit column density. In equation 1 $`m`$ and $`s`$ stand for main and satellite hyperfine lines, respectively; $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{B}`$ is the observed brightness temperature; $`\tau `$ is the optical depth; and $`a`$ is the ratio of the satellite to main hyperfine intensities. We list all results in Tables 3 and 5 for the deutero–ammonia and ammonia column densities. $`5\sigma `$ upper limits for the line intensities and column densities are listed in Table 4. In Tables 6 & 7 we list the ammonia fractionation for single–temperature and multiple–layer models, respectively.

The quality of our $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ data was not sufficient for reasonable comparison with our $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ in all cases. In general, not all of the hyperfine components were obtained in one spectrum because of hardware errors in the velocity offsets. This required us to carefully compare all column density estimates based on only a subset of the ammonia hyperfine components, with data of similar spatial and spectral resolution found in the literature. We list all references for ammonia data in Table 5. In all cases we find good agreement between our own $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ column density estimates and those available in the literature. This lends confidence to our estimates of ammonia deuterium fractionation.

#### 3.1.2 Para–to–Ortho Ratio for $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$.

In Table 8 we list the Ortho–to–Para ratio for the 86 and 110 GHz transitions of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ for eight sources. If one compares the statistical weights, the 110 GHz line strength is three times weaker than the 86 GHz transition. Different excitation conditions may vary this ratio slightly. Direct comparison of the integrated line strengths indicated that the ratio $`T_\mathrm{R}^{}𝑑v[86GHz]/T_\mathrm{R}^{}𝑑v[110GHz]`$ is consistent with 3 for all sources we observed in both lines. We also determine the column density of ortho–$`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ for comparison to para–$`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$. Again, we find that the ratios of the column densities in the upper levels of both transitions are consistent with three.

### 3.2 Self–absorption

We find asymmetric spectral features indicative of an inwardly increasing temperature gradient in low–mass protostars in the 86 GHz NH2D transitions towards NGC 1333 IRAS4A, L1448C, S68 FIRS1, and possibly in NGC 1333 IRAS4C and S68N. Very high resolution profiles show similar spectral signatures in $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$, $`\mathrm{N}_2\mathrm{H}^+`$, $`\mathrm{HCO}^+`$, and CS (Mardones et al. 1997; Gregersen et al. 1997). Line asymmetries or skewness were computed using the following dimensionless quantity:

$`Skewness`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{T}(\mathrm{V}\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{LSR}})^3\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{V}/(\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{T}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{V})\times `$
$`=`$ $`\left\{(\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{T}(\mathrm{V}\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{LSR}})^2\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{V})/(\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{T}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{V})\right\}^{3/2}`$
Here, we take a weighted sum over each of the hyperfine components to obtain an average skew of the entire $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ line profile. For a line that possesses most of its emission at velocities less than the source’s systemic velocity (“blue-ward” asymmetric), the skewness is negative; it is positive for a similar “red-ward” asymmetry. We list our calculations for those sources with significantly asymmetric line profiles in Table 10. This method indicates that IRAS4A and L1448C possess the largest blue asymmetry. The $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ spectra of IRAS4C and S68N show strong blue-ward behavior as well. The relative uncertainty in the S68 FIRS1 data makes quantifying an asymmetry difficult. No sources show significant ($`\stackrel{>}{}1\sigma `$) red-ward asymmetries.

## 4 Deuterium Chemistry and Ammonia

Gas-phase synthesis of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ is strongly supported by observational evidence for $`\mathrm{H}_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ (McCall et al., 1998; Geballe & Oka, 1996) and $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{D}^+`$ (Stark, et al., 1999) ion–molecule chemistry model predictions, and limits to desorption mechanisms in the molecular gas towards our observed sources. We discuss grain desorption mechanisms in $`\mathrm{\S }`$5. For clarity, we briefly discuss the general ion–molecule chemistry responsible for $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ production. We use the detailed models of Roberts & Millar (2000) and Turner (2001) to compare our data to in $`\mathrm{\S }`$5. We refer the reader to those sources for a more extensive discussion. Using the most current set of reaction rates from the UMIST database (Millar, Farquhar & Willacy, 1997), Roberts & Millar (2000) determined the most important chains for the deuterium injection into the ammonia production process. The three general schemes considered in the literature are:

$`\mathrm{H}_2+\mathrm{N}^+`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{NH}^++\mathrm{H}`$ (3)
$`\mathrm{H}_2^++\mathrm{N}`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{NH}^++\mathrm{H}`$ (4)
$`\mathrm{H}_3^++\mathrm{N}`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{NH}_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}+\mathrm{H}`$ (5)
Reaction 3 is often rejected for $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ production because experiments performed at very low temperatures indicate a reaction endothermicity of 85K (Marquette et al., 1985) for thermal conditions. The corresponding reaction with HD, on the other had, has an endothermicity of 16K. This reaction also has the problem that $`\mathrm{N}^+`$ is not very abundant. Herbst, Defrees, & McLean (1987) suggests that a nonthermal formation mechanism, where $`\mathrm{N}^+`$ obtains additional translational energy in the reaction

$`\mathrm{N}_2+\mathrm{He}^+`$ $``$ $`(\mathrm{N}^+)^{}+\mathrm{N}+\mathrm{He}`$ (6)
can provide the necessary abundance of $`\mathrm{N}^+`$ for equation 3. A standard set of laboratory-determined reaction rates have not been determined. The range of rates lead to a factor of 10-100 variation in predicted ammonia abundances. Reaction 4 works well only for the formation of $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$, since the deuterium equivalent has an energy barrier and limited abundance of $`\mathrm{HD}^+`$. Reaction 5 has received much recent debate since its rate was remeasured by Scott et al. (1997) to be sufficient for ammonia (and, assuming the same rate, $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$) production. However, this contradicted earlier theoretical work which indicated that double–proton transfer was too inefficient (Huntress, 1977), even if favored at cold temperatures. A more recent measurement for the rate of equation 5 indicates that the result of Scott et al. (1997) was erroneous. The authors no longer consider it a viable channel for ammonia production.

## 5 Discussion

### 5.1 Comparisons with gas–phase model predictions of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$.

We plot in Figure 7 the ammonia fractionation as a function of source temperature listed in Table 9. Observed values rise to $`20`$ K; sources warmer than this have a flat $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ ratio. The range of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ for massive hot cores is included as an arrow on the right side of the plot. We include curves (dashed–lines) based on the calculations of Roberts & Millar (2000) that bracket a range of values for $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$. These model points are for steady–state models at densities of $`10^4`$ and $`10^5\mathrm{cm}^3`$. The initial conditions of their models include a cosmic D/H and HD/$`\mathrm{H}_2`$ ratio of $`1.6\times 10^5`$ (Linsky et al., 1995), a C/O ratio of 0.4, and a cosmic ray ionization rate of $`1.3\times 10^{17}\mathrm{s}^1`$. The range of model values plotted in Figure 7 includes a depletion of C, N, and O abundances by factors of 3 and 6. Larger depletions and densities lead to higher $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ values.

The observational result suggests that Class 0 and dark core sources have $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ values set by the earlier conditions of the parent cloud. Thus, we observe the “fossil remnants” of gas–phase chemistry when we study $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ towards these sources. The theoretical predictions of Roberts & Millar (2000), however, appear to conflict with the observed values, even for the coldest sources whose formaldehyde models consist of single, isothermal zones. The time–dependence of ammonia fractionation suggests a way to resolve this discrepancy. Roberts & Millar (2000) indicate that $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ values of $`0.1`$ are reached very quickly within a few $`\times 10^3`$ yrs, for isothermal 10 K sources at moderate densities of $`10^4\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and persists for roughly $`10^{5.5}`$ yrs. In a pure gas–phase model, this decreases to $`10^2`$ after $`10^{5.5}`$ yrs, while for a model that includes active grain accretion the fractionation rises above $`10^1`$. This suggests that all of the sources except one (TMC1-CY) are at least $`10^4`$ yrs old. However, such age estimates are unconstrained. Additional deuterium fractionation ratios and abundances are necessary in order to fully test the validity of such a “chemical chronometer”. One example that may help calibrate such a clock is recent modeling of CO depletion towards L1544 by (Caselli et al., 1999). Their dynamical and chemical modeling of CO, $`\mathrm{H}^{13}\mathrm{CO}^+`$, and $`\mathrm{D}^{13}\mathrm{CO}^+`$ line profiles suggests an age of at least $`10^4`$ years. They derive a $`\mathrm{DCO}^+`$/$`\mathrm{HCO}^+`$ ratio of $`0.12\pm 0.02`$. We find $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3=0.13\pm 0.02`$ towards L1544 which, according to the model of Roberts & Millar (2000), is consistent with the age derived by (Caselli et al., 1999).

The two primary Taurus positions, TMC1-CY and TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ offers a relative comparison of age estimates derived from deuterium fractionation ratios. Pratap et al. (1997) mapped the spatial distribution of 34 transitions of 14 molecules towards the Taurus Molecular Cloud ridge, which includes these sources. They argue that variations in the emission from carbon–bearing and other molecules result from both density and abundance variations. Pratap et al. (1997) find especially striking abundance gradients for SO, $`\mathrm{HC}_3\mathrm{N}`$, and $`\mathrm{CH}_3\mathrm{CCH}`$, which they explain with a small difference in the chemical evolution time-scale between the northeast and southwest ends of the cloud, or by a small change in the gas–phase C/O ratio. Both possibilities effectively reduce the carbon abundance, which would explain the lower abundances of cyanopolyyenes in the northern regions near the ammonia peak. Comparisons of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$, $`\mathrm{DCO}^+/\mathrm{HCO}^+`$, $`\mathrm{DCN}/\mathrm{HCN}`$, and $`\mathrm{N}_2\mathrm{D}^+/\mathrm{N}_2\mathrm{H}^+`$ with the chemical model of Roberts & Millar (2000) satisfies both of these requirements. However, the age difference is preferred since both $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\mathrm{N}_2\mathrm{H}^+`$ are considered to be largely derived from $`\mathrm{N}_2`$. Molecular nitrogen is among the least reactive of neutral species in the ISM, making it likely to be abundant in the dense gas found in the more advanced stages of protostellar evolution.

Two recent studies of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ by Tiné et al. (2000) and Saito et al. (2000) support and contradict, respectively, our conclusion that gas–phase chemistry is responsible for the ammonia deuterium ratios of L183 and TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$. Tiné et al. (2000) compare their observations with a simple–gas phase network based on the reaction rates of Millar et al. (1991). They successfully reproduce their observed abundances and deuterium fractionation ratios. Saito et al. (2000) on the other hand, compare $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ data for several ammonia cores. They invoke grain synthesis of deuterated species even for their cold, star-less sources such as L183. Tiné et al. (2000) observed L134N (1′ NW of L183) and TMC1-N (equivalent to TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$). They experienced some ambiguity in modeling the spectra with an LVG code and relied instead on LTE values for determining $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ column densities, analysis, and fractionation: $`\mathrm{N}(\mathrm{L134N})=2\times 10^{14}`$ and $`\mathrm{N}(\mathrm{TMC1}\mathrm{N})=1.3\times 10^{13}`$; $`\mathrm{X}(\mathrm{L134N})=1.5\times 10^9`$ and $`\mathrm{X}(\mathrm{TMC1}\mathrm{N})=1.2\times 10^{10}`$; $`(\mathrm{L134N})=0.18`$ and $`(\mathrm{TMC1}\mathrm{N})=0.02`$.

We find N($`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$) equal to $`3\times 10^{13}`$ and $`1\times 10^{13}`$ $`\mathrm{cm}^2`$, one and zero orders of mag different for L183 and TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$. However, we have beam dilution between effects between our 12 m observations and the 30 m survey of Tiné et al. (2000) and different positions, for L183. Our abundances, columns and fractionations for TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ are fairly similar. Tiné et al. (2000) are able to reproduce their observations with extensive gas–phase modeling of the ammonia chemistry, with a few important caveats. Moderate to significant (factors of a few to 10) depletion of carbon and oxygen (i.e. removal of neutral and atomic destroyers, and reduction of $`X_e^{}`$) will help achieve the high abundances and fractionations (0.02 and 0.1 for L134N and TMC1–N, respectively). Our results for TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ and L183 are similar, though we find a factor of two smaller deuterium fractionation towards L183. Additionally, we have been able to extend our analysis to other dark cores, which also indicates that gas–phase chemistry is most important. This suggests that grain processes are unimportant for these low mass cores, at least for ammonia formation and deuterium fractionation.

The results of Saito et al. (2000) are discrepant with our view that gas–phase synthesis dominates the formation of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$. They studied $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ for 16 ammonia cores from the Benson & Myers (1983) list and found that mostly those with IRAS detections show elevated or observable $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ abundances and $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ fractionation. Furthermore, they find larger abundances than expected from gas–phase networks for the kinetic temperatures of 4 sources. They concluded that ammonia is formed and deuterated on grains. Several problems exist with their analysis. First, a notable exception to their conclusions regarding grain–chemistry formation of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ is L183, where they find abundances and fractionations similar to our own. Second, they use an LTE estimate of the excitation of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$, which tends to over-predict the column density. This is because in an LTE scenario, one requires a larger abundance (column density or optical depth of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$) to achieve the same line intensities than for non-LTE methods. Third and last, they did not integrate enough on all of their sources, since TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ has a clear detection by us and by Tiné et al. (2000). Thus, it is also possible that for their dark cores without infrared sources, the column density of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ may be below the detection limit of their survey.

Observational and theoretical comparison of L183 and TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ provide important benchmarks for gas–phase synthesis of molecules (Swade, 1987). L183 and TMC1–$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ possess similar values of $`n`$, $`T`$, and size, but display very different chemical characteristics. Most chemical and dynamical models of L183 have concentrated on the dearth of cyanopolyyenes and abundance of sulferetted molecules. Deuterium fraction may provide additional constraints. Ammonia fractionation is larger by a factor of two in L183 when compared to TMC1–$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$. Different initial abundances between L183 and TMC1 have generally been ruled out by their relative isolation and similar galactocentric distance. TMC1–$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ should, as a whole, be older than L183 based on time–evolution models of hydrocarbons; however the same cannot be said for sulphur, which is observed to have lower abundances in TMC1 resulting in the conclusion that L183 is older. Swade (1987) points out that the conflicting chemical histories of L183 and TMC1–$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ can be rectified in terms of larger depletions in TMC1. In order to achieve this, one requires a larger molecular hydrogen volume density, which in cold gas leads to more easily depleted material. The slightly lower abundance of ammonia (which we observe) is consistent with a larger depletion in TMC1–$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$.

### 5.2 Sources with warm gas and more complex structure

Our $`\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ modeling indicates that several sources (L1448IRS3, NGC 1333 IRAS4A, NGC 1333 IRAS2, NGC 1333 IRAS7, S68 FIRS1, and S68N) are well fitted with two distinct layers with different densities and temperatures. We do not know for a certainty where all of the $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ is located. The reason for this discrepancy is the inherent ambiguity in our source models. We are able to arbitrarily place the ammonia in either the warm or cold zones, and still successfully reproduce the observed integrated intensity. Therefore, we know only what the total column density and column density ratios are towards these sources. The lack of knowledge about the grain contributions to the observed deuterium fractionation makes an accurate census difficult. However, similarity between column density ratios among Tables 6 (cold, single layer) and 7 (warm, multi-layer) does not suggest an extra warm gas contribution is necessary. Those profiles that show well–resolved self–reversal provide a tool to break this degeneracy. We concentrate on IRAS4A, since it contains the most well resolved line profiles, and is thus easiest to consider. Higher spectral resolution data are necessary for a less ambiguous estimate of the column density distribution in the other self–absorbed sources.

#### 5.2.1 Foreground Absorption in IRAS4A

An extended, cool envelope may explain the self–absorbed profile observed towards IRAS4A. We estimate a lower limit to the self-absorbing layer of NGC 1333 IRAS4A. We assume that the $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ absorbing layer is primarily cold gas near 25K located along the line–of–sight in the central 0.5 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. We estimate the lower limit to the absorbing layer column density by assuming that the optical depth is 1 and varying the temperature. We find that the column density must be at least a few times $`10^{13}`$ $`\mathrm{cm}^2`$ for temperatures between 10 and 25 K (the temperature of the cold layer in our micro-turbulent model).

This allows us to fix the column density in the outer layers of IRAS4 to at least $`1\times 10^{13}`$ $`\mathrm{cm}^2`$ and estimate the total column density with our micro-turbulent model by fitting the observed integrated intensity listed in Table 3. Using this as an initial guess we estimate the column density towards IRAS4A in the warm gas is at least a factor of 10 less than in the colder gas. The ammonia data lacks the spectral resolution to permit a similar analysis. If we arbitrarily divide the $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ column density evenly between the warm and cool layers (i.e. assume that $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ itself is ubiquitous and well–mixed in the ISM), $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ falls off by about a factor of 10. This is roughly the expectation from gas–phase chemical models of deuterium fractionation. However, in addition to the lack of spectral resolution in the $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ data, we are not resolving any spatial structure towards IRAS4A. High spatial resolution analysis are necessary to understand the distributions of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$.

### 5.3 Grain Deuteration

Grain enhancements may provide an important alternative source for deuterium fractionation of ammonia for Class 0 sources. Though we suggest that the flat trend in $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ for sources warmer than 20 K indicates a gas–phase origin, it is important to discuss the general scheme here. Grain accretion time scales in dense cores are of order the collapse time scale, $`\stackrel{<}{}10^6`$yrs. The larger mass of deuterium allows it to stick longer to a surface, and bind more strongly than hydrogen with other atoms. Observations of $`\mathrm{D}_2\mathrm{CO}/\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{CO}`$ (Turner, 1990; Castets et al., 1999), $`\mathrm{HDO}/\mathrm{H}_2\mathrm{O}`$ (Jacq et al., 1990), and $`\mathrm{CH}_3\mathrm{OD}/\mathrm{CH}_3\mathrm{OH}`$ (Mauersberger et al., 1988), underscore the importance of grain–based molecular formation and fractionation, although more recent gas–phase synthesis models (e.g. Roberts & Millar 2000) suggest otherwise.

A grain origin for $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ is suggested based on the similarity of the fractional abundances of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ in TMC1 versus the Orion Hot Core. A review of the abundances using standard methods is appropriate at this point. Walmsley et al. (1987) find that the $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ emission is optically thin in the Orion–KL region. They obtain N($`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$)=$`1.54\pm 0.4\times 10^{14}`$. Using the dust continuum measurements of Masson et al. (1985) to estimate the $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ fractional abundance, one finds $`X[\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}]`$=$`1.016.21\times 10^{10}`$. Using the $`\mathrm{C}^{18}\mathrm{O}`$ value from Ungerechts et al. (1997) and the conversion factor for carbon monoxide to molecular hydrogen developed by Frerking, Langer & Wilson (1982), $`\mathrm{N}(\mathrm{H}_2)`$ is a factor of 10 smaller than the dust value. Therefore, the abundance of deuterated ammonia is equivalently larger by ten. Towards TMC1, only $`\mathrm{C}^{18}\mathrm{O}`$ data is available, and we find $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{H}_2=4.91\pm 1.63\times 10^{10}`$, quite similar to the Orion Hot Core. Abundance comparisons, in general, are problematic, especially between physically different regions such as TMC1 and the hot core associated with IRc2. CO to molecular hydrogen conversion factors and line-of-sight complexity towards a source are difficult to properly estimate. Therefore, abundance studies should be approached with some caution222See the discussion by Mundy & McMullin (1996)..

An important distinction between our source list and hot cores used in studies such as Walmsley et al. (1987) and Jacq et al. (1990) is the temperature. Desorption mechanisms will be largely ineffective at removing any depleted or surface-chemistry products in dark clouds, unless low-temperature, non-thermal desorption such as $`\mathrm{H}_2`$ formation on grains (which releases $`4.5`$ eV of energy) occurs rapidly. This will only occur for low density regions, where $`\mathrm{H}_2`$ formation theoretically prevents the condensation of CO and water on small grains and PAHs (Duley & Williams, 1993). Even for the more evolved Class 0 objects included here, grain chemistry can be excluded because of the sublimation temperature of ices. Grain mantles are dominated by water ice (e.g. Ehrenfreund & Charnley 2000), whose sublimation temperature is 90K. Since our sources are all cooler than this, grain sublimation is not likely. In fact, thermal grain desorption at low temperatures and densities above $`10^5`$ $`\mathrm{cm}^3`$ proves quite inefficient, even in the most optimistic models where tunneling on small grains occurs, reaction exothermicities exceed binding energies, and H/$`\mathrm{H}_2`$ is large enough to quickly saturate C, O, and N atoms. We discuss several other grain desorption mechanisms below, under the assumption that surface deuterium enhancements may contribute to the observed $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$. These include: thermal, cosmic-ray induced grain heating, photo-desorption, collisional (grain-on-grain violence). Impulse heating of grains (temporarily increasing the temperature of a single grain above the threshold for thermal desorption) is achieved with X-rays and cosmic rays. Léger et al. (1985) investigated this affect in regions of varying density and visual extinction. For $`n<10^4`$ $`\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and $`A_V<5`$, desorption efficiently removes CO and even water–ammonia ice mantles quite readily. However, for more dense regions, the water-ammonia lattice will remain, since for $`A_V\stackrel{>}{}`$few UV photons cannot penetrate them. Wootten, Loren, & Snell (1982); Butner, Lada, & Loren (1995); Williams et al. (1998) have shown that X–ray contributions appear to be minimal since the electron fraction measured via $`\mathrm{DCO}^+/\mathrm{HCO}^+`$ varies little for sources with and without stars. Therefore, our sources would have little cosmic–ray desorbed input from abundances of ammonia either stored or produced on grains.

## 6 Conclusions

We observed $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ hyperfine transitions towards 32 protostellar and pre–stellar sources with similar spatial resolution. We find nearly a 70% detection rate for the $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ lines at 85.9 GHz. The observed abundances of $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ when compared to single–dish $`\mathrm{NH}_3`$ observations of similar beam–width, indicate that the deuterium fractionation is large, $`10^3\stackrel{<}{}`$$`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$$`\stackrel{<}{}10^1`$. The observed $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ values generally exceed or equal those seen in hot core regions as well as in warm, embedded condensations in otherwise low luminosity sources with large, cold envelopes. Sources with $`T_K\stackrel{<}{}20`$ K follow gas–phase predictions for $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$; for $`T_K>20`$ K the trend flattens, indicating that Class 0 sources have not begun to destroy $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$. $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$ ratios reflect the “fossil” remnants of gas–phase synthesis. We additionally conclude that grain formation of deuterated ammonia is not necessary to explain $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}/\mathrm{NH}_3`$.

Some evidence exists that dynamical ages of protostellar sources can be derived from comparisons of deuterium fractionation and chemical models of star forming cores. However, this notion is currently rather speculative. We are able to address relative evolutionary differences between sources such as TMC1-CY, TMC1-$`\mathrm{NH}_3`$, and L183 successfully.

Self–reversed profiles indicate that the overall story for $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ is far more complicated, however. Indeed, future careful modeling and observations will attempt to address the coupled influences of chemistry and dynamical evolution in IRAS4. Nonetheless, $`\mathrm{NH}_2\mathrm{D}`$ provides important insights into deuteration in the ISM. Deuterium fractionation not only varies among sources of different physical attributes, but also among different molecules. Thus, a full census of deuterium fractionation seems necessary in order to test astrochemical models. Furthermore, with deuterated molecules now providing information on the collapse regions of protostars, new and potentially powerful tools for examining the history of core collapse via chemical evolution models can provide checks on more traditional methods.

We thank Barry Turner for many helpful comments and discussions. RYS thanks NRAO for support through the Junior Research Associate program. RYS also expresses profound appreciation to the NRAO Tucson/12–meter staff for their aid through his thesis work. Research support at the Laboratory for Astronomical Imaging is supported by NSF grant AST 99-81363 and by the University of Illinois.


text:
# A Chandra Observation of M51: Active Nucleus and Nuclear Outflows

## 1 Introduction

M51 (NGC 5194) is a nearby (distance 8.4 Mpc; Feldmeier et al. 1997) spiral galaxy hosting a low-luminosity active galactic nucleus (AGN). The nucleus shows optical emission lines and is classified as a Seyfert 2 (e.g., Ford et al. 1985; Ho, Filippenko, & Sargent 1997). Radio continuum and optical emission-line observations reveal a bi-polar structure comprising a southern extranuclear cloud (hereafter XNC) and a northern loop; this morphology and the high gas velocities observed are indicative of nuclear outflow (Ford et al. 1985, Cecil 1988, Crane & van der Hulst 1992). A radio jet connecting the nucleus and the XNC is also seen in a 6 cm image (Crane & van der Hulst 1992). The optical emission-line clouds are inferred to be heated by the jet emanating from the nucleus.

X-ray observations are a powerful tool to investigate the physical nature of these phenomena. However, the spatial resolution of previous observations is not good enough to resolve the structures in the nuclear region. In the soft X-ray regime, extended nuclear emission was detected with the Einstein HRI (Palumbo et al. 1985), the ROSAT PSPC (Marston et al. 1995), and the ROSAT HRI (Ehle, Pietsch, & Beck 1995; Roberts & Warwick 2000), but only a hint of enhanced emission in the direction towards the XNC is seen in the ROSAT HRI data. The spectrum of the nuclear region obtained with the ROSAT PSPC is very soft. Hard X-ray emission,with an X-ray luminosity of 9$`\times 10^{40}`$ ergs s-1 (2–20 keV) was detected by Ginga and interpreted as a combination of low-mass X-ray binaries in the host galaxy and a highly absorbed AGN (Makishima et al. 1990). Subsequently, ASCA detected a strong Fe K$`\alpha `$ emission line with an equivalent width (EW) of $``$ 1 keV, which probably comes from the heavily obscured AGN, as well as emission from thermal plasma with a temperature of $``$0.5 keV. The 2–10 keV luminosity of the entire galaxy measured by ASCA was $`8.4\times 10^{39}`$ ergs s-1 which is about six times smaller than that obtained with Ginga in the same band (Terashima et al. 1998). The reason for this large difference in luminosities has recently been clarified by BeppoSAX observations. Fukazawa et al. (2001) find that the nucleus is photoelectrically absorbed below 10 keV, but seen directly through the absorption at 20 keV, implying an absorbing column of $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ = $`5.6\times 10^{24}`$ cm-2. The 2–10 keV luminosity measured by BeppoSAX was similar to that of ASCA. Fukazawa et al. (2001) attributed the higher Ginga luminosity to variability of the absorbing column, as long as the Ginga measurement is not contaminated by nearby bright sources. None of these X-ray studies has sufficient spatial resolution to resolve the nucleus and outflows seen in radio continuum and optical \[N II\]$`\lambda \lambda `$6548,6583 images.

High spatial resolution X-ray observations with the Chandra X-ray observatory can easily resolve the multiple components in the nuclear region and enable us to study the physical nature of the nucleus and outflows, as well as the various X-ray sources in the host galaxy. In this Letter, we present Chandra results on the nuclear region of NGC 5194. Results on the diffuse X-ray emission and discrete X-ray sources seen in the host galaxy will be presented in a future paper. At the distance of 8.4 Mpc, 1 arcsec corresponds to 40.7 pc.

## 2 Observation and Data Analysis

M51 was observed on 2000 June 20 with the Chandra Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer (ACIS; Garmire et al. 2001, in preparation). M51 was located on the back illuminated CCD chip S3. The data were reduced using the CIAO software version 1.1.5. Gain correction was made using the latest calibration files. We used only ASCA event grades 0, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (see Chandra Proposer’s Observatory Guide, 2000). The background was stable during the observation and a net exposure time of 14865 sec was obtained. The count rates of all the detected sources in the field were relatively low and effects of pileup were negligible. Spectral fits were performed using XSPEC version 11.0 and all the quoted errors are 90% confidence range for one parameter of interest.

## 3 Results and Discussion

### 3.1 X-ray Images

Our Chandra image of NGC 5194 shows X-rays from a bright nuclear region, diffuse emission distributed over the host galaxy, and many discrete sources. The companion galaxy NGC 5195 is also detected in the same field. In this Letter, we concentrate on the nuclear region of NGC 5194.

An expanded image of the central region of NGC 5194 in the 0.5–8 keV band is shown in Figs 1 and 2. In Fig. 1, red, green, and blue colors correspond to the energy bands 0.5–1.3, 1.3–3, and 3–8 keV, respectively. The nucleus, extended features, and a few discrete sources are seen. The extended structures north and south of the nucleus are remarkably similar to the features seen in radio (6 cm , 20 cm) and \[N II\] images, and we refer to them as the northern loop and the XNC, respectively. Fig. 2 shows a 20 cm image (contours, from Ford et al. 1985) overlaid on a Chandra image in the 0.5–8 keV band. Both images have $`1^{\prime \prime }`$ resolution and a close correspondence is seen between the two maps. The nuclei were aligned by shifting the X-ray image by 0.4′′.

The color (=hardness) map (Fig. 1) shows that the nucleus has a hard spectrum while the XNC and the northern loop are soft. A spectral analysis (next subsection) shows that the nucleus emits both hard and soft spectral components, the latter being very similar to the spectra of the XNC and northern loop. The north-east part of the XNC is somewhat harder than the rest of the XNC and the northern loop. It is intriguing to note that this region coincides with a bright knot in the \[N II\] image from which the broadest optical emission lines (extending over $`1500`$ km s-1) are found (the point P in Cecil 1988). It is also worth noting that the elongation of the nucleus seen in \[N II\] is towards the point P, and that the radio jet connects the nucleus and point P (Crane & van der Hulst 1992). Thus this medium-hardness region might be the site where the jet emanating from the nucleus is currently interacting with the interstellar medium and shock heating it.

### 3.2 X-ray spectra

#### 3.2.1 Nucleus

The spectrum of the nucleus was extracted from a circular region with a radius of 1.5 arcsec. The spectrum was binned so that each bin contains at least three counts in order to enhance the visibility of the narrow Fe-K$`\alpha `$ emission line. In this case, a chi-squared fit is not adequate and a maximum-likelihood method using the C-statistic (Cash 1979) was employed. In the fit with the C-statistic, background cannot be subtracted, so we first constructed a model of the background spectrum. This background model was obtained from an area away from the nucleus, which includes diffuse emission in the host galaxy. The spectrum from this area was fitted by a two temperature ($`kT`$=0.23 keV, 0.60 keV; abundance 0.16 solar) plasma model plus a flat power law. This fixed background model was then added to the model for the nucleus after normalizing by the geometrical area.

The spectrum of the nucleus (Fig. 3a) consists of at least three components, namely a soft component showing emission lines from ionized species, a hard component which dominates the 3–8 keV band, and a strong emission line at 6.4 keV. We modeled the soft component with the optically-thin thermal plasma model MEKAL. Two models were examined for the hard component: an absorbed power law or pure reflection from almost face-on cold matter (Magdziarz & Zdziarski 1995). The latter corresponds to a situation in which the X-ray emission from the nucleus is almost completely obscured by a column density in excess of $`10^{24}`$ cm-2 and only emission scattered by matter near the nucleus is observed. We added a Gaussian component to represent the emission line at 6.4 keV. The absorbed power law and pure reflection model provide a similar quality of fit (C-statistic = 39.1 and 39.6, respectively). The spectral parameters obtained are summarized in Table 1.

In the case of the best-fit absorbed power law model, we fixed the photon index of the power law component at 2.0 (typical of unobscured AGN) and obtained an absorption column density of $`N_\mathrm{H}`$=$`3.1_{1.5}^{+1.8}\times 10^{23}`$ cm-2. The emission line centroid energy and equivalent width (EW) are $`6.458_{0.039}^{+0.033}`$ keV (source rest frame) and $`3.5_{1.6}^{+2.7}`$ keV, respectively. Although this model can describe the data, the very large EW of the Fe line is not compatible with the relatively small absorption column ($`3\times 10^{23}`$ cm-2), from which an Fe line with much lower EW ($`200`$ eV) is expected (e.g, Awaki et al. 1991; Leahy & Creighton 1993; Ghisellini, Haardt, & Matt 1994 ).

The center energy, line width, and EW of the strong emission line in the pure reflection model are $`6.458_{0.048}^{+0.035}`$ keV at the source rest frame, $`\sigma `$ = 0.020 ($`<`$0.099) keV, and $`4.8_{2.5}^{+4.3}`$ keV, respectively. This line centroid energy is consistent with fluorescent iron emission from neutral or low-ionization state ($`<`$ FeXIX) iron when possible small calibration uncertainties are taken into account. The line intensity of $`(5.4_{2.5}^{+3.5})\times 10^6`$ photons cm-2 s-1 is consistent with that obtained with an ASCA observation (Terashima et al. 1998), although the error ranges are large. The huge EW ($`>`$2.4 keV) is difficult to explain even in the pure reflection picture and probably an overabundance of iron is required (Matt, Fabian, & Reynolds 1995). Such a large equivalent width is also seen in other Compton thick Seyfert 2s such as the Circinus galaxy (Matt et al. 1996). The X-ray luminosity of the reflection component in M51 is $`9.8\times 10^{38}`$ ergs s-1 in the 2–10 keV band. Although this luminosity is nine times smaller than the total 2–10 keV luminosity of M51 observed by ASCA, X-ray binaries contribute significantly to the ASCA luminosity (Terashima et al. 1998). Therefore, the smaller luminosity obtained with Chandra does not imply time variability of the AGN. Recently BeppoSAX observations have shown that the nucleus is heavily absorbed by a column density of $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ = $`5.6\times 10^{24}`$ cm-2 and the intrinsic luminosity corrected for the absorption is $`1.1\times 10^{41}`$ ergs s-1 in the 2–10 keV band (Fukazawa et al. 2001). Thus, the luminosity obtained with Chandra is about 1% of the intrinsic X-ray luminosity, implying that $``$1% of the nuclear luminosity is scattered in our direction.

The soft component (Fig. 3a) is well represented by a MEKAL plasma model (Table 2). The obtained absorption column density is only slightly larger than the Galactic value ($`1.3\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2, Stark et al. 1992) given the large errors. The emission measure is $`1.2\times 10^{62}`$ cm-3 and the luminosity corrected for the absorption is $`4.5\times 10^{38}`$ ergs s-1 in the 0.5–4 keV band. The temperature and abundance are quite similar to the extended emission (the XNC and north loop). The gas may be shock heated as discussed below.

#### 3.2.2 Southern Extranuclear Cloud and Northern Loop

We extracted X-ray spectra of the southern extranuclear cloud (XNC) and the northern loop. A background spectrum was obtained from a region free of the nuclear emission. Bright point sources in this region were excluded. This background spectrum was then subtracted from the spectra of the XNC and northern loop. The spectra were binned so that at least 15 counts were contained in each bin, so chi-squared statistics can be used.

The two spectra (Fig. 3b and c) show emission lines which are indicative of optically thin thermal plasma emission with a temperature below 1 keV. Therefore, we fitted the spectra with the MEKAL model modified by photoelectric absorption along the line of sight. This model provides successful descriptions of both the XNC and the northern loop. The results of the spectral modeling are shown in Table 2.

The spectral parameters obtained for the XNC are $`kT=0.58_{0.08}^{+0.04}`$ keV, abundance $`0.14_{0.05}^{+0.07}`$ solar, and $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ = $`9.5_{3.9}^{+5.5}\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2. We note that the abundance values in all the fits in this paper are unusually low for the central regions of spiral galaxies and are similar to other X-ray measurements of abundance of spiral galaxies and starburst galaxies. The reason for these unphysically low abundances is unknown, but may involve systematic errors in modeling thermal plasmas, nonthermal continuum contributions, or depletion of gas phase elements onto grains (Netzer & Turner 1997, Arimoto et al. 1997, Dahlem et al. 2000, Matsushita et al. 2000) and does not necessarily mean real low abundance. The luminosity (corrected for absorption) and emission measure are $`1.5\times 10^{39}`$ ergs s-1 in the 0.5–4 keV band and $`2.7\times 10^{62}`$ cm-3, respectively. If we assume a simple spherical shape with a radius of 80 pc and a filling factor $`\eta (<1)`$ of the X-ray emitting gas, we can derive some physical quantities. The density $`n`$, gas mass $`M`$, and the thermal energy $`U`$ are determined as $`n=2.1\eta ^{1/2}`$ cm-3, $`M=1.5\times 10^5\eta ^{1/2}M_{}`$, and $`U=1.2\times 10^{53}\eta ^{1/2}`$ ergs, respectively.

This thermal plasma is expected from shock heating due to outflows. The expected postshock temperature is $`T_\mathrm{s}=1.4\times 10^5V_{\mathrm{s7}}^2`$ K, where $`V_{\mathrm{s7}}`$ is the shock velocity in units of 100 km s-1, if the preshock medium is fully ionized and the helium abundance is 10% of hydrogen by number (Hollenbach and McKee 1979). Using this relation, the shock velocity is determined as 690 km s-1 from the observed temperature of the XNC. This shock velocity is roughly consistent with that determined from \[N II\] observations (500 km s-1; Cecil 1988). The XNC shows LINER-like optical emission lines (Ford et al. 1985). The emission line ratios \[O I\]/H$`\alpha `$, \[O III\]/H$`\beta `$, and \[S II\]/H$`\alpha `$ are in the range expected from fast shocks without precursors for a shock velocity of 300–500 km s-1, as calculated by Dopita & Sutherland (1995, 1996). The observed \[N II\]/H$`\alpha `$ ratio is larger than predicted by the shock model and could be due to an overabundance of nitrogen, as often suggested previously. Thus the optical emission line ratios are consistent with fast shocks and reinforce a shock interpretation of the origin of the extranuclear clouds.

The spectral parameters for the northern loop are $`kT=0.53_{0.04}^{+0.05}`$ keV, abundance $`0.14_{0.04}^{+0.07}`$ solar, and $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ = $`6.2_{3.3}^{+2.7}\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2. The luminosity (corrected for absorption) and emission measure are $`2.0\times 10^{39}`$ ergs s-1 in the 0.5–4 keV band and $`3.8\times 10^{62}`$ cm-3, respectively. As in the case of the XNC, we determine physical parameters of the X-ray gas by assuming a simple geometry. Here we assume a spherical shell with an outer radius of 200 pc and a thickness of 40 pc, and a volume filling factor of $`\eta `$. The parameters obtained for the hot gas are $`n=0.88\eta ^{1/2}`$ cm-3, $`M=5.0\times 10^5\eta ^{1/2}M_{}`$, and $`U=3.7\times 10^{53}\eta ^{1/2}`$ ergs.

The X-ray spectral shape (i.e. the model’s $`kT`$ and abundance), X-ray morphology, and optical emission line properties of the northern loop are quite similar to the XNC and suggest a similar origin to the XNC, i.e., shock heating by nuclear outflows. The shock velocity required to heat the gas to $`kT`$ =0.53 keV is 660 km s-1, almost the same shock velocity as obtained for the XNC. The fact that the northern loop is much larger than the XNC suggests that it is an older structure.

The total radiative luminosity of the shock heated gas ($`L_\mathrm{T}`$) can be estimated from the H$`\beta `$ luminosities (Ford et al. 1985) by assuming the shock model (Dopita & Sutherland 1995, 1996). A value $`L_\mathrm{T}2\times 10^{42}`$ ergs s-1 is obtained. This luminosity is comparable to the photon luminosity of the nucleus if an intrinsic X-ray luminosity of $`10^{41}`$ ergs s-1 (Fukazawa et al. 2001) and a bolometric correction of a factor of ten (Ho 1999) are assumed. If the shock-heated gas is, indeed, powered by the jets, which are assumed to be steady, the mechanical and radiative outputs of the nucleus are then similar to within the considerable uncertainties.

## 4 Concluding Remarks

Our Chandra observations have shown that the X-ray morphology of the extranuclear regions of NGC 5194 is very similar to that seen in radio continuum and optical emission-line imaging. The X-ray spectra of the extranuclear cloud and the northern loop are well described by thermal plasma models with $`kT`$ 0.5–0.6 keV. This temperature is close to that expected from shock heating given the range of velocities seen ($``$500 km s-1) in optical emission-line spectra. The optical emission-line ratios also agree with models involving shocks with velocities in the range 300–500 km s-1. Further, the location with the hardest X-ray spectrum in the extranuclear cloud coincides with the region exhibiting the broadest optical lines ($`1500`$ km s-1). This location is also apparently the terminus of the radio jet. All of these findings indicate that the extranuclear gas is shock heated by nuclear jets and/or other collimated outflows.

The nucleus itself exhibits a soft X-ray spectrum which is very similar to that of the extranuclear gas. We presume that this gas is also shock heated by mass outflows. In addition, the nucleus shows a very hard continuum and an iron line with equivalent width in excess of 2 keV. This spectrum arises through reflection of the radiation from a compact nuclear source with a power law spectrum by cold matter in its vicinity. The nuclear source itself is obscured by a large column density of gas ($`N_\mathrm{H}`$=$`5.6\times 10^{24}`$ cm-2) and is only seen directly above 10 keV (Fukazawa et al. 2001).

We are grateful to Gerald Cecil for providing the radio and \[N II\] images in computer readable format. YT was supported in part by a Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Postdoctoral Fellowship for Research Abroad. This research was supported by NASA grant NAG 81027.


text:
# Analytic Confinement and Regge Trajectories

## I Introduction

The meson spectroscopy as the theory of bound states of quarks, and the phenomenology of the Regge trajectories (RTs) are important and interdependent subjects of investigation in particle physics .

At the present time, QCD is commonly considered the true theory of the strong interaction describing all processes in the hadron world, including the mesonic spectroscopy . However, being a nonlinear theory with local colour gauge symmetry, QCD is quite complicated from the computational point of view and corresponding methods of calculations require great efforts in additional assumptions and ideas. In contrast to QED, simple and reliable methods of calculations are still missing in QCD. From our point of view, the main puzzle is that any acceptable and well established description of quarks and gluons explaining the hadronization on large distances, where the confinement of quarks and gluons takes place, has not been found yet. On the other hand, one may expect that a theoretical description of colorless hadrons considered as bound states of quarks and gluons, when the confinement is taken into account and the averaging over all non-observable color degrees of freedom is performed, can lead to a physical picture, where the quarks and gluons are realized in the form of some phenomenological ”bricks”. We suppose that a successful guess of the structure of these ”bricks” in the confinement region can result, particularly, in a qualitatively correct description of the basic features of the meson spectrum. Our guess is that the analytic confinement realizes these ”bricks”.

Following this idea, in the present paper we consider the meson spectroscopy within the theory of bound states of quarks and gluons. Our aim is to show within a simple relativistic quantum field model that the basic features of experimentally observed meson spectrum (see, e.g. ) can be qualitatively explained by the analytic confinement of quarks and gluons. The basic dynamic characteristics of spectrum of all mesons considered bound states of quarks and gluons (in contrast to the relations of the $`SU_3`$ flavor symmetry) can be listed as follows:

> \- quarks and gluons are confined;
>
> \- glueballs are bound states of massless gluons, i.e. they are completely relativistic systems;
>
> \- the masses of mesons are larger than the sum of masses of the constituent quarks;
>
> \- the RTs of different families of mesonic orbital excitations are quite close to linear and their slopes practically coincide. It means that the slope is an universal parameter which is defined by the general nature of quark-gluon interaction.

Obviously, these characteristics cannot be obtained in the framework of any local quantum field theory, where the constituent particles, quarks and gluons, are described by standard Dirac and Klein-Gordon equations. From the common point of view the confinement plays the first role in understanding and explaining of this picture. The point is how to realize mathematically the conception of confinement in specific theoretical formalism?

The standard theoretical calculations leading to linear RTs of mesonic bound states of quarks and gluons are based on the following assumptions. First, the quarks are accepted as ordinary fermions interacting by means of gluons. Some argumentations including lattice calculations of the nonlinear QCD gluon dynamics are given to get a particular infrared behavior of the gluon propagator ($`\stackrel{~}{D}(p^2)1/p^4`$ for $`p^20`$) which results in a linear increasing potential between quarks in three-dimensional space $`𝐱𝐑^3`$ (see, for example, ). Exactly this infrared behavior is interpreted as the quark confinement.

Second, one of three-dimensional reductions of the relativistic Bethe-Salpeter equation is used. For this purpose it is necessary to overcome some mathematical problems caused by the singularity of the gluon kernel and an ambigously defined choice of particular reduction of the relativistic two-body Bethe-Salpeter equation (see, for example, ). As a result a relativized Scrödinger equation is obtained in $`𝐑^3`$-space to estimate the meson masses including higher orbital excitations. Hereby, the kinetic energy of the quarks looks like $`E_{kin}=\sqrt{𝐩^2+m^2}`$ and the potential energy increases linearly. The most essential part of the two-body Hamiltonian takes the form

$$H=\sqrt{𝐩_1^2+m_1^2}+\sqrt{𝐩_2^2+m_2^2}+\alpha |𝐫_1𝐫_2|.$$

In the present paper we demonstrate another possible mechanism explaining the above mentioned characteristics of mesonic spectrum, including the origin of linear RTs. In doing so, we use a simple relativistic quantum-field model of two scalar particles (the prototypes of constituent ”quarks” and intermediate ”gluons”) with the analytic confinement. Our approach is based on the following assumptions:

> \- the analytic confinement takes place, it means that propagators of ”quarks” and ”gluons” are entire analytic functions of the first order on the complex momentum $`p^2`$-plane;
>
> \- the interaction is described by the Yukawa type Lagrangian;
>
> \- the coupling constant binding the ”quarks” with ”gluons” is small;
>
> \- final bound states of ”quarks” are described by the relativistic Bethe-Salpeter equation in one-”gluon” exchange without using any three-dimensional reduction.

In the present paper we shall not discuss the origin and details of the analytic confinement. Particularly, the self-dual homogeneous vacuum gluon field in QCD results in the analytic confinement of quarks and gluons . The model of induced quark currents based on this vacuum gluon field describes correctly the experimental data .

This paper is aimed to demonstrate the mathematical sketch of calculations of the two-body bound-state spectrum within the Bethe-Salpeter equation within simple QFT models, when the analytic confinement takes place in the weak-coupling regime. These simple relativistic models are based on physically transparent hypotheses and can be treated by simple analytic methods. We claim that the analytic confinement is the basic underlying ”brick” leading to the qualitatively correct description of main characteristics of the meson spectra. In any case we believe that our models represent certain theoretical interest because they clarify the underlying physical principles of the meson spectrum.

For simplicity, we deal with two possible versions of the analytic confinement. In the first model the propagators of ”quarks” and ”gluons” are pure Gaussian exponents, i.e. $`\stackrel{~}{D}(p^2)e^{p^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}`$, where the parameter $`1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ represents the ”radius” of confinement. From physical point of view this model is important because the eigenfunctions and eigenvalues of the relativistic Bethe-Salpeter equation within one-particle exchange approximation can be found explicitly and the obtained RTs are purely linear. One can say that this model can be considered a ”relativistic oscillator”, i.e. it is a relativistic generalization of the quantum nonrelativistic oscillator with equidistant spectra.

The second model comes from a natural physical picture of standard particles with a relevant scale of mass $`m`$. It is supposed that the analytic confinement characterized by the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ makes the propagators of particles (”quarks” and ”gluons”) entire analytic functions. As a result there are two physical parameters: the scale of confinement $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and the mass of quark $`m`$. An interesting problem is to investigate the dependence of the meson spectrum on the relative parameter $`\mu =m/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. We shall show that this model describes qualitatively well all above listed dynamical characteristics of meson spectra.

## II Two-particle Bound States

We consider the Yukawa model of two interacting scalar fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ and $`\phi (x)`$ described by the following Lagrangian in the Euclidean space-time as follows

$`(x)=\mathrm{\Phi }^+(x)S^1(\mathrm{})\mathrm{\Phi }(x){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\phi (x)D^1(\mathrm{})\phi (x)g\mathrm{\Phi }^+(x)\mathrm{\Phi }(x)\phi (x).`$ (1)
The coupling constant $`g`$ is supposed to be sufficiently small.

We postulate that the analytic confinement takes place here. It means, that propagators $`\stackrel{~}{S}(p^2)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{D}(p^2)`$ of confined particles $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\phi `$ are entire analytic functions in the complex $`p^2`$-plane so that the functions $`S^1(z)`$ and $`D^1(z)`$ have no zeros at any finite complex $`z`$. As a result the equations for free fields

$`S^1(\mathrm{})\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=0,D^1(\mathrm{})\phi (x)=0`$ (2)
result only in the unique trivial solutions $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)0`$ and $`\phi (x)0`$. We call this property analytic confinement, i.e. the corresponding particles exist only in virtual states, so $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\phi `$ are the virton fields (see ). One can say that these fields describe constituent particles, e.g. $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ and $`\phi (x)`$ represent scalar ”quarks” and scalar ”gluons”, correspondingly.

As mentioned above, we deal with two simple versions of the analytic confinement.

First, we consider the simplest, but important case with pure Gaussian propagators

$`\stackrel{~}{S}(p^2)={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}e^{\frac{p^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}},S(x)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2ϵ}{(4\pi )^2}}e^{\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2x^2},`$ (3)
$`\stackrel{~}{D}(p^2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}e^{\frac{p^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}},D(x)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{(4\pi )^2}}e^{\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2x^2},`$ (4)
where the parameter $`ϵ1`$ implies that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$-particle is much ”heavier” than $`\phi `$-particle. In some sense this model can be considered a relativistic ”oscillator” because the corresponding Bethe-Salpeter equation can be solved exactly and the exact solution gives linear RTs. We call this case the virton model.

The second model implies that there exists a certain physical mechanism which generates analytic confinement of standard particles with the initial masses $`m`$ and $`0`$. Then, their propagators are given in more realistic forms

$`\stackrel{~}{S}(p^2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2+m^2}}\left(1e^{\frac{p^2+m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}\right),S(x)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{(4\pi )^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha }{\alpha ^2}}e^{\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\alpha \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2x^2}{4\alpha }},`$ (5)
$`\stackrel{~}{D}(p^2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}\left(1e^{\frac{p^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}\right),D(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^2x^2}}e^{\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2x^2}{4}}.`$ (6)
The confinement region is characterized by the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. In the deconfinement limit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ one obtains the standard propagators of massive and massless scalar particles. Within this model we want to analyze the influence of the parameter $`\mu `$ on the behavior of the meson spectrum. We call this case the scalar confinement model.

”Two-quark” bound states can be found in the following way. Let us consider the partition function

$`Z={\displaystyle \delta \mathrm{\Phi }\delta \mathrm{\Phi }^+\delta \varphi e^{(\mathrm{\Phi }^+S^1\mathrm{\Phi })\frac{1}{2}(\phi D^1\phi )g(\mathrm{\Phi }^+\mathrm{\Phi }\phi )}}.`$ (7)
By integrating over $`\phi `$ we arrive at

$`Z={\displaystyle \delta \mathrm{\Phi }\delta \mathrm{\Phi }^+e^{(\mathrm{\Phi }^+S^1\mathrm{\Phi })+\frac{g^2}{2}(\mathrm{\Phi }^+\mathrm{\Phi }D\mathrm{\Phi }^+\mathrm{\Phi })}}.`$ (8)
The term $`L_2[\mathrm{\Phi }]=(\mathrm{\Phi }^+\mathrm{\Phi }D\mathrm{\Phi }^+\mathrm{\Phi })`$ can be transformed as

$`L_2[\mathrm{\Phi }]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x_1𝑑x_2\mathrm{\Phi }^+(x_1)\mathrm{\Phi }(x_1)D(x_1x_2)\mathrm{\Phi }^+(x_2)\mathrm{\Phi }(x_2)}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x𝑑y_1𝑑y_2\sqrt{D(y_1)}J(x,y_1)\delta (y_1y_2)\sqrt{D(y_2)}J^+(x,y_2)},`$
where $`x_1=x+\frac{y}{2}`$, $`x_2=x\frac{y}{2}`$ and

$`J(x,y)=\mathrm{\Phi }^+\left(x+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}y\right)\mathrm{\Phi }\left(x{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}y\right)=\mathrm{\Phi }^+(x)e^{\frac{y}{2}\stackrel{}{}}\mathrm{\Phi }(x),`$
$`J^+(x,y)=J(x,y).`$
Let us introduce an entire orthonormal system $`\{U_Q(y)\}`$, where $`Q=\{n,l,\{\mu \}\}`$ may be considered as a set of radial $`n`$, orbital $`l`$ and magnetic $`\{\mu \}=(\mu _1,\mathrm{},\mu _l)`$ quantum numbers. We have the conditions

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑yU_Q(y)U_Q^{}(y)}=\delta _{QQ^{}},{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}}U_Q(y)U_Q^{}(y^{})=\delta (yy^{}).`$
Then,

$`L_2[\mathrm{\Phi }]={\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑xJ_Q(x)J_Q(x)},J_Q(x)=\mathrm{\Phi }^+(x)V_Q(\stackrel{}{})\mathrm{\Phi }(x),`$
$`J_Q^+(x)=J_Q(x),V_Q(\stackrel{}{})=i^l{\displaystyle 𝑑y\sqrt{D(y_1)}U_Q(y)e^{\frac{y}{2}\stackrel{}{}}}.`$
By using the Gaussian functional representation we write

$`e^{L_2[\mathrm{\Phi }]}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{g^2}{2}\underset{Q}{}{\scriptscriptstyle 𝑑xJ_Q(x)J_Q(x)}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}\delta B_Qe^{\frac{1}{2}\underset{Q}{}(B_QB_Q)+g\underset{Q}{}{\scriptscriptstyle 𝑑xB_Q(x)J_Q(x)}}}.`$
We substitute this representation into the partition function (8) and integrate over $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. The result reads

$`Z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}\delta B_Qe^{\frac{1}{2}\underset{Q}{}(B_QB_Q)\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{ln}(1gB_QV_QS)}}`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}\delta B_Qe^{\frac{1}{2}\underset{QQ^{}}{}(B_Q[\delta _{QQ^{}}\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }_{QQ^{}}]B_Q^{})+W_I[B]}}.`$ (10)
Here

$$W_I[B]=\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{ln}(1gB_QV_QS)+\frac{g^2}{2}B_QV_QSB_Q^{}V_Q^{}S\right]$$

is a functional, which describes the interactions of the fields $`B_Q`$.

The polarization operator $`\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }_{QQ^{}}`$ in the one-loop approximation is

$`\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }_{QQ^{}}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`g^2\mathrm{Tr}(V_QSV_Q^{}S)`$ (11)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑y_1𝑑y_2U_Q(y_1)\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }(z;y_1,y_2)U_Q^{}(y_2)},`$ (12)
$`\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }(z;y_1,y_2)`$ $`=`$ $`g^2\sqrt{D(y_1)}S\left(z+{\displaystyle \frac{y_1y_2}{2}}\right)S\left(z{\displaystyle \frac{y_1y_2}{2}}\right)\sqrt{D(y_2)},`$ (13)
where $`z=x_1x_2`$ and $`\lambda =\left(g/4\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\right)^2`$. Its Fourier transform reads

$`\lambda \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_p(y_1,y_2)`$ (14)
$`=g^2\sqrt{D(y_1)}{\displaystyle 𝑑ze^{ipz}S\left(z+\frac{y_1y_2}{2}\right)S\left(z\frac{y_1y_2}{2}\right)\sqrt{D(y_2)}}.`$ (15)
The orthonormal system of functions $`\{U_Q(y)\}`$ should diagonalize the kernel (14). For this aim we consider the eigenvalue problem

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑y^{}\lambda \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_p(y,y^{})U_Q(y)}=E_Q(p^2)U_Q(y),`$ (16)
where $`E_Q(p^2)=E_{nl}(p^2)`$, i.e. the eigenvalues are degenerated over the magnetic quantum numbers $`\{\mu \}`$.

If the functions $`\{U_Q(y)\}`$ are found, the polarization operator $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_p(x,y)`$ is diagonal on these eigenfunctions

$`\lambda \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_p(y,y^{})={\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}}E_Q(p^2)U_Q(y)U_Q(y^{}).`$ (17)
We note that the diagonalization of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_p(y,y^{})`$ is nothing else but the solution of the Bethe-Salpeter equation in the one-boson exchange approximation. To get the standard form of the Bethe-Salpeter equation, we have to introduce new functions $`U_Q(y)=\sqrt{D(y)}\mathrm{\Psi }_Q(y)`$ (see, e.g., ) and go to the momentum space.

So, the partition function (9) becomes

$`Z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}\delta \stackrel{~}{B}_Qe^{\frac{1}{2}\underset{Q}{}(B_QG_Q^1B_Q)+W_I[gB]}},`$ (19)
$`G_Q^1=G_Q^1(\mathrm{})=1E_Q(\mathrm{}),p^2=\mathrm{}.`$
The functional integral (19) is given over a Gaussian measure defined by the operator $`G_Q^1(\mathrm{})`$.

We would like to stress that this representation is completely equivalent to the initial one (7). From physical point of view, we pass on from the world containing fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\varphi `$ to the world of bound states $`\{B_Q\}`$.

The fields $`\{B_Q\}`$ can be interpreted as the fields of particles with quantum numbers $`Q`$ and masses $`M_Q`$, if the Green functions $`G_Q(p^2)`$ have simple poles in the Minkowski space ($`p^2=M_Q^2`$), in other words the equations

$`1=E_Q(M_Q^2)`$ (20)
define the masses $`M_Q=M_{nl}`$ of two-particle bound states with quantum numbers $`Q=(nl)`$. These states are degenerated over magnetic quantum numbers $`\{\mu \}`$. The operator $`G_Q^1(\mathrm{})`$ defines the kinetic term of the field $`B_Q`$. To represent this operator in the standard form we expand it in the vicinity of $`p^2=M_Q^2`$ as follows

$`1E_Q(p^2)=Z_Q(p^2+M_Q^2)+O[(p^2+M_Q^2)^2],Z_Q=E_Q^{}(M_Q^2)>0,`$
where the positive constant $`Z_Q`$ defines the renormalization of the wave function of the field $`B_Q`$. By using the standard renormalization relation

$$\stackrel{~}{B}_Q(p)=Z_Q^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{}_Q(p)$$

we write the kinetic term in the standard form:

$`\left(\stackrel{~}{B}_Q^+(p)\left[1E_Q(p^2)\right]\stackrel{~}{B}_Q(p)\right)`$
$`=\left(\stackrel{~}{}_Q^+(p)\left[(p^2+M_Q^2)+O((p^2+M_Q^2)^2)\right]\stackrel{~}{}_Q(p)\right).`$
The interaction functional in (19) reads

$`W_I[gB]=W_I[g_{\mathrm{eff}}],g_Q^{\mathrm{eff}}=gZ_Q^{1/2}={\displaystyle \frac{g}{\sqrt{E_Q^{}(M_Q^2)}}}>0.`$ (21)
It is essential, that according to (16) the effective coupling constant $`g_Q^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ does not depend on $`g`$ in any explicit way.

## III The Virton Model

Let us consider a pure Gaussian case of analytic confinement (3), where the parameter $`1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ represents the ”radius” of confinement. Due to the Gaussian character of these propagators, the polarization kernel (14) is quite simple

$`\lambda \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_p(y,y^{})=\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4ϵ^2}{2^6\pi ^2}}e^{\frac{p^2}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}K(y,y^{}),K(y,y^{})=e^{\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{4}(y^2yy^{}+y^2)}`$ (22)
with $`\lambda =\left(g/4\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\right)^2`$. The kernel $`K(x,y)`$ can be explicitly diagonalized

$`K(y,y^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}}U_Q(y)\kappa _QU_Q(y^{}),`$ (23)
$`\kappa _Q`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _{nl}=\kappa _0\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2+\sqrt{3}}}\right)^{2n+l},\kappa _0=\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(2+\sqrt{3})}}\right)^2.`$ (24)
The eigenfunctions $`U_Q(y)`$ are given in Appendix A.

According to (20) the mass spectrum of two-particle bound states can be found explicitly

$`M_Q^2`$ $`=`$ $`M_{nl}^2=M_0^2+(2n+l)2\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\mathrm{ln}(2+\sqrt{3}),`$ (25)
$`M_0^2`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _c}{\lambda }},\lambda _c=\left({\displaystyle \frac{4(2+\sqrt{3})^2}{ϵ}}\right)^2.`$ (26)
Thus, the Gaussian form of analytic confinement (3) leads to the purely linear and parallel RTs. The slope of RTs is defined only by the scale of the confinement region $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and does not depend on the coupling constant $`\lambda `$ and other dynamic constants entering the interaction Lagrangian.

Bound states exist in the weak-coupling regime $`\lambda <\lambda _c`$. If $`\lambda \lambda _c`$ the size of the confinement region is remarkably larger than the Compton length of all bound states

$$r_{\mathrm{conf}}\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}l_Q\frac{1}{M_Q}.$$

In other words, the physical particles, described by fields $`B_Q(x)`$, and all physical transformations involving them take place within the confinement region.

## IV The Scalar Confinement Model

The propagators of this model are given by (5). In this case the eigenvalue problem (16) cannot be solved exactly, so a variational approach will be used to evaluate approximately the two-particle spectra. Further we consider only the orbital excitations, i.e. the eigenvalues for zero radial quantum number $`n=0`$, so that $`Q=\{0,l,\{\mu \}\}`$. If $`\{\mathrm{\Psi }_Q(y)\}=\{\mathrm{\Psi }_{l\{\mu \}}(y)\}`$ is a set of normalized trial wave functions, then we have to calculate

$`\underset{\mathrm{\Psi }_Q}{\mathrm{max}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{\mu \}}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑y_1𝑑y_2\mathrm{\Psi }_Q(y_1)\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }_p(y_1,y_2)\mathrm{\Psi }_Q(y_2)}=ϵ_l(M_l^2)E_l(M_l^2)`$ (27)
with $`p^2=M_l^2`$. The mass of the bound state is determined by the equation (20):

$`ϵ_l(M_l^2)=1.`$ (29)
Note, the solution of this equation gives the upper bound to the mass $`M_l^2`$, because $`ϵ_l(M^2)E_l(M^2)`$ for positive $`M^2>0`$.

In the present paper we choose the normalized trial wave function in the following form

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{l\{\mu \}}(x,a)=C_lT_{l\{\mu \}}(x)\sqrt{D(x)}e^{\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{4}ax^2},`$ (30)
$`C_l=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{l+1}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(1+2a)^{l+1}}{2^l(l+1)!}}},{\displaystyle \underset{\{\mu \}}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\left|\mathrm{\Psi }_{l\{\mu \}}(x)\right|^2}=1,`$ (31)
where $`a`$ is a variational parameter. The four-dimensional spherical orthogonal harmonics $`T_{l\{\mu \}}(x)`$ are defined in Appendix A. We guess that the test function in (30) should be a sufficiently good approximation to the exact one because the kernel (14) is proportional to $`\sqrt{D(y)}`$ and $`S(y)`$ is of the Gaussian type.

Let us define

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{l\{\mu \}}(k,a)`$ $`=`$ $`i^l{\displaystyle 𝑑xe^{ikx}\sqrt{D(x)}\mathrm{\Psi }_{l\{\mu \}}(x,a)}={\displaystyle \frac{C_l}{(2\pi )^l}}T_{l\{\mu \}}(k)I(k^2),`$
where

$$I(k^2)=d^{4+2l}Ye^{iKY}D(Y)e^{aY^2},K,Y𝐑^{4+2l},k^2=K^2.$$

Here the rotational symmetry $`D=D(y^2)=D(Y^2)`$ has been used. One obtains

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{l\{\mu \}}(k,a)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{l\{\mu \}}(k,a)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{C_l^2k^{2l}(l+1)}{2^{4+3l}}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{u_0}{}}}𝑑uu^le^{uk^2/4}\right]^2,`$ (32)
$`u_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(1+a)}}.`$ (33)
Substituting representations (5), (30) and (32) into (27) and after some calculations we arrive at

$`ϵ_l(M_l^2)`$ $`=`$ $`g^2\underset{a}{\mathrm{max}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk}{(2\pi )^4}\underset{\{\mu \}}{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{l\{\mu \}}(k,a)\stackrel{~}{G}\left(k+\frac{p}{2}\right)\stackrel{~}{G}\left(k\frac{p}{2}\right)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{l\{\mu \}}(k,a)}`$ (34)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\lambda }{l!}}\underset{c}{\mathrm{max}}\left\{[4c(1c)]^{l+1}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑t𝑑se^{(t+s)(\mu ^2\kappa ^2)}R_l(t,s,\chi )}\right\}=1.`$ (35)
Here

$`R_l(t,s,\chi )={\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑u𝑑ve^{\kappa ^2\chi ^2}(uw)^lF_l(b,\chi )},`$
$`F_l(b,\chi )={\displaystyle d^4kk^{2l}e^{k^2bkp(ts)}}=e^{\chi ^2/b}\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{b}}\right)^l\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{b^2}}e^{\chi ^2/b}\right]`$
with $`p=(iM,0,0,0)`$ and $`p^2=M^2`$, $`b=t+s+2c(u+w)`$ and

$$\lambda =\left(\frac{g}{4\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }}\right)^2,\mu =\frac{m}{\mathrm{\Lambda }},\kappa =\frac{M_l}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }},\chi ^2=\kappa ^2(ts)^2.$$

The mass $`M_l`$ of the two-particle bound state in the one-parameter variational approximation should be determined from the variational equation (34). We have solved this equation numerically for different values of parameters $`\lambda `$, $`l`$ and $`\mu `$. The obtained results are plotted in Figs. 1-3.

## V Discussion

Now let us make sure that the Scalar Confinement Model correctly describes the basic features of the meson spectrum, when mesons are considered bound states of quarks and gluons. In Fig.1 we show the mass $`M_0/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the lowest bound state $`B_0`$ with quantum numbers $`Q=(0,0)=0`$ as the function of the mass of constituent quarks $`\mu =m/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ for small coupling constant $`\lambda =0.01`$.

First of all, one can conclude that there exists a bound state in the case $`\mu =0`$, i.e. with $`m=0`$. In other words, provided that the analytic confinement takes place, two massless particles can be coupled into a stable bound state (see also ). This situation cannot be realized under any circumstances in the local quantum field theory.

Second, the mass $`M_0>2m`$ for $`\mu 50÷80`$, i.e. it exceeds the sum of masses of two constituent quarks. Besides, these bound states are stable. It means that these heavy mesons are relativistic systems and therefore, the nonrelativistic Schrödinger equation is not adequate tool to describe these heavy mesons. Probably the masses of real heavy quarks (see Table 1) are not sufficiently ”heavy” to use nonrelativistic description. The conventional regime $`M_0<2m`$ appears for very large $`\mu 50÷80`$. In the deconfinement limit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ our rough variational estimation (34) gives the qualitatively correct behavior (for details see Appendix B)

$`M_0=2m\left({\displaystyle \frac{g}{4\pi m}}\right)^416\pi mC^2,`$
i.e. we get the standard nonrelativistic (the coupling constant $`g/4\pi m`$ is small!) bound state under the Coulomb potential.

| Quarks | Mass (Mev) | Meson | Mass (Mev) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`u`$ | 1$`÷`$5 | $`\rho =u\overline{u}`$ | 770 |
| $`d`$ | 3$`÷`$9 |  |  |
| $`s`$ | 75$`÷`$170 | $`K^{}=s\overline{s}`$ | 900 |
| $`c`$ | 1150$`÷`$1350 | $`\eta _c=c\overline{c}`$ | 2980 |
| $`b`$ | 4000$`÷`$4400 | $`\gamma =b\overline{b}`$ | 9460 |

Table 1.

The experimentally observed masses of light and heavy quarks $`q`$ and mesons $`q\overline{q}`$ .

In Table 1 we list the masses of quarks and mesons as bound states of corresponding quarks. One can see that the meson masses are larger than two masses of the constituent quarks. The Scalar Confinement Model discribes this property of meson spectrum.

In Figures 2 and 3 we plot the Regge trajectories, i.e the squared masses of orbital excitations at different values of the small coupling constant $`\lambda `$ and masses of constituent quarks $`\mu `$. One can see that the dependence of RTs on the parameters $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ is not strong. Besides, the RTs are not linear, although the linearity begins in fact for $`l4÷6`$. The asymptotical behavior of the Regge spectrum for sufficiently large $`l`$ can be obtained analytically and coincides with the exact solution of the Virton Model (25):

$`M_l^2l\mathrm{\Lambda }^22\mathrm{ln}(2+\sqrt{3})\mathrm{for}l\mathrm{}.`$ (37)
On the other hand, the dependence $`M_l^2`$ on $`l`$ is quite smooth, so that three or four lowest orbital excitations can be approximatly considered almost linear. Therefore, they can be well approximated by linear trajectories on a short interval $`l=0÷3`$.

A recent analysis of the experimental data shows (see ) that the RTs of different meson and baryon families are approximately linear and their slopes deviate slightly around a constant value, although the quark configurations and quantum numbers of these hadronic families are considerably different. Note, the analysed data in  have been obtained for low orbital momenta $`l=0÷3`$ only.

Nevertheless, one can conclude that the slope of RTs weakly depends on specific details of hadron internal dynamics and may be considered an universal characteristic which is dictated only by the general properties of quark-gluon interactions.

Precisely this qualitative picture takes place for our models with analytic confinement. Thus, we have sufficient ground to claim that the analytic confinement realizes these general properties and leads to the approximate linearity of RTs for meson families.

Therefore, the Scalar Confinement Model should qualitatively describe the correct behavior of orbital excitations. We can compare the experimental data with our calculations. In  the RTs of $`\pi `$-, $`K`$-, $`\rho `$-, $`\omega `$-, $`\varphi `$\- and $`K^{}`$-meson families have been fitted on the interval $`0l3`$ by curves $`M_l^2=m_0+m_1l+m_2l^2`$ with appropriate constants $`m_j`$. We have also performed fittings of our data obtained for $`l=1,2,3`$. By comparing corresponding coefficients of fittings for $`\pi `$\- and $`K`$-meson trajectories with our fit coefficients obtained at different values of parameters $`\mu `$ and $`\lambda `$ we have found the possible values of the confinement scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The result is given in Table 2. One can see that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ depends weakly on $`\mu `$ and $`\lambda `$ in wide ranges. Our semiquantative result indicates that the confinement scale parameter is around $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{conf}500\mathrm{𝑀𝑒𝑉}`$.

| $`\mu `$ | $`\lambda `$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi (\mathrm{𝑀𝑒𝑉})`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_K(\mathrm{𝑀𝑒𝑉})`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 0.2 | 0.01 | 562 | 504 |
| 1.0 | 0.001 | 558 | 502 |
| 1.0 | 0.01 | 539 | 487 |
| 1.0 | 0.1 | 502 | 452 |
| 5.0 | 0.01 | 506 | 456 |

Table 2.

The scale of confinement $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ calculated from the comparison with real spectra of $`\pi `$\- and $`K`$-meson families given in .

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors would like to thank I.Ya. Aref’eva, V.Ya. Fainberg and A.A. Slavnov for useful discussions.
Appendix A
Consider the kernel   $`K=K(x,y)=e^{ax^2+2bxyay^2},a>b`$ (38)
with

$`\mathrm{Tr}K={\displaystyle 𝑑yK(y,y)}={\displaystyle 𝑑ye^{2(ab)y^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{4(ab)^2}}<\mathrm{}.`$
The eigenvalues with quantum numbers $`Q=\{nl\{\mu \}\}=\{nl\{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _l\}\}`$ and eigenfunctions of the problem

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑yK(x,y)U_Q(y)}=\kappa _QU_Q(x)`$
can be solved explicitly. The eigenvalues are

$`\kappa _Q=\kappa _{nl}=\kappa _0\left({\displaystyle \frac{b}{a+\sqrt{a^2b^2}}}\right)^{2n+l},\kappa _0={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{(a+\sqrt{a^2b^2})^2}}.`$ (39)
The eigenfunctions are

$`U_Q=U_{nl\{\mu \}}(y)=N_{nl}T_{l\{\mu \}}(y)L_n^{(l+1)}\left(2\beta y^2\right)e^{\beta y^2}.`$ (40)
Here $`L_n^{(l+1)}(x)`$ are the Laguerre polynomials and

$`\beta =\sqrt{a^2b^2},N_{nl}={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2^l(l+1)}}{\pi }}(2\beta )^{1+\frac{l}{2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+l+2)}}}`$
The functions

$$T_{l\{\mu \}}(y)=T_{l\{\mu \}}(n_y)|y|^l,n_y=\frac{y}{|y|},|y|=\sqrt{y^2}$$

satisfy the conditions

$$T_{l\{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _l\}}(n)=T_{l\{\mu _2\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _l\}}(n),T_{l\{\mu \mu \mu _3\mathrm{}\mu _l\}}(n)=0,$$

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\{\mu \}}{}}T_{l\{\mu \}}(n_1)T_{l\{\mu \}}(n_2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2^l}}C_l^1((n_1n_2)),C_l^1(1)=l+1,`$
where $`C_l^1(t)`$ are the Gegenbauer polynomials and

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑nT_{l\{\mu \}}(n)T_{l^{}\{\mu ^{}\}}(n)}=\delta _{ll^{}}\delta _{\{\mu \}\{\mu ^{}\}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2}{2^l(l+1)}}.`$
Besides, the following relation takes place

$`{\displaystyle d^4yT_{l\{\mu \}}(y)F(y^2)e^{iky}}=(i)^lT_{l\{\mu \}}(k)J(k^2),`$ (41)
$`J(k^2)={\displaystyle 𝑑Ye^{iKY}F(Y^2)},K,Y𝐑^{4+2l},k^2=K^2.`$ (42)
Appendix B

Consider the variational problem (34) in the deconfinement limit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ for $`l=0`$

$`8\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\right)^2\lambda _0\underset{0<c<1}{\mathrm{max}}\{c(1c){\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}dtdse^{\left(\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\frac{M_0^2}{4\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\right)(t+s)}`$ (43)
$`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}dudu{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{M_0^2}{4\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\frac{(ts)^2}{t+s+2c(u+v)}\right\}}{[t+s+2c(u+v)]^2}}\}=1.`$ (44)
Here $`M_0`$ is the mass of the lowest bound state and the effective coupling constant is given as

$`\lambda _0=\left({\displaystyle \frac{g}{4\pi m}}\right)^21.`$
Going to the new variables

$$t=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{2m^2}(x+y),s=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{2m^2}(xy),c=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{m^2}\xi $$

we rewrite (43)

$`4\lambda _0\underset{\xi }{\mathrm{max}}\{\xi (1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{m^2}}\xi ){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}{}}}dxe^{\left(1\frac{M_0^2}{4m^2}\right)x}`$
$`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dudv}{[x+2\xi (u+v)]^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{x}{\overset{x}{}}}dye^{\frac{M_0^2}{4m^2}\frac{y^2}{x+2\xi (u+v)}}\}=1.`$
Obviously, the limit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ exists if $`M_0<2m`$. Besides, since $`\lambda _01`$ and $`1\frac{M_0}{2m}1`$, the main contribution into the integral over $`dx`$ comes from large $`x`$, so that the inner integral over $`dy`$ can be explicitly taken on the extended interval $`\{\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}`$ without any loss of accuracy. Thus, we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{8m\lambda _0}{M_0}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{1M_0^2/4m^2}}}C=1,`$ (45)
$`C=\underset{0<\xi <\mathrm{}}{\mathrm{max}}\left\{\xi {\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑xe^x{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}\frac{dudv}{[x+2\xi (u+v)]^{3/2}}}\right\}=0.31923\mathrm{}.`$ (46)
By solving (45) we obtain the mass of the lowest two-particle bound state in the deconfinement limit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$ as follows

$$M_0=2m\lambda _0^216\pi mC^2+O(\lambda _0^4).$$
(47)
This behavior is in accordance with the conventional nonrelativistic picture of the attractive Coulomb interaction when the binding energy of two-particle bound system is negative.