text:
# Vector field localization and negative tension branes

## I Introduction

Suppose that the space-time contains non-compact extra-dimensions and consider, for sake of concreteness the following $`D`$-dimensional geometry

$$ds^2=a^2(w)[dt^2dx_1^2\mathrm{}dx_d^2dw^2],$$
(1.1)
with one bulk coordinate $`w`$ and with $`D=d+2`$ space-time dimensions. Even in the absence of gravitational interactions, five-dimensional domain-wall solutions allow the localization of fermionic zero modes . This type of multi-dimensional domain-wall solutions can be obtained by setting the warp factors to a constant. From a strictly gravitational point of view the four-dimensional Planck mass would not be finite. In this sense the increase of the dimensionality of space-time represents a tool in order to obtain an effective lower dimensional theory where chiral fermions may be successfully localized. Indeed, this approach led to a very interesting development in the analysis of chiral gauge theories on the lattice. In particular, it was shown that the massless fermionic zero mode is still present if the five-dimensional continuous space is replaced by a lattice . Hence, it was realized that chiral symmetry can be realized in different ways avoiding the known problem of doubling of fermionic degrees of freedom . A crucial ingredient, in this context, was the use of the so-called Wilson-Ginzparg relation .

In spite of the fact that an increase in the dimensionality of space-time may lead to localized chiral fermions a problem may still remain as far as vector fields are concerned . In particular, a higher-dimensional domain-wall solution of the type of  does not lead to the localization of vector fields. More specifically, neither the vector fields generated as fluctuations of the higher-dimensional metric, nor the gauge fields can be localized on the same wall to which the fermionic zero-modes are attached. The localization of vectors fields is the subject of the present analysis. It is well known that there are various mechanisms aiming at the localization of gauge fields in higher-dimensional contexts . In most of these approaches the idea is to analyze the situation where the four-dimensional Planck mass

$$M_P^2M^3𝑑wa^d(w),$$
(1.2)
is finite. In such a background it can be shown, in general terms, that the graviton zero mode is also localized leading to ordinary gravity on the wall . A particularly simple example of this phenomenon is provided by five-dimensional AdS space where, however, neither the gauge fluctuations coming from the geometry  nor the minimally coupled higher dimensional gauge fields can be simply localized  The reason for this statement is that the squared modulus of the zero mode leads, in this case, to a logarithmically divergent normalization integral..

Suppose now to drop this hypothesis. Suppose, in other words, that the four-dimensional Planck mass is not finite. Is it possible to localize spin one fields on such a configuration? As in  gravitational interactions are used here as an effective tool in order to localize higher spins but not as an interaction which should be, by itself, localized. In this sense, the present approach is more modest than the one proposed in  where all  the higher spins should be, in principle, localized.

Our logic is, in short, the following. Consider, for sake of concreteness, a five-dimensional warped geometry of the type of Eq. (1.1) with $`d=3`$. In this type of warped geometry vector modes may come both from the gauge field living in the bulk and from the vector fields arising as fluctuations of the five-dimensional metric. In qualitative terms, the possible behavior of spin one fluctuations of the geometry and of bulk gauge fields will be now separately examined.

The spin one fluctuations of a five-dimensional geometry in the presence of a brane configuration can be expressed in terms of two equations which are written in fully gauge-invariant \[i.e. coordinate independent\] termsThe Greek indices label the $`(3+1)`$ (Poincaré invariant) dimensions. The Latin (uppercase) indices run over the whole five-dimensional space-time.:

$`_\alpha ^\alpha 𝒱_\mu =0,`$ (1.3)
$`𝒱_\mu ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}𝒱_\mu =0,`$ (1.4)
where the prime denotes the derivative with respect to $`w`$ and $`=(\mathrm{ln}a)^{}`$. Eq. (1.4) will be specifically derived in Section II and generalized in Section III. Here some qualitative remarks will be made.

Eqs. (1.4) tell that the vector modes of the geometry are always massless and that the zero mode is localized provided

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dw}{a^3(w)},$$
(1.5)
is convergent. By looking, simultaneously, at Eq. (1.5) and at the expressions of the curvature invariants pertaining to the geometry (1.1)

$`R={\displaystyle \frac{4}{a^2}}(2^{}+3^2),`$ (1.6)
$`R_{MN}R^{MN}={\displaystyle \frac{4}{a^4}}(9^4+6^{}^2+5_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}),`$ (1.7)
$`R_{MNAB}R^{MNAB}={\displaystyle \frac{8}{a^4}}(2_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}5^4),`$ (1.8)
it can be argued that there may exist warped backgrounds where the vector modes of the geometry are localized and the bulk geometry is regular §§§By regular we mean that the curvature invariant are analytic functions of the bulk coordinate for every $`w>0`$. For $`w=0`$ we will allow the possibility of a singularity which comes from the thin nature of the brane configuration.. An example of this class of backgrounds is the warp factor

$$a(w)=e^{K|w|},$$
(1.9)
with $`K>0`$. One of the questions which will be investigated in this paper is the actual possibility of realizing such a model. As it will be shown in Section II this type of behavior will never be realized in original Randall-Sundrum set-up. This statement will be made clear by a detailed calculation. Here it is enough to notice that in the Randall-Sundrum model the $`Z_2`$ symmetry, together with the requirement that the four-dimensional Planck mass is finite, implies that while the integral appearing in Eq. (1.2) is always convergent, the integral of Eq. (1.5) is always divergent (in particular for $`w\mathrm{}`$). Hence, the graviphoton is never normalizable.

The gauge fields leaving in the bulk lead to spin one fluctuations obeying equations which are different from the ones of the spin one fluctuations arising directly from the geometry. In order to have an explicit example, consider, for instance, the case of an Abelian gauge field coupled to the geometry in five dimensions. The action of such a field can be written as

$$S=\frac{1}{4}d^5x\sqrt{G}F_{AB}F^{AB},$$
(1.10)
where $`F_{AB}=_{[A}A_{B]}_{[A}A_{B]}`$ and $`A_B`$ is the vector potential. From Eq. (1.10), a Schrödinger-like equation leading can be obtained for the mass eigenstates. Defining $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1=\sqrt{a}`$, the normal modes of the action (1.10) are $`𝒜_\mu =\mathrm{\Delta }_1A_\mu `$. In terms of these normal modes the equation of motion is

$$𝒜_\mu ^{\prime \prime }\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_1^{\prime \prime }}{\mathrm{\Delta }_1}𝒜_\mu _\alpha ^\alpha 𝒜_\mu =0,$$
(1.11)
where $`_\mu 𝒜^\mu =0`$ and where $`𝒜_w=0`$. In the specific case of the action (1.10) $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1=\sqrt{a}`$ but, in more general terms, some couplings to the higher-dimensional dilaton field could be expected. This case will be studied in Section IV. Here only notice that the normalization condition of Eq. (1.11) for the gauge zero mode leads to the following integral

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑w\mathrm{\Delta }_1^2.$$
(1.12)
In the case of five-dimensional AdS space-time (i.e. $`a(w)1/|w|`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1^2a1/|w|`$) the integral (1.12) is logarithmically divergent. Is it possible to envisage the situation where $`\mathrm{\Delta }e^{K_1|w|}`$? In this case the gauge zero mode would be localized and it would be separated from the massive tower by a mass gap of the order $`K_1`$. The problem of the gauge zero modes and the possible occurrence of a mass gap in the spectrum will be one of the issues related to the present analysis.

A perspective similar to the one discussed in this paper has been recently adopted in a partially related problem, namely the possibility of implementing the Higgs mechanism without invoking a fundamental scalar . Suppose  that the higher dimensional theory gives rise to a weight function multiplying the gauge kinetic term by a factor which depends upon the bulk coordinate $`w`$. In the simplest realization this weight function can be related to the volume of the extra-dimensional space but there may be different situations like the ones where some other field (like the dilaton) gives important contributions. If the weight function satisfies a number of properties, then, the pure higher dimensional theory may lead to a lower-dimensional theory of massive vector bosons with a gap in the spectrum. Another important analogy is that the backgrounds leading to the effects analyzed in  do not necessarily lead to a finite four-dimensional Planck mass.

The plan of the paper is the following. In Section II arguments will be provided in order to show that the gauge modes of the geometry may be localized provided the four-dimensional Planck mass is not finite. In Section III an explicit model of negative tension branes will be provided. In Section IV the localization of the spin one fluctuations will be discussed. Section V contains some concluding remarks.

## II Basic Considerations

Consider, as a warm-up, the case of gauge-invariant vector fluctuations in the case where the bulk action contains the usual Einstein-Hilbert term supplemented by a bulk cosmological constant in the presence of a thin brane configuration. This is exactly the case of a Randall-Sundrum type of background and it will be shown that, in this case the vector fluctuations of the geometry cannot be localized, as anticipated in the introduction.

The action for the system is given as

$$S=d^5x\sqrt{|G|}\left[R\mathrm{\Lambda }\right]\frac{\lambda }{2}d^4\rho \sqrt{|\gamma |}[\gamma ^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha X^M_\beta X^NG_{MN}2],$$
(2.1)
where $`\gamma _{\alpha \beta }`$ is the induced metric on the brane and where $`\rho ^\mu `$ are the coordinates on the brane. It is important to write down the action in rigorous terms not so much for the analysis of the background but for the analysis of the vector fluctuations. By functional derivation of the action with respect to the space-time and induced metric we get a set of two (coupled) equations that can be simply written as

$`𝒬_{AB}=𝒯_{AB},`$ (2.2)
$`\gamma _{\alpha \beta }=_\alpha X^M_\beta X^NG_{MN}`$ (2.3)
where

$`𝒬_{AB}=R_{AB}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}G_{AB}`$ (2.4)
$`𝒯_{AB}={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}{\displaystyle d^4\rho \frac{\sqrt{|\gamma |}}{\sqrt{|G|}}\gamma ^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha X^M\beta X^N(G_{AM}G_{BN}\frac{1}{3}G_{MN}G_{AB})\delta (w)}.`$ (2.5)
In the background (1.1) with $`d=3`$ the induced metric is

$$\gamma _{\alpha \beta }=\delta _\alpha ^A\delta _\beta ^B\eta _{AB}a(w)^2,$$
(2.6)
and the equations for the background are

$`6(^2^{})=\lambda a\delta (w),`$ (2.7)
$`6[3^2+^{}]+2\mathrm{\Lambda }a^2+\lambda a\delta (w)=0.`$ (2.8)
In the case of five-dimensional AdS space-time, the only solution to Eqs. (2.7)–(2.8) is given by

$$a(w)=\frac{1}{(b|w|+1)}$$
(2.9)
where $`b=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }/12}`$.

Consider now the localization properties of the vector fluctuations pertaining to this geometry. In order to address this question Eqs. (2.2) and (2.3) have to be perturbed with respect to the spin one degrees of freedom appearing in the fluctuations of $`G_{AB}`$, namely,

$$\delta G_{AB}^{(V)}=a^2(w)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}& D_\mu & \\ D_\mu & 0& \end{array}\right).$$
(2.10)
where $`_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}=\frac{1}{2}(_\mu f_\nu +_\nu f_\mu )`$ and where $`_\alpha f^\alpha =0`$ and $`_\alpha D^\alpha =0`$. Eq. (2.10) represents the most general decomposition of the spin one fluctuations of the geometry. The remaining nine degrees of freedom correspond either to scalar or to tensor fluctuations.

From Eqs. (2.2)–(2.3) the perturbed equations are:

$`\delta 𝒬_{AB}=\delta 𝒯_{AB},`$ (2.11)
$`\delta \gamma _{\mu \nu }=\delta _\mu ^M\delta _\nu ^N\delta G_{MN}.`$ (2.12)
As far as the vector fluctuations are concerned, the relevant components are the $`(\mu ,w)`$ and the $`(\mu ,\nu )`$. Direct calculations show that

$`\delta 𝒬_{\mu \nu }=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\mathrm{\Lambda }a^2+2(^{}+3^2)\right]_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}+[_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}^{}]^{}+3[_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}^{}]`$ (2.13)
$`[_{(\mu }D_{\nu )}]^{}3[_{(\mu }D_{\nu )}],`$ (2.14)
$`\delta 𝒬_{\mu w}=[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}a^2+^{}+3^2]D_\mu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\alpha ^\alpha [D_\mu f_\mu ^{}],`$ (2.15)
and that

$`\delta 𝒯_{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{3}}a(w)\delta (w)_{(\mu }f_{\nu )},`$ (2.16)
$`\delta 𝒯_{\mu w}={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{6}}a(w)\delta (w)D_\mu .`$ (2.17)
Hence, the relevant equations for the spin one fluctuations of the metric can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\alpha ^\alpha [D_\mu f_\mu ^{}]+[^{}+3^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}a^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{6}}a\delta (w)]D_\mu =0,`$ (2.18)
$`[_{(\mu }D_{\nu )}]^{}3[_{(\mu }D_{\nu )}]+[_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}^{}]^{}+3[_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}^{}]`$ (2.19)
$`+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\mathrm{\Lambda }a^2+2(^{}+3^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{6}}a\delta (w)\right]_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}=0.`$ (2.20)
The vectors $`f_\mu `$ and $`D_\mu `$ are not invariant with respect to infinitesimal coordinate transformations preserving the vector nature of the fluctuations. The coordinate transformation preserving the vector nature of the fluctuations is a nothing but a vector shift in the coordinates which can be parametrized in terms of the (divergence-less) Poincaré vector $`\zeta _\mu `$:

$$x_\mu \stackrel{~}{x}_\mu =x_\mu +\zeta _\mu .$$
(2.21)
On the fixed background defined by Eqs. (2.7)–(2.8), Eq. (2.21) induces a computable transformation in $`f_\mu `$ and $`D_\mu `$ while we move from the original coordinate system to the tilded one. More specifically, the shift is given by

$`\stackrel{~}{f}_\mu =f_\mu \zeta _\mu ,`$ (2.22)
$`\stackrel{~}{D}_\mu =D_\mu \zeta _\mu ^{}.`$ (2.23)
Now looking together at Eqs. (2.22)–(2.23) we can define a gauge-invariant vector fluctuation which is exactly

$$𝒱_\mu =a^{3/2}[D_\mu f_\mu ^{}].$$
(2.24)
This quantity is clearly invariant under infinitesimal coordinate transformations. The factor $`a^{3/2}`$ in Eq. (2.24) comes about since we want to work with fluctuations which have canonical kinetic terms in the action  Since the kinetic term of the combination $`D_\mu f_\mu ^{}`$ always appears, in the action, multiplied by $`a^3(w)`$, $`𝒱_\mu `$ is correctly normalized.. In terms of the gauge-invariant fluctuations Eqs. (2.11) and (2.12) can be written in a fully coordinate independent form since the gauge-dependent part vanishes once the background equations (2.7)–(2.8) are used inside the perturbed equations of motion (2.18)–(2.20). The result is that

$`_\alpha ^\alpha 𝒱_\mu =0,`$ (2.25)
$`𝒱_\mu ^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}𝒱_\mu =0.`$ (2.26)
Hence, as anticipated in the introduction, the gauge-invariant vector fluctuations are always massless and the normalization condition for the zero mode implies that

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dw}{a^3(w)},$$
(2.27)
should be finite. In the case of the set-up discussed in the present Section, inserting Eq. (2.9) into (2.27), the resulting integral is never convergent. Moreover, the form of Eq. (2.7)–(2.8) prevents a solution of the type $`a(w)e^{K|w|}`$ for the warp factor.

As discussed in the introduction, the evolution equation for the canonical gauge modes corresponding to the action of an Abelian field strength can be simply obtained

$$𝒜_\mu ^{\prime \prime }\frac{(\sqrt{a})^{\prime \prime }}{\sqrt{a}}𝒜_\mu _\alpha ^\alpha 𝒜_\mu =0,$$
(2.28)
and the normalization condition for the zero mode implies that the integral

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}a(w)𝑑w$$
(2.29)
should be convergent. Again, using Eq. (2.9) it can be checked that the above integral is always logarithmically divergent. The conclusion is that, in the case of the typical Randall-Sundrum set-up neither the vector fields of the geometry nor the bulk gauge fields can be normalized.

## III Negative tension branes

Consider now a slightly different situation, namely the case where the brane action also contain a dilatonic contribution. The action of the system, in analogy with the notations of the previous Section can be written as:

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^5x\sqrt{|G|}\left[R+\frac{1}{2}G^{AB}_A\phi _B\phi V(\phi )\right]}`$ (3.1)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}f(\phi ){\displaystyle d^4\rho \sqrt{|\gamma |}[\gamma ^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha X^M_\beta X^NG_{MN}2]},`$ (3.2)
whose related equations of motion can be written as

$`𝒬_{AB}=𝒯_{AB},`$ (3.3)
$`G^{AB}(_A_B\phi \mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}^C_C\phi )+{\displaystyle \frac{V}{\phi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{f}{\phi }}{\displaystyle d^4\rho \frac{\sqrt{|\gamma |}}{\sqrt{|G|}}\gamma ^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha X^M_\beta X^NG_{MN}\delta (w)}=0,`$ (3.4)
$`\gamma _{\alpha \beta }=f(\phi )_\alpha X^A_\beta X^BG_{AB},`$ (3.5)
where, now,

$`𝒬_{AB}`$ $`=`$ $`R_{AB}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_A\phi _B\phi +{\displaystyle \frac{V}{3}}G_{AB},`$ (3.6)
$`𝒯_{AB}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}f(\phi ){\displaystyle d^4\rho \frac{\sqrt{|\gamma |}}{\sqrt{|G|}}\gamma ^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha X^M_\beta X^N[G_{AN}G_{BM}\frac{1}{3}G_{MN}G_{AB}]\delta (w)}.`$ (3.7)
Consider now the case where the dilaton field only depends upon the bulk coordinate. Then Eqs. (3.3)–(3.4) give

$`\phi _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=6(^2^{})\lambda a(w)f^2(\phi )\delta (w),`$ (3.8)
$`^{}+3^2+{\displaystyle \frac{V}{3}}a^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{6}}af^2(\phi )\delta (w)=0,`$ (3.9)
$`\phi ^{\prime \prime }+3\phi ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{V}{\phi }}a^22\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{f}{\phi }}a\delta (w)=0,`$ (3.10)
with

$$\gamma _{\alpha \beta }=a^2(w)f(\phi )\delta _\alpha ^M\delta _\beta ^N\eta _{AB}.$$
(3.11)
With the same algebra discussed in the previous Section we can obtain the equation describing the gauge-invariant vector fluctuations. Indeed, recalling that

$`\delta 𝒬_{\mu \nu }=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}Va^2+2(^{}+3^2)\right]_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}+[_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}^{}]^{}+3[_{(\mu }f_{\nu )}^{}]`$ (3.12)
$`[_{(\mu }D_{\nu )}]^{}3[_{(\mu }D_{\nu )}],`$ (3.13)
$`\delta 𝒬_{\mu w}=[{\displaystyle \frac{V}{3}}a^2+^{}+3^2]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\alpha ^\alpha [D_\mu f_\mu ^{}],`$ (3.14)
and that

$`\delta 𝒯_{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{3}}a(w)f^2(\phi )\delta (w)_{(\mu }f_{\nu )},`$ (3.15)
$`\delta 𝒯_{\mu w}={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{6}}a(w)f^2(\phi )\delta (w)D_\mu ,`$ (3.16)
exactly the same equations for the gauge-invariant vector fluctuations can be obtained.

The analysis of the background equations leads in the case examined in the present Section to the possibility of the solutions postulated in the introduction on the basis of more general arguments. More specifically, consider the following parameterization of the solution to Eq. (3.8)–(3.10):

$`a(w)=e^{B|w|},\phi (w)=A|w|,`$ (3.17)
$`V(\phi )=\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{b\phi },f(\phi )=e^{c\phi }`$ (3.18)
Inserting Eqs. (3.17)–(3.18) into Eqs. (3.8)-(3.10) we obtain the following matching conditions for the discontinuities :

$`B={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{12}},`$ (3.19)
$`A=c\lambda ,`$ (3.20)
and the following algebraic equations from the remaining terms:

$`A^2=6B^2,B^2={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{9}},`$ (3.21)
$`2B+bA=0,3ABb\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.`$ (3.22)
The algebraic relations (3.21) and (3.22) to gather with the junction condition (3.19)–(3.20) give rise to two sets of solutions depending upon the sign of $`A`$. If $`A>0`$ we will have increasing dilaton solutions (denoted by $`A^>`$). If $`A<0`$ we will have decreasing dilaton solutions (denoted $`A^<`$).

Let us now consider, separately, these two classes of solutions. In the first case the solution of Eqs. (3.19)–(3.20) together with Eqs. (3.21)–(3.22) can be written as

$`A^>=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }},`$ (3.23)
$`c^>={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}b^>,`$ (3.24)
$`B_\pm ^>=\pm \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{9}}},`$ (3.25)
$`\lambda _\pm ^>=4\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }},`$ (3.26)
If $`A<0`$ the corresponding solution reads

$`A^<=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }},`$ (3.27)
$`c^<=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}b^<,`$ (3.28)
$`B_\pm ^<=\pm \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{9}}},`$ (3.29)
$`\lambda _\pm ^<=4\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}.`$ (3.30)
Notice that the relation among the couplings $`c`$ and $`b`$ \[i.e. $`c=b/4`$\] holds in both sets of solutions. In Eqs. (3.23)–(3.26) and also in Eqs. (3.27)–(3.30) the $`\pm `$ refers to the sign of $`B`$. Hence, for both sets of solutions $`B`$ is positive for negative tension branes \[i.e. $`\lambda <0`$ \] and it is negative for positive tension branes \[i. e. $`\lambda >0`$\]. Notice that our conventions differ slightly from the ones usually employed in the case of positive tension dilatonic walls .

## IV Localization properties of spin one fluctuations

Let us now analyze the case of negative tension branes in light of the localization properties of the vector fields of the geometry. If the brane has negative tension the gauge-invariant vector zero mode is always localized. In fact, since the zero mode is

$$𝒱_\mu ^0=\frac{𝒩_1}{a(w)^{3/2}},$$
(4.1)
the corresponding normalization condition

$$𝒩_1^2_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dw}{a^3(w)}=\frac{2}{3B_+}\frac{2}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}},$$
(4.2)
implies that $`𝒩_1\sqrt{2}(\mathrm{\Lambda })^{1/4}`$. Clearly, if the brane has positive tension the gauge-invariant vector zero mode is never localized. Consider now the evolution equation for the gauge fluctuations. In the presence of the dilaton field the kinetic term of the gauge fields picks up a coupling to the higher-dimensional dilaton field. In particular the action will be written as

$$S=\frac{1}{4}d^5x\sqrt{|G|}e^\phi F_{AB}F^{AB}.$$
(4.3)
The evolution equation for the gauge modes has the form anticipated in the introduction namely  Notice that the energy-momentum tensor derived from the gauge kinetic term of Eq. (1.10) has been neglected in the solution of the background equations. This is correct, in the present case, since the background gauge field vanishes. However, there are brane models where the background gauge field does not vanish .In this case the full Einstein-Maxwell system should be consistently studied and perturbed. Furthermore, it would be interesting to study the possible effect of back-reaction of the zero mode on the obtained solution. Also in this case the full Einstein-Maxwell system should be analyzed. This interesting aspect is left for future work.

$$𝒜_\mu ^{\prime \prime }\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_2^{\prime \prime }}{\mathrm{\Delta }_2}𝒜_\mu _\alpha ^\alpha 𝒜_\mu =0,$$
(4.4)
where, now,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_2(w)=e^{\frac{\phi }{2}}\sqrt{a}.$$
(4.5)
Consider, first, the case where the dilaton is a decreasing function of the modulus of the bulk coordinate. Then, in this case, the gauge zero-mode is

$$𝒜_\mu ^0=𝒩_2\mathrm{\Delta }(w)=e^{\gamma _<|w|},$$
(4.6)
where $`\gamma _<=\frac{1}{2}(B_+A^<)`$. From the obtained solutions we can immediately say that $`\gamma _<>0`$. Hence, in this case, the zero mode is not localized.

Consider then the situation where the dilaton is an increasing function of the bulk coordinate. In this case the gauge zero mode is given by

$$𝒜_\mu ^0=𝒩_3\mathrm{\Delta }(w)=e^{\gamma _>|w|},$$
(4.7)
where, now,

$$\gamma _>=\frac{1}{2}(A_>B_+)=\left(\frac{\sqrt{6}1}{6}\right)\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}.$$
(4.8)
From Eqs. (4.7)–(4.8) the gauge zero mode is clearly normalizable \[i.e. $`\gamma _>>0`$\] since $`A_>>B_+`$. The normalization constant turns out to be

$$𝒩_3^2=\frac{\sqrt{6}1}{6}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }}.$$
(4.9)
The zero mode of Eq. (4.7) is separated from the other states of the continuum by a mass gap. This aspect can be understood by writing down the equation for the mass eigenstates, namely

$$\left(\frac{d^2}{dw^2}+V(w)\right)𝒜_\mu =m^2𝒜_\mu ,$$
(4.10)
where $`V(w)=\mathrm{\Delta }^{\prime \prime }/\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma _>^22\gamma _>\delta (w)`$. The massive wavefunctions start for $`m^2>\gamma _>^2`$.

## V Concluding remarks

In this paper the localization properties of the gauge modes coming from the geometry has been analyzed under the hypothesis that the four-dimensional Planck mass is not finite. It has been shown that the spin one fluctuations can be localized on negative tension branes. The gauge-invariant vector modes of the geometry are always massless. Furthermore the localization of spin one fluctuatuations coming from the gauge sector has been analyzed on the same type of configurations. It has been shown that solutions describing negative tension branes can simultaneously localize the gauge fields and the vector modes of the geometry.

## Acknowledgments

It is a pleasure to thank M. E. Shaposhnikov for important hints which motivated the present analysis.


format: text

text:
# A locally connected continuum without convergent sequences

## 1. Introduction

During the Ninth Prague Topological Symposium, Juhász asked whether there is a locally connected continuum without nontrivial convergent sequences. This question arose naturally in his investigation in  with Gerlits, Soukup, and Szentmiklóssy on characterizing continuity in terms of the preservation of compactness and connectedness. The aim of this note is to answer this question in the affirmative under the Continuum Hypothesis (abbreviated: $`\mathrm{𝖢𝖧}`$).

Fedorchuk  constructed a consistent example of a compact space of cardinality $`𝔠`$ containing no nontrivial convergent sequences. See also van Douwen and Fleissner  for a somewhat simpler construction under the Definable Forcing Axiom. These constructions yield zero-dimensional spaces. As a consequence, our construction has to be somewhat different. As in  and , we ‘kill’ all possible nontrivial convergent sequences in a transfinite process of length $`\omega _1`$. However, our ‘killing’ is done in the Hilbert cube $`Q=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}[1,1]_n`$ instead of the Cantor set.

For all undefined notions, see  and .

## 2. The Hilbert cube

A *Hilbert cube* is a space homeomorphic to $`Q`$. Let $`M^Q`$ denote an arbitrary Hilbert cube.

A closed subset $`A`$ of $`M^Q`$ is a *$`Z`$-set* if for every $`\epsilon >0`$ there is a continuous function $`f:M^QM^QA`$ which moves the points less than $`\epsilon `$. It is clear that a closed subset of a $`Z`$-set is a $`Z`$-set. We list some other important properties of $`Z`$-sets.

1. Every singleton subset of $`M^Q`$ is a $`Z`$-set.
2. A countable union of $`Z`$-sets is a $`Z`$-set provided it is closed.
3. A homeomorphism between $`Z`$-sets can be extended to a homeomorphism of $`M^Q`$.
4. If $`X`$ is compact and $`f:XM^Q`$ is continuous then $`f`$ can be approximated arbitrarily closely by an imbedding whose range is a $`Z`$-set.

See \[11, Chapter 6\] for details.

Observe that by (1) and (2), every nontrivial convergent sequence with its limit is a $`Z`$-set in $`M^Q`$.

A *near homeomorphism* between compacta $`X`$ and $`Y`$ is a continuous surjection $`f:XY`$ which can be approximated arbitrarily closely by homemorphisms. This means that for every $`\epsilon >0`$ there is a homeomorphism $`g:XY`$ such that for every $`xX`$ we have that the distance between $`f(x)`$ and $`g(x)`$ is less than $`\epsilon `$.

A closed subset $`AM^Q`$ has *trivial shape* if it is contractible in any of its neighborhoods. A continuous surjection $`f`$ between Hilbert cubes $`M^Q`$ and $`N^Q`$ is *cell-like* provided that $`f^1(q)`$ has trivial shape for every $`qN^Q`$. The following fundamental result is due to Chapman  (see also \[11, Theorem 7.5.7\]).

1. Let $`f:M^QN^Q`$ be cell-like, where $`M^Q`$ and $`N^Q`$ are Hilbert cubes. Then $`f`$ is a near homeomorphism.

It is easy to see that if $`f:M^QN^Q`$ is a near homeomorphism between Hilbert cubes then $`f`$ is cell-like. So within the framework of Hilbert cubes the notions ‘near homeomorphism’ and ‘cell-like’ are equivalent.

A continuous surjection $`f`$ between Hilbert cubes $`M^Q`$ and $`N^Q`$ is called a $`Z^{}`$-map provided that for every $`Z`$-set $`AN^Q`$ we have that $`f^1[A]`$ is a $`Z`$-set in $`M^Q`$.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`M^Q`$ and $`N^Q`$ be Hilbert cubes, and let $`f:M^QN^Q`$ be a continuous surjection for which there is a $`Z`$-set $`AM^Q`$ which contains all nondegenerate fibers of $`f`$. Then $`f`$ is a $`Z^{}`$-map.

###### Proof.

Let $`BN^Q`$ be an arbitrary $`Z`$-set, and put $`B_0=Bf[A]`$. Write $`B_0`$ as $`_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}E_n`$, where each $`E_n`$ is compact. It follows from \[11, Theorem 7.2.5\] that for every $`n`$ the set $`f^1[E_n]`$ is a $`Z`$-set in $`M^Q`$. As a consequence,

$$f^1[B]A\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}f^1[E_n]$$

is a countable union of $`Z`$-sets and hence a $`Z`$-set by (2). ∎

###### Theorem 2.2.

Let $`(Q_n,f_n)_n`$ be an inverse sequence of Hilbert cubes such that every $`f_n`$ is cell-like as well as a $`Z^{}`$-map. Then

1. $`\underset{}{\mathrm{lim}}(Q_n,f_n)_n`$ is a Hilbert cube.
2. The projection $`f_n^{\mathrm{}}:\underset{}{\mathrm{lim}}(Q_n,f_n)_nQ_n`$ is a cell-like $`Z^{}`$-map for every $`n`$.

###### Proof.

It will be convenient to let $`Q_{\mathrm{}}`$ denote $`\underset{}{\mathrm{lim}}(Q_n,f_n)_n`$.

By (5), every $`f_n`$ is a near homeomorphism. Hence we get (A) from Brown’s Approximation Theorem for inverse limits in . It follows from \[11, Theorem 6.7.4\] that every projection $`f_n^{\mathrm{}}:Q_{\mathrm{}}Q_n`$ is a near homeomorphism, hence is cell-like.

For every $`n`$ let $`\varrho _n`$ be an admissible metric for $`Q_n`$ which is bounded by $`1`$. The formula

$$\varrho (x,y)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}2^n\varrho _n(x_n,y_n)$$

defines an admissible metric for $`Q_{\mathrm{}}`$. With respect to this metric we have that $`f_n^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a $`2^{(n1)}`$-mapping (\[11, Lemma 6.7.3\]).

For (B) it suffices to prove that $`f_1^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a $`Z^{}`$-map. To this end, let $`AQ_1`$ be a $`Z`$-set, and let $`\epsilon >0`$. Pick $`n`$ so large that $`2^{(n1)}<\epsilon `$. It follows that for every $`xQ_n`$ we have that the diameter of the fiber $`(f_n^{\mathrm{}})^1(x)`$ is less than $`\epsilon `$. An easy compactness argument gives us an open cover $`𝒰`$ of $`Q_n`$ such that for every $`U𝒰`$ we have that

$`()`$
$$\mathrm{diam}(f_n^{\mathrm{}})^1[U]<\epsilon .$$

Let $`\gamma >0`$ be a Lebesgue number for this cover (\[11, Lemma 1.1.1\]). Since $`f_n^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a near homeomorphism, there is a homeomorphism $`\phi :Q_{\mathrm{}}Q_n`$ such that for every $`xQ_{\mathrm{}}`$ we have

$$\varrho _n(f_n^{\mathrm{}}(x),\phi (x))<\text{“sevenrm}\text{1}/\text{“sevenrm}\text{2}\gamma .$$

Observe that $`A_n=(f_1^n)^1[A]`$ is a $`Z`$-set in $`Q_n`$. There consequently is a continuous function $`\xi :Q_nQ_nA_n`$ which moves the points less than $`\text{“sevenrm}\text{1}/\text{“sevenrm}\text{2}\gamma `$. Now define $`\eta :Q_{\mathrm{}}Q_{\mathrm{}}`$ by

$$\eta =\phi ^1\xi f_n^{\mathrm{}}.$$

It is clear that $`\eta [Q_{\mathrm{}}]`$ misses $`(f_1^{\mathrm{}})^1[A]`$. In order to check that $`\eta `$ is a ‘small’ move, pick an arbitrary element $`xQ_{\mathrm{}}`$. By construction,

$$\varrho _n(x_n,\xi (x_n))<\text{“sevenrm}\text{1}/\text{“sevenrm}\text{2}\gamma .$$

Since $`\eta (x)=\phi ^1\left(\xi (x_n)\right)`$, clearly

$$\varrho _n(\eta (x)_n,\xi (x_n))<\text{“sevenrm}\text{1}/\text{“sevenrm}\text{2}\gamma .$$

We conclude that $`\varrho _n(\eta (x)_n,x_n)<\gamma `$. Pick an element $`U𝒰`$ which contains both $`\eta (x)_n`$ and $`x_n`$. By $`()`$ it consequently follows that $`\varrho (\eta (x),x)<\epsilon `$, which is as required. ∎

###### Theorem 2.3.

If $`(A_n)_n`$ is a relatively discrete sequence of closed subsets of $`Q`$ such that $`\overline{_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}A_n}`$ is a $`Z`$-set then there are a Hilbert cube $`M`$ and a continuous surjection $`f:MQ`$ such that

1. $`f`$ is a cell-like $`Z^{}`$-map.
2. The closures of the sets $`_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}f^1[A_{2n}]`$ and $`_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}f^1[A_{2n+1}]`$ are disjoint.

###### Proof.

Consider the subspace $`A=\overline{_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}A_n}`$ of $`Q`$, and the ‘remainder’ $`R=A_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}A_n`$. Observe that $`R`$ is compact since the sequence $`(A_n)_n`$ is relatively discrete. Let $`T`$ denote the product $`A\times 𝕀`$; put

$$S=(R\times 𝕀)\left(\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}A_{2n}\times \{0\}\right)\left(\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}A_{2n+1}\times \{1\}\right).$$

Then $`S`$ is evidently a closed subspace of $`T`$. Let $`\pi :R\times 𝕀R`$ denote the projection. It is clear that the adjunction space (cf., \[12, Page 507\]) $`S_\pi (R\times 𝕀)`$ is homeomorphic to $`A`$. By (4), any constant function $`SQ`$ can be approximated by an imbedding whose range is a $`Z`$-set. So we may assume without loss of generality that $`S`$ is a $`Z`$-subset of some Hilbert cube $`M^Q`$. Now consider the space $`N=M^Q_\pi (R\times 𝕀)`$ with natural decomposition map $`f`$. It is clear that $`f`$ is cell-like, each non-degenerate fiber of $`f`$ being an arc (\[11, Corollary 7.1.2\]). We will prove below that $`NQ`$. Once we know that, we also get by Lemma 2.1 that $`f`$ is a $`Z^{}`$-map. Observe that the projection $`\pi :R\times 𝕀R`$ is a hereditary shape equivalence. So by a result of Kozlowski  (see also ), it follows that $`N`$ is an $`\mathrm{𝖠𝖱}`$. Since $`S`$ is a $`Z`$-set in $`M^Q`$ it consequently follows from \[11, Proposition 7.2.12\] that $`f[S]A`$ is a $`Z`$-set in $`N`$. But $`Nf[S]`$ is obviously a $`Q`$-manifold, and consequently has the disjoint-cells property. But this implies that $`N`$ has the disjoint-cells property, i.e., $`NQ`$ by Toruńczyk’s topological characterization of $`Q`$ in  (see also \[11, Corollary 7.8.4\]). So we conclude that $`f[S]A`$ is a $`Z`$-set in the Hilbert cube $`N`$. By (3) there is a homeomorphism of pairs $`(Q,A)(N,f[S])`$. This homeomorphism may be chosen to be the ‘identity’ on $`A`$. This shows that we are done by Lemma 2.1 and the obvious fact that the sets

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}A_{2n}\times \{0\},\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}A_{2n+1}\times \{1\}$$

have disjoint closures in $`M^Q`$. ∎

## 3. The construction

We will now construct our example under $`\mathrm{𝖢𝖧}`$. After the preparatory work in §2, the construction is very similar to known constructions in the literature (see e.g., Kunen ).

Consider the ‘cube’ $`Q^{\omega _1}`$. For every $`1\alpha <\omega _1`$ let $`\{S_\xi ^\alpha :\xi <\omega _1\}`$ list all nontrivial convergent sequences in $`Q^\alpha `$ that do not contain their limits. For all $`\alpha ,\xi <\omega _1`$ pick disjoint complementary infinite subsets $`A_\xi ^\alpha `$ and $`B_\xi ^\alpha `$ of $`S_\xi ^\alpha `$.

We shall construct for $`1\alpha \omega _1`$ a closed subspace $`M_\alpha Q^\alpha `$. The space we are after will be $`M_{\omega _1}`$.

Let $`\tau :\omega _1\omega _1\times \omega _1`$ be a surjection such that $`\tau (\beta )=\alpha ,\xi `$ implies $`\alpha \beta `$.

For $`\alpha \beta \omega _1`$ let $`\pi _\alpha ^\beta `$ be the natural projection from $`Q^\beta `$ onto $`Q^\alpha `$. The following conditions will be satisfied:

1. $`M_\alpha Q`$ for every $`1\alpha <\omega _1`$, and if $`\alpha \beta `$ then $`\pi _\alpha ^\beta [M_\beta ]=M_\alpha `$.

We put $`\rho _\alpha ^\beta =\pi _\alpha ^\beta M_\beta :M_\beta M_\alpha `$.
2. If $`\alpha \beta `$ then $`\rho _\alpha ^\beta :M_\beta M_\alpha `$ is a cell-like $`Z^{}`$-map.
3. If $`\beta <\omega _1`$, $`\tau (\beta )=\alpha ,\xi `$, and $`S_\xi ^\alpha M_\alpha `$ then $`(\rho _\alpha ^{\beta +1})^1[A_\xi ^\alpha ]`$ and $`(\rho _\alpha ^{\beta +1})^1[B_\xi ^\alpha ]`$ have disjoint closures in $`M^{\beta +1}`$.

Observe that the construction is determined at all limit ordinals $`\gamma `$. By compactness and (A) we must have

$$M_\gamma =\{xQ^\gamma :(\alpha <\gamma )(\pi _\alpha ^\gamma (x)M_\alpha )\}.$$

Also, if $`(\gamma _n)_n`$ is any strictly increasing sequence of ordinals with $`\gamma _n\gamma `$ then $`M_\gamma `$ is canonically homeomorphic to

$$\underset{}{\mathrm{lim}}(M_{\gamma _n},\rho _{\gamma _n}^{\gamma _{n+1}})_n.$$

By Theorem 2.2 this implies that $`M_\gamma Q`$ and also that $`\rho _{\gamma _n}^\gamma `$ is a cell-like $`Z^{}`$-map for every $`n`$. Since $`\gamma _1`$ can be *any* ordinal smaller than $`\gamma `$, the same argument yields that $`\rho _\alpha ^\gamma `$ is a cell-like $`Z^{}`$-map for *every* $`\alpha <\gamma `$. So in our construction we need only worry about successor steps.

Put $`M_1=Q^{\{0\}}`$, and let $`1\beta <\omega _1`$ be arbitrary. We shall construct $`M_{\beta +1}`$ assuming that $`M_\beta `$ has been constructed. To this end, let $`\tau (\beta )=\alpha ,\xi `$. We make the obvious identification of $`Q^{\beta +1}`$ with $`Q^\beta \times Q`$. If $`S_\xi ^\alpha M_\alpha `$ then there is nothing to do. We then fix any element $`qQ`$, and put

$$M_{\beta +1}=M_\beta \times \{q\}.$$

So assume that $`S_\xi ^\alpha M_\alpha `$. By Theorem 2.3 there exists a cell-like $`Z^{}`$-map $`f:QM_\beta `$ such that

$$f^1\left[(\rho _\alpha ^\beta )^1[A_\xi ^\alpha ]\right],f^1\left[(\rho _\alpha ^\beta )^1[B_\xi ^\alpha ]\right]$$

have disjoint closures in $`Q`$. Put

$$M_{\beta +1}=\{f(x),xQ^\beta \times Q:xQ\}.$$

So $`M_{\beta +1}`$ is nothing but the graph of $`f`$. It is clear that $`M_{\beta +1}`$ is as required.

Now put $`M=M_{\omega _1}`$. Observe that $`M`$ is a locally connected continuum, being the inverse limit of an inverse system of locally continua with monotone surjective bonding maps (see e.g., \[4, 6.3.16 and 6.1.28\]). Assume that $`T`$ is a nontrivial convergent sequence with its limit $`x`$ in $`M`$. Since $`T\{x\}`$ is countable, there exists $`\alpha <\omega _1`$ such that $`\rho _\beta ^{\omega _1}(T\{x\})`$ is one-to-one and hence a homeomorphism for every $`\beta \alpha `$. Pick $`\xi <\omega _1`$ such that $`S_\xi ^\alpha =\rho _\alpha ^{\omega _1}[T]`$, and $`\beta \alpha `$ such that $`\tau (\beta )=\alpha ,\xi `$. Then $`\rho _{\beta +1}^{\omega _1}[T\{x\}]`$ is a nontrivial convergent sequence with its limit in $`M_{\beta +1}`$ which is mapped by $`\rho _\alpha ^{\beta +1}`$ onto $`S_\xi ^\alpha `$ with its limit. But this is clearly in conflict with (C).


text:
# Enhanced Production of Neutron-Rich Rare Isotopes in the Reaction of 25 MeV/nucleon 86Kr on 64Ni

## 1 Introduction

Synthesis and investigation of very neutron-rich nuclides are of exceptional importance to advance our understanding of nuclear structure and properties at the extreme isospin limit of the nuclear landscape. Many of these nuclides play a key role in stellar nucleosynthesis, especially in the r-process. The production and separation of these nuclides represent an essential ingredient in regards to current or future radioactive beam facilities (see e.g. ).

Fission or spallation are prolific ways to generate a variety of neutron-rich nuclides (see e.g. ). In addition, projectile fragmentation of n-rich beams  at high or intermediate energy (well above the Fermi energy) has been efficiently employed to produce radioactive beams of n-rich nuclei. The so-called “cold” projectile fragmentation has been described by abrasion/ablation models which provide a phenomenological basis for extrapolation to even more exotic n-rich species . Based on available fragmentation data, a detailed parametrization of the fragmentation cross sections from high-energy reactions has been developed  and is commonly used for planning of radioactive beam experiments. In high or medium energy projectile fragmentation reactions, the production of n-rich rare isotopes is based on a more or less “clean-cut” removal of protons from the projectile. In such reactions, the target has almost no effect on the production cross sections, apart from a geometric factor. One-neutron pick-up products are produced with very small cross sections .

In contrast to high-energy reactions, the effect of the target neutron-to-proton ratio (N/Z) in n-rich rare isotope production has been shown in multinucleon transfer reactions close to the Coulomb barrier. For example, large cross sections for several neutron pick-up channels, along with proton stripping channels have been observed in the reaction of 64Ni projectiles with 238U above the Coulomb barrier . The effect of the projectile and target N/Z in the production of projectile-like fragments from 32,34S (E/A=6–20 MeV/nucleon) on 12C and 197Au has recently been reported in , following earlier work in this energy range . Deep inelastic collisions around the Coulomb barrier have also been used to produce and study n-rich rare earth isotopes at high spin states . Around the Fermi energy (20–40 MeV/nucleon) a number of n-rich yield measurements of heavy projectiles (e.g. 40Ar, 86Kr) exist in the literature , but in these measurements no production cross sections have been reported. Cross sections have been reported for the reaction 70 MeV/nucleon 86Kr \+ 27Al , but the n-rich side of the fragment distribution was not covered.

In the present work, we have performed a systematic high-resolution spectrometric study of the production cross sections and the velocity distributions of projectile-like fragments from the reaction 25 MeV/nucleon 86Kr + 64Ni with particular attention on the n-rich nuclides. In this study, we observed enhanced production cross sections of n-rich fragments near the projectile and the formation of several neutron pick-up products, along with proton stripping products. The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the experimental setup, the measurements and the data analysis procedures. In Section 3, the experimental results are presented and compared with model predictions. Finally, in Section 4, a summary and conclusions are given.

## 2 Experimental Method and Data Analysis

The present study was performed at the Cyclotron Institute of Texas A&M University. A 25 MeV/nucleon 86Kr22+ beam from the K500 superconducting cyclotron, with a typical current of $``$5 pnA, interacted with an isotopically enriched (98%) 64Ni target of thickness 4 mg/cm2. The reaction products were analyzed with the MARS recoil separator . The primary beam struck the target at 0o relative to the optical axis of the spectrometer. The direct beam was collected in a small square Faraday cup approx. 30 cm after the target, blocking the angular range 0.0–1.0o. The fragments were accepted in the remaining angular opening of MARS: 1.0–2.7o (the angular acceptance of MARS is 9 msr ). This angular range lies inside the grazing angle of 3.6o  for the present reaction. An Al foil (1 mg/cm2) was positioned after the Faraday cup to reset to equilibrium the ionic charge states of the reaction procucts. MARS optics  provides one intermediate dispersive image and a final achromatic image (focal plane) and offers a momentum acceptance of 4%.

At the focal plane, the fragments were collected in a large area (5$`\times `$5 cm) three-element ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$E1, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$E2, E) Si detector telescope. The $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$E1 detector was a position-sensitive Si strip detector of 63 $`\mu `$m thickness whereas the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$E2 and the E detector were single-element Si detectors of 150 and 950 $`\mu `$m, respectively. The position information from the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$E1 strips provided a continuous monitoring of the focusing and collection of the fragments at the various settings of the separator. Time of flight was measured between two PPACs (parallel plate avalanche counters)  positioned at the dispersive image and at the focal plane, respectively, and separated by a distance of 13.2 m. The PPAC at the dispersive image was also X–Y position sensitive and used to record the position of the reaction products. The horizontal position, along with NMR measurements of the field of the MARS first dipole, was used to determine the magnetic rigidity $`B\rho `$ of the particles. Thus, the reaction products were characterized by an event-by-event measurement of dE/dx, E, time of flight, and magnetic rigidity. The response of the spectrometer/detector system to ions of known atomic number Z, mass number A, ionic charge q and velocity was calibrated using low intensity primary beams of 40Ar, 44Ca and 86Kr at 25 MeV/nucleon. To cover the N/Z and velocity range of the fragments, a series of measurements was performed at overlapping magnetic rigidity settings in the range 1.6–2.0 Tesla-meters.

The determination of the atomic number Z was based on the energy loss of the particles in the first $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ detector  and their velocity, with a resulting resolution (FWHM) of 0.5 Z units for near-projectile fragments. The ionic charge $`q`$ of the particles after the Al stripper, was obtained from the total energy Etot=$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$E1+$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$E2+E, the velocity and the magnetic rigidity according to the expression:

$$q=\frac{3.107}{931.5}\frac{E_{tot}}{B\rho (\gamma 1)}\beta \gamma $$
(1)
where Etot is in MeV, B$`\rho `$ in Tm, $`\beta =\upsilon /c`$ and $`\gamma =1/(1\beta ^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. The measurement of the ionic charge q had a resolution of 0.4 units (FWHM). Since the ionic charge must be an integer, we assigned integer values of q for each event by putting windows ($`\mathrm{\Delta }q=0.4`$) on each peak of the q spectrum. Using the magnetic rigidity and velocity measurement, the mass-to-charge A/q ratio of each ion was obtained from the expression:

$$A/q=\frac{B\rho }{3.107\beta \gamma }$$
(2)
Combining the q determination with the A/q measurement, the mass A was obtained as:

$$A=q_{int}\times A/q$$
(3)
(qint is the integer ionic charge determined as above) with an overall resolution (FWHM) of about 0.6 A units (Fig. 1).

Combination and appropriate normalization of the data at the various magnetic rigidity settings of the spectrometer provided fragment distributions with respect to Z, A, q and velocity. Correction of missing yields caused by charge changing at the PPAC (positioned at the dispersive image) was performed based on the equilibrium charge state prescriptions of Leon et. al. . (The overall data reduction procedure was similar to that followed in earlier work on 197Au fragmentation and was described in detail in .) The distributions were subsequently summed over all values of q. It should be pointed out that the resulting distributions in Z, A and velocity are the fragment yield distributions in the reaction angle interval 1.0–2.7o in the magnetic rigidity range 1.6–2.0 T m. Fig. 1 shows, as an example, the mass spectrum of Germanium (Z=32) isotopes in full resolution.

## 3 Results and Discussion

The gross features of the distributions of projectile fragments from the present reaction are described in Fig. 2. The detailed mass distributions of elements Z=35 to Z=30 are presented in Fig. 3. Before further discussion of the data, we will give an outline of the calculations we performed for this reaction using a phenomenological model appropriate for this energy regime.

The primary interaction stage was modeled with the deep inelastic transfer code of Tassan-Got and Stephan  in which stochastic nucleon exchange was assumed for the orbital angular momentum range $`\mathrm{}`$=100–520. This DIT model has been successfully applied to describe the primary interaction stage in studies of projectile multifragmentation of 28Si on 112,124Sn around the Fermi energy . Events corresponding to trajectories in which the projectile–target overlap exceeded 3 fm were rejected. Following the creation of the primary fragments by the DIT mechanism, the statistical de-excitation of the excited primary fragments was simulated using GEMINI . This statistical deexcitation code uses Monte Carlo techniques and the Hauser-Feshbach formalism to calculate the probabilities for fragment emission with Z$``$2. Heavier fragment emission probabilities are calculated using the transition state formalism of Moretto . In the GEMINI calculations, we used Lestone’s temperature dependent level density parameter , a fading of shell corrections with excitation energy and we enabled IMF emission. Each partial-wave distribution was appropriately weighted and combined to give the overall fragment A, Z and velocity distributions. The results of the DIT/GEMINI calculation were also filtered by the angular and B$`\rho `$ acceptance of the spectrometer. The predictions of this calculation are compared with the present data in the following paragraphs.

In Fig. 2a the mass yield curve is presented. The measured data, normalized for beam current and target thickness are given in mb and presented as open circles. The result of the DIT/GEMINI calculation, filtered by the spectrometer acceptance is given by the dashed line, whereas the full line gives the total (unfiltered) yield. A comparison of the measured yields (open symbols) to the calculated filtered yields (dashed line) shows excellent agreement for the heavier fragments (A$`>`$65). The discrepancies for lower mass fragments are mainly due to incomplete coverage of the measured data for this mass range. Using the ratio of filtered to unfiltered calculated yield for each mass, correction factors (whose magnitude is inferred from Fig. 2a) for the acceptance of the spectrometer were obtained as a function of mass and were applied to the measured yield data to obtain the total yield, given by the full circles in Fig. 2a. The systematic uncertainty in the extraction of absolute cross sections by this procedure is estimated to be about 40% (FWHM). The correction factors were also employed to obtain total isotope production cross sections (Fig. 3) from the measured yields. A comparison of the extracted total isobaric cross sections (full circles) to the calculated unfiltered yields (full line) again shows fair agreement, except for the lower mass fragments (A$`<`$65).

In Fig. 2b, the measured yield distributions as a function of Z (relative to the line of $`\beta `$ stability, Zβ) and A are presented as contour lines. The line of stability is calculated as: Zβ = A/(1.98 + 0.0155A2/3) . The calculated values from DIT/GEMINI are shown as a thick full line (without acceptance cut) and as a thick dashed line (with spectrometer acceptance cut). The thin dashed line is from the EPAX parametrization  of relativistic fragmentation data and is given here for comparison. From this Figure we see that very neutron-rich nuclides (up to 4 Z units away from stability for isobars near the projectile) are produced. The DIT/GEMINI calculation describes reasonably well the experimental data. Finally, the locus of the relativistic fragmentation data is towards more proton-rich fragments than the data in this energy regime.

Finally, in Fig. 2c, the velocity vs. mass distributions are given. The data are again shown as contours. The thick full line is from the DIT/GEMINI calculation without acceptance cut and the dashed line is with acceptance cut. This mass resolved velocity distribution exhibits correlations characteristic of quasi-elastic interactions (for near projectile fragments) and deep inelastic interactions (for fragments further away from the projectile) as revealed by the continuous fragment ridge with monotonically decreasing velocities. For lower masses (A$`<`$65) the fragment velocities seem to increase with decreasing mass. This is due to the fact that the spectrometer settings were such that only forward moving fragments coming from decay of highly excited primary products were observed. In addition, comparing the filtered DIT/GEMINI calculations with the data, we see that the calculation is able to describe well the observed velocity distributions in the whole mass range. In summary, based on the comparisons presented in Fig. 2, we can state that the DIT/GEMINI calculation is able to provide a satisfactory quantitative description of the observed gross distributions. Also, as we will see below, it does a fair job in predicting the absolute values of the production cross sections (except for the very n-rich isotopes, as will be pointed out).

In Fig. 3, the mass distributions for elements Z=35–30 are presented. In this figure, the full circles are the present data, corrected for the spectrometer acceptance as discussed earlier. The open squares are the predictions of the DIT/GEMINI calculation. The dotted lines are the predictions of the EPAX parametrization  of relativistic fragmentation cross sections and are plotted here for comparison. Note that, in high-energy fragmentation, nucleon-pickup products are not produced or, at best, are highly suppressed compared to lower energy peripheral collisions . As we see, neutron-rich nuclides are produced with large cross sections. Apart from proton-removal products, neutron pick-up fragments are produced. For example, for the case of selenium (Z=34), which corresponds to the removal of 2 protons from the projectile, up to 4 neutrons are seen to be picked-up to produce 88Se (with cross section of 0.3 $`\mu `$b). Similarly, for germanium (four-proton-removal from the projectile), up to two neutrons are picked-up to give 84Ge (cross section 0.4 $`\mu `$b).

For near-projectile elements, an enhanced production of neutron rich isotopes is observed relative to the expectations of the EPAX parametrization. Also, the DIT/GEMINI calculation, while able to describe rather well the n-deficient and the central part of the distributions, fails to describe the n-rich sides of the distributions for elements above zinc (Z=30). Since this enhancement is observed for near projectile elements, it should be a result of very peripheral collisions, where the nucleon exchange is restricted near the surface of the projectile and the target. To further examine this statement, we present in Fig. 4 the velocity distributions for elements Z=35–30. These distributions have two components: a narrow one peaking close to the beam velocity (quasielastic) and another wider component peaking at lower velocity (deep inelastic component). The quasielastic component progressively decreases for fragments with lower Z. As expected, the production of the most neutron-rich isotopes is associated with the quasielastic component (also verified in two-dimensional correlations of A with velocity). Using velocity vs impact parameter correlation from the DIT/GEMINI calculation, we found that these peripheral events correspond to a projectile–target overlap not exceeding 1–1.5 fm.

Qualitatively, the enhanced production of neutron rich fragments from 86Kr may be understood by considering the peripheral character of the collisions and the particular structure of the projectile and the target. The projectile has a compact neutron distribution (N=50 closed shell) and, reversely, the target has a compact proton distribution (Z=28 closed shell) and a more diffuse neutron distribution (N=36, partially filled neutron shell with 8 neutrons above the closed shell N=28). In peripheral collisions, an overlap of the 86Kr projectile surface with the neutron-rich 64Ni surface (neutron “skin”) will lead to a local nucleon redistribution and N/Z equilibration, favoring the production of more neutron-rich fragments near the projectile. For larger projectile–target overlaps this effect washes out and the observed fragments have more or less cross sections as described by DIT/GEMINI. Interestingly, they are in general agreement with EPAX, despite the vastly different primary ineraction mechanism, indicating that such products result from long evaporation chains of highly excited primary nuclei. It should be noted that in the DIT code, the nuclei are assumed spherical with homogeneous proton and neutron density distributions. Incorporating realistic proton and neutron density distributions in the DIT code may improve the capability to describe peripheral collisions in projectile–target combinations where the neutron–proton profile of nuclear surface can play a role, as in the present case of the 86Kr+64Ni system.

From a practical standpoint, the large production cross section of neutron-rich nuclides, and more importantly the neutron pick-up possibility can render these reactions a useful route to produce extemely neutron-rich nuclides. It may be noted that neutron pick-up cross sections are also large in the case of multinucleon transfer reactions close to the Coulomb barrier . However, these reactions have very wide angular, velocity and ionic charge distributions, in addition to the necessity of rather thin targets (around 1 mg/cm2). Around the Fermi energy, however, inverse kinematic reactions have angular and ionic charge state distributions that can be efficiently dealt with using a large acceptance spectrometer (e.g. MARS in the present study). Also the energies are high enough to allow moderately thick targets (10–30 mg/cm$`{}_{}{}^{2})`$.

Using the present cross sections, we can make estimates of rare isotope production rates from intense beams at this energy regime. As examples, we present in Table I the cross sections and production rates for the most n-rich nuclides of Se (Z=34) and Ge (Z=32). The experimental cross sections of this work are given in the second column, while the the third column gives the cross sections predicted by the DIT/GEMINI calculation. The fourth column gives the cross sections measured in the reaction 86Kr(500 MeV/nucleon) + Be . We observe, as already discussed, the inability of the present simulation to reproduce the measured cross sections of the most n-rich nuclides. Also, we note that in relativistic peripheral collisions, up to one neutron can be picked up from the target with very low cross section. The rates given in the last column of the table were calculated using the measured cross sections and assuming a beam of 100 pnA 86Kr at 25 MeV/nucleon striking a 20 mg/cm2 64Ni target. Such yields of very neutron rich isotopes may enable a variety of nuclear structure and nuclear reaction studies in the Fermi energy regime. These rare isotopes may be separated in flight with a large acceptance separator or can be stopped and collected in a gas cell with the possibility of subsequent charge breeding and reacceleration .

Finally, another interesting possibility is the use of such reactions as a second stage in two-stage rare isotope production schemes. For example, a beam of 90Kr from an ISOL facility can be accelerated around the Fermi energy and subsequently strike a 64Ni target to produce very n-rich nuclides that may be separated and studied in flight. To estimate the rates of such reaction products the present cross sections can be used as a first approximation. However, a quantitative prediction will be possible after improving our present description of these peripheral collisions between n-rich nuclei.

## 4 Summary and conclusions

In the present study, the yields and velocity distributions of projectile-like fragments from the reaction of 25 MeV/nucleon 86Kr + 64Ni were measured using the MARS recoil separator at Texas A&M, with special focus on the neutron rich isotopes. Proton-removal and neutron pick-up isotopes have been observed with substantial cross sections. A model of deep-inelastic transfer (DIT) for the primary interaction stage and the statistical evaporation code GEMINI for the deexcitation stage have been used to describe the properties of the product distributions. The results have also been compared with the high-energy fragmentation parametrization EPAX. The experimental data show an enhancement in the production of n-rich isotopes close to the projectile relative to the predictions of DIT/GEMINI and the expectations of EPAX. We attributed this enhancement to the effect of the target 64Ni neutron “skin” in peripheral interactions of 86Kr with 64Ni. The large cross sections of such reactions near the Fermi energy, involving peripheral nucleon exchange between the projectile and the target, suggest that not only the N/Z of the projectile and the target, but also the N/Z distribution at the surface (i.e. neutron “skin”) may be properly exploited in the production of rare neutron-rich isotopes. This synthesis approach may provide a fruitful pathway to extremely neutron rich nuclei towards the neutron-drip line.

## 5 Acknowledgement

We would like to thank A. Sanzhur for useful discussions regarding neutron density distributions and relevant calculations. We gratefully acknowledge the support of the operations staff of the Cyclotron Institute during the measurements. Financial support for this work was given, in part, by the U.S. Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG03-93ER40773 and by the Robert A. Welch Foundation under Grant No. A-1266.


text:
# The Temperature Structure in Ionized Nebulae and the Chemical Evolution of Galaxies

## 0.1 Overview

To constrain models of stellar evolution and of chemical evolution of galaxies it is necessary to derive accurate abundances from gaseous nebulae. Inversely, it might be possible to constrain the assumptions made to derive the abundances from gaseous nebulae based on robust models of stellar evolution and of chemical evolution of galaxies.

The determination of the chemical abundances in gaseous nebulae depends strongly on their temperature structure. By adopting the temperature derived from the 4363/5007 \[O 3\] ratio and assuming that the temperature is constant it can be shown that in the presence of temperature variations the abundances are overestimated (?; ?). Typical overestimates of the O/H abundances are in the 1.4 to 3.0 range, with extreme cases reaching overabundances of an order of magnitude.

We compare the predicted abundances based on models of galactic chemical evolution with the abundances derived under the assumption of: a) a constant temperature distribution and b) the presence of temperature fluctuations. We conclude that significant temperature variations are present in gaseous nebulae.

Recent reviews on the temperature structure of gaseous nebulae are those of ?, ? and ?. Recent reviews on the abundances of galactic and extragalactic H 2 regions are those by ?, Peimbert (1999, 2002), ? and Peimbert, Carigi, & Peimbert (2001).

## 0.2 Temperature Structure

We can characterize the temperature structure of a gaseous nebula by two parameters: the average temperature, $`T_0`$, and the mean square temperature fluctuation, $`t^2`$, given by

$$T_0(N_e,N_i)=\frac{T_e(𝐫)N_e(𝐫)N_i(𝐫)𝑑V}{N_e(𝐫)N_i(𝐫)𝑑V},$$
(1)
and

$$t^2=\frac{(T_eT_0)^2N_eN_i𝑑V}{T_0^2N_eN_i𝑑V},$$
(2)
respectively, where $`N_e`$ and $`N_i`$ are the electron and the ion densities of the observed emission line and $`V`$ is the observed volume (?).

For a nebula where all the O is twice ionized we can derive $`T_0`$ and $`t^2`$ from the ratio of the \[O 3\] $`\lambda \lambda `$ 4363, 5007 lines, $`T_e(4363/5007)`$, and the temperature derived from the ratio of the Balmer continuum to $`I(\mathrm{H}\beta )`$, $`T_e(\mathrm{Bac}/\mathrm{H}\beta )`$, that are given by

$$T_e(4363/5007)=T_0\left[1+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{90800}{T_0}3\right)t^2\right],$$
(3)
and

$$T_e(\mathrm{Bac}/\mathrm{H}\beta )=T_0(11.70t^2),$$
(4)
respectively.

It is also possible to use the intensity ratio of a collisionally excited line of an element $`p+1`$ times ionized to a recombination line of the same element $`p`$ times ionized, this ratio is independent of the element abundance and depends only on the electron temperature. In this review we will adopt the view that the C 2 4267 and the O 2 permitted lines of multiplet 1, are produced by recombination only and consequently that other mechanisms like radiative transfer, collisions, and fluorescence do not affect their intensities.

When oxygen is present both in the form of O++ and O+, then there will be different $`T_0`$ and $`t^2`$ values for the O++ and the O+ zones. A full analytic treatment to second order of this case can be found in Peimbert, Peimbert, & Luridiana (2002).

The comparison of $`T_e(4363/5007)`$ with $`T_e(\mathrm{Bac}/\mathrm{H}\beta )`$ in planetary nebulae clearly indicates that $`t^2>0.000`$ and that the temperature structure needs to be taken into account to determine the abundances (e.g. ?; ?; ? and references therein).

In H 2 regions an important fraction of the volume is in the form of O+, and $`T_e(\mathrm{Bac}/\mathrm{H}\beta )`$ has to be compared with a temperature derived from a weighted average of collisionally excited lines in the O+ and O++ zones. From photoionization models for H 2 regions by ? the O+ zones are expected to be hotter than the O++ zones for objects with $`T_0<`$ 12400 K, which is the case for galactic H 2 regions of the solar vicinity, prediction that has been confirmed by observations (Esteban et al. 1998, 1999a, 1999b). From a comparison of $`T_e(\mathrm{Bac}/\mathrm{H}\beta )`$ with a weighted average of colisionally excited lines in the O+ and O++ zones it is also found that $`t^2>0.000`$.

A large number of papers have been presented in favor and against the idea that the recombination lines of heavy elements can be used to derive the chemical abundances of gaseous nebulae. A strong argument in favor that they are representative of the abundances of gaseous nebulae is given by the work of ? where they find a very strong correlation between the O++ abundance ratio derived from the O 2 to \[O 3\] lines and the $`T_e(4363/5007)T_e(\mathrm{Bac}/\mathrm{H}\beta )`$ values, this correlation has been studied further by ? who find that it can be explained quantitatively as being due to temperature fluctuations.

From observations it has been found that $`0.01t^20.09`$, with typical values around $`0.04`$; while from photoionization models of chemically and density homogeneous nebulae it has been found that $`0.000t^20.020`$, with typical values around $`0.005`$. An explanation for the differences in the $`t^2`$ values predicted by photoionization models and those found by observations has to be sought (see ?).

## 0.3 O/H in the Orion Nebula and the Sun

The determination of the O/H value is paramount for the study of chemical evolution for at least three reasons: a) O is the most abundant heavy element, it comprises about 50% of the heavy elements, b) it is easily observed in the main ionization stages of H 2 regions and planetary nebulae, c) its atomic physics parameters have been determined with high precision, and d) practically all of it has been produced by supernovae of Type II, therefore in chemical abundance models can be treated under the instant recycling approximation.

A decade ago the O/H solar abundance in the literature was 0.44dex higher than in the Orion nebula (see Table 1), a result of great concern because from galactic chemical evolution models the Orion nebula O/H value is expected to be about 0.05dex higher than the solar value, if the Sun was formed at the same galactocentric distance than the Orion nebula (e. g. ?). Note that the Orion nebula is about 0.4kpc farther away than the Sun from the galactic center, and from an O/H gradient of -0.05dex kpc-1, a correction of about 0.02dex has to be made if the Sun were in a circular orbit; nevertheless this correction might be compensated by the ellipticity of the solar orbit that probably implies that the Sun was formed at a larger galactocentric distance, about 0.5 to 1kpc farther away from the galactic center than its present position.

At present the best Orion nebula O/H value in the literature is 0.02dex higher than the solar value, the difference between models and observations is well within the observational errors. The change in the last ten years is due to two recent results for Orion and two for the Sun: a) the 0.15dex increase in the O/H value derived from recombination lines (which implies a $`t^2=0.024`$) relative to that derived from forbidden lines assuming that $`t^2=0.000`$, b) the increase in the Orion O/H value of 0.08dex due to the fraction of oxygen embedded in dust grains, and c) the decrease of 0.23dex due to two new solar determinations (see Table 1).

## 0.4 Abundance Gradients in Our Galaxy

In Table 2 we present average gradients for gaseous nebulae based on results by many authors (see reviews by ?, ?, ? and references therein), most of the gradients have been determined from colisionally excited lines. The values come from H 2 regions of the solar vicinity and for O, Ne and S were derived from more than 40 objects. The planetary nebulae values by ? were derived from a data set of 130 planetary nebulae of Type II. ? from approximately 80 B stars of the solar vicinity derived an O gradient of $`0.061\pm 0.005`$ dex kpc-1 , and similar gradients for Mg, Al and Si. Chemical evolution models of the Galaxy predict very similar gradients for the elements included in Table 2 (e.g. ?; ?; ?), since most of their production is due to massive stars that explode as supernovae of Type II. Therefore for the elements in Table 2 we expect gradients of about — $`0.05`$ to $`0.06`$ dex kpc-1.

There are only three H 2 regions with good determinations of $`t^2`$: Orion, M8, and M17; in Table 2 we present for these H 2 regions two sets of gradients derived under the assumption of $`t^2=0.000`$ and $`t^20.000`$. The abundances derived under the assumption of $`t^20.000`$ indicate the presence of moderate gradients, while for those derived under the assumption of $`t^2=0.000`$ the gradients disappear. This result supports the contention that temperature fluctuations exist inside gaseous nebulae.

## 0.5 Evolution of C/O with Time or with O/H in the Solar Vicinity

? has constructed models of the chemical evolution of the Galaxy based on observational yields of carbon derived from recombination lines and from forbidden lines of planetary nebulae, she finds that the models that use the yields based on permitted lines agree better with the observational constrains provided by H ii regions and stars of the solar vicinity, than the models based on the yields derived from forbidden lines. This result is also indicative of the presence of temperature fluctuations inside gaseous nebulae.

## 0.6 $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }O`$ in our Galaxy, M101 and M33

In Table 3 we present the following values in mass units: helium ($`Y`$), oxygen ($`O`$), and heavy elements ($`Z`$) for M17 computed in this paper. The helium abundance was recomputed from the line intensities presented by ?, the He recombination coefficients computed by ?, the helium recombination coefficients computed by ?, and the optical depth effects computed by ?. The results presented in Table 3 are an average for regions M17-3 and M17-14. The self consistent method (see Peimbert, Peimbert, & Luridiana 2002) based on the $`\lambda \lambda `$ 3819, 3889, 4026, 4387, 4471, 4922, 5876, 6678, 7065, and 7281 lines yielded $`N_e=800\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}^3`$ and $`\tau (3889)=7.5`$ for M17-3, and $`N_e=500\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}^3`$ and $`\tau (3889)=4.5`$ for M17-14. The helium values are slightly smaller than those presented by ?.

Also in Table 3 we present the abundance values for NGC 5461 in M101, and for NGC 604 in M33 derived by ?.

In Table 4 we present the $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }O`$ and the $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ values derived from a pregalactic helium abundance of $`Y_p(+\mathrm{Hc},t^20.000)=0.2384\pm 0.0025`$ and $`Y_p(+\mathrm{Hc},t^2=0.000)=0.2475\pm 0.0025`$ (Peimbert, Peimbert, & Luridiana 2002) and the abundance values presented in Table 3, where +Hc indicates that the collisional contribution to the hydrogen Balmer lines has been taken into account.

For M17 the difference between the values presented in Table 4 and those presented by ?, in addition to the difference in the $`Y`$ values mentioned in the previous paragraph, is due to the adoption of two different pregalactic helium abundances, one for the $`t^2=0.000`$ values and another for the $`t^20.000`$ values, while ? used the same $`Y_p`$ for both types of determinations.

Based on their two-infall model for the chemical evolution of the Galaxy ? find $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }O=3.15`$ for the solar vicinity. ? derives values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }O`$ in the 2.4 to 3.4 range. ? computed chemical evolution models for the Galactic disk, under an inside-out formation scenario, based on different combinations of seven sets of stellar yields by different authors; the $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }O`$ spread predicted by her models is in the 2.9 to 4.6 range for the Galactocentric distance of M17 (5.9 kpc), the spread is only due to the use of different stellar yields. The $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }O`$ values predicted by the models are in better agreement with the observations derived under $`t^20.000`$ the assumption than those derived under the $`t^2=0.000`$ assumption.

Similarly the models of chemical evolution of the Galaxy mentioned in the previous paragraph predict $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ values in the 1–2 range. Again the values derived from observations under the assumption that $`t^20.000`$ are in better agreement with the models than those derived under the assumption that $`t^2=0.000`$.

## 0.7 He/H Abundances in Planetary Nebulae and Giant Extragalactic H 2 Regions

Each helium recombination line has a different dependence on the density and the temperature, therefore from the helium line intensity ratios it is possible to determine the density and the temperature in gaseous nebulae. ? and ? determined $`T`$(He 2) values considerably smaller than the $`T`$(O 3) values for a group of planetary nebulae. The extreme object was Hu 1-2, where $`T`$(O 3) amounts to $`19000\pm 500`$K, while $`T`$(He 2) derived from the $`\lambda \lambda `$ 4472, 5876, and 6678 lines amounts to $`12500\pm 500`$K.

From extragalactic H 2 regions Peimbert, Peimbert, & Ruiz (2000) and Peimbert, Peimbert, & Luridiana (2002) also find that $`T`$(H 2) is also smaller than $`T`$(O 3). This difference is paramount for the determination of the primordial helium abundance because the use of $`T`$(O 3) instead of $`T`$(He 2) leads to an overestimate of $`Y_p`$ of about 0.008, a small amount but significant for testing the standard big-bang model and possible deviations from it.

It is a pleasure to acknowledge information prior to publication and fruitful discussions with Leticia Carigi, César Esteban, Valentina Luridiana, Miriam Peña and Silvia Torres-Peimbert.