text:
# A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140

## 1 INTRODUCTION

KR 140 ($`l=133\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}425`$, $`b=0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}055`$; Kallas & Reich 1980) is a small (5.7 pc diameter) H II region located in the Perseus arm of the Galaxy at a distance of 2.3$`\pm `$0.3 kpc (Kerton, Ballantyne, & Martin 1999). It is close to, but apparently isolated from, the W3/4/5 star formation complex. The region is ionized by VES 735, an O8.5 V(e) star (Kerton et al., 1999). It has been the subject of a recent multiwavelength study (Ballantyne, Kerton, & Martin 2000) utilizing the data set of the Canadian Galactic Plane Survey (CGPS; Taylor 1999).

Surrounding the H II region are six IRAS point sources (see Table 1 and Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140; there is a faint source coincident with VES 735 as well). These are the brightest sources within several square degrees, suggestive of a region of enhanced star formation. In particular, infrared point sources located at the periphery of H II regions are of interest because they may be associated with star formation induced by the expansion of the H II region (e.g., Sugitani, Fukui, & Ogura 1991). Characterization of these sources is important in order to form a complete picture of the star formation history in that area.

Determining the true nature of these sources is hampered by the low resolution of the commonly available IRAS image products: $`4^{}`$ for the Infrared Sky Survey Atlas (ISSA, Wheelock et al. 1994), and $`1^{}`$ (after HIRES reprocessing) for the IRAS Galaxy Atlas (IGA, Cao et al. 1997) and Mid-Infrared Galaxy Atlas (MIGA, Kerton & Martin 2000). At these resolutions a collection of objects can appear as a single point source. Moreover, areas of extended dust shells surrounding H II regions can be misidentified as point sources. While the IRAS colors can be used as a general guide to the nature of the source (e.g., Hughes & MacLeod, 1989) they can sometimes be misleading (see Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.4).

Moving from the infrared wavelengths observed by IRAS to the submillimeter yields two advantages. First, the current generation of submillimeter mapping bolometers have far better resolution than the IRAS data and sufficient sensitivity to allow star formation regions at the distance of KR 140 to be investigated. Second, the submillimeter observations are sensitive to colder dust not detected by IRAS and thus allow a more complete picture of the dust distribution. The observations we have obtained have both clarified the nature of the IRAS point sources surrounding KR 140 and have led to the discovery of new discrete sources not visible in the IRAS data.

In Section 2 the observations are described. Data analysis techniques are outlined in Section 3. In Section 4 the results of the analysis are discussed. Finally, in Section 5 the conclusions are presented.

## 2 OBSERVATIONS

The observations were obtained through the CANSERV service observing program at the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope (JCMT 111The JCMT is operated by the Joint Astronomy Centre on behalf of PPARC of the UK, the Netherlands OSR, and NRC Canada.) using the Submillimeter Common-User Bolometer Array (SCUBA, Holland et al. 1999). Observations using SCUBA in its “jiggle map” mode were obtained in December 1997 and observations in the larger-scale “scan mapping” mode were obtained in July 1998.

SCUBA was used to acquire 450 $`\mu `$m and 850 $`\mu `$m data simultaneously. At these wavelengths the beam can be approximated as a Gaussian with a FWHM of about 8$`\mathrm{}`$ at 450 $`\mu `$m and 14.5$`\mathrm{}`$ at 850 $`\mu `$m (Matthews, 1999). The main beam solid angle ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{MB}}`$) can then be calculated using the standard formula $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{MB}}=1.133\theta _{\mathrm{FWHM}}^2`$ (Kraus, 1966).

### 2.1 Jiggle Maps

Jiggle mapping, being closely related to pointed observations, allows users to make images of objects on the scale of the SCUBA field of view, $`2^{}`$. The northwest rim of KR 140 was selected as the target for the initial jiggle maps because the brightest infrared source (IRAS 02160+6057) is located there (see Section 4.1.1 for the analysis of this source). Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140 shows the resulting jiggle maps ($`2^{}\times 2^{}`$ in size). A chop throw of $`2^{}`$ with a position angle of 135$`\mathrm{°}`$ was used to obtain a reasonable sky estimate by avoiding bright infrared emission associated with the H II region. Beam sizes of 8.5$`\mathrm{}`$ and 14.5$`\mathrm{}`$ were achieved for this set of observations. The average normalized sky transparency during the observations was 0.81 at 850 $`\mu `$m and 0.34 at 450 $`\mu `$m. The expected noise equivalent flux density per pixel for the bolometer arrays is approximately 0.08 and 0.95 Jy Hz-0.5 at 850 and 450 $`\mu `$m respectively (Holland et al., 1999). The measured noise levels in the maps are $`0.01`$ Jy/beam and $`0.08`$ Jy/beam at 850 and 450 $`\mu `$m respectively, consistent with the expectations from sky transparency and bolometer characteristics. There are no strong point sources visible in either map. Instead, extended emission is quite evident in the 850 $`\mu `$m map (S/N $``$ 4–8). The same region of emission is barely visible in the 450 $`\mu `$m map. However, convolving the image to the 850 $`\mu `$m resolution reduces the noise level to 0.05 Jy/(850 $`\mu `$m beam) and results in the extended emission being clearly visible (S/N $``$ 3–7).

### 2.2 Scan Maps

Larger scale maps of KR 140 at 450/850 $`\mu `$m were obtained in July 1998 using the recently (at the time) developed “scan mapping” observing mode which allows larger areas to be mapped out by scanning the array across the sky. These maps included the jiggle-map region and enabled the study of the other IRAS point sources near KR 140.

The raw bolometer data were reduced using the standard SCUBA software (Holland et al., 1999) for flatfield and extinction corrections. The data were then further reduced and transformed into the final maps using a matrix inversion technique (Johnstone et al., 2000a) which effectively minimizes the difference between the individual chop measurements and the resulting map. One advantage of this technique compared to standard reductions is that the bolometer input may be weighted to account for variations in the quality of the measurement. Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140 shows maps created at this stage. Weiner filtering these maps (see, e.g., Press et al., 1992) removes the high (spatial) frequency noise associated with the individual chop measurements without affecting structure on scales equal to or larger than the JCMT beam. Further processing of the map proves useful. Due to the finite chop size, SCUBA maps have their low spatial frequency modes suppressed. Restoring these modes requires a large re-amplification which also amplifies any existing low frequency noise. Furthermore, correlated errors introduced by variations in the sky opacity and the drift in the bolometer response produce excess residual low frequency modes. Thus the large scale structure in the map is less reliable, and in order to better visualize the small scale features in the data, the low frequency modes were entirely suppressed. This was achieved by convolving the filtered map with a $`\sigma =130\mathrm{}`$ Gaussian beam (twice the largest chop throw) and then subtracting the convolved map from the original to remove any large-scale structure. Both images were then brought to a common 20$`\mathrm{}`$ resolution to facilitate comparison. In Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140 the resultant maps are displayed. Noise levels are $``$ 0.01 Jy/beam and 0.05 Jy/beam at 850 and 450 $`\mu `$m respectively.

Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140 compares the derived 850 $`\mu `$m scan map for the region with other data obtained from the CGPS database (see Ballantyne et al. (2000) for details).

## 3 ANALYSIS

Our quantitative analysis focuses on the discrete sources detected in our maps. The next three subsections describe how the sources were detected, and the subsequent measurements of flux, size, temperature, mass and density for these objects. Interpretation of these results is presented in Section 4.

### 3.1 Source Detection, Flux and Size

Individual sources were identified through a combination of visual inspection of the maps, and by using a 2D version of the automated clump finding algorithm CLUMPFIND (Williams, de Geus, & Blitz, 1994) which separates objects along minimum flux surfaces within the map. In total 22 sources were detected; 11 at both 850 and 450 $`\mu `$m, nine sources at only 850 $`\mu `$m, and two at only 450 $`\mu `$m. These last two sources may be visible at 850 $`\mu `$m but it is hard to be certain because of the increased noise at that location due to edge effects from processing. The flux-weighted centroid of each source was determined and used as a measure of the source position. We have assigned the acronym KMJB to these new submillimeter sources. Except for one of our sources (KMJB 1 = IRAS 02174+6052) detected near the edge of the map, there was no significant difference in the centroid positions between the two observed wavelengths (when applicable). For KMJB 1 we have reported the 850 $`\mu `$m centroid position because of the higher quality of the data. Table 2 lists the positions of the sources indicated by the white crosses in Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140.

In order to estimate the size of the sources, an azimuthally averaged Gaussian profile was fitted to each source using the image analysis program kview (Gooch, 1995). To take into account the beam size, a simple convolution of a Gaussian source with a Gaussian beam was assumed, $`\theta _{\mathrm{observed}}^2=\theta _{beam}^2+\theta _{\mathrm{object}}^2`$, where $`\theta _{beam}=20\mathrm{}`$. Physical sizes ($`D_{\mathrm{eff}}=\theta _{\mathrm{object}}d`$) were calculated assuming a distance $`d=2.3\pm `$0.3 kpc to KR 140 and tabulated in Table 2. The effective diameters range from 0.7 pc down to the resolution limit, 0.1 – 0.2 pc. This size scale of a few $`\times `$ 0.1 pc is typical for cores observed within molecular clouds (Evans, 1999).

Flux measurements of the sources were obtained using the Imview software package222Imview is a multi-purpose image display and analysis package developed at DRAO.. The uncertainty in each measurement is dominated by the uncertainty in choosing a correct background level. To quantify this uncertainty, we interactively selected three different bounding polygons for each source, and used two different functional forms for the background (twisted plane and twisted quadratic) which were fit to the boundary points of the polygon. The six resulting flux measurements were then averaged together and the standard deviation of the measurements was calculated and used as a conservative uncertainty estimate. The results are summarized in Table 2.

### 3.2 Temperature

The spectral energy distribution (SED) of the dust emission was parameterized using what we call a “bluebody” spectrum after Dent, Matthews, & Ward-Thompson (1998): a single temperature Planck function with a $`\nu ^2`$ dependence ($`\beta =2`$) for the dust emissivity 333“Modified blackbody” is the term often used in the literature, but bluebody is both shorter and more descriptive.. While this is clearly a gross oversimplification of the dust properties Dent et al. (1998) and Gordon (1995) point out that the quantities derived from these simple fits are often consistent with results derived from a more complex, and often non-unique, analysis of the data.

For the isolated sources detected by IRAS, this SED was fit to the submillimeter and 100 and 60 $`\mu `$m IRAS data. However, for two sources, IRAS 02168+6052 and IRAS 02157+6053, this technique was not possible because of the significant beam size difference between IRAS and SCUBA: multiple submillimeter sources were detected within the larger IRAS beam. In these cases, and for sources without IRAS counterparts, the submillimeter photometry was used where possible to derive a 450/850 $`\mu `$m bluebody color temperature. This estimate can be rough for two reasons. For warmer dust, one is out on the Rayleigh-Jeans tail of the Planck function which is relatively insensitive to temperature. The calculated temperature for colder dust is still very uncertain due to the relatively poor quality of the 450 $`\mu `$m data.

For sources detected at only a single wavelength representative masses were calculated using a temperature of 20 K, as has been done in other single wavelength analyses of millimeter and submillimeter data (e.g., Johnstone et al. 2000b, Motte, André, & Neri 1998). This temperature is a typical value observed for compact dust features found by submillimeter studies of the Orion molecular clouds (Chini et al., 1997; Lis et al., 1998).

### 3.3 Mass and Density

Table 2 summarizes the mass and density estimates. The mass calculation used the standard formulation of Hildebrand (1983) for an optically thin molecular cloud with a uniform temperature:

$$M=d^2F_\nu C_\nu /B_\nu (T)$$
(1)
where $`M`$ is the total (dust and gas) cloud mass, $`d`$ is the distance to the objects, $`F_\nu `$ is the observed flux density, $`B_\nu (T)`$ is the Planck function evaluated at dust temperature $`T`$, and $`C_\nu `$ is a factor combining the dust opacity ($`\kappa _\nu `$) and the dust to gas mass ratio ($`C_\nu =M_g/(M_d\kappa _\nu )`$).

Table 3 summarizes various values of $`C_{850}`$ derived from the literature. Most of the articles cited report the value of $`C_\nu `$ at 1 mm, and the values shown have been calculated assuming that $`C_\nu \nu ^2`$ ($`\beta =2`$ for the opacity). The canonical Hildebrand (1983) value is derived from the observations of the reflection nebula NGC 7023 (Hildebrand 1983). While this is empirically derived, ideally it should be applied to observed objects which have similar properties to the calibration object (Hildebrand, 1983); this is probably not the case here where we find lower temperatures and higher densities. The Draine & Lee (1984) value is appropriate for dust in the general ISM; however, it is known that properties of dust in dense clouds differ from those in the diffuse ISM (Kim, Martin, & Hendry 1994). The difference in optical properties arises from a combination of coagulation, leading to an increase in grain porosity, and the accretion of volatile grain mantles. The remaining values in the table are from various models that have attempted to deal directly with these processes. Various authors suggest different values ranging at 850 $`\mu `$m from 21 – 86 g cm-2, depending upon the gas density and temperature. Since we do not know the density in advance we have adopted a value of $`C_\nu =50`$ g cm-2 at 850$`\mu `$m and, assuming a $`\beta =2`$ dust emissivity, $`C_\nu =14`$ g cm-2 at 450$`\mu `$m for this investigation. This is in general agreement with the results of a recent detailed observational study of circumstellar material by van der Tak et al. (1999).

The masses derived in our study range from 0.7 to 130 M. They can be linearly scaled to another value of $`C_\nu `$ if desired. The uncertainty in the distance to KR 140 leads to a systematic 26% uncertainty in the derived masses. The average tabulated uncertainty in the flux density measurements is 17% at 850 $`\mu `$m and 28% at 450 $`\mu `$m. Uncertainties relating to the derived temperature are harder to quantify because of the simple bluebody model that we have used and because the temperature enters into the mass derivation non-linearly through the Planck function. Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140 shows the change in the mass derived from 850 $`\mu `$m flux measurements produced by varying the temperature. At lower temperatures the derived mass is very sensitive to the temperature. For example, reducing the temperature by only 2 K will cause the derived mass to almost double. The same absolute change at 15 K causes an increase of only 28% and at 25 K the change is only 12%. Based upon these considerations a total uncertainty (not including the uncertainties in $`C_\nu `$) for the derived masses of $`\pm 50`$% is an optimistic minimum value (see, e.g., Gordon, 1995).

For each source the cube of $`D_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ was taken as a rough estimate of the volume and used to calculate a density. Considering both the lack of information about the true three-dimensional structure of the sources and the uncertainty in the masses, these densities should be considered as only order of magnitude estimates.

## 4 DISCUSSION

In this section we first consider what the new submillimeter observations can tell us about the nature of the IRAS point sources, drawing on the multifrequency data available. Discussion about the newly detected sources and the region as a whole follow in Sections 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4.

### 4.1 The Nature of the IRAS Sources

#### 4.1.1 IRAS 02160+6057 = KMJB 15

The source IRAS 02160+6057 identified with the north-west dust arc has been the subject of two molecular line investigations. Wouterloot & Brand (1989) identified it as a potential star-forming area via its IRAS colors (see their paper for the exact selection criteria) and examined it (along with about 1300 other IRAS point sources) for CO emission. They found a CO feature in that direction at a velocity of $``$49.7 km s-1 (LSR), which corresponds to CO in the associated background molecular cloud (Ballantyne et al., 2000), and assigned it the catalog number \[WB89\]417. This point source was not detected in a subsequent H2O line survey by Wouterloot, Brand, & Fiegle (1993).

A comparison of the scan maps with the IRAS images of KR 140 for this region provides a striking example of how much the morphology of the dust emission associated with an H II region can change with wavelength. In the IRAS images this region at all bands (Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140; Ballantyne et al. 2000, Figure 2) is the dominant feature. In contrast, while the feature is visible in the submillimeter maps it is certainly not the dominant one. This contrast indicates that the dust emission one sees from this area is from relatively hot dust with no additional cool components along the line of sight. This is consistent with the lack of significant clumped CO emission in this area which could have indicated a region containing colder dust grains (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140). The submillimeter and infrared emission are also aligned spatially which is what we would expect if the submillimeter emission is just coming from the hot dust we see in the IRAS bands (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140). Morphologically, IRAS 02160+6057 appears to be part of the partial dust shell surrounding KR 140. This line of sight has one of the highest column densities of warm dust in the KR 140 H II region and so it is possible that a protostar could be forming there as a result of the expansion of the H II region. However, examination of the HIRES images shows no point-like features in the dust arc and none are found in the new submillimeter observations.

The average mean flux density at 850 $`\mu `$m is $`0.7\pm 0.1`$ Jy in the jiggle map and $`1.0\pm 0.3`$ Jy in the scan map. For our calculations we have used 0.8$`\pm `$0.2 Jy as the flux density at 850 $`\mu `$m. At 450 $`\mu `$m we used the flux density from the jiggle maps, $`4\pm 1`$ Jy, since the feature is not seen in the 450 $`\mu `$m scan maps. In order to construct an SED for the source we measured infrared flux densities in the same region at 60 and 100 $`\mu `$m using HIRES images of KR 140. We found F$`{}_{60}{}^{}=42\pm 5`$ Jy and F$`{}_{100}{}^{}=101\pm 8`$ Jy. Combining this infrared data with the submillimeter data we obtain a best-fit bluebody curve to the SED with T$`=27.5`$ K (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140). Comparison with the azimuthally averaged dust temperatures for KR 140 (see Figure 5 in Ballantyne et al. 2000), shows that our derived temperature is consistent with dust being heated by the central star VES 735.

We conclude that IRAS 02160+6057 is not a point source but simply part of the dust shell associated with KR 140. This naturally explains the non-detection of H2O in the Wouterloot et al. (1993) study. Using equation 1 we find a mass of 9 M in this segment of the shell; the density there is 102.9 cm-3, the lowest for all of the sources and would be even lower if allowance were made for limb brightening (line of sight distance $`>D_{\mathrm{eff}}`$). The structure of this dust shell (morphology, density, temperature) was examined in detail in Section 6 of Ballantyne et al. (2000).

#### 4.1.2 IRAS 02168+6052 = KMJB 6, 7 and 8

At submillimeter wavelengths the region around the single IRAS point source IRAS 02168+6052 contains three sources (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140). The brightest submillimeter source in the area (KMJB 8) is well off the 60 $`\mu `$m centroid and is associated with the CO emission. It is also detectable at 450 $`\mu `$m. The resulting color temperature is 8$`\pm `$2 K. This leads to a mass of 80 M and a density of 104.1 cm-3.

KMJB 6 breaks up into three discrete objects at 450 $`\mu `$m. We calculated a 450/850 color temperature using the combined flux of the sources at 450 and the measured flux density at 850 $`\mu `$m. The derived dust temperature is 7$`\pm `$2 K. The corresponding mass is about 55 M, and the overall density in this region is around 104.3 cm-3. KMJB 6 and 8 are most likely cold molecular cores; however, the very cold temperatures derived for these objects should be confirmed with future spectral line observations.

KMJB 7 is located near the position of IRAS 02168+6052 and is most likely a dense knot of dust and gas within the dust shell surrounding KR 140. Like in KMJB 15, the shell is the source of the prominent ridge of emission seen in all of the IRAS emission bands. Faint submillimeter emission from the dust shell is visible as a diffuse ridge running between KMJB 6 and 8. The temperature of dust within this shell was measured to be around 30 K (Ballantyne et al., 2000), which is consistent with the ratio of 60 and 100 $`\mu `$m to 850 $`\mu `$m fluxes. Using this dust temperature we derive a mass of 1 M for the knot that is KMJB 7.

#### 4.1.3 IRAS 02157+6053 = KMJB 17, 18 and 19

This region (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140) is associated with molecular material located behind KR 140 (Ballantyne et al., 2000). The three submillimeter sources are located within the larger CO envelope running roughly SW–NE, following the orientation of the 60 $`\mu `$m contours. The IRAS scan pattern for this region places the major axis of the detectors along a SW–NE direction and so the PSC fluxes are the contribution of the ensemble of sources in the area. The crowded nature of the region makes it difficult to use the IRAS flux densities to determine temperatures.

Nevertheless, KMJB 19 is well off the $`60\mu `$m centroid and hence relatively cold. It is detectable at 450 $`\mu `$m, leading to a 450/850 $`\mu `$m color temperature of 8$`\pm `$2 K. The resulting mass (50 M) and density (104.6 cm-3) are consistent with the object being a cold molecular core, like KMJB 8.

Mass estimates were obtained for KMJB 17 and 18 using the 850 $`\mu `$m flux and assuming a temperature of 20 K (which is roughly consistent with explaining the $`60\mu `$m emission). The mass and lower limits on the density (the sources are point sources) are both consistent with the objects being molecular cores. KMJB 18 is probably warmer than KMJB 17 given the facts that they are of comparable brightness at 850 $`\mu `$m and 18 is located closer to the centroid of the 60 $`\mu `$m emission. Taking this into account would accentuate the mass and density differences.

#### 4.1.4 IRAS 02171+6058 = KMJB 3

This source is located to the northeast and outside of the KR 140 radio continuum emission. It seems likely that this relatively bright source is associated with molecular material at the distance of KR 140. On the basis of the SED, this would be a class I object (Andre, Ward-Thompson, & Barsony, 1993). We proceed with the analysis assuming a distance of 2.3 kpc and show that this consistently explains a number of observational characteristics of the source.

The infrared colors of the infrared point source IRAS 02171+6058 are characteristic of an ultracompact H II (UCHII) region based upon the criteria of Wood & Churchwell (1989): $`\mathrm{log}(F_\nu (60)/F_\nu (12))>1.3`$ and $`\mathrm{log}(F_\nu (25)/F_\nu (12))>0.57`$. They also match the criteria of Hughes & MacLeod (1989) for an H II region: $`\mathrm{log}(F_\nu (60)/F_\nu (25))>0.23`$ and $`\mathrm{log}(F_\nu (25)/F_\nu (12))>0.40`$. It should be noted that the PSC 60 $`\mu `$m flux is only of moderate quality (as defined in the IRAS Explanatory Supplement 1988), but it is in agreement with a flux density measurement we made from the HIRES images of the region. The source does not meet the additional flux criteria set by Hughes & MacLeod (1989), F$`{}_{100}{}^{}80`$ Jy which was designed to help filter out reflection nebulae and extragalactic objects. The source was included in a CS (2-1) survey by Bronfman, Nyman, & May (1996) and a methanol maser survey by Lyder & Galt (1997), but in both cases no detections were made.

Since this IRAS point source is detected at 12, 25, 60, 100 and 850 $`\mu `$m it is surprising that it is not seen at 450 $`\mu `$m. We fit a single-temperature bluebody to the 850, 100 and 60 $`\mu `$m data points to obtain a temperature estimate of 27 K (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140). This best fit predicts a flux density of 2.8 Jy at 450 $`\mu `$m which normally should be detectable, especially in the smoothed scan map. However, there is a large gradient in the 450 $`\mu `$m scan map around this position due to enhanced noise at the edge of the map which may be making it hard to detect the source. The fitted SED yields a total mass of 5 M. Using 0.23 pc as a typical length scale, the density is found to be $`10^{4.1}`$ cm-3.

Note that this dust is not heated by the exciting star of KR 140; there must be a source internal to the cloud. The total flux derived from the best-fit SED gives a luminosity of $`L=10^{2.5}`$ L assuming a distance of 2.3 kpc. This can be compared to the bolometric luminosity for main sequence B5 V – B8 V stars which ranges from $`L10^{3.0}`$ to 102.3 L (Lang, 1992).

This is consistent with the lack of a corresponding point source in the 1420 MHz continuum image. The sensitivity of the 1420 MHz CGPS images is 0.2 mJy/$`1^{}`$ beam (Taylor, 1999). Ionization equilibrium can be used to relate this brightness level to the rate at which a star is emitting ionizing photons (Q). At the distance of KR 140 this brightness level corresponds to log(Q) = 44.0 for a point source, and so any embedded O or early B main sequence stars (which have log(Q) $``$ 47; Kerton 2000) would certainly be detected in the CGPS radio data.

Chini, Krügel, & Wargau (1987) derived a relationship between the total luminosity (as seen reradiated by dust) of a compact H II region and the gas mass:

$$L=(56\pm 21)M_g^{0.93\pm 0.06}$$
(2)
where $`L`$ and $`M_g`$ are the luminosity and gas mass in solar units. The lowest luminosity and mass considered in their study was $`L=10^{3.6}`$ $`L_{}`$. Using an extrapolation of this relationship, the luminosity derived for this object above corresponds to a mass of 6$`{}_{2}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+6}`$ $`M_{}`$. This is consistent with the independently determined measurement of the mass based upon the submillimeter observations, and indicates that the Chini et al. (1987) relationship may hold to lower $`L`$ and $`M`$ values than covered in their study of regions with ionizing stars.

#### 4.1.5 IRAS 02174+6052 = KMJB 1

The IRAS PSC fluxes for this object are only of marginal use since they contain two upper limits at 60 and 100 $`\mu `$m. To get more information we examined HIRES images of the KR 140 region. At 100 $`\mu `$m the source is not visible against the very strong emission coming from the nearby dust shell of the H II region. We were able to measure flux densities at the other three IRAS bands. At 60 $`\mu `$m we obtained a flux density of 12$`\pm `$2 Jy. This is consistent with the upper limit reported in the PSC. Flux densities obtained at 12 and 25 $`\mu `$m agreed with the PSC values. Like KMJB 3, this has a class I SED. The object does have $`F_\nu (60)/F_\nu (25)`$ and $`F_\nu (25)/F_\nu (12)`$ colors in the range expected for an UCHII region as set by Hughes & MacLeod (1989), although the $`F_\nu (25)/F_\nu (12)`$ color is at the lower limit. Wood & Churchwell (1989) used the $`F_\nu (60)/F_\nu (12)`$ color and a higher limit to the $`F_\nu (25)/F_\nu (12)`$ color to define UCHII regions, and this object does not match their criteria for an UCHII region. Therefore, from the IRAS colors alone it is unlikely that the object is an UCHII region.

We fit a single-temperature bluebody to the 850, 450 and 60 $`\mu `$m data points to obtain a temperature estimate of 22 K (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140). The best-fit curve predicts a flux density of 68 Jy at 100 $`\mu `$m which is consistent with the upper limits reported in the PSC. This value is also below the 100 $`\mu `$m flux density limit set by Hughes & MacLeod (1989). Values from this best-fitting curve were then used to derive a total mass of 19 $`M_{}`$.

Using the SED, and assuming a distance of 2.3 kpc, we calculated a total luminosity of 102.8 $`L_{}`$. As with KMJB 3 there is no corresponding 1420 MHz continuum source. This is what one would expect for a star with luminosity corresponding to B5 V. Using this luminosity and the mass-luminosity relation of Chini et al. (1987) (equation 2) we obtain a mass estimate of 14$`{}_{5}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+14}`$ $`M_{}`$ in agreement with the value derived from the submillimeter observations.

### 4.2 Cumulative Clump Mass Function

The cumulative mass distribution for the sources detected in this study is shown in Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140. A least-squares fit to the data of a $`N(>M)=N_oM^\alpha `$ power law resulted in $`\alpha =0.49\pm 0.04`$. Kramer et al. (1998) compiled results from a number of studies and showed that a power law distribution with $`\alpha =0.65\pm 0.10`$ describes the clump mass distribution in molecular clouds for clumps with masses ranging from $`10^4`$ to several $`10^4`$ $`M_{}`$. The two studies contained within Kramer et al. (1998) that are closest to our study with respect to the mass range covered agree within the stated uncertainties. Clumps in the mass range 0.6 to 160 $`M_{}`$ surrounding the H II region S 140 were found to follow an $`\alpha =0.65\pm 0.18`$ power law, while clumps in the mass range 0.8 to 50 $`M_{}`$ surrounding the H II region NGC 1499 followed $`\alpha =0.59\pm 0.18`$. In Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140 we have plotted the cumulative mass distribution for the larger scale cores (0.05 pc to 0.3 pc in size) in $`\rho `$ Oph using the data from Motte et al. (1998). These objects also follow a power law relationship similar to what we find in KR 140, $`\alpha =0.6\pm 0.08`$.

In contrast, millimeter and submillimeter studies of the nearby $`\rho `$ Oph region have shown that the mass distribution of the smaller scale fragments (2400 to 5000 AU in size) contained within the cores appears to mimic the stellar IMF (Motte et al., 1998; Johnstone et al., 2000b). Testi & Sargent (1998) used the OVRO interferometer to study similarly sized objects in the more distant Serpens molecular core. They also found a steep power law distribution consistent with the stellar IMF, $`\alpha =1.1`$. The key similarities in these three studies are that they probed sufficiently small linear scales (0.01 – 0.02 pc) and that a sufficient range in masses was observed to detect a steepening of the mass function above 0.5 $`M_{}`$. These both appear to be important requirements. Of the studies listed by Kramer et al. (1998) only the study of the nearby ($`d=65`$ pc) quiescent cloud L1457 has sufficiently high angular resolution to be comparable to the $`\rho `$ Oph and Serpens studies. However, the highest mass clump detected is only 0.2 $`M_{}`$ and so all of the detected objects lie on a shallow part of the mass distribution function ($`\alpha =0.77\pm 0.3`$). One can interpret this as either being consistent with the low mass portion of the stellar IMF or being consistent with a global power law for molecular cloud structure. Our study of KR 140 has sufficient overlap in mass coverage to probe the connection between cloud structure and the stellar IMF, but the larger scale objects that we detect at our relatively low resolution follow the well-established $`\alpha 0.5`$ power law seen for structures within giant molecular clouds and for the clouds themselves (Williams, Blitz, & McKee 2000).

### 4.3 Nature of the Sources

How might the submillimeter sources relate to future star formation? The Bonnor-Ebert (BE) critical mass (Ebert, 1955; Bonnor, 1956) is given by

$$M_{BE}=\frac{2.4Ra_s^2}{G}.$$
(3)
Using $`R=D_{\mathrm{eff}}/2`$ and the standard formula for the isothermal sound speed ($`a_s`$) we can write

$$M_{BE}=0.99\left(\frac{D_{\mathrm{eff}}}{\mathrm{pc}}\right)\left(\frac{T_{gas}}{\mathrm{K}}\right).$$
(4)
To derive $`M_{BE}`$ from our data we have assumed that $`T_{gas}=T_{dust}`$ since our CO data are of too low resolution to give information about the gas dynamics or temperatures within specific clumps directly.

Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140 plots the derived submillimeter mass $`M`$ versus the corresponding $`M_{BE}`$ for each clump. Clumps with $`M<M_{BE}`$ are not gravitationally bound or unstable. Prominent among these are the sources that we have identified as parts of the dust shell, 7 and 15; their existence depends on pressure of the H II region and its dynamical expansion. All of the other “stable” sources (2, 10, 13, 16, 20, 21, 22) would also be pressure supported or transient. There are clumps which are detected at only one submillimeter wavelength and have no clear IRAS counterparts. For these we have assumed $`T=20`$ K. Adopting a lower $`T`$ would have led to a lower $`M_{BE}`$ and higher $`M`$ (Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140), moving the clumps toward the region of instability. However, unless we adopted a substantially lower temperature ($``$ 7 K) the clumps would remain in the stable region.

Clumps with $`M>M_{BE}`$ are massive enough to collapse under the effect of self-gravity. Excluding the clumps that have already formed stars (KMJB 1 and 3), we find eleven, including the aligned sources 11, 12, and 14, and 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 19. This result derives from the low temperature ($`T<13`$ K) that we have measured for these sources. KMJB 17 and 18 are also barely over the instability line. For these we have assumed $`T=20`$ K. Adopting a lower $`T`$ would move the clumps further into the region of instability.

By combining the available observational data on molecular clouds, Larson (1981) showed that over a wide range in sizes gravitationally-bound molecular clumps follow the relationships $`\sigma D^{0.4}`$ and $`\sigma M^{0.2}`$ were $`\sigma `$ is the velocity dispersion, $`D`$ is the largest linear dimension (in pc), and $`M`$ is the mass of the object; thus $`MD^2`$. This is equivalent to saying that the objects have a constant column density. Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140 shows $`M/D^2`$ (or equivalently $`A_V`$) vs. $`D`$. The bimodal distribution of the sources is apparent. All of the unbound sources, with $`M<M_{BE}`$, have a very low column density below $`A_V2`$. The average column density, $`nD=2.1\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2, for all of the sources with $`M>M_{BE}`$ (except the outlying sources 5 and 12) is twice what would be deduced from Larson (1981). This may be due to our using a different tracer, and thus a different length and mass scale. Myers (1983) showed that this result can be interpreted as virial equilibrium with non-thermal pressure support from turbulent gas motions.

As discussed by Evans (1999), star formation appears to occur only in cores with $`N_\mathrm{H}>8\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 ($`A_V4`$). Theoretically this is expected because of the sharp decrease in the ionization fraction within such cores which in turn allows ambipolar diffusion to proceed at a faster rate (McKee, 1989, 1999). In clouds where both magnetic and turbulent support are important one still needs a low ionization fraction to allow collapse to proceed after the loss of turbulent support (Shu et al., 1999). The sharp decrease in the ionization fraction at $`A_V4`$ may also be related directly to the loss of turbulent magnetohydrodynamic support because of the reduction in ion-neutral coupling (Ruffle et al., 1998). Onishi et al. (1998) studied 40 molecular cloud cores in Taurus in C18O and found that all of the cores with $`N_\mathrm{H}>8\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 were associated with H13CO+ emission (which they interpret as being protostellar condensations) and/or cold IRAS sources. In our sample of sources around KR 140 only KMJB 1 and 3 have unambiguous evidence for star formation having occurred and both are high column density sources. It would be interesting to investigate the other observed sources for evidence of star formation via higher resolution observations of dense gas tracers. KMJB 12, lying well above the line, is an interesting object for further study because of its large mass and location on the ridge boundary discussed below. Among the clumps with $`M>M_{\mathrm{BE}}`$, KMJB 5 has an unusually low column density.

### 4.4 Clump and Star Formation in the KR 140 Region

Are the clumps just structure in the cloud that pre-existed the formation of VES 735 and KR 140 or is there ongoing evolution? The three high density sources 11, 12, and 14 are of particular interest. Their cold temperature, small size, and high density suggest that they are cold molecular cores. They are aligned along the edge of a CO cloud with V$`{}_{\mathrm{LSR}}{}^{}=46.0`$ km s-1 (Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140) and also parallel to, but outside of, a ridge which appears in a high resolution H$`\alpha `$ map (Kerton et al., 1999). These sources are probably not foreground to the H II region since even with their large column densities they do not produce distinctive silhouettes on the H$`\alpha `$ map. This and the striking alignment suggest that a causal relationship exists between the formation of these clumps at this location and the expansion of the KR 140 H II region. We have estimated that the age of the KR 140 H II region is about $`2\times 10^6`$ years (Ballantyne et al., 2000), which is certainly sufficient time for a layer of gas to be swept up and become gravitationally unstable even for the low density molecular cloud associated with KR 140. Other cold submillimeter sources (e.g., 6, 8, and 19) lie at the the edge of the H II region (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140) and their location is also suggestive of a link between the expansion of the H II region and their formation.

This mix of clumps, some that appear to have formed in particular locations because of the action of other stars, some that appear to have formed spontaneously in various regions throughout a larger cloud, and some which are forming stars (this would include the clump that formed VES 735), is not unlike what is seen in other star-forming regions (e.g., for $`\rho `$ Oph, see the discussion in Section 6.3 of Motte et al. 1998).

It would be expected that a cluster would be forming near VES 735 and so it is interesting to examine the stellar (or proto-stellar) content. Our analysis has shown that there are no UCHII regions in the vicinity of KR 140 and so VES 735 appears to be the only O star to have formed in the region. From Ballantyne et al. (2000) the total mass of the molecular cloud associated with KR 140 is estimated to be about 5$`\times 10^3`$ $`M_{}`$. O star formation in clouds with a cloud mass of below 104 $`M_{}`$ is considered rare (Elmegreen, 1985; Williams & McKee, 1997) and so it would actually have been very unusual to find yet another O star in the vicinity of VES 735.

KMJB 1 and 3 contain embedded objects with the luminosity of main sequence B stars. Their position in the molecular cloud suggests no causal relationship with the H II region and instead they could have formed in the original molecular cloud along with VES 735. The evolution time for a 4–6 $`M_{}`$ star ($``$ B5 V to B8 V) to the main sequence ranges from 0.4 – 8.4 $`\times 10^5`$ years (Palla & Stahler, 1993). Ballantyne et al. (2000) estimate that VES 735 and KR 140 are 1–2 $`\times 10^6`$ years old, ample time for these stars to have formed and evolved to their present state; in fact their evolution is probably relatively delayed rather than coeval.

Close to KR 140 there are five bright infrared stars (BIRS 128 to 132; Elmegreen 1980; see Figure 14 in Ballantyne et al. 2000) with very red $`m_Rm_I`$ colors (4.3 to 6.7; $`m`$ and $`M`$ in this paragraph refer to apparent and absolute magnitudes respectively). BIRS 128 is just outside of KMJB 7 (see Figure A Submillimeter View of Star Formation Near the H II Region KR 140), BIRS 131 and 132 are near KMJB 16, and BIRS 129 and 130 are seen projected against the H II region, north of VES 735. However, while Elmegreen (1980) considers the stars as possibly “embedded” there is no significant submillimeter (or infrared) emission coincident with their positions, which puts a limit $`A_V1`$ or $`E_{RI}0.27`$ on associated clumped dust. The general foreground extinction seen to affect VES 735 and KR 140 amounts to $`A_V6`$ (Kerton et al., 1999) or $`E_{RI}1.6`$. They are possibly more highly extinguished by the molecular material that lies behind KR 140 ($`V=46`$ to $`54`$ km s-1). Using the CO and H I data cubes and gas to dust conversion factors from Digel et al. (1996) or Strong & Mattox (1996) $`E_{RI}3`$ seems possible. Nevertheless, the stars probably have intrinsically redder colors than early main sequence stars ($`M_RM_I0`$). They are not ionizing stars. They could be pre-main sequence stars or evolved giants, though the latter seems less likely since these stars would have had lower mass than VES 735 yet have evolved sooner. Additional photometry at J, H, and K, when available from 2MASS, should help to clarify both this and the overall stellar content of the recently formed cluster.

## 5 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the analysis of the SCUBA 450 and 850 $`\mu `$m maps of the KR 140 region we conclude that:

1) The putative UCHII region IRAS 02160+6057 is actually part of the partial dust shell surrounding KR 140, to the NW. IRAS 02168+6052 is also part of the partial dust shell, to the east.

2) The infrared point source IRAS 02157+6053 appears in the submillimeter as a number of discrete sources or clumps, some colder than the IRAS source.

3) The cumulative mass distribution of clumps follows a $`N(>M)=N_oM^\alpha `$ curve with $`\alpha =0.49\pm 0.04`$. This is consistent with studies of clumps of this scale in other molecular clouds. At the distance of KR 140 we lack sufficient resolution to study the mass distribution of even smaller cores, such as has been done for the more nearby star forming regions of $`\rho `$ Oph (Motte et al., 1998; Johnstone et al., 2000b), and Serpens (Testi & Sargent, 1998). The use of current (OVRO) and future (SMA, ALMA) mm arrays is needed to build up a significant sample of star forming regions and to probe different star forming environments at sufficient resolution to probe the possible relationship between observed structures in molecular clouds and the observed stellar IMF.

4) The evolution of some of the clumps appears to have been affected by the KR 140 H II region. Three molecular cloud cores are aligned along the edge of a larger CO structure at the interface between the molecular and ionized gas. The alignment strongly suggests a causal relationship to the expansion of the H II region.

5) Many of the the submillimeter sources we detect are gravitationally bound. Most of the sources with $`M>M_{\mathrm{BE}}`$ follow a mass–size relationship expected for objects in virial equilibrium with non-thermal pressure support. Upon the loss of non-thermal support they could be sites of star formation.

6) A cluster of stars is probably forming along with VES 735. IRAS 02171+6058, previously thought to be an UCHII region on the basis of its PSC colors, has the luminosity of a lower mass embedded B star (later than B5 V). IRAS 02174+6052 is also an embedded star with similar luminosity ($``$ B5 V). Both objects appear to have formed spontaneously in the molecular material outside KR 140. Their evolution is somewhat delayed relative to the evolution of the O star VES 735 and its H II region. We show that five BIRS stars are possibly pre-main sequence stars. More infrared photometry, such as will be available from 2MASS, is required to delineate the cluster properties.

We thank Henry Matthews for making the JCMT observations through the CANSERV program. C.R.K. thanks the Ontario Graduate Scholarship program for financial support during part of this study. The research of P.G.M. and D.J. is supported through grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). D.R.B. acknowledges financial support from the Commonwealth Scholarship and Fellowship Plan and NSERC.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recently a class of field theories which arise as a continuation of the Dirac-Born-Infeld theories to the case where the dimension of the base space is larger than that of the target space was investigated . We named these theories Companion theories, as they appeared as associated with string and D-brane theories, and the corresponding Lagrangians as Companion Lagrangians, which were of square-root form,

$$=\sqrt{det\left|\frac{\varphi ^i}{x^\mu }\frac{\varphi ^j}{x^\mu }\right|},$$
(1)
where the set of functions $`\varphi ^i`$ $`(i=1,2,\mathrm{},p+1)`$ each dependent upon co-ordinates $`x^\mu `$ ($`\mu =1,2,\mathrm{},d>p+1`$) is a mapping from the base space to the target space. A remarkable property of the theory is that the equations of motion derived from $``$ are invariant under arbitrary field redefinitions $`\varphi ^i\varphi ^i(\varphi ^j)`$. In consequence, a large class of solutions may be found, and these equations are completely integrable when $`d=p+2`$. However the solutions are for the most part given in implicit form.

In this article, we shall instead study the Lagrangian density which is the square of (1), for which it will turn out that it inherits much of the integrability of the previous case, but permits solutions of the equations of motion in explicit form. Indeed, while this investigation was motivated by the notion of the Companion Lagrangian, it may be regarded as a study in its own right of a natural generalisation of the Klein-Gordon Lagrangian to many fields obtained by replacing $`\varphi /x_\mu `$ by the Jacobian $`J_{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _{p+1}}`$ of $`p+1`$ fields with respect to a set of the co-ordinates, and summing over all combinations of $`J_{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _{p+1}}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}`$.

After a short description of the equations of motion for the general case of $`p+1`$ fields in $`d`$ dimensions, we analyse the specific example of two fields. We also give attention to a first order differential equation as an ansatz to solve the full equations of motion with $`p+1`$ fields in $`d=p+2`$ dimensional Euclidean space. In the simplest, non-trivial example among such theories, corresponding to two fields in three dimensions, we explicitly demonstrate a large class of solutions, including a solution of the ansatz equation associated with each spherical harmonic function.

In this article, we shall restrict ourselves in the main to the massless case. The example studied should not be confused despite analogous duality features with the study of antisymmetric tensor fields, as in Freedman and Townsend . Here the antisymmetric field has an additional structure, as it is constructed from two scalar fields.

## 2 Companion Equations

### 2.1 Notation

We work in $`d`$-dimensional flat space with the totally antisymmetric tensor $`ϵ_{\nu _1\nu _2\mathrm{}\nu _d}`$ with $`ϵ_{12\mathrm{}d}=+1`$. Indices with an arrow above them denote a set of several indices. $`\stackrel{}{\mu },\stackrel{}{\nu },\stackrel{}{\rho }`$ each have $`p+1`$ components, e.g., $`\stackrel{}{\nu }=\{\nu _1,\nu _2,\mathrm{},\nu _{p+1}\}`$. $`\stackrel{}{\tau },\stackrel{}{\kappa },\stackrel{}{\eta }`$ each have $`(dp1)`$ components, e.g., $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }=\{\kappa _1,\kappa _2,\mathrm{},\kappa _{dp1}\}`$. If the prime  is used for the indices, $`\stackrel{}{\mu },\stackrel{}{\nu }`$ or $`\stackrel{}{\tau },\stackrel{}{\kappa }`$, then their components start from the second entry of un-primed ones, e.g., $`\stackrel{}{\nu }^{}=\{\nu _2,\mathrm{},\nu _{p+1}\}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\kappa }^{}=\{\kappa _2,\mathrm{},\kappa _{dp1}\}`$.

### 2.2 Jacobians

We define Jacobians $`\stackrel{~}{J}_\stackrel{}{\kappa }`$ and their duals $`J_\stackrel{}{\nu }`$ as

$`\stackrel{~}{J}_\stackrel{}{\kappa }=\stackrel{~}{J}_{\kappa _1\kappa _2\mathrm{}\kappa _{dp1}}`$ $`=ϵ_{\kappa _1\kappa _2\mathrm{}\kappa _{dp1}\nu _1\nu _2\mathrm{}\nu _{p+1}}\varphi _{\nu _1}^1\varphi _{\nu _2}^2\mathrm{}\varphi _{\nu _{p+1}}^{p+1}`$ (2)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(p+1)!}}ϵ_{\stackrel{}{\kappa }\stackrel{}{\nu }}ϵ_{i_1\mathrm{}i_{p+1}}\varphi _{\nu _1}^{i_1}\mathrm{}\varphi _{\nu _{p+1}}^{i_{p+1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(p+1)!}}ϵ_{\stackrel{}{\kappa }\stackrel{}{\nu }}J_\stackrel{}{\nu },`$
where $`\varphi _\nu ^i=\varphi ^i/x^\nu `$. The derivatives of the Jacobians are

$$\frac{\stackrel{~}{J}_\stackrel{}{\kappa }}{\varphi _\mu ^i}=\frac{1}{p!}ϵ_{\stackrel{}{\kappa }\mu \stackrel{}{\nu }^{}}ϵ_{ii_2\mathrm{}i_{p+1}}\varphi _{\nu _2}^{i_2}\mathrm{}\varphi _{\nu _{p+1}}^{i_{p+1}}\frac{1}{p!}ϵ_{\stackrel{}{\kappa }\mu \stackrel{}{\nu }^{}}J_{i,\stackrel{}{\nu }^{}}.$$
(3)
Using the Jacobians, the Companion Lagrangian $`_1`$ without square-root is written as

$$_1=det\left|\frac{\varphi ^i}{x^\mu }\frac{\varphi ^j}{x^\mu }\right|=\frac{1}{(dp1)!}\stackrel{~}{J}_\stackrel{}{\kappa }\stackrel{~}{J}_\stackrel{}{\kappa }=\frac{1}{(p+1)!}J_\stackrel{}{\mu }J_\stackrel{}{\mu }.$$
(4)
The equation of motion for $`_1`$ is then given by

$$_\mu \left(\frac{_1}{\varphi _\mu ^i}\right)=\frac{2}{(dp1)!}\frac{\stackrel{~}{J}_\stackrel{}{\kappa }}{\varphi _\mu ^i}\frac{\stackrel{~}{J}_\stackrel{}{\kappa }}{\varphi _\nu ^j}\varphi _{\mu \nu }^j=\frac{2}{p!}J_{i,\stackrel{}{\nu }^{}}_\mu J_{\mu \stackrel{}{\nu }^{}}=0.$$
(5)
## 3 Solutions of Quadratic Jacobian Lagrangian

Let us consider the specific case of two fields, in which the Jacobians are given, with $`\varphi ^1=u`$ and $`\varphi ^2=v`$,

$$J_{\mu \nu }=\frac{u}{x^\mu }\frac{v}{x^\nu }\frac{u}{x^\nu }\frac{v}{x^\mu }.$$
(6)
It is noteworthy that $`J_{\mu \nu }`$ is like a field strength $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ for the gauge potential

$$A_\mu =u\frac{v}{x^\mu }+\frac{w}{x^\mu },$$
(7)
where the field $`w`$ represents an ambiguity by gauge transformation. This is the Clebsch representation for a vector field in the case of three dimensions . Using subscripts to denote derivatives, e.g. $`u_\mu =u/x^\mu `$, the equations of motion (5) in this case are simply

$$u_\nu \frac{}{x^\mu }J_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},v_\nu \frac{}{x^\mu }J_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.$$
(8)
Note that these equations mean that the vector $`J_{\mu \nu }/x^\mu `$ is orthogonal to both the vectors $`u_\nu `$ and $`v_\nu `$, and this implies the following equation in three dimensions,

$$\frac{}{x^\mu }(u_\mu v_\nu u_\nu v_\mu )=\lambda (u,v)ϵ_{\nu \rho \sigma }u_\rho v_\sigma ,$$
(9)
where $`\lambda `$ is a function of $`u,v`$.

There is a large class of solutions which may be simply categorised as follows,

$$u=f(a_\rho x^\rho ,b_\rho x^\rho ),v=g(a_\rho x^\rho ,b_\rho x^\rho ),$$
(10)
where $`f,g`$ are arbitrary functions of two variables and the constant vectors $`a_\rho ,b_\rho `$ satisfy

$$(a_\rho a_\rho )(b_\sigma b_\sigma )(a_\rho b_\rho )^2=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.$$
(11)
Notice that in Euclidean space such solutions, if they are to be nontrivial, are necessarily complex. The trivial solution $`a_\rho =\lambda b_\rho `$ implies that $`u`$ and $`v`$ are functionally related. This result is a direct generalisation of the Klein-Gordon situation, that $`\varphi (\stackrel{}{a}\stackrel{}{x})`$ is a solution of the massless equation iff $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ is null. A specific example of this form of solution in three dimensions is given by

$$u=f(x+i\mathrm{sin}\theta y,z+i\mathrm{cos}\theta y),v=g(x+i\mathrm{sin}\theta y,z+i\mathrm{cos}\theta y).$$
(12)
In Minkowski space, of course, real solutions may be obtained by setting $`t=iy`$. In fact a yet more general construction can be given; in three dimensions it is

$$u=F(a_\rho x^\rho ,b_\rho x^\rho ,c_\rho x^\rho ),v=G(a_\rho x^\rho ,b_\rho x^\rho ,c_\rho x^\rho ),$$
(13)
where $`F,G`$ are arbitrary functions of three variables and the constant vectors $`a_\rho ,b_\rho ,c_\rho `$ satisfy

$$(a_\rho a_\rho )(b_\sigma b_\sigma )(a_\rho b_\rho )^2=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},c_\rho =ϵ_{\rho \tau \sigma }a_\tau b_\sigma ,$$
(14)
while in higher dimensions the definition of $`c_\rho `$ is replaced by

$$c_\rho =ϵ_{\rho \lambda _1\lambda _2\mathrm{}\tau \sigma }k_{\lambda _1}^1k_{\lambda _2}^2\mathrm{}a_\tau b_\sigma ,$$
(15)
and $`\stackrel{}{k}^1\stackrel{}{k}^2\mathrm{}`$ are constant vectors orthogonal to $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{b}`$. There is an alternative strategy in seeking solutions, which we elucidate below.

## 4 Ansatz for Companion Equations

In this section, we consider $`p+1`$ fields in $`p+2`$ dimensional Euclidean space and obtain auxiliary equations whose solution implies that of the full equations of motion in the manner of the equations of self-duality.

### 4.1 Ansatz equations for $`(d=p+2,p+1)`$

In the $`d=p+2`$ dimensional case, the Jacobian defined in (2) has one index $`\kappa `$; $`\stackrel{~}{J}_\kappa =\frac{1}{(p+1)!}ϵ_{\kappa \nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{p+1}}J_{\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{p+1}}`$. We make the assumption that the Jacobian is expressed as the derivative of a function $`G(x)`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{J}_\kappa =\frac{1}{(p+1)!}ϵ_{\kappa \nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{p+1}}J_{\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{p+1}}=\frac{1}{(p+1)!}ϵ_{\kappa \stackrel{}{\nu }}J_\stackrel{}{\nu }=_\kappa G(x),$$
(16)
or equivalently, in terms of the dual $`J_\stackrel{}{\nu }`$,

$$J_\stackrel{}{\nu }=ϵ_{\kappa \stackrel{}{\nu }}_\kappa G(x).$$
(17)
From (17), we can easily see solutions of the ansatz to satisfy the Companion equation of motion (5), since $`_{\nu _1}J_{\nu _1\stackrel{}{\nu }^{}}=ϵ_{\kappa \nu _1\stackrel{}{\nu }^{}}_{\nu _1}_\kappa G(x)=0`$. Differentiating the LHS of (16) and using the Jacobi identity for $`J_\stackrel{}{\nu }`$, $`_{[\kappa }J_{\stackrel{}{\nu }]}=0`$, we obtain the harmonic equation for $`G(x)`$,

$$\mathrm{}G(x)=_\mu _\mu G(x)=0.$$
(18)
The relation (17) between $`J_\stackrel{}{\nu }`$ and $`_\kappa G(x)`$ may be considered analogous to the implications of self-duality in monopole theory. The Jacobi identity for the former gives the harmonic equation for the latter, while the integrability condition for the latter leads to a divergence-free equation for the former which solves the Companion equations (5).

### 4.2 $`(d=3,p=1)`$ case

Let us apply the ansatz equation (16) for the case with two fields in three dimensions,

$$\stackrel{~}{J}_\mu =\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{\mu \nu \sigma }J_{\nu \sigma }=ϵ_{\mu \nu \sigma }u_\nu v_\sigma =_\mu G(x).$$
(19)
In , this equation has appeared as a dual version of the Poisson Bracket version of the three-dimensional Nahm equations, for which Ward has given an implicit solution . From (19), we see that the vector $`_\mu G`$ is orthogonal to both vectors $`u_\nu `$ and $`v_\sigma `$. As is well known, with the use of polar co-ordinates

$$x=r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi ,y=r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi ,z=r\mathrm{cos}\theta ,$$
(20)
the 3D harmonic equation for $`G`$ is solved in terms of spherical harmonic functions,

$`G={\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=l}{\overset{l}{}}}a_l^mG_l^m,G_l^m={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^{l+1}}}Y_l^m(\theta ,\varphi ),`$
$`Y_l^m(\theta ,\varphi )=P_l^{|m|}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )e^{im\varphi },`$ (21)
where $`a_l^m`$ are constants and $`P_l^{|m|}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$ are associated Legendre polynomials.

Let us first apply each $`G_l^m`$ to the ansatz equation and find corresponding solutions of $`u`$ and $`v`$. The homogeneity of the RHS of (19) is of degree $`(l+2)`$, as $`G_l^m`$ is of degree $`(l+1)`$, Thus, at a first attempt to solve the ansatz, it is natural to impose a homogeneity condition upon both functions $`u`$ and $`v`$,

$$u(tx,ty,tz)=t^ku(x,y,z),v(tx,ty,tz)=t^nv(x,y,z),$$
(22)
or equivalently,

$$x^\mu _\mu u(x,y,z)=ku(x,y,z),x^\mu _\mu v(x,y,z)=nv(x,y,z).$$
(23)
When $`u`$ and $`v`$ are expressed in terms of $`\{r,\theta ,\varphi \}`$, their $`r`$ dependences are determined by the condition (22) as $`u=r^kU(\theta ,\varphi )`$ and $`v=r^nV(\theta ,\varphi )`$. The degrees of $`u`$, $`v`$ and $`G`$ are obviously related by

$$k+n=l.$$
(24)
We suppose the numbers $`k`$ and $`n`$ to be integers and also $`kn0`$ to make sure that $`u`$ and $`v`$ are well behaved as $`r\mathrm{}`$.

In the $`l=0`$ case, $`G=G_0^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}=1/r`$ and functions $`u`$ and $`v`$ are homogeneous of degree zero. Then a solution of the ansatz (19) is easily obtained as

$$u=\mathrm{cos}\theta =\frac{z}{r},v=\varphi =\mathrm{arctan}\frac{y}{x}.$$
(25)
For the $`l>0`$ case, multiplying (19) by $`ϵ_{\mu \lambda \rho }x_\lambda `$, with the use of the homogeneity condition of $`u`$ and $`v`$, we have

$$kuv_\rho +nvu_\rho =ϵ_{\mu \lambda \rho }x_\lambda G_\mu .$$
(26)
Conversely, acting with the operator $`ϵ_{\tau \sigma \rho }_\sigma `$ upon (26), we have $`l(ϵ_{\tau \sigma \rho }u_\sigma v_\rho G_\tau )=x_\tau \mathrm{}G`$, showing the equivalence between (19) and (26), provided $`G(x)`$ is a solution of the harmonic equation.
Let us consider the canonical transformation,

$$u^{}=\frac{1}{l}uv,v^{}=\mathrm{ln}\frac{v^k}{u^n},\{u^{},v^{}\}_{(u,v)}=1,$$
(27)
under which the ansatz equation (19) is invariant. Then (26) is transformed into the form of the equation (26) with $`(k,n)=(l,0)`$. Therefore, in the following, we concentrate on the $`(l,0)`$-type solutions.

For the $`(l,0)`$ case, the equation (26) becomes

$$v_\mu =\alpha (x)ϵ_{\mu \lambda \rho }x_\lambda G_\rho =l_\mu G,\alpha (x)=\frac{1}{lu},$$
(28)
where $`l_\mu `$ are angular momentum operators, which are rewritten in terms of $`\{r,\theta ,\varphi \}`$,

$$l_1=\mathrm{sin}\varphi \frac{}{\theta }\mathrm{cot}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi \frac{}{\varphi },l_2=\mathrm{cos}\varphi \frac{}{\theta }\mathrm{cot}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi \frac{}{\varphi },l_3=\frac{}{\varphi }.$$
(29)
The first equation in (28) can be recast as

$$v_\theta =\frac{\alpha (x)r}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }G_\varphi ,v_\varphi =\alpha (x)r\mathrm{sin}\theta G_\theta .$$
(30)
The integrability condition $`_\varphi v_\theta =_\theta v_\varphi `$ gives a first order equation for $`\alpha (x)`$,

$$\frac{G_\varphi }{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }_\varphi \mathrm{ln}\alpha +G_\theta _\theta \mathrm{ln}\alpha =\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }(\mathrm{sin}\theta _\theta (\mathrm{sin}\theta G_\theta )+G_{\varphi \varphi })=\stackrel{}{l}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}G,$$
(31)
where the operator $`\stackrel{}{l}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}=l_1^2+l_2^2+l_3^2`$.

For $`G=G_l^m`$ $`(l=1,2,\mathrm{},m=0,1,\mathrm{},l)`$ in (21), the operators $`\stackrel{}{l}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}`$ and $`_\varphi =l_3`$ give eigenvalues $`l(l+1)`$ and $`im`$, respectively. Then (31) becomes, with $`q=\mathrm{cos}\theta `$

$$im\frac{P_l^m(q)}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }_\varphi \mathrm{ln}\alpha +\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \frac{dP_l^m(q)}{dq}_q\mathrm{ln}\alpha =l(l+1)P_l^m(q).$$
(32)
To find real solutions for $`\alpha (x)`$, we assume $`\alpha (x)=\alpha (r,q)`$, which gives

$$_q\mathrm{ln}\alpha (r,q)=\frac{l(l+1)P_l^m}{(1q^2)(dP_l^m/dq)}.$$
(33)
The function $`u`$ is then given as

$$u=\frac{1}{l\alpha }=\frac{e^{T(q)}}{lr^l},T(q)=l(l+1)𝑑q\frac{P_l^m(q)}{(1q^2)dP_l^m(q)/dq}.$$
(34)
The form of $`v`$ is easily evaluated by the second equation of (30), for $`m0`$,

$$v=\frac{i}{m}e^{T(q)}(1q^2)\frac{dP_l^m(q)}{dq}e^{im\varphi }.$$
(35)
We can easily check this solution to satisfy the first equation for $`v_\theta `$ in (30) by using the fact that the associated Legendre polynomials satisfy

$$\frac{d}{dq}((1q^2)\frac{d}{dq}P_l^m(q))+(l(l+1)\frac{m^2}{1q^2})P_l^m(q)=0.$$
(36)
Having chosen the function $`u`$ to be real, we obtain solutions for $`G_l^m`$ $`(m=1,\mathrm{},l)`$ by taking the complex conjugation of (35),

$$u=\frac{e^{T(q)}}{lr^l},v=\frac{i}{m}e^{T(q)}(1q^2)\frac{dP_l^m(q)}{dq}e^{im\varphi }.$$
(37)
Taking a linear combination of solutions for $`G_l^m`$ and $`G_l^m`$, we have real solutions for the ansatz equation,

$`G={\displaystyle \frac{P_l^m(q)}{r^{l+1}}}(a\mathrm{cos}m\varphi +b\mathrm{sin}m\varphi ),(m=1,\mathrm{},l)`$
$`u={\displaystyle \frac{e^{T(q)}}{lr^l}},v={\displaystyle \frac{e^{T(q)}}{m}}(1q^2){\displaystyle \frac{dP_l^m(q)}{dq}}(a\mathrm{sin}m\varphi +b\mathrm{cos}m\varphi ),`$ (38)
where $`a`$, $`b`$ are arbitrary constants.

For $`m=0`$, with the use of the differential equation (36), (33) becomes

$$_q\mathrm{ln}\alpha (r,q)=\frac{d}{dq}\mathrm{ln}((1q^2)\frac{dP_l}{dq}),$$
(39)
which gives

$$u=\frac{(1q^2)(dP_l/dq)}{lr^l},v=\varphi .$$
(40)
Since the function $`v`$ does not depend upon the parameter $`l`$, the sum of any number of $`u`$’s with different $`l`$’s also becomes a solution of (28) with the corresponding sum of $`G_l^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}=P_l(q)/r^{l+1}`$. Indeed this solution satisfies the ansatz equation (19), although it contains terms with different homogeneities. This class of solutions of the ansatz equation is also obtained by taking $`z`$-derivatives of the $`l=0`$ solution (25),

$$G=\underset{n}{}a_n_z^n\frac{1}{r},u=\underset{n}{}a_n_z^n\frac{z}{r},v=\varphi =\mathrm{arctan}\frac{y}{x},$$
(41)
where $`a_n`$ are constants. These solutions also belong to the space of $`m=0`$ solutions.

To find an explicit form of $`T(q)`$ in (34) for $`m0`$ cases, let us introduce the following identity,

$$(1q^2)\frac{dP_l^m}{dq}=(l+m)P_{l1}^mlqP_l^m,$$
(42)
and a series expansion formula for $`P_l^m`$,

$`P_l^m(q)`$ $`=`$ $`(1q^2)^{\frac{m}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^m}{dq^m}}P_l(q)`$ (43)
$`=`$ $`(1q^2)^{\frac{m}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{[(lm)/2]}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^r}{2^rr!}}{\displaystyle \frac{(2l2r1)!!}{(lm2r)!}}q^{lm2r}.`$
Using these formulae, we can rewrite the integrand of $`T(q)`$ as a ratio of polynomials with respect to $`q`$,

$$t(q)=\frac{l(l+1)P_l^m}{(1q^2)dP_l^m/dq}=\frac{l(l+1)P_l^m(q)}{(l+m)P_{l1}^mlqP_l^m}.$$
(44)
Note that the factor $`(1q^2)^{\frac{m}{2}}`$ in the RHS of (43) does not appear in the above ratio. The integral may be performed in principle by resolving the integrand into partial fractions.

In the following, we demonstrate explicit solutions of the ansatz equation (19) for $`m=l`$ to $`m=l4`$.

 $`m=l`$

$$G=\frac{(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^l}{r^{l+1}}e^{il\varphi },u=\frac{(\mathrm{cos}\theta )^{l+1}}{lr^l},v=i(\mathrm{tan}\theta )^le^{il\varphi }.$$
(45)
 $`m=l1`$

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{l1}\mathrm{cos}\theta }{r^{l+1}}}e^{i(l1)\varphi },`$
$`u`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(l\mathrm{cos}^2\theta 1)^{\frac{l+1}{2}}}{lr^l}},v={\displaystyle \frac{i}{(l1)}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{l1}}{(l\mathrm{cos}^2\theta 1)^{\frac{l1}{2}}}}e^{i(l1)\varphi }.`$ (46)
 $`m=l2`$

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{l2}((2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta 1)}{r^{l+1}}}e^{i(l2)\varphi },`$
$`u`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{lr^l}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )^{\frac{l(l+1)}{5l4}}((2l1)l\mathrm{cos}^2\theta (5l4))^{2\frac{(l+1)(l1)}{5l4}},`$ (47)
$`v`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{(l2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{l2}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )^{\frac{(l2)^2}{5l4}}}{((2l1)l\mathrm{cos}^2\theta (5l4))^{\frac{(2l1)(l2)}{5l4}}}}e^{i(l2)\varphi }.`$
 $`m=l3`$

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{l3}\mathrm{cos}\theta ((2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta 3)}{r^{l+1}}}e^{i(l3)\varphi },`$
$`u`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{lr^l}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\omega +9(l1)2l(2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^{(l+1)\frac{3(l3)+\omega }{4\omega }}}{(\omega 9(l1)+2l(2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^{(l+1)\frac{3(l3)\omega }{4\omega }}}},`$ (48)
$`v`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{e^{i(l3)\varphi }(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{l3}}{4l(l3)(2l1)}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\omega 9(l1)+2l(2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^{(l3)\frac{3(l+1)\omega }{4\omega }}}{(\omega +9(l1)2l(2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )^{(l3)\frac{3(l+1)+\omega }{4\omega }}}},`$
where $`\omega =\sqrt{3(19l^250l+27)}`$ .

 $`m=l4`$

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{l4}((2l1)(2l3)\mathrm{cos}^4\theta 6(2l3)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta +3)}{r^{l+1}}}e^{i(l4)\varphi },`$
$`u`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{lr^l}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )^{\frac{l(l+1)}{9l16}}{\displaystyle \frac{(l(2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta (7l8)2\xi )^{\frac{2(l+1)(l2)(l4+\xi )}{(9l16)\xi }}}{(l(2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta (7l8)+2\xi )^{\frac{2(l+1)(l2)(l4\xi )}{(9l16)\xi }}}},`$ (49)
$`v`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{(2l3)}{l(l4)(2l1)}}(\mathrm{sin}\theta )^{l4}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )^{\frac{(l4)^2}{9l16}}\times `$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{(l(2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta (7l8)+2\xi )^{\frac{2(l+1)(l2)(l4\xi )}{(9l16)\xi }+1}}{(l(2l1)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta (7l8)2\xi )^{\frac{2(l+1)(l2)(l4+\xi )}{(9l16)\xi }1}}}e^{i(l4)\varphi },`$
where $`\xi =\sqrt{(l2)(11l^240l+24)/(2l3)}`$ .

## 5 Fourier mode solutions

The equations of motion (5) in the case of two fields can be recast as, in general dimension,

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{v}{x^\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{x^\nu }}{\displaystyle \frac{v}{x^\nu }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{x^\mu }}\right)^2u=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},`$ (50)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{u}{x^\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{x^\nu }}{\displaystyle \frac{u}{x^\nu }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{x^\mu }}\right)^2v=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.`$ (51)
Suppose now we look for a solution of the form

$$u=A\mathrm{exp}(k_\nu x^\nu ),v=B\mathrm{exp}(p_\nu x^\nu )+C\mathrm{exp}(q_\nu x^\nu ),$$
(52)
where $`A,B,C`$ are constants, and $`\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{q}`$ are constant $`d`$-dimensional vectors. (If C=0, then this is simply a special case of the form discussed earlier.) Then the coefficient of $`AB^2`$ in (50) is

$`\mathrm{exp}(p_sx^s)\left(p_\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{x^\nu }}p_\nu {\displaystyle \frac{}{x^\mu }}\right)(p_\mu k_\nu p_\nu k_\mu )\mathrm{exp}(p_rx^r+k_rx^r)`$
$`=\mathrm{exp}(2p_rx^r+k_rx^r)\left(p^2k^2(pk)^2\right)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.`$ (53)
Similarly, the coefficient of $`AC^2`$ in (50) vanishes, provided

$$q^2k^2(qk)^2=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.$$
(54)
These conditions ensure that (51) is also satisfied without any further condition. They have only nontrivial complex solutions in Euclidean space, but have real (or pure imaginary, as befits plane wave solutions) in Minkowski space. What is remarkable is that the cross term proportional to $`ABC`$ in (50) also vanishes if those two conditions (53),(54) are imposed. The vanishing of this term is tantamount to the following condition;

$$(p_\mu (q_\nu +k_\nu )p_\nu (q_\mu +k_\mu ))(q_\mu k_\nu q_\nu k_\mu )+(q_\mu (p_\nu +k_\nu )q_\nu (p_\mu +k_\mu ))(p_\mu k_\nu p_\nu k_\mu )=0.$$
(55)
Simplifying this equation by using the previous conditions, we have

$$(pq)[(p+q+2k)k](pk)q^2(qk)p^22(pk)(qk)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.$$
(56)
This is satisfied if the pair $`(p,q)`$ obeys a similar restriction to $`(p,k)`$ and $`(q,k)`$. These restrictions enable (56) to be expressed in the form

$$(pq|p||q|)(2|k|+|p|+|q|)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}.$$
(57)
which is clearly satisfied if $`pq`$ is replaced by $`|p||q|`$. By a linear transformation, $`k,p,q`$ may be represented by three-dimensional vectors. $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ is then expressed as a linear combination,

$$\stackrel{}{k}=\alpha \stackrel{}{p}+\beta \stackrel{}{q}+\gamma \stackrel{}{p}\times \stackrel{}{q}.$$
(58)
Taking scalar products of both sides with respect to $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ yields the required condition;

$$\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{q}=|p||q|.$$
(59)
With the metric $`(+,,)`$, the vectors may be parametrised by

$`\stackrel{}{k}`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{sinh}\theta ,\mathrm{cosh}\theta ,0),`$
$`\stackrel{}{p}`$ $`=`$ $`(a_1,a_2,a_1\mathrm{cosh}\theta a_2\mathrm{sinh}\theta ),`$ (60)
$`\stackrel{}{q}`$ $`=`$ $`(b_1,b_2,b_1\mathrm{cosh}\theta b_2\mathrm{sinh}\theta ).`$
These vectors all satisfy the condition that the cross product of any pair are lightlike automatically. Further terms may also be added to both $`u`$ and $`v`$, provided they fall within this parametrisation; all pairs have lightlike cross products, so the modes which fall within this class satisfy a superposition principle. It is expected that the analysis can be extended at the cost of more technical complexity, to the case of three or more fields. The surprising result is that although the equations are non-linear, nevertheless a large class of plane wave solutions obey a superposition principle. Note further that the analysis extends to the situation where both fields are linear combinations of plane wave solutions; Suppose

$$u=\underset{j}{}A_j\mathrm{exp}(p_jx),v=\underset{j}{}B_j\mathrm{exp}(q_jx).$$
(61)
Then apart from the trivial case where $`u`$ and $`v`$ are functionally related, the conditions for a solution of this type are simply

$$(p_ip_j)^2p_i^2p_j^2=(k_ik_j)^2k_i^2k_j^2=(p_ik_j)^2p_i^2k_j^2=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},\mathrm{for}(i,j).$$
(62)
An important feature of a solution of this type is that the coefficients $`A_j,B_j`$ are all independent, and therefore may be treated as creation or annihilation operators in quantising the theory.

## 6 Incorporation of mass

A natural way to introduce a mass will be through the introduction of a term $`M^{2n}_1^n(\varphi ^j)^2`$ into the Lagrangian. Then in the case of two fields in general dimension discussed in section 3, the conditions for a solution of the form of (10) require that $`f,g`$ are pure exponentials and (11) is modified to

$$(a_\rho a_\rho )(b_\sigma b_\sigma )(a_\rho b_\rho )^2=M^4.$$
(63)
It seems that the incorporation of mass drastically reduces the variety of tractable solutions.

## 7 Discussion

In the case of two fields, in section 3, we have exhibited an arbitrary family of solutions to the second order equations of motion. These solutions are complex in Euclidean space, but real in Minkowski space. On the other hand, in section 4, we have demonstrated real solutions of the first order ansatz equation in Euclidean space. This situation is reminiscent of the instanton construction, as the self-dual ansatz for Yang-Mills also yields solutions which are real in Euclidean space. The solutions we have found are associated with spherical harmonics, labelled by two integers, which also brings to mind the fact that instantons also have a label, the instanton number.

## Acknowledgements

D.B.F. would like to thank C.K. Zachos and R. Sasaki for useful discussions.
The work of T.U. is partially supported by the Daiwa Anglo-Japanese Foundation and the British Council.


text:
# One-loop self-energy correction to the 𝟏𝐬 and 𝟐𝐬 hyperfine splitting in H-like systems

## Introduction

Hyperfine splitting of the ground state in hydrogen was measured already thirty years ago up to utmost precision of about $`6\times 10^{13}`$ . For many years this measurement remained the most accurate experiment in modern physics. Unfortunately, the theoretical situation still remains much less satisfactory in this case, due to uncertainties in the proton-size and proton-polarizability corrections. At present, accuracy of the theoretical prediction is on the level of several ppm, and further progress is going to be rather slow. This fact limits perspectives for testing higher-order QED effects in comparison of theory and experiment for the ground-state hyperfine splitting.

It is possible partly to avoid problems connected with the proton structure, if we study the specific difference of the $`1s`$ and $`2s`$ hyperfine structure intervals ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _2`$), $`D_{21}=8\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _2\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _1`$. The most accurate measurements of the $`1s`$  and $`2s`$  hyperfine structure of $`{}_{}{}^{3}\mathrm{He}_{}^{+}`$ yield

$$D_{21}({}_{}{}^{3}\mathrm{He}_{}^{+})=\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}189.979}(71)\mathrm{kHz}.$$

This difference is much less sensitive to the proton structure than $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _2`$ separately and, therefore, provides better possibilities to test higher-order QED effects by comparison with the experiment.

In the present investigation, we perform a nonperturbative (in the parameter $`Z\alpha `$) calculation of the one-loop self-energy correction for the specific difference of the $`1s`$ and $`2s`$ hyperfine structure intervals $`D_{21}`$ for H-like low-$`Z`$ atoms. We check consistency of our results with perturbative calculations and evaluate the unknown higher-order contribution to $`D_{21}`$ for hydrogen and He<sup>+</sup>.

## I Self-energy correction to the hyperfine splitting

In the nonrecoil, point-nucleus limit, the hyperfine splitting of the $`ns`$ state of a H-like atom can be conveniently represented as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _n=\frac{E_F}{n^3}\left[B_n+\frac{\alpha }{\pi }D_n^{(2)}(Z\alpha )+\left(\frac{\alpha }{\pi }\right)^2D_n^{(4)}(Z\alpha )+\mathrm{}\right],$$
(1)
where $`E_F`$ is the non-relativistic Fermi energy, $`B_n`$ is the relativistic factor, and the functions $`D_n^{(2r)}(Z\alpha )`$ represent $`r`$-loop radiative corrections. In this work we are interested in the one-loop self-energy contribution to the hyperfine splitting, $`D_n^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$. This correction can be written as a double expansion in $`Z\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{ln}(Z\alpha )`$,

$`D_n^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`a_{00}+(Z\alpha )a_{10}+(Z\alpha )^2\{a_{22}\mathrm{ln}^2(Z\alpha )`$ (4)
$`+a_{21}\mathrm{ln}(Z\alpha )+a_{20}`$
$`+(Z\alpha )[a_{31}\mathrm{ln}(Z\alpha )+F_n^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )]\},`$
where the coefficients $`a_{ij}`$ are listed in Table I, and the function $`F_n^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ contains a constant entering in order $`(Z\alpha )^3`$ plus all higher-order contributions.

Now consider the function $`D_{21}^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}=D_2^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}D_1^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}`$ which corresponds to the specific difference of the $`1s`$ and $`2s`$ hyperfine structure intervals, $`8\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _2\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _1`$. The coefficients $`a_{00}`$, $`a_{10}`$, $`a_{22}`$, and $`a_{31}`$ are state-independent, and, therefore, the function $`D_{21}^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}`$ can be written as

$$D_{21}^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )=(Z\alpha )^2\left[a_{21}\mathrm{ln}(Z\alpha )+a_{20}+(Z\alpha )F_{21}^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )\right].$$
(5)
The coefficients $`a_{21}`$ and $`a_{20}`$ for this difference were investigated in Refs.  and recently re-evaluated in Ref.  (see also references therein),

$`a_{21}(2s)a_{21}(1s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}\mathrm{ln}27,`$ (6)
$`a_{20}(2s)a_{20}(1s)`$ $`=`$ $`5.221233(3).`$ (7)
While the traditional approach to the calculation of QED effects in loosely bound systems is based on the perturbative expansion in the parameter $`Z\alpha `$, it turns out that complexity of calculations grows very rapidly in higher orders. As a result, the exact numerical treatment of radiative corrections to all orders in $`Z\alpha `$ becomes rather competitive. Despite the fact that nonperturbative calculations of the self-energy corrections for light atoms are impeded by large numerical cancellations, several accurate results complete in $`Z\alpha `$ have been obtained for hydrogen during last few years . Among them we mention the calculation by Blundell, Cheng and Sapirstein  in which the function $`F_1^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ was determined numerically to all orders in $`Z\alpha `$. For hydrogen, their evaluation yields $`F_1^{\mathrm{SE}}(1\alpha )=12.0(2.0)`$.

## II Non-perturbative evaluation of the self-energy correction

The self-energy correction to the ground-state hyperfine splitting in various H-like ions was calculated by a number of authors . We note that the first two evaluations turned out to be not completely correct. In our first calculation  we employed the partial-wave renormalization procedure. As was found later (see, e.g., ), this procedure delivers a certain spurious term due to the non-covariant nature of the regularization. This spurious term yields an additional contribution of about 3% for bismuth ($`Z=83`$). In the second evaluation , a certain term in the vertex part was omitted, which contributes on the level of about 1% for bismuth (see the related discussion in Ref. ). The self-energy correction to the $`2s`$ hyperfine splitting was calculated in our previous studies  for several medium- and high-$`Z`$ ions and, for $`Z=83`$, also in Ref. . In the present investigation, we extend our calculations to the low-$`Z`$ region and increase numerical accuracy, in order to get information about terms of order $`\alpha (Z\alpha )^3`$ and higher.

The self-energy correction to the hyperfine splitting can be conveniently represented as a perturbation of the first-order self-energy correction by the hyperfine-splitting interaction

$$V_{\mathrm{hfs}}(𝐫)=\frac{|e|}{4\pi }\frac{𝜶[𝝁\times 𝐫]}{r^3},$$
(8)
where $`𝜶`$ denotes the Dirac matrices, and $`𝝁`$ is the nuclear magnetic moment. Taken to first order in $`V_{\mathrm{hfs}}`$, this perturbation gives rise to the modification of the wave functions, the electron propagator, and the binding energy. We refer to the corresponding contributions as the irreducible part ($`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{\mathrm{ir}}`$), the vertex part, and the reducible part, respectively. The irreducible contribution can be expressed as a non-diagonal matrix element of the first-order self-energy operator. For its evaluation we use the numerical scheme described in detail in Ref. . We note that an expression for a wave function modified by the magnetic field can be derived analytically both in configuration and in momentum space using virial relations for the Dirac equation . Corresponding formulas for the $`1s`$ and $`2s`$ wave functions modified by the magnetic field can be found in Ref. .

The reducible and the vertex part are conveniently evaluated together. Both of them are ultraviolet divergent. In order to isolate the divergences in a covariant way, we separate terms in which bound electron propagators are replaced with free propagators. The sum of these terms for the reducible and the vertex part is denoted by $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{\mathrm{vr}}^{(0)}`$. It is evaluated in momentum space, where the ultraviolet divergences can be treated in a standard way. The remaining part of the reducible and the vertex contribution is referred to as $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{\mathrm{vr}}^{(1+)}`$. This part does not contain any ultraviolet divergences and can be evaluated in configuration space. We note that both the reducible and the vertex part of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{\mathrm{vr}}^{(1+)}`$ possess some infrared divergences that cancel each other when considered together.

Generally, our scheme of the numerical evaluation is rather similar to that used in Ref. . Here we address several features of our calculation which distinguish it from previous studies. First, our treatment of infrared divergences in $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{\mathrm{vr}}^{(1+)}`$ is essentially different from that in Ref. . These divergences can be easily separated when bound electron propagators are written in the spectral representation,

$$S_F(\epsilon ,𝐱,𝐲)=\underset{n}{}\frac{\psi (𝐱)\overline{\psi }(𝐲)}{\epsilon \epsilon _n(1i0)}.$$
(9)
As can easily be shown, the infrared divergence arises only when the energy $`\epsilon _n`$ in the spectral representation of all internal electron propagators coincides with the energy of the initial state $`\epsilon _a`$. In that case, the integration over the energy of the virtual photon can be carried out analytically, and a finite result is achieved explicitly in the sum of the reducible and the vertex contribution. So, we divide $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{\mathrm{vr}}^{(1+)}`$ into two parts. The first one is the finite expression derived from the infrared-divergent part, and the next is given by the point-by-point difference of the original expression and its divergent part, which is a regular function of the virtual-photon energy.

Some additional complications arise for the self-energy correction to the $`2s`$ hyperfine splitting, as compared to that for the ground state. For the $`2s`$ state, the integration over the virtual-photon energy involves the integrand with an additional pole in the first quadrant of the complex energy plane. This pole arises from the virtual $`1s`$ state which is more deeply bound than the initial state. When the standard Wick rotation is applied, the whole contribution is separated into an integral along the imaginary axis and a pole term. This separation leads to a significant numerical cancellation in the low-$`Z`$ region. An additional problem in this case is the presence of a pole due to the $`2p_{3/2}`$ state near the integration contour. This pole is separated from the contour only by relativistic effects that nearly vanish for very low $`Z`$. We avoid both these problems by performing the integration along the contour $`C`$ in the complex energy plane, as shown in Fig. 1.

The crucial point of the evaluation, which defines numerical accuracy of the result, is the infinite sum over the angular-momentum quantum number of intermediate states, $`|\kappa |`$. To reduce the uncertainty due to the termination of the summation, we extrapolate it to infinity. The extrapolation was carried out using two different schemes. First, we use least-squares fitting of several last expansion terms to polynomial in $`1/|\kappa |`$. Next, we approximate last terms of the expansion by $`1/|\kappa |^\alpha `$, where the exponent $`\alpha `$ is fitted. Convergence of different fits as a function of the truncation parameter $`|\kappa _{\mathrm{max}}|`$ was studied, and the most stable fit was chosen.

Naturally, a reasonable extrapolation of the truncated summation is possible only if expansion terms exhibit a clear asymptotic behavior. A problem appears for the irreducible contribution, in which the expansion terms change their sign at a certain point $`|\kappa |=|\kappa _0|`$. It is clear that when $`|\kappa _0|`$ comes close to the truncation point $`|\kappa _{\mathrm{max}}|`$, no reliable extrapolation is possible. While this problem is present for the ground state if $`Z`$ is very small, it appears much more immensely for the $`2s`$ state. We found that by a minor modification of the renormalization procedure it is possible to eliminate this unfortunate feature of the partial-wave expansion of the irreducible contribution.

Let us examine the cancellation of ultraviolet divergences in the sum of the zero- and the one-potential term for the first-order self-energy correction (for the detailed discussion of the renormalization procedure we refer to ). The free self-energy operator $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(0)}(p)`$ can be represented as

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(0)}(p)\delta m=\frac{\alpha }{4\pi }\mathrm{\Delta }_ϵ(p_\mu \gamma ^\mu m)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_R^{(0)}(p),$$
(10)
where $`\delta m`$ denotes the mass counterterm, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_ϵ`$ is a divergent constant, $`p`$ is the 4-momentum. In the zero-potential term, the time component of $`p`$ is fixed at the physical energy of the initial state, $`p_0=\epsilon _a`$. The renormalized free self-energy operator $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_R^{(0)}(p)`$ is finite. Analogously, we can write the time component of the free vertex operator as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^0(p,p^{})=\frac{\alpha }{4\pi }\mathrm{\Delta }_ϵ\gamma ^0+\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^0(p,p^{}),$$
(11)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^0(p,p^{})`$ is finite. Assuming that the operators act on the Dirac wave functions, the divergences cancel each other due to the Dirac equation

$$(p_\mu \gamma ^\mu m)\psi _a(𝐩)=\frac{d𝐩^{}}{(2\pi )^3}\gamma ^0V_C(𝐩𝐩^{})\psi _a(𝐩^{}).$$
(12)
In the one-potential term, the time components of the 4-momenta $`p`$ and $`p^{}`$ in the vertex operator are normally fixed at the physical energy, $`p_0=p_{}^{}{}_{0}{}^{}=\epsilon _a`$. However, as can be seen from Eq. (11), the ultraviolet divergent part of the vertex operator does not depend on them. Therefore, we can formally regard $`\epsilon =p_0=p_{}^{}{}_{0}{}^{}`$ as a free parameter. In this case the one-potential term loses its transparent physical meaning but still contains the same ultraviolet divergent part. Of course, care should be taken calculating the many-potential term in this case. In our approach (see Ref. ), the many-potential contribution is calculated as the point-by-point difference of the unrenormalized expression and the zero- and one-potential terms in configuration space. Therefore, it is sufficient simply to shift the energy in the one-potential part from its physical value, $`\epsilon _a\epsilon `$.

We found that terms of the partial-wave expansion of the irreducible part do not change their sign if the parameter $`\epsilon `$ is chosen as $`\epsilon =(\epsilon _a+m)/2`$. In that case, the expansion terms are monotonically decreasing and can be reasonably fitted. A similar procedure can be applied to the computation of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{\mathrm{vr}}^{(1+)}`$. In our implementation, it was used as an additional cross-check of the numerical evaluation.

## III Numerical results and discussion

The numerical calculation was carried out in the Feynman gauge, for the point nuclear model. The partial-wave summation was terminated typically at $`|\kappa _{\mathrm{max}}|=40÷50`$. The tail of the series was estimated by fitting as described above. Various contributions to the functions $`D_1^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ and $`D_2^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ are listed in Tables II and III, respectively. The quoted errors originate mainly from the partial-wave extrapolation. The estimated accuracy is essentially worse for the $`2s`$ state than for the $`1s`$ state due to a larger contribution of high partial waves. For the ground state, our results are in reasonable agreement with the previous calculation by Blundell and co-workers . However, we note a small systematic deviation of our results from those of Ref. . For the $`2s`$ state, the present evaluation agrees well with our previous calculation  of this correction in the medium- and high-$`Z`$ region. For $`Z=49`$ we found $`D_2^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )=3.555(1)`$, as compared to the point-nucleus result of $`3.553(18)`$ . The present results for the difference $`D_{21}^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ show to be consistent with perturbative calculations. Fitting our data to the form given by Eq. (5) with undetermined coefficients, we found $`3.3(6)`$ for $`a_{21}`$ and $`5.1(1.0)`$ for $`a_{20}`$, which analytically are $`3.303`$ and $`5.221`$, respectively.

Our aim is the higher-order contributions $`F_n^{\mathrm{SE}}(1\alpha )`$ and $`F_n^{\mathrm{SE}}(2\alpha )`$. In order to get them, we have to subtract the known terms of the $`Z\alpha `$ expansion from our numerical results. Of course, this subtraction leads to a severe loss of accuracy, especially for very low $`Z`$. At the present level of numerical precision, the direct determination of the higher-order contribution for $`Z=1`$ and $`2`$ is not possible. Still, we can evaluate this contribution for higher $`Z`$ (where cancellations are smaller) and then extrapolate it to $`Z=1`$ and $`2`$, as it was done in Ref.  for the $`1s`$ state. Aiming this, we tabulate the functions $`F_1^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ and $`F_{21}^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ in a wide region of $`Z`$ starting from $`Z=4`$, as presented in Table IV. We note that for fitting purposes the difference $`F_{21}^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ is more appropriate than the function $`F_2^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$. In this difference a number of higher-order contributions cancel each other (e.g., the cubed logarithm of order $`\alpha (Z\alpha )^4`$), and some others have smaller coefficients.

We start our analysis with the function $`F_{21}^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$. The corresponding results are plotted in Fig. 2. We note that the function varies smoothly in a wide range of $`Z`$, which again indicates that our results are consistent with the first two terms of Eq. (5). Surprisingly enough, the general behaviour of the higher-order contribution is rather close to linear in $`Z`$, even for relatively large nuclear charge numbers of about 30. For very low $`Z`$, we observe a systematic deviation of our results from the linear behavior, which is, however, well within the given error bars. We interpret this as a small systematic error in the partial-wave extrapolation of $`D_{21}^{(2),\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$ divided by the factor $`(Z\alpha )^3`$ when converting to $`F_{21}^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$. A least-squares fit to the numerical results yields $`F_{21}^{\mathrm{SE}}(1\alpha )=6.5(8)`$ and $`F_{21}^{\mathrm{SE}}(2\alpha )=6.3(6)`$. We estimate the uncertainty of the fitting procedure by studying sensitivity of the result to the form of the fit, and assuming that the leading logarithm in the order $`\alpha (Z\alpha )^4`$ enters with the coefficient of about unity. For the introduction into the fitting procedure we refer to , where fitting of nonperturbative results for the one-loop self-energy correction to the Lamb shift is discussed in detail.

Next, we examine the function $`F_1^{\mathrm{SE}}(Z\alpha )`$. The obtained results are plotted in Fig. 3, together with the data from Ref. . A least-squares fit to our results yields $`F_1^{\mathrm{SE}}(1\alpha )=14.3(1.1)`$ and $`F_1^{\mathrm{SE}}(2\alpha )=14.5(7)`$. The error of the fit was estimated assuming that the leading logarithm of order $`\alpha (Z\alpha )^4`$ enters with the coefficient of about unity. Our fitting result for $`F_1^{\mathrm{SE}}(1\alpha )`$ agrees with the previous calculation of Ref.  which yields $`12.0(2.0)`$.

## IV Summary

In the present investigation we evaluated the higher-order contribution to the one-loop self-energy correction to the $`1s`$ and $`2s`$ hyperfine splitting of H-like ions. The calculation was carried out to all orders in $`Z\alpha `$. The higher-order correction to the specific difference of the hyperfine structure intervals $`D_{21}=8\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _2\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _1`$ is found to be $`0.394(38)`$ kHz for $`{}_{}{}^{3}\mathrm{He}_{}^{+}`$, $`0.0083(10)`$ kHz for H, and $`0.0019(2)`$ kHz for D. For helium, our result should be compared with the experimental value $`D_{21}=\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}189.979}(71)`$ kHz . We see that the higher-order contribution evaluated in this work is rather significant for comparison of theory and experiment. Still, it should be noted that there is a number of other corrections contributing at the same level. For the latest analysis of theoretical predictions for the hyperfine structure of hydrogen and $`\mathrm{He}^+`$ atoms we refer to .

This work was supported in part by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (Grant No. 98-02-18350) and by the program ”Russian Universities: Basic Research” (project No. 3930). We would like to thank S. G. Karshenboim for drawing our attention to the fact that the $`\alpha (Z\alpha )^3`$ contribution is important for the comparison with experiment for $`D_{21}`$ in $`{}_{}{}^{3}\mathrm{He}_{}^{+}`$, for the introduction into the fitting procedure, and for many fruitful discussions. We also are grateful to the Gesellschaft für Schwerionenforschung and personally to Th. Beier for hospitality during our visits in 2000-2001.