text:
# Low-scale Quantum Gravity and Double Nucleon Decay

## I Introduction

One of the exciting implications of extra spacetime dimensions with large radii of compactification is the possibility that the scale of quantum gravity may be brought down to TeV energies . While much effort has focused on understanding the experimental signals of the extra dimensions themselves (for example, through the effects of Kaluza-Klein excitations in the effective four-dimensional theory), much less has been said on the physics that originates at the cut off . This is understandable for two reasons. First, any detailed knowledge of Planck-suppressed operators in a theory with a low quantum gravity scale requires a complete theory of quantum gravity, which is not yet at hand. Alternatively, a general effective field theory approach, in which one includes all operators consistent with the gauge symmetries of the standard model and suppressed by powers of the cut off, leads to baryon- and lepton-number-violating effects far in excess of the experimental bounds . The most common approach to this dilemma is to assume that some mechanism forbids the undesirable operators, and then to ignore the issue altogether. Here we will explore the possibility that the mechanism responsible for maintaining proton stability does not forbid the complete set of operators that violate the global symmetries of the standard model. Assuming $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=1`$ interactions are absent, higher-dimension operators that violate baryon number $`B`$ by two units are far less problematic, and may be present in low Planck scale scenarios at a phenomenologically interesting level. Moreover, such operators are not suppressed by separating quarks and leptons in an extra dimension, as has been suggested as a remedy to the proton decay problem . In this letter we study the two-body double nucleon decays that are induced by $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=2`$ operators and determine the sensitivity of existing experiments to the scale of the new physics.

The idea that the most dangerous baryon-number-violating operators may be absent, while others are present is not at all a radical one. Consider any model in which baryon-number is promoted to a gauge symmetry and then spontaneously broken: higher-dimension operators that violate baryon number by $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ units are induced in the low-energy theory, but the smallest possible value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ is controlled by the charge of the Higgs field that is responsible for the spontaneous symmetry breaking . From a low-energy perspective, the original continuous gauge symmetry is irrelevant, and one concludes that a discrete remnant is sufficient to eliminate the unwanted interactions. Such “discrete gauge symmetries” are known to be preserved by quantum gravitational effects , are well defined as fundamental symmetries , and arise in string theory . It is not hard to imagine scenarios in which operators that contribute to nucleon decay are forbidden by some residual discrete symmetry below the string scale, while operators of higher-dimension that violate baryon number remain in the low-energy theory .

Past interest in effective $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=2`$ interactions has appeared in the context of grand unified theories , R-parity-violating supersymmetry , and Planck-scale physics . The relevant dimension-nine operators have been cataloged in the literature , but have not been studied in their entirety. This is due in part to the difficulty in evaluating hadronic matrix elements, and the relatively large number of operators involved. The fact that each operator has an undetermined coefficient of O(1) leads to an unavoidable theoretical uncertainty, and makes the value added in undertaking a complete analysis somewhat small. We will proceed by selecting a typical operator and decay process that is convenient for an explicit matrix element evaluation (in fact, one that has never appeared in the literature); we then use this result to estimate the size of other accessible modes.

Our canonical decay calculation will be for the process $`DK^{}K`$, where $`D`$ represents a deuteron. We choose this mode for a number of reasons: (i) The underlying operator changes strangeness and is unconstrained by neutron-antineutron oscillation bounds. (We will have more to say about the relationship between the operator we consider and others that do not change strangeness in the final section.) (ii) the operator we consider contributes to the matrix element of this process via precisely one Feynman diagram, and (iii) the spin-flavor-color-spatial wave function of the initial state is easily cross-checked with studies of the deuteron structure that appear in the literature . We compute the effective lifetime for this decay, and then extrapolate to other NN modes of interest. We will show that such two-body decays may be accessible if the Planck scale is less than $`400`$ TeV, and we discuss the dependence of our result on the flavor structure of the theory.

How then can a significant number of quarks within a deuteron be annihilated by a contact interaction, if the quarks are spatially separated within the neutron and proton?

## II Deuteronomy

A favorable answer to this question is that the deuteron is not entirely made of a proton and neutron, but also includes a significant admixture of a six-quark (6q) cluster state . In the case at hand, the 6q cluster is a six quark state that is totally antisymmetric in color, spin, and flavor, with isospin 0 and spin 1. Such a state is not factorable into a simple product of two color-singlet, three-quark states.

When the constituents of the nucleus are far apart, a description in terms of neutrons and protons is accurate. The question is what happens to the material inside the nucleus when the pieces come close to each other. The quark cluster viewpoint is that if two nucleons come sufficiently close together, the quarks within them reorganize into a new state where each quark is in the lowest energy spatial state, and the color-spin-flavor part of the quark wave function is uniquely fixed  by the requirement that it be totally antisymmetric, colorless, and of the desired spin and isospin.

Quark clustering gained impetus  in explaining 3He data in kinematic regions inaccessible to scattering off a stationary nucleon and where contributions due to Fermi motions calculated in standard models were insufficient. Further, differences between quark distributions in 6q clusters and in nucleons provide one straightforward explanation  of the nuclear EMC effect.

The deuteron state may be expressed as a linear combination

$$|D=(1f)^{1/2}|D,NN+f^{1/2}|D,6q,$$
(1)
where $`f`$ is the 6q cluster probability. The crucial point is that there is no reason to expect the overlap of the quark spatial wave functions to be negligibly small in a 6q cluster. Providing $`f`$ is also non-negligible, we avoid the possibility of obtaining an uninteresting result due to wave function suppression.

Values for $`f`$ have been estimated from 6q cluster models of the nuclear EMC effect ; from calculations of the probability for nucleons to overlap using realistic deuteron wave functions ; from descriptions of high energy SLAC electron-deuteron data at $`x>1.0`$ ; from studies of the deuteron electromagnetic structure functions ; and from calculations of fast backward tagged nucleons coming from deuteron breakup . The estimates range between 0.01 and 0.07. We shall quote results assuming $`f`$ = 0.01 for free deuterons, and scaling $`f`$ appropriately for 6q clusters within the nuclear medium.

It will be convenient for us to represent the spin-flavor-color structure of the deuteron 6q state in a field-theoretic form. Letting $`q^{}`$ represent an (anticommuting) quark creation operator, the highest projection spin state may be written

$`|D,6q,S_z=1=`$ $`N`$ $`ϵ^{\alpha \beta \gamma }ϵ^{\delta ϵ\zeta }ϵ^{ab}ϵ^{de}ϵ^{cf}ϵ^{ij}ϵ^{kl}`$ (2)
$`\times `$ $`q_{\alpha ai}^{}q_{\beta bj}^{}q_{\gamma c}^{}q_{\delta dk}^{}q_{ϵel}^{}q_{\zeta f}^{}|0,`$ (3)
where the Greek indices represent SU(3) color, $`a\mathrm{}e`$ SU(2) flavor, and $`i\mathrm{}l`$ SU(2) spin, and $`q^{}`$ is a creation operator for a quark state satisfying

$$\{q_{\alpha ai},q_{\beta bj}^{}\}=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{ab}\delta _{ij}.$$
(4)
One may see by inspection that the state has the quantum numbers of the deuteron. Note that the SU(2) spin space corresponds exactly to the MIT bag model wave functions described below (so the reader should not think that our calculation is nonrelativistic). In this representation, it is straightforward (though tedious) to compute the normalization factor $`N`$; we find $`N=1/(48\sqrt{10})`$.

## III Matrix Element

With the state defined, we now turn to one possible operator of interest

$`O=[u_R^{T\alpha }Cu_R^\beta ][d_R^{T\gamma }Cd_R^\delta ][s_R^{T\rho }Cs_R^\tau ]ϵ_{\alpha \gamma \rho }ϵ_{\beta \delta \tau },`$ (5)
which contributes to the decay $`DK^{}K`$. Here, $`C`$ represents the charge conjugation matrix, and all the fermion fields are right-handed, so that $`O`$ is manifestly SU(3)$`\times `$SU(2)$`\times `$U(1) invariant. Since strange quarks are present only in the final state, the four remaining fields annihilate quarks in the deuteron, leaving two spectators. We represent the quark cluster component of the deuteron as well as the outgoing kaons as MIT bag model states (described in more detail below), and define the spatial origin as the point at which our $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=2`$ operator acts. When quark fields are replaced by ground state bag wave functions multiplied by appropriate creation or annihilation operators, the spin-flavor-color (SFC) matrix element may be factored from the spatial one. It may be determined by allowing

$`\widehat{O}=ϵ^{\alpha \gamma \rho }ϵ^{\beta \delta \tau }ϵ^{ij}ϵ^{kl}ϵ^{mn}u_{\alpha i}u_{\beta j}d_{\gamma k}d_{\delta l}\overline{s}_{\rho m}^{}\overline{s}_{\tau n}^{}`$ (6)
to act on the state Eq. (3), where the symbols now represent creation or annihilation operators rather than fields; one then takes the overlap with a similarly constructed two kaon state. We have computed the SFC matrix element by hand and by symbolic mathematics code, and obtain

$$\eta _{SFC}=K^0;K^+,S_z=1\left|\widehat{O}\right|D,6q,S_z=1_{SFC}=4\sqrt{5}.$$
(7)
To evaluate the spatial part of the matrix element, we must take into account that the desired external states are eigenstates of momentum. To relate these to bag states, we suppose that the momentum eigenstates form a complete set, so that

$`|D(\stackrel{}{R})_B={\displaystyle \frac{d^3P}{(2\pi )^32E}\varphi (\stackrel{}{P})e^{i\stackrel{}{P}\stackrel{}{R}}|D(\stackrel{}{P})},`$ (8)
and similarly for the other states. The state with the subscript “B” is a bag state centered at $`\stackrel{}{R}`$, spin variables are tacit, and the momentum eigenstate is normalized by

$`D(\stackrel{}{P}^{})|D(\stackrel{}{P})=2E(2\pi )^3\delta ^3(\stackrel{}{P}\stackrel{}{P}^{}).`$ (9)
By inversion,

$`|D(\stackrel{}{P})={\displaystyle \frac{2E}{\varphi (\stackrel{}{P})}}{\displaystyle d^3Re^{i\stackrel{}{P}\stackrel{}{R}}|D(\stackrel{}{R})_B}.`$ (10)
The normalization condition determines $`\varphi (P)\varphi (\stackrel{}{P})`$,

$`\varphi ^2(P)=2E{\displaystyle d^3re^{i\stackrel{}{P}\stackrel{}{r}}I_n(r)}=2E\stackrel{~}{I}_n(P),`$ (11)
where $`I_n`$ is the wave function overlap of two $`n`$-quark states centered at different points,

$`I_n(r)=\text{ }BD({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{}{r})|D({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{}{r})_B.`$ (12)
For applications where the wave function is written as the product of $`n`$ independent quark wave functions, one has

$$I_n(r)=\left(I_1(r)\right)^n,$$
(13)
with

$`I_1(r)\text{ }Bq({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{}{r})|q({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{}{r})_B.`$ (14)
In the bag model, this may be written explicitly as

$$I_1(r)=(4\pi )_0^{R_Br/2}𝑑z_0^{\sqrt{R_B^2(z+r/2)^2}}\rho 𝑑\rho (u_+u_{}+l_+l_{}\widehat{R}_+\widehat{R}_{})$$
(15)
where,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}R_\pm =[(r/2z)^2+\rho ^2]^{1/2}& \text{ , }& \widehat{R}_+\widehat{R}_{}=(R_+^2+R_{}^2r^2)/(2R_+R_{})\end{array}$$
(16)
and where the factors $`u_i=u(R_i)`$ and $`l_i=l(R_i)`$ are the upper and lower components of bag wave functions

$`\psi (\stackrel{}{r})=\left(\begin{array}{c}u(r)\chi \\ il(r)\stackrel{}{\sigma }\widehat{r}\chi \end{array}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{N}{\sqrt{4\pi }}}\left(\begin{array}{c}j_0(\omega r)\chi \\ ij_1(\omega r)\stackrel{}{\sigma }\widehat{r}\chi \end{array}\right).`$ (21)
Here $`\chi `$ is a Pauli spinor, $`\omega =x/R_B=2.043/R_B`$, and $`N^2R_B^3=x/[2(x1)j_0^2(x)]5.15`$.

To calculate the matrix element for the decay $`D(\stackrel{}{P}=0)K^{}(\stackrel{}{p})K(\stackrel{}{p})`$, we apply the foregoing formalism to the quark cluster part of the deuteron as well as to the kaons. For simplicity, we assume the same bag radius $`R_B1`$ fm for all states. We obtain

$`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ $`=`$ $`K(\stackrel{}{p});K^{}(\stackrel{}{p}),S_z=1\left|O\right|D(\stackrel{}{P}=0),6q,S_z=1`$ (22)
$`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2m_D2E_12E_2}{\stackrel{~}{I}_6(0)\stackrel{~}{I}_2^{2}(p)}}\right]^{1/2}\times \stackrel{~}{N}`$ (23)
and

$`\stackrel{~}{N}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3Rd^3R_1d^3R_2e^{ip(Z_1Z_2)}}`$ (24)
$`\times `$ $`BK(\stackrel{}{R}_1);K^{}(\stackrel{}{R}_2),S_z=1\left|O\right|D(\stackrel{}{R}),6q,S_z=1_B,`$ (25)
where $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ are the energies of the $`K`$ and $`K^{}`$, respectively, and the $`\widehat{z}`$-direction is taken parallel to $`\stackrel{}{p}`$. This may be re-expressed as

$`\stackrel{~}{N}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\eta _{SFC}{\displaystyle d^3Rd^3R_1d^3R_2e^{ip(Z_1Z_2)}}`$ (26)
$`\times `$ $`I_1(r_{10})I_1(r_{20})(u^2+l^2)^2(u_1u_2+l_1l_2\widehat{R}_1\widehat{R}_2),`$ (27)
where $`u=u(R)`$, $`l=l(R)`$, and $`r_{i0}=|\stackrel{}{R}_i\stackrel{}{R}|`$. The factors of $`I_1`$ come from the overlap of spectator quark wave functions. All the integrals in Eq. (22) may be evaluated numerically. For $`pR_B=3.12`$, we find $`\stackrel{~}{N}=\eta _{SFC}(N^2R_B^3/8\pi )^3\times 0.31`$, $`\stackrel{~}{I}_2(p)=R_B^3\times 0.41`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{I}_6(0)=R_B^3\times 0.13`$.

## IV Results

Using the results from the previous section, it is straightforward to derive the decay width. In keeping with the proton decay literature, we will instead express our result in terms of a ‘partial lifetime’ (i.e. the lifetime if the branching fraction to the given mode were 100%). We find

$$\tau (DK^{}K)=2.18\times 10^7\text{ yrs }\left(\frac{M}{1\text{ TeV}}\right)^{10}f^1$$
(28)
where $`M^5`$ is the dimensionful factor that suppresses the dimension-nine operator of interest. (While we identify $`M`$ with the Planck scale in the present discussion, it is worth mentioning that our calculational framework is applicable to any model, e.g. R-parity violating supersymmetry, in which such effective operators are induced.) For a free deuteron (for example, in $`D_2O`$), we set $`f=0.01`$ and find $`\tau 10^{34}`$ years for $`M293`$ TeV. For a deuteron within the O16 nucleus, the quark cluster probability will scale as the nuclear density; for a reasonable estimate, $`f=0.2`$, one finds $`\tau 10^{34}`$ years for $`M395`$ TeV. Varying $`M`$ by a factor of $`2`$ changes the lifetime by $`2^{10}10^3`$, which allows the result to vary from well below to significantly above the lifetimes usually associated with the maximum proton decay reach of Super-Kamiokande.

A more realistic estimate of the decay rate would also include flavor suppression factors that provide a small dimensionless number multiplying our operator. Without a model of flavor, however, we cannot exclude the extreme possibility in which Eq. (5) has no further suppression and all other $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=2`$ operators are simply absent. On the other hand, we may consider how our results change if we impose a simple flavor ansatz: we could assume that fields of the first (second) generation are suppressed by a factor of $`\lambda ^3`$ ($`\lambda ^2`$), where $`\lambda 0.2`$ is of comparable size to the Cabibbo angle. (This could arise if a $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=2`$ operator involving only third generation fields is allowed, and all others are generated from it via CKM-like rotations on the fields .) In this case, our previous estimate for $`\tau `$ is extended by $`\lambda ^{32}10^{22}`$; for decays in O16 we now find $`\tau 10^{34}`$ years for $`M=2.3`$ TeV. With this ansatz, we can now also say something about the strangeness conserving operators that contribute to $`n`$-$`\overline{n}`$ oscillation. Estimates of the relevant matrix elements already exist , from which we find

$$\tau 10^{12}\text{ yrs }\left(\frac{M}{1\text{ TeV}}\right)^5\lambda ^{18}=7.6\text{ yrs.}\left(\frac{M}{1\text{ TeV}}\right)^5$$
(29)
which exceeds the best experimental bound, $`3.8`$ yrs., 90% CL  for any value of $`M`$ that could be plausibly identified with the Planck scale.

Table 1 shows other possible nucleon-nucleon decay modes, and the multiplicative correction that must be applied to our $`DKK^{}`$ result to obtain an estimate for the lifetime. This factor takes into account the differing phase space, spatial wave function overlaps and flavor suppression following from our previous ansatz. We simply assume the SFC matrix elements are of comparable size. While we don’t compute these matrix elements explicitly (given the far larger uncertainty from the proliferation of operator coefficients) the contribution of any given operator of interest may be evaluated explicitly using the approach we have presented. Observation of any of these modes in the absence of conventionally expected nucleon decays would be a remarkable and unexpected sign of exotic physics not too far beyond directly accessible energies.

Acknowledgments

We thank the National Science Foundation for support under Grant No. PHY-9900657. In addition, C.D.C. thanks the Jeffress Memorial Trust for support under Grant No. J-532.


format: text

text:
# CHANDRA OBSERVATION OF A2256 — A CLUSTER AT THE EARLY STAGE OF MERGING

## 1 Introduction

In the hierarchical scenarios of the structure formation of the universe, cluster of galaxies are formed through subcluster mergers. Both observations (e.g. Bliton et al. 1998; Owen et al. 1999; Markevitch et al. 2000) and simulations (e.g. Roettiger, Loken & Burns 1997; Roettiger, Stone & Burns 1999; Bekki 1999) show that the merging dramatically change the physical characteristics of the intracluster medium (ICM) and galaxies, like the temperature, density and magnetic field strength of ICM, star formation rate and radio emission of galaxies. However, many processes related to the mergers and their effects are still vague. Hence systematic analyses of merging clusters are very helpful to deepen our understanding on this complex dynamical process. Here we present recent Chandra observations and analysis on the well-known merging cluster A2256.

A2256 is a rich cluster with strong X-ray emission (L$`{}_{x}{}^{}`$ 1045 ergs s-1) at the redshift 0.058. ROSAT observations (Briel et al. 1991) clearly revealed two peaks near the center, separated by about $`3.5^{}`$. One of them is roughly at the geometric center of the cluster, while the other one is considered to be a merging subcluster. The previous X-ray observations also showed that the subcluster has a lower temperature than the main cluster (Briel et al. 1991; Miyaji et al. 1993; Markevitch 1996, M96 hereafter) and temperature generally decreases with the radius (M96; Molendi, De Grandi & Fusco-Femiano 2000, MDF00 hereafter). Briel & Henry (1994) reported two hot spots ($`>`$ 12 keV) in this cluster using ROSAT data. However, they were not confirmed by ASCA and BeppoSAX observations (M96; MDF00). The velocity dispersion of the galaxies is very large ($``$ 1300 km/s; Fabricant, Kent & Kurtz 1989) and the velocity distribution shows substructure (Roettiger, Burns & Pinkney 1995). The radio properties of A2256 are anomalous (Bridle & Fomalont 1976; Bridle et al. 1979; R$`\ddot{\mathrm{o}}`$ttgering et al. 1994, R94 hereafter). A remarkable radio relic, with sharp edges and possible filamentary structure, was found northwest of the two X-ray peaks. At least four head-tail sources were found, including one with an exceptional narrow, straight tail extending to at least about 0.7 Mpc. R94 suggested that the halo was composed of a few head-tail galaxies that were heavily distorted due to the infalling subcluster. Recent BeppoSAX observation (Fusco-Femiano et al. 2000) also showed the existence of nonthermal X-ray emission from the cluster but only significant above 10 keV.

In this paper, we present the analysis of the recent Chandra observations of A2256. Chandra observations and data reduction are in $`\mathrm{\S }`$2. The analysis is in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3. $`\mathrm{\S }`$4 is the discussion and $`\mathrm{\S }`$5 is the summary. Throughout this paper, we assume H0 = 70 km s-1 Mpc-1 and q0 = 0.5. These cosmological parameters correspond to the linear scale of 1.08 kpc/arcsec at the cluster redshift.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

A2256 was observed by Chandra three times with Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer (ACIS). The information of the observations are listed in Table 1. For each observation, we excluded the known bad columns, hot pixels, chip node boundaries and events with ASCA grades 1, 5 and 7, as well as bad aspect intervals. The proper gain map file for that period was used. Particle background flare periods were excluded based on the X-ray light curves from the outer parts of the field. The back-illuminated (BI) chips and front-illuminated (FI) chips were filtered separately since they have different background flare levels (see Markevitch et al. 2000 for details). The chips used for data analysis are I0 - I3 chips of the ACIS-I observation and S2 - S4 chips of the ACIS-S observation. The streak events in S4 chip were removed by the ”destreak” tool in CIAO. The short observation 1521 was dominated by background flares (over 80% of its exposure time) and the statistics are quite poor so we do not include that data in our analysis.

To subtract the correct background, the blank field background dataset relevant for the period of the observations was used (Markevitch 2001). Since the background may change slightly with time, we also checked the background rate using the data at high energy (10-12 keV in the front-illuminated - FI chips and 9-12 keV in the back-illuminated - BI chips). It was found that the background normalization should be increased by 8% in FI chips, consistent with the expected long-term background trend. Note that although the correction should apply only to the particle component of the total background (and not the cosmic x-ray background or CXB), that component is dominant at energy greater than 2 - 3 keV which is most important for the gas temperature fitting. Small rescaling of the CXB component generally has only tiny effect on the spectral fitting. Thus we apply this correction across the energy range for simplicity. The systematic uncertainty of the background normalization ($`\pm `$10%) that encompasses this correction was also included in all the confidence intervals reported below.

Shortly after the launch of Chandra, the ACIS FI chips suffered increasing ”charge transfer inefficiency” (CTI) problem. The effect is seen as a decreasing quantum efficiency (QE) with increasing distance from the readout node. Here the results of the calibration observations of G21.5-0.9 were adopted to make CTI corrections (Vikhlinin 2000). We also used an additional position-independent correction factor of 0.93 for the ACIS-I quantum efficiency below 1.8 keV to account for the difference between ACIS-S3 and ACIS-I (Vikhlinin 2000). For hot clusters, ignoring it results in spuriously high temperature and the dependence of fitting results on the adopted low energy cut (Markevitch & Vikhlinin 2001). CIAO(1.1.5), FTOOLS(5.0), XSPEC(10.0) and some our own software were used to do the data reduction. The exposure maps were generated using our own software (equivalent to the similar one in CIAO). Since vignetting is dependent on the energy, narrow bands were used and weighting spectra were also applied in producing the exposure maps (the weighting spectra differ from chip to chip based on the fitting result of the integrated spectrum of each chip). To produce response files of the spectra in the interested regions (response matrices - RMF and auxiliary response files - ARF), the tools calcrmf and calcarf by Vikhlinin were used. The ARF was calculated by weighting the mirror effective area in the region with the observed cluster brightness distribution in 0.5 - 2.0 keV band. The RMF was calculated by weighting the standard set of matrices within the region by the observed cluster brightness distribution. All the errors in this paper are 90% confidence interval.

## 3 Analysis

### 3.1 Point sources

Over 30 point sources were detected in two observations using the CIAO wavelet detection tool. A detailed analysis on those point sources is beyond the scope of the paper. In this section, we will mainly discuss the point sources coincident with the member galaxies. Three member galaxies (all ellipticals) were found to have corresponding X-ray sources in both observations. They are shown in Fig. 1. One is the elliptical galaxy E (Fig. 2) which is also a radio head-tail galaxy (A in R94). Only about 50 counts from it in total were collected during the two observations. The statistics of the data do not allow us to constrain the temperature or the photon index well even if its spectrum is that simple. If we simply assumed a 1 keV thermal plasma with normal solar abundance, the derived luminosity is about 8$`\times `$1040 ergs s-1 (0.5 - 10 keV). If a powerlaw with photon index 1.7 is assumed, the derived luminosity is about 3$`\times `$1041 ergs s-1 (0.5 - 10 keV). The other two sources correspond to the NW core of the double galaxy NGC 6331 (C) and galaxy D respectively (Fig. 2). Only about 20 counts in total were collected from each source in the two observations. Their luminosity are estimated to be around 3$`\times `$1040 ergs s-1 for the 1 keV thermal plasma assumption, or 1041 ergs s-1 for the powerlaw (photon index 1.7) assumption (0.5 - 10 keV). The X-ray emission may come from the low luminosity active galactic nuclei (LLAGN) or thermal halos.

We also tried to explore the nature of the brightest two point sources in the field (Fig. 1; #1: 7.5 c/ks - I3; #2: 5.4 c/ks \- I0 and 8.4 c/ks - S3). #1 is also marginally seen in both ROSAT PSPC and HRI images. #1 has a very faint optical counterpart in DSS II while #2 has no counterpart. We extracted and fitted their spectra with a simple powerlaw model. If the absorption is fixed at the galactic value, the photon index for #1 and #2 are 1.4$`{}_{0.4}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.5}`$ and 1.3$`\pm `$0.4 respectively. Thus, they might be background AGNs. Based on these best-fit, their 0.5 - 10 keV unabsorbed flux are 10-13 ergs s-1 cm-2 and 7$`\times `$10-14 ergs s-1 cm-2 respectively.

We also compared the observed source number with the predicted by the Log N - Log S relation derived in Chandra deep fields (e.g. Giacconi et al. 2001) and found no significant difference.

### 3.2 Structure of diffuse emission

The 0.5 - 7 keV combined ACIS-I/S image is shown in Fig. 1 overlaid on a DSS II image. The background was subtracted and the image was divided by the exposure map. All the point sources were excluded. The two previously resolved peaks at the center (P1 and P2 hereafter) by ROSAT (Briel et al. 1991) are prominent and both show internal structures (Fig. 2). It is noticed that the central part of the subcluster (the western peak) is elongated along the east-west direction, while the central part of the main cluster (the eastern peak) is elongated along the north-south direction (Fig. 1 and 2). These two peaks are separated by about $`3^{}`$ and P2 is somewhat brighter. In DSS II image, there is no galaxy concentration around P2. Radio head-tail galaxies E, F and G (Fig. 2) and double galaxy NGC 6331 (C) all have offsets to P2 from $`1^{}`$ to $`2^{}`$. The surface brightness peak of the main cluster is located 0.5 north of a big elliptical galaxy (B), while galaxy A, the galaxy with the most extended optical halo in A2256, is about 50 kpc east of the peak. Besides P1 and P2, a new structure was found significantly to the east of P1 in Chandra observations (Fig. 1 and 2). In this paper we call it P3 or ”shoulder” from its morphology. This structure is shown as a small clump extended from P1 but with a clear local maximum and seems to be embedded in the main cluster. The ROSAT images were re-checked and this structure was also found in both HRI and PSPC images though it is not very significant. It was also detected in the wavelet analysis on PSPC data by Slezak, Durret & Gerbal (1994). This structure has interesting spectral characteristics and will be discussed later.

We also zoom-in the central part of A2256 to see any substructures around the center (Fig. 2). The wavelet decomposition tool (Vikhlinin, Forman & Jones 1997) was applied to the image and the reconstructed image (the right one in Fig. 2) is quite similar to the simply smoothed one (the left one in Fig. 2). Both images show complex structures around the center. P1 and P2 also show internal structures, which may also be a support for some kind of ongoing dynamical process in this cluster. However, the current data do not allow us to constrain the spectral difference on such small scales. Besides the ”shoulder” and the substructures within P1 and P2, there are still several interesting significant facts. First, there are no X-ray enhancements around the central biggest ellipticals A, B and C (the 3 $`\sigma `$ upper limits are all about 2$`\times `$1041 ergs s-1 at 0.5 - 10 keV, assuming 1 keV thermal spectrum and 0.5 aperture size.). Second, the surface brightness gradient at the south of P2 is sharper than those in other directions (more prominent in the unsmoothed image; also pointed out by Briel & Henry, 1991). Third, there is a protrusion which extends from the center of P2 to the southwest. As shown in Fig. 6, after removing the main cluster, the southern parts become even sharper. In $`\mathrm{\S }`$3.6, we will show that it may be something like a cold front.

### 3.3 Temperature map

In view of the complex central structure mentioned in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3.2 and the fact that A2256 is very likely a cluster in merging, the knowledge of the temperature distribution can reveal us the nature of the structures and the merging. The resolution of the temperature map one can achieve for A2256 with Chandra is limited by statistics and the PSF effect can be ignored completely. We used the following method to obtain the temperature map. First, the field was divided into 30 regions (as shown in Fig. 3) with similar number of counts, then for each region we fitted the spectrum to get the temperature (for region # 11 - 30, we fitted the spectra from two observations simultaneously). In view of the uncertainty of the ACIS low energy response, only 0.9-9 keV data were used and the absorption was fixed to the galactic value 4.1$`\times `$1020 cm-2. The best-fit temperatures are not sensitive to any small excess in absorption. The redshift was fixed at 0.058 and the abundance was fixed at 0.3 solar (we used the solar abundance table by Anders & Grevesse 1989), which is the average value of previous observations (e.g. M96; MDF00). The MEKAL code in XSPEC was used. Second, we shifted the regions half-size along the parallel and perpendicular directions to the orientation of the first set of regions to get two additional similar temperature maps. The final one was obtained by averaging the above three. Then the final temperature map was adaptively smoothed a little bit for a better presentation (Fig. 3). Two checks were performed. The first is the integrated temperature of the central $`8.3^{}`$ square (ACIS-S3 chip FOV, see Fig. 4). The result is 6.7$`{}_{0.2}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.2}`$ keV, consistent with the central temperature ($``$ 7 keV) reported by previous observations (e.g. Miyaji et al. 1993; Markevitch & Vikhlinin 1997b; White 2000; MDF00). The second is that we did spectral fits at the same regions as those in BeppoSAX paper (MDF00). Our results generally agree with theirs within 0.5 keV, except in their region 2NW, where BeppoSAX spectrum may suffer the contamination from the nearby high temperature regions due to the large point spread function (PSF) of BeppoSAX ($`105^{\prime \prime }`$ HPD for MECS at 1.5 keV).

On the 5 arcmin scale, the ACIS temperature map is in agreement with that of ASCA (M96). It shows moderate temperature variations across the cluster but not as strong as expected in a major merger (e.g. Roettiger et al. 1997 and other simulations). Combining this temperature map with the image, no shock was found in the field (a feature that is likely a ”cold front” will be discussed in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3.6). The subcluster has lower temperature ($``$ 4 keV at the coolest region) than the main cluster and the shape of the low temperature regions strongly suggests that the subcluster entered the main cluster from somewhere west. This temperature map, if we omit the ”shoulder”, resembles those at the early stages of merging in simulations (e.g. Roettiger et. al 1997; Takizawa 1999; Takizawa 2000). It is also interesting that the apparent coolest part of the subcluster is about $`2^{}`$ west of its surface brightness peak. The main cluster appears largely undisturbed, as concluded by Markevitch & Vikhlinin (1997a) from the ASCA results. The central region of the main cluster is generally cooler than its outskirts covered by our FOV. This is more likely due to the projection of the cooler subcluster and possibly the ”shoulder”, rather than the genuine temperature gradient. There is a hot region ($``$ 9 keV; around regions #5 and #16 in Fig. 3) at the north of the main cluster. We notice that it is just in positional coincidence with the eastern lobe of the radio relic (Fig. 1). This might imply some kind of physical relation between the merging events and the radio relics. It is also noticed that there is a hot region near the south edge of the subcluster. In $`\mathrm{\S }`$3.6, we will show it might be related to a cold front. The two hot spots reported by Briel & Henry (1994) are located in the FOV of ACIS-I (Fig. 3). Our measurements (7.9$`{}_{1.0}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+1.3}`$ keV for their NE spot and 5.8$`{}_{1.2}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+1.5}`$ keV for the SW one) do not confirm the existence of these hot spots, consistently with the earlier ASCA and BeppoSAX conclusions (Markevitch & Vikhlinin 1997a; MDF00).

We also checked the existence of any nonthermal component in the spectra, especially at the regions of the radio relic. No clear evidence for such component in ACIS spectra was found. A simple cooling flow component was also added to the spectral model but that never changed $`\chi ^2`$ significantly and the obtained mass accretion rates were always very small.

### 3.4 Iron abundance & red shift

The integrated abundance for the central $`8.3^{}`$ square (ACIS-S3 chip FOV) was obtained by simultaneously fitting the spectra of two observations. It is 0.34$`{}_{0.05}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.06}`$, which is a little higher than the previous results for the whole cluster, 0.27$`\pm `$0.06 by M96 (we converted their value for the abundance table used here) and 0.25$`\pm `$0.03 by MDF00 (we converted their 68% confidence error into 90%). This is consistent well with the recent finding that the abundance generally falls with radius (MDF00) and their results in the inner radial bins. Here we are more interested in the distribution of iron. The statistics of the data do not permit a detailed analysis for the whole field. However, in checking spectra from the regions that we used for the temperature map, at least two with significantly high iron abundance areas were found. The results are shown in Fig. 4. The four solid line regions, from a to d, represent P1, P2, P3 and a southern part of the main cluster (relatively far from the subcluster) respectively. The results from ACIS-I and ACIS-S agree well, so we performed simultaneous fits for each region. As shown in the figure 4, it is clear that P2 and P3 have more iron than P1 and the southern main cluster region. The joint abundance-temperature 90% confidence regions for a - d are shown in Fig. 5, which again reinforces that a and d are different from b and c. Markevitch & Vikhlinin (1997b) also obtained a higher iron abundance at the subcluster than that of the main cluster using ASCA data but the difference was not significant, which may due to the wide PSF of ASCA. If we further consider the possible contamination of emission among the three structures due to projection, even higher abundance contrasts would be expected. The iron abundance in other regions (e.g. the outer parts of the subcluster and the north part of the main cluster) are all around the average ($``$ 0.3) but poorly constrained. Current data can not allow us to determine whether the high iron abundance is only localized in the ”shoulder” or also present in its immediate surrounding. No iron abundance enhancement was found to be around galaxies C and E.

We also measured the redshifts in several regions from the iron K$`\alpha `$ line blend. The regions we chose among those in Fig. 4 are b (the subcluster), c (the ”shoulder”), and the ACIS-S3 FOV excluding b, c and their $`1^{}`$ surrounding (the main cluster). The results are 0.056$`{}_{0.007}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.008}`$, 0.064$`{}_{0.011}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.007}`$, and 0.064$`\pm `$0.010 respectively. All the values are consistent with a single redshift, suggesting that the main cluster, the subcluster and the ”shoulder” are possible to be associated. Using the log N - log S relation for clusters (e.g. Kitayama, Sasaki & Suto 1998; De Grandi et al. 1999), and considering the observed maximal difference of redshifts ($``$ 0.03), the possibility that they are a chance superposition is less than 10-4. Therefore we conclude that they are very likely to be associated and interacting as also suggested by the temperature map and the possible cold front ($`\mathrm{\S }`$3.6).

The current data and calibration status do not allow us to constrain the spatial distribution of other elements, like silicon. The integrated silicon abundance in the ACIS-S3 FOV is 0.50$`\pm `$0.23 while the ASCA result is 0.97$`\pm `$0.39 for the whole cluster (Fukazawa et al. 1998).

### 3.5 Decomposition of the structures

Chandra observations reveal complex structures around the center of A2256. We should realize that due to the projection the observed spectra, especially those around the center, have at least two components entangled — the main cluster and the subcluster. It would be very helpful for our understanding if we can separate them. However, this is actually very hard since the merging clusters are not in hydrostatic equilibrium and we do not yet know their relative geometry. Here, we just present a very simple way to isolate the subcluster and decompose the spectral components. Briefly speaking, we tried to use a $`\beta `$-model to represent the main cluster (not the whole cluster) and examine the residuals. Then we can use those information to separate the spectral components in observed spectra. The ROSAT image (background-subtracted and exposure-corrected) shows that the surface brightness is rather spherical in the outer parts, especially after we exclude the subcluster region using a circle with some radius ($``$ 7) centered at the core of the subcluster. Thus we can simply measure the surface brightness beyond that subcluster region to make a $`\beta `$-model fit to the main cluster.

The outer contours of the ROSAT PSPC images were used to find the geometric center of the main cluster, which is about $`1^{}`$ south of the apparent peak of the main cluster. It is shown in Fig. 6. Then a $`7^{}`$ radius circle centered at the peak of the subcluster was used to represent the subcluster and a $`2^{}`$ radius circle at P3 was used to represent the emission from the ”shoulder”. Only radial surface-brightness measurement outside of these circles was made. All the point sources were excluded. ACIS-I/S and PSPC data were used. The derived core radius is 3.8$`\pm `$0.3 arcmin (or 0.25$`\pm `$0.02 Mpc), and $`\beta `$ is 0.58$`\pm `$0.04. The residual after removing the best-fit $`\beta `$-model of the main cluster is shown in Fig. 6. The ”shoulder” is more prominent and the morphology of the subcluster is distorted, which is natural for a falling cluster. Moreover, the southern surface brightness has become sharper and points SSE, appearing more edge-like.

Then we can try to disentangle the spectral components in the observed spectra. From the temperature map and the observed surface density discontinuity ($`\mathrm{\S }`$3.6), it is known that the subcluster enters the main cluster from the west. Thus we do not expect much projection effect from the subcluster on P1. Here we only want to investigate P2 and P3 (the two regions in Fig. 2). To do that, we first need to assume the temperature of the contaminating gas from the main cluster at P2 and P3. Three value, 7, 8 and 9 keV, were assumed. The abundance of the main cluster gas was fixed at 0.3. The normalization of the contaminating gas is obtained from the best-fit $`\beta `$-model. The results are shown in Table 2. As expected, we obtained larger contrasts on temperature and abundance between the main cluster and the others. The abundance of the ”shoulder” is still high after the decomposition. From the best-fit emission measure, assuming a constant density sphere, its gas mass is around 2$`\times `$1011 M if its dimension along the line of sight is not very different from others.

### 3.6 The SSE edge — a moving cold front?

Fig. 6 shows a clear edge-like structure running along the SSE direction. We measured the surface brightness profile in the linear regions parallel to the edge in the co-added ACIS image (not the residual). The temperature at each side of the edge are also obtained in the regions shown in Fig. 6. The results are shown in Fig. 7. At the edge, there is a break in the surface brightness profile that indicates a density discontinuity and a temperature jump from about 4.5 keV to about 8.5 keV. This feature is quite similar to the cold fronts found in A2142 by Markevitch et al. (2000) and A3667 by Vikhlinin et al. (2001a). In A2142 and A3667, these features delineate the contact surfaces of the cold dense clouds and the surrounding hotter gas, through which they move. In the case of A2256, the geometry is more complicated and there is projection of multiple structures. Therefore, it is not possible to derive the real density and pressure contrast across the edge. The flat shape of the edge may imply that it is only part of the whole moving edge (the other parts are smoothed out by projection if the moving front is tilted from the plane of sky), or the moving front viewed by an angle with the line of sight. The protrusion mentioned in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3.2 might be related to the striping gas of the subcluster or its wake.

This discovery, adds another candidate to the list of merging clusters which have cold fronts — A2142, A3667 and RXJ1720.1+2638 (Mazzotta et al. 2001). More cold fronts could be expected when more Chandra data are available. Systematic studies of such phenomena will enrich our knowledge on merging of the clusters.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 The nature of the ”shoulder”

Chandra observations reveal a new structure - the ”shoulder” - near the center, a localized feature with size about $`3^{}`$ and gas mass about 2$`\times `$1011 M (assuming a constant density sphere and its dimension along the line of sight is similar as others). Its spectrum implies that iron is enriched in this structure ($``$ 1 after the decomposition). Two galaxies (D and H in Fig. 2) are apparently located in this structure though they are not necessarily associated with it. Bridle & Fomalont (1976) found a $`10^{}`$ low-brightness radio relic roughly centered at galaxy D (also the radio source D in the same paper) besides the bright NW halo (Fig. 1). The ”shoulder” is within that diffuse radio relic.

Although the roughly similar temperature and abundance between this structure and the center of the subcluster may suggest that it is a remaining of the subcluster spread along the path of its infall, its location (east of P1) is inconsistent with the infalling direction (somewhere from the west) of the subcluster suggested by the temperature map, the possible cold front and the general direction of the radio head-tail sources (E, F and G in Fig. 2).

Since its X-ray redshift suggests it is a feature inside A2256 ($`\mathrm{\S }`$3.4), only two choices are left: either a new merging component or an internal structure of the main cluster. Another merging component seems to be a feasible explanation. In fact, if we ignore the subcluster, the Chandra image resembles simulated images for a merger between a massive cluster and a much less massive one at about 0.3 Gyr after core crossing (e.g. Takizawa 1999; Takizawa 2000). The fact that there are two big elliptical galaxies rather than one dominant galaxy around the center also supports the idea that the main cluster has not yet relaxed well. Hence, we suggest that A2256 may be a system with three clusters (or two clusters and one group) in merging. About 0.3 Gyr before the ongoing merger, there was a merger between the massive cluster and a less massive system. The less massive system might be a galaxy group that did not disturb the potential well of the massive cluster much. The ”shoulder” might be the relic of its core and galaxy B might be once the dominant galaxy of that less massive system since it is 2 times less luminous than A. González-Casado, Mamon & Salvador-Solé (1994) found such kind of the relic of the core can survive in at least one cluster crossing. The observed iron abundance difference between the ”shoulder” and P1 might suggest it was an off-center merger. The less massive system may have fallen into the massive cluster somewhere from the west as implied by the simulations and the relatively sharper surface brightness at the east than other directions. Under such scenario, the low-brightness radio relic found by Bridle & Fomalont (1976) would be related to this earlier merger event and the much brighter NW one may be related to the ongoing merger. The fading of the radio haloes after the merger was discussed by Tribble (1993). The typical aging time-scale is at the order of 108 years, consistent with our picture here.

Another possibility is that the ”shoulder” is an internal structure of the main cluster as the two local dips of the potential around the D galaxies in Coma (Vikhlinin et al. 2001b). The gas mass of the ”shoulder” is about 2$`\times `$1011 M, while cD galaxies in clusters of galaxies often have gas content at the level of 1011 \- 1012 M (Trimble 2000). The galaxy A, which resembles the cD most in A2256, is quite near the ”shoulder”. Before the ongoing merger, the galaxy A may be at the center of the ”shoulder”, which could be the halo of hot gas. When the ongoing merger began, the gases (the ”shoulder”) might lag behind the galaxy A similar to the case discussed in $`\mathrm{\S }`$4.2. The iron mass excess within it is estimated to be about 108 M, while the stellar mass of A is estimated to be about 7$`\times `$1011 M assuming M/L = 7(M/L) and LB = 1011 M. Thus, an injection of iron about 0.03% of the stellar mass of A is needed to explain the iron excess, which is still possible in the galactic-wind models (e.g. Arimoto & Yoshii 1987).

### 4.2 The nature of the subcluster and the merger

Fabian & Daines (1991) suggested that the subcluster had a cooling flow based on ROSAT observations. In $`\mathrm{\S }`$3.5 it is shown that the real temperature of the subcluster is about 4.5 keV around the center. The estimated gas density at the central 80 kpc of the subcluster is about 3.6$`\times `$10-3cm-3 from the spectral fitting. The cooling time scale is 85 Gyr (n/10-3 cm$`{}_{}{}^{3})^1`$ (T/8.6 keV)1/2 , where n and T are the density and temperature of the gas. Our revised cooling time at the center of the subcluster is 14 - 20 Gyr. Though the estimated cooling time cannot completely rule out the existence of the cooling flow, neither the image nor spectra require any present cooling flow around the center of the subcluster.

$`\mathrm{\S }`$3.5 shows that the central 150 kpc of the subcluster has high iron abundance ($``$ 0.6), which decreases to about 0.3 at the outer parts. Briel & Henry (1991) divided the galaxies in A2256 into two groups using a simultaneous fit of two Gaussians to the whole velocity data, though the two redshift distribution components are not spatially separated. Based on their fit, they suggested that the subcluster was a poor cluster. Indeed, the observed X-ray characteristics of this subcluster resemble those of some poor clusters (Virgo by Matsumoto et al. 1996; Centaurus by Fukazawa et al. 1994; AWM 7 by Xu et al. 1997 and Ezawa et al. 1997). All of them have comparably low (or lower) temperature with the subcluster in A2256 and similar abundance gradients. However, all these poor clusters have central cooling flows while as discussed above, currently there is no cooling flow in the subcluster. One possibility is that the cooling flow of the subcluster has been destroyed by the early interaction during the merger while the abundance gradient was kept.

It is interesting that there is no galaxy concentration near the surface brightness peak of the subcluster. A natural explanation would involve the different falling velocity of the galaxies (here they may be C, E, and F) and the gas. The gas may lag behind the galaxies due to the drag by the main cluster gas, which is implied by the highly distorted shape of the subcluster gas and the apparent contact discontinuity. We investigate whether this picture is applicable to galaxy C, the best candidate of the cD of the subcluster according to its halo size. Though both galaxies and gas may undergo spiral-in, deceleration or acceleration, the time from when they began to separate could be simply expressed as 0.1 Mpc sin$`{}_{}{}^{1}\theta `$ / (VC \- VG), where $`\theta `$ is the angle with the line of sight, VC and VG are the velocity of the galaxy C and gas respectively. For a time scale of 0.5 Gyr, a velocity difference about 200 sin$`{}_{}{}^{1}\theta `$ km s-1can explain the observed displacement. Since large velocity dispersion ($``$ 1300 km s-1) was found in this cluster, a velocity difference (VC \- VG) around several hundred km s-1 is quite possible.

The temperature map and the observed surface density discontinuity imply that the subcluster entered the main cluster from somewhere west. However, current data do not allow us to make a definite conclusion to the moving direction of the subcluster. It has been suggested that mergers may amplify the magnetic field and be responsible for the strong radio haloes and relics (Tribble 1993; Roettiger et al. 1999). The NW bright radio relic in A2256 appears to be located near the moving path of the subcluster, thus it is likely associated with the ongoing merger event. Finally, the temperature map excludes any significant disturbance of the cluster, indicating that the merger with the subcluster is at very early stage.

## 5 Summary

Chandra observations of the merging cluster A2256 confirm some of our previous understanding on it, but also reveal some new phenomena. Our results are summarized below:

1) A new structure (”shoulder”) was found $`2^{}`$ east of the peak of the main cluster. It is shown as an extension from the main cluster peak but with local maximum. Several galaxies (A, D and H in Fig. 2) are near or apparently within it, but the physical association is hard to be established. The position is also roughly at the center of a low-brightness radio relic. This feature is also characterized by a high iron abundance ($``$ 1 after decomposition). Its temperature is comparable to or somewhat lower than that of the surrounding. The gas mass within this structure is about 2$`\times `$1011 M. We suggest that it is either a relic of a prior merger or an internal structure of the main cluster.

2) The subcluster was found to have a higher abundance ($``$ 0.6), but a lower temperature (4.5 - 5 keV) than the main cluster (0.2 - 0.3 and $``$ 7 keV respectively). Its characteristics resemble some of the poor clusters. The morphology of the subcluster is distorted, which could be due to the infall. The central part of the subcluster, as well as the main cluster, show some internal structures.

3) The brightness profile across the southern edge of the subcluster indicates a density discontinuity and the temperature jump from about 4.5 keV inside the dense gas to about 8.5 keV outside. This probably indicates a contact the subcluster and the main cluster gases and their relative motion, somewhat similar to A2142 and A3667 (Markevitch et al. 2000; Vikhlinin et al. 2001a), although the geometry is more complex. Due to the projection, the real moving direction of the whole edge is not easy to be determined and the jumps of density and pressure are hard to be constrained.

4) The temperature map shows moderate temperature variation across the cluster, but not as strong as expected in a major merger. The temperature map implies that the subcluster entered the main cluster from somewhere west and the merger is still at the early stage. The main cluster appears not yet largely disturbed by the merger with the subcluster. The two hot spots reported by Briel & Henry (1994) are not confirmed.

5) No X-ray enhancement is detected around the two brightest galaxies (A and B in Fig. 2; the 3 $`\sigma `$ upper limits are about 2$`\times `$1041 ergs s-1 at 0.5 - 10 keV) around the center of the main cluster. Over 30 point sources were detected in the observations, but only 1/3 of them have optical counterparts (usually faint) in the DSS II image. No significant excess of point sources was found in the field. Three member galaxies near the center, including a radio head-tail source and a dumbbell-like big elliptical, were found to have corresponding X-ray point-like emission. Their X-ray luminosity were estimated to be several times 1040 \- 1041 ergs s-1.

The results presented here are made possible by the successful effort of the entire *Chandra* team to build, launch, and operate the observatory. We are grateful to the referee for the valuable comments to improve the manuscript. We acknowledge helpful discussions with W. Forman, C. Jones, D. M. Neumann, T. Clarke and F. Durret. This study was supported by NASA contract NAS8-38248.

TABLE 1

Observations

| Obs. ID | 1386 | 965 | 1521 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Obs. Mode | ACIS-I, | ACIS-S, | ACIS-S, |
|  | 012378 | 236789 | 136789 |
| Observing time | Oct. 13, 99 | Oct. 13, 99 | Feb. 27, 00 |
| Total exposure (s) | 15809 | 15717 | 2976 |
| Effective exposure (s) | 9966 | 8256(S3), | - |
|  |  | 9458(S2,S4) |  |
| RA (2000) | 17:04:14 | 17:04:36 | 17:04:22 |
| DEC (2000) | 78:37:52 | 78:36:18 | 78:39:59 |

TABLE 2

Decomposition of P2 and P3

| Region | Ta | Abund.a | Tb | Abund.b | Tc | Abund.c | Td | Abund.d |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | (keV) |  | (keV) |  | (keV) |  | (keV) |  |
| P2 | 5.0$`{}_{0.3}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.3}`$ | 0.51$`{}_{0.11}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.12}`$ | 4.3$`{}_{0.3}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.3}`$ | 0.59$`{}_{0.14}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.17}`$ | 4.2$`{}_{0.3}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.3}`$ | 0.56$`{}_{0.14}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.16}`$ | 4.0$`{}_{0.3}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.3}`$ | 0.55$`{}_{0.13}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.17}`$ |
| P3 | 6.2$`{}_{0.6}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.6}`$ | 0.82$`{}_{0.27}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.31}`$ | 5.0$`{}_{1.1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+1.3}`$ | $`>`$ 0.75 | 4.5$`{}_{1.0}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+1.0}`$ | $`>`$ 0.68 | 3.9$`{}_{0.8}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+1.1}`$ | $`>`$ 0.55 |

a Uncorrected

b After the decomposition (7 keV assumption, see text)

c After the decomposition (8 keV assumption, see text)

d After the decomposition (9 keV assumption, see text)


text:
# Antiferromagnetism of the Hubbard Model on a Layered Honeycomb Lattice – Is MgB2 a Nearly-Antiferromagnetic Metal? –

## 1 Introduction

The recent discovery of MgB2,$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ an intermetallic superconductor with high superconducting transition temperature ($`T_\mathrm{c}`$), initiated a large number of activities both in experimental and theoretical researches. Several experiments, including NMR,$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ specific heat,$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ as well as photoemission spectrum$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ measurements suggest that this material shows BCS-like $`s`$-wave superconductivity. Band calculations$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ indicate a strong interaction between electrons and high-frequency phonon modes exists, which has been discussed as a possible origin of high $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ superconductivity in this material. It has been also argued that roles of strong Coulomb interactions may directly or indirectly give rise to high $`T_\mathrm{c}`$.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$

The crystal of MgB2 consists of alternative stackings of honeycomb-lattice B2 layers and triangular-lattice Mg layers, as is in AlB2. The band calculations show that Mg are almost fully ionized, and the bands at the fermi level have mostly B 2$`p`$ characters. There exist four fermi surfaces, two of them in the 2$`p_z`$ bands and the rest in the 2$`p_{x,y}`$ bands. The 2$`p_{x,y}`$ bands are derived from the intra-layer $`\sigma `$ bonding orbitals, and have a quasi two-dimensional hole character. The 2$`p_z`$ bands are derived from the intra-layer $`\pi `$ bonding orbitals which also have inter-layer couplings between adjacent atomic orbitals in the $`c`$-axis direction.

The tight-binding fits to the band structure calculations$`^{\text{?, ?)}}`$ show that the 2$`p_z`$ bands are well reproduced by a nearest neighbor (N.N.) hopping model on a layered honeycomb lattice of B sites in the formulae

$`\epsilon _\pm (𝐤)`$ $`=`$ $`\pm 2t_{xy}\gamma _{xy}(𝐤)2t_z\mathrm{cos}(k_z),`$ (1)
$`\gamma _{xy}(𝐤)`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{cos}(k_x)+\mathrm{cos}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}k_x)\mathrm{cos}({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}}k_y)},`$ (2)
where $`t_{xy}`$ ($`t_z`$) denotes intra-layer (inter-layer) N.N. electron hopping energy, while $`\gamma _{xy}`$ is the structure factor of the intra-layer electron hopping to the N.N. sites on a honeycomb lattice. A lattice structure of the tight-binding model is illustrated in Fig. 1.

In this Letter, we investigate an aspect of the 2$`p_z`$ bands in MgB2 which comes from its characteristic band structure. We consider a Hubbard model on a layered honeycomb lattice. Using a random phase approximation (RPA) as well as quantum Monte Carlo (MC) methods, antiferromagnetism (AF) at the ground state is examined. We discuss that inter-layer electron hoppings create a perfect fermi-surface nesting in the 2$`p_z`$ bands. With infinitesimal values of the Coulomb repulsion, the system is unstable against an AF order at half filling.

First, let us consider a half-filled Hubbard model on a general bipartite lattice with N.N. hoppings. This model has a particle-hole symmetry, and as a result, a non-interacting electron dispersion has a relation

$$ϵ(k+Q)=ϵ(k),$$
(3)
where $`Q`$ is the AF wavevector defined by the bipartite structure of the lattice, e.g. $`Q=(\pi ,\pi )`$ for a square lattice. To be more precise, the relation (3) holds when a electron on a A-sublattice site hops only to sites on B-sublattice, and vice versa. A particle-hole symmetry gives the chemical potential $`\mu =0`$ at half filling. On the fermi surface, the relation $`\epsilon (k)=\epsilon (k+Q)=0`$ means that there exists a perfect nesting with the nesting vector $`Q`$.

Upon the presence of the particle-hole symmetry, non-interacting magnetic susceptibility at $`Q`$ is given by

$`\chi _0(Q){\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{f(ϵ(k))f(ϵ(k+Q))}{ϵ(k)ϵ(k+Q)}}`$
$`={\displaystyle D(\epsilon )d\epsilon \frac{f(\epsilon )\frac{1}{2}}{\epsilon }}={\displaystyle D(\epsilon )d\epsilon \frac{f(\epsilon )}{\epsilon }},`$ (4)
where $`f(\epsilon )`$ is the fermi distribution function. In the derivation, we used that $`D(\epsilon )/\epsilon `$ is an odd function of $`\epsilon `$ so that its principal value integration vanishes. Generally, when density of states (DOS) at the fermi level is finite, the susceptibility $`\chi _0(Q)`$ shows a logarithmic divergences. On a square lattice, van Hove singularity creates a divergence of the DOS, $`D(\epsilon )\mathrm{log}(\epsilon )`$, and hence we have a log-square singularity in $`\chi _0(Q)`$.

Using an RPA, the criterion for the AF instability is given by $`1U\chi _0(Q)=0`$, where $`U`$ is the on-site repulsion energy. The divergence of $`\chi _0(Q)`$ implies that an AF spin density wave (SDW) occurs at infinitesimal values of $`U`$. In other words, the critical value for the SDW phase transition is $`U_\mathrm{c}=0`$. The SDW state is smoothly connected to the strong coupling limit $`U\mathrm{}`$, where the system is well described by an AF Heisenberg model on a bipartite lattice.

Let us now consider a half-filled Hubbard model on a single-layer honeycomb lattice with N.N. hoppings. The energy dispersion is given by $`ϵ_\pm (k)=\pm 2t\gamma _{xy}(k)`$, where $`t`$ is the hopping energy. The energy dispersion has a particle-hole symmetry due to the bipartite nature of the lattice. What is unique in this lattice is that the DOS decreases to zero at the fermi level,

$$D(\epsilon )|\epsilon |.$$
(5)
This may be understood from the fact that, at $`\mu 0`$, the fermi surface shrinks to points at $`K`$-points $`(\pm 2\pi /\sqrt{3},\pi )`$. Using eq. (5) in eq. (4), we see that the singularity in $`\chi _0(Q)`$ is suppressed. Then, RPA gives that the AF instability occurs at a non-zero value of $`U_\mathrm{c}=1/\chi _0(Q)`$. The detailed calculation gives $`U_\mathrm{c}/t=2.23`$.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$

In order to examine this result with respect to the reliability of the RPA treatment, we perform a quantum Monte Carlo calculation of the Hubbard model on a honeycomb lattice. We apply a projection algorithm with optimized initial states.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ The ground state is obtained by $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{G}\mathrm{exp}(\tau )|\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{ini}}`$ at large enough values of $`\tau `$. Here, $``$ is the Hamiltonian of the Hubbard model with electron hopping energy $`t`$ and a repulsive interaction $`U`$. For the initial state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{ini}}`$, we use a Hartree-Fock solution for the identical lattice with an interaction $`U_{\mathrm{ini}}`$. Note that $`U_{\mathrm{ini}}`$ ($`U`$) can be chosen arbitrarily, and an appropriate value for $`U_{\mathrm{ini}}`$ accelerates the convergence to the ground state.

Monte Carlo runs are performed for various system sizes with linear dimension $`L=6`$, $`8`$, $`10`$, $`12`$, $`14`$ and $`16`$. We typically run 10,000 Monte Carlo steps after 1000 relaxation steps. AF structure factor is calculated by

$$S(Q)=\frac{1}{N}\underset{i,j}{}S_iS_j(1)^{r_ir_j}.$$
(6)
Here $`N`$ is the number of sites. Staggered magnetization $`M_\mathrm{s}`$ is obtained by

$$M_\mathrm{s}{}_{}{}^{2}=\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}S(Q)/N.$$
(7)
Therefore, existence of the AF order can be judged by the extrapolation of $`S(Q)/N`$ to the thermodynamic limit.

System size dependence of $`S(Q)/N`$ for various values of $`U`$ is depicted in Fig. 2. We extrapolate the data by $`1/L`$. Here, finite size effects due to linear spin-wave type excitations in the AF ordered states are assumed. From the data we see that the extrapolation gives $`M_\mathrm{s}>0`$ at $`U/t3.7`$. Meanwhile, at $`U/t3.5`$ the $`1/L`$ extrapolation gives negative values for $`M_\mathrm{s}^2`$, indicating that $`1/L`$-dependence derived from the linear spin wave theory does not hold in this case. From this fact, the critical value for the onset of AF order is estimated to be $`U_\mathrm{c}/t3.6`$.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ Thus, quantum fluctuations do not extinguish RPA instability. They only renormalize the value of $`U_\mathrm{c}/t`$ by a factor of about 1.6. As long as the existence of the instability is concerned, RPA is considered to be reliable.

Next, we introduce inter-layer hoppings. For a while, we assume a half-filled situation for the 2$`p_z`$ bands, of which energy is described by eq. (1). In actual MgB2, however, existence of hole fermi surfaces in the 2$`p_{x,y}`$ bands leads a deviation from half-filling for the 2$`p_z`$ bands. The doping effect will be discussed later.

As illustrated in Fig. 1, the lattice structure is bipartite. We take intra-layer and inter-layer N.N. hoppings only. An inter-sublattice hopping on a bipartite lattice creates a particle-hole symmetry. Indeed, a non-interacting electron dispersion in eq. (1) shows

$$\epsilon _+(k_x,k_y,k_z)=\epsilon _{}(k_x,k_y,k_z+\pi ).$$
(8)
Note that, since a unit cell contains two boron atoms and the first Brillouin zone is already halved by the crystallographic reason, the AF wavevector in this lattice is $`Q=(0,0,\pi )`$. As an inter-layer hopping $`t_z`$ is increased from zero, the energy dispersion along the $`k_z`$ axis makes the fermi surface expand from the lines in the Brillouin zone connecting K and H points, and creates fermi surfaces with finite surface volumes around $`k_z=0`$ and $`k_z=\pi `$. Therefore, at $`t_z0`$, the DOS at the fermi level becomes non-zero. Then, from eq. (4), $`\chi _0(Q)`$ diverges logarithmically, and the RPA instability occurs at infinitesimal values of $`U`$.

This behavior can be understood as a creation of a fermi surface nesting by increasing the inter-layer electron hoppings. For any $`k`$-points on the fermi surface, the relation $`\epsilon _+(k_x,k_y,k_z)=\epsilon _{}(k_x,k_y,k_z+\pi )=0`$ holds, which means the perfect interband nesting with $`Q=(0,0,\pi )`$. The situation is schematically illustrated in Fig. 3. Increase of $`t_z`$ makes the surface volumes of the perfectly-nested fermi surfaces increases.

Enhancement of the nesting behavior by the inter-layer hoppings is in a great contrast with usual quasi low-dimensional systems where three dimensionality induces curvatures of the fermi surface and hence decreases nesting properties. This unique feature comes from the bipartite geometry of a honeycomb lattice.

Within this band structure, $`U_\mathrm{c}0`$ holds strictly only at $`t_z=0`$, while we suddenly have $`U_\mathrm{c}=0`$ at $`t_z0`$. $`U_\mathrm{c}`$ behaves singularly as a function of $`t_z`$. In other words, for a small value of $`U`$, SDW order appears as soon as inter-layer hopping is allowed. In practice, however, there exist particle-hole symmetry breaking terms, e.g. second neighbor hoppings as well as a chemical potential shift due to carrier doping. Then, there exists a competition between the inter-layer hopping term which create the fermi surface nesting and the symmetry breaking terms which destroys the nesting. As a result, the singular behavior in the $`t_z`$ dependence of $`U_\mathrm{c}`$ will be smeared out by the particle-hole symmetry breaking terms, and $`U_\mathrm{c}`$ is speculated to remain non-zero. Nevertheless, as long as the particle-hole symmetry breaking terms are small, we expect that AF instability occurs at relatively small values of $`U`$.

If the 2$`p_z`$ bands of MgB2 are half filled, the strong nesting behavior of the fermi surfaces creates an AF-SDW state even if the Coulomb repulsion is not so large. Therefore, it is possible that MgB2 is a nearly-AF metal. Self-doped carriers from the 2$`p_{x,y}`$ bands to the 2$`p_z`$ bands might have destroyed the AF order and make MgB2 nonmagnetic, being similar with the case for high-$`T_\mathrm{c}`$ cuprates in the doped region. At this point, however, it is not clear whether such AF is correlated to the mechanism of the superconductivity in MgB2, e.g. whether remnant AF fluctuations assist the phonon mechanism to enhance the attractive interaction for the Cooper pairing. Further detailed studies are required to address this question.

In this sense, lattice structure of MgB2 is special because the layer stacking conserves the bipartite nature. As a counter example, we make a comparison with graphite, where stacking of the honeycomb layers are not similar to those for MgB2. A carbon atom on an adjacent layer lies on top of the center of a hexagon, which is not a bipartite structure. Then, the system is stable against AF instabilities in the small $`U`$ region. This explains the fact that graphite does not show AF. Coulomb interactions are expected to be not strong enough to induce a magnetically ordered state.

In order to justify the idea that MgB2 is a nearly-AF metal, we propose some crucial tests. From the band calculation, more precise estimate for the band dispersion, either by the tight-binding fits, or by directly calculating the fermi surface, will give how strong the nesting behavior is in this material. Coulomb repulsion energy should also be estimated to clarify whether it is strong enough to cause AF states if the 2$`p_z`$ bands are half filled. Experimentally, measurement of remnant AF spin fluctuations in MgB2 is important. A search for AF states in various diboride compounds with half-filled 2$`p_z`$ bands is also interesting.

To summarize, ground state magnetism of the Hubbard model on a layered honeycomb lattice at half-filling is studied as a model for the B 2$`p_z`$ bands of MgB2. RPA as well as MC calculations are performed to study AF-SDW singularities. On a single-layer honeycomb lattice, AF instability occurs at $`U_\mathrm{c}/t3.6`$. On a layered honeycomb lattice, inter-layer hopping term induces the fermi-surface nesting, contrary to the usual cases where three dimensionality destroys nesting behaviors. Within RPA scheme, the perfect nesting leads AF to occur at $`U_\mathrm{c}=0`$. We discuss that MgB2 might be a nearly-AF metal.

The computations have been performed on the massive-parallel personal computer systems of AOYAMA+ project (http://www.phys.aoyama.ac.jp/~aoyama+). This work is supported by a Mombu-Kagakusho Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research.


text:
# PACS:13.60.Hb;14.80.-j;14.80.Ly Estimates of threshold cross section for stoponium production at 𝑒⁺𝑒⁻ colliders

## 1 Introduction

In the Standard Model it has been shown that bound states can be created for every quark but the top (see for instance  and references therein). The latter possibility is ruled out due to the high value of the top quark mass, which is responsible for its short lifetime. The top quark decays directly into a $`W`$ boson and a $`b`$ quark before being able to create a bound state. In a recent paper  it has been shown that a finite probability of formation exists for a supersymmetric bound state made out of a squark stop and an antitop squark, for a certain range of $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$ mass and some regions of the MSSM parameter space. In that, the possibility of signal detection at an $`e^+e^{}`$ collider with LEP and NLC characteristics has also been investigated by means of a Breit–Wigner formula.

A more refined result is needed in the threshold region which is characterised by low values of the squark velocity $`\beta `$, i.e.

$$\beta =\sqrt{1\frac{4m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}^2}{s}}1.$$
(1)
For this purpose a by now standard Green function approach has been developed (see  and references therein).

We will assume that the supersymmetric bound state creation does not differ from the standard model case, as the relevant interaction is driven by QCD and controlled by the mass of the constituent squarks . For this reason the Schrödinger Green function technique is suitable for treating the problem of the scalar bound state. It will be used to compute the bound state effects on the cross section of stoponium near threshold. We will compare the results obtained in this manner to the Born cross section estimates for energies above threshold. The effects of the beam energy spread of the $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders on the computed cross section will be discussed.

## 2 The method

The basic idea of the method is to consider the Schrödinger Green function equation

$$(𝐇E)G(𝐱,𝐲,E)=\delta (𝐱𝐲),$$
(2)
where $`𝐇`$ is the Hamiltonian of the system

$$𝐇=\frac{_𝐱^2}{2m}+V(𝐱),$$
(3)
and $`V(𝐱)`$ is the potential for the squarks. The imaginary part of the derivative of the Green function given by (2) taken at the origin is proportional to the cross section at threshold . The finite width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of the state is taken into account by the substitution

$$EE+i\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
(4)
Unlike the process

$$e^+e^{}t\overline{t},$$
(5)
the reaction

$$e^+e^{}\stackrel{~}{t}\overline{\stackrel{~}{t}}$$
(6)
proceeds in P–wave, whereas top quarks are produced in S–wave configuration. This implies the Born level cross section to grow as $`\sigma \beta `$ for top production (5), while for process (6) of scalars one obtains a slower rise, $`\sigma \beta ^3`$.

The threshold cross section of the process $`e^+e^{}\stackrel{~}{t}\overline{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ is given by the following expression :

$`\sigma (e^+e^{}\stackrel{~}{t}\overline{\stackrel{~}{t}})=R{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \alpha ^2}{s}}`$ $`\times `$ $`[\stackrel{~}{Q}_\gamma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{(v_e^2+a_e^2)\stackrel{~}{Q}_Z^2}{4\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _W}}{\displaystyle \frac{s^2}{(sM_Z^2)^2+M_Z^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z^2}}+`$ (7)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{v_e\stackrel{~}{Q}_\gamma \stackrel{~}{Q}_Z}{\mathrm{sin}2\theta _W}}{\displaystyle \frac{s(sM_Z^2)}{(sM_Z^2)^2+M_Z^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z^2}}]`$
where $`v_e=1+4\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$, $`a_e=1`$, $`M_Z`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z`$ are the mass and the total width of the $`Z`$ boson respectively. The charges are defined by $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_\gamma =Q`$, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_Z=(\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}2Q\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)\mathrm{sin}2\theta _W`$ , with $`\theta _W`$ being the standard electroweak mixing angle and $`\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ is the left–right mixing angle.

The $`R`$ term of equation (7) is obtained  upon taking the imaginary part of the derivative at the origin of the Green function given by (2)

$$R=\frac{1536}{81}\frac{\pi }{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}^4}\mathrm{}\left[\frac{}{𝐱}\frac{}{𝐲}G_1(𝐱,𝐲,E)\right]|_{𝐱=0,𝐲=0}$$
(8)
($`\mathrm{}`$ stands for the imaginary part, while $`G_1`$ is the $`l=1`$ component of the Green function).

For the purpose of our investigation, we will use a Coulombic potential for the Hamiltonian given in (3) (here $`r=|𝐱|)`$

$$V=\frac{4}{3}\frac{\alpha _s}{r}$$
(9)
where $`\alpha _s`$ is given by the QCD two–loop expression

$$\alpha _s(Q^2)=\frac{4\pi }{\beta _0\mathrm{log}\left[Q^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2\right]}\left\{1\frac{2\beta _1}{\beta _0^2}\frac{\mathrm{log}\left[\mathrm{log}\left[Q^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2\right]\right]}{\mathrm{log}\left[Q^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2\right]}\right\}$$
(10)
and is calculated at a fixed value of the Bohr radius $`r_B`$ given by

$$r_B=\frac{3}{2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}\alpha _s}.$$
(11)
The validity of this choice has been shown (see  and references therein), and is essentially justified by the fact that the stop quark should be much heavier than all other quarks except (maybe) the top. The high value of $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ implies from (11) that the average distance between two squarks inside the scalar bound state is small, and therefore the dominant term of the potential is the Coulomb expression given in (9). This assumption for the bound state potential allows us to obtain an analytic expression for the Green function needed for the threshold cross section .

Following the above cited authors we introduce some standard notations: $`E=\sqrt{s}2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ is the energy displacement from threshold, $`k^2=m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}E`$, $`\lambda =3\alpha _sm_{\stackrel{~}{t}}/2`$ is the wavelength, and $`\nu =\lambda /k`$ is the wave number. Here the argument of $`\alpha _s`$ is taken to be at the soft scale $`1/r_B`$ . The finite width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of the bound state is taken into account by means of the substitution given in (4).

The expression for the $`l=1`$ Green function for the Coulombic potential (9) is given by

$`G_1(0,0,k)=`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{36\pi }}\lambda \left\{2(k^2\lambda ^2)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{k}{2\lambda }}+\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k}{\mu _f}}\right)+2\gamma _E{\displaystyle \frac{11}{6}}+\psi _1(1\nu )\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{2}}\right\}`$ (12)
where $`\gamma _E`$ is Euler constant ($`0.57721`$), and $`\psi _1`$ is the digamma function, $`\psi _1(x)=d(\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }(x))/dx`$. The derivative at the origin of (12) is obtained by the simple multiplicative relation

$$\frac{}{𝐱}\frac{}{𝐲}G_1(𝐱,𝐲,k)|_{𝐱=0,𝐲=0}=9G_1(0,0,k).$$
(13)
Some caveats (as described in ) have to be considered for the case of the $`P`$ wave. There exists a constant linear term in the decay width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contributing to the $`l=1`$ Green function that cannot be properly computed in a purely nonrelativistic framework . The term independent from $`k`$ that has to be added to the Green function (12) is given by

$$0.185\frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}^3}{36\pi }\mathrm{\Gamma }$$
(14)
and from  the $`\mu _f`$ argument of the logarithmic term in (12) is given by $`0.13m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ by means of an analysis of relativistic perturbation theory. We note that the last two results have been obtained only for the top quark case, and we will assume that those results remain valid also for the stop quark which has a high mass, presumably close to that of the top quark. In any case the two aforementioned terms do not contribute much to the Green function estimates, since they are dominated by the leading $`k^3`$ term of (12).

## 3 Results and discussion

Our analysis of the threshold behaviour of the cross section should hold for a range of mass values and decay widths. For the mass range we will refer to the current stop mass value limits  and the LEP capabilities, while for the decay widths we have to take into account the formation requirements of the bound state . A criterion for the formation of bound states is that the creation of a hadron can occur only if the level splitting which depends upon the strength of the strong force between the (s)quarks and their relative distance , is larger than the natural width of the state. This means that, if

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{2P1P}\mathrm{\Gamma }$$
(15)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{2P1P}=E_{2P}E_{1P}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the width of the would–be bound state, then the bound state exists. Performing the analysis in this way allows us also to avoid dealing directly with several parameters of the MSSM model which are relevant to stop quark decay (apart from the stop mass), namely the ratio of the two Higgs vacuum expectation values $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, the Higgs–higgsino mass parameter $`\mu `$ and the wino mass $`M_2`$ . The only constraint we have to impose is that the decay width be lower than about 1 GeV, necessary for the scalar bound state creation  regardless of the values assumed for the parameters mentioned above.

As a first step, we check that the expression (12) used for our potential model (9) is consistent with the Born cross section for $`E>0`$. We see in figure (1) that in the non interacting limit with $`\alpha _s0`$ the cross section given by (12) tends to the usual Born expression, and is zero for $`E<0`$. This confirms the consistency of the expression found in (7).

In figures (2,3) we present the results of the threshold cross section for a LEP mass range, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=60,\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}100}GeV`$. We have chosen the left–right mixing angle to be such that $`\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}=1`$. From (7) it is possible to see that the cross section minimum value is obtained for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=100GeV`$ at $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}\pm 0.55`$, the point where the $`Z`$ boson coupling vanishes, which does not much differ from the maximal value. As previously stated, assuming the decay width to be smaller than 1 $`GeV`$, we show for each chosen mass for widths of $`10^3,10^2,10^1`$ and 1 $`GeV`$ respectively. The cross sections are plotted against the threshold offset energy $`E`$, the centre of mass energy being given by the relation $`\sqrt{s}=2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}+E`$.

For $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=60GeV`$, figure (2) shows the structure of the discrete energy levels for $`E<0`$ versus decay width values given above. The maximal height of the peak, about 8400 $`fb`$, is obtained for the smallest width of $`1MeV`$. The shape of the peaks are similar to the one obtained by the Breit–Wigner formula, except for the resonance tails that are set higher with increasing energy. The height of the peaks decreases drastically as the binding energy reaches asymptotically the $`E=0`$ level. They tend also to accumulate and merge towards the $`E=0`$ value as the energy increases; this happens when the distance of the two resonance peaks is of the order of the decay width. For the Coulombic model the binding energy of the $`l=1`$ level is given by the expression

$$E_n=\frac{4}{9}\frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}\alpha _s^2}{n^2},n>1$$
(16)
and the resonance peaks merge when

$$\frac{4}{9}m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}\alpha _s^2\left[\frac{1}{n^2}\frac{1}{(n+1)^2}\right]\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
(17)
This means that the the last visible peak has a quantum number $`n`$ given by

$$\frac{2n+1}{n^2(n^2+1)}\frac{9\mathrm{\Gamma }}{4m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}\alpha _s^2},$$
(18)
we can see for instance in plot (2) that for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.1GeV`$ the $`n=3`$ peak is already barely noticeable. For $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1GeV`$, the limiting region of bound state formation , we see that there is no visible structure; even the first peak is smeared by the large width.

The continuum energy region $`E>0`$ does not present any fine structure, and remains essentially the same for any given decay width. One important effect to be noted is the large difference of the Green function result with respect to the Born prediction for $`E>0`$. This fact is shown in figure (1) where the two estimates of the cross section are compared. It is clearly seen that the former is about one order of magnitude larger than the Born cross section. This can be understood by the fact that the Green function technique takes into account the interaction between the particles, and the contributions of the binding energies accumulate towards the $`E=0`$ energy level as described, thus affecting substantially the continuum region as well.

In figure (3), we show the results for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=100GeV`$, with the same parameters given in figure (2). The peaks are lower than the previous case, in particular the largest value of the cross section is obtained for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1MeV`$ at about 2400 $`fb`$. The position of the peaks are shifted towards lower values of the centre of mass energy because the binding energy given by the expression (16) is higher.

For NLC energies, we present in figures (4) and (5) results obtained for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=200GeV`$ and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=500GeV`$ respectively. The parameters have been chosen to be the same as of the LEP case, and the qualitative behaviour of the threshold cross section is analogous. For $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=200GeV`$, the maximal value of the first peak obtained at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1MeV`$ is about 450 $`fb`$, while for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=500GeV`$ the highest peak reaches only 90 $`fb`$. The position of the peaks is shifted towards even lower energy values because of still higher values of bound state binding energy, as can be verified from (16).

We remark that all our results have been obtained for the Coulombic potential (9). It is known that in the threshold region there are singular Coulombic terms $`(\alpha _s/\beta )^n`$ which spoil the finite order perturbation theory. The resummation of these contributions have been done – see  and references therein – and they give small contributions and only modify slightly the Coulombic potential. The effect on the cross section is quite small, as can be seen from the plots in , and does not change our estimates by more than a few percent.

Another point concerns the validity of the Schrödinger Green function method (12). Since it is a nonrelativistic procedure, we have to ensure that the velocity of the squarks is low enough in order to make relativistic corrections negligible. From kinematical arguments, it is possible to give a bound for the maximal acceptable energy offset $`E_{MAX}`$ . Assuming an upper value for the squark velocity, $`\beta _{MAX}`$ , and the expression (1) together with the centre of mass energy parametrisation, $`\sqrt{s}=2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}+E`$, one obtains by means of a series expansion in $`E`$

$$E_{MAX}<m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}\beta _{MAX}^2.$$
(19)
In table (1) we present some estimates on $`\beta _{MAX}`$ and $`E_{MAX}`$ for different squark masses and some Lorentz $`\gamma `$ parameter values. We see that the limit of validity for the nonrelativistic equation (2) lies in a range of a few $`GeV`$ around the threshold, and naturally increases with larger squark masses; this can be intuitively understood since the heavier the squark is, the slower will it rotate inside the bound state .

The results obtained so far have to be folded with the beam energy spread of the collider. For the LEP2 case, which has a beam energy spread of the order of 200 $`MeV`$ , even if the peak cross section is in the $`nb`$ range for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=60GeV`$ (2) the various resonance peaks are practically undetectable because their widths are much smaller than the typical beam energy spread (see also the discussion of ). The sole possibility of a width larger than the beam energy spread, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1GeV`$ case, as already discussed, has no peaks as they have been smeared and thus no visible fine structure is envisaged. The situation does not change for the value of $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}}=100GeV`$; as we can see from figure (3) this situation is essentially the same as the previous one, and the peak cross section is even smaller than the former by a multiplicative factor of about 4.

With the increase of the centre of mass energy (NLC case) the net result for the cross section detection is even worse than before. The beam energy spread is of the order of 6 $`GeV`$  and, as seen clearly from figures (4) and (5), it is even larger than the energy range used for the plots by a factor of 4, thus making impossible the detection of any possible fine structure present in the threshold cross section.

## 4 Conclusions

In this letter, we have shown that the bound state effect on the threshold cross section of a scalar stop bound state is not negligible, at least for the case of a Coulombic potential. This effect turns out to be also dramatically different from the simple Born cross section results for $`E>0`$ .

However, because of the large beam energy spread of the present (LEP2) and future (NLC) $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders, the possible structure of the cross section at threshold cannot be resolved. This confirmes our less refined Breit–Wigner approach of , and reinforces our previous result that the stoponium cannot be detected at the present and even future $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders.

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank M. Antonelli for useful discussion and support during this work; and also O. Panella and P. Gensini for helpful hints. Many thanks also to Y. Srivastava for careful reading and patiently correcting the manuscript.